Posted September 17 2006 - 02:28 AM
| Originally Posted by Tim Glover |
I appreciate the honesty Adam you and RAF have shown regarding these projectors. With all the excitement of seeing Sony's Pearl and the other 1080p units, it would be easy and kind of human nature to over due the quality of these and downgrade the lesser spec'd 720p units. And it probably is the setup in some way.
Still, that's encouraging to know that especially in the good 720p market and above, Front Projection really, really can produce hauntingly good images for the consumer at prices all over the map.
It's really a great time to be an enthusiast in this market. Just need more $$ to make it more fun.
Yes, Tim, everything you and others here have said is true regarding the fact that 720p (essentially visually equivalent to 1080i) is still the current "HD" standard and produces some fine images. That's why it's exciting that 720p FP (DLP and other technologies) are now available at pricing that was unheard of
less than one year ago. The HD FP HT experience (how's that
for a bunch of two letter combinations!) is well within the means of most people who don't blink at the thought of spending over $1000 on a "normal" TV for the home.
I fullly understand that the real world difference between 1080p and 720p is the ability for the viewer to sit closer to the set (or bring the set closer to the seating area) with 1080p without the individual structures (pixels, scan lines, etc.) becoming visible. Add to this the fact that the closer one sits to a given size screen the more likely that the image will fill more of the peripheral viewing real estate which results in a more emmersive video experience and you can understand the real advantage to 1080p. Much has been said about 1080p and 720p images sometimes being hard to tell apart and that's absolutely true with many products. It's the geometry (seat to screen distance and the emmersive experience that results which is the true difference.)
Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that 720p images are the equal of 1080p images which obviously have higher resolution. I'm talking about perception by the viewer in a variety of home configurations. On a personal note, with both a 1080p display (my 58" HP MD5880n DLP RPM) and a 720p display (my Runco CL-710 single chip DLP FP) I sometimes forget to switch the output from my DVDO iScan VP30 from 720p to 1080p when switching from viewing my FP to viewing my RPM. There are a lot of other related questions here that I will be addressing once I get the chance to sit down for an extended session at the computer after the show ends - specifically: "Why don't you automate the switching process?"
(HDMI issues) and, "Why don't you just get a 1080p FP?"
(you know what's going to happen in that regard within a year). I've got lots
to say on all of that later in the week because it involves things I found out talking to top people at CEDIA 2006.
My point is that I will sometimes be watching my 1080p for quite a few minutes and then press some button on the HP (like changing the source or checking the time) which brings up the HP information bar at the lower part of the set. Many is the time that I notice the "720p" legend (which means that the iScan is feeding 720p, not 1080p to the HP because I forgot to change the output resolution setting on the scaler). A simple touch of a button on the DVDO remote corrects this and the picture changes to full 1080p. Sure the 1080p looks better than 720p (in a true A/B test as described above). However, the fact that I didn't notice the 720p setting right away is proof, at least to me, that 720p isn't that far behind 1080p perceptually. I think that this is what others who saw the demos/shootouts of various resolution screens have been saying in another context. After all, we built our HT's, whatever the flavor, to watch movies and not to watch test patterns. Test patterns, of course, have their purpose and I use them, but can anyone name one that has won an Academy Award for Best Picture?
| And the Oscar goes to Pluge!! |