Please note that this is a public poll, we can see the choices you make!

Please select the choice that corresponds to your primary movie watching home theater display. In other words what type of display shows off your Blu-rays or HD DVDs?

Also, this would be a great place to tell us what kind of displays you have at home.

I have three 1080P capable displays. Not counting the two 1920x1200p computer monitors, that would make it five total.

In no uncertain order:

Mitsu HC5000
Sony KDS-R60XBR2
Sony KDL-46XBR3


I'm currently Blu-ray only.

Where is the poll?

Where is the poll?

It should be up now with 10 options. This is the maximum that AVS will allow.

I currently own a 56" Samsung DLP which is 720p native (both formats look great in 1080i though). I purchased this set almost 3 years ago and have had zero issues. I would not benefit very much from 1080p unless my screen size is around 60-65" or higher based on my viewing distance.

I plan on upgrading to a 60+" 1080p DLP or LCD screen as screen sizes increase and prices drop. Perhaps in 18+ months.

sony 47" Xbr3, PS3 blu play back, yes its very nice.

Olevia 747i 1080p 47" LCD HDTV w/ built-in Realta HQV + SA 8300 HD DVR + XBox 360 w/HD-DVD add-on = bliss! :p

26 votes so far. Would be helpful if the people that respond would just add a post with brief detail on their setup. :)

I assume you mean a home theater display. I too have several 1080p-capable computer displays, and I do watch HDTV on them. I also have one of them wired to the 720p projector to show HD content, as well as play games and do general computing, but I rarely use it. Most of the "home theater" use is an HD-A2 player to 720p front PJ. Also an Oppo, and a tuner, and another "game computer", a Wii, and a Mac laptop get hooked in.

26 votes so far. Would be helpful if the people that respond would just add a post with brief detail on their setup. :)

Player: Toshiba HD-A1
Display: Sony VW50 projector, 80"-diagonal screen.

Sony PS3 on a Sony 50" A2000 SXRD 1080P.

Player: Toshiba HD-A1
Display: Sony VW50 projector, 80"-diagonal screen.


Hmmmmmm . . .

To sum it up in one sentence: the VW50 has outstanding black levels, color saturation and contrast, but the image is softer than we'd like to see from a 1080p resolution projector.

http://www.projectorcentral.com/sony_vw50.htm

Sony Pearl 1080p (VPL-VW50) on a 120" screen and a 57" Hitachi rear-projection CRT 1080i. I also have two 1080p capable LCD computer monitors 22" Sammy widescreen and a 19" Acer.

Players: BD-P1000, PS3, and HD-XA1.

Panasonic TH-42PX60U (viewing distance is... oh, 8 feet or so)

Sony PS3
Toshiba HD-A2

Hmmmmmm . . .



http://www.projectorcentral.com/sony_vw50.htm

Wow, someone is a sore loser. Granted, the Pearl is softer than a typical 1080p DLP, but it does resolve 1080p, as indicated by Greg Rogers in the review published on Widescreen Review (compared to which the projectorcentral review is toilet paper, btw).

KD-34XBR970 CRT @ 1080i - Do I have to sit at the kids table?

Toshiba A1, and a Samsung 1200 hooked to a 60" Sony XBR1 (1080p), viewed at about 8-9 '.
J
EDIT: All (R1) DVDs are watched on the 1200, which is an excellent DVD player.

Interesting poll...
Its looking like most HD-DVD owners use 720, while Blu-ray owners prefer 1080.
Which of course supports the claim that BD owners demand the best PQ/AQ, while HD-DVD prefer the better value...

Toshiba XA2 on 110" screen, JVC RS-1 projector

I do the majority of my HD on my SONY 1080-I VPL, LCD front projector, for some reason it looks better than 720-P on a nearly 85" (diagonal) screen.

I have the HD DVD Toshiba XA2, which actually does a better job upconverting than my $2300 DVDO in combo with my Pioneer Elite. That said, at the size I view films upconversion is not comparable to real HD, and simple toggling between formats makes this abundantly clear.

Player: Xbox 360 HD DVD drive connected to my HTPC
Display: Dell 2407WFP

Wow, someone is a sore loser. Granted, the Pearl is softer than a typical 1080p DLP, but it does resolve 1080p, as indicated by Greg Rogers in the review published on Widescreen Review (compared to which the projectorcentral review is toilet paper, btw).

You have a projector rated as soft and you claim that BB is soft. Who's the loser? :rolleyes:

55" SXRD 1080p
Onkyo TSXR 805 with Energy Reference Speakers all around
Blu-ray

720p DLP FP from 2003 + HD-E1, all installed in my home at my local trailer park :p :D

You have a projector rated as soft and you claim that BB is soft. Who's the loser? :rolleyes:

He can compare the pq of a disc relative to his other discs and make a valid assessment this way.... :rolleyes:

720p DLP FP from 2003 + HD-E1, all installed in my home at my local trailer park :p :D



He can compare the pq of a disc relative to his other discs and make a valid assessment this way.... :rolleyes:

No, you can't...two different movies, different artistic intent. :rolleyes:

Interesting poll...
Its looking like most HD-DVD owners use 720, while Blu-ray owners prefer 1080.
Which of course supports the claim that BD owners demand the best PQ/AQ, while HD-DVD prefer the better value...

that's a pretty broad generalization. resolution is only one factor out of many that determines PQ.

Seriously, when will you HD DVD only guys stop falling for these threads?

that's a pretty broad generalization. resolution is only one factor out of many that determines PQ.

And if my memory serves me . . .it was 4th on the list of the 4 most important pieces that make up good PQ.

26 votes so far. Would be helpful if the people that respond would just add a post with brief detail on their setup. :)


I didn't votes as I have both 720p and 1080p displays and I watch on both. Your poll does not allow multiple votes.

Interesting poll...
Its looking like most HD-DVD owners use 720, while Blu-ray owners prefer 1080.
Which of course supports the claim that BD owners demand the best PQ/AQ, while HD-DVD prefer the better value...

Do you really think that a poll like this supports that claim? There can be different reasons HD DVD only owners have less than 1080p displays. For example they may have early adopted HD and are waiting to upgrade. The poll does not give you this type of information and you can't draw this type of conclusion.

Seriously, when will you HD DVD only guys stop falling for these threads?

"We" like to keep our fellow brethren entertained! :D:D:D

Olevia 532h 1080i with a Toshiba HD-A2....

HD DVD Only the best for my displays. ;)

Hi,

HD-XA2 HD DVD player
InFocus ScreenPlay 7205, 720p DLP projector
120" diagonal Stewart Firehawk screen.

For details click on link in signature.

Larry

Do you really think that a poll like this supports that claim? There can be different reasons HD DVD only owners have less than 1080p displays. For example they may have early adopted HD and are waiting to upgrade. The poll does not give you this type of information and you can't draw this type of conclusion.

The Blands been saying this for months... and to be honest with you, I agree.

The more I think about it, maybe there is room for both formats.
On one hand you got superior PQ and AQ, but at a premium price.
On the other side you got not so great PQ and AQ, but you got neat little interactive features and games...
BD for the enthusiast and HD-DVD for the masses.
Kinda like when I was a kid and my Mom only bought that Jewel brand "cola"(the one in a red can and it just said cola on it). It didn't quite taste like Coke or Pepsi, but she said "It's good enough!!!"

I have a Sharp Aquos, 46 inch, 1080p.

Toshiba a20
PS3

I also own an older 720p 32incher. It uses a DVD player, and a Toshiba s20 projector also hooked up to a DVD player.

Sony VW50/VW100 110" screen. I am replacing my VW50 with the VW60 once it ships.
I use the Toshiba HD-A2 for HD DVD and PS3 for Blu-Ray.

42" Samsung 768P
Xbox 360 add on

Awesome picture at a great value. Even on my system the difference from SD DVD is dramatic.

If the cost of entry to HD media is what you 1080P Blu ray people paid there would be one less HD Media supporter at this time. Even though I could have afforded higher end gear there is a value "sweet spot" I look for when I'm ready to buy electronics.

Interesting poll...
Its looking like most HD-DVD owners use 720, while Blu-ray owners prefer 1080.
Which of course supports the claim that BD owners demand the best PQ/AQ, while HD-DVD prefer the better value...

I don't know how everyone didn't see this coming from a mile away just by reading the thread title.

Seriously, when will you HD DVD only guys stop falling for these threads?

I was thinking the poll was a bit suspect with br and HD DVD being specifically highlighted. Rather than list the format used the resolution is the only relevant answer if the OP was really seeking unbiased answers. Pretty soon this poll will be held up as factual evidence that HD DVD supporters accept inferior PQ to BR owners. I guess the audio version of this poll will be along shortly asking about lossless vs lossy.

I didn't votes as I have both 720p and 1080p displays and I watch on both. Your poll does not allow multiple votes.

Looks like we have to redo this poll again.

The Blands been saying this for months... and to be honest with you, I agree.

The more I think about it, maybe there is room for both formats.
On one hand you got superior PQ and AQ, but at a premium price.
On the other side you got not so great PQ and AQ, but you got neat little interactive features and games...
BD for the enthusiast and HD-DVD for the masses.
Kinda like when I was a kid and my Mom only bought that Jewel brand "cola"(the one in a red can and it just said cola on it). It didn't quite taste like Coke or Pepsi, but she said "It's good enough!!!"

No offense Shamus but saying things like 'not so great PQ and AQ' flies in the face of the experience of a lot of dual format owners that have seen great titles on both formats. This type of posturing by either side isn't really helpful at all.

The more I think about it, maybe there is room for both formats.
On one hand you got superior PQ and AQ, but at a premium price.
On the other side you got not so great PQ and AQ, but you got neat little interactive features and games...
BD for the enthusiast and HD-DVD for the masses.

Where is the objective empirical evidence for the "superior" PQ/AQ over "not so great?"
Why is this post even part of this thread?

Where is the objective empirical evidence for the "superior" PQ/AQ over "not so great?"
Why is this post even part of this thread?

Things are slow on bluray.com.:p

Guys you only have to look in the Natures Journey thread to see the OP's true intention with this poll.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11721293#post11721293

TV: Sony KDL-46XRB3
Blu-Ray: Sony BDP-S1

You have a projector rated as soft and you claim that BB is soft. Who's the loser? :rolleyes:

Heh. Go with that post to the projector forum, see what happens to you. :rolleyes:

"Format of Choice" means I have to state my preference, even tho I own both formats.

So, HD DVD on various 1080p displays - JVC HD1, JVC HD2K, Samsung 4695 and Vizio 47".

Joy :)

3 HD displays 1 of 1366x768 and 2 of 1920x1080 (57" TV and 119" screen). Use only HD DVD and only on the 1920x1080p, 119" diagonal screen. In signature.

Why are there so many HD DVD only owners trying to find bias in this poll?

This poll is simply an attempt to discover the truth about ownership demographics.

We will be able to answer questions like:

What percentage of Blu-ray only owners have 1080p?

What percentage of Dual Format owners have 1080p?

What percentage of 720p owners only bought HD DVD?

What percentage of 720p owners are dual format?

What percentage of people are watching HDM on a SDTV or EDTV? :eek:

XA1--->720P/1080i Hitachi Projector-->108" screen
A2---->1080i Mits CRT (65")

We have:

Mitsubishi HC5000 1080p Projector
Sony KDL 52W3000
Westinghosue 47" 1080p

2 HD-A1'a
1 HD-A2
3 PS3's

~Josh

ISF calibrated Loewe Aconda 38" direct view CRT (1080i) with HD-XA2/PS3

HD-DVD only

Sony 46" XBR4 1080p
XA2

The intention of this poll seems to be to measure the number of "true" HT enthusiasts who support one format over the other. IMO, the resolution of one's display is just one factor in judging that. I own a 50" 1366x768 plasma and a 37" 1366x768 LCD. I got my 37" just a couple of days ago for the bedroom and purposely avoided 1080P 42" and under displays because I believe strongly that the added resolution is a waste on such a small display when viewed from normal viewing distance.

Now I also own a 1280x720 LCD front projector and a 45"x80" (92" diagonal) screen. I would *much* rather watch movies on this "low-res" big-screen experience than on a 58" 1080P plasma or LCD flat-panel.

Obviously, if you tried to poll people for both resolution and screen size, you'd hit the max poll option limit. But given the choice between resolution and screen size, I personally think a more accurate way to measure "true" HT enthusiasts would be screen size.

The Blands been saying this for months... and to be honest with you, I agree.

The more I think about it, maybe there is room for both formats.
On one hand you got superior PQ and AQ, but at a premium price.
On the other side you got not so great PQ and AQ, but you got neat little interactive features and games...
BD for the enthusiast and HD-DVD for the masses.
Kinda like when I was a kid and my Mom only bought that Jewel brand "cola"(the one in a red can and it just said cola on it). It didn't quite taste like Coke or Pepsi, but she said "It's good enough!!!"

So are you just ignorant or a troll? And you people wonder why generalizations have been made about the blu crowd.

The Blands been saying this for months... and to be honest with you, I agree.

The more I think about it, maybe there is room for both formats.
On one hand you got superior PQ and AQ, but at a premium price.
On the other side you got not so great PQ and AQ, but you got neat little interactive features and games...
BD for the enthusiast and HD-DVD for the masses.
Kinda like when I was a kid and my Mom only bought that Jewel brand "cola"(the one in a red can and it just said cola on it). It didn't quite taste like Coke or Pepsi, but she said "It's good enough!!!"

I guess that ignorance is truely bliss.

The most ignorant post I think I have ever read on this forum. And that is saying alot!

Well my main display in the living room is Pioneer Elite 1130HD with flawless picture. I will upgrade my main viewing display to new 1080p projectors and 100" screen however I have 2 more plasmas one at 720p and the other one as 1080p. The 1080p one I used to evaluate the quality of 1080p signal to my Pioneer Elite for both Blu-ray and HD DVD titles and as my Elite actually looked better I still kept it as a main display.

It is absolutely proof that a great 720p display can outmatch middle level 1080p displays, not to mention that I'm watching these TVs from 7-8 feet difference and Elite is by far the best display I've had ever.

I do the majority of my HD on my SONY 1080-I VPL, LCD front projector, for some reason it looks better than 720-P on a nearly 85" (diagonal) screen.

I have the HD DVD Toshiba XA2, which actually does a better job upconverting than my $2300 DVDO in combo with my Pioneer Elite. That said, at the size I view films upconversion is not comparable to real HD, and simple toggling between formats makes this abundantly clear.

That isn't a 1080i display as there are no 1080i digital displays as far as I know. It's 720p.

Olevia 532h 1080i with a Toshiba HD-A2....720P

Hitachi 46F10 1080i

Toshiba A2

Samsund 46" LCD 1080P with Sony PS3 and Toshiba XA2....just swell!

Westinghouse LVM-42w2 42" 1080p60 LCD, HD-XA2. Beautiful picture.

Pio 5060 (50" plasma 2 gen prior to current); PS3 & Xbox360 Elite AO. Switching and audio w/ Onkyo 705 used as pre/pro w/ Sunfire 200 w/ch amp. Revel (front) speaker; F30's & C30.

1080i - Panny TH-50PH9UK plasma (1366x768), PS3, HD-A2. ~Edit~ Oh yeah, and the Xbox 360 add-on just recently purchased for ripping. ;)

Hard to vote when you have both 720P and 1200P display.

But there is no way I rather watch a movie on 24inch 1200P display then my 106 inch 720P screen.

Its hardly any visuall difference between the 2 displays since most movies barely passes 720P res anyway. But the moviemagic is just lost for me when I watch on a "TV".

Sony VPL-VW11HT and 120" screen. 1080i on both Panasonic BD10 and Toshiba XA2. Loving them both by the way. HD rules :D

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/09/26/the-hd-guru-reveals-the-flaws-in-the-latest-hdtvs/

The HD Guru reveals the flaws in the latest HDTVs

This year the HD Guru discovers that there is a significant loss in resolution when there is motion -- you know like when the camera pans or a player runs down the field. What he discovered is very interesting, but not surprising; Plasmas fared the best with a loss of 18.52%, microdisplays were next at 27.78% and the LCDs were last at 44.45%.

Samsung LN-T3253H(1366x768) and a HD-A2.

The fact that some of the most outspoken and opinionated supporters of hd dvd are using a 720/768p display is hilarious.

I won't point you out, but you know who you are.....

My setup:

Toshiba 72HM195 1080p display with 1080i only inputs
Denon AVR-2807
Toshiba HD-A1
Samsung BD-P1200

The fact that some of the most outspoken and opinionated supporters of hd dvd are using a 720/768p display is hilarious.

I won't point you out, but you know who you are.....
A few things about that:
+ Glad to see they voted honestly or didn't dodge voting. It says something positive about their character
+ It makes sense that people that buy blu on this forum don't mind paying extra for their hardware vs the more cost conscious HD DVD folks.
+ Do you think a 720P tv makes a bad transfer look good or a good transfer look bad?

A lot of the more cost conscious HD owner like myself would get nothing instead of Blu Ray if HD DVD didn't exist. How would HD media adoption numbers look without us?

My TV has 1366 x 768 pixels, but it accepts both a 1080i and 720p signal. I think the best option for viewing is 1080i - maybe (so it will downsample from 1080 to 768 lines instead of upsampling (guessing) from 720p to 768 - correct?. Gee, I hope I selected the right option in the poll.

Pioneer PRO-1140HD 50" Plasma (768P) accepts 1080P/24 signal

Pioneer BDP-HD1 Blu-Ray Player

Toshiba HD-A2

A few things about that:
+ Glad to see they voted honestly or didn't dodge voting. It says something positive about their character
+ It makes sense that people that buy blu on this forum don't mind paying extra for their hardware vs the more cost conscious HD DVD folks.
+ Do you think a 720P tv makes a bad transfer look good or a good transfer look bad?

A lot of the more cost conscious HD owner like myself would get nothing instead of Blu Ray if HD DVD didn't exist. How would HD media adoption numbers look without us?

I was also glad to see avs members voting honestly and not dodging. There were some members that made fun of a 1080p display while using a 720 display themselves. I don't think that is fair,

You can tell a bad transfer or a good transfer on 720p display. "marcroblocking" and other artifacts are more likely to be introduced when you down convert a signal rather than display the signal in its native format.

Personally, I would prefer the disc read, signal sent untouched and displayed untouched by the output device.

1080i o/p from HDA2 to 720P Optoma HD70 displayed onto 92" Screen.

PS3 to Samsung 4095D 1080p/24hz with 1:1 pixel mapping.

The fact that some of the most outspoken and opinionated supporters of hd dvd are using a 720/768p display is hilarious.

I won't point you out, but you know who you are.....

Because for some papperspecs are not as important as the final quality. There are very few BDs and HDs that actually resolves much more then 720P in res. You can have whatever display you want but it the end there is a very marginal improvment with 1080P.

If something looks and sound great thats fine with me. I dont need to know what the bitrate is or what codec is used as long as the PQ and AQ is top notch.

I watch HD because I want to watch movies, I do not watch movies because I must watch HD.

Because for some papperspecs are not as important as the final quality. There are very few BDs and HDs that actually resolves much more then 720P in res. You can have whatever display you want but it the end there is a very marginal improvment with 1080P.

If something looks and sound great thats fine with me. I dont need to know what the bitrate is or what codec is used as long as the PQ and AQ is top notch.

I watch HD because I want to watch movies, I do not watch movies because I must watch HD.

+1

You can tell a bad transfer or a good transfer on 720p display. "marcroblocking" and other artifacts are more likely to be introduced when you down convert a signal rather than display the signal in its native format.
Are you sure converting a signal (ie. downsamping from 1080 to 768) would introduce macroblocks? I suppose it might introduce some sort of artifacts if 1080i->768p. I don't have have a 1920x1080 TV to compare it with yet, but I would have assumed if the conversion was done in the TV that it might just sort of "resample" and might show less artifacts than the full size pic (though the picture would obviously be lower resolution/less sharp). Are you sure about the macroblocking (as if it was done in the TV surely it wouldn't need to recompress it in an mpeg/jpeg style way as it could do the resampling in an uncompressed form.

The fact that some of the most outspoken and opinionated supporters of hd dvd are using a 720/768p display is hilarious.

I won't point you out, but you know who you are.....

..same thing goes for some BD supporters. :rolleyes:

Are you sure converting a signal (ie. downsamping from 1080 to 768) would introduce macroblocks? I suppose it might introduce some sort of artifacts if 1080i->768p. I don't have have a 1920x1080 TV to compare it with yet, but I would have assumed if the conversion was done in the TV that it might just sort of "resample" and might show less artifacts than the full size pic (though the picture would obviously be lower resolution/less sharp). Are you sure about the macroblocking (as if it was done in the TV surely it wouldn't need to recompress it in an mpeg/jpeg style way as it could do the resampling in an uncompressed form.


Well if a macroblock is 2X2 pixels it would be masked perfectly if you downconverted it to 960*540, but if you downconvert it to 720P it will not be enough resdrop to mask it. And the downconversion could actually make it even worse if you have some bad luck.

The problem is that macroblocks is often bigger then 2X2.

Well if a macroblock is 2X2 pixels it would be masked perfectly if you downconverted it to 960*540, but if you downconvert it to 720P it will not be enough resdrop to mask it. And the downconversion could actually make it even worse if you have some bad luck.

The problem is that macroblocks is often bigger then 2X2.

So wouldn't DOWNconverting (higher res to lower res) blend any macroblocks (and pixels) together, making any macroblocks less noticeable instead of introducing macroblocks?

+1

Of course you would agree with that statement......

Are you sure converting a signal (ie. downsamping from 1080 to 768) would introduce macroblocks? I suppose it might introduce some sort of artifacts if 1080i->768p. I don't have have a 1920x1080 TV to compare it with yet, but I would have assumed if the conversion was done in the TV that it might just sort of "resample" and might show less artifacts than the full size pic (though the picture would obviously be lower resolution/less sharp). Are you sure about the macroblocking (as if it was done in the TV surely it wouldn't need to recompress it in an mpeg/jpeg style way as it could do the resampling in an uncompressed form.

What I am saying is that if you take a 1080 source and change it AT ALL, there is a much better chance of introducing some sort of artifact than displaying it in its original form.

Because for some papperspecs are not as important as the final quality. There are very few BDs and HDs that actually resolves much more then 720P in res. You can have whatever display you want but it the end there is a very marginal improvment with 1080P.

If something looks and sound great thats fine with me. I dont need to know what the bitrate is or what codec is used as long as the PQ and AQ is top notch.

I watch HD because I want to watch movies, I do not watch movies because I must watch HD.

That might be true, but a 720 display will NEVER resolve a true 1080 signal.

Of course you would agree with that statement......


You are absolutely correct. When I look at an image I look for the things that truly make an image outstanding:

1. Contrast Ratio - the "3D" Effect - The "POP" of the image
2. How well it tracks a Gray Scale
3. How defined the Color Saturation is
4. The resolution of the image.

I totally agree with all those who have stated this over 20 years ago starting with Joe Kane. And they are STILL saying it today. Nothing has changed.

That might be true, but a 720 display will NEVER resolve a true 1080 signal.

Nope but it will be so close it isnt worth paying twice the money for it.

Put it this way, I rather watch HD on a 720P projector, then I watch on a 1080P plasma/LCD.

The first gives me something that the others wont.

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels
1280 x 720 = 921,600 pixels

You are throwing away 1,152,000 pixels.

Resolution might have moved up that list in the past 20 years....

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels
1280 x 720 = 921,600 pixels

You are throwing away 1,152,000 pixels.

Resolution might have moved up that list in the past 20 years....

Thats OK, I lost count at 789 002 pixels anyway.

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels
1280 x 720 = 921,600 pixels

You are throwing away 1,152,000 pixels.

Resolution might have moved up that list in the past 20 years....

It hasn't. We had not that long ago a professional make a post for the front page of AVS. And he said the same thing Joe Kane said 20 years ago.

Like I said - nothing has changed. It is inherient of ANY image whether it is Filmed based, Analog based or Digital based.

Panny AE900 PJ with 106" High Power screen (720p) HD only, though I would happily pay for a BD for what I paid for my HD ($237 plus 7 movies 4+ months ago). Heck I'll even take used.

Sony 70xbr2 and Tosh a2. Heh - at this moment there are fewer BD users with 1080p

It hasn't. We had not that long ago a professional make a post for the front page of AVS. And he said the same thing Joe Kane said 20 years ago.

Like I said - nothing has changed. It is inherient of ANY image whether it is Filmed based, Analog based or Digital based.

I'm a bit confused. The 4th item on your list is resolution, are you saying resolution hasn't increased or just that it's only the 4th important thing you consider for a good image? Are you saying that an original 65mm negative has no more resolution than an average 35mm negative (all other things being equal). Are you saying that a 1920x1080 image (no matter how it is created) will never have more resolution than a 1280x720 image - or just that it is less important than the others on your list?

Toshiba A2 & PS3 into an Optoma HD72 (80" screen).

So you are saying that if you have a 480p display feeding it a 1080p image and a 1080p display feeding it the same image. They are going to look the same??

As long as contrast, gray scale tracking and color saturation are the same??

I think that is a stretch.

I'm a bit confused. The 4th item on your list is resolution, are you saying resolution hasn't increased or just that it's only the 4th important thing you consider for a good image? Are you saying that an original 65mm negative has no more resolution than an average 35mm negative (all other things being equal). Are you saying that a 1920x1080 image (no matter how it is created) will never have more resolution than a 1280x720 image - or just that it is less important than the others on your list?

In the basic rules for overall PQ, resolution comes in 4th place.

I'm a bit confused. The 4th item on your list is resolution, are you saying resolution hasn't increased or just that it's only the 4th important thing you consider for a good image? Are you saying that an original 65mm negative has no more resolution than an average 35mm negative (all other things being equal). Are you saying that a 1920x1080 image (no matter how it is created) will never have more resolution than a 1280x720 image - or just that it is less important than the others on your list?

The list I made is the list that was made 20 years ago and then again about 3 months ago right here at AVS. This list has stood the test of time.

It is a list of yardsticks to measure an image by - ANY image. They are placed in their order of importance.

So you are saying that if you have a 480p display feeding it a 1080p image and a 1080p display feeding it the same image. They are going to look the same??

As long as contrast, gray scale tracking and color saturation are the same??

I think that is a stretch.

Nope because then everything else is equal and the fourth factor will determine the PQ.

The 1080P display will win.

So you are saying that if you have a 480p display feeding it a 1080p image and a 1080p display feeding it the same image. They are going to look the same??

As long as contrast, gray scale tracking and color saturation are the same??

I think that is a stretch.

You are not looking at the list the way it is supposed to be looked at. You are mixing different items as opposed to looking at a single image and seeing what makes it an outstanding image.

At the same time you have to keep in mind the technology of the time and what was available. The type of displays available when 480 was the best that we could see are much different than the displays we use to see HD (720/1080).

Would anyone like to take a guess at the resolution of an image you see at a commerical movie theater? I have a link that can be used to show proof it is a lot lower then you believe it will be.

So take a guess at the resolution of projected 35mm movies.

Im a HD fan, not a fanboy, there are way to many great movies offered from both sides.. I enjoy them all in 1080P on my sammy 6188

720p letterboxed in a 1280x1024 frame on Xbox360, Viewsonic 19" PS790 CRT, fed via BNC outputs from my NEC ISS-6010. Haven't got the CRT projector fixed up and set up yet..

My TivoHD is set to output 1080i though, through the moome and onto same monitor, my V-squeeze is maxed out at that rez and yet it's still slightly stretched, kinda 16:10'ish instead of 16:9. Need to get me one of those Sony 16:10 CRT monitors, I'm sure they have enough squeeze to get 16:9 :D

I have tried 1080p from 360, but the timings are still a bit too tight, and the monitor's geometry is all kinds of maxed out and still 16:10'ish at best.. also, you can hear the monitor straining :D

Edit: In response to the discussion of 720 vs 1080... my dad has a Sony 1080p screen, when I hooked the 360 to it I was all :O you could see so much more! But I was the only one impressed, nobody else in the family cared so much. Granted, they did admit it looked better than their directivo's! (DTV being 480x480 scaled back to 4:3 on display) And better than DVD, but to them only slightly. I had to point things out like the texture on clothing and such.

PS3 & XA2 into a 52" XBR4. Loving it!

Dual Format all the way.

So take a guess at the resolution of projected 35mm movies.


Don't care. It has nothing to do with a home theater....

for those scoffing at 720p viewers, this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=767929) is a pretty good read.

as an aside, i'll be happy to spring for a 1080p setup when i'm able - i'd love to have what is considered the best available. when i bought my projector, though, i bought what i could afford - not because i'm cheap, but because it was the highest standard i could reach within my means. to date, though, i've never felt restricted in the least - i'm even able to benefit from 1080p/24 (displayed at 720p/48). i've only rarely seen a 1080p display that dramatically outperformed 720p front projection (1080p front projection excepted).

Nope but it will be so close it isnt worth paying twice the money for it.

Put it this way, I rather watch HD on a 720P projector, then I watch on a 1080P plasma/LCD.I just wanted to comment on the part about 1080p not being worth twice the money for 720p. For most display technologies that I looked at the price difference is nowhere near twice the price. At 40" and above, LCDs currently seem to be $200-300 more for 1080p than 720p, although it's getting harder to find 720p sets in that size range. Plasmas look to have more of a difference, about 25-33% more for 1080p in comparable models. Probably because 1080p is newer in plasmas. Pretty much all rear projection models I saw on the sites I checked were all 1080p except for what looked like some possibly discontinued models. Projectors looked to have the biggest difference, closer to twice the price. So depending on the type of display technology someone is focused on, they may have a very different take on the cost/benefit of 720p vs. 1080p.

Put it this way, I rather watch HD on a 720P projector, then I watch on a 1080P plasma/LCD.

big +1

I just wanted to comment on the part about 1080p not being worth twice the money for 720p. For most display technologies that I looked at the price difference is nowhere near twice the price. At 40" and above, LCDs currently seem to be $200-300 more for 1080p than 720p, although it's getting harder to find 720p sets in that size range. Plasmas look to have more of a difference, about 25-33% more for 1080p in comparable models. Probably because 1080p is newer in plasmas. Pretty much all rear projection models I saw on the sites I checked were all 1080p except for what looked like some possibly discontinued models. Projectors looked to have the biggest difference, closer to twice the price. So depending on the type of display technology someone is focused on, they may have a very different take on the cost/benefit of 720p vs. 1080p.

I think you can find a bigger difference between frontprojector people and flatscreen people what they prefer.

Primarily feeding a Pio FHD1 via an XA2. Upgrade of the Pio is on it's way :)

I am not scoffing at 720p displays. I owned an Infocus 720p projector and it threw an impressive image (black levels were not so good). I personally wanted to upgrade to 1080p.

Just don't be a hypocrite.

Most people argue on this forum all day long:

1. Have never seen the movie on the opposing format.
2. Have never used the opposing format in their home.
3. Have never used that particular piece of equipment.
4. Have never owned a similar piece of equipment.



By the way, this argument sounds very familiar to "I don't need lossless because it is only a little better than DD+".:D

blu-ray on a Panny ED plasma, still looks great!

I just wanted to comment on the part about 1080p not being worth twice the money for 720p. For most display technologies that I looked at the price difference is nowhere near twice the price. At 40" and above, LCDs currently seem to be $200-300 more for 1080p than 720p, although it's getting harder to find 720p sets in that size range.The important point for me is not the difference in price between 720p and 1080p displays in the 50" and under size, but rather the similarly minimal difference in price between a 1080p 46-50" flat-panel and a 720p front-projector setup.

For example, taking a quick look at one retailer, I see a Vizio 47" 1080p LCD for $1500 and a Toshiba for $1900. This same place sells a Sony 720p LCD projector for $1500. It even comes with an 80" screen though I don't know how good it is (Dynaclear?). But even if you replaced the screen with a 45x80" Da-Lite Hi-Power (like mine), it would only be about $300 more ($1800 total). IMO, the 720p front-projector setup provides a more satisfying movie watching experience, but to each his own.

blu-ray on a Panny ED plasma, still looks great!I'm guessing you've got a PS3, right? This raises an interesting point...this poll is missing the option for people with sub-720p displays (most/all of which ought to be PS3 owners). Just out of curiosity...why do you bother watching Blu-ray discs over standard DVDs? I can't imagine that the PQ difference could be significant. Slightly better colors/contrast? Resolution should be no better. Or perhaps you have a modern receiver and are a fan of lossless audio?

I am not scoffing at 720p displays. I owned an Infocus 720p projector and it threw an impressive image (black levels were not so good). I personally wanted to upgrade to 1080p.

Just don't be a hypocrite.

Most people argue on this forum all day long:

1. Have never seen the movie on the opposing format.
2. Have never used the opposing format in their home.
3. Have never used that particular piece of equipment.
4. Have never owned a similar piece of equipment.



By the way, this argument sounds very familiar to "I don't need lossless because it is only a little better than DD+".:D

well, let's be clear, then: i'm appreciative of lossless audio, which is why i bought an HDMI capable receiver (albeit within my budget ;)). i also am a fan of unprocessed 1080p/24 for film content; as i said above, i'd love to upgrade to 1080p when i can (though i currently have to settle for 720p/48). for the record, though, i'm glad to be enjoying what i have: dual format HD video and audio on a nice sized screen (and front projection!). it is certainly more than i would have envisioned myself with a few years back, and for that i'm thankful.

look, you're right about the tiresome format bickering. it drags down the forum, in my opinion - and why i thought it was a more of the same to draw connections between hd dvd supporters and 720 displays. if i misread your intent, then i apologize. i'm not trying to make the case that we shouldn't have the best quality - but rather that we should enjoy the best we can, and be happy that there are means of putting together pretty amazing systems for those of us on tighter budgets.

also, i stand by the statement that i'd rather watch a 720p front projection than 1080p plasma/lcd/rear proj.

:D

A lot of these "experts" think they know everything about the formats (by the way I am not saying I do either). Some of the problems I see though are forum members not even trying out the competing format?

Do I own both? Yes.

Do I prefer Blu Ray? Yes I do.

But I gave both of them a fair shake. The 720 bickering is directed at a certain group of "fanbois" that are NEVER wrong. They sit at their computer and talk a good game(they think) when they have never even tried the formats out the WAY THEY WERE DESIGNED @ 1080!!! Enough ranting, it will not change this forum anyway.

If I had to choose between a 720p front projection and a 1080p plasma/lcd/rear proj., I would give the same answer as you.:D

I am not scoffing at 720p displays. I owned an Infocus 720p projector and it threw an impressive image (black levels were not so good). I personally wanted to upgrade to 1080p.


Exactly. My BenQ PE8700 served me well for three years. But having watched The Searchers on both, there's no going back.

... The 720 bickering is directed at a certain group of "fanbois" that are NEVER wrong. They sit at their computer and talk a good game(they think) when they have never even tried the formats out the WAY THEY WERE DESIGNED @ 1080!!!

and here is where we can reach some consensus. i'm not sure that i totally agree that one must own a 1080p display to have an opinion on the technology - i'd like to think that i have some understanding from sampling the various friends, family, and local dealers (though i understand some dealers displays would be uncalibrated, etc). for instance, i've spent extensive time with my brother in law's 1080p rear projection and father in law's 1080p LCD (not to mention countless vendor/dealer visits) - enough to realize that i prefer a 720p front projection.

but, i totally agree with your basic premise: there are a lot of blowhards around here claiming to be experts on things that they often know little to nothing about. i have no problem with your insinuations therein. :)

hopefully one of these days i'll be able to look back on my 720p pj and say "how could i go back to that?"

cheers,
-L

i dunno its hard toss up for which for me to click in my theater room i have a little more dated equipment still with a older panasonic ae900u 720 projector that I probably watch most of my hd-dvd movies on but upstairs i have a panny 50" 1080p plasma that I watch a lot of my hd-dvd series (smallville. sapronos etc) on. i have two hd-dvd players and no blu-ray.

Well,

Next week when construction is done, I'll be able to see HD DVD and BD in a new light...

14' WIDE Stewart VistaScope Microperf automatic masking fixed screen (masks all aspects between 1.33 and 2.40). ISCO III anamorphic lens (CIH set up). Sony Qualia at 1080P24sF (Lumagen Radiance for scaling / deinterlacing).

Toshiba XA2 HD DVD, JVC D-VHS D-Theater & panasonic BD players.

I'm guessing you've got a PS3, right? This raises an interesting point...this poll is missing the option for people with sub-720p displays (most/all of which ought to be PS3 owners). Just out of curiosity...why do you bother watching Blu-ray discs over standard DVDs? I can't imagine that the PQ difference could be significant. Slightly better colors/contrast? Resolution should be no better. Or perhaps you have a modern receiver and are a fan of lossless audio?

remember that ED's res is (852X480) which is a bit higher than dvd res. I can clearly see that bit of difference specially on tier 0 stransfers.

Using an HD-A1 with a sanyo PLV-60 (768P) on a 108" screen.

Well,

Next week when construction is done, I'll be able to see HD DVD and BD in a new light...

14' WIDE Stewart VistaScope Microperf automatic masking fixed screen (masks all aspects between 1.33 and 2.40). ISCO III anamorphic lens (CIH set up). Sony Qualia at 1080P24sF (Lumagen Radiance for scaling / deinterlacing).

Toshiba XA2 HD DVD, JVC D-VHS D-Theater & panasonic BD players.

I'm envious of the automatic masking system, ISCO III and Radiance. Nice setup!

So with all this discussion about what display people use to watch their HD on . . I have a question . . .

How many have had their display Professionally Calibrated?

There is a BIG difference between what you can do with a test disk and a few adjustments versus an experienced calibrater with thousands of dollars of test equipment and over 100 adjustments.

Are you settling for the best that you can do over the best your display can do?

Well,

Next week when construction is done, I'll be able to see HD DVD and BD in a new light...

14' WIDE Stewart VistaScope Microperf automatic masking fixed screen (masks all aspects between 1.33 and 2.40). ISCO III anamorphic lens (CIH set up). Sony Qualia at 1080P24sF (Lumagen Radiance for scaling / deinterlacing).

Toshiba XA2 HD DVD, JVC D-VHS D-Theater & panasonic BD players.

envy envy envy :)

that sounds terrific, jeff.

I'm envious of the automatic masking system, ISCO III and Radiance. Nice setup

Thanks! My 10 ft wide Stewart electrimask is for sale on the AVS site if you're in the market.

Lee,

My display is ISF calibrated and room is acoustically certified..

Well calibration is something I don't want to pay for right now. I live without for now I am pretty happy with the calibrating that I have done.

I'm envious of the automatic masking system, ISCO III and Radiance. Nice setup

Thanks! My 10 ft wide Stewart electrimask is for sale on the AVS site if you're in the market.

Lee,

My display is ISF calibrated and room is acoustically certified..

Thanks! My 10 ft wide Stewart electrimask is for sale on the AVS site if you're in the market.

Lee,

My display is ISF calibrated and room is acoustically certified..

Your system is definitely off the hook. The budget constrained are jealous...

Bland,

You can criticize my system whenever you like.....:D

Thanks! My 10 ft wide Stewart electrimask is for sale on the AVS site if you're in the market.




Thanks for the heads up. The screen I'm using is only 3 months old so I don't think I could justify buying another one, :( even though it would be much nicer than the one that I'm using.

Speaking of Stewart filmscreen, this is off topic, but my motor on my electric 106" Firehawk screen burned out last week. The screen is 5 years old, so it is out of warranty. After speaking with a customer service rep, they sent out a replacement motor NO CHARGE. They made me pay for shipping both ways, which was around $20. I had the replacement motor in my hands within 5 days.

Some of the best customer service I have seen in the A/V industry. Period.

Sorry to be off topic....

Speaking of Stewart filmscreen, this is off topic, but my motor on my electric 106" Firehawk screen burned out last week. The screen is 5 years old, so it is out of warranty. After speaking with a customer service rep, they sent out a replacement motor NO CHARGE. They made me pay for shipping both ways, which was around $20. I had the replacement motor in my hands within 5 days.

Some of the best customer service I have seen in the A/V industry. Period.

Sorry to be off topic....

Wow! That is great customer service.

I am not scoffing at 720p displays. I owned an Infocus 720p projector and it threw an impressive image (black levels were not so good). I personally wanted to upgrade to 1080p.

Just don't be a hypocrite.

Most people argue on this forum all day long:

1. Have never seen the movie on the opposing format.
2. Have never used the opposing format in their home.
3. Have never used that particular piece of equipment.
4. Have never owned a similar piece of equipment.



By the way, this argument sounds very familiar to "I don't need lossless because it is only a little better than DD+".:D

Obviously there are more hypocrites on the BD side, since 90% of BD owners have PS3 and 90% of them have never made a real comparison of any sort...and a good 50% plus are not feeding a 1080p display....

Looks like a lot of people prefer uncompressed lossless v. compressed loss-less or even lossy DD+...and yet don't have the set up to even listen to the lossless tracks!

I chose dual format 1080i. I use a Panasonic DMP-BD10 Blu-ray player and a Toshiba HD-XE1 HD-DVD player. These feed through a Denon AVC-A11XV AV amp to a Panasonic PT-AE1000E LCD projector. The projector fires onto a 106" Grandview Cyber screen. Oh and I also have a Philips 42PF9731D LCD TV. Both the TV and amp are only 1080i capable, but I may upgrade to a higher spec Denon or Onkyo amp soon, which will allow me to feed the Panasonic projector with a 1080p signal. But for now, I'm very happy with the results of the projector, it gives a lovely image....
Steve.

I am on the sidelines right now (no HD optical medial in my rack) and am using a DVD upscaler for now. My TV is a Sony KF-E50A10 (50" RP LCD 720p native resolution).

I am considering getting an HD-DVD player in 6 months time or so. I only need 720p output. I am curious to see if Blu-Ray will come out with a player to compete with the A-2. Not everyone needs 1080p output...

sorry, Plazman, what you said really didn't finish in complete sentences or get a point accross. Could you try that one more time???

Something about BD supporters being more hypocrytical because 90% of us own a PS3 and .....well, then was lost after that....

So with all this discussion about what display people use to watch their HD on . . I have a question . . .

How many have had their display Professionally Calibrated?

There is a BIG difference between what you can do with a test disk and a few adjustments versus an experienced calibrater with thousands of dollars of test equipment and over 100 adjustments.

Are you settling for the best that you can do over the best your display can do?

I just had Eliab Alvarez de la Campa calibrate my Panasonic AE1000U 1080p LCD projector and he did a fantastic job as always. This is the first front projector I've ever owned and it's amazing. I've had MANY rear-projection units including DLP and CRT, but this thing blows them all away.

Once you go front, you never go back! haha. Sorry.

Anyway, I mate it with the A2. I'm waiting to see more reviews of the new Samsung dual-format player before I trade-up for it. I can see this format war going for years, and there are getting to be more than a few BD's that I want now.