@frigg: (aside from inventing the strawberry - who would have thought a red lump of seeds would catch on as a popular fruit?!)

LOL! CLASSIC!

leMel

@Xenocide: Unless you can grab a Pioneer at a similar price. ;)

Aloof

geez, what TECHGUY1138 said. Using that same logic, my fancy dancy computer screen capable of way higher than HD resolution would be working in the neighborhood of true 1080p. Some body forgot common sense here guys. I foresee some editing of this recap in the near future.

jkr

Panny Plasmas ftw!

Xenocide

I scanned the article quickly. My take on it was that moving images tend to be reproduced with less apparent resolution than a static image. If you can imagine the resolution test the guy is pointing to in the picture slowly bouncing around the screen, the blur produced by the movement will prevent you from seeing the lines you would see if the test image was not moving. I can tell you from experience with a rear projection LCD based set and an LCD panel that the LCD blur is significant. This would explain why plasmas fair the best then LCOS like tech and finally LCD.
I suspect the new 120hz panels may fair better.

anon4321

Actually reading the article fully it is apparent that GIZ is the one out of order.

This is a test of 1080i signals into 1080p TVs. The article NEVER makes the claims that Gizmodo has as the article summary.

The claims break down to you do not get 1080p resolution with a 1080i signal and some TV's do much better than other given that signal.

This is NOT an overall resolution test of 1080p sets. This is a special test where you see 1080i material fed to a 1080p set.

Techguy1138

@EMOSHUNZ

Well the signal from cable is 1080i but it seems fine with the odd exception of pixelation now and then which I think occurs when the signal gets crappy as others in my (recenly constructed) building get the same - even on CRTs..
We've had Time Warner in a few times and it's got better so it's almost definitely a signal issue and not the TV.

Lukewpnunn

@arsenic0: ditto. in fact, i was just researching a samsung hl-t5089s.

EMoShunz

@Techguy1138: Maybe you will start a website and discuss these issues in articles of your own, which we will happily entertain posting as well. As it stands, we do respect Gary Merson's expertise, and so does most of the home-electronics industry. But thanks for your technical input.

Wilson Rothman

@Wilson Rothman:
His test was flawed. he did not test weather 1080p sets could deliver 1080p with a progressive source. he tested how well the deinterlacers work in 1080p equipment to display 1080i content.

It doesn't test if 1080p sets can deliver 1080p content.

Techguy1138

Please retract this article and post. This person does not know what they are doing. They are a HD guru only in the way that people listen to him.

This 'article' shows just how you can misuse fancy testing equipment to get a poor answer.

Reading through this article all he did was prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that 1080i DOES NOT interlace to 1080p without signal loss.

Also he does not understand the concept of pull down as he has confused it with interlace.

Techguy1138

What i am interested in is how do DLP's compared to Plasma's and LCD's? I am a little disappointed they didnt review one 1080P DLP TV.

LCD & Plasma arent the only dogs in town, some of the new LED based DLP's are simply amazing.

arsenic0

@Lukewpnunn: i'm going to go with the crock answer. i believe your ps3 outputs 1080p native, so your screen is only displaying, not translating, which i think is the fault in this test.
out of curiosity though, how is the tv with an hdtv signal from cable/satellite?

EMoShunz

I would image that this is a result of image processing in the television, which likely cannot handle complex video at 1080p resolution, so they dynamically allow for the loss of detail. However, the physical resolution of plasma and lcd tvs can't changes, so theoretically any content is "displayed" at 1080p resolution, simply because it will be interpolated to fit the native resolution. I wonder however, about digital connections that don't uses image processing, such as playing a game on a computer at 1080p resolution, that could output to a monitor with no scaling hardware.

ogremustcrush

I don't know if the GV47FHDTV is an older model but I have the Vizio GV47LF hooked up to a PS3 directly over an HDMI cable and BluRay movies don't seem to suffer any visible qualitly loss at 1080p. Nor do fast moving 1080p games like Ridge Racer..
Either:

Mine is a different model which performs better than the test model

or

These results are not visible to the human eye at any distance from the screen

or

this test is a crock!

Lukewpnunn

@khefer:

:)

That's great!

My only other claim to fame (aside from inventing the strawberry - who would have thought a red lump of seeds would catch on as a popular fruit?!) is the strange similarity between my name and the so-called "Frigg's Law" of online grammar correction:

"Frigg's Law:
Anyone who corrects someone else's grammar on the internet has a greater than 90% chance of 1) being wrong, 2) including grammatical mistakes of their own in the text of the purported correction, or 3) being a dick. The more the grammar-corrector pursues their correction in a thread, the closer that percentage approaches 100%."

frigg

Well.... how about trying out Sony's top line? The XBR's were not tried out.... LAME TEST

dambo29

Just one more reason to get a Plasma, IMHO.

UnnDunn

@khefer: Right, right.. Don't want to get confused with "Talkies"

William C Bonner

That's it .. I am sticking with NTSC, baby, since 1080p in motion might only have 200 lines of resolution, anyway. Right?

Which begs the question: Who the heck cares as long as the picture quality looks good to you, right?

Monty

@jibbly: Dude, don't talk with marbles in your mouth, k?

VNSROCK

@Dearhaw: i think that may be the issue in this test, the blu-ray drive was sending a 1080i signal to the tv. and even if the scaling was done on the player, then the 1080p signal recieved by the tv may have already been crap.

EMoShunz

just tossing this out, what about dlp?

EMoShunz

@demonwolf:

I can't see there being a difference, so long as the upscaling is done on the player side; the TV is getting 1080P signal regardless of whether the original source was 1080p or not.

Dearhaw

Like I've always said. Buy a goddamn plasma.

Aloof

LOL...so uh, a standurd DVD source would look like 100?

I've seen good blu-ray output on a Samsung 1080P HDMI 1.3 monitor and I find all this REALLY hard to believe. This is harkening back to the fantastical lands of magic monster cables and 50,000$ tube amps. There will always be people who say stupid stuff like this.

FrankenPC

@EMoShunz: that's how I was reading it as well ... so what about 1080p signals from 1080p devices using a 1080p source to a 1080p tv??????????

demonwolf

ANDREWPETTY: "You can fit movies on a hard drive?"

Forgive my vulgar American colloquialisms, sir. Films, I properly should say.

khefer

@Wilson Rothman: so, just trying to understand, 1080p doesn't do 1080p upscaling at 1080p, but still produces a better signal then 1080i or 720p, which are also lossing quality in use?

EMoShunz

[en.wiktionary.org]

Revision history of "wrag"
From Wiktionary

(cur) (last) 15:03, 16 November 2007 Frigg (Talk | contribs) (45 bytes) (undo)
(cur) (last) 15:00, 16 November 2007 66.6.80.49 (Talk) (44 bytes) (New page: a website regarded with contempt or distaste)

khefer

Grover and Daed get bonus points for reading comprehension: This is a description of the current technology, which will never give you full 1080p no matter how much you scream at it. This (clearly) has nothing whatsoever to do with the future, but only models on sale now.

As far as 1080i and 720p sets, Gary only tested resolution on 1080p TVs, but I am thinking that, with the same technologies, plasma, LCD and microdisplay rear-projection (which I didn't cover but he does), the 1080p sets will definitely do the best. Except maybe that Vizio POS.

Wilson Rothman

but weren't they were testing 1080i signals that were upconverted to 1080p .... unless I missed the part that mentioned the test material that was 1080p

demonwolf

@KHEFER: I think they called him a guru on the pic because his website is HDGuru.com. And yes, it is stupid to say "you will never be able to do this or that" but they are only referring to the current technology.

Grover

@frigg: 'wrag' - lmao!

Windhawk

@T-man: good point, he was using a 1080i source, so perhaps it's not the motion that is bad, it's the upscaling?

EMoShunz

That's funny... I think I'm the only one who took it to mean, "You'll never get 1080p moving resolution out of THIS hardware."

daed

@khefer: You can fit movies on a hard drive?

Andrewpetty

@khefer:

"btw, what's the website equivalent for "rag" for a print publication?"

That's easy: "wrag."

frigg

@khefer: I love it when experts say that things are never going to happen. I saw a guy way back in the day who was a "tech expert" that said videos on computers were fun but that nobody would ever want to actually watch a TV show or movie on their computer.

baltwade

Don't 1080p TVs deliver 1080p motion if you send it a 1080p source?

T-man

i guess i should be aiming the above comment at hometheatermag, but you guys are calling him a guru. gary, you look like a nice guy but don't say things like this. 10 years from now you'll be trying to bullshit your way out of it by saying "well, at the time".

khefer

comeon, gizmodo, don't be reactionary. i remember in 1990 when pc magazine or some other industry-leader mag said you would never be able to fit a movie on a hard drive.

btw, what's the website equivalent for "rag" for a print publication?

khefer

I am curious if, even though not as good, it's still better than 720p or 1080i?

EMoShunz

Would it be fair to make the same assumption for 720p? i.e 720 static with 500 lines motion? I looked at the link to the previous tests and found only the previous 1080i testing on the 2005 models.

They allude to it being a limitation of the hardwares bandwidth and processing ability, so there is a good possibility this type of issue is not as common with 720p displays...

At the end of the day.. I'm a person that if it looks OK and its at the right price then sweet!

NZRUSS

So what you're saying is...jummuh zummuh gummuh hummuh?

I likes teh hd. Thems som purdy picturds.

jibbly

@Wilson Rothman: I'm sorry. So why would I want to listen to a guy who clearly misrepresent the test, industry expert or not. I know a few so-called industry experts who are idiots.

Many people get 1080p because they have a source that produces 1080p. This is also HDTV buying 101. If you never use Blueray, etc, don't waste your money on 1080p sets.

This guy is clearly clueless about this. It's like saying plugged in an rabbit antenna on a TV in the basement. What moron!

phantom701

@daed: No, I did as well.

Inorde

Depends on how you read it. It does say "never", but it doesn't say "never will be".

The way I see it they're talking about current screens. If you buy one now, you won't get the full-HD resolution.

To be honest, moving images on a Blu-ray or HDDVD will not be full-HD either. Compression will always drag down detail.

The only "real" full-HD you can pump out of your screen is while playing on a PS3, or from a PC.

Inorde

Kind of reminds me of a review where a guy said that 1080i and 1080p and the exact same thing, because he couldn't see any difference when he switched his blu-ray player between 1080i/p, when he was using a projector which outputs @ 1080i (yet was able to accept a 1080p input)

CyRu5

From the matrix it doesn't look like he tested any CRTs. Anyone guess if they would fare better?

I haven't yet been disabused of the notion that my Loewe Aconda 38" has a better picture than any plasma or LCD I've seen to date.

It's a tank at around 250lbs, but I'm waiting until I can actually get a better picture before investing in a new flat screen. So sad SEDs seem like they're not going to make it.

braddo_99

@braddo_99:

I don't know about that particular set but most CRT's actually don't have the full vertical resolution they support. I know HD CRT's were often found to display only a fraction of the lines sent to them.

The only real advantage CRT's have always had is blacks.

juriko