kn said: Fanboys will choose to ignore logic and reason like that found in this article, though. My personal favorite is the 1080i vs 1080p on a digital panel...

  

Wait, so I wont get 20 virgins when I die if I support blu-ray?

Damn you Sony!

ssj12 said: kn said: Fanboys will choose to ignore logic and reason like that found in this article, though. My personal favorite is the 1080i vs 1080p on a digital panel... right now you cant tell much difference uunless your a PC gamer like me who count pixels.

Actually, for a 24fps movie you shouldn't be able to tell at all.  By counting pixels or any other means.

In the instance where your framerate is <=30, you can consider 1080i@60hz vs 1080p a difference in transport, with the exact same result.  Look at it this way: with 1080i@60hz, every other line is updated every 1/60th of a second.  However, since you're watching movies with 24 frames per second, the entire frame is updated whether you're using an interlaced or progressive scan transport for the image.

Now, you'd notice a difference for 60fps games/broadcasts, but there should be no discernable difference for the movie case when viewed on a natively progressive TV set (LCD, DLP, Plasma, etc).

A proper 1080p source will give slightly smoother motion than a 1080i one. Or at least this is my experience.

 

http://www.plasma.com/classroom/Proscanexplained.htm

Is pretty good at explaining 3:2 pulldown for 24fps video if anyone is in any doubt. 

ion-storm said: A proper 1080p source will give slightly smoother motion than a 1080i one. Or at least this is my experience. http://www.plasma.com/classroom/Proscanexplained.htm Is pretty good at explaining 3:2 pulldown for 24fps video if anyone is in any doubt.

Where did you get that a proper 1080P source will give slightly smoother motion than a 1080i one? That article doesn't imply that. 3:2 pulldown is going to happen with a 1080p or 1080i source because the native video is 24fps and this is how they map it to fit 60FPS. Both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray store the image on the player at 1080P/24... The HD-DVD feeds the display 48 fields of 540 lines each which, when properly de-interlaced, will produce an identical image (same amount of data!) as a Blu-Ray which feeds 24 progressive images. The point is this... 1980x1024 is being stored on-disk by both formats and every single pixel is being delivered to the display regardless of it being delivered as an interlaced or progressive feed. http://www.hometheatermag.com/gearworks/1106gear/index.html Again, this is worth a read. And again, this is concerning 1080p vs. 1080i players -- Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD... It isn't concerning computer feeds, gaming feeds, animal feeds, or any other type of feed. I suspect that we will start to see screens capable of 72fps which will do a straight 3:3 pulldown and things will be a bit better. Regardless, 1080i vs. 1080p, with proper de-interlacing, is identical.

Here's the conceptual analogy that comes to mind with HD-DVD/Blue-Ray movie playback, let me know if this is correct (again, conceptually, not technically)-

1. 1080p- 60 full frames per second
2. 1080i- 60 'half' frames per second, for the sake of argument let's equate it to 30 frames per second

3. Blu-Ray or HD-DVD movie- 24 frames per second. Of course 24 FPS is less than either 30 or 60 FPS, so that's the rate limiting factor. And that's simply not going to change with the current formats.

Whether 1080p or 1080i, you are actually displaying more information than is in the original 24 FPS content (achieved via pull-down, etc.) Either way you are repeating frames of the original 24 FPS to display on a 1080p or 1080i screen.

kn said: ion-storm said: A proper 1080p source will give slightly smoother motion than a 1080i one. Or at least this is my experience.   http://www.plasma.com/classroom/Proscanexplained.htm Is pretty good at explaining 3:2 pulldown for 24fps video if anyone is in any doubt.   Where did you get that a proper 1080P source will give slightly smoother motion than a 1080i one?

From watching 1080i and 1080p videos

Im sure they are the same info for 24fps video. But the main problem is most tv's dont do some form of direct multiple of 24 for the refresh rate. The 120Hz sets are the way forward for this. I'm more concerned about judder caused by forcing 24fps into 60Hz. For these tv's 3:2 pulldown will have to happen somewhere either on the hd-dvd/blu-ray player or on your tv. Though i'm aware this is a problem which affects both hd-dvd and blu-ray. It's more of a tv problem really.

Go blu-ray :) Why not have 20gb of extra space :) (yes im ignoring 3 layer hd-dvds because no-one uses them) 

kn said: I suspect that we will start to see screens capable of 72fps which will do a straight 3:3 pulldown and things will be a bit better. Regardless, 1080i vs. 1080p, with proper de-interlacing, is identical.

The reason our TVs are 60 Hz is because the AC power coming out of the wall socket in the U.S. is 60 Hz.  In PAL countries, AC power runs at 50 Hz, hence so do their TVs.  We are starting to see 120 Hz TVs, which can repeat each frame 5 times for a 24 fps film with no juddering.

Entroper said: kn said: I suspect that we will start to see screens capable of 72fps which will do a straight 3:3 pulldown and things will be a bit better. Regardless, 1080i vs. 1080p, with proper de-interlacing, is identical. The reason our TVs are 60 Hz is because the AC power coming out of the wall socket in the U.S. is 60 Hz. In PAL countries, AC power runs at 50 Hz, hence so do their TVs. We are starting to see 120 Hz TVs, which can repeat each frame 5 times for a 24 fps film with no juddering.

Today's digital sets are not tied to the electrical current like back in the days of black and white. The TV can refresh at any rate it wants without generating hum bars. Case in point: PC monitors refresh at all sorts of odd rates when gaming and you don't get bars or strange behavior when the refresh rate falls or climbs... Pioneer has a line (and I believe Panasonic, too) of sets that provide 72FPS mode. They will take a 1080P feed and triple each frame -- no 3:2 pulldown -- and as a result produce a smoother flowing image from frame to frame. If we are to move higher than that, we certainly could see sets go to 144fps but I don't think that is going to improve things. The 120 sets are an interesting development and each manufacturing is doing their own unique thing with it. 72FPS would provide for a clean, smooth panning full screen and it would be very, very difficult for the average person to see any flicker since the threshold is about 60fps for flicker-free viewing.

My cat's breath smells like cat food







Just thought everyone should know.

I love me. This article shows me once again, why I am glad that I have not purchased an HDTV or HD player yet.

1. This keeps reinforcing the idea that since I will buy a 42 or 46 HDTV, that one that displays only 720p or less is just fine.

2. Players and movie prices for HD need to keep naturally decreasing before I jump in and when I eventually do it will either be a dual format player or the clear winner at that point.