Shhhhh Don't Tell Pix....Vizio is coming out with...A PLASMA!!!!

[pixelthis]

And I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but talky also says that 480i is 480 lines of resolution.
Its silly statements like this that lead me to beleive that his ass is full of sand.
480I IS 480 SCAN LINES made up of two fields.
I am constantly trying to explain to laymen that scan lines are different from
lines of resolution.
SCAN LINES are the number of lines the picture is composed of, resolution is how fine
the set can resolve detail, this is TV 101.
Put a test pattern on screen and see how far down the scale you can resolve a line of increasingly finer bars.
Why does the "expert" keep missing the basics?
And joe kane did say that progressive is better than interlaced, not once but several times. I read it in a long ago issue of Widescreen review

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

And I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but talky also says that 480i is 480 lines of resolution.
Its silly statements like this that lead me to beleive that his ass is full of sand.
480I IS 480 SCAN LINES made up of two fields.

We do not look at televisions scan lines, the process of scanning is too quick to even make this a point of discussion. NTSC television is based on 525 scan lines of picture information presented in two fields, each field representing half resolution. 486 of those lines are what we use for visual information. Since the temporal effect of our eyes and brains do not represent a half field viewing, you cannot measure resolution based on half field information. You seem to like to do this. Your 240 lines is only half the amount of resolution our eyes see at any given time. So your THEORY is correct, but you cannot measure theory, you have to measure what the eye actually captures.

I am constantly trying to explain to laymen that scan lines are different from
lines of resolution.
SCAN LINES are the number of lines the picture is composed of, resolution is how fine
the set can resolve detail, this is TV 101.

Hence, the more scan lines that compose the picture, the more resolution you can see. That is why there is more information in a 1080i signal than in a 480i signal. You need to put the pieces together.

Put a test pattern on screen and see how far down the scale you can resolve a line of increasingly finer bars.
Why does the "expert" keep missing the basics?
And joe kane did say that progressive is better than interlaced, not once but several times. I read it in a long ago issue of Widescreen review

This is a duh statement. The more lines, the more of the finer bars you can resolve.

Here is the problem with what you present. Its only half the information. We have not talked about scan rate, how far you are setting from the device, how well the internal or external processing deals with motion and artifacts, refresh rates, and visual acuity. You are just looking at a single deminsion of theory without all of the other factors that complete the whole picture.

Can you tell me if CRT is so compromised why all high definition programming from monitoring to mastering done on CRT based devices?

Once again you are taking Joe Kane's comment out of context. I have subscribed to Widescreen review since it started. I have every issue going back to 1996, and I have read everything he has published in that magazine.

Joe Kane has said that progressive is best when we speak of 1080p. He has never said that 720p was better than 1080i EXCEPT when fast motion is taken into consideration. For film based material with a lot of static images, 1080i is better than 720p because their is more information on the screen in 1080i. 1080p is best overall, and I think everyone acknowledges this. He has also said that this whole 1080p versus 1080i arguement fails when you take viewing distance and the 24fps frame rate for film into consideration because of the conversion from 24fps to 60ftps. Tell the whole story.

[Smokey]

I am constantly trying to explain to laymen that scan lines are different from lines of resolution. SCAN LINES are the number of lines the picture is composed of, resolution is how fine the set can resolve detail, this is TV 101.

As Sir TT explained, that statement is completely false.

Scan Lines are part of resolution (vertical resolution). Why do you think we moved from 480 scan lines to 720 and 1080 scan lines for HD? Because 720/1080 means more scan lines AKA more resolution (answered my own question )

If you look at TV resolution specifications in the manual, you will note that both horizontal and vertical resolution are stated as either 640 x 480, 1280×720 or 1920x1080 i/p as both numbers will determine TV’s total resolution. The higher the scan lines, the more resolution a TV will have.

[RoyY51]

This is really getting good...could someone pass the popcorn?