32 inch -- do I really need 1080p ?

[Umen Pich]

I am going to buy a 32 inch LCD TV.
So far I am not aware of any other difference between these two models, except that the one which costs $1100 is capable of 1080p, while the other costs $800 and can handle 720p/1080i. THey are the same brand name, both 32 inch.

We will use it mostly for watching movies from 3 meters distance or so.

The main question is - should I give $300 more or it doesn't make any difference visually.

BTW, how do they pretend to show 1080i on something which has 768 vertical pixels only ????


Thank you !

[jagabo]

You don't need 1080p in a 32" HDTV if you're watching from 3 meters. You'll see a difference at half that distance though.

I think all the lines on this chart need to be moved up a bit but, for what it's worth:

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

1080i is shown on a 720p HDTV by deinterlacing and downscaling.

[J. Baker]

Everyone has their view on this but mine is... If you're upgrading, you might as well go with the FULL 1080p. Upgrading from 480 to 720 just doesn't seem worth it to me. 720 isn't even half way there if you're thinking between 480 and 1080. And that's not to say 720 is bad. It's just a "budget HD".

[lordsmurf]

No, the screen is way too small. You really won't even notice much difference between 720p and 1080p at that size.

[Epicurus8a]

32 inch -- do I really need 1080p ?

In a word, "No." Furthermore, here are a couple of deals that are hard to pass up:
http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11236930&whse=BC&Ne=4000000&eC at=BC|79|43064&N=4017123&Mo=22&No=11&ViewAll=23&Nr =P_CatalogName:BC&cat=56016&Ns=P_Price|1||P_SignDe sc1&lang=en-US&Sp=C&topnav=
http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11237476&whse=BC&Ne=4000000&eC at=BC|79|43064&N=4017123&Mo=22&No=10&ViewAll=23&Nr =P_CatalogName:BC&cat=56016&Ns=P_Price|1||P_SignDe sc1&lang=en-US&Sp=C&topnav=

[edDV]

Two issues are being confused here: Screen resolution and input resolution.

Most 32" LCD panels will be 1366x768 "native screen resolution". Most plasma panels up to 50" are likely to be 1024x768. 1600x900, 1650x1050 and 1920x1080 panels in the 19-30" size are usually intended for close up computer/graphics work. For 32" and normal 4-9ft viewing distance, you won't see much difference with 1366x768.

480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p are input resolutions. These need to be converted to the "native screen resolution" for each size TV. LCD and plasma also require 480i and 1080i to be converted to progressive. In theory 24p movies telecined to 1080i/29.97 should flawlessly convert to 1080p when inverse telecined
so long as the TV has inverse telecine "cinema" processing . If the TV just has blend (blur) deinterlacing the results will be lass satisfactory.

The only sources where 1080p matters are BD/HD DVD players and computers. Games are fine at 720p.

[politiken]

Hi - Your panel is small and it is the distance you are placed from your panel that is important. You will NOT be able to see the fine details on a 32 inch panel - Instead of black and white lines you will see a greyish blur (and then it is wasted on you). But you should burn a dvd with alternating black and white lines etc. and do your own testing.

I've found this site regarding "Video Quality Test Streams" : http://www.w6rz.net/
Take a look at the sections "Vertical Resolution Patterns" and "Horizontal Resolution Patterns".

The latest indeepth test of 6 major panel producers I read (size 42+ inch and up), came to the surpricing conclusion: NOT to waste money on Full HD (1080P) panels.

The above link (CarltonBale) is illustrative - but IMO way to optimistic and should certainly be moved upwards.

REM: If I remember correctly 1 feet = 0,3048 meters.

regards Pol

[jagabo]

With the single pixel wide horizontal and vertical lines tests (from http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html) I can see the individual lines at 6 feet away from my 46" 1080p HDTV. At 9 feet I can still see a hint of the lines. At 12 feet it's just gray. The two pixel wide patterns are easily seen as lines at 12 feet.

[FulciLives]

Call me crazy but I wouldn't buy a HDTV in today's market UNLESS it was 1080p capable. After all 1080p is the "future" of HDTV with formats like Blu-Ray and HD-DVD etc.

Although it's taking a while I am sure that Blu-Ray and/or HD-DVD will be the future of home video and they both do 1080p so "future proof" yourself now and go 1080p with the HDTV.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[SatStorm]

For 32" TVs, the answer is "No". IMO always!

[harrisonford]

They had done test with 50 inch and 74 inch screens at the CES in 2006.

Test showed regular DVD and HD-DVD's, on 50 inch, 80% failed to tell the difference between DVD and HD-DVD,

At 32 inch, you will be lucky if you can tell anything at all.

The source of your encoded film from the DVD or HD-DVD will make more of a difference than your 32 or 50 inch screen.

HD under 60 inch is a scam ....... The quality of the film maker stock film is far more important and the encoding job of the final video.

[jagabo]

HD under 60 inch is a scam .......

Nonsense. It's a combination of screen size and viewing distance.

[lordsmurf]

HD under 60 inch is a scam .......

Nonsense. It's a combination of screen size and viewing distance.

The breaking point is about 45".

I originally considered a 60", but it was too big. I'd be bobbing my head all around trying to watch it.
55" was perfect for my room, being about 9 feet away (eyeball to screen)

It is a combination of size and distance, absolutely. Distance is largely determined by the room used.

[jagabo]

It is a combination of size and distance, absolutely. Distance is largely determined by the room used.

Only if one insists on putting the TV against one wall and the seating against the opposite wall. I know someone who has the TV in a corner and a lazyboy about 4 feet away. A 32" 1080p HDTV would be about perfect for him.

[Umen Pich]

Guys, thank you for all your opinions.

Yes it must be a matter of size and distance. My laptop has 1280x800, and I definitely can make the difference between a standard DVD and a 720p content. From a distance equal to the diagonal - 17 inches.
However when you look at your PC screen at such distance, you are normally alone When 4 people are going to watch at the same time it will be inconvenient for those in the corners of the sofa if the sofa is too close to the screen. Then you have two choices - buy something big, or live with the fact that something which may seem big for you alone is quite small for 4 together.

[ricoman]

1080p in a 32" display is a waste of money especially at 3m. With 32" 2m is optimum and 720p is all you would need. 1080p comes in to play at about 60" at 3.5-4m. Not to mention that the only 1080p inputs are HD or Bluray players. No cable or satellite providers broadcast 1080p and none have any plans to because of the extra bandwidth (and cost0 that is required.

[jagabo]

THX recommends a 90" HDTV at 10 feet (~3m), 32" at 3 feet (~1m). You'll want 1080i/p at those sizes/distances. SMPTE recommended screen sizes run about 20 percent smaller.

[ricoman]

THX recommends a 90" HDTV at 10 feet (~3m), 32" at 3 feet (~1m). You'll want 1080i/p at those sizes/distances. SMPTE recommended screen sizes run about 20 percent smaller.

I would like to see those recommendation, they seem awful close. I have read in several articles that the rule of thumb is 1.5x the size of the screen is the best approx. min. distance. So, 32" would be 4' min. I watch my 50" at approx. 8', that seems about perfect to me and I don't think I would want to be any closer. My 32" in my bedroom is approx. 5.5'-6' and that seems fine, although I suppose that could be closer I never felt like it was too far.

[jagabo]

THX recommends a 90" HDTV at 10 feet (~3m), 32" at 3 feet (~1m). You'll want 1080i/p at those sizes/distances. SMPTE recommended screen sizes run about 20 percent smaller.

I would like to see those recommendation, they seem awful close.

http://www.thx.com/home/setup/display.html

THX has established a two step process for calculating the best viewing distance for 1080p HDTVs.

Step 1: Measure the diagonal screen size
Step 2: Divide by .84

I used a calculator from another site but the numbers aren't too different.

[jagabo]

Something else the OP may want to consider: 720p vs 1080p may not be the only difference between the two sets he's considering. A 1080p set is likely to be newer technology and may have better black levels, better off angle viewing, better color rendition, etc.

[Umen Pich]

32" Sharp, 720p
Bought from Walmart for 727CAD +tax, , so far everything is OK.

[lordsmurf]

If you sit too close to some sets, it's just as bad as being at an odd angle. You can't see anything, or you'll see distortions. If I sit 3 feet or less from my screen, I get spotlight effect. Further out, with about 150-degree angle of view, it's perfectly fine edge to edge.

[FulciLives]

Since we are debating 720p vs 1080i/1080p etc. I thought I'd throw something else into the "mix".

What about the new HDTV sets that have a "120 Hz frame rate" mode. Supposedly this has something to do with frame rate issues or something. I really don't understand it. I've seen some flat panel models from Samsung with this feature and I think Sony has one or more models as well with this "feature". Is it BS or what?

Maybe someone can explain?

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[jagabo]

At 120 Hz the TV can show 24 fps material by displaying each frame 5 times. So there is no 3:2 pulldown stutter.

The 120 Hz TVs can also synthesize in-between frames with motion vector interpolation techniques similar to those used in AviSynth's MVTools.

Some of them also reduce LCD switching blur by strobing the backlight much like a film projector does.

[budz]

only the SONY XBR line has the motion flow 120mhz which is suppose to be for smoother movie viewing and for fast action sports according to avs forums.

Panasonic has it on their 32 inch LX700 model. Panasonic is the only one that has it on a 32 inch lcd.

[jagabo]

The Samsung 71 an 81 series have motion vector interpolation too.

[FulciLives]

Well is this "120 Hz frame rate" beneficial to INTERLACED video as well as PROGRESSIVE video or is it only good for one while hurting the other or what?

I mean I love 480p DVD and HDTV resolutions etc. but damn it's like the "super rare" VHS stuff I have is looking worse and worse as televisions get "better" and "better". It really sucks. Especially since I have stuff that might otherwise NEVER come out again on video.

I'm getting sick and tired of interlaced stuff looking like ass on newer televisions.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[edDV]

The advantage of 120 ( 119.88 ) Hz as a display rate is it is an even multiple of both 24 (23.976) fps and 29.97 fps plus it is above the magic 70-90 Hz where flicker disappears to the human eye. So by frame repeating or playing with interpolation for intermediate frames, fluid motion is achieved. No more 3:2 judder for film source.

Forgot to mention it is also an even multiple of 59.94 fps.

2x 59.94 = 119.88

4x 29.97 = 119.88

5x 23.976 = 119.88


PAL areas have similar 4 x 25 = 100 Hz or 5 x 25 = 125 Hz but film match is still done by speeding 24 fps 4% to 25 fps and processing audio.

[SatStorm]

Here in Europe we have 100Hz, but for NTSC you need 120hz.
It's like what edDV say.

BUT:

Samsung LCDs (and Sony's that use the Samsung Panels) beyond the 100/120hz scan, also add frames inside the framerate.

You can read about what these technologies do here:
www.compression.ru/video/frame_rate_conversion/index_en.html
www.compression.ru/video/resampling/index_en.html

Sharp on some latest models also begun to do something like this.
The new "technology" on the LCDs, is the LED back light (for true black) and the "100hz" (120Hz for the Americans) with added framerates.

De-interlace the interlace source is necessary, so pulldown removal take place by default on those TVs, for both PAL and NTSC users. That's bad news for DV fans and for true interlace TV material. It is also a nightmare for NTSC to PAL converted material.

[lordsmurf]

120Hz is amazing. It does increase the fluidity of motion. Sony has several levels of motion enhancement beyond that, and movies can look more like little people trapped in your screen than a movie. Resolution doesn't make any difference, plain ol' cable and DVDs both benefit. I have a Sony SXRD (sort of like a LCD-DLP, if you know what that is). It's using Sony proprietary technology, as far as I know.

HDTV as a format is not better. But my specific Sony HDTV is an amazing television, I can't imagine watching my favorite movies and shows on anything else.

Resolution means nothing here.

Sharp 120Hz is almost non-existent from what I've seen. I can't tell any difference between the Sharp and the cheap no-name beside it. I really like my Sharp EDTV, but the HDTV was unimpressive.