Why are 32" displays mostly 720p?

Keep in mind those charts are based wholly on a single aspect of viewing resolution. It's a fine metric for estimating what we can see, but is not the whole story and is doesn't account for the influence of motion or color. The chart are useful, but shouldn't be taken as gospel.

Mike, when I was looking for a new TV last Winter, Vizio's were getting good reviews in Consumer Reports and the forums. I probably would have bought one, except they weren't sold at BestBuy and I had BB GC's to help fund my purchase.

I second what Man says.  Unless you have Ted Williams vision or are sitting with the 32" screen in your lap, 1080p is not worth it at that screen size.

Thanks fellas!


Cnet gave this particular Vizio a pretty good review. 

My vision's probably about as good as Ted's is now. 

Well, maybe not THAT bad.    But never as sharp as his was back-in-the-day. 

Agreed.  However, probably none of those issues would actually favor going for 1080p over 720p all that much, if at all.  I'm not too sure, but I'd expect the motion issue (particularly for LCDs) to actually reduce the usefulness of 1080p rather than give it an edge.  OTOH, it might be true that color fidelity for 1080i/p sources may be better on a 1080p display even if your eyes cannot resolve the difference (over 720p) at a given screen-size-to-distance ratio -- that is, assuming you're actually getting 1080p, not motion blurred reduced resolution.  Then again, if there's a practical diff in color fidelity at such a level, I'd think many other issues will come into play (probably w/ greater priority/impact) also, eg. the dynamic range of the display, general color fidelity (and color calibration), etc.

Also, not all 1080i/p content will take full advantage of a perfect 1080p display anyway, if such a beast even exists.  I'm sure plenty of BDs don't have quite the detail and color fidelity for that even though many of them will still look great.

I suspect all those smaller issues won't matter much in practice when it comes to choosing between 720p and 1080p for the display w/ all else being roughly equal under the circumstance, if viewing distance will be too far.

Now, if the question is whether a quality 1080p source (eg. quality BD) is better than heavily compressed 720p source (eg. some HD network programming), then that would be quite different.  The quality 1080p source downrezz should still look better than the heavily compressed 720p source even if your eyes can't resolve the difference in absolute resolution terms -- the downrezzed 1080p source will likely still have more real quality image (both details and color along w/ less compression artifacts, etc) than the heavily compressed 720p source.  That's why BDs downrezzed to 480p (for a quality non-HD display) can still beat DVDs.

_Man_

 720P is better for DVDs and other SD sources, since there's less upscaling needed. 

That may be true on paper at the per-pixel level, but for practical purposes (of comparing 720p to 1080p on same size screen from same distance), that's not likely going to be consistently true.  It'll more likely depend on the scaling algorithm itself *plus* how you personally perceive scaling artifacts -- both will yield some degree of artifacts, but they may each look a bit different (and/or may not be noticeable to you at all).

_Man_

While I appreciate everyone's help, I believe I've found all the advice I need in the following (for full resolution on the diagram, click it to call up the image and then click on it again):

My favorite parts:

"Jeez. Relax. Throw another $200 at it.  It won't really make a difference but you'll feel better!"

AND

"Just take a deep breath and remember:  Buying this television is the most important thing you'll ever do.   Do NOT screw it up."

ROTFLMAO!!! 

Awesome guide, Mike!  Gotta bookmark that -- and maybe print a copy out for the wife to see!   Thanks for making my day!

_Man_

I got about 2/3 through that flowchart and forgot where I started. Do they get off the island? Can the future be changed? :)

When TV shopping this year, I came to a dismaying conclusion: You can only buy a TV based on specs and reviews. Window shopping is pointless. Comparing TVs in the store is a futile endeavor. Find the set with the best reviews, lowest price, and most comfortable remote control / menu system and then buy it.

Then absolutely do not go back to the store or look at ads for the next 12 months.

So very true although that's easier said than done!   I'd add though that I do tend to check up on price at the big names (like Amazon) for the 15-30 days after I buy the set in case I want to haggle for a pricematch or get my CC company to do the match or something along those lines.   Most big name retailers offer a 30-day return policy (or maybe even a price protection policy) -- or longer for holiday shopping season.

_Man_

Oh, yes, of course. Must watch during the post-purchase price-matching window.

And my shopping experience is informed by local stores. The BestBuy had the Kuro mounted 6 feet above eye level, being fed a mediocre signal. Trying to discern the qualities of a 50" Plasma when viewed about 45-deg from below in the well-lit warehouse is pointless. Trying to compare it to the Samsung LCD placed at eye-level 30 feet away even more ridiculous. And judging whether it's a good size my living room in a vast showroom ten-fold larger than my house is madness.

I concluded that personal observations were mostly misleading. This was driven home when, after shopping the big-box stores, my brother-in-law bought an LCD over Plasma because the LCD, to his eyes, had better blacks. By all accounts in reviews and professional commentary, this is a result of comparing in an overlit showroom, and not the typical dim living room.

So I read reviews, asked owners questions online, watched prices, and bought blind.

Well, I followed the chart in Post #39 to-the-letter and made my purchase. 

Christmas came early for me this year when I won an HTF contest in November and scored a $200 GC to the retailer of my choice. 

I make no bones about doing my HT hobby on a major budget, which explains why I'm always looking for good deals on HT software (and infrequently dealing with new hardware issues). 

Well, I allowed myself to think about the $200 retailer GC in terms of maybe upgrading my old 26" Samsung CRT HD set to a 32" LCD.  In this thread and several PMs I got more invaluable advice and information than I could ever imagine. 

Wouldn't you know it...but my old set must've caught wind of my treachery because the weekend after Black Friday it decided to die.  A couple of random instances of shutting itself off lead to the ultimate shutdown in which its power supply would NOT allow it to be turned back on. 

So...the great TV purchase was ratcheted into high gear and, thanks to the HTF winnings and another early Christmas gift, I am now the proud owner of a 1080p 32" Vizio VL320M.

Thanks to the HTF for holding the contest and showing some love to its membership.  Also thanks to all who took time to help me out with my endless questions about LCD technology and value of specs vs. cost.

And now, some pix:


Here's the old Samsung 26".  When I purchased it (about six years ago) my wife said I could get a new set as long as we put it in a cabinet with doors.  That lead me to convert a 100-year old packing crate into our entertainment cabinet.  I built the base of the cabinet myself from scratch.  (The kind of project I wish I had more time for.)  My teenage son dubbed my project "TV in a Barn." 



And here's the new Vizio in place.  The only accommodation I needed to make for size was in regard to height.  Instead of moving up all the shelving, I removed a fake floor I had built under the set for wires/AC/etc. 

You wouldn't think 6" would make that much of a difference (insert inappropriate joke here) but when you are talking about sets of that size, the difference is really substantial.  The picture looks great.   My main sources are a Panny BD-10 Blu-ray player and a Dish Network HD signal.  So many people here insisted I should get a 1080p set (even though many claim 720p vs. 1080p on a set this size is negligible) and I'm glad I did because the Blu-ray images have been spectacular.  Yes, even my wife says she "sees a real difference."

It being the holidays, I haven't yet had the time to take out my DVE HD disc and start tweaking any settings yet...but that is something I look forward to once I get some time off.  I am amazed at how nice the image is "out of the box."

Thanks, again, to all.

Enjoy the new toy!

Congrats, Mike!  You definitely deserve it!   And it does look nice... "barn" and all!  

_Man_

Was the pink your choice, your wife's, or it is a color anomaly due to the camera? 

It's like something out of a John Mellencamp song -- "little pink TV houses for you and me".

Interestingly (or maybe not so), I grew up in a pink house.  My parents still live in it.  Everytime my dad went to paint the cedar siding, we kids would beg him to select another color, but he's always wanted it to be pink.  I don't know why.

Anyway, Hanson...the camera flash has bleached the color a bit.  It's more of a country/rustic red.  Not quite as deep a red as you'd see on a barn exterior.  Here's a shot taken without a flash.  There was minor incandescent lighting so it's a little dark.  Still not a great representation of the color...but closer to the right idea.

What an excellent thread. Well done guys!