Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 76 to 92 of 92

Thread: Blu-Ray Players

  1. #76
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis View Post
    Not older, just better
    You are just slight..and I mean slightly better than an idiot.


    MORE nonsense that doesnt matter.
    Everything I HAVE READ ON THE PLANET...everything, states that 24p is achieved
    by a freq of 72hz, each frame is showed three times for a total frame rate of 24p.
    I DON'T care how they do it, it looks great. AND blu HAS A RATE OF 24P?
    What about all of the viideo I HAVE ON blu THAT IS 60HZ?
    This is what I mean by your ignorance of this technology. 72hz is a refresh rate. There is zero within the video stream coming from the player that needs refreshing, that is the job of the set itself. 24p is a video stream - constant bits that when unpacked represent each frame 24 times a second. 72hz is used on some plasma's(my Kuro's has it). to reduce motion judder. There are some televisions with a 48hz rate, but flicker is a problem with them.

    and your statement shows your ignorance of the criminal mind.
    THESE morons saw an opportunity after the Japanese earthquake, and all of the confusion created, and took advantage, and were wildly successful
    This is not what happen. Anonymous is a hacker group that hacked into PSN as payback for Sony going after one of its members for releasing the jail break to the PS3 on the internet. This had nothing to do with the earthquake because the servers they broke in to were in San Diego, not Japan.

    You should stay with issues you know about, which means you will have to leave this site permanently.

    You need to quit talking about things you don't have any comprehension of.
    A 1080i pic has less than half of the res of a 1080p pic at any given time.
    WHEN AN interlaced pic is deinterlaced (two fields stiched together) twice the
    picture info is shown on screen, and that pic is not subject to artifacts, like res loss when theres movement.
    I already provided two links that prove that you don't know what you are talking about. So I won't bother to address this AGAIN!


    One of the reasons I BOUGHT MY FIRST 1080I HD set was to see DVD in 480p(my
    set had two native resolutions, 480p and 1080i).
    THE 480P DVD pic, while SD, was a lot better than the 480i, because it had twice the picture info onscreen at any given time.
    First there are ZERO sets that sport a 480p native resolution. 1080i sets have 540p as a alternate display rate. If 480p was the native rate, the set would be throwing pixels away when trying to display full screen DVD's. 540p is either first or second sequential field on a 1080i image from a CRT set.

    No, there was no "new" resolution created, just more pixels onscreen, creating a
    more detailed picture.
    This is why progressive has replaced interlaced, progressive has more picture information on screen at any given time.
    If you cannot see the sequential fields being painted on the screen, then there is really no difference between interlaced images and progressive ones. Once again, the links I provided state pretty clearly that when it comes to Bluray, there is no difference between 1080i/p.


    DENY reality all you want, pull any layman off of the street, ask ANYBODY on this board,
    and they will ALL tell you that a progressive pic is sharper, just plain better.
    BECAUSE IT HAS MORE PICTURE INFOR MATION THAN AN INTERLACED PIC!!!
    Unless you can see the television painting the sequential images on the screen, you eyes cannot tell the difference between 1080i and 1080p. The screen refreshes faster than we can see, so we never see two fields painted separately or there would be too much flicker. When coming from a bluray disc, there is no more "information" in 1080p than there is in 1080i. All 1080i does(if it can take the native 1080p straight) is interlace the images in to two sequential fields, it throws nothing away in the process. If you television cannot take the 1080p video stream direct, then the player does the interlacing and sends it to the set. No matter which way you slice it, there is no more information in 1080p than in 1080i. A sharper picture is not a result of more information, it is a result of not having to perform any post processing on the incoming stream.

    And you are ignorant as "hell".
    So what does that make you? Stupid and retarded as hell?

    My electronics teacher told me about forty years ago that any interlaced pic was going to lose up to half its resolution whenever there is movement. JOE KANE and others have said
    it, its common knowledge, its something I HAVE TAKEN FOR GRANTED.
    40 years ago we were not talking about 1080i or 1080p. Now that we are talking 1080i/p, no, interlaced images do not lose half of their resolution with moving objects. It is all about what processing the 1080i set uses. My old dino when placed into its interlace modes only loses 100 lines of information with moving objects as a result of using advance motion processing. That is far better than all LCD panels, and equal to the best plasma panels. Part of why you take these things for granted is because your information is outdated, and does not represent current technology.



    You don't even have to take my word for it, set a progressive panel next to an interlaced
    CRT, run a 480i DVD picture to the CRT and a progressive 480p to the panel.
    EVERYBODY looking at the demo will tell you that the progressive is sharper and all
    around better.
    What I CAN'T BELIEVE is that I am arguing with a ninny that refuses to face the obvious
    Your testing method is pretty stupid considering you would have to consider the quality of the deinterlacing chips in the test. You are going to dismiss this, but considering the fact that not all progressive players can accurately deinterlace an image, your test would be more about the quality of the deinterlacing chips, than the actual capability of the set or the images.

    The real test is to run two identical 1080p video streams to a 1080p and 1080i set, and see if we can see a difference. Since I have already done this using a single set in the "butterfly" mode(split screen), nobody could see a difference between the two on my set. They can't because "perceptively" they are seeing identical images(they cannot see the refresh rate in action), and the amount of resolution going to each input is exactly the same. As the link I posted says, there is no difference between 1080p and 1080i when presented a 1080p signal.



    "Wooch" knows juat enough to get himself into trouble.
    IS THIS THE SAME Wooch that is running around saying that a component cable is better than an HDMI? Is this your champion?
    FIGURES
    Wooch takes many things into consideration, and goes through great detail to explain his reasoning. You don't. You gloss over all detail in favor of absolutes, and absolutes don't exist when you actually address the detail.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  2. #77
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis View Post
    "Wooch" knows juat enough to get himself into trouble.
    Actually, I know more than enough to get you wound up into knots by pointing out the errors and contradictions in your posts. I'm not the one trying to claim that deinterlacing a 480i source "doubles" the resolution, or claiming that there's no difference between a 480i source and 1080p source when viewed on a "720p" TV.

    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    IS THIS THE SAME Wooch that is running around saying that a component cable is better than an HDMI?
    Ah, back to distortions and lies to win a strawman argument. Bravo! Either that or you got me confused with some other guy named Wooch.
    Wooch's Home Theater 2.0 (Pics)
    Panasonic VIERA TH-C50FD18 50" 1080p
    Paradigm Reference Studio 40, CC, and 20 v.2
    Adire Audio Rava (EQ: Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124)
    Yamaha RX-A1030
    Dual CS5000 (Ortofon OM30 Super)
    Sony UBP-X800
    Sony Playstation 3 (MediaLink OS X Server)
    Sony ES SCD-C2000ES
    JVC HR-S3912U
    Directv HR44 and WVB
    Logitech Harmony 700
    iPhone 5s/iPad 3
    Linksys WES610



    The Neverending DVD/BD Collection

    Subwoofer Setup and Parametric EQ Results *Dead Link*

  3. #78
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible View Post
    72hz is a refresh rate...
    Here's a genuine thanks for the detailed and informative posts. More greenies to you! When it comes to video matters, I'm the first to admit that I know what I don't know. Apparently, Pix isn't there yet.

    rw

  4. #79
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Talking

    [QUOTE=Woochifer;360615]Actually, I know more than enough to get you wound up into knots by pointing out the errors and contradictions in your posts. I'm not the one trying to claim that deinterlacing a 480i source "doubles" the resolution, or claiming that there's no difference between a 480i source and 1080p source when viewed on a "720p" TV.

    Oh, gee, then every DVD player ON EARTH has a totally unnecessary feature, mainly progressive playback.
    IF a 480p picture is no improvement , then why bother?
    FACT is that with a 480i pic you have 240 lines on the screen
    at any given time, then another 240 is painted between
    them.
    IF THERES MOVEMENT, resolution drops to as low as 240 lines.
    Deinterlace the pic and 480 lines are painted onscreen one after
    the other in a progressive manner.
    No, there is no "increase" in res, but there is more resolution,
    because the full resolution is displayed.
    Really, why do you insist on showing your ignorance?
    EVEN ANY LAYMAN, looking at a 480i and a 480p pic side by side will be able to tell which is superiour.
    BUT YOU ARE stating there is no difference, basically like stating the world is flat.
    SO why have deinterlacing DVD players at all?

    Ah, back to distortions and lies to win a strawman argument. Bravo! Either that or you got me confused with some other guy named Wooch.
    NO, YOU ARE the same know nothing who believes that a
    component cable is better than HDMI, but I bet you use HDMI on your setup. WHICH makes you a hypocrite and a liar,
    not to mention uninformed.
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  5. #80
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat View Post
    Here's a genuine thanks for the detailed and informative posts. More greenies to you! When it comes to video matters, I'm the first to admit that I know what I don't know. Apparently, Pix isn't there yet.

    rw
    THE FACT that you applaud a know nothing like talky shows
    that you most certainly are not "there" yet.
    TALK about the ignorant leading the unknowing.
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  6. #81
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    4,380
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis View Post
    THE FACT that you applaud a know nothing like talky shows
    that you most certainly are not "there" yet.
    TALK about the ignorant leading the unknowing.
    Maybe if you took as much time to google corroborating links to your claims as you do for gifs and jpegs for your posts, along with not typing like you still ride the Short Bus, someone might just take you seriously.

    You realize just how easy it is to figure out whose claims have more credible backing than the other, don't you?

  7. #82
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible View Post
    You are just slight..and I mean slightly better than an idiot.
    WHICH PUTS me about seven levels above you in the evolutionary chain



    This is what I mean by your ignorance of this technology. 72hz is a refresh rate. There is zero within the video stream coming from the player that needs refreshing, that is the job of the set itself. 24p is a video stream - constant bits that when unpacked represent each frame 24 times a second. 72hz is used on some plasma's(my Kuro's has it). to reduce motion judder. There are some televisions with a 48hz rate, but flicker is a problem with them.
    The "refresh" rate is the frequency (the rate that a picture is refreshed. EVERY video source on the planet has a frequency, usually 60hz THIS is the number of frames a second,
    THIS is pretty basic stuff, and all you have to do is look on the
    back of a BLU ray box with video content to see that its
    60hz. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS.
    Any BLU box that contains a film states on the back that
    the frame rate is 24p.
    This is each frame three times, 72hz, which divided by three
    is 24, which is shown in progressive format, 24p.
    This is because the freq of a film is 60hz, has to be to be compatible with most sets. BUT IF a set with 24p is detected
    a freq of 72hz is used, with each frame shown three times.
    This is shown as 24p.
    This is what I HAVE READ from every bit of info concerning this subject, BLU uses a frequency rate of 72hz to show 24p, or
    24x3, which is shown as 24p.
    Video source material is shown at 60hz.



    This is not what happen. Anonymous is a hacker group that hacked into PSN as payback for Sony going after one of its members for releasing the jail break to the PS3 on the internet. This had nothing to do with the earthquake because the servers they broke in to were in San Diego, not Japan.
    But the company affected was Japan, doesn't matter if the servers were on MARS.
    Turns out that Sony was using outdated Apache software, with
    no firewall, making them a target of opportunity.
    You need to stick with what you know about, which is nothing.



    You should stay with issues you know about, which means you will have to leave this site permanently.
    You should try using your brain every once in awhile, and come back to this site in about fifty years

    I already provided two links that prove that you don't know what you are talking about. So I won't bother to address this AGAIN!
    Thanks, I HAVE HEARD ENOUGH OF YOUR NONSENSE.



    First there are ZERO sets that sport a 480p native resolution. 1080i sets have 540p as a alternate display rate. If 480p was the native rate, the set would be throwing pixels away when trying to display full screen DVD's. 540p is either first or second sequential field on a 1080i image from a CRT set.
    heres a clue, ace, nobody gives a hoot about what an antique
    like CRT does.
    My last CRT(about half a decade ago) had native resolutions of 480p and 1080i, sorry if my info on obsolete tech is a bit scant.
    DON'T HAVE TIME TO WASTE ON HORSE AND BUGGY.

    If you cannot see the sequential fields being painted on the screen, then there is really no difference between interlaced images and progressive ones. Once again, the links I provided state pretty clearly that when it comes to Bluray, there is no difference between 1080i/p.
    YOU have been stating this nonsense ever since I have been on this site.
    Its mostly a justification for your obsolete 1080i CRT rig.
    BUT if there wre "no" difference between an interlaced and
    a progressive pic, then there would not be an army of DVD players
    out there with progressive scan.
    THE ACTUAL TRUTH is that most sets are 1080p these days,
    and it doesnt matter much what the res of the source material
    is. 480i is going to be up converted to 1080p or 720p.
    1080i is going to be deinterlaced to 1080p or 720p
    .
    AND YOUR INTERLACED gear is going to be just as obsolete
    tomorrow as it is today, and when theres movement the res is
    going to be reduced by up to half.

    Unless you can see the television painting the sequential images on the screen, you eyes cannot tell the difference between 1080i and 1080p. The screen refreshes faster than we can see, so we never see two fields painted separately or there would be too much flicker. When coming from a bluray disc, there is no more "information" in 1080p than there is in 1080i. All 1080i does(if it can take the native 1080p straight) is interlace the images in to two sequential fields, it throws nothing away in the process. If you television cannot take the 1080p video stream direct, then the player does the interlacing and sends it to the set. No matter which way you slice it, there is no more information in 1080p than in 1080i. A sharper picture is not a result of more information, it is a result of not having to perform any post processing on the incoming stream.
    Total nonsense.
    THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL difference between an interlaced pic and a progressive pic.
    An interlaced pic loses up to half its res whenever theres movement.
    I KEEP SAYING THIS, along with the likes of Joe Kane
    and others who actually know something about how video acts
    and its nature.
    IS AN INTERLACED and a progressive pic the same?
    YEP, until theres movement. You can deny this, but a
    1080p set has two million pixels at any given time, twice as much
    as an interlaced pic.
    Interlaced picture tech was a good way to get around limited
    airspace in its time, today its a great way to send video and save
    space while doing it, but as a display tech, its obsolete.
    EVEN 720 LINES progressive is better than 1080 lines interlaced,
    which is why Fox and ABC broadcast in 720p, at the time they started most sets were still interlaced, and the 720p
    was an improvement. PROGRESSIVE IS ALWAYS AN
    IMPROVEMENT over interlaced.
    Thats why most sets on the planet(except for a few antiques
    like yours) are progressive, why most DVD players have
    progressive scan.
    ANYBODY looking at a progressive ands an interlaced side
    by side who is honest will pick the progressive every
    time.
    GET OVER IT.

    So what does that make you? Stupid and retarded as hell?
    If I AM THEN YOU ARE IN BAD SHAPE, because I HAVE FORGOTTEN MORE ON THIS than you have ever known.


    40 years ago we were not talking about 1080i or 1080p. Now that we are talking 1080i/p, no, interlaced images do not lose half of their resolution with moving objects. It is all about what processing the 1080i set uses. My old dino when placed into its interlace modes only loses 100 lines of information with moving objects as a result of using advance motion processing. That is far better than all LCD panels, and equal to the best plasma panels. Part of why you take these things for granted is because your information is outdated, and does not represent current technology.
    Keep whistling past the graveyard ace, you know I AM
    RIGHT.
    Really, whats the point of using thousands of dollars of tech
    to bring an obsolete CRT system barely up to date, when a
    thousand dollar panel from WALMART still outperforms
    it by a mile? Nostalgia?
    AND YOU STILL HAVE TO LOOK AT YOUR SYSTEM IN THE DARK to even see the darn thing.
    Totally irrelevant to 99% of HT enthusiasts, who can't see spending megabucks on an inferiour system that can't
    outperform a n average VIZIO.



    Your testing method is pretty stupid considering you would have to consider the quality of the deinterlacing chips in the test. You are going to dismiss this, but considering the fact that not all progressive players can accurately deinterlace an image, your test would be more about the quality of the deinterlacing chips, than the actual capability of the set or the images.
    deinterlacing chips are of course cheap, but thats more a function of mass production than quality.
    DEINTERLACING is very basic and not difficult anyway, and the most poorly deinterlaced pic is still going to look better than
    any given interlaced pic

    The real test is to run two identical 1080p video streams to a 1080p and 1080i set, and see if we can see a difference. Since I have already done this using a single set in the "butterfly" mode(split screen), nobody could see a difference between the two on my set. They can't because "perceptively" they are seeing identical images(they cannot see the refresh rate in action), and the amount of resolution going to each input is exactly the same. As the link I posted says, there is no difference between 1080p and 1080i when presented a 1080p signal.
    Of course theres no difference between a deinterlaced 1080i and a native 1080p signal, because both are shown progressive.
    AND YOU CAN split screen an image all you want, total image will either be interlaced or progressive.
    1080p SETS were more expensive than interlaced sets, but they
    still won in the marketplace, because any unbiased person will
    see the obvious superiority of the progressive picture.
    You can talk nonsense all day long about interlaced and progressive being the "same", but nobody sides with you.
    WHEN MAKING THE MOST IMPORTANT VOTE,
    with their wallet, they choose, progressive every time, which
    put interlaced viewing displays on the scrap heap.
    ARGUE nonsense all you want, you can't argue with that




    Wooch takes many things into consideration, and goes through great detail to explain his reasoning. You don't. You gloss over all detail in favor of absolutes, and absolutes don't exist when you actually address the detail.
    THATS because his "reasoning" is perception and opinion,
    my statements are from training and stated fact.
    WOOCH IS QUITE GOOD at blowing sunshine up your skirt,
    but most of what he says falls apart on close inspection,
    like nonsense such as a "component cable" is better than an HDMI cable.
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  8. #83
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis View Post
    WHICH PUTS me about seven levels above you in the evolutionary chain
    You are not even in the evolutionary chain.


    The "refresh" rate is the frequency (the rate that a picture is refreshed. EVERY video source on the planet has a frequency, usually 60hz THIS is the number of frames a second,
    THIS is pretty basic stuff, and all you have to do is look on the
    back of a BLU ray box with video content to see that its
    60hz. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS.
    Any BLU box that contains a film states on the back that
    the frame rate is 24p.
    This is each frame three times, 72hz, which divided by three
    is 24, which is shown in progressive format, 24p.
    This is because the freq of a film is 60hz, has to be to be compatible with most sets. BUT IF a set with 24p is detected
    a freq of 72hz is used, with each frame shown three times.
    This is shown as 24p.
    This is what I HAVE READ from every bit of info concerning this subject, BLU uses a frequency rate of 72hz to show 24p, or
    24x3, which is shown as 24p.
    Video source material is shown at 60hz.
    Since you have firmly established that you cannot read, its no wonder that you have this all wrong. You are so stupid, you cannot seperate what the Bluray player does from what the television does. The disc is encoded with a 24fps 1080p visual encode. The player reads the disc, and passes the 24/1080p data stream to the televsion set. Since a 60hz television cannot reproduce a 24p frame rate, 3:2 pulldown must be used. If the LCD set is a 120hz set, it will frame interpolate or frame double(24x5=120) the 24fps frame rate to match the televisions refresh rate of 120hz If the television is a plasma, it can double the frame rate to 48hz. The problem with that is that it introduces flicker. Some plasma's use 72hz, and some use 96hz, and both of these frame rates avoid flicker issues. The bluray PLAYER sends out a pure 24p frame rate, and the TELEVISION adds the necessary frame rates that have been programmed within it. No Bluray player sends out a 72hz frame rate, NOT ONE IN THE WORLD!

    But the company affected was Japan, doesn't matter if the servers were on MARS.
    Turns out that Sony was using outdated Apache software, with
    no firewall, making them a target of opportunity.
    You need to stick with what you know about, which is nothing.
    Japan is not a company egghead. Sony is the company, its headquarters are in Japan. No servers in Japan were effected, it was the servers in San Diego. Specifically Sony Online Entertainment servers where the ones attacked, not any in Japan. Get your sh!t straight foo.

    Remember stupid, you were the one that mentioned a earthquake and tsunami, events that had ZERO to do with the break in.


    You should try using your brain every once in awhile, and come back to this site in about fifty years
    Even if I did use it once in a while, it would be used far more than yours.



    Thanks, I HAVE HEARD ENOUGH OF YOUR NONSENSE.
    Since I have not spoken a damn thing to ya, you have not heard anything. It seems that READING the truth causes your air head to lose its pressure. Looks like you will have a raisin head pretty soon.


    heres a clue, ace, nobody gives a hoot about what an antique
    like CRT does.
    My last CRT(about half a decade ago) had native resolutions of 480p and 1080i, sorry if my info on obsolete tech is a bit scant.
    DON'T HAVE TIME TO WASTE ON HORSE AND BUGGY.
    BS. No CRT has ever had native resolution of 480p. It would be throwing away information when it is presented in full screen 16x9. All rear projection based CRT televisions have 540p and 1080i as native refresh rates -as 540p is exactly one field of the 1080i image.

    YOU have been stating this nonsense ever since I have been on this site.
    Its mostly a justification for your obsolete 1080i CRT rig.
    I don't have a 1080i CRT rig. My CRT based rear projection set does not have a native rate. It can take a incoming 480i/p to 1080i/p signal, and display it at that resolution. 480i/p is displayed as 480i/p. 720p is displayed as 720p. 1080i/p is displayed as 1080i/p. That is why it is not obsolete and will never be. It can display signals up to 1440p, so it will never be obsolete. It has more resolution than your little 42" 768p LCD set, that is for sure. So who's set is obsolete? It would probably be yours - it cannot even display full HD(that would be 1080p).

    BUT if there wre "no" difference between an interlaced and
    a progressive pic, then there would not be an army of DVD players
    out there with progressive scan.
    For your information stupid, DVD should always be displayed progressively, or line doubled. Its resolution is so low, anti aliasing lines crawl and line twitter become a problem if it remains interlaced. That is why most DVD players are progressive. When you get to 1080 lines of resolution, it does not matter if it is interlaced or deinterlaced, you don't get line twitter or anti aliasing crawl. The offset of the two interlaced fields is too fine to see.

    THE ACTUAL TRUTH is that most sets are 1080p these days,
    and it doesnt matter much what the res of the source material
    is. 480i is going to be up converted to 1080p or 720p.
    1080i is going to be deinterlaced to 1080p or 720p
    In your particular case, your set has to throw away lines, and downconvert 1080p to 768p. My Dino set has more resolution than that!


    .
    AND YOUR INTERLACED gear is going to be just as obsolete
    tomorrow as it is today, and when theres movement the res is
    going to be reduced by up to half.
    I don't have any interlaced gear, and even progressively scanned sets lose up to half of their resolution during motion. Your set drops down to 330 lines(from 768) when images move. Tests prove this, and oh look, that more than half!


    Total nonsense.
    THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL difference between an interlaced pic and a progressive pic.
    An interlaced pic loses up to half its res whenever theres movement.
    I KEEP SAYING THIS, along with the likes of Joe Kane
    and others who actually know something about how video acts
    and its nature.
    You are a bald face liar, Joe Kane never said this. The only way a interlaced set would lose half of its resolution during movement is if you can see each field being painted separately. Since we cannot, it does not. The reason that LCD panels lose so much information during moving images stems from the fact the pixels do not switch on and off fast enough to keep up with the motion. Since plasma's use fast switching phosphor technology, it does not lose much resolution at all.


    IS AN INTERLACED and a progressive pic the same?
    YEP, until theres movement. You can deny this, but a
    1080p set has two million pixels at any given time, twice as much
    as an interlaced pic.
    Until your eyes can see each field being updated(of which you cannot), then 1080i and 1080p are perceptively the same resolution. My links prove this, and prove you to be the dumb idiot that you are.

    Interlaced picture tech was a good way to get around limited
    airspace in its time, today its a great way to send video and save
    space while doing it, but as a display tech, its obsolete.
    EVEN 720 LINES progressive is better than 1080 lines interlaced,
    which is why Fox and ABC broadcast in 720p, at the time they started most sets were still interlaced, and the 720p
    was an improvement.
    ABC and Fox are major sports programmers, that is why they choose 720p. When it comes to fast moving objects, progressive is better. 1080i is better for stations that most show films, because you are not losing resolution just to support fast moving objects.

    720p=1280x720 or 921600 pixels
    1080i/p= 1920x1080 or 2,073,000 pixels

    720p has a lot less pixels even when all shown at once, which means less resolution than 1080i/p.


    PROGRESSIVE IS ALWAYS AN
    IMPROVEMENT over interlaced.
    Thats why most sets on the planet(except for a few antiques
    like yours) are progressive, why most DVD players have
    progressive scan.
    ANYBODY looking at a progressive ands an interlaced side
    by side who is honest will pick the progressive every
    time.
    GET OVER IT.
    Once again, a response devoid of detail and context. 480p is definitely an improvement over 480i. At such low resolution, the images should be deinterlaced or line doubled to keep on screen diagonal lines straight. When you get to 1080i/p, one is barely sharper than the other. Since I have already "butterflied" 1080i and 1080p images on the same set, I can tell you for a fact you can barely tell them apart. So you are once again a liar, people will not always be able to pick them apart. It is not as easy as you are making it, and that is for sure. I seriously doubt you would pass a DBT on this.

    So now you get over it liar.


    If I AM THEN YOU ARE IN BAD SHAPE, because I HAVE FORGOTTEN MORE ON THIS than you have ever known.
    Based on your responses pix, you have not even leaned what you claimed to have forgotten. 72hz to describe a native frame rate? Bluray disc is a 72hz technology? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, oh yeah, you truly have forgotten something. You don't even know a refresh rate from a frame rate, nor your ass from a hole in the ground.

    Keep whistling past the graveyard ace, you know I AM
    RIGHT.
    Really, whats the point of using thousands of dollars of tech
    to bring an obsolete CRT system barely up to date, when a
    thousand dollar panel from WALMART still outperforms
    it by a mile? Nostalgia?
    If my CRT can display a full 1080p image, and your panel can only display a 720p image, which of these is really obsolete? No thousand dollar panel can display a 1440p image, but my CRT can. With moving images, my CRT maintains 1000 lines of resolution, your panel a measly 330 lines of resolution. Your set has very mediocre black levels, and only fair dynamic contrast levels. My set has such deep blacks, that with the lights off, you cannot see the set at all. It also has an excellent dynamic contrast, as all CRT's have over LCD. My set can display a totally accurate Cal Rec 709 color gamut, your set cannot, no LCD can.

    I think you have this twisted. My dino set can outperform any consumer based LCD set easily.

    AND YOU STILL HAVE TO LOOK AT YOUR SYSTEM IN THE DARK to even see the darn thing.
    Totally irrelevant to 99% of HT enthusiasts, who can't see spending megabucks on an inferiour system that can't
    outperform a n average VIZIO.
    Since all films are made to be viewed in the dark, you have no point here. When you go to a movie theater, do you watch films with the lights on? No you don't, so the only point you made sits conveniently on your head.

    A Vizio cannot even outperform your mediocre LG set, let alone my custom CRT big screen.



    deinterlacing chips are of course cheap, but thats more a function of mass production than quality.
    DEINTERLACING is very basic and not difficult anyway, and the most poorly deinterlaced pic is still going to look better than
    any given interlaced pic
    If deinterlacing was so basic, then how come so many televisions don't do it so well? The Toshiba 46UX600U, and at least 14 other LCD panels tested by displaymate all show mediocre to poor deinterlacing performance with 1080i and 480i test materials. It is not as easy as you think foo.


    Of course theres no difference between a deinterlaced 1080i and a native 1080p signal, because both are shown progressive.
    AND YOU CAN split screen an image all you want, total image will either be interlaced or progressive.
    1080p SETS were more expensive than interlaced sets, but they
    still won in the marketplace, because any unbiased person will
    see the obvious superiority of the progressive picture.
    You can talk nonsense all day long about interlaced and progressive being the "same", but nobody sides with you.
    WHEN MAKING THE MOST IMPORTANT VOTE,
    with their wallet, they choose, progressive every time, which
    put interlaced viewing displays on the scrap heap.
    ARGUE nonsense all you want, you can't argue with that
    Sorry pix, but the whole example of a butterfly test is to show each image in its native rate. So on my set, the left image can be progressive, and the right split image can be interlaced. When viewed that way, nobody in the room could 100% guess which was progressive, and which was interlaced - the two looked too similar for that.

    I am not interested in who sides with me - I am interested in exposing your lies, misinformation, and just general BS. Since this constitutes all of your posts, I am a busy man.



    THATS because his "reasoning" is perception and opinion,
    my statements are from training and stated fact.
    Exactly what training and fact have you had on Bluray, or 1080i/p? They weren't even thought of when you were in high school. All of your training and supposed stated fact is based on the single gun CRT, and 480i images - two of the lowest forms of image and display technology there is. You have ZERO training with Bluray, and that is demonstrated by your 72hz comment and explanation. The only 1080p images you have seen are at the electronics store, because your display cannot do it.

    Wooch has posted links to support his arguments, you have posted your uninformed opinion and that is all. Any person with a ounce of critical thinking would choose Wooch's posts over yours. You have not provided enough proof to support a training bra.

    WOOCH IS QUITE GOOD at blowing sunshine up your skirt,
    but most of what he says falls apart on close inspection,
    like nonsense such as a "component cable" is better than an HDMI cable.
    He never said any such thing liar. Pix, I just saw your nose go past my window and down the street. From this thread alone, you have told enough lies for that beak of your to stretch from Alabama to San Leandro California. It seems that your nose needs the same kind of work that Bristol Palin jaw got. Perhaps those tornadoes have more of an effect than your are willing to admit.....
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  9. #84
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Thumbs down

    [QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible;360883]You are not even in the evolutionary chain.




    Since you have firmly established that you cannot read, its no wonder that you have this all wrong. You are so stupid, you cannot seperate what the Bluray player does from what the television does. The disc is encoded with a 24fps 1080p visual encode. The player reads the disc, and passes the 24/1080p data stream to the televsion set. Since a 60hz television cannot reproduce a 24p frame rate, 3:2 pulldown must be used. If the LCD set is a 120hz set, it will frame interpolate or frame double(24x5=120) the 24fps frame rate to match the televisions refresh rate of 120hz If the television is a plasma, it can double the frame rate to 48hz. The problem with that is that it introduces flicker. Some plasma's use 72hz, and some use 96hz, and both of these frame rates avoid flicker issues. The bluray PLAYER sends out a pure 24p frame rate, and the TELEVISION adds the necessary frame rates that have been programmed within it. No Bluray player sends out a 72hz frame rate, NOT ONE IN THE WORLD!
    Your keepers need to educate you better.
    My set is 60hz, but displays 24p.
    A BLU player might output 24p, but does it by means of a 72HZ
    frame rate, elimating the need for 3:2 pulldown.
    The entire reason for a 24p frame rate was to eliminate 3:2 pulldown, which sometimes caused artifacts in DVD playback.
    No need for 24p if youi need 3:2 pulldown anyway.
    VIDEO sourced material from BLU is 60hz, 24p is 72hz,
    which is 60hz in a 60hz set, 24p in a 24p capable set.
    This may be wrong, but if it is then the dozens of articles and
    net pages I HAVE READ ON THE SUBJECT ARE WRONG ALSO.

    Japan is not a company egghead. Sony is the company, its headquarters are in Japan. No servers in Japan were effected, it was the servers in San Diego. Specifically Sony Online Entertainment servers where the ones attacked, not any in Japan. Get your sh!t straight foo.
    On the net it doesnt matter where anything is "located".
    THE SERVERS COULD BE LOCATED in someones closet
    under some dirty clothes...DOESNT MATTER





    BS. No CRT has ever had native resolution of 480p. It would be throwing away information when it is presented in full screen 16x9. All rear projection based CRT televisions have 540p and 1080i as native refresh rates -as 540p is exactly one field of the 1080i image.
    Again you show your ignorance.
    MY FIRST HD set was a 47" PANASONIC RPTV, with two native resolutions, 1080i and 480p.
    HD was rare then, I PRIMARILY purchased it to watch DVD's in 480p. THAT WAS THE MAIN REASON FOR the 480p resolution,
    so once again you are exposed for the know-nothing that you
    really are.


    I don't have a 1080i CRT rig. My CRT based rear projection set does not have a native rate. It can take a incoming 480i/p to 1080i/p signal, and display it at that resolution. 480i/p is displayed as 480i/p. 720p is displayed as 720p. 1080i/p is displayed as 1080i/p. That is why it is not obsolete and will never be. It can display signals up to 1440p, so it will never be obsolete. It has more resolution than your little 42" 768p LCD set, that is for sure. So who's set is obsolete? It would probably be yours - it cannot even display full HD(that would be 1080p).
    Whats sad is that you really think any of this is relevant.
    THE ONE ADVANTAGE OF crt is that it has no native resolution,
    and this matters NOT AT ALL.
    This is because my 1080p(not 768) set upconverts or deinterlaces all resolutions to its native resolution.
    TRUTH IS your security blanket-excuse me museum piece
    of a science project is as obsolete as you are.
    The future of projection video is DLP, for most panels...OLED.
    The "future of CRT...the junkyard

    For your information stupid, DVD should always be displayed progressively, or line doubled. Its resolution is so low, anti aliasing lines crawl and line twitter become a problem if it remains interlaced. That is why most DVD players are progressive. When you get to 1080 lines of resolution, it does not matter if it is interlaced or deinterlaced, you don't get line twitter or anti aliasing crawl. The offset of the two interlaced fields is too fine to see.
    And the fact that the quality advantage of a 1080p set is so superior that people pay more for it, rendering 1080i obsolete
    affects you not at all. YOU DO REALIZE THAT MOST READING
    this at one time had to make that decision...AND CHOOSE 1080P.Because a progressive image will always be better than an interlaced one. AND those who choose 1080p to the point of making 1080i obsolete realize just what a know nothing you actually are


    In your particular case, your set has to throw away lines, and downconvert 1080p to 768p. My Dino set has more resolution than that!
    WHY DO YOU INSIST on calling my 1080p set 768p when even you know better? Just to get my goat? OR IS it just ignorance
    on your part? I GO WITH THE IGNORANCE.
    .


    I don't have any interlaced gear, and even progressively scanned sets lose up to half of their resolution during motion. Your set drops down to 330 lines(from 768) when images move. Tests prove this, and oh look, that more than half!
    actually they don't, which is why the world went progressive.
    AGAIN WITH THE 768, you are even more delusional than usual.



    You are a bald face liar, Joe Kane never said this. The only way a interlaced set would lose half of its resolution during movement is if you can see each field being painted separately. Since we cannot, it does not. The reason that LCD panels lose so much information during moving images stems from the fact the pixels do not switch on and off fast enough to keep up with the motion. Since plasma's use fast switching phosphor technology, it does not lose much resolution at all.
    NOT JUST JOE KANE, but everybody else. I READ IT IN FREQUENT ARTICLES IN WIDESCREEN REVIEW
    And about half a dozen other places.
    Joe KANE was a champion of 720p at the start of the HD
    transition, because after allowing for the resolution loss from
    1080i, 720p actually had more real resolution.
    IT WAS jOE kane and others that influenced ABC and FOX
    to go 720p, for the very reason of resolution loss among interlaced formats.
    GET A CLUE, do I CONSTANTLY have to educate you out of ignorance?

    Until your eyes can see each field being updated(of which you cannot), then 1080i and 1080p are perceptively the same resolution. My links prove this, and prove you to be the dumb idiot that you are.
    AND THIS IS HOGWASH , as I SAID EARLIER.
    Not that it matters, as INTERLACED sets are EXTINCT.
    So what the heck does it matter now?

    ABC and Fox are major sports programmers, that is why they choose 720p. When it comes to fast moving objects, progressive is better. 1080i is better for stations that most show films, because you are not losing resolution just to support fast moving objects.
    WHEN it comes to "fast moving objects" AND IN EVERY OTHER AREA.


    720p=1280x720 or 921600 pixels
    1080i/p= 1920x1080 or 2,073,000 pixels

    720p has a lot less pixels even when all shown at once, which means less resolution than 1080i/p.
    not really.
    1080i is two FIELDS interlaced to make one frame, at any given time.
    OF THE 1080 "LINES" you see on a 1080i pic, 540 are rapidly fading "image retention" and the others are the last "field".
    On an interlaced pic at any given time only 540 lines are available,
    so there are only about a million or so pixels onscreen at
    any given time, and the whole illusion falls apart when theres movement.
    AND again...it doesnt matter because 1080i is, for all
    practical purposes...EXTINCT.



    Once again, a response devoid of detail and context. 480p is definitely an improvement over 480i. At such low resolution, the images should be deinterlaced or line doubled to keep on screen diagonal lines straight. When you get to 1080i/p, one is barely sharper than the other. Since I have already "butterflied" 1080i and 1080p images on the same set, I can tell you for a fact you can barely tell them apart. So you are once again a liar, people will not always be able to pick them apart. It is not as easy as you are making it, and that is for sure. I seriously doubt you would pass a DBT on this.
    you know, one of these days even you will figure out that its
    IRRELEVANT because 1080i is EXTINCT.
    Pretty much like your dino sel



    Based on your responses pix, you have not even leaned what you claimed to have forgotten. 72hz to describe a native frame rate? Bluray disc is a 72hz technology? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, oh yeah, you truly have forgotten something. You don't even know a refresh rate from a frame rate, nor your ass from a hole in the ground.
    EXCUSE me if I BELIEVE every HT magazine I HAVE EVER
    read on the subject instead of you.

    If my CRT can display a full 1080p image, and your panel can only display a 720p image, which of these is really obsolete? No thousand dollar panel can display a 1440p image, but my CRT can. With moving images, my CRT maintains 1000 lines of resolution, your panel a measly 330 lines of resolution. Your set has very mediocre black levels, and only fair dynamic contrast levels. My set has such deep blacks, that with the lights off, you cannot see the set at all. It also has an excellent dynamic contrast, as all CRT's have over LCD. My set can display a totally accurate Cal Rec 709 color gamut, your set cannot, no LCD can.
    Well, you start out with the wrong res of my panel and go downhill from there.
    My set is a full 1080p, you can watch it in a lit room if you like,
    and 1440p would be relevant if you could rent 1440p FROM
    the video store, which you cant.
    BRAG ON your antique all you want, the measurements you
    cite as spectacular are actually very slight improvement over a
    panel from WALMART , HELPS you massage your ego as you explain it to those who dont notice, and don't really care.
    Truth is any cheap DLP (the true comparsion for your piece of junk) will blow its doors off quite handily


    I think you have this twisted. My dino set can outperform any consumer based LCD set easily.
    In ways nobody gives a hoot about

    Since all films are made to be viewed in the dark, you have no point here. When you go to a movie theater, do you watch films with the lights on? No you don't, so the only point you made sits conveniently on your head.
    This statement is so ignorant I AM GOING TO GIVE IT A PASS

    A Vizio cannot even outperform your mediocre LG set, let alone my custom CRT big screen.
    it cant outperform my LG, it can outperform your science project
    in all the ways that matter, like, you can actually buy one



    If deinterlacing was so basic, then how come so many televisions don't do it so well? The Toshiba 46UX600U, and at least 14 other LCD panels tested by displaymate all show mediocre to poor deinterlacing performance with 1080i and 480i test materials. It is not as easy as you think foo.
    Easier than for you to spell "fool"

    Sorry pix, but the whole example of a butterfly test is to show each image in its native rate. So on my set, the left image can be progressive, and the right split image can be interlaced. When viewed that way, nobody in the room could 100% guess which was progressive, and which was interlaced - the two looked too similar for that.
    WELL, your display is so dim its no wonder they couldn't tell

    I am not interested in who sides with me - I am interested in exposing your lies, misinformation, and just general BS. Since this constitutes all of your posts, I am a busy man.
    SLANDER all you want, you know I AM TELLING THE TRUTH.
    And cry for your CRT glory days, they are gone forever,
    obsoleted by more advance tech



    Exactly what training and fact have you had on Bluray, or 1080i/p? They weren't even thought of when you were in high school. All of your training and supposed stated fact is based on the single gun CRT, and 480i images - two of the lowest forms of image and display technology there is. You have ZERO training with Bluray, and that is demonstrated by your 72hz comment and explanation. The only 1080p images you have seen are at the electronics store, because your display cannot do it.
    AND YOUR BRAIN CANNOT process a single intelligent thought

    Wooch has posted links to support his arguments, you have posted your uninformed opinion and that is all. Any person with a ounce of critical thinking would choose Wooch's posts over yours. You have not provided enough proof to support a training bra.
    It is not my job to train simple minded children
    He never said any such thing liar. Pix, I just saw your nose go past my window and down the street. From this thread alone, you have told enough lies for that beak of your to stretch from Alabama to San Leandro California. It seems that your nose needs the same kind of work that Bristol Palin jaw got. Perhaps those tornadoes have more of an effect than your are willing to admit.....
    ACTUALLY HE DID, and on this thread. Guess the "unimpeachable" source he used?
    HIS PARENTS.
    They though that a signal from component was better, so it must be so!
    BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
    I would say hes just about as ignorant as you are, but I DON'T WANT TO INSULT THE MAN, he actually has a personality .
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  10. #85
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis View Post
    Oh, gee, then every DVD player ON EARTH has a totally unnecessary feature, mainly progressive playback.
    IF a 480p picture is no improvement , then why bother?
    Because it's another feature to add to the checklist.

    If every DVD player on the planet only output the native 480i resolution, an HDTV would display the output by simply rescaling and deinterlacing it to the native 768p or 1080p resolution.

    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    FACT is that with a 480i pic you have 240 lines on the screen
    at any given time, then another 240 is painted between
    them.
    IF THERES MOVEMENT, resolution drops to as low as 240 lines.
    Deinterlace the pic and 480 lines are painted onscreen one after
    the other in a progressive manner.
    No, there is no "increase" in res, but there is more resolution,
    because the full resolution is displayed.
    Really, why do you insist on showing your ignorance?
    EVEN ANY LAYMAN, looking at a 480i and a 480p pic side by side will be able to tell which is superiour.
    BUT YOU ARE stating there is no difference, basically like stating the world is flat.
    SO why have deinterlacing DVD players at all?
    Man, you are a marketer's dream customer. Throw a bunch of fancy sounding features and specs on a sheet, and you're ready to junk whatever you bought just a few months ago for a brand new one. Like you've done so many times before.

    The part that you're missing is that EVERY HDTV will do the deinterlacing to 480p and then do the rescaling to 768p or 1080p when fed a non-native signal. Progressive scan on a DVD player is a redundant feature, and always has been. The only value that it would offer up is in those specific cases where the the DVD player uses a video processor superior to the one inside of the TV.

    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    NO, YOU ARE the same know nothing who believes that a
    component cable is better than HDMI, but I bet you use HDMI on your setup. WHICH makes you a hypocrite and a liar,
    not to mention uninformed.
    Anyone who wants to check who the liar on this thread is can simply check post #29 for themselves and see what I actually wrote. Seems that distorting and misquoting is all you got left.

    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    ACTUALLY HE DID, and on this thread. Guess the "unimpeachable" source he used?
    HIS PARENTS.
    They though that a signal from component was better, so it must be so!
    BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
    And again, check post #29 to see what was actually posted everywhere other than in pix's head.
    Last edited by Woochifer; 05-22-2011 at 05:55 PM.
    Wooch's Home Theater 2.0 (Pics)
    Panasonic VIERA TH-C50FD18 50" 1080p
    Paradigm Reference Studio 40, CC, and 20 v.2
    Adire Audio Rava (EQ: Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124)
    Yamaha RX-A1030
    Dual CS5000 (Ortofon OM30 Super)
    Sony UBP-X800
    Sony Playstation 3 (MediaLink OS X Server)
    Sony ES SCD-C2000ES
    JVC HR-S3912U
    Directv HR44 and WVB
    Logitech Harmony 700
    iPhone 5s/iPad 3
    Linksys WES610



    The Neverending DVD/BD Collection

    Subwoofer Setup and Parametric EQ Results *Dead Link*

  11. #86
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Hyfi View Post
    Maybe if you took as much time to google corroborating links to your claims as you do for gifs and jpegs for your posts, along with not typing like you still ride the Short Bus, someone might just take you seriously.

    You realize just how easy it is to figure out whose claims have more credible backing than the other, don't you?
    Shhhh! You're gonna spoil the fun for the rest of us ...
    Wooch's Home Theater 2.0 (Pics)
    Panasonic VIERA TH-C50FD18 50" 1080p
    Paradigm Reference Studio 40, CC, and 20 v.2
    Adire Audio Rava (EQ: Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124)
    Yamaha RX-A1030
    Dual CS5000 (Ortofon OM30 Super)
    Sony UBP-X800
    Sony Playstation 3 (MediaLink OS X Server)
    Sony ES SCD-C2000ES
    JVC HR-S3912U
    Directv HR44 and WVB
    Logitech Harmony 700
    iPhone 5s/iPad 3
    Linksys WES610



    The Neverending DVD/BD Collection

    Subwoofer Setup and Parametric EQ Results *Dead Link*

  12. #87
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis View Post
    Your keepers need to educate you better.
    My set is 60hz, but displays 24p.
    A BLU player might output 24p, but does it by means of a 72HZ
    frame rate, elimating the need for 3:2 pulldown.
    The entire reason for a 24p frame rate was to eliminate 3:2 pulldown, which sometimes caused artifacts in DVD playback.
    No need for 24p if youi need 3:2 pulldown anyway.
    VIDEO sourced material from BLU is 60hz, 24p is 72hz,
    which is 60hz in a 60hz set, 24p in a 24p capable set.
    This may be wrong, but if it is then the dozens of articles and
    net pages I HAVE READ ON THE SUBJECT ARE WRONG ALSO.
    You still don't have it right stupid. Your display cannot reproduce 24fps, not with a 60hz refresh rate. There are no multiples of 24 that equal out to 60hz, so 3:2 pulldown MUST be used. So based on your assumptions, Bluray out puts at 72hz and your set refreshes at 60hz? It would have to discard 12fps to meet your sets refresh rate, does that sound right to you idiot? The picture would be severely degraded if that happens.

    Film content=24fps
    Video content=30fps

    Your set can process programs shot with video without 3:2 pull down, as 60hz is a multiple of 30fps frame rate. The problem is that all material encoded to Bluray disc is done so at 24fps, so you are still stuck with 3:2 pull down no matter what.

    http://www.tech-evangelist.com/2008/...te-frame-rate/

    Find where it states ANYWHERE that Bluray uses a 72hz "refresh" rate. If you cannot, then stop repeating the lie over and over again.

    On the net it doesnt matter where anything is "located".
    THE SERVERS COULD BE LOCATED in someones closet
    under some dirty clothes...DOESNT MATTER
    Look stupidpixel, these are your words.

    and your statement shows your ignorance of the criminal mind.
    THESE morons saw an opportunity after the Japanese earthquake, and all of the confusion created, and took advantage, and were wildly successful


    Can you explain to me what confusion was happening in San Diego after an earthquake in JAPAN? The servers that were attacked was in San Diego, not Japan. Get your facts straight, or shut the hell up!


    Again you show your ignorance.
    MY FIRST HD set was a 47" PANASONIC RPTV, with two native resolutions, 1080i and 480p.
    HD was rare then, I PRIMARILY purchased it to watch DVD's in 480p. THAT WAS THE MAIN REASON FOR the 480p resolution,
    so once again you are exposed for the know-nothing that you
    really are.
    Pixelidiot, do you realize that there is no way to get to the maximum resolution of a 1080i RPTV from 480p? The only way a consumer RPTV can be progressive is if it is displaying one of the two fields it sequentially displays. 540p is one field of a sequentially displayed 1080i image. Using your logic, your set would only be capable of 960i resolution, not 1080i. No 1080i RPTV has a native resolution of 480p, not one, it would be impossible to do on consumer based RPTV's.

    Whats sad is that you really think any of this is relevant.
    THE ONE ADVANTAGE OF crt is that it has no native resolution,
    and this matters NOT AT ALL.
    This is because my 1080p(not 768) set upconverts or deinterlaces all resolutions to its native resolution.
    TRUTH IS your security blanket-excuse me museum piece
    of a science project is as obsolete as you are.
    The future of projection video is DLP, for most panels...OLED.
    The "future of CRT...the junkyard
    Pix, either you are lying here, or you lied when you stated this.

    BTW the LG "42 that passed your weird little "motion" res test in your gamespot link
    (the only one that passed) is the same model I HAVE.


    The LG 42" that passed the deinterlacing test was a 768p set. As a matter of fact all of LG's 42" models in that test were 768p. So either you are lying about owning the set that past the test, or you are lying to yourself about getting 1080p which is it?

    http://www.gamespot.com/forums/topic/26585312


    And the fact that the quality advantage of a 1080p set is so superior that people pay more for it, rendering 1080i obsolete
    affects you not at all. YOU DO REALIZE THAT MOST READING
    this at one time had to make that decision...AND CHOOSE 1080P.Because a progressive image will always be better than an interlaced one. AND those who choose 1080p to the point of making 1080i obsolete realize just what a know nothing you actually are
    This link say you are a liar plain and simple.

    http://www.hometheater.com/geoffreym...061080iv1080p/

    Once again, notice these words stupidpixel

    There Is No Difference Between 1080p and 1080i

    You can repeat your lies to yourself over and over again, but they are still lies.


    WHY DO YOU INSIST on calling my 1080p set 768p when even you know better? Just to get my goat? OR IS it just ignorance
    on your part? I GO WITH THE IGNORANCE.
    It is a 768p set, or you are lying about your set passing the test. You said this

    BTW the LG "42 that passed your weird little "motion" res test in your gamespot link
    (the only one that passed) is the same model I HAVE.


    Well according to gamespot, the LG that passed the deinterlacing test was the 42LB5D, which is a 768p set. Once again, either you lied with this statement, or you are lying now. Which is it pixelliar? Your goat is your lying tongue.


    actually they don't, which is why the world went progressive.
    AGAIN WITH THE 768, you are even more delusional than usual.
    Your nose just went by and is halfway to China by now.


    NOT JUST JOE KANE, but everybody else. I READ IT IN FREQUENT ARTICLES IN WIDESCREEN REVIEW
    And about half a dozen other places.
    Joe KANE was a champion of 720p at the start of the HD
    transition, because after allowing for the resolution loss from
    1080i, 720p actually had more real resolution.
    IT WAS jOE kane and others that influenced ABC and FOX
    to go 720p, for the very reason of resolution loss among interlaced formats.
    GET A CLUE, do I CONSTANTLY have to educate you out of ignorance?
    Pix, I have been a Widescreen Review subscriber since the first day it was printed. I have every issue they have ever printed in my AV library. Joe Kane never said any of what you state. I have been to over 20 of his workshops over the last 15 years, and I have never heard him make that claim. You are lying about Joe Kane influencing ABC to go 720p. The company I work for owns ABC, and I know for a fact that it was internal testing with sport material that convinced ABC to choose 720p over 1080i. David Session who is the head of ABC technical operations convinced the top brass at ABC to choose 720p over 1080i.

    Do you have any more lies you want to tell and have holes shot in them?



    AND THIS IS HOGWASH , as I SAID EARLIER.
    Not that it matters, as INTERLACED sets are EXTINCT.
    So what the heck does it matter now?
    I hate to bring this to you, but 10 years of panel sales cannot overwhelm 50+ years of interlace television sales. Flat panels are all they are selling now, but tons of folks still own the venerable single gun CRT sets out there. Based on the amount of black boxes sold during the DTV transition(hundreds of millions of them) alot of people have kept them and have never purchased a new panel. Extinct means they don't exist, Smokey will probably tell you differently, and so would my grandmother.



    WHEN it comes to "fast moving objects" AND IN EVERY OTHER AREA.
    Not when it comes to displaying film content its not. Not with 921600 pixel out of 2,073,000 pixels


    720p=1280x720 or 921600 pixels
    1080i/p= 1920x1080 or 2,073,000 pixels



    not really.
    1080i is two FIELDS interlaced to make one frame, at any given time.
    OF THE 1080 "LINES" you see on a 1080i pic, 540 are rapidly fading "image retention" and the others are the last "field".
    On an interlaced pic at any given time only 540 lines are available,
    so there are only about a million or so pixels onscreen at
    any given time, and the whole illusion falls apart when theres movement.
    AND again...it doesnt matter because 1080i is, for all
    practical purposes...EXTINCT.
    If what you say is true(which it isn't) one million pixels is still more than 921600 pixels of 720p. If the images fall apart during movement, then the set would be unwatchable 90 percent of the time. That is not the case is it liar?

    1080i is still used on concert videos, so it is not extinct. Do you know what extinct means? I guess not.


    you know, one of these days even you will figure out that its
    IRRELEVANT because 1080i is EXTINCT.
    Pretty much like your dino sel
    My dino set is not a 1080i set, but your panel is a 768p panel, or you are a liar. How that clothes hanger for a nose you have Pixliar?




    EXCUSE me if I BELIEVE every HT magazine I HAVE EVER
    read on the subject instead of you.
    Your nose just landed in China liar, no magazine ever stated that Bluray has a 72hz refresh rate. Post a link that proves this, or be the liar that you are.



    Well, you start out with the wrong res of my panel and go downhill from there.
    My set is a full 1080p, you can watch it in a lit room if you like,
    and 1440p would be relevant if you could rent 1440p FROM
    the video store, which you cant.
    BRAG ON your antique all you want, the measurements you
    cite as spectacular are actually very slight improvement over a
    panel from WALMART , HELPS you massage your ego as you explain it to those who dont notice, and don't really care.
    Truth is any cheap DLP (the true comparsion for your piece of junk) will blow its doors off quite handily
    Your set is a 768p set, and movies are to be watched in the dark. They were edited in the dark, QC'd in the dark, and presented in a dark theater.

    The rest of your statement is pure bull sh!t, and as stupid as you are, you know this.


    [quote]This statement is so ignorant I AM GOING TO GIVE IT A PASS[quote]

    You have lied enough, so perhaps you should.


    it cant outperform my LG, it can outperform your science project
    in all the ways that matter, like, you can actually buy one
    Your LG is a peice of crap compared to my old dusty custom RPTV. It doesn't even do full HD, and my RPTV does and some. You are out of your league here, but you are so delusional you will never admit it, and you don't have to.





    Easier than for you to spell "fool"
    Calling you a fool is too generous. You are not even smart enough to earn the L.



    WELL, your display is so dim its no wonder they couldn't tell
    You have never seen my set liar, so you cannot make this statement. That nose is still growing



    SLANDER all you want, you know I AM TELLING THE TRUTH.
    And cry for your CRT glory days, they are gone forever,
    obsoleted by more advance tech
    You have been caught in so many lies in this thread, you are nothing more than a common low life liar, and that is all there is to it. When you stop your lying, you just be a dummy instead of a dumb liar.




    AND YOUR BRAIN CANNOT process a single intelligent thought
    And you have yet to present one liar



    It is not my job to train simple minded children
    A simple minded old man does not have the capacity to do so anyway.


    ACTUALLY HE DID, and on this thread. Guess the "unimpeachable" source he used?
    HIS PARENTS.
    They though that a signal from component was better, so it must be so!
    BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
    I would say hes just about as ignorant as you are, but I DON'T WANT TO INSULT THE MAN, he actually has a personality .
    Read his post, he caught your lies and posted a link to them. You have now proved my point, you can't read. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, you makes this so easy!
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  13. #88
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    4,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer View Post
    Shhhh! You're gonna spoil the fun for the rest of us ...
    Taste Great......Less Filling......this is getting old for sure, but it is some of the best fun we have had here in a while.

  14. #89
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyfi View Post
    Taste Great......Less Filling......this is getting old for sure, but it is some of the best fun we have had here in a while.
    and the vast majority of it is irrelevant.
    WHEN just about every tv on the planet is either 1080p or 720p
    any discussion of 1080i is a total waste of time.
    THE TRANSITION phase is just about over, TV is going to be 1080p
    eventually, with 1080i as a transmission medium .
    AS FOR "LINKS" it might seem hard to believe, but how do you provide a "link" to the dozens of magazine articles read during the late ninties/early 2000's, the dozens of web sites surfed over the years?
    Widescreen review is, I BELIEVE, DEFUNCT, if they still have a website, check it out. GOOGLE Joe Kane, video displays, etc.
    None of it matters, really.
    DURING THE EARLY years of the auto, there were three major types, electric, steam, and internal combustion
    Internal combustion won out.
    And we are closing down a similar period with video displays..
    THE DIFFERENT formats and displays have sorted themselves
    out, and two form factors have won out...
    LCD and DLP.
    I saw THOR in IMAX lite projected with DLP, simply magnificent.
    DLP is it for theater and home projection, with the lcd for the standard display for everybody, soon to be replaced by OLED.
    CRT is destined for the trash heap, and no amount of pining away
    and nonsense like "1440" displays will change that
    THE AGE of CRT is over, as is the age of its bastard child, PLASMA, which is really just a flattened CRT.
    ANY talk of anything outside of 1080p is quite useless, really.
    Might as well be arguing as to how many angels can dance on
    the top of a pin...
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  15. #90
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Pix, you are already reduced yourself to a common liar, how much more damage to your rep do you want to do?(as if it wasn't sh!t already!)

    Link after link has proven that you don't know crap, so it might be wise to back away from this thread, and call it a day.

    Widescreen Review is not defunct, I got my latest issue two weeks ago. Their website is also alive and well. Any more lies you want to tell?

    http://www.widescreenreview.com/
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  16. #91
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    82
    OMG!
    This is one of those few time I am thankful that I do not know a whole lot about something!
    Home Theater:
    • Harman Kardon AVR 335
      (Supplied 7.1 Channel speaker with this receiver as HTiB)
    • Panasonic DMP-BD85K Blu Ray
    • XBOX 360 Slim
    • Belkin Pure AV PF-30 Power Conditioner
    • Epson Home Cinema 8700 UB Projector
    • Logitech Harmony 880

    http://picasaweb.google.com/arm.amar/HomeTheater#

    Family Room:
    • Panasonic 42" 42PX600U Plasma
    • Harman Kardon DVD31
    • Motorola Cable Box

  17. #92
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    4,380
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis View Post
    and the vast majority of it is irrelevant.
    WHEN just about every tv on the planet is either 1080p or 720p
    any discussion of 1080i is a total waste of time.
    THE TRANSITION phase is just about over, TV is going to be 1080p
    eventually, with 1080i as a transmission medium .
    AS FOR "LINKS" it might seem hard to believe, but how do you provide a "link" to the dozens of magazine articles read during the late ninties/early 2000's, the dozens of web sites surfed over the years?
    Widescreen review is, I BELIEVE, DEFUNCT, if they still have a website, check it out. GOOGLE Joe Kane, video displays, etc.
    None of it matters, really.
    DURING THE EARLY years of the auto, there were three major types, electric, steam, and internal combustion
    Internal combustion won out.
    And we are closing down a similar period with video displays..
    THE DIFFERENT formats and displays have sorted themselves
    out, and two form factors have won out...
    LCD and DLP.
    I saw THOR in IMAX lite projected with DLP, simply magnificent.
    DLP is it for theater and home projection, with the lcd for the standard display for everybody, soon to be replaced by OLED.
    CRT is destined for the trash heap, and no amount of pining away
    and nonsense like "1440" displays will change that
    THE AGE of CRT is over, as is the age of its bastard child, PLASMA, which is really just a flattened CRT.
    ANY talk of anything outside of 1080p is quite useless, really.
    Might as well be arguing as to how many angels can dance on
    the top of a pin...
    Glad you had time to attach a stupid pic and no links. If you do a simple google search, you should be able to provide thousands of links to support your story.....or maybe not. The rest of us have all used that great creation called Google throughout this post and have just been sitting back to watch the P|ssing match continue.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •