1080i vs 1080p: A Noticeable Difference

Ok, as I said in another thread, I went with my brother to CC so that he can purchase an 80 gig PS3. On the way back to his house we stopped at my house to pick up a couple of movies to play on the PS3. We only really had enough time to watch one movie because the fight was coming on. So we watched the Fifth Element because it had a Dolby TrueHD track so we could also test his new ONKYO 605 that he just got from J&R ($399). As the movies started in the beginning I immediately noticed that the picture quality was nat as good as compared to on my TV eventhough it was a good picture. He has a SONY GrandWega 50 inch 1080i LCD a very nice TV. I on the other hand have a Mits 57inch 1080p DLP. Both are rear projection. After playing with the video settings I still could not find a picture equal or better to mine. So I guess alot of stories that I've heard are correct, anything 50 inches and over 1080p is noticeably better than 1080i, or does it depend on the what kind of HD technology your TV employs.

Not exactly Tony.

According to reviews of Sony R-Pro SXRD displays (on cnet's site, A/V magazines, and elsewhere), the image processors that Sony's been using in most of their TVs DO NOT properly deinterlace 1080i film-based signals. This likely means that their displays are only using half of the interlaced signal's resolution (or 540 lines) and then upconverting "this" to the set's native resolution (wether 720p or 1080p). So the result is a SOFTER "less-HD" picture.

Depending on your brother's TV capability (like can it accept 1080p signals from the PS3?), the image quality WOULD LOOK BETTER by feeding either a 1080p or 720progressive signal from the PS3.

In progressive form (480p 720p, or 1080p), the processor in the PS3 will properly deinterlace the native signal off the disc - (example: 1080p/24hz native converted into 720p/60hz, 1080p/60hz, or standard 480p/60hz, all progressive signals) - and the image will look much better, clearer/smoother, with less artifacts/jaggies and more HD, since the disc's resolution is now at a full deinterlaced 720p (or 1080p), instead of 540 upconverted. Hope this helps. (I've also enjoyed reading your knowledge about the PS3 capabilities on other threads here).

Reminder: it's been reported in magazines like The Perfect Vision, Home Theater Magazine, etc, that around 60% to 80% of all HDTV displays unfortunately DO NOT PROPERLY DEINTERLACE 1080i film-based HD signals (one of the most popular HD signals). So, for best image quality, unless you know for sure that your TV display has an excellent signal processing chip [Pioneer, Toshiba, Sharp, JVC, etc], be sure to output your player's signal in progressive form, either 480p, 720p, or 1080p (if capable), whether it's a standard player, upconversion player, Blu-ray or HD-DVD.

EDIT - Here's a brief quote from a Nov 2007 Cnet.com REVIEW - SONY KDS-55A3000

"As has been the case with Sony for many years, the video processing on the KDS-A3000 leaves something to be desired. On the plus side, the CineMotion feature does provide 2:3 pull-down, and the Motion Enhancer 120Hz feature also smooths out the picture with film-based content. However, the processing does not de-interlace film-based 1080i HD material properly, which reduces some vertical resolution from 1080i material from off-air HD broadcasts, and cable and Satellite TV HD sources. Of course, those sources still appeared quite sharp, and the lack of proper 1080i de-interlacing is not a problem with Blu-ray and HD DVD as long as you set your player to output 1080p." [or 720p - LH]

-Love Hendrix! (The Loverboy)
~ DVD/HD-DVD/Blu-ray/KURO Plasma owner ~

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on Jan 20, 2008]

Tony, don't forget the 50" Sony LCD/projection your brother has won't look as good as your DLP. Why? Well those LCD's had VERY poor black levels and on some of the earlier models the dark/shadow scenes actually looked blue instead of black.

I used to have a 50" Sony Wega myself 3 years ago, I'm thinking it's the same one your brother has. Anyway yes it's 1080i and it can show some decent images, especially daytime shots but the contrast ratios were not the greatest, in fact they were sometimes really bad. Thankfully technology has vastly improved since those tv's were released.

As Hendrix mentioned it has been well documented the Sony tv's do NOT deinterlace 1080i signals properly. Check cnet.com reviews and read up on them. I don't know if they have corrected this but I know it was still an issue in the first half of 2007.

Quote:
(I've also enjoyed reading your knowledge about the PS3 capabilities on other threads here).

Thanks Love Hendrix, I like to think that I try to help anyone with a PS3 try to get the most out of it. It's a fantastic machine full of capabilities.

Falcon,

The "screen door effect" from LCD's is the reason why I did'nt go LCD. Eventhough the burn in technology has vastly improved for plasma I still did'nt what to take that chance. I was kinda skeptical about DLP's picture not being as good as LCD's 1080p and Plasma's 1080i, but after I read that DLP does not suffer from LCD's "screen door effect" and Plasma possible image retention and also that DLP does actually have a great picture, my choice was clear. Eventhough I do love the Pioneers Kuros Plasmas. I came really close to forking out the extra money for one, but I'm very happy with my choice

[Post edited by tony1569 on Jan 20, 2008]

DLP projection is an excellent technology - that DLP processing chip is really good, and improves with each generation.

Where Rear-Pro can't compete with Plasma:

-less contrast than plasma

-not as deep black levels as plasma

-known 'hot spots' (usually in the center) on certain models

-must sit "dead on" [center and level to your eyes] for best image, while with plasma you can view at almost any angle and picture quality remains excellent

-a rear-projected bulb-lighted or LED-lighted "image" is just not as great as plasma's gas/phospher technology [image is created right behind the glass with no 'hot spots' in either the center, or screen edges]

However, for COST purposes, rear-projection is the #1 value for home theater displays, easily provided more screen size per dollar, than anything plasma, LCD, front-projection.

-LH (The Loverboy)

I have a Panasonic 58" Viera 1080P plasma screen, and I can tell you that you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between 1080P and 1080i. I have used my Samsung BP-UP5000 (combo Blu Ray/HD DVD) and set it to both settings and I can't really see much (if any) difference...and this is on a 58" set.

I also own a Toshiba A1 (1080i only) and it's picture quality is as good or better than the Samsung deck at 1080P. My advice to you A1/A2/A3 owners out there who are considering an upgrade to a 1080P Toshiba like the A35...don't bother because picture quality wise you are wasting your money.

The 1080p / 1080i difference IS PURE UNADULTERATED HYPE.

Consider these factors instead: Color Accuracy, Contrast Ratio, and Refresh Rate.

I can't believe people out there, are still giving evangelical GARBAGE, regarding 1080p's false-advertising-superiority, over 1080i.

xplaytendo - you're missing the point.

"1080" is one thousand and eighty lines of resolution. If sent progressively it remains the full 1080. If sent by interlaced form, it remains the full 1080 - IF the TV display has an adequate processing chip, so as to correctly DEINTERLACE the 1080 in full, before converting to the native resolution of the display (whether 720p or 1080p).

If done correctly, you will not see any difference, as they are both 1080, and it would not matter if the player processed it progressively, or if the TV did it - just as long as it's done accurately (FULL 1080, not half/540 upconverted), and this depends on either the TV display's processing chip (or the player's).

If done incorrectly, YOU WILL SEE THE DIFFERENCE. The picture will look softer, with more artifacts/jaggies (overall noisier image than progressive), and this is because an interlaced signal is NOT the same as a progressive signal. I've explained this in detail here before, so will not repeat again now. You would do well to research it further.

Again, 1080i vs 1080p is equal ONLY if the signal processing done to an interlaced signal matches the quality (or equals) the signal processing done by a progressive signal (whether it's the player or the TV display). But beware, as MANY HDTV DISPLAYS do not have superior quality processing chips and cannot properly deinterlace film-based signals back into progressive form. Hence a visable difference in quality. (see various reviews, like the sample I provided above)

Further Study...

1080i vs 1080p by Geoffrey Morrison
(from Nov 2006 - Home Theater Magazine)

-Love Hendrix! (The Loverboy)
~ DVD/HD-DVD/Blu-ray/KURO Plasma owner ~

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on Jan 20, 2008]

Loverboy, if I were to pick up a new tv, which brand do you think I should look into? Samsung, Pioneer ..Tosh? Sony?

Lets just clear this up right here. A 1080p set will have about 1900 vertical lines and 1080 horizontal lines. A 1080i set, such as mine has 1366 vertical lines and 768 horizontal lines.

It's not so much the i/p thing as it is the physical resolution. The higher the resolution the better the picture. But if you have a 1080i set, there's no need to buy a 1080p player.

Whether or not a 1080i player will output 1900 x 540 at a time or a lesser vertical resolution I'm not certain. I am certain that 480p looks more solid (brighter by having each scanline filled with color at every pass) than 480i, so I assume the same goes for 1080p vs 1080i. If you've got the 1080p set get a 1080p player!

Quote:
If done incorrectly, YOU WILL SEE THE DIFFERENCE.

Ok, Hendrix... you've given me a lot of "If's" scenario. I don't mean to sound skeptical, but that's where I still stand on you numbers where the difference between the two ARE SO SCANT to the naked eye, shown at 5-8 feet of distance, given a 52-inch screen... that the AVERAGE CONSUMER (like me) would not cough up the extra $$$... for such a feature.

But to humor your logic behind the 1080i vs 1080p rez, what brand and model HDTV would you give, as an example... supporting your stated theory. In addition, how much is that model currently selling NOW. Is it worth buying for that price?

I didn't even bother using my 1080P setting in my projo. The 1080i is a lot clearner, and less buzzy that the 1080p picture. The projo does the scaling for me. 1080p is good for LCD and Plasma actually the can process it. Pioneer, some Toshiba's, some Sharp's, and if you get he high, high end LG's(Toshiba platforms)

I personally think THIS WHOLE 1080i VS 1080p issue IS BULL CRAP! It's a matter of taste that NO SALESPERSON can universally sell to every customer, entering a showroom.

What really counts are color accuracy, refresh rates, saturation, even sharpness of the picture.

Take away the cosmetic features of a HDTV set, set the volume to mute, and cover the brand name and price of the HDTV, THEN SHOW A SERIES OF HDTV's (of the same size, with 1080i & 1080p mixed in the room, showing the same hidef loop) TO A CUSTOMER standing at a reasonable distance (that a normal person would watch a HDTV)... and it's GUARANTEED THE RESULTS WILL BE MIXED.... for EACH & EVERY CUSTOMER.

It's a matter of taste. NOT NUMBERS. The SALES PITCH of 1080p superiority to consumers is HYPE. Don't let the "1080p" symbol judge your preference, let your eyes -staring at the HDTV screen- do the talking.

[Post edited by xplaytendo on Jan 21, 2008]

Well I've told this store here before but I'll tell it again. When I returned my Sharp Aquos 52" LCD I was shopping for a replacement flat screen. Obviously I didn't go to Bestbuy and such because they tell you anything they can think of. I went to an electronics store that is pretty well known here in Toronto and spoke to my usual guy. I told him what I was looking for and he showed me the Pioneer 50" 5080HD Plasma which is 1080i. He proceeded to tell me that he was at some convention or something of the sort and was sitting at a demonstration with other "industry professionals". On stage they had 5 screens with all the names hidden and anything else that would give the tv's away. They watched some video demos and when it was done they guy doing the demo asked everyone which tv they thought looked the best. Everyone said the one in the middle. He then revealed all the tv's and it turns out the one in the middle was the only 1080i tv out of the 5 that were on stage. It was the Pioneer 5080HD. The other 4 were all 1080P (2 LCD's and 2 Plasmas).

Don't believe into the whole 1080P thing too much unless you're watching on a projector with a 100" big screen.

By the way I saw the Pioneer on sale at Futureshop.ca for $2475.00 the last week of December. Currently it's $3299. Also it has a much better picture than my old Sharp Aquos and that tv was not bad either.

Falcon... the Pioneer KURO Plasmas [all models, both 720p and 1080p] include superior processing chips that pass the lab tests and correctly deinterlace film-based signals... etc.

xplaytendo... again, you need to realize that I'm referring to the overall image quality, and not just your understanding of "1080 resolution" or "sharpness" etc.

To see what I'm getting at, please try an experiment (anyone here on the message board).

Most of us are watching thru the player's HDMI output, going to the TV display's HDMI input, regardless of whether we have our players outputting 1080i, 1080p, 720p signals.

First... set your player to output 1080i, but INSTEAD OF HDMI, now send the signal using a COMPONENT output, to your TV display's Component input [will need a Component cable for this]. For HD-DVD players, you will also have to "tell" your player to now send the signal from the component output, since it's currently using HDMI probably.

Now... after you've done the settings, put on an HD-DVD disc that you are familiar with (favorite scenes etc), and select something that doesn't have a lot of moving images. A good choice is the HD-DVD movie BREACH (slow moving scenes) or something similar.

Now... watching the movie, with 1080i from your player's component output (to your TV's compoent input), IF YOUR TV DOESN'T HAVE AN EXCELLENT PROCESSING CHIP you will "see" artifacts, jaggies, etc along the edges of people and objects.

WHY? Because practically every HDTV yet made does NOT deinterlace 1080i film-based signals thru the Component input (softer image). Some will do it right thru the HDMI input, and SOME DON'T DO IT PROPERLY AT ALL THRU ANY INPUT [hello, Sony?].

I've read many reviews that state this. And since some of you (like xplaytendo) don't seem to understand what I mean, I'm suggesting this test that anyone can do (if you have an HD-DVD player). Or, you can use Blu-ray too, if your player has a Component output (as my PS3 doesn't).

You could do the experiment with standard DVD too (upconverted to 1080i required), but since it has less resolution, the jaggies/artifacts are much more noticeable when using and HD-DVD or Blu-ray movie.

Again, you WILL SEE some artifacts and jaggies for 1080i signals thru your TV's Component input. But if you have a TV with superior processing (like my Pioneer KURO plasma), you won't see any visual signal-processing "noise" with 1080i signals sent thru HDMI. But not all TVs deinterlace 1080i correctly even thru HDMI (hello, Sony?) - except for quality models released from Pioneer, Toshiba, Sharp, JVC, NEC, and sometimes others.

Just check online reviews to confirm, beyond my test suggestion above -

Cnet.com
soundandvisionmag.com
hometheatermag.com
hdguru.com
...etc.

-LH (The Loverboy)

I completely understand what you're saying, Hendrix. I also understand that what you're saying ARE ALL ACADEMICS.

Place the 1080i 'issue' under a microscope... SURE there will be a difference, compared to a 1080p. But average consumers don't care about slight 'jaggies' when they're sitting 5-feet away from their 52-inch HDTV, while watching Matrix Trilogy. In fact, THEY WON'T EVEN discern such 'jaggies', as much as they would IMMEDIATELY NOTICE the proper color calibration/saturation, sharpness, & refresh rate of the picture.

Your THEORY does not apply to the average Jane & Joe... only the hardware fanatics. Unfortunately, THE MAJORITY of the masses is populated by AVERAGE JANE & JOE's. Average consumers don't look for 'jaggies' on a frame-by-frame basis.

Also, you still haven't given me an example OF A HDTV model, that MAY GIVE your support... of a 1080p set done right.

Yes, you mentioned the KURO. A DAMN NICE HDTV, Hendrix. I actually envy you for having that. Around 2100 now at Amazon.com, but my primary choice (should I have an excuse to get it NOW), is the Samsung LN-T5271F. It's like DIRECTLY looking at A REAL PERSON OR EVENT, separated by a glass window.

xplaytendo said -

Quote:
"But average consumers don't care about slight 'jaggies' when they're sitting 5-feet away from their 52-inch HDTV, while watching Matrix Trilogy."

Oh please! At 5-feet the artifacts/jaggies would definitely be noticeable on a large-screen display, if the 1080i was NOT properly deinterlaced by the TV.

Again, you're trying to take this into another area [what the average John/Jane Doe would notice, etc], which is irrelevant. Anyone who cares about quality HD, and watches 1080i signals, will notice the difference (compared to 720p or 1080p] if the HDTV doesn't accurately deinterlace the signal.

As for my recommendation of an excellent 1080p display with quality processing/deinterlacing (of all signals, especially 1080i), contast, etc I recommend:

PLASMA - Pioneer (best), Panasonic (very good)

LCD - Sharp* (best), Toshiba, JVC, Samsung, Sony, Mitsubishi, NEC, Panasonic (very good) - although not all models accurately deinterlace 1080i film-based signals

*apart from problematic "banding" issues reported on some models (occasionally).

-LH (The Loverboy)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on Jan 21, 2008]

Quote:
Again, you're trying to take this into another area [what the average John/Jane Doe would notice, etc], which is irrelevant. Anyone who cares about quality HD, and watches 1080i signals, will notice the difference (compared to 720p or 1080p] if the HDTV doesn't accurately deinterlace the signal.

Your ASSUMPTION that someone REALLY CARES about 1080i over 1080p is A MATTER OF OPINION. It's a MATTER OF TASTE to each and every individual. For you to declare that those who care about 'quality HD' & notice the 1080i/1080p difference is PURE ACADEMICS {"so I see a difference, but is it better?"}. It's CERTAINLY NOT WORTH THE OVERHYPED PRICE!

What you've given me are theories regarding the 1080p hype.

For the record, and I'm not stating that this is what you're indicating: 1080p HDTV DOES NOT MEAN BETTER HD EXPERIENCE. That's PURE HYPE delivered by your local salesperson, everytime you go to your electronic store.

[Post edited by xplaytendo on Jan 21, 2008]

Well xplaytendo... I tried my best here to provide pertinent info, and not "hype".

I don't know about you, but I ALWAYS prefer my movies on disc to have accurate deinterlacing (regardless of resolution, whether 480p, 720p, 1080p, just as long as it's accurately deinterlaced in progressive form, either by the player or TV)... but I don't know about you.

After reading again what you wrote above, perhaps you just don't care if your HDTV has accurate 1080i deinterlacing?

-LH (The Loverboy)

[Post edited by Love Hendrix! on Jan 21, 2008]

Oh I care about my hdtv, I just to care about what you're preaching about 1080p.

Clearly our views are different, that neither one will give.

I respect your opinion, as I have done so in your previous threads. I'll continue to read your rants, as they are both informative.... and interesting.

Hey thanks for 'humoring' a skeptic.