HDMI

[Diyisfun]

Ive been watching the tennis & flicking from HD to Standard the only differnce I could see was on HD the net was sharper.

Snobery comes to mind with all this tech no stuff.

 

[gday2uk]

Snobery comes to mind with all this tech no stuff.

So you are implying you are a snob because you have a HD television and access to HD broadcasts?
You've said yourself you can see the difference it makes so whats the argument?
If you are aware of and have interest in 'tech no stuff' it does not make you a snob just because others are uneducated to the subject.

 

[nitro23456]

A 1080p 24 inch tv is a complete waste of time. You'd have to be sat so close your face was actually through the screen.

I don't think it matters the fact that it is 1080p and 24" - you're just saying a 24" tv is a waste of time (I agree to a certain extent - eg. if you put it in a large room).
Would you have made that comment if it were a 720p 24"? They are after all the same sort of price as 1080p ones.

All I was trying to put forward was that pretty soon there are going to be 1080p tv's in the 32" - 37" region for sub £300. This will push the whole 1080p HD marketing thing forward and it will (hopefully) become mainstream, pushing prices ever lower as more people buy the goods.

I wasnt criticising your post mate.

Any HD tv at 24 inch (720 or 1080) is a complete waste of time. Obviously 24 inch TVs have their place (bedrooms, small houses etc) but you would have to literally be sat with your face on the screen to notice any difference with HD on such a small screen......

I think these 'smaller' size TVs are the worst offenders for marketing hype as people would compromise on size (when the HD TVs were expensive) just to get a HD ready set within their budget, when in fact they would have been better off just getting a decent SD set or saving up a bit more to buy a bigger size where the difference is noticeable.

I have a decent 32 inch Panasonic set with 100hz and SKY HD and I can see the difference quite easily (the wife can't!!!) but its certainly not the best thing since sliced bread, more of an enhancement.

The following graph sums it up well:

.....and you can see with my 32 inch set, the best distance for even just 720p is about 6 foot and I reckon I am about 8-9 foot away!!

I also agree with your cheap 1080p set comments..... marketting hype rather than benefit though. From my viewing distance (which must be pretty typical) I would need a 70 inch set for full 1080p benefit!!!!!!!!

bit of a difference from 24 inches.

 

[drummerbod]

That graph is not worth the electrons it was produced with.

I went from a 720p prjector to 1080p. Distance 12 feet. Diagonal of 80.

According to that graph I shouldn't see the "full" benefit. Difference was night and day.

I could tell the difference between a 1080p and 720p 32" TV (assuming they were fed native resolution material) instantly whereas others may not.

Best thing to do is try it and see if you can tell the difference.

Same with most things visual. I instantly spot stutter\dropped frames. A lot of people don't.

 

[slup]

I think the graph is generally helpful. Your case is well into the 'starts to become noticible' section.

I think the solid line is intended to be the point at which the available resolution exceeds your ability to resolve the difference. Or the other way of looking at it is that until you reach the line, if you had slightly fewer than 1920x1080 pixels, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I'd argue that at 80" diagonal viewed at 12 feet, you may not be able to resolve individual pixels - so it's correct that you are not at the solid line.

I have 92" diagonal at a 10 foot viewing distance and can just make out individual pixels if I focus the projector critically sharp - that fits in with the graph.

So if you were on the line or beyond it, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I guess it depends how you interpret the graph.

Also, that graph is more useful for projector users than TV users - it's hard to interpret the lower end of the graph.