Full HD or HD Ready?

[Luxman]

I know Full HD TV support 1080p ATSC spec whereas HD Ready sports a 1366x768 resolution. Obviously for HDTV the first it's a better choice but what about the 576p PAL signal? Which TV would manage that in a more appropriate way? Will I get a poor vision with a Full HD compared with HD Ready? :thanks:

Have a nice day :)

[SeeMoreDigital]

My recommendation is to always go for a display that offers a native resolution of 1920x1080 pixels.

Preferably with support for 1080p running at 23.976, 24.000, 25.000 and 29.976 fps

[Luxman]

My recommendation is to always go for a display that offers a native resolution of 1920x1080 pixels.

Preferably with support for 1080p running at 23.976, 24.000, 25.000 and 29.976 fps

Thanks for the prompt reply. I'd rather get a 1920x1080 too, but I'd like to know a bit more how would it behave with a 576p PAL signal, considering that right now in Italy the very majority of TV and SAT channels provide that type of resolution.

[Soulhunter]

I know Full HD TV support 1080p ATSC spec whereas HD Ready sports a 1366x768 resolution...

Actually HDReady means:


From the Annex B "HD ready" testing and verification...

1. Min. native resolution should be 720 physical lines in wide aspect ratio
2. Display must accept all of the following HD inputs: YPbPr1, and either DVI or HDMI
3. HD inputs should accept 1280x720 @50/60Hz (720p), and 1920x1080 @50/60Hz interlaced (1080i)
4. DVI and HDMI input must support HDCP content protection.

No matter if you buy a FullHD model or not... Most important is checking the displays live! Go to one of this big stores where they display some dozen different models... As you cant be sure about what/how they feed their stuff, come with your own input source [a laptop... or a laptop from a friend + test/sample clips n pics etc.]. Also make sure to tweak the TVs setting as the they are often adjusted suboptimal [sometimes they even adjust cheap models suboptimal on purpose... to sell more of the expensive models they adjusted properly]. Oh, and dont listen to the salesman too much... A lot of em probably dont know much more about this stuff than you! ;]


Bye

[SeeMoreDigital]

Thanks for the prompt reply. I'd rather get a 1920x1080 too, but I'd like to know a bit more how would it behave with a 576p PAL signal, considering that right now in Italy the very majority of TV and SAT channels provide that type of resolution.There's no need to worry about this... 576p sources up-scaled to 1080i or 1080p have the capability of looking very good indeed.

[Luxman]

No matter if you buy a FullHD model or not... Most important is checking the displays live! Go to one of this big stores where they display some dozen different models... As you cant be sure about what/how they feed their stuff, come with your own input source [a laptop... or a laptop from a friend + test/sample clips n pics etc.].

That's a good idea. I could bring a DVD to make those tests considering that DVD resolution is the same as PAL TV signal...

Also make sure to tweak the TVs setting as the they are often adjusted suboptimal [sometimes they even adjust cheap models suboptimal on purpose... to sell more of the expensive models they adjusted properly].

Shame on them! I will keep that in mind ;)

Oh, and dont listen to the salesman too much... A lot of em probably dont know much more about this stuff than you! ;]

You are SO RIGHT! :D

Another thing: I have to choose yet between Plasma and LCD. I read somewhere that LCDs equipped with LED technology (untill now I've seen only some made by Samsung) have very improved capabilities compared to the standard LCDs. Any direct experience on that matter? :thanks:

[Luxman]

There's no need to worry about this... 576p sources up-scaled to 1080i or 1080p have the capability of looking very good indeed.

Great to know ;)

[smok3]

There's no need to worry about this... 576p sources up-scaled to 1080i or 1080p have the capability of looking very good indeed.

cough, what? (maybe i saw some other Hd ready displays yesterday...?) PAL SD looks like cr** imho.

[Luxman]

cough, what? (maybe i saw some other Hd ready displays yesterday...?) PAL SD looks like cr** imho.

Well, sure HD displays give their best with a HD signal but here I'm asking whether the difference between a Full HD and a so-called HD Ready in managing a 576p signal is noticeable or not.

[jshumate]

cough, what? (maybe i saw some other Hd ready displays yesterday...?) PAL SD looks like cr** imho.

I hear this nonsense all the time, usually about NTSC SD. It is so not true. People, the most important thing about HDTVs is the quality of your connections. If you use high quality connections to your HDTV, you will get fine performance out of SD video. Another important thing is do NOT just set your TV to stretch everything to 16:9 as that will certainly make them look worse. If you watch SD video on an HDTV in 4:3, it will look fine. High quality video connections are DVI, HDMI and component. Avoid all other connection types for best results.

[SeeMoreDigital]

cough, what? (maybe i saw some other Hd ready displays yesterday...?) PAL SD looks like cr** imho.For sure, std-def "interlaced" sources can look poor when up-scaled to 1920x1080 or even 1280x720. But that's certainly not the case with std-def "progressive" sources....

[Shakey_Jake33]

Well, sure HD displays give their best with a HD signal but here I'm asking whether the difference between a Full HD and a so-called HD Ready in managing a 576p signal is noticeable or not.

HD-Ready and FullHD are just marketing terms. There's no technological difference other than 'FullHD' being marketing speak for 1080p. Management of SD signals depends on the capabilities of the television itself.

[Soulhunter]

I read somewhere that LCDs equipped with LED technology (untill now I've seen only some made by Samsung) have very improved capabilities compared to the standard LCDs...

Yeah, a LED matrix as backlight brings LCDs a big step closer to plasma, and even to its future competitor OLED! One of the advantages over current backlights is that you can turn on/off particular LEDs solitary, so brightness can be raised/lowered locally much much better... Via LED backlights you can not only achieve a better blackpoint but also higher contrast n brightness... And, the LEDs should last much longer than current backlights! The downside is: Atm there are only like 2-3 displays [im aware of] with LED backlight, and unfortunately this first models dont deliver yet what this technology is capable of... Thats why I still hesitate buying a LCD! As soon this technology is matured enough, Ill dump my CRT... ^^


Bye

[Luxman]

For sure, std-def "interlaced" sources can look poor when up-scaled to 1920x1080 or even 1280x720. But that's certainly not the case with std-def "progressive" sources....

I just read that analog TV (at the moment the most common format) uses in Italy PAL-B and G with a 576i signal... So I won't get a great quality with VHF. Fortunately I also signed up with a SAT TV provider which should broadcast at 576p and 1080p (few channels of the latter so far) :D

HD-Ready and FullHD are just marketing terms. There's no technological difference other than 'FullHD' being marketing speak for 1080p. Management of SD signals depends on the capabilities of the television itself.

Ok. What I wanted to know is if there is a technical reason that would make a 1366x768 display handle a 720x576 signal in a better way than a 1920x1080 display or not. Does the up-scale give better results in the first case?

Another thing: I have to choose yet between Plasma and LCD. I read somewhere that LCDs equipped with LED technology (untill now I've seen only some made by Samsung) have very improved capabilities compared to the standard LCDs. Any direct experience on that matter?

Any reply on the above?

[foxyshadis]

Quality of SD is more dependent on the scaler & deinterlace chips built in than than the pixel resolution. There are examples of horribly ugly and beautiful scaling with both resolutions, from what I've seen at stores and others' houses, but I don't have much direct experience. All a higher resolution could give you is a very slightly sharper image, but only if the scaler is sharp enough in the first place. AVSforum has quite a few threads on the topic.

Plasma vs LCD vs LCD/LED depends on what's important to you: Black level, response time (blurring), viewing angle, color gamut, price. They have different tradeoffs (as do LCD-TN and LCD-PVA). Contrast ratio is a red herring, though, pay attention to black level and white level instead.

[Luxman]

Yeah, a LED matrix as backlight brings LCDs a big step closer to plasma, and even to its future competitor OLED! One of the advantages over current backlights is that you can turn on/off particular LEDs solitary, so brightness can be raised/lowered locally much much better... Via LED backlights you can not only achieve a better blackpoint but also higher contrast n brightness... And, the LEDs should last much longer than current backlights! The downside is: Atm there are only like 2-3 displays [im aware of] with LED backlight, and unfortunately this first models dont deliver yet what this technology is capable of... Thats why I still hesitate buying a LCD! As soon this technology is matured enough, Ill dump my CRT... ^^


Bye

Thanks! Let's hope to see some new LED LCDs soon :D

Quality of SD is more dependent on the scaler & deinterlace chips built in than than the pixel resolution. There are examples of horribly ugly and beautiful scaling with both resolutions, from what I've seen at stores and others' houses, but I don't have much direct experience. All a higher resolution could give you is a very slightly sharper image, but only if the scaler is sharp enough in the first place. AVSforum has quite a few threads on the topic.

That's exactly what I was missing: so it's a scaler/deinterlace chip matter... I will surely have a look at AVSforum about that ;)

Plasma vs LCD vs LCD/LED depends on what's important to you: Black level, response time (blurring), viewing angle, color gamut, price. They have different tradeoffs (as do LCD-TN and LCD-PVA). Contrast ratio is a red herring, though, pay attention to black level and white level instead.

Thanks for the hints :) Btw what are good black/white levels in your opinion?
I read that Plasma sports better features than LCD in almost every aspect you mentioned. The only LCD advantage would be the lower power consumption and (eventually) lifespan... Do you agree with this?
LCD-TN, LCD-PVA... I guess I'll have to learn a bit more about them... :D

[Inventive Software]

Regarding screen sizes, HD Ready ones above 37 or 38 inches should ideally support 1920x1080 natively, because 1366x768 makes it seem too blocky. I have seen first hand experience of an (at the time) expensive 42" model that displays a Sky SD signal quite poorly. LCD vs Plasma, IMHO check the differences in the stores.

[smok3]

i was looking at some LCDs yesterday again, but since they feed it with the progressive dvds or bluray sources it is hard to tell anything about how interlaced stuff would look like.

horror stories:
- i was told that this truemotion and similar DSP stuff CAN'T be turned off on most of the sony LCD screens, true?
- i was told that 'autolevels' or whatever they call that tech, can't be turned off as well - how would an image with only high levels of gray shades look like there?
- bluray source doesn't look very well when some motion is present with some static areas as well
- philips pal blowup looks like crayons, clicking around i could not turn off enough DSPs...
- good old CRT screens are now hard to find...
- most look like some sort of frame blending is going on (+ ghosting), why is this? are those 60Hz refresh rates (when it should be 50) or is this just the nature of the LCD?

(i'am starting to think that better deal would be some huge computer monitor + external analog tuner and/or DVBT tuner)

[Shinigami-Sama]

- good old CRT screens are now hard to find...


the longer I have it, the more happy I am with my 32' 1080i CRT

I keep seeing all these HDTVs that look horrible, even with HD inputs
expecially when they're all side by side and don't even have the same colour levels, most of LCDs I see are so red you'd think that someone bled all over the screen

[Blue_MiSfit]

Yeah it's shocking how bad some HDTVs are - especially in-store. The salespeople calibrate the TVs for max brightness, so it pops out at the average glassy eyed consumer that can't even tell the difference between HD and SD.

I'm planning on buying a really good HDTV in the 40 - 50" range sometime this year. I will be getting extremely OCD about researching, when the time comes :)

~MiSfit

[Shinigami-Sama]

Yeah it's shocking how bad some HDTVs are - especially in-store. The salespeople calibrate the TVs for max brightness, so it pops out at the average glassy eyed consumer that can't even tell the difference between HD and SD.

I'm planning on buying a really good HDTV in the 40 - 50" range sometime this year. I will be getting extremely OCD about researching, when the time comes :)

~MiSfit

I got mine 'cause it was a discontinued model/size and thus on sale
then they didn't have the 38' I wanted
but they had the 32' but display model only
so I got about 400$ off on it in total
and yeah
I was looking at the DPLs and plasma's they had, all looked horrible, save the one they were just setting up and hadn't messed with the colours yet...
it looked half decent

[smok3]

another problem i noticed is built-in DVB-T tuners which have little or no info on what format they are supposed to support..., anyway this is a customer nightmare, something to be fixed by some EU authority imho (Some armed forces would probably work fine as well). To Sony: I mean, come on, what do you expect from random joe/jane, to understand that his overpriced tuner will never really work in the country he/she is in?