LCD/Plasma TV's

[Samdy Gray]

Got a linky arriba? I'm after an LCD as a crimbo pressie to myself.

[Ralphy]

That Panny is nice.

Can any technical boffs on here clear up all the jargon?

There are 3 resolutions in HD, 768p, 1080i and 1080p.

I also see some TV's are 100 MHz??

I don't understand all this jargon!

[Arriba]

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/cgi-bin/displayreview.php?reviewid=7296

review of it

bought from here

www.laskys.com

  type in code PANN4 for £40 off. next cheapest is dixons at £588

[Arriba]

That Panny is nice.

Can any technical boffs on here clear up all the jargon?

There are 3 resolutions in HD, 768p, 1080i and 1080p.

I also see some TV's are 100 MHz??

I don't understand all this jargon!

just go to  www.avforums.com and look through the threads.its all there

[Samdy Gray]

Cheers, I'll have a look.

[Samdy Gray]

That Panny is nice.

Can any technical boffs on here clear up all the jargon?

There are 3 resolutions in HD, 768p, 1080i and 1080p.

I also see some TV's are 100 MHz??

I don't understand all this jargon!

From Wikipedia:

To compare 1080i and 1080p, it is important to compare framerates. Due to interlacing, 1080i has twice the frame-rate but half the resolution of a 1080p signal using the same bandwidth, although, also due to interlacing, 1080i looks to be the same resolution, although with more flicker. Faster frame-rates are especially useful in sports shows and other shows with fast-moving action. However, on some flat screens that do not support interlacing, this instead becomes smeared or jarred artifacts.

Current digital television broadcast systems and standards are not equipped for 1080p50/60 transmission. Also, the majority of consumer televisions offered for sale are currently not equipped to receive or decode a 1080p signal at any frequency. It is less bandwidth-intensive to broadcast a film at 1080p24 than 1080i30, since 20% less data would be transferred. In addition, when the source material is 24 frames per second, as are most films, it would be easy to convert a 1080p24 broadcast to an NTSC 1080i30 format using a 3:2 pulldown process (see telecine). Moreover, displaying a p24 broadcast on an i50 system (such as PAL) requires the speed of video and audio be increased by over 4% (to 25 frames per second).

For videos the frames (25 or 30 per second) are segmented into two interlaced fields with equal time index (psf, progressive in or with segmented frames). The deinterlacer has to perform a simple weave only. This ensures compatibility with 1080i25/30 with only a little less coding efficiency than 1080p25/30 and half the bandwidth requirement of 1080p50/60, but the SDTV problems of PAL speed-up and Telecine judder remain.

[Arriba]

sam, of the ones that take your fancy.google them and look up the reviews and info on them.
some i considered, i then disregarded after doing this.

[Simon Pieman]

That Panny is nice.

Can any technical boffs on here clear up all the jargon?

There are 3 resolutions in HD, 768p, 1080i and 1080p.

I also see some TV's are 100 MHz??

I don't understand all this jargon!

Ralphy - if it's got a p after the resolution it's progressive scan. A 768p is probably going to be better than a 1080i

[Simon Pieman]

Oh and HD DVDs are likely to use the 1080p as the max resolution in the future, so I'd probably go for that for futureproofness.

[flammableBen]

I always thought that ones ending with i blagged it by alternately showing every other line?

[Batch]

That Panny is nice.

Can any technical boffs on here clear up all the jargon?

There are 3 resolutions in HD, 768p, 1080i and 1080p.

I also see some TV's are 100 MHz??

I don't understand all this jargon!

Short answer - get a good demo of the TV(s) you are interested in from a  good shop and see which looks better for you. Remember to try both SD and HD source material as well as fast moving action (footy) before deciding.

Long answer:
768, 1080 are the number horizontal lines that make up the display. Both are High Definition . Standard definition is 576 lines (PAL) and 480 (NTSC).

In theory 1080 has more lines so should provide a more detailed picture when viewing a high definition source - i.e. HD-DVD/Blueray (1080i/p)/Sky HD (which is 1080i). But unless you sit really close to the TV, or have a really big TV (37/42"+ min IMHO) you are not that likely to notice it above the other factors that make a good picture (colour, sharpnesss,  smoothness, etc,).

New 768 displays take a 1080i (and  more commonly 1080p) signal, but because they only have 768 lines they 'lose' some before displaying on the screen (downscale).

Conversely both 1080 and 768 have to make up(interpolate) lines to display Standard Definition 576 line on a 768 or 1080 display (upscale). If the TV (or connected device e.g. Sky HD box)  does this well the results of watching SD on a HD TV will be pleasing, if not they will be terrible. Also a 1080 will have to interpolate more line than a 768 display, meaning that whilst HD should look better on a 1080 display, it may be the SD quality is worse than on a 768 display.

I = interlaced/P = progressive. This refers to how the picture on the screen is drawn when a picture moves from one frame (picture) to another. Progressive refreshes each line one after the other. Interlaced draws every other line one after the other, then goes back and does the ones it hasn't done. In theory 1080p should provide a smoother picture (less blur/judder) than 1080i. In reality, can you tell the difference?

[Ralphy]

From Wikipedia:

To compare 1080i and 1080p, it is important to compare framerates. Due to interlacing, 1080i has twice the frame-rate but half the resolution of a 1080p signal using the same bandwidth, although, also due to interlacing, 1080i looks to be the same resolution, although with more flicker. Faster frame-rates are especially useful in sports shows and other shows with fast-moving action. However, on some flat screens that do not support interlacing, this instead becomes smeared or jarred artifacts.

Current digital television broadcast systems and standards are not equipped for 1080p50/60 transmission. Also, the majority of consumer televisions offered for sale are currently not equipped to receive or decode a 1080p signal at any frequency. It is less bandwidth-intensive to broadcast a film at 1080p24 than 1080i30, since 20% less data would be transferred. In addition, when the cunt custard material is 24 frames per second, as are most films, it would be easy to convert a 1080p24 broadcast to an NTSC 1080i30 format using a 3:2 pulldown process (see telecine). Moreover, displaying a p24 broadcast on an i50 system (such as PAL) requires the speed of video and audio be increased by over 4% (to 25 frames per second).

For videos the frames (25 or 30 per second) are segmented into two interlaced fields with equal time index (psf, progressive in or with segmented frames). The deinterlacer has to perform a simple weave only. This ensures compatibility with 1080i25/30 with only a little less coding efficiency than 1080p25/30 and half the bandwidth requirement of 1080p50/60, but the SDTV problems of PAL speed-up and Telecine judder remain.

 

[Simon Pieman]

I think the xbox uses progressive scan so you're best off sticking to that.

[Ralphy]

So in short, a 1080p is the one to go for.

Now i just have to decide Plasma or LCD.

[Batch]

In short do some research online, then get a good demo of whatever you narrow it down to. It's all subjective as to what is 'best'.