Is 720P format dead?

[blackraven]

720P format is one of HD protocol when it was established. But with 720p TV on market disappearing and only available on elcheapos and smaller TVs, one wonder if 720P is a dying dinosaur.

The argument was that 720p is progressive and better for sport and high action programs, but with 1080P capable TVs, that argument is not true anymore. 720p was the preferred format for ABC and Fox network, but I am not sure if they have moved on to 1080 format or not.

Does a Duck Fart in Water?

[Rich-n-Texas]

Do ducks fart at all?

Ya know, I don't think my TV converts 1080i broadcasts to 1080p. If I press the TV's info button, it shows 1080i. Only time I see 1080p is when I watch BD's.

[jvc]

When you press the tv's info button, it shows the signal it's receiving. Not what it's displaying. Tvs these days are supposed to display at their native resolution. That's why a lot of people say the tv upscales their dvds.

[Rich-n-Texas]

OIC. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

[Smokey]

Ya know, I don't think my TV converts 1080i broadcasts to 1080p. If I press the TV's info button, it shows 1080i. Only time I see 1080p is when I watch BD's.

You better not push your TV too hard

[pixelthis]

Do ducks fart at all?

Ya know, I don't think my TV converts 1080i broadcasts to 1080p. If I press the TV's info button, it shows 1080i. Only time I see 1080p is when I watch BD's.

Thats true, because outside of some Dish offerings only BLU has 1080p.
Unless your TV's native format is 1080i.
Any TV will show only one format, its native one, if your set is 1080i , than thats all you will see.
Whatever your sets resolution, that is what it will display, it will scale non-native
formats to fit.
Your set is just telling what the input rez is.

(If I AM "PIXELDUMBASS" and still know more than you, what does that make you,
carpetbagger?)

[pixelthis]

OH, and your 1080p set wont convert 1080i to 1080p, it will deinterlace
1080i to 1080p, which is a real increase in resolution, where "upscaling" a resolution
will actually provide no increase in picture quality, outside of the slightly more stabe pic a
progressive as opposed to an interlaced will provide.

[kelsci]

I do not know whether a duck "farts" but they sure take "cwaps" around my neighborhood,the species is Muscovy.

I have a 720P Toshiba Regeza that is a year and half old. I am very pleased with this set. Picture quality is IMHO determined by the quality of material broadcasted. I have noticed that some films shown in high-def made during the 50s and 60s look quite awsome; like looking through a glass window. In fact they look better than the current lot of more recent films, at least to me. Just some examples that looked impressive to me was HATARI,THE SEARCHERS,TRAPEZE, THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN and LITTLE BIG MAN.

I have had only one opportunity to observe a 1080P 40 inch television made by Proscan that a friend bought from Costco. Broadcasts looked good but his upconverting dvd player made dvds look astonishing. If I live long enough, my next set would be 1080P but there is no rush to upgrade over the performance of the Toshiba Regza I own now.

[Smokey]

I have had only one opportunity to observe a 1080P 40 inch television made by Proscan that a friend bought from Costco. Broadcasts looked good but his upconverting dvd player made dvds look astonishing.

I wonder how these Proscan TVs hold up. They are really cheap. Walmart have 40 inch Proscan 1080p LCD for $448, and 42 inch LED-LCD model for $649. Proscan use to be brand name for higher end of RCA TV models, but now I think it is just a bought out name.

http://www.walmart.com/browse/TV-Vid..._tab_value=All

[Rich-n-Texas]

(If I AM "PIXELDUMBASS" and still know more than you, what does that make you,
carpetbagger?)

That makes me one who doesn't sit in front of a monitor, at the hospital, watching granny walk around with the back of her gown open, while reading HT magazines.

Thank you for continuing down the low road pix.

[pixelthis]

That makes me one who doesn't sit in front of a monitor, at the hospital, watching granny walk around with the back of her gown open, while reading HT magazines.

Thank you for continuing down the low road pix.

You say that and accuse me of going down the "low" road?
I AM THE ONE ON THE HIGH ROAD, AS YOU WILL
find out when you look up and see me up there, on top of the world,
tut-tuting your latest idiodicy.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

OH, and your 1080p set wont convert 1080i to 1080p, it will deinterlace
1080i to 1080p, which is a real increase in resolution, where "upscaling" a resolution
will actually provide no increase in picture quality, outside of the slightly more stabe pic a
progressive as opposed to an interlaced will provide.

Pix, your are a professed TV expert who has seen all, owned all(at least all of the cheapo stuff), and nobody can tell you nothing. In saying that;

1080p has no more resolution than 1080i. In fact, they have the same resolution. The only difference is 1080p is painted in one complete field, and 1080i requires two fields of sequential information. 1080i paints those two sequential fields so quickly, the naked eye cannot see the process. So perceptively both 1080p and 1080i are essentially the same thing. Bad processing of 1080i may show line twitter and some stair stepping of lines(cheap sets), but really good processing allows 1080i to look just like 1080p.

Get your facts straight, or stop posting...you are spreading misinformation and you really need to stop.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You say that and accuse me of going down the "low" road?
I AM THE ONE ON THE HIGH ROAD, AS YOU WILL
find out when you look up and see me up there, on top of the world,
tut-tuting your latest idiodicy.

Pix, your version of the high road puts you just below even from a curb.....that is apparent to everyone here.

[Woochifer]

720P format is one of HD protocol when it was established. But with 720p TV on market disappearing and only available on elcheapos and smaller TVs, one wonder if 720P is a dying dinosaur.

It's still commonplace among TVs under ~42". Below that size, it's actually hard to distinguish between the 768 and 1,080 line grids unless you get in fairly close.

720p's not a dying dinosaur given how many broadcast networks use 720p as the default format. This has been discussed previously.

1080i or 720p?

The argument was that 720p is progressive and better for sport and high action programs, but with 1080P capable TVs, that argument is not true anymore. 720p was the preferred format for ABC and Fox network, but I am not sure if they have moved on to 1080 format or not.

Nope. I'm not aware of any networks that have switched to a different resolution. As others have noted, there are no broadcast networks that use 1080p, and 1080p is not a standard for HDTV broadcast transmissions.

Figure it this way, 1080p would roughly double the bandwidth needed, assuming equal data compression. 1080i and 720p are not that different in the bandwidth required.

1080i renders a 1,920 x 1,080 pixel map at a frame rate of 30 frames/sec, which gives you a data rate of 62.2 million pixels/sec.

720p renders a 1,280 x 720 pixel map at a frame rate of 60 frames/sec, giving you a data rate of 55.3 million pixels/sec.

1080p renders that 1,920 x 1,080 pixel map at a 60 frames/sec, for a data rate of 124.4 million pixels/sec.

Cable, satellite, and online providers are now advertising 1080p movies for rent/download. I wouldn't trust the picture quality, given that those files are highly compressed. Even with that resolution, a lot of other factors go into picture quality.

I wonder how these Proscan TVs hold up. They are really cheap. Walmart have 40 inch Proscan 1080p LCD for $448, and 42 inch LED-LCD model for $649. Proscan use to be brand name for higher end of RCA TV models, but now I think it is just a bought out name.

Yep, that's exactly what it is. High-end TVs don't sell for under $500. And LED backlit TVs in this price range are going to be the edge-lit models, which don't perform any differently than the CCFL models except for lower energy consumption and thinner panels.

Thanks everybody for chiming in. Don’t have HD yet, but I figured that broadcasting 1080p does occupy alot of bandwidth. SirTT said that two main reason being bandwidth requirements and TV station’s lack of storage.

Good gawd Smoke, how many more HDTV threads are you gonna start before you actually run out and get one? Bite the bullet, get the TV!

[Woochifer]

I have had only one opportunity to observe a 1080P 40 inch television made by Proscan that a friend bought from Costco. Broadcasts looked good but his upconverting dvd player made dvds look astonishing. If I live long enough, my next set would be 1080P but there is no rush to upgrade over the performance of the Toshiba Regza I own now.

FYI, upconversion is one of those misnomers in home theater. There's nothing magical about it.

Think about it this way -- EVERY signal that gets fed into a 1080p TV MUST be rescaled/deinterlaced to 1080p just for the TV to display an image. All that happens with an upconverting DVD player is that the rescaling and deinterlacing occurs inside the DVD player. A non-converting DVD player will send a 480i/p signal to the TV, and the TV will do the rescaling and deinterlacing.

A difference in picture quality will show up only the TV or the DVD player uses a noticeably better video processor. Nowadays, the video processors built into most TVs are comparable in quality to those used in upconverting DVD players.

IMO, you really see the biggest difference in picture quality with Blu-ray. Basically, the smaller the screen, the less you'll notice the improvement from 1080p. 40" is right at the point where it's not that noticeable.

[Invader3k]

Proscan used to be considered a professional grade television. When I first started working in an electronics store in 2002, they still have some CRT Proscan 4:3 sets used for display purposes that actually displayed in 540p.

They soon sold those sets off not long after I started there, and went with actual HD flat panel sets. I believe Proscan sets are now made by some Korean company.

[Smokey]

720p's not a dying dinosaur given how many broadcast networks use 720p as the default format. This has been discussed previously.

1080i or 720p?

Thanks Wooch. That is good information to have and worth repeating:

720p: ABC, Fox, ESPN Networks, A&E Networks (A&E, History, Biography), Fox Sports Net, Fox News, Fox Business, CBS College Sports, MLB Network, Disney Channels (Disney, Toon Disney, ABC Family)

1080i: NBC, CBS, CNN, HDNet, NFL Network, Discovery Networks, National Geographic, HDTV, Food Network, Weather Channel, HBO, Showtime, TNT, USA, TBS, MTV Networks, Nickelodeon Networks, CNBC

With 1080p TVs, theoretically 1080i should look better than 720p channels due to not having either cablebox/satelite or TV do the rescaling. But as you said, other factors also go into picture quality.

Good gawd Smoke, how many more HDTV threads are you gonna start before you actually run out and get one? Bite the bullet, get the TV!

We don't have Costco around here

I still watch alot of SD materials from DVD and cable, so haven't felt the urge yet. But on the side, been eyeing 37 inch LCD TVs which I have a perfect space for.

Proscan used to be considered a professional grade television. When I first started working in an electronics store in 2002, they still have some CRT Proscan 4:3 sets used for display purposes that actually displayed in 540p.

Was the name of store Sears since that is only place I used to see Proscan TVs.

[pixelthis]

Pix, your are a professed TV expert who has seen all, owned all(at least all of the cheapo stuff), and nobody can tell you nothing. In saying that;

1080p has no more resolution than 1080i. In fact, they have the same resolution. The only difference is 1080p is painted in one complete field, and 1080i requires two fields of sequential information. 1080i paints those two sequential fields so quickly, the naked eye cannot see the process. So perceptively both 1080p and 1080i are essentially the same thing. Bad processing of 1080i may show line twitter and some stair stepping of lines(cheap sets), but really good processing allows 1080i to look just like 1080p.

Get your facts straight, or stop posting...you are spreading misinformation and you really need to stop.

Pot calling the kettle black.
Been over this time and time again, this is what happens when lawyers try to do electronics.
Progressive is inherently better than interlaced.
A 1080i pic does have 1080 lines, but its shown in two fields of 540 lines laced together,
any res above 540 is an illusion.
And you have artifacts associated with interlaced pictures.
But the most important point is... progressive just looks better.
AS WELL IT SHOULD , with twice as much res at any given time than an interlaced
pic.
I would rather watch a 720p picture than an 1080i, because the 720 lines on the screen
at any given time is more than the 540 you get from the chicanery of interlaced 1080i.
Anybody just eyeballing the two side by side can see that any given progressive
pic is just more stable and better than any given interlaced pic.
And for the last time, any illusion of 1080 lines disapears when theres movement in an interlaced field.
A 480I WILL ONLY GIVE 240 LINES OF RESOLUTION.
This falls under the heading of "no such thing as a free lunch".
And a 1080i, where theres' movement, will only give 540 lines of res, nice but nowhere
near the 1080 lines from 1080p.
My electronics teacher first told me this, Joe Kane said in several writings for widescreen review, the very same thing , citing it as the reason he favored 720p over 1080i.
NOW WE HAVE 1080p sets, and 1080i broadcast , which is a good combo, as the 1080p sets stich the two fields of 540 frames together, giving a true pic of 1080p, with no interlace artifacts or res loss.
And I REALLY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINION old sot.
I HAVE A 1080P SET right in front of me, and I am going to enjoy the glorious pic, no matter what your disinformed opinion is.

[Invader3k]

"Was the name of store Sears since that is only place I used to see Proscan TVs."

No. This was an audio company store that rhymes with "Blows".

[pixelthis]

i saw a Proscan at Sears (rhymes with "tears") and almost bought it, glad now I DIDN'T.
Because its a Korean knock-off, basically buying a defunct name and slapping it on a
generic Asian TV(is there any other kind?).
Picture was great, but what about longetivity?
BTW all this talk of 720p being "dead" It occured to me that 1080i is DEAD.
At least from the receiving end, can't buy one anymore, really.
However as a broadcast medium its going great, looks like we're heading to a 1080i
world, with 1080p sets deinterlacing these to 1080p.
Which provide exelent pictures, and really, isnt that what its all about?
BTW Smoke, this is what a color pic looks like, for when you do upgrade.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Pot calling the kettle black.
Been over this time and time again, this is what happens when lawyers try to do electronics.
Progressive is inherently better than interlaced.
A 1080i pic does have 1080 lines, but its shown in two fields of 540 lines laced together,
any res above 540 is an illusion.
And you have artifacts associated with interlaced pictures.
But the most important point is... progressive just looks better.
AS WELL IT SHOULD , with twice as much res at any given time than an interlaced
pic.
I would rather watch a 720p picture than an 1080i, because the 720 lines on the screen
at any given time is more than the 540 you get from the chicanery of interlaced 1080i.
Anybody just eyeballing the two side by side can see that any given progressive
pic is just more stable and better than any given interlaced pic.
And for the last time, any illusion of 1080 lines disapears when theres movement in an interlaced field.
A 480I WILL ONLY GIVE 240 LINES OF RESOLUTION.
This falls under the heading of "no such thing as a free lunch".
And a 1080i, where theres' movement, will only give 540 lines of res, nice but nowhere
near the 1080 lines from 1080p.
My electronics teacher first told me this, Joe Kane said in several writings for widescreen review, the very same thing , citing it as the reason he favored 720p over 1080i.
NOW WE HAVE 1080p sets, and 1080i broadcast , which is a good combo, as the 1080p sets stich the two fields of 540 frames together, giving a true pic of 1080p, with no interlace artifacts or res loss.
And I REALLY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINION old sot.
I HAVE A 1080P SET right in front of me, and I am going to enjoy the glorious pic, no matter what your disinformed opinion is.

1080i has more resolution than 720p, and the same resolution as 1080p. These are indisputable facts.

A 1080p flatpanel may display a full 1080x1920 image when static(some 1080p don't even do that), but when objects move across the screen, its resolution drops dramatically. Let's take your beloved Vizio set. When objects move on 1080p Vizio sets(all models), resolution drops to 330p. A 1080i RPTV will have 540 lines of information during motion. This is also a fact you cannot dispute.

LCD panels still suffer from motion blur, so even during fast motion, blurring will lower resolution even if the screen is painted in one pass. 1080i CRT RPTV have no motion blur, so any advantage that progessive scanning has on motion is lost while the pixels refresh themselves.

The amount of detail you get on the screen is the same for both 1080p and 1080i. Though the amount of information (data throughput) transmitted through the cable is higher in the case of 1080p, the number of pixels you actually see it’s the same – 1920×1080.

You cannot see each alternating 540 lines being painted on the screen separately. The whole process of combining the two 540 line fields is so quick, it is transparent to the eye. If it was not, you would see flickering, and you don't. Both lines are on the screen in 1/60th of a second(each taking 1/30 of a second), which is faster than you can blink. Your eyes only see the combined fields, not the alternating frames.

Joel Kane's comments on 1080p and 1080i are based on non processed images. With very good processing, 1080i looks exactly like 1080p, as line twitter and stair stepping(his two major points against 1080i) are totally eliminated. Motion processing can get rid of motion artifacts with 1080i. All of your assumptions are based on single gun CRT's, not high end projection systems and good outboard processing.

You can continue to deny these facts, but they don't go away because of your denial. In motion test done by Displaydata, your coveted Vizio finished at the bottom of the pack in motion resolution, finishing lower than a single odd field of the interlace format. (330 vs 540 lines of information). So this whole progressive is better than interlace when looked at carefully is not as simple as you say it is.

[audio amateur]

Sir T, I don't get the part about 1080p dropping to 330p. Why is this?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sir T, I don't get the part about 1080p dropping to 330p. Why is this?

What this refers to as the ability of the televisions pixels to mechanically twist and update to its correct brightness frame by frame. LCD panels use a backlight, and the pixels determine how much light is supposed to be on the screen with each frame by twisting themselves at varying degrees to allow light through(called rise and fall). With static images, there is no movement between frames, so there is no need for the pixels or move or flex to their correct positions. Once there is movement, the pixels have to twist and update very quickly, especially when 120 and 240hz refresh rates are deployed, hence the difference between resolution when images are static, and when they are moving. The refresh rate may be high, but the pixel response is slow, which mitigates the speed of the refresh rate. Once you get the response rate of the pixels and the refresh rate in sync(like Samsung and Sony have in their higher end models), this effect becomes unnoticeable. The ability of LCD panels to do this well is measured by its motion resolution, as it tells how quickly either the processing, or pixels are doing at correctly updating frame by frame with moving objects.

Samsung and Sony's upper line of televisions maintain their full resolution with moving images. Vizio's televisions across their entire line where all 400 lines of resolution(with their 1080p models) or less during motion, the slowest and worse of all televisions tested. The results where the same when they moved to the XVT line of televisions, and higher refresh rates. The response of the pixels cannot keep up with the refresh rate, so the resolution goes down until they can fully update and twist into position.

[pixelthis]

Sir T, I don't get the part about 1080p dropping to 330p. Why is this?

Because its BS is why.
LCD pixels are like a shutter, they turn on and off, allowing light to pass.
These "magic twisting pixels" are just the latest from the plasma crowd(primarily PANASONIC) MAKING AN EFFORT to slam LCD in general and vizio in patricular.
EVEN IF IT DOES EXIST it makes no difference, my set has been measured at
FULL resolution.
BASICALLY this is a way of saying that I am an idiot who cant tell the diff between
330 lines of res and 1080p.
Insults such as this from this hatefull, vindictive, personality challenged beaurucrat
are the main reason this site is such a ghost town, people get tired of putting up with it.
As long as plasma backers like PANASONIC try to propagandize the virtues of plasma, trying in vain to save their idiotic format(something to do with a 300 million dollar factory)
shills like talky are going to be around.
THE SPEED at which pixels open and close only affects response time, BTW,
has nothing to do with rez.
And my brand of TV (vizio ) is number one because everybodies an idiot except talkie and his made up "tests" that have nothing to do with the real world.
And I AM STILL going to be enjoying my set, along with millions of other tommorrow,
and when I AM READY, will probably be buying my third VIZIO.
A great monitor at a great price.

[pixelthis]

[QUOTE]

1080i has more resolution than 720p, and the same resolution as 1080p. These are indisputable facts.

Its an indisputable fact that you can't do simple math.
A 1080i screen produces the illusion of 1080i by displaying two fields of 540 lines,
just like a 480i pic shows 480 lines by showing first one field and then another.
Your eye isnt fast enough to see the first field fade before the second is " interlaced"
between it, and this gives a great picture, but when theres movement of any
kind the picture collapses back to 540 lines.
This is why still graphics, etc, look so good on interlaced sets.
Not that it matters, 1080i is a DEAD format, you cant buy a 1080i set anymore,
excepting some esoteric crap.

A 1080p flatpanel may display a full 1080x1920 image when static(some 1080p don't even do that), but when objects move across the screen, its resolution drops dramatically. Let's take your beloved Vizio set. When objects move on 1080p Vizio sets(all models), resolution drops to 330p. A 1080i RPTV will have 540 lines of information during motion. This is also a fact you cannot dispute.

SO you finally agree with me about the true res of 1080i being 540 lines.
STILL havent explained how that beats 720p, which has 720 lines at all times.
THE effect of a sharp drop in res only affects interlaced pictures, doesnt affect progressive pictures.
When you think about it , theres no way it can.
On a 1080p set one thousand and eighty lines are on each field.
Half of those aren't going to "disapear" just because somethings moving.
It will disapear on an interlaced set because theres only half the lines on the screen at any given time, and interlaced resolution is an illusion at best

LCD panels still suffer from motion blur, so even during fast motion, blurring will lower resolution even if the screen is painted in one pass. 1080i CRT RPTV have no motion blur, so any advantage that progessive scanning has on motion is lost while the pixels refresh themselves.

Motion "blur" used to be a problem, but once we got into 8 mill, it passed a point where the human eye could detect any blur, and most sets these days are 4mil, and 120 hz sets have even less of a problem.
LCD sets have gotten a lot of blame from cheap cable and sat boxes, with their underpowered procs.

The amount of detail you get on the screen is the same for both 1080p and 1080i. Though the amount of information (data throughput) transmitted through the cable is higher in the case of 1080p, the number of pixels you actually see it’s the same – 1920×1080.

Unless theres' movement in the 1080i pic.
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, as 1080i sets are dead, just about

You cannot see each alternating 540 lines being painted on the screen separately. The whole process of combining the two 540 line fields is so quick, it is transparent to the eye. If it was not, you would see flickering, and you don't. Both lines are on the screen in 1/60th of a second(each taking 1/30 of a second), which is faster than you can blink. Your eyes only see the combined fields, not the alternating frames.

THIS is funny as he**.
By the time the second field is painted the first is already fading.
THE EYE CANT DETECT IT, but when theres movement the res drops, has nothing to do with what the eye can "detect".
And "flicker" has plagued interlaced pics since the dawn of TV.

Joel Kane's comments on 1080p and 1080i are based on non processed images. With very good processing, 1080i looks exactly like 1080p, as line twitter and stair stepping(his two major points against 1080i) are totally eliminated. Motion processing can get rid of motion artifacts with 1080i. All of your assumptions are based on single gun CRT's, not high end projection systems and good outboard processing.

Which is rediculously expensive, even more so as the CRT is mostly a museam
piece, and anything built to fix its shortcomings has to be custom made.
A display with a native 1080p is cheaper and better, not to mention more
versatile.
You can keep a horse, most people don't.
AUDIOPHILES CAN HANG ONTO THEIR OBSOLETE turntables, that relatively
inexpensive, very few are going to be sticking with tubes

You can continue to deny these facts, but they don't go away because of your denial. In motion test done by Displaydata, your coveted Vizio finished at the bottom of the pack in motion resolution, finishing lower than a single odd field of the interlace format. (330 vs 540 lines of information). So this whole progressive is better than interlace when looked at carefully is not as simple as you say it is.

No, but after months of hitting you in the head with a rock, I HAVE FINALLY
convinced you about the true resolution of interlacerd formats.
Like they said in the movie "Contact"...
SMALL STEPS... SMALL STEPS.
My set has been measured, but I AM GOING TO MY AUDIO DEALER,
(who also sells TV sets, and has a full service bay) see if I get a test pattern on it.
You can keep your "twisting pixels".