By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
dahuman on 29 December 2009
Edit Thread
Reasonable said:
xlost4 said:
@Reasonable

Listen to yourself, you keep leaving out the fact I'm saying picture quality on a smaller HDTV is superior than a 1080p 42"+. That's what I'm saying a smaller HDTV that does 720p will look exactly the same as a 1080p 42"+.

Re-read my posts and maybe you will understand what I'm saying. And besides I know the new year is coming, I'm not making an argument or anything I just want you to know that this thread title shouldn't be targeted to people like me (20" HDTV owner) who does not see an improvement from my 20" 720p HDTV to a 1080p HDTV.

Yes its the internet and this is a forum, which you then post your opinion and to let it be heard

Sent via BlackBerry

Ah, but it doesn't really look better.  Whether 18 inches, 20 inches or 46 inches the 1080p would look better than the 720p.  Now, the smaller the set he less noticable the difference is, although view distance also plays a part, but my point is - and where I believe you are empirically in error - is that no matter how small the TV the 720p picture will never look better than 1080p - it can't.

It's like sitting in front of a 16 inch monitor and changing the resolution of a game - the lower resolutions are never going to look better, ever.  The different between one resolution and another may be small, but it's there.

My point is you were mixing up an opinion about what you are happy with personally with facts - and I just find that hard to pass up, being a bit empirical myself having studied physics, maths, engineering and the like before computer science.

It's just a teeth gritter for me.

I can understand someone being perfectly happy with 720p 20 inch TV, I myself use 720p HD TV for gaming currently, but that doesn't alter facts is all.

So since we're having one last exchange - why not explain the other comment that puzzled me, that we are approaching the end of the road for visual improvements, because I see little evidence for this?

 

It only depends on how far away he's sitting, if it's monitor distance, PC has been doing 1280x1024 - 1600x1200 at 19-20inch for a while and both look hell of a lot better than something like 800x600 or 1024x768, now that we are at the average of 22-24 16x10 monitors, the difference is huge when comparing 1920x1200 to 1280x800 (or 1080p to 720p, whichever.) The thing is, it only really trully shows when you are on a PC because the power of PC is on par with the actual tech and already over it. For console gamers, it won't matter until next gen, and for videos, only really trained eyes can tell the difference.

I'm not even gonna go into how different companies use different ways to encode H.264 so even if the profile is 4.1, you often get different results from companies so unless you get an actual uncompressed source which would be too much for consumer products atm, it's very hard for people to tell the different. I can easily encode a blu ray source into a very high quality but lower bitrate H.264 result while maintaining the resolution and drop it onto a DVD and most people won't notice the very little artifacts since it's a video, not realtime rendering, well, unless you press your head really close to the screen anyways.