Why 1080p has no merit, apart from maybe reducing SDE. - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 144 Old 12-25-2006, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Lindahl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Dan,

I'm not really the person to be answering these questions with any authority, but I can tell you what I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanLW View Post

Does the limitation of the tapes also apply to more recent movies which were recorded digitally, such as the Star Wars movies?

I believe so, since it's also true of computer generated animations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanLW View Post

Where in the process are these tapes used - between the final cut and the film that makes it's way into theaters, or is it rather something used to get the information to the machines which make the optical media?

I believe the film is sampled to digital video (detail lost). Then the digital video is edited (detail lost), and then finally encoded onto a D5 master tape (detail lost). These tapes are duplicated and delivered to theaters. Then, the D5 tapes are transcoded to the delivery format (MPEG4/MPEG2) and then delivered via optical media (HD-DVD/Blue-Ray/DVD) to the public.
Lindahl is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 144 Old 12-25-2006, 03:56 PM
PLB
Senior Member
 
PLB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
It doesn't matter whether you think you can see the difference between 1080 and 720. Almost everyone will sooner or later buy a 1080 projector. Why? Because that's all that will be sold for Home Theater.

Already its hard to find new models of 480 projectors. InFocus decided not to create a 1080 projector and instead created a very good new 480 model - the IN72. Now they are having trouble giving them away. A new IN72 costs today about $100 more than its bulb. I doubt if they are making a lot of money at those prices. They get more than three times as much money for their 720 models.

The half life of a projector's price is about nine months. The Panasonic 1080 model could sell for about $1,700 by next Labor Day (the time of the year when prices are lowest). It won't drop too much after that. In fact the price should rise a little to about $2,000 by next Christmas. The Misubishi will sell at a similar price.

There will be a lot of 720 projectors sold next year at around $500 to $700. There will be no new 480 projectors developed and not many sold.

In a rock bottom HT the projector price may be 40% or 50% of the total price. But in an average HT setup with a pretty good screen, light contol drapes, decent speakers, and good electronics the price of the projector is likely to be less than 25% of all costs. In the big fancy $50,000+ HT setups the price of the projector is just not a major consideration. The carpeting, seats and wiring are likely to be more expensive.

So if I'm building a new Home Theater next year - shall I go with 1080 for a total price of $52,000 or will I settle for 720 and only spend $51,000?
PLB is offline  
post #93 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
Otto J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by PLB View Post

In a rock bottom HT the projector price may be 40% or 50% of the total price. But in an average HT setup with a pretty good screen, light contol drapes, decent speakers, and good electronics the price of the projector is likely to be less than 25% of all costs. In the big fancy $50,000+ HT setups the price of the projector is just not a major consideration. The carpeting, seats and wiring are likely to be more expensive.

So if I'm building a new Home Theater next year - shall I go with 1080 for a total price of $52,000 or will I settle for 720 and only spend $51,000?

I agree with you completely, HOWEVER - in a $50.000 home theater, you'd still have to choose between 3-chip 720P and 1-chip 1080P, were you to go with DLP exclusively (which may or may not be a good idea, but it's still a valid point). In the future I believe you're right, at some point all projectors will be 1080P (and higher, probably), but right now you won't _necessarily_ be getting the best picture for your money by going for 1080P, even at higher price ranges.

EDIT: What I'm trying to say is: Getting 1080P isn't always just a matter of paying a premium and getting the exact same picture quality as the 720P version, just at higher resolution. Often, but of course not always, you are giving away picture quality in other areas, to get 1080P.

Mvh. Otto, AV Precision
Installer/Calibrator
Otto J is offline  
post #94 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 05:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
briandx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lewes DE
Posts: 1,139
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Otto J: I'm not sure what you mean by your statement that sometimes you are giving away picture quality to go with 1080p.

If mean going with a 1080p vs. 720p unit, based on my observations the only thing I'm giving away by going to 1080p is additional bucks out of my wallet!
briandx is offline  
post #95 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 05:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Tweakophyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Boulder, CO, USA
Posts: 3,361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have a 480p PJ and am sitting closer than I "should be". You can train your eyes to ignore SDE to some level. I'd love to have a 1080p PJ, though there is another issue if you get 1080p vs 720p. The whole chain needs to support the native resolution of your PJ. For HTPCs and gaming it is easier to drive a 720p image. In other words if you buy a "cheap" car that requires hi-octane fuel, you may end up spending more than just the difference in buy-price.

To some degree the resolution of the PJ is the sizzle part of the specs, kind of like the number of mega-pixels in a digital camera. I'd rather have a 720p PJ with incredible optics, color fidelity, real contrast, and image processing than a 1080p PJ that cut too many corners. You could argue to some extent, the HD70 shows the buying public does not focus on these other, highly important features.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Tweakophyte is offline  
post #96 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 05:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
briandx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lewes DE
Posts: 1,139
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've personally seen two 1080p projectors and have read the reviews on several others, and none of them to my knowledge has cut any corners.

IMHO the 1080p projectors I've seen are better in every tangible way than the 720p units I've seen.

Having said that, the vast majority of the general public will not either see or care about these differences, given the extra $2K or more it costs to go 1080p.

I myself was extremely impressed with the 720p units I saw. If SDE was not present I probably would have bought the Sanyo Z5. But to me, SDE is the ultimate show-stopper.
briandx is offline  
post #97 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 10:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
augiedoggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: North Tonawanda NY,
Posts: 1,164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by briandx View Post

Otto J: I'm not sure what you mean by your statement that sometimes you are giving away picture quality to go with 1080p.

If mean going with a 1080p vs. 720p unit, based on my observations the only thing I'm giving away by going to 1080p is additional bucks out of my wallet!

what he is trying to say is a 3chip 720p could be a better choice than a one chip 1080p...depending on owner (rainbows) I could see this being a great point... and possibly better colors.. but then there's the convergence thing being introduced...
augiedoggy is offline  
post #98 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 10:59 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Jones_Rush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
If by using the state-of-the-art HD-DVD/Blu-ray transfers, we are still limited to a maximum of 1300 horizontal lines, which could be (almost) fully presented by a 720p projector, then maybe we should test the difference between 1080 and 720 projectors, using a computer with on-the-fly graphics.

A computer (with a good 3D card) doesn't have a problem to produce 1920x1080 graphics, and it will be interesting if by using this method, people who watch at around 1.5X, will suddenly discover a whole new world of detail and immersion (in comparison to 720p). Imo I don't think it would happen, but at least those who claim we are limited by the resolution of the source, will have an answer.

Eventually the transfers will be done using 1920 lines, it's just a matter of time.
Jones_Rush is offline  
post #99 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 11:28 AM
Advanced Member
 
Otto J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by briandx View Post

Otto J: I'm not sure what you mean by your statement that sometimes you are giving away picture quality to go with 1080p.

If mean going with a 1080p vs. 720p unit, based on my observations the only thing I'm giving away by going to 1080p is additional bucks out of my wallet!

What I mean is: Now that you're shelling out additional bucks, should you go with a more expensive 720P projector, or go with a 1080P projector?

Say you look at a single-chip 720P at $2000. You then decide to shell out $4000 instead. What is best: Buy a 1080P LCD, or buy a more expensive 720P DLP (say, the Samsung SPH 710)? It will obviously still be a matter of personal preference, but at a given price point, since 1080P is generally more expensive (why else should you be giving additional bucks out of your wallet?), there must have been cut corners somewhere, to make 1080P possible at this higher price point, compared to 720P at the same price point.

I understand your point that you are willing to pay a premium to get 1080P, but why is it okay to pay e.g. double the price, for getting 1080P instead of 720P, all else being equal, but not okay to pay double the price for getting "just" a better 720P? 720P is available at, what, $30k? (i'm not familiar with us pricing). That means that at any given price point, you will still have to make a decision on whether to for 1080P, or "settle" with 720P to gain other qualities. Say you wish to spend $20k. That will buy you a _really_ good single-chip 1080P DLP, but not a 3-chip 1080P. For the same money, you can buy a 720P 3-chip. So, which do you choose?

Mvh. Otto, AV Precision
Installer/Calibrator
Otto J is offline  
post #100 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 11:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
Otto J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by briandx View Post

I've personally seen two 1080p projectors and have read the reviews on several others, and none of them to my knowledge has cut any corners.

IMHO the 1080p projectors I've seen are better in every tangible way than the 720p units I've seen.

Did you compare units at the same price, or compare $2000 720P's to $4000 1080P's?

_Any_ projector cuts corners somewhere... ;-)

Mvh. Otto, AV Precision
Installer/Calibrator
Otto J is offline  
post #101 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 11:34 AM
Member
 
helloseth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jones_Rush View Post

No.

I use an image which has a resolution of 4000x3000 (just an example).

I set my monitor to a resolution of 1280x960, and look at this image as hard as I can. (the monitor can not resolve more than 1280x960 at this point).

I then set my monitor to a resolution of 1600x1200, and see if I can see a difference while looking at the same image.


The comparison with a CRT monitor (like the one I expained above) is *the* most accurate comparison for 1080 vs 720, because the only variable is resolution.

You have some inaccurate/missing information.

1. " I set my monitor to a resolution of XXXXxYYYY"
What you mean is you set our OS resolution to XXXXxYYYY. (I presume you are using Windows)

2. What application are you using to view the image? Some applications are designed to make the image look the same at different resolutions. Photoshop for example tries its best to make the images look the same no matter the display resolution.

3. Do you display the entire "4000x3000" image, scaled to your display resolution, or do you display the image "1:1". (So in the 1600x1200 resolution, it displays a 1600x1200 pixel portion of the "4000x3000" image?)


4. Try your test at 576p and 480p. How do they compare to 720p?


Seth
helloseth is offline  
post #102 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 11:59 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Jones_Rush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


1. " I set my monitor to a resolution of XXXXxYYYY"
What you mean is you set our OS resolution to XXXXxYYYY. (I presume you are using Windows)

Yes, I set the monitor through the OS, I thought this was obvious.

Quote:


2. What application are you using to view the image? Some applications are designed to make the image look the same at different resolutions. Photoshop for example tries its best to make the images look the same no matter the display resolution.

What application do you recommend then ?.

Quote:


3. Do you display the entire "4000x3000" image, scaled to your display resolution, or do you display the image "1:1". (So in the 1600x1200 resolution, it displays a 1600x1200 pixel portion of the "4000x3000" image?)

I display the entire image, scaled.


Quote:


4. Try your test at 576p and 480p. How do they compare to 720p?

I will try tomorrow to do a serious comparison. But I can tell you now that the difference I experience is big.

Thanks for your remarks/suggestions.
Jones_Rush is offline  
post #103 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 01:04 PM
Member
 
helloseth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jones_Rush View Post

I display the entire image, scaled.

Seems to me then that what you are truly testing is the scaling software. Any photo app nowdays is going to resample/scale/anti-alias the image to the display resolution.

Now to some extent, that is the gist of your argument. That Scaled 720p = scaled 1080p.

But if so, then to me your argument is moot. It boils down to source material not good enough for the resolution. Which is why 720p/1080p is 'wasted' on standard DVD.

I don't quite know how to remove that factor. Perhaps you need a source image that displays 1:1 @ 1080p.

Then display it scaled to 720p and compare those images. If you have photoshop, you can have it rescale the image to your XXXXxYYYY resolution, and select the different scaling methods. The resulting image file would be 1:1 for each resolution.

WRT DPI, why is it that an image @ 72dpi looks fine on a monitor, but like crap if printed out? You need at least 150dpi to make an inkjet photo look 'real'.

Interesting discussion.

Seth
helloseth is offline  
post #104 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 01:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
augiedoggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: North Tonawanda NY,
Posts: 1,164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by helloseth View Post

Seems to me then that what you are truly testing is the scaling software. Any photo app nowdays is going to resample/scale/anti-alias the image to the display resolution.

Now to some extent, that is the gist of your argument. That Scaled 720p = scaled 1080p.

But if so, then to me your argument is moot. It boils down to source material not good enough for the resolution. Which is why 720p/1080p is 'wasted' on standard DVD.

I don't quite know how to remove that factor. Perhaps you need a source image that displays 1:1 @ 1080p.

Then display it scaled to 720p and compare those images. If you have photoshop, you can have it rescale the image to your XXXXxYYYY resolution, and select the different scaling methods. The resulting image file would be 1:1 for each resolution.

WRT DPI, why is it that an image @ 72dpi looks fine on a monitor, but like crap if printed out? You need at least 150dpi to make an inkjet photo look 'real'.

Interesting discussion.

Seth

thats pretty much what I was tring to say...+ a crt will handle different resolutions totally different than a projector. so while it may not make a noticable difference on a crt the same might not be true for FP.
augiedoggy is offline  
post #105 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 02:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jacksonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Summerfield, NC
Posts: 4,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think the spirit of this debate got confused by the OP's comparison to computer monitors and still images.

The bottom line is that I have directly compared a 1080p and 720p pj from the same manufacturer on Blu Ray, HD-DVD, and broadcast 1080i and 720p material on a 106" screen and could not detect any difference in detail at any distance from the screen.

There were differences in SDE, blacks, and contrast due to new generation LCD panels on the 1080p, but there was no more detail.

I think that's the bottom line of this debate, not OS's, dpi's or still photographs.
jacksonian is offline  
post #106 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jsaliga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 4,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Did you do a double blind test?

--Jerome


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
jsaliga is offline  
post #107 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:43 PM
Member
 
helloseth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonian View Post

There were differences in SDE, blacks, and contrast due to new generation LCD panels on the 1080p, but there was no more detail.

Ok, one question.

How do you define "more detail"? What would "more detail" look like?

Individual facial hair in 1080p where there isn't on 720p?

Not trying to flame, but is better shadow detail from blacks/contrast/LCD improvements, or is it from improved resolution, or both?
helloseth is offline  
post #108 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jsaliga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 4,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by helloseth View Post

Seems to me then that what you are truly testing is the scaling software.

It seems that way to me too.

--Jerome


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
jsaliga is offline  
post #109 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jsaliga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 4,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by helloseth View Post

Not trying to flame, but is better shadow detail from blacks/contrast/LCD improvements, or is it from improved resolution, or both?

I certainly don't think you are flaming. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. You're asking the right questions.

--Jerome


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
jsaliga is offline  
post #110 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:47 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonian View Post


The bottom line is that I have directly compared a 1080p and 720p pj from the same manufacturer on Blu Ray, HD-DVD, and broadcast 1080i and 720p material on a 106" screen and could not detect any difference in detail at any distance from the screen.

This is simply not the case in my experience.

Art


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is offline  
post #111 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jsaliga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 4,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Mine neither Art.

--Jerome


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
jsaliga is offline  
post #112 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jacksonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Summerfield, NC
Posts: 4,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsaliga View Post

Did you do a double blind test?

--Jerome

Yes, I did. With my wife also. Since we could use the same remote with the "blank" button, you could easily alternate them. We mixed them up several times.
jacksonian is offline  
post #113 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jacksonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Summerfield, NC
Posts: 4,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by helloseth View Post

Ok, one question.

How do you define "more detail"? What would "more detail" look like?

Individual facial hair in 1080p where there isn't on 720p?

Not trying to flame, but is better shadow detail from blacks/contrast/LCD improvements, or is it from improved resolution, or both?

I didn't think you were flaming. I define "more detail" as being able to see an extra hair, an extra blade of grass, distinguishing details.
jacksonian is offline  
post #114 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jacksonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Summerfield, NC
Posts: 4,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsaliga View Post

I certainly don't think you are flaming. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. You're asking the right questions.

--Jerome

It's not an extraordinary claim unless you've been placebo'd by the specs.
jacksonian is offline  
post #115 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 03:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jacksonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Summerfield, NC
Posts: 4,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

This is simply not the case in my experience.

Art

Art, not doubting you, but what's your experience? You've had a 720p and 1080p pj from the same manufacturer, same model year, in the same room with BluRay, HD-DVD, and OTA broadcast HD and put them side by side and blinded yourself and you could see a difference in detail?

I simply don't believe it. The Greeks couldn't see it in their test. I tried as hard as I could to see it in my test. It's simply not there.
jacksonian is offline  
post #116 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 04:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jsaliga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 4,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonian View Post

It's not an extraordinary claim unless you've been placebo'd by the specs.

As I used the term in the first case:

Extraordinary, adj., Beyond what is usual, ordinary, regular, or established.

and in the second case:

Extraordinary, adj., Exceptional in character, amount, extent, degree, etc.

Now you can argue the point if you wish, but saying your claim isn't extraordinary doesn't make it so. It is outside of established experience and that alone is sufficient reason to consider your claim extraordinary.

--Jerome


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
jsaliga is offline  
post #117 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 04:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jsaliga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 4,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonian View Post

Yes, I did. With my wife also. Since we could use the same remote with the "blank" button, you could easily alternate them. We mixed them up several times.

I don't know if that qualifies. In scientifically valid double-blind tests the subjects are only exposed to the stimulus and have no part in setting up or controlling the test conditions and the researchers construct the test to filter out experimenter bias. So you would need a control group and an experimental group.

--Jerome


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
jsaliga is offline  
post #118 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 04:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jacksonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Summerfield, NC
Posts: 4,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsaliga View Post

I don't know if that qualifies. In scientifically valid double-blind tests the subjects are only exposed to the stimulus and have no part in setting up or controlling the test conditions and the researchers construct the test to filter out experimenter bias.

--Jerome

Thanks, Jerome. I'm a physician. I'm keenly aware of scientific tests and how they're conducted. I'm also intimately familiar with placebo and its effects.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and bet that no one on this thread arguing against me has even come close to the standards I put in place. Have you?
jacksonian is offline  
post #119 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 04:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jacksonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Summerfield, NC
Posts: 4,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsaliga View Post

As I used the term in the first case:

Extraordinary, adj., Beyond what is usual, ordinary, regular, or established.

and in the second case:

Extraordinary, adj., Exceptional in character, amount, extent, degree, etc.

Now you can argue the point if you wish, but saying your claim isn't extraordinary doesn't make it so. It is outside of established experience and that alone is sufficient reason to consider your claim extraordinary.

--Jerome

Again, thanks for the definitions. But just because the math and the graphs tell you there should be a difference, it doesn't mean it exists.

Show me the "established experience" to refute my statement other than videophiles assuming that the 1080p pj will have more detail.

Until one of you guys who likes to criticize puts your money where your mouth is and does the test better than I did, you don't have any room to talk.
jacksonian is offline  
post #120 of 144 Old 12-26-2006, 04:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jsaliga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 4,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonian View Post

Have you?

Why do you ask? You are the one making the claim and the burden rests with you to prove it. The fact you are a physician has no bearing whatsoever on the topic. You claimed to have conducted a double blind test and I challenged your assertion. I think it is pretty clear that you have not done a valid double-blind test, and I'm not sure why you felt it necessary to say you have when you did not.

And rest assured I am not arguing against you. But I am suggesting that you have not met your burden of proof. You may be persuaded by something less than extraordinary proof, which is fine as far as it goes. I often trust myself implicitly under similar circumstances. I just wouldn't expect anyone other than myself to consider my results valid under the circumstances.

I think you and Jones_Rush have posted some thought-provoking ideas, but I am unable to draw any meaningful conclusions from this thread. The only thing I can conclude at this time is that a valid double-blind test with the proper controls might be more informative. It might also be impossible to marshall the necessary resources to complete such a test.

--Jerome


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
jsaliga is offline  
Reply Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

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