"The last article I read from Sound and Vision states that the Sony 1080p's don't accept a 1080p input, the set mearly upconverts. They compared the HP and Sony side by side. HP's does accept 1080p input."That's because I wasn't talking about Sony's SXRD RPTVs. I was talking about projectors, as in front projectors.
Chad, most of the delay you experienced was possibly caused by a feature on Samsungs called DNI. This filter definitely causes the latency you mention. If you set the name of the input to "GAME", it disables DNI, and the game will run fine. After applying this to my Samsung 4667-R 46" DLP, the delay was undetectable, maybe on the order of 50ms at maximum.
But for sources that should be progressive (like high-motion video), 1080i is sub-optimal.Rendering in 1080i is absurd, as a long-term strategy. Consoles should render in 1080p and then pull one field from each 1080p frame, since 1080p has more spatial resolution per frame (1080 lines instead of 540, as each 1080i field would correspond to a 1080p frame).Of course, that may come in a couple of generations. For now, however, I would prefer to enjoy 720p media over 1080i.
obediah and LocalH:Actually, NBC just "settled" on 1080i too, even though they were 720p until the olympics. When I say most video is 30FPS, I mean: Movies, TV shows, etc. They're all mostly between 24 - 30FPS. Whether or not the broadcast is being transmitted at 60hz or not, it's not really "wasting" the bandwidth, because you need to sync 60hz anyways. But, it does depend on the source.Personally, I've never been able to witness the difference between 720p being recorded AND displayed at 30 or 60FPS. (FPS != Hz.) I've watched plenty of baseball and football games, and they always look better on CBS because of their high quality cameras recording at 1080i. Never have I been able to distinguish the difference in frame rates on 720p sports versus 1080i. This is probably also due to the recording type.Film is captured progressively, but video can be captured progressive or interlaced. If the video is captured interlaced, you do get 60 frames per second - they're just half frames. So, 60 times a second, the screen will move, the players will move, etc. With deinterlacing techniques used on LCD and Plasma, you really can't tell it's interlaced.Perhaps if you had a 110" screen, you might be able to see the difference, which is the only time I feel that 1080p could come in useful - projectors on large screens.
estvirApr 18, 2006
the 720p vs 1080i part was so useful.
drizekApr 18, 2006
uhhh.... nocnet is retarded. they have been wrong so many times before ane have proven they dont know s**t about computers.
arcanedeviceApr 18, 2006
"The last article I read from Sound and Vision states that the Sony 1080p's don't accept a 1080p input, the set mearly upconverts. They compared the HP and Sony side by side. HP's does accept 1080p input."That's because I wasn't talking about Sony's SXRD RPTVs. I was talking about projectors, as in front projectors.
rastanApr 18, 2006
Chad, most of the delay you experienced was possibly caused by a feature on Samsungs called DNI. This filter definitely causes the latency you mention. If you set the name of the input to "GAME", it disables DNI, and the game will run fine. After applying this to my Samsung 4667-R 46" DLP, the delay was undetectable, maybe on the order of 50ms at maximum.
localhApr 19, 2006
@cbreaker:I'd bet money that I could. I get to choose the source, however.
localhApr 19, 2006
But for sources that should be progressive (like high-motion video), 1080i is sub-optimal.Rendering in 1080i is absurd, as a long-term strategy. Consoles should render in 1080p and then pull one field from each 1080p frame, since 1080p has more spatial resolution per frame (1080 lines instead of 540, as each 1080i field would correspond to a 1080p frame).Of course, that may come in a couple of generations. For now, however, I would prefer to enjoy 720p media over 1080i.
cbreakerApr 20, 2006
obediah and LocalH:Actually, NBC just "settled" on 1080i too, even though they were 720p until the olympics. When I say most video is 30FPS, I mean: Movies, TV shows, etc. They're all mostly between 24 - 30FPS. Whether or not the broadcast is being transmitted at 60hz or not, it's not really "wasting" the bandwidth, because you need to sync 60hz anyways. But, it does depend on the source.Personally, I've never been able to witness the difference between 720p being recorded AND displayed at 30 or 60FPS. (FPS != Hz.) I've watched plenty of baseball and football games, and they always look better on CBS because of their high quality cameras recording at 1080i. Never have I been able to distinguish the difference in frame rates on 720p sports versus 1080i. This is probably also due to the recording type.Film is captured progressively, but video can be captured progressive or interlaced. If the video is captured interlaced, you do get 60 frames per second - they're just half frames. So, 60 times a second, the screen will move, the players will move, etc. With deinterlacing techniques used on LCD and Plasma, you really can't tell it's interlaced.Perhaps if you had a 110" screen, you might be able to see the difference, which is the only time I feel that 1080p could come in useful - projectors on large screens.