Okay, I've done my research and I believe I have a basic understanding of 1080 signals, but I'd just like to clarify and make sure that I do.

Given
You have a 1080p television that "correctly" de-interlaces 1080i material

Question
As I understand it, HD-DVD's/Blu-ray contain an image that is 1080p resolution, 24 times a second. When you output that signal as a 1080p signal from the disk player, it alternately doubles and triples frames to make 60 per second, and when a 1080p TV receives that signal, all it does is paste those 60 frames straight up onto the screen.

Now, if you still have that 1080p TV, but you switch the player to output in 1080i (or you now hookup a 1080i only player), that player will take each one of the 24 1080-pixel frames, split it into two 540 pixel frames to get 48 frames per second, double some of them to get 60, and send it to the TV. When the TV receives these 540p frames, it will hold the first one of each set, add the second one to get a 1080p image, and then double (or triple) it to get back to 60 frames a second after combination, the whole time ignoring the doubled 540p frames that the player originally made to get the 60hz signal that it sent. When all is said and done, the images that are pasted up on the screen are EXACTLY the same. (As in, you can use a 1080i HD-DVD player on a 1080p TV, and you have no drawback)

Is this correct? What am I overlooking? Thanks in advance.

These links have more details on the process
http://www.100fps.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine

These links show how badly TVs de-interlace 1080i signal in real life.
http://hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/1107hook2/
http://www.hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/1106hook/index.html

The biggest issue is that we have two major video sources: film in 1080p24 and video/tv in 1080i. The method used to deinterlace the two are difference so your tv must analyze the signal to determine which to use. The tv's job is further complicated since the source materials used in film can originate from film and video in difference scenes or even in the same scene.

Most tv don't have the processing or memory resources to handle de-interlacing 1080i properly. When Toshiba starts putting the Cell processors in their TV or when tv mfgs using putting Reon chips, then the above statement can be assumed.

LOL look at all the miserable 3:2 fails.

Midshipman, in principle your thoughts are correct. However, the devil is in the detail. The main problem is that the TV needs to recognize that it is receiving an 1080p24 sequence encoded in 1080i, as opposed to genuine 1080i (which is used for video-sourced material like sports). This "film mode" detection does not always work 100% correctly, and in that case the TV will not simply "weave" the two fields together, but use some more complex (and lossy) interpolation method for deinterlacing.

That said, modern digital displays generally have quite good deinterlacers. Also, BD and HD DVD make the job easier for the deinterlacer compared to DVD or TV, since the 3:2 cadence is player-generated and thus generally error-free, whereas on DVD and TV there are often "jumps" e.g. at cut points which can throw off the deinterlacer.

Another thing to note is that some of the "1080p" BD and HD DVD players do exactly the same thing: They first decode the video stream into 1080i, and then use a deinterlacer (implemented by the same type of chip that is used in TVs) to convert this to 1080p. In these cases the deinterlacing has just moved from the TV into the player.

does anyone know if any tvs can correctly convert 1080p60 to 1080p24 (48/72/120) ???

does anyone know if any tvs can correctly convert 1080p60 to 1080p24 (48/72/120) ???

I hope you mean 1080i60. They're talking about 3:2 pulldown detection from 1080i TV (sat, cable, OTA) broadcasts. The Pioneer plasmas are known for detecting 3:2 pulldown and performing a reverse of that to change their display to 72Hz for a 3:3 cadence. Several other sets passed , too.

Does autodetection or 1080p24 input matter for a set that can't refresh a natural number multiple of 24Hz? (Yes, I read about the strobing and panning.)

I hope you mean 1080i60. They're talking about 3:2 pulldown detection from 1080i TV (sat, cable, OTA) broadcasts. The Pioneer plasmas are known for detecting 3:2 pulldown and performing a reverse of that to change their display to 72Hz for a 3:3 cadence. Several other sets passed , too.

Does autodetection or 1080p24 input matter for a set that can't refresh a natural number multiple of 24Hz? (Yes, I read about the strobing and panning.)

no. i mean 1080p60. some players only output 1080p60 and not 1080p24.

so, you have a choice of 1080i60 or 1080p60 from the player.

"does any display properly convert 1080p60 to 1080p24" is my question.

no. i mean 1080p60. some players only output 1080p60 and not 1080p24.

so, you have a choice of 1080i60 or 1080p60 from the player.

"does any display properly convert 1080p60 to 1080p24" is my question.

Don't know for sure but Pioneer would be a brand that I would check into. They have pretty good record judging from my links in post #2.

LOL look at all the miserable 3:2 fails.

Yup.

"Overall, this year's HDTVs have significantly improved deinterlacing abilities, with a 64.86-percent pass rate, up from last year's 45.91 pass rate. The failure rate for proper 3:2 processing is still very poor at 81.09 percent."

no. i mean 1080p60. some players only output 1080p60 and not 1080p24.

so, you have a choice of 1080i60 or 1080p60 from the player.

"does any display properly convert 1080p60 to 1080p24" is my question.

You can take 1080i 60Hz and convert to native 1080p 24HZ (or 48HZ in my case) but only a few external video processors can do this and I don't know of any TV's that can. I don't think you can take 1080p 60Hz and convert to native 1080p 24Hz.

You can take 1080i 60Hz and convert to native 1080p 24HZ (or 48HZ in my case) but only a few external video processors can do this and I don't know of any TV's that can. I don't think you can take 1080p 60Hz and convert to native 1080p 24Hz.

i am pretty sure a lot of the FPs and tvs that support 1080p24 also convert 1080i60 to 1080p24/48/72... internally. i have never heard of 1080p60 to 1080p24 support.

When all is said and done, the images that are pasted up on the screen are EXACTLY the same. (As in, you can use a 1080i HD-DVD player on a 1080p TV, and you have no drawback)

Basically yes.

i am pretty sure a lot of the FPs and tvs that support 1080p24 also convert 1080i60 to 1080p24/48/72... internally. i have never heard of 1080p60 to 1080p24 support.

That's my thinking too. In principle, if a TV can support 24p and 60i and 60p adaptively, it should have enough smarts to do the deinterlacing and cadence properly, but I think all TVs should have a menu selection to force 60i (540p) or forced 24p 60p (from 60i) given as owners, we know what material is being fed.

That's easier and less prone to errors than the smart deinterlacing that are more likely to yield wrong per pixel results if it relies on heuristics are are too easy to defeat. All this will go awat if 1080P24 becomes a standard widely accepted signal for HD, and all TVs can accept this signal in the future. Failing that, telling the tv how to handle 1080i60 feed is a good compromise in the meantime. (ie: always weave or always bob, none of these per pixel multi-field messy heuristics that fail so easily --- not to mention the 100-200ms delay in the display pipe introduced by the deinterlacers) .

Like early generation deinterlacing HDTVs, the HD-A1s deinterlacer is too aggressive with 480i60 materials and makes bad mistakes on the torture clips deliberately designed to catch deinterlacers designed for movie based materials and forgot about 60i video.

Like early generation deinterlacing HDTVs, the HD-A1s deinterlacer is too aggressive with 480i60 materials and makes bad mistakes on the torture clips deliberately designed to catch deinterlacers designed for movie based materials and forgot about 60i video.

Ah, so that's what I see with my A1. I only have a couple of 480i video SD disks, and I see deinterlacing problems. With film material it's perfect. Better that bug than having problems with film mode though!

You have a pretty good understanding of the process. It is fairly complicated, and does not get discussed around here often enough. I've added some comments to your text below:

Okay, I've done my research and I believe I have a basic understanding of 1080 signals, but I'd just like to clarify and make sure that I do.

Given
You have a 1080p television that "correctly" de-interlaces 1080i material

Question
As I understand it, HD-DVD's/Blu-ray contain an image that is 1080p resolution, 24 times a second. When you output that signal as a 1080p signal from the disk player, it alternately doubles and triples frames to make 60 per second, and when a 1080p TV receives that signal, all it does is paste those 60 frames straight up onto the screen.

Now, if you still have that 1080p TV, but you switch the player to output in 1080i (or you now hookup a 1080i only player), that player will take each one of the 24 1080-pixel frames, split it into two 540 pixel frames [actually this should be two 540 pixel *fields* -SS]to get 48 frames per second, double some of them to get 60, and send it to the TV. When the TV receives these 540p frames [fields], it will hold the first one of each set, add the second one to get a 1080p image, and then double (or triple) it to get back to 60 frames a second after combination, the whole time ignoring the doubled 540p frames [this is what I have a hard time understanding, how the TV drops this extra 1920x540 field -SS] that the player originally made to get the 60hz signal that it sent. When all is said and done, the images that are pasted up on the screen are EXACTLY the same. (As in, you can use a 1080i HD-DVD player on a 1080p TV [As you noted, only if your 1080p TV does proper inverse telecine deinterlacing of 1080i film based sources, few do -SS], and you have no drawback)

Is this correct? What am I overlooking? Thanks in advance.

Please correct me if im missunderstanding anything.
1080i/60 = 540p/60
1080p/24 = 1080i/48
1080p/30 = 1080i/60

If this is true and i am understanding this correctly than what is the advantage of having a 1080p/60 display over a 1080i/60 display for 1080p/24/30 content in terms of resolution? Wouldnt the pulldown process be the same only adding reduntant frames in the 60p tv? Is there a realistic benifit of this? Does this really make for a smoother picture?

I understand that a 1080p/72 or 1080p120 display is desirable for 24hz content because it is an even multiple and eliminates the need to do a 3:2 pulldown hence eliminating motion jutter but unless broadcast goes 1080p/60 or you have 60 fps video games to play why would you want a 1080p/60 display over a 1080i display from a resolution standpoint?

THe rapid evolution of display devices and the marketing practices of ce compinies has made things confusing to me. Im starting to feel like lusting after 1080p is more perception of benifits than actual benifits. If my grasp of these principles is sound i see no need to upgrade my 1080i rpcrt untill 1080p/120hz displays come way down in price or broadcast goes to 1080p/60. If im wrong on this stuff please someone set me strait.

Well, you've got it kinda right, 1080p/24=1080i/48 would never be used in any scenario. 1080i/60=540p/60 is a bad assumption, because with video based material, each 1080i field captures different information every 1/60 of a second, so with static images, it is twice the resolution of 540p. And with film-based sources, each 1080i/60 field is holding 1/2 of the frame from a 1080p/24 image, so it's not really 540p. However, many TVs assemble the 1080i/60 fields incorrectly and give you the equivalent of 540p resolution.


I have a 1080i CRT RPTV and a 1080p LCD (that does inverse telecine and motion adaptive deinterlacing correctly), and I can safely say the 1080p device is much sharper, with more resolution. This is a combination of two things: 1) CRTs can rarely focus tight enough to see all of the 1080i scan lines and 2) with proper 3:2 pulldown of film based sources, a 1080p display will show more detail/less artifacts of a film based source.
Please correct me if im missunderstanding anything.
1080i/60 = 540p/60
1080p/24 = 1080i/48
1080p/30 = 1080i/60

If this is true and i am understanding this correctly than what is the advantage of having a 1080p/60 display over a 1080i/60 display for 1080p/24/30 content in terms of resolution? Wouldnt the pulldown process be the same only adding reduntant frames in the 60p tv? Is there a realistic benifit of this? Does this really make for a smoother picture?

I understand that a 1080p/72 or 1080p120 display is desirable for 24hz content because it is an even multiple and eliminates the need to do a 3:2 pulldown hence eliminating motion jutter but unless broadcast goes 1080p/60 or you have 60 fps video games to play why would you want a 1080p/60 display over a 1080i display from a resolution standpoint?

THe rapid evolution of display devices and the marketing practices of ce compinies has made things confusing to me. Im starting to feel like lusting after 1080p is more perception of benifits than actual benifits. If my grasp of these principles is sound i see no need to upgrade my 1080i rpcrt untill 1080p/120hz displays come way down in price or broadcast goes to 1080p/60. If im wrong on this stuff please someone set me strait.

Just wanted to thank you all for your insights.
This is one of the best forums on the internet; filled with very knowledgeable and helpful people.

Just wanted to thank you all for your insights.
This is one of the best forums on the internet; filled with very knowledgeable and helpful people.

imo this is the biggest strength of avs... getting to the bottom of the tech.

imo for the enthusiast on a tight budget, it is best to spend as little on the player as possible and put the money into the display. get one that supports 1080p24 and 1080i correctly. hopefully they will have player/tv bundles for the holidays.

if you make sure you buy a display that does proper de interlacing to 24p internally then you don't need a better player.

however, if you already have the display 1080i might suck compared to 1080p due to screwed up de interlacing in the tv and the more expensive player is needed.

I wasn't aware that tv's could accept 1080p60, I thought the valid signals were:

1080p24
1080p30
1080i60

Also, don't a number of players(like samsung) that output 1080p do so be converting the 1080p24 movie to 1080i, then de-interlacing it again to 1080p? So which is better, the player de-interlacing or the tv? When they tested the tv's did they also test the players?

Just wanted to thank you all for your insights.
This is one of the best forums on the internet; filled with very knowledgeable and helpful people.+1

Well, you've got it kinda right, 1080p/24=1080i/48 would never be used in any scenario. 1080i/60=540p/60 is a bad assumption, because with video based material, each 1080i field captures different information every 1/60 of a second, so with static images, it is twice the resolution of 540p. And with film-based sources, each 1080i/60 field is holding 1/2 of the frame from a 1080p/24 image, so it's not really 540p. However, many TVs assemble the 1080i/60 fields incorrectly and give you the equivalent of 540p resolution.


I have a 1080i CRT RPTV and a 1080p LCD (that does inverse telecine and motion adaptive deinterlacing correctly), and I can safely say the 1080p device is much sharper, with more resolution. This is a combination of two things: 1) CRTs can rarely focus tight enough to see all of the 1080i scan lines and 2) with proper 3:2 pulldown of film based sources, a 1080p display will show more detail/less artifacts of a film based source.I know 1080i/48 would never be used for anything i just wanted to show the interlaced equivilent to 1080p/24. Thanks for getting me right on the 540p part.

As far 1080i/60 vs 1080p/60 displays for 1080p24 material im still kinda confused. Are you saying that in theory there is no advantage with 1080p but in practice crt's cant focus tight enough to display the full resolution or that the 1080p display actually shows more resolution in theory and in practice?

As far 1080i/60 vs 1080p/60 displays for 1080p24 material im still kinda confused. Are you saying that in theory there is no advantage with 1080p but in practice crt's cant focus tight enough to display the full resolution or that the 1080p display actually shows more resolution in theory and in practice?

I'm not sure I completely understand you question. A 1080p DLP/SXRD/LCD projector/display that runs at 48/72/120hz with a 24p input, or does proper 3:2 pulldown of 1080i/60 film-based material would all show the same resolution.

There are some big 9" CRTs that can do 1080p (think Sony G90, big $$). Typically only 9" CRT RPTVs can show true 1080i across the entire screen. I suppose this is ideal for 1080i/60 video, but you'll still see jaggie artifacts as a nature of the source material. There's also focus and convergence concerns with CRTs.

Life is full of compromises, but luckily displays are getting better and cheaper every year. With a little research, you can find 1080p displays that will push the limits of what all HD formats have to offer.

I can tell you this: my 1080i CRT RPTV has extraodinary black levels, I mean pure black. While my 1080p LCD is clearly sharper, has better focus across the image, and never any convergence or geometry problems. However, black is more like a "dark gray". So, resolution is not necessarily the ultimate decision to make when deciding on a display.

You can take 1080i 60Hz and convert to native 1080p 24HZ (or 48HZ in my case) but only a few external video processors can do this and I don't know of any TV's that can. I don't think you can take 1080p 60Hz and convert to native 1080p 24Hz.

The Pioneer plasmas *do* do this with 1080i but do *not* do this with 1080p.

I wasn't aware that tv's could accept 1080p60, I thought the valid signals were:

1080p24
1080p30
1080i60

The accepted signals are usually 1080p/24, 1080p/60, and 1080i/60.

My brand new Pioneer plasma, for example, does not claim it can accept 1080p/30.

I'm not sure I completely understand you question. A 1080p DLP/SXRD/LCD projector/display that runs at 48/72/120hz with a 24p input, or does proper 3:2 pulldown of 1080i/60 film-based material would all show the same resolution.

There are some big 9" CRTs that can do 1080p (think Sony G90, big $$). Typically only 9" CRT RPTVs can show true 1080i across the entire screen. I suppose this is ideal for 1080i/60 video, but you'll still see jaggie artifacts as a nature of the source material. There's also focus and convergence concerns with CRTs.

Life is full of compromises, but luckily displays are getting better and cheaper every year. With a little research, you can find 1080p displays that will push the limits of what all HD formats have to offer.

I can tell you this: my 1080i CRT RPTV has extraodinary black levels, I mean pure black. While my 1080p LCD is clearly sharper, has better focus across the image, and never any convergence or geometry problems. However, black is more like a "dark gray". So, resolution is not necessarily the ultimate decision to make when deciding on a display.Sorry if my wording is confusing but this subject is kind of confusing. I'll try to do better this time.

The 1080i/60 display is essentialy the same thing as having a 1080p/30 display and the source is 1080p/24 than all of the resolution of the original content should be displayed on the 1080i display right? When displaying the same content on 1080p/60 display you are not really gaining resolution aren't you basicly upconverting it to 1080p/60 by adding reduntant frames?

Sorry if my wording is confusing but this subject is kind of confusing. I'll try to do better this time.

The 1080i/60 display is essentialy the same thing as having a 1080p/30 display and the source is 1080p/24 than all of the resolution of the original content should be displayed on the 1080i display right? When displaying the same content on 1080p/60 display you are not really gaining resolution aren't you basicly upconverting it to 1080p/60 by adding reduntant frames?

Well, your question is slightly nonsensical. The display is 1080p either way. Everything gets scaled to 1080p. The limitation is what inputs the display accepts, and then how well it is capable of handling those inputs, specifically how well it can detect the cadence of the content and do IVT if necessary. If you have a display that can only refresh the display at multiples of 30fps, then feeding it it 1080p24 content will result in judder.

I'm not really sure if that answers your question, but I couldn't completely decipher it, so maybe not? :)

Sorry if my wording is confusing but this subject is kind of confusing. I'll try to do better this time.

The 1080i/60 display is essentialy the same thing as having a 1080p/30 display and the source is 1080p/24 than all of the resolution of the original content should be displayed on the 1080i display right? When displaying the same content on 1080p/60 display you are not really gaining resolution aren't you basicly upconverting it to 1080p/60 by adding reduntant frames?The answer to this question is not as simple as one might think.

First of all, when discussing 1080i60 material, one must distinguish between whether the native source was a 1080i60 native source, or a progressive image source.

For instance, TV shows, sports, etc, are often filmed natively as 1080i60, which means that ALL 60 fields are different images. Deinterlacing this is dependent on "filling in" the missing lines for each and every field, to create 60 different frames per second, for a true 1080p60. VPs like the Realta HQV are good at this, as well as converting 1080i50 native sources (like SkyHD Sports) into 1080p50.

However, if the source material for the 1080i60 output was actually progressively filmed material, such as 1080p24, 1080p25 or 1080p30, then some of the fields will actually just be the "other half" of a full frame that gets split into two fields. As such the information is repeated, unlike a true 1080i60 source.

This makes it easier to deinterlace in some ways, but harder in others, as many processors don't expect this 2:2 pulldown variant.

Currently, my Samsung 4695 handles this fine, as well as my Vantage HD video processor also.

Well, your question is slightly nonsensical. The display is 1080p either way. Everything gets scaled to 1080p. The limitation is what inputs the display accepts, and then how well it is capable of handling those inputs, specifically how well it can detect the cadence of the content and do IVT if necessary. If you have a display that can only refresh the display at multiples of 30fps, then feeding it it 1080p24 content will result in judder.

I'm not really sure if that answers your question, but I couldn't completely decipher it, so maybe not? :)Yeah it seems everbody is having that problem. I hope you guys dont think im retarded and maybe people are confused because im asking how this principal applies to the displays instead of how the player outputs. I also apologize if this is slightly off topic. Basicly what i am asking is if there is any advantage in having a 1080p/60 display over a 1080i display for watching blu ray or hd dvd?

Yeah it seems everbody is having that problem. I hope you guys dont think im retarded and maybe people are confused because im asking how this principal applies to the displays instead of how the player outputs. I also apologize if this is slightly off topic. Basicly what i am asking is if there is any advantage in having a 1080p/60 display over a 1080i display for watching blu ray or hd dvd?

Not really. And there are very few (if any) "new" 1080i displays. Any flat panel or projector is a progressive display. The previous posts discuss the nuances associated with that.

Not really. And there are very few (if any) "new" 1080i displays. Any flat panel or projector is a progressive display. The previous posts discuss the nuances associated with that.
Right I understand that, but I already own a tosh rpcrt that i bought a year ago for $800 bucks brand new. I couldnt be happier with my dive into hd but this question has bugged me since i began thinking about diving into HDM.

Right I understand that, but I already own a tosh rpcrt that i bought a year ago for $800 bucks brand new. I couldnt be happier with my dive into hd but this question has bugged me since i began thinking about diving into HDM.

No worries. 1080p60 is largely a marketing thing with very little real technical value. But the display manufacturers have indeed made it confusing in playing a numbers game to try and sell more sets.

1080i60? Fine. 1080p24 as well? A bonus.

1080p60? Meh. Show me content first. Video games maybe.

No worries. 1080p60 is largely a marketing thing with very little real technical value. But the display manufacturers have indeed made it confusing in playing a numbers game to try and sell more sets.

1080i60? Fine. 1080p24 as well? A bonus.

1080p60? Meh. Show me content first. Video games maybe.Pretty much what i thought to begin with. Thanks for the confirmation. A 1080p/120 display with a 1080p/24 output player would be cool though. I'll probably wait awhile to go that route.

Pretty much what i thought to begin with. Thanks for the confirmation. A 1080p/120 display with a 1080p/24 output player would be cool though. I'll probably wait awhile to go that route.

Indeed... my projector will do 24p input and display at 96fps. I'm looking to upgrade to a 24p capable HD DVD player soon.