HD demystified; if you're shopping for Christmas here's what you need to know. We've been waiting over a decade for HDTV, and now that it's finally available, there's as much confusion in the marketing as there is clarity in the images.
You missed WMV HD. This is currently available on standard DVDs for use in PC's. There are several movies (Mostly IMAX conversions) and content from HDNet. The IMAX coversions often contain 720p and 1080i versions and include a player on the DVD that plays directly from the DVD. {NOTHING to install.... how rare is that :-) } This is a way to see HD content with your PC without spending a fortune for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.
The only issue I have found with it so far is that in the IMAX conversions I have seen, the movies have been highly compressed, so there is some blotchyness to blue sky's, sunsets, etc. The resolution is good and the compression is not very noticable in moving or action type scenes.
Does the DRM nugget you mentioned have any implication for those of use wanting to hook a PC up to a gigunda 1080P screen for use with Oblivion, FEAR, etc?
I wish to disagree with some of the info on HDTV.
1) HD is ALL digital. Once totally in place there will be no more analog TV - and the government can sell a bunch of bandwidth.
2) HD has one digital signal being sent out from the source. How the set at home displays it determines whether it is full HD - since there are now SD (standard definition) digital sets that will display that same HD digital image - although at a lower resolution. PDP (plasma) ED (enhanced definition) sets are some of the best buys there are - for now anyway. Prices are dropping all over, really fast.
Isn't the resolution (720 or 1080) the horizontal lines, not the vertical as stated in the article? It makes sense if you think about it - the dimensions of widescreen (16 wide by 9 high) leave less room for horizontal lines than the vertical , so the smaller number in the reolution (i.e. 720 or 1080) should be the horizontal.
Kudos! IMHO, this is by far the best Tom's article yet on HD. Previous authors have not seemed to focus on the pertinent points and have seemed to not fully understand the majority of the issues.
As HD tuner technology gets better, the directional dependence on the antenna should get less and less for local signals. It has already been significantly reduced from 1st gen tuners. However, distant signals will likely need an outdoor antenna and a pointing mechanism - i.e., a "rotor." I can't help but think we're going back to the future on this; however, the possibility exists to pull in a vast amount of distant digital tv signals over the air. Someone I know reported that the content is still viewable even when the S/N ratio is 20 percent. With that S/N ratio on an analog signal, you would only get snow.
I can't say that I agree that HD-DVD or Blu-Ray writers will be expensive for a long time. Though I have not fully investigated this, there are single-layer Blu-Ray burners out there for PCs that should be able to read and play back pre-recorded movies in addition to recording your own. I've seen street prices on such burners at around $750 which seems in line with Blu-Ray "player only" units for home theater systems.
And, as I understand it, the issue with releasing dedicated HD "disk" player/burners is ironing out the copy protection issues. However, once they are released to a wider market (Sony has had a dedicated Blu-Ray HT player/burner available in Japan for several years), I'm willing to bet prices will drop rapidly. Personally, I won't consider buying a dedicated player only unit for my HT system.
Last, it will be interesting to see where HVD (holographic versatile disk) goes. As I see it, the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray could easily be obsoleted as HVD capabilities are far beyond either. AFAIK, there are storage HVD solutions available; it's only a matter of time before it comes to the movie industry.
Its an older 19" NEC CRT with a DVI input. I got it used, and I haven't found any model No. info on it. It will do 1600x1200. I mostly run at 1280x1024. The card is a 7800GTX which does not have HDCP. I think only the 7600 series has HDCP right now.
I also had it hooked up to an Epson TW100 1280 x 720 projector once, and had no issues playing non DRM content, or any games. The projector was not HDCP compliant. It failed to play up-converted DVD movies from a DVD play via the DVI out.
There will be ALOT of people pissed off about HDCP. Many things still are not HDCP compliant. And 2 years ago I don't think anything was including all the big screen TV's.
Isn't the resolution (720 or 1080) the horizontal lines, not the vertical as stated in the article? It makes sense if you think about it - the dimensions of widescreen (16 wide by 9 high) leave less room for horizontal lines than the vertical , so the smaller number in the reolution (i.e. 720 or 1080) should be the horizontal.
I hate the whole setup. As a cable guy, I have the displeasure of explaining to the customer who just spent 6000 bux on a new TV why the Analog channels look bad on their HDTV, then why the HD channels don't look as good as they should when the box is in 1080i. And it varies VASTLY between brands. I see lots of variations in TV's and some tv's, the menus look crisp and clean and the pictures are beautiful, and others they are blocky, blotchy and noisey. And they don't supply the HDMI cables with the DVR boxes either because they cost too much, they only give them the component cables.
What I would like to see Tom's Hardware do is a comparison chart of all TV's and the visual quality of each one in each mode.
I am in the business, working for a distributor selling LG HDTV. Here in my state, cable can be good to pretty bad - depending on the company. Just the way it is.
Dish or Direct is what a lot of folk here do, but even that is limited as far as true HD content. The best picture to be had is from an UHF antenna - pulling in stations from as far away as 85 miles away. I have one dealer that is doing that very thing from that distance. The picture he gets is perfect - and I do mean perfect. Also when he tunes in on the educational channel (the first to go HD) it is even better. The stuff they broadcast is not only being shown in digital HD, it is recorded in HD. Amazing quality!
It is really amazing that years back folks got away from antennas to go cable and dish. Now the best picture can be had with an antenna.
Is there any real point of getting a 1080p TV? besides the fact that the $800+ Blue Ray and HD-DVD are the only things that can take advantage of 1080p. When we will start seeing 1080p broadcasts?
I am a firm believer that no matter what set you buy - 1080P or 720P - when you get it home you will love it. They all are adjustable, and the settings you see in the store are usually hyped up as far as the contrast and color is concerned, and often the models the box store wants to sell the most look the best.
I am looking to buy a 42" 720P LCD myself soon. Do I want a 1080P? Oh, it would be nice - but there is no real content now to bring out the full benefit in 1080P, and as far as the new HD players are concerned - all the better 720P sets have HDMI - and will play that content just fine.
One high priority might be the quality and service that one might get - and there are real quality differences out there. Just ask any tech and you get a boatload of info on how so many of the bargain sets can be difficult to impossible to fix when a problem comes up.
"What I would like to see Tom's Hardware do is a comparison chart of all TV's and the visual quality of each one in each mode."
Below are some comparisons. Check the web under other hometheater sites. There are many comprehensive comparative reviews that include a number of products similar the link below.
A number of sets or stores also "cheat" by implying they display a 1080p or 1080i image they only "accept" that signal. The end resolution is less because their native resolution is less. Most 1280x720 HDTV sets and projectors or computer panels and projectors today can "accept" a 1080i signal and some can accept 1080p. The native resolution is the maximum it can display.
Some native 1080i and p sets do a poor job of displaying that signal too due to poor scaling. See the home theater mag link above.
I don't see much benefit to Theater movies in 1080p, ie 1920 x 1080 @ 60fps [(full)frames per second]. Theater movies are 24fps. A good 1080i signal should suffice. The main benefit would be that frame conversion could be done with a high quality converter, and special attention applied to certain scenes to ensure a good converstion. Though that is not very likely for the majority of movies.
Another point on 1080i vs 1080p is 1080i referers to 1080i @ 60fps (1080i/60). Much of 1920 x 1080 content is shot at only 30fps, or 1080p/30. Each frame is split in to two 540 interlaced fields so two fields at 60 feilds per second equal a complete image. That is why I don't like this article ( http://alvyray.com/DigitalTV/Naming_Proposal.htm ). It is very misleading on all fronts. Who cares if an image in interlaced if the interlaced field rate is over twice the original frame rate. Part of the image shifting problems he is referring to relates to 3:2 pull down errors when converting 24fps film to TV frame rates.
The biggest benefit of 1080p/60 is the higher frame rate for motion. The funny thing is most people don't really notice 30fps vs 60 fps until you freeze frame. Another point is that to limit file size or bandwidth the 60fps image may be compressed more, like a blotchy jpg. Unless noise it added it may have a poor image that 1080i/60 or 1080p30.
Below is a good article on many of the formats and explainations of frame and field rate designations.
As far as standard TV on an HD TV, the biggest reason for a poor picture is a very poor or non-existent scaler and converter. That is why DVD players with upconversion have become more popular. My projector has a good Faroudja chip and the component signal looks better than most of the mid-range up converting DVD players 720p (or 1080i) DVI (HDMI) output. Since the scaler is in the projector standard TV, even old VHS doesn't look too bad. I have seen some HD sets that look very pixelated with no anti-aliasing when displaying standard TV.
