MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters 
Saturday, July 12, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 76.0° F  Overcast
Collapse Photo Bar

HDTV

Wiis, PlayStations, iPads, blogging platforms, Facebook and anything else worthy of buzz in the digital world.

Re: HDTV

Postby Kenneth Burns » Sat Aug 08, 2009 7:05 pm

HeartandSoul wrote:Anyone who owns or plans to own an HDTV 42" and above who doesn't own or doesn't plan to own a Blu-Ray player is wasting away the potential of their set.


42" might be pushing it. I have a 42" TV and a BD player, and although I can see a difference with BD, I wouldn't say it's dramatic.
Kenneth Burns
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2981
Joined: Fri May 24, 2002 3:14 pm

Re: HDTV

Postby HeartandSoul » Sun Aug 09, 2009 9:19 pm

Perhaps you're right. I suppose it also depends on how close you sit to the TV. So 47" and up then.
HeartandSoul
Senior Member
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 6:22 pm

Re: HDTV

Postby Beer Moon » Tue Aug 18, 2009 1:48 pm

Neither. Blu-Ray isn't necessary for anything. A good 1080i source is fine, and you can get that through any HD provider. Netflix streams respectable HD (their problem is audio). DirecTV and Dish both stream 1080p now, too with 5.1 DD audio. The pricing needs work - other than that it is fine.

Most normal TV viewers will never have the setup or calibration necessary to showcase the difference in detail between 1080i and 1080p - it is so slight. Decent deinterlacers are fairly easy to find in good sets, making the issue effectively moot.

Blu-ray is not necessary for anything, and the biggest advantage - by far - of the HD disc formats - is audio. And of course - there again - most consumers do not have the equipment necessary to discern the difference between compressed and uncompressed audio. As an example - how many people do you know with Bose?

Have you had your TV calibrated? If not, you can definitely back off on the blu-ray/1080p argument. Washed out colors and overblown whites and the poor resulting contrast is a far worse treatment of your HD material than interlacing.
Beer Moon
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2032
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:08 pm

Re: HDTV

Postby HeartandSoul » Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:43 pm

Well, if I can tell the difference between DVD and HDDVD/Blu-Ray on a 27 inch tube, I'm assuming I'd also be able to tell the difference on a large flat-panel. Better source material.
HeartandSoul
Senior Member
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 6:22 pm

Re: HDTV

Postby Beer Moon » Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:41 pm

The issue is compression. Quality 1080i material is very difficult to distinguish from 1080p. Deinterlacing is a very easy way to recover the additional material.

If broadcasters are not able to consistently provide a quality 1080i signal - that says nothing about the technology - and everything about the execution.

You need good 1080i sources more than you need Blu-Ray. Given the vast disparity in quantity of material available between the two methods of delivery - you're far better lodging a complaint to your provider about how much compression they are using than you are shelling out several hundred dollars for a few movies.
Beer Moon
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2032
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:08 pm

Re: HDTV

Postby HeartandSoul » Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:03 am

Beermoon, I am simply pulling attention to the differences between DVD and Blu-Ray (new release), I am not debating 1080i on pay movie channels versus 1080p on Blu-Ray. If you have all the movie channels in the world, there's little reason for either a Blu-Ray or a DVD player.
HeartandSoul
Senior Member
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 6:22 pm

Re: HDTV

Postby MadM2nd » Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:26 am

Beer Moon wrote:
MadMind wrote:Now there's even LCD's with 200Hz and 240Hz refresh rates. Thoughts? Anyone have a set with 200Hz/240Hz refresh rates?


Same as I explained before. Useless marketing stats - they know bigger numbers are thought of as better. This is not a statistic to be interested in - and if you have a Blu-Ray player, then you might want 120hz. No, 240hz doesn't hurt. Doesn't help either compared to 120hz.

And the "MotionFlow" or whatever crap that they market along with this is always recommended to be turned off - because it just adds more processing and doesn't make the picture look any better.

I recently noticed Plasma screens advertising refresh rates of 600Hz!
Related article
MadM2nd
 

Re: HDTV

Postby MadM2nd » Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:06 am

Beer Moon wrote:No offense, but 3D is not really a consideration imo.
If it goes anywhere, it won't be for another 5 years. Too long to wait for someone shopping today.

2010 will be the year full-HD 3D at home comes to fruition, with Panasonic
and Sony at the forefront.
From what I've read, I think Panasonic is planning on using passive polarized glasses while Sony is going the Active Shutter glasses route.
MadM2nd
 

Re: HDTV

Postby Bwis53 » Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:45 am

I've noticed stores are a little more willing to advertise the small HDTVs, these last few months.
Bwis53
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6278
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 9:39 pm
Location: Bay Creek

Previous

Return to Technology & Video Games

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


FacebookcommentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar