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!