1080i vs. 1080p, any visible difference? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 33 Old 02-28-2007, 11:33 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Krout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm wondering if there is any difference in picture quality between 1080i and 1080p in terms of HD-DVD/Blu-ray. And if there are differences, are they visibly apparent? Thanks for the help.
Krout is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 33 Old 03-01-2007, 12:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 31
You have to specify for a film-based source or a video-based source, first. Otherwise, the answer could be yes or no, and both answers could be correct. Then once you get past that, there is a difference between theoretically and in-practice. Once again, the answer could be yes or no, and both answers could still be correct. How's that for an answer that takes you nowhere?

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is offline  
post #3 of 33 Old 03-01-2007, 12:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Star56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: In my armed redoubt deep in the mountains of northern Ohio
Posts: 3,491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krout View Post

I'm wondering if there is any difference in picture quality between 1080i and 1080p in terms of HD-DVD/Blu-ray. And if there are differences, are they visibly apparent? Thanks for the help.

No.

These Links will answer your questions

http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoff...061080iv1080p/

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-ente...ork-160103.php

42" in the dining room.
50" in the bedroom
80" in the living room

65" in the family room
106" in the family room


"There is another system"

Video Modes: SDTV-EDTV-XGA-HDTV-3D
All HD Modes: Blu Ray, HD DVD, DVHS

Star56 is offline  
post #4 of 33 Old 03-01-2007, 04:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Spektricide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Most everyone on this forum will tell you.

720P looks better than 1080i.

1080i=1080p virtually unnoticeable


THEREFORE.....

720P looks better than 1080p............

I'm sure anyone can see the issue here..
Spektricide is offline  
post #5 of 33 Old 03-01-2007, 04:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
vurbano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 7,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektricide View Post

Most everyone on this forum will tell you.

720P looks better than 1080i.

I doubt that. For a still image 1080i blows 720p away. 720p's advantage is its progressive nature in motion scenes. Once you apply progressive scan to 1080i you get something that is not only sharper than 720p during stills but also has all of its advantages during fast motion.
vurbano is offline  
post #6 of 33 Old 03-01-2007, 06:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HPforMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,813
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektricide View Post

Most everyone on this forum will tell you.

720P looks better than 1080i.

1080i=1080p virtually unnoticeable


THEREFORE.....

720P looks better than 1080p............

I'm sure anyone can see the issue here..


I read sarcasm...
HPforMe is offline  
post #7 of 33 Old 03-01-2007, 09:27 PM
Senior Member
 
dwisniski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Florence, NJ
Posts: 498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektricide View Post

Most everyone on this forum will tell you.

720P looks better than 1080i.

I'm one person on this forum who will disagree with this statement. To my eyes and on my display (HD DVD + Blu-ray, Panny AE900u) 1080i most definitely looks better than 720p. But to each his own...
dwisniski is offline  
post #8 of 33 Old 03-02-2007, 04:04 AM
Senior Member
 
Spektricide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I personally don't have a 720o/1080i source to judge on other than OTA broadcast signals so I can't dispute or verify the 720p > 1080i claim. However, it doesn't take much of a math genius to know that 1080p > 720p.

I think a lot of people try to explain 1080p as being equal to 1080i want to rationalize themselves into not owning another TV.

It's kinda like the people who talk about getting 1:1 pixel mapping on their 720p TV for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. It's all encoded in 1080p so your never getting a 1:1 pixel map to the source. So even if your TV does 1:1 pixel mapping, the signal is still getting scaled at the player.
Spektricide is offline  
post #9 of 33 Old 03-02-2007, 04:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
wormraper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tucson Arizona
Posts: 4,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektricide View Post

I personally don't have a 720o/1080i source to judge on other than OTA broadcast signals so I can't dispute or verify the 720p > 1080i claim. However, it doesn't take much of a math genius to know that 1080p > 720p.

I think a lot of people try to explain 1080p as being equal to 1080i want to rationalize themselves into not owning another TV.

1080i and 1080p are virtually indistinguishable on a 1080p TV using a 1080p source. In terms of the player outputting 1080i you won't see a difference being that the source is 1080p. However if you were saying that a 1080i source and a 1080p source are indistinguishable then I would have to cry foul.
wormraper is online now  
post #10 of 33 Old 03-02-2007, 09:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sketcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Grants Pass, Oregon
Posts: 3,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HPforMe View Post

I read sarcasm...

Max your volume and click...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tWWHi7aYTyU
Sketcha is offline  
post #11 of 33 Old 03-02-2007, 09:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sketcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Grants Pass, Oregon
Posts: 3,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So...

Given a 1080p source (software w/capable player) and display with 1080p input capability....

1. Set the player to 1080i and let the display deinterlace.

2. Set the player to 1080p.

Can you see a difference?


My guess is, unless you have a very capable deinterlacer in your display, you might see the difference.

Seems like why introduce another link into the digital chain?

But in practice, I don't know... So I'm askin'.
Sketcha is offline  
post #12 of 33 Old 03-02-2007, 09:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PeterS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 2,338
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 25
This is simple - I don't see why this issue keeps coming up.

First - Almost EVERYONE misses the point. Are you talking about TRANSMISSION or DISPLAY??? These are two different issues.

Second - ALL digital displays which are 1080 are 1080p at the panels - regardless of the input limitations (if they only take in 1080i). 1080i in display technology is limited to scanning rasters - or CRT-based systems. There is no 1080i digital display.

Third - in TRANSMISSION, you can send the signal as either 1080i or 1080p (or 1080psf - which is getting too complicated). The issue is what then hits the panel.

The difference between (i) and (p) is wether or not the signal comes from two different moments in time (i) or one (p). However, if the difference in time is not relevant (such as in film where the actual source rate (24fps) is lower than the display rate 30 or 60fps, then there is no difference in 1080i vs. 1080p from a TRANSMISSION/SOURCE perspective.

Note - from video sources, the issue of (i) can make a greater difference as the two fields are offset in time from each other, and the field rate is equal to the display rate.

In Film however, if you look at it properly, I am either scanning and transmitting the film as:

(Progressive)
Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
Line 4

or (Interlaced)
Line 1
Line 3
(all odd lines)
Line 2
Line 4
(all even lines)

However, so long as the deinterlacing circuits putting the signal back together work as they should (and this is one of the easist tasks for them to perform), then when the image hits your screen, it should be

Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
Line 4

Regardless of how they were sent.

So, the long and short of it is, so long as your deinterlacer (built into the set) is working properly, then NO there should be no difference at all.

"Read Less, More TV." - Dr. Gregory House

"That which can not be questioned, can not be trusted." - Me

The Metropolis Home Theater

Blue Smoke Entertainment Systems - Affiliated
PeterS is offline  
post #13 of 33 Old 03-02-2007, 01:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sketcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Grants Pass, Oregon
Posts: 3,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sketcha View Post

So...

Given a 1080p source (software w/capable player) and display with 1080p input capability....

1. Set the player to 1080i and let the display deinterlace.

2. Set the player to 1080p.

Can you see a difference?


My guess is, unless you have a very capable deinterlacer in your display, you might see the difference.

Seems like why introduce another link into the digital chain?

But in practice, I don't know... So I'm askin'.

PeterS answered a few of my questions in PM. With his permission, I am posting them here, for reference.

Quote:


If you can go TRUE 1080p from source to display, than this is of course best.

However, most, if not all, 1080p sources ARE NOT TRUE 1080p. Since there is no broadcast or recording standard for 1080p, almost all of the 1080p output sources you see - such as BluRay, actually, internally deinterlace a 1080i signal and send it out 1080p. This is fine if the 1080p in your player is better than the one in your display, but this is RARELY the case (a notable exception it the deinterlacer in the Toshiba HD-XA2 player).

In general, you will find that the deiniterlacer in your display is better - and better tuned to the specifics of your display - of which it has intimate knowledge.

Remember, the key here is that there are really no 1080p native sources on the market.

Quote:


Both HD-DVD and BluRay are ENCODED on the disc as 24p - however, so far, only the Pioneer can actually output the 24p encode. All the rest must reinterlace to do 1080p60.

Sketcha is offline  
post #14 of 33 Old 03-02-2007, 05:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TheLion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
How about this excellent thread for a start:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=808958
TheLion is offline  
post #15 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 11:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
WilliamG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by wormraper View Post

1080i and 1080p are virtually indistinguishable on a 1080p TV using a 1080p source. In terms of the player outputting 1080i you won't see a difference being that the source is 1080p. However if you were saying that a 1080i source and a 1080p source are indistinguishable then I would have to cry foul.

You are 100% wrong. And you're also right, but it REALLY depends. My 1080p LCD does NOT deinterlace, so 1080i has nasty artifacting occasionally (moire, aliasing etc), whereas 1080p is clean as a whistle. I could point out 1080i vs 1080p every time (Samsung LN-S4695D).

So, if your 1080p display does NOT deinterlace, you want to feed it 1080p as much as possible.
WilliamG is offline  
post #16 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 11:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sketcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Grants Pass, Oregon
Posts: 3,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

My 1080p LCD does NOT deinterlace.

I've never heard of such a thing. How does an HDTV signal look?
Sketcha is offline  
post #17 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WilliamG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sketcha View Post

I've never heard of such a thing. How does an HDTV signal look?

Pretty good, though I'm going on a friend of mine's 1080i experience because I don't have any HDTV hookup whatsoever. I just use my TV for DVDs, video games, HTPC, Blu-ray and HD-DVD.

But yep, I can tell the difference between 1080i and 1080p. There are some scenes in Mission Impossible 3 HD-DVD that show significant moire and aliasing in 1080i on my XBOX 360 HD-DVD drive AND my Toshiba HD-A2 (both outputting 1080i), and via my HTPC at 1080p there are no issues at all. I can also see the difference on my PS3 when I switch the dashboard from 1080p to 1080i.

Also, PS2 games look like total ass on this set because 480i is not being deinterlaced. This causes all kinds of graphical issues - vertical bars in FMV sequences, etc. Just nasty. Never had any of these problems on my old plasma.

But yep, my set is not a good set for 1080i, or any interlaced signal.
WilliamG is offline  
post #18 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:07 PM
 
Slim GoodBooty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

You are 100% wrong. And you're also right, but it REALLY depends. My 1080p LCD does NOT deinterlace, so 1080i has nasty artifacting occasionally (moire, aliasing etc), whereas 1080p is clean as a whistle. I could point out 1080i vs 1080p every time (Samsung LN-S4695D).

So, if your 1080p display does NOT deinterlace, you want to feed it 1080p as much as possible.

What is the model of this mystery display?
Slim GoodBooty is offline  
post #19 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WilliamG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slim GoodBooty View Post

What is the model of this mystery display?

You just quoted me, and the model.

Samsung LN-S4695D, which is a 46" 1080p LCD. Great TV (absolutely love it), but boy does it blow with interlaced sources.
WilliamG is offline  
post #20 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:12 PM
 
Slim GoodBooty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

You just quoted me, and the model.

Samsung LN-S4695D, which is a 46" 1080p LCD. Great TV (absolutely love it), but boy does it blow with interlaced sources.

Damn, I guess I blew that.

Why do you believe that it doesn't deinterlace?
Slim GoodBooty is offline  
post #21 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WilliamG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slim GoodBooty View Post

Damn, I guess I blew that.

Why do you believe that it doesn't deinterlace?

I can see with my own eyes, and also the HDTV Guru (I think that was his name) said the TV failed all deinterlacing tests, as I recall. Someone here will know what I'm talking about.
WilliamG is offline  
post #22 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:25 PM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 22,805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

I can see with my own eyes, and also the HDTV Guru (I think that was his name) said the TV failed all deinterlacing tests, as I recall. Someone here will know what I'm talking about.

Gary Merson did a series of articles about this: basically many displays dropped half of the resolution in deinterlacing some signals

However newer displays using newer processors do better

Most of his tests are dated now

If I can find the threads, I will post a link (I had started one in the LCD & Plasma forum a year ago)
markrubin is online now  
post #23 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:32 PM
 
Slim GoodBooty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

I can see with my own eyes, and also the HDTV Guru (I think that was his name) said the TV failed all deinterlacing tests, as I recall. Someone here will know what I'm talking about.

That just means it sucks at it. The reason why it failed is because it was deinterlacing poorly.
Slim GoodBooty is offline  
post #24 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WilliamG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 22
However you want to put it, basically, I can see the difference between 1080i and 1080p, and you better believe that if this relatively nice Samsung looks craptastic at 1080i, other TVs will too. THEREFORE, 1080i vs 1080p is not a simple question.
WilliamG is offline  
post #25 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 12:53 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
John Mason's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 10,609
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post

Gary Merson did a series of articles about this: basically many displays dropped half of the resolution in deinterlacing some signals

However newer displays using newer processors do better

Most of his tests are dated now

If I can find the threads, I will post a link (I had started one in the LCD & Plasma forum a year ago)

Here's a post with three links to Merson's evaluations. -- John
John Mason is offline  
post #26 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
schticker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The AVS Echochamber
Posts: 2,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by vurbano View Post

I doubt that. For a still image 1080i blows 720p away. 720p's advantage is its progressive nature in motion scenes. Once you apply progressive scan to 1080i you get something that is not only sharper than 720p during stills but also has all of its advantages during fast motion.

All this effort and expense to get a picture that actually rivals a calibrated CRT.

The First Clarke Law states, 'If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible he is almost certainly right, but if he says that it is impossible he is very probably wrong.'
schticker is offline  
post #27 of 33 Old 03-13-2007, 01:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
abr27440's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Bentonville, AR
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Why cant people understand the difference between 1080i transmission of 1080p source, and true 1080i source?
abr27440 is offline  
post #28 of 33 Old 03-31-2014, 11:20 PM
Member
 
Sabidox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12

to cut this short and based on a personal experience...yes 1080p looks better, its smoother and sharper than 1080i , i kept on switching between signals on my 4k TV using a handy cam and  i can tell 1080p looks better.

 

the reason i am reading all these threads about 1080p and 1080i is because i might be wrong (maybe its only me or my brain telling me 1080p is better), i wanted to verify from somebody else but unfortunately i didn't find a decisive answer all tons of blab-la so i think i am going to trust my instinct on this.


Sony XBR-65X9004A 4K - Toshiba Qosmio i7 - PS3 - PS4 - Sony BDV-E6100 Home Theater - Sony Xperia Z1-Sony HDR GW 77v -  IPad Air - IPad Mini Retina - Macbook Pro Retina - Iphone 5S  - Lenovo Idea Pad S - Dre Beats Studio - Dre Beats Pill
Sabidox is offline  
post #29 of 33 Old 04-01-2014, 05:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabidox View Post

to cut this short and based on a personal experience...yes 1080p looks better, its smoother and sharper than 1080i , i kept on switching between signals on my 4k TV using a handy cam and  i can tell 1080p looks better.
You don't mention frame rate. Interlaced shot content has twice the number of samples taken per second. So 1080p24 has 24 pictures per second, 1080p25 has 25 pictures per second, and interlaced 1080i25 (50i) has 50 pictures per second. So when, at the same frame rate, interlaced has twice as many pictures of the scene taken per second, why do you say progressive is smoother? If you're using progressive at 60 fps that will look just as smooth as 60i, and should look better, depending on bitrate. But you need to say more about the content type and frame rate. On Blu-ray, 1080p24 is the only full HD progressive format currently, which will give a lot less smooth motion than 1080i25 (50i) or 1080i30 (60i).
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #30 of 33 Old 04-01-2014, 11:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 756
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Interlaced is sending 1/2 the vertical resolution on each frame (odd lines) and reconstructing full frames prior to display. It is really that simple. Effectively it means a 1080i 60hz interlaced signal is only effectively showing you the equivalent 1080p / 30 at most. Probably actually 24p, which means you get the full 1080p/24 in a broadcast signal, but the cadence is off and it's up to the TV or set top box to make it progressive again and do the pulldown from 30hz to 24hz. (if at all. cadence can be changed prior to broadcast at the source).

As others have written here, all LCDs and plasmas and so on display progressive scan. Interlaced signals take 2 frames to make 1 final one.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
Reply HDTV Software Media Discussion

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off