AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Ok,

If this question has been asked before, please excuse me and refer me to the correct thread.


I am just curious, it seem that all 42†plasma are either ED (853x480) or HD (1024x768), the Sony KE-42XS910 and a few others exceptions are (1024x1024), the Pioneer PDP-4340HD is (1280 x 768).


My question is: I read that since the resolution on these sets is not 1080, they cannot display all of the information contained in an HD Broadcast.


Why can’t they make 42†HD Plasma screens with higher resolutions???
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,539 Posts
Actually the Pioneer 43" is 1024x768 resolution (their 50" model is 1280x768). Its a current limitation of plasma design technology, is it improving however. A couple years ago only the 852x480 42" plasmas existed, the new 1024x768 models are quite recent - so in a couple more years perhaps they will be able to improve it further. However higher resolution is mainly important on larger size displays, so they are concentrating on the 50-70" sizes. I hear Samsung is coming out with a full 1920x1080 progressive plasma display in the ~70" size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,285 Posts
In all fairness, even a 1080i broadcast doesn't actually contain all of the potential *information* of 1920x1080. There are very few display devices that can actually display the entire potential resolution.


The technology has its limitations, thus the panels have the pixel numbers as they do. Also in reality, at 8+ feet, the 1300x768 pixels that a 50" panel does have are not distinguishable to the eye, so it is a reasonable compromise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
577 Posts
I wish the manufacturers concentrate on producing 50" 1366x768 at a lower prices first (Target: $3000). People can't even see the difference between HD and ED, I bet nobody can see the difference between 1366x768 and a higher pixel count.

Mass produce and saturate the market with the present HD's first, to a point where there's no sense buying a ED, only then should we consider moving on to higher resolutions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
660 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Re “Why can’t they make 42†HD Plasma screens with higher resolutions???â€, it also encourages plasma shoppers to consider buying their more-profitable 50†HD units to get 1366x768+ resolutions for 720p. Bottom line is that the manufacturers need to maximize near-term plasma profits before LCD and DLP eat into that market. That’s also why the shortage on Panny 42 HD panels will ease before less-profitable 42 ED panels.


KT
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,528 Posts
When one considers that most people can't see the difference between a 42" ED plasma @ 852 X 480 and a 42" HD @ 1024 X 768 from distances of 8' or greater, one wonders just how much extra resolution will really improve PQ. IMO, more important aspects of picture performance improvements could be black levels, elimination of remaining plasma artifacts, scaling etc. However, people will usually buy in to higher numbers, whatever they are, thinking that's the key to PQ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,921 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Ross
When one considers that most people can't see the difference between a 42" ED plasma @ 852 X 480 and a 42" HD @ 1024 X 768 from distances of 8' or greater, one wonders just how much extra resolution will really improve PQ. IMO, more important aspects of picture performance improvements could be black levels, elimination of remaining plasma artifacts, scaling etc. However, people will usually buy in to higher numbers, whatever they are, thinking that's the key to PQ.
There is NO sense of talking about resolution WITHOUT including picture

size and viewing distance. And these parameters are tied to pixel size.

This point is easy to illustrate: take computer monitor and try to

use it at 852x480 or imagine going to cinema to watch movie in 852x480.


The viewing distance for optimal perceptual stimulation of cinematic kind (so like in cinema) is somewhere between 3-4H, although it might be even smaller for most sophisticated viewing, say 2.4-3.5H where H is the displayed picture height. Assuming 8' viewing distance this translates in most demanding case to the picture height of 100 cm:cool: which translates to the display size of 85".

We can say that at the assumed viewing distance the optimal display size will be from 70-something" to the 80-something". Increasing the distance will lead

to even bigger display size.


Now, at the resolution of 852x452 the pixel size of such dizplay would be

2.5 mm resulting in perceivable low resolution. To get rid of this problem

pixel size has to go below 1 mm and this leads to the 2000x1000 pixels from

which the highest HD resolution of 1920x1080 is standardized (the exact numbers come from other technical considerations.


Obviously, panels in the 70-80" range and 1920x1080 resolution are huge and

difficult to fabricate. Plasma displays with such sizes and resolutions for HD viewing were just shown at the CES for the first time.


Thus, having higher resolution makes sense only if the viewing distance is

adjusted, e.g. in Asia where they live in cages 45" 1920x1080 LCD panels make

sense.


All this is said under assumption of perfect quality material displayed. If material is bad lower resolution may reduce visibility of artefacts so pereceived PQ will be better.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top