iMac Pro review
I read an interesting article in the Daily Mail, on Saturday; (page 37).
Basically it said that 99% of TV sets being sold as "HD Ready" are not capable of showing the full detail promised by the new technology. HDTV offers up to 2Mpixel, but almost all currently on sale can show only 921.6Kpixels. This was described by a broadcast analyst as "entry level HDTV"
Anyone considering a new HDTV would be well advised to wait
That's why I am about 2 or 3 years behind new technology. I like to see things well proven before I spend my money.
The lower pixel hidden agenda doesn’t surprise me at all. Look at the interpolation figures still mentioned on cameras and scanners. Also, there is still no universal test page with defined print font type, size and a specific number of characters, to produce a true print page speed for different makes of printer evaluation. (Not to my knowledge anyway).
I consider the foregoing akin to the small print on most of today’s warranty documentation, or the many software packages that never seem to live up to the manufacturer’s claims.
Today I do not consider myself a technophobe, although I did not buy my first colour tv until around 8 years after the BBC2 625 line colour service started in 1967.
At the moment I shall stay with a TFT monitor for my computer. Later on I may tread the TFT tv waters, but for the moment I will stay with my 51cm CRT tv.
Well, I'll continue to enjoy my HDTV's eye-poppingly gorgeous picture, especially with my XBox360.
I think it's very relative and somewhat subjective...
For example, it's obvious that a 5 megapixel digital camera is better than a 3 megapixel, yet a 3 megapixel camera captures at 2048x1536... anyone got a monitor or TV that can display that?
So a 720p HDTV which pushes 1280x720 will look great on screens up to a fairly big size, and you would be hard pressed to notice a major difference between 720p and 1080p. The extra detail 1080p (1920x1080) provides is not really noticeable on smaller screens.
I believe the BBC have stated they will broadcast at 720p, so 1080p might be better, but for mainstream use it might not be a widely adopted standard. 1080p could be nice for HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, but there's a number of factors I dislike about the format, so won't be adopting it for some time (if at all), especially when a good upscaling DVD player will provide fantastic quality for the forseeable future, and at a much better price.
You don't appear to be comparing like with like...:-)
A computer monitor's display cannot be compared with HDTV - they are unrelated.
You can display a modest digital camera's output on screen and be perfectly happy, but take it to a photo processing centre and you will see the difference with larger prints.
That's why professional and keen amateur photographers use high megapixel cameras.
Certainly not to look at the results on monitors, but to produce large prints.
Top of the range digital cameras are now producing virtually indistinguishable results compared with those from equivalent priced film cameras.
The film grain is now the limiting factor.
Digital cameras can only get better in the future.
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
My example is not directly comparing monitors or cameras with HDTV, but using the different resolutions and outputs as an example.
If you have an HDTV, sub 40", capable of 1080p, and you compare 720p and 1080p broadcasts on it you will have a tough time noticing the extra detail... the screen is just too small.
A 40"+ screen capable of 1080p will look better when displaying 1080p than 720p as the extra screen 'real estate' makes it easier to discern the extra detail the images.
So your statement, Stuartli, "You can display a modest digital camera's output on screen and be perfectly happy, but take it to a photo processing centre and you will see the difference with larger prints" is the same here... View lower quality broadcast (720p) on a smaller HDTV and be perfectly happy, display a 720p image on a larger HDTV and you'll notice the difference.
I don't agree with anchors original statement that people looking for HDTV's should wait. There's no broadcasts around that are in 1080p (and both BBC and Sky are supposedly going to be broadcasting in 720p), plus, as I mentioned before, it depends one what size screen you are intending to buy as to whether you will be able to enjoy the benefits of 1080p.
So unless a person is planning on jumping on the HD-DVD or Blu-Ray bandwagon (which does support 1080p) and planning on buying a big HDTV I don't see the point in waiting if you have a need for an HDTV... I have an XBox360, which outputs at 720p, and will probably get Sky+ HD if the price is sensible later this year, so I saw no point waiting and certianly don't feel I am missing out on the extra detail (especially as I feel that by the time 1080p becomes a standard - if at all - then 1080p capable TV's will be a lot cheaper)
And lets not forget support for HDCP!
Just about the close this thread.
I for one, will wait until the dust settles, and the HDTV service actually starts. At present, all one can see in the shops is demos from DVD`s.
Probably prices may become more realistic when sales increase.
>>View lower quality broadcast (720p) on a smaller HDTV and be perfectly happy, display a 720p image on a larger HDTV and you'll notice the difference.>>
Terrestial stations viewed on an "HDTV" compatible LCD or plasma set are even lower quality, yet most people are perfectly happy.
No doubt the benefits of HDTV will be appreciated, but owners will have to acquire additional equipment, plus pay a subscription to view the bulk of it.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.