AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am going to buy a new TV and need to replace another TV in a few

years. I don't have a need for watching HDTV broadcasts for a few

years. ( When I plan to replace my satellite components).


But I do a lot of DVD watching and want to maximize that

experience, withing a budget constraint, on a TV, of between

$800-$2500.


I also plan to upgrade my DVD player from my current pro-scan

that is a bit old one.


I was planning on buying HDTV down the road when it's

cheaper. But if getting one now will give big benefits

when watching widescree DVD's I'd take the plunge now.


So the basic question is:


Is it worth the extra $$ just to watch DVD's on an HDTV.


I am looking at the Sony 36" non-HDTV and the Sony 36" HDTV.

As well as the Samsung 32" models.


Any info appreciated.


I have done a lot of reading of various threads. And

I think the answer is weighted toward no. But maybe

yes if I get a DVD player with DVI output???


Ken
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,297 Posts
Ken I would consider it a shame if you were not to upgrade to a 2 times sharper Progressive Scan DVD player allowing your line doubled HDTV to give you a mighty fine picture, not available on analog sets. You pick your size and price, Happy Trails in them thar hills pardner.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
There is a new Samsung DVD player that up-converts the DVD image to an HD signal. Since the DVD image encoded onto the disc is (I guess) a 525 line image, you lose a little resolution when a normal player converts it to 480 (either 480i or 480p).


The new Samsung player can convert the DVD image to either 720p or 1080i. BUT, it will only output this on the DVI output for any DVD that is copy protected (nearly all of them). SO, if you buy a new TV, you should get one with DVI input.


That's what I'm going to do, at least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Cryptnotic
There is a new Samsung DVD player that up-converts the DVD image to an HD signal. Since the DVD image encoded onto the disc is (I guess) a 525 line image, you lose a little resolution when a normal player converts it to 480 (either 480i or 480p).


The new Samsung player can convert the DVD image to either 720p or 1080i. BUT, it will only output this on the DVI output for any DVD that is copy protected (nearly all of them). SO, if you buy a new TV, you should get one with DVI input.


That's what I'm going to do, at least.
NTSC calls for 525 lines, so non progressive output is scaled UP to that, but within the TV set. Right?


The DVD natively is 720x480, so you don't lose anything at 480p.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Well, I don't know what to say. I was in a very similar situation. The only exception being that I already had a Progressive Scan DVD player. The way I looked at it there wasn't "that" big of a price difference from the 32" Sony HDTV to their non-HDTV (about $200-300).


Since my current set was dying a painful death I HAD to buy a new tv. My logic was, why buy a new set now and then have to buy another new one in 2 years when the standards change to all HDTV (or get stuck with a converter to res is down). So I sprung for the HDTV.


DVD's are absolutely amazing. As I have mentioned in other threads, regular SD signals can vary with the signal coming through the cable. I have noticed something over the last week or so though. Just about all the pre-Prime Time schedule looks a bit fuzzy on HDTV (tried to watch the Democratic debate on CNBC and had to change the channel it looked so bad) BUT the Prime Time shows looked fine. Many of these are now being Broadcast in HDTV. I DO NOT have a HDTV cable signal so I am not seeing these shows in HDTV.


BUT my assumption is leaning toward the fact that since they are "broadcasting" them in HDTV they are not compressing them as much and the actual signals from the stations to the cable company is better and therefore the picture is better on the HDTV set.


Has anyone else noticed this difference?


Just my 2 cents. It really depends on the ratio of tv/dvd you watch. I do NOT watch a "lot" of DVD's and still consider this choice a good one


Joel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
I think its worth it just for DVDs. You get a true 16:9 screen for one, and additionally you get an image that's about twice as good as a non-HDTV (480p vs 480i).


I wouldnt replace your DVD player unless something's wrong with the one you have now. DVD's are encoded at 480 resolution so i cant see how, mathematically, a device can artificially increase to a resolution that doesnt exist on the source material. Havent we been told you cannot make something from nothing? AFAIK, that's still true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
>>Well, I don't know what to say. I was in a very similar situation. The only exception being that I already had a Progressive Scan DVD player. The way I looked at it there wasn't "that" big of a price difference from the 32" Sony HDTV to their non-HDTV (about $200-300).>You get a true 16:9 screen for one, and additionally you get an image that's about twice as good as a non-HDTV (480p vs 480i).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,481 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Cryptnotic
There is a new Samsung DVD player that up-converts the DVD image to an HD signal. Since the DVD image encoded onto the disc is (I guess) a 525 line image, you lose a little resolution when a normal player converts it to 480 (either 480i or 480p).
I think you may be a bit confused on this. AFAIK, DVD players do not convert video from 525 to 480 lines. All 15.75kHz or 31.5kHz NSTC/ATSC SD signals have a total of 525 lines to begin with, however only some of those lines (usually 480-486) are used for the actual video picture. The rest are left blank and are hidden in the overscan anyway. Some of those blank lines may be part of the vertical blanking interval (VBE), to give the electron guns time to retrace back to the top of the screen to begin the next scan. (I believe some of those blank lines can carry other types of information as well.)


You can't see all 480 lines of the video image on most TVs either, because about 5-10% of them are also hidden in the overscan. On a typical TV, I think you'd see only about 440-450 actual scanlines out of the original 525. The rest of the scan is simply cropped off by the borders of the screen.


Perhaps some of the discussion re 540p here lately has been confusing things a bit. So let me try to clarify a couple things. Here's the way the different signals typically work, I believe.


480i = 15.75kHz = 525 total lines (interlaced) with 480 lines used for the actual video image.


480p = 31.5kHz = 525 lines (progressive) with 480 lines used for the actual video image


540p = 33.75kHz = 563 lines (progressive) with 540 lines used for the actual video image.


1080i = 33.75kHz = 1126 total lines (interlaced) with 1080 lines used for the actual video image.


720p = 45kHz = 751 lines (progressive) with 720 lines used for the actual video image.


If an HDTV tube can only scan at one rate (typically 33.75kHz), then a 15.75kHz 480i or 31.5kHz 480p signal has to be upconverted to either 540p or 1080i (33.75kHz).


If the HDTV tube is dual-scan (31.5kHz or 33.75kHz) then a 31.5kHz 480p signal can be passed straight through basically as-is. Depending on how the TV is designed, a 15.75kHz 480i signal could be upconverted to either 480p, 960i (also 31.5kHz, but interlaced), 540p or 1080i. Many or perhaps most dual scan TVs will have some form of cadence-based reverse telecine to convert film-based DVDs from an interlaced 480i DVD player to progressive 480p scan. If the reverse telecine de-interlacing on the TV works well, then it should deliver results nearly as good as a high-quality progressive 480p DVD player. (The progressive output on many low-end DVD players actually looks worse in many cases IMO, due to their cheaper electronics and signal processing.)

Ken,


Hopefully the above hasn't just confused you more. If your TV can scan at 31.5kHz, then it can display DVDs progressively at 480p. However, most analog TVs can only scan at 15.75kHz, which limits them to 480i. If they were capable of true progressive display that would usually be listed prominently as one of their special features. Some analog TVs will have filtering that reduces the flicker of 480i, making them look more progressive though.


Is the ability to watch DVDs in true progressive vs interlaced really worth the price of a new HDTV alone? I dunno. I actually like analog TVs for watching alot of 480i material. In my case though, I really wanted a bigger and wider (16:9) screen for watching movies, so that was more my justification for upgrading. The progressive scan was just another bonus that came along with that.


Although DVDs look very good at 480p, IMO they can look even better on some large-screen direct-view tubes at 720p or 1080i. It just depends on how good the de-interlacing, scaling, resampling and other processing is, either in the DVD player and/or HTPC and/or the TV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
Quote:
However, most analog TVs can only scan at 15.75kHz, which limits them to 480i. If they were capable of true progressive display that would usually be listed prominently as one of their special features.
True, and the way this is usually listed is as a feature called "widescreen Mode". For instance, the sony wega's have this.

Quote:
Is the ability to watch DVDs in true progressive vs interlaced really worth the price of a new HDTV alone? I dunno. I actually like analog TVs for watching alot of 480i material.
Actually, HDTV's convert all 480i material to 480p, not just DVD's.... or at least mine does. But i'm pretty sure most all of them do.

Quote:
Although DVDs look very good at 480p, IMO they can look even better on some large-screen direct-view tubes at 720p or 1080i. It just depends on how good the de-interlacing, scaling, resampling and other processing is, either in the DVD player and/or HTPC and/or the TV.
As i mentioned above, i just dont see how considering the source is 480p. Ok, sure, true HDTV in 1080i is breathtaking, but there's no way a 1080i DVD player can magically increase the detail from a "480" resolution encoded DVD by 5 fold or thereabouts much less even enough for the difference to be that noticeable. In lamens terms, if the extra detail doesn't exist on the CD Disk, how can the CD player fabricate extra detail? Something doesnt add up.


HDTV's will make DVD's look better for one specific reason only - they can output 480p (whether you have a progressive scan DVD player or not) as compared to 480i on a regular tv. I'm assuming you could say that's twice the detail since at any exact moment, twice as many lines of detail are being displayed. And that says nothing of the elimination of flickering associated with interlaced viewing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,481 Posts
Azanon,


You're right regarding the upconversion of all 480i material on HDTVs. My remarks were focused mainly on how this works on DVDs though, because that seemed to be Ken's main question.


As far as watching DVDs at 480p vs 1080i, I saw a noticeable difference in the tests I did. IMO this is because 1080i is the sweet spot on some TVs, and bumping the DVD up to 1920x1080i allows the CRT to draw the image with greater precision, making details clearer & more well-defined.


If the up-conversion is done well, then jaggies may be less visible at 1080i than 480p as well. In addition to the Coruscant Speeder Chase, one of the scenes you may want to look at bit is Episode II: Scene 4 - The Chancellor's Meeting. The sharp edge of the Chancellor's desk is at a slight angle, and there are visible jaggies in it at 480p. A good 1080i up-conversion ought to reduce that while still making the edge look very well-defined.


However, the quality of the up-conversion is entirely dependent on how good the de-interlacing, resampling and other processing is on the picture, by all the components involved. I'm afraid this can vary rather widely from player-to-player, TV-to-TV and program-to-program. So not everyone will necessarily see the same improvements. It's possible that some 33.75kHz TVs may do a good job of 1080i up-conversion on their own as well, particularly if they could accept a digital input. I don't think most of the TVs I've seen so far would fall into this category though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,481 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by radical2k
But I spend 80-90 percent of the time watching 4:3 standard

satellite broadcast signals. Hopefully there is no fear of

degradation only enhancement with my new HDTV, right?

After all the satellite signal is a clean, powerful, digital

signal....
I don't have much experience with satellite input myself. but the general consensus seems to be the better the 480i signal, the better it'll look up-converted by the HDTV. Ultimately, it's probably somethin you'll just have to try out and judge for yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Quote:
Originally posted by Azanon [/i] True, and the way this is usually listed is as a feature called "widescreen Mode". For instance, the sony wega's have this.

That's doesn't mean it's the same as 480p is it?


And are you referring to the 16:9 enhanced mode they list for wega's?


Ken
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
ADU,


I wonder if that phenemenon of 1080i looking better on the upconvert is similar to what i've heard about LCD monitors - that they have a native resolution, and that setting the monitor to the native resolution results in the best picture. I guess direct tube HDTV's like mine's native resolution is 1080i, but i'm not exactly sure it works that way. Its capable of 1080i, 480p, and 480i, but i'm not sure it does all three with equal distortion, so to speak.


You mentioned something about the tv's ability to upconvert to 1080i. I think some direct tubes can upconvert 720p to 1080i, (like my samsung 3098whf can), but i'm not aware of any of them that can upconvert 480p to 1080i. AFAIK, that can only be done now with dvd's and the right kind of dvd player like a samsung 931.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
Quote:
That's doesn't mean it's the same as 480p is it?
Ahh good point. I was confusing some tv's ability to focus the scanlines so that none of them are wasted.


Ok, so the original poster was suggesting some tv's might have the ability to progressive scan as a feature. LOL - now that i think about, AFAIK, the only tv's that can do that are HDTV's. I dont believe there exist any hybrids that have that as an aside feature, if i may call it that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
846 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Azanon


Ok, so the original poster was suggesting some tv's might have the ability to progressive scan as a feature. LOL - now that i think about, AFAIK, the only tv's that can do that are HDTV's. I dont believe there exist any hybrids that have that as an aside feature, if i may call it that.
480p is EDTV. Other than plasmas, the Samsung TXN2745FP is the only EDTV, that I've seen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,481 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Azanon

I wonder if that phenemenon of 1080i looking better on the upconvert is similar to what i've heard about LCD monitors - that they have a native resolution, and that setting the monitor to the native resolution results in the best picture. I guess direct tube HDTV's like mine's native resolution is 1080i, but i'm not exactly sure it works that way. Its capable of 1080i, 480p, and 480i, but i'm not sure it does all three with equal distortion, so to speak.
Funny you should mention that. I just got a new LCD computer display (my 10 year old CRT finally died), and yes, the PQ is significantly sharper if you match the LCD's native pixel resolution (in this case 1280x1024), otherwise the display has to interpolate/scale the picture to match the on-screen pixels, and the quality goes down.


Analog CRTs don't really have a native resolution liked digital fixed pixel displays, but they are designed with certain optimum scanning rates and resolutions in mind. IMO, on many TVs, 1080i will give you the greatest spacial density, and potentially the most well-defined details (if the resampling/up-conversion is done right). So even though there may be a slight amount of loss in fidelity going from 480->1080i, 1080i may allow the CRT to draw what details are there with perhaps much greater precision.


I don't want to oversell the benefits too much though, because they may be more visible to some folks than others, and there can be alot of variation in how this works depending on the equipment involved.
Quote:
You mentioned something about the tv's ability to upconvert to 1080i. I think some direct tubes can upconvert 720p to 1080i, (like my samsung 3098whf can), but i'm not aware of any of them that can upconvert 480p to 1080i. AFAIK, that can only be done now with dvd's and the right kind of dvd player like a samsung 931. [/b]
Some HDTV's can only scan at a single rate, typically 33.75kHz, or 45kHz (on many digital fixed pixel displays). So 15.75kHz/480i or 31.5kHz/480p signals are always upconverted to either 540p, 1080i or 720p on them. Some do a better job of this up-conversion than others. If your TV already does a superb job of up-converting to 1080i or 720p (which seems somewhat rare), then you may not get much benefit from a 1080i/720p-capable DVD player.


DVDs can be scaled externally to 720p/1080i with a Home Theater PC, more expensive dedicated video scalers/processors, as well as some of the new 1080i/720p DVD player/scalers.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top