Like the pulling-hen's-teeth comparison. I'm also surprised, this far along in HDTV marketing, there are no unbiased sources of set resolutions. Think it might take publications that aren't advertiser supported to provide such data. Buying a set because images look good seems insufficient. Unless you're aware of the limitations imposed by shadow masks or grilles in direct-view-CRT sets, you'll discover your new set can't display about 40 percent of the details in a typical taped HDTV broadcast (say, less than 1400 lines of resolution, full 16X9 width). And if a broadcaster manages to crank out, say, 1700 lines or more during a live broadcast, you'll be missing 53 percent or more of the details (luminance or black-and-white resolution, anyway). Filters within sets lop off about 20 percent of received HDTV horizontal resolution just for starters. And MPEG-2 encoding varies the resolution according to motion and details within scenes.
The ability to deliver and view fine details is what HDTV is all about. Such high resolutions enable you to sit closer to the screen and fill a wider viewing angle for a better simulation of realism. Other image parameters such as contrast and color are important, of course, but without fine details, IMO, it's like constantly viewing impressionistic paintings. A director might want to provide such fuzzy impressions for a dream sequence or other creative reasons, but with limited-resolution receivers intricate details will never reach the eyes of HDTV viewers.
Would have selected a plasma set myself a year ago while shopping for HDTV, but what seemed to be the most desirable models, such as Panasonic's 60-inch, full-HDTV-resolution model, were only at trade shows, and still aren't available. -- John
------------------
STOP DVI/HDCP AND DFAST
[This message has been edited by John Mason (edited 05-28-2001).]