----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Anthony,
Please ask the sales person to show you specs from Sony that prove that the set can receive/accept
1080p externally, when he can not produce it he will have answered your question to even himself.
Sometimes is not productive to engage in exchanges with sales people that are not well informed and
want to impose their ignorance to customers that know, but I understand them, it is quite demanding
and time consuming to be up to speed on every feature of every model out there, although they might
at least do the effort to know their sets well enough for questions like yours.
Mitsubishi "claims" in written that their DLP 1080p can accept 24fps 1080p over VGA, that would not
do much for Hi Def DVD using HDMI/HDCP if with 1080p outputs when out, but would offer some option
of using an external scaler to do the delicate 1080p upconversion and feed that signal as analog
VGA, although the D/A and A/D conversions connecting via analog to a fixed pixel display would
certainly detract from the scaler benefit.
Another issue that no one seems to be talking about when qualifying 1080p capabilities (accepting,
displaying, etc) is as follows:
Any integrated TV with an internal ATSC tuner should by definition be capable to tune to any of the
18 ATSC formats, that includes 1080p 24fps and 30fps, if the TV set do as all of the STBs out there,
its integrated tuner would output it as 1080i internally to the next stage of the TV, which the TV
then doubles it back to 1080p for display.
In other words the tuned 1080p, if it ever becomes available in broadcast, would be downgraded to a
1080i interlaced version, and then jack up to the 1080p native pixel array, with the consequent
multiple conversion steps. Would you call that set as "accepting" 1080p, just because it tunes to
1080p signals? (like any integrated TV, even the SD RCA $269 CRT).
Manufacturers did not yet abuse of that obscure angle of the 1080p story but be warned that when
money talks and pressure builds up that might come up, like the "double the HD resolution" claim.
One must also consider if it really pays to spend $1500+ on a 1080p scaler for a 1080p TV that costs
from $3500 up, but that is the life of the quality oriented cutting edge person, and we do not have
any of those on this List, do we?
Regarding the LCoS technology, we have witnessed over past few years Mitsubishi, Toshiba and the
others to give up on it, but JVC DILA, Sony SXRD, Brillian, etc are still doing well enough to
continue the effort with some faith, Sony introduced the $13K Qualia 6 months before CES as a press
release and actually show it 3 months before in CEDIA 2004, both times as a $10K product under the
XBR line, then at CES the set was renamed as Qualia, and its price magically jacked up to $13K, even
Sony admitted to me it was the same unit when I pushed them against the wall in defense of
consumers.
Sony was launching a product that did not have much competition on that technology, so as usual,
manufacturers set prices to what they believe people would pay for the product, in this case a
unique product, many people paid and they keep paying, it is not easy to determine exactly how much
of that was the cost to Sony of making a better quality LCoS than the rest, if one would allow for
that excuse.
As you said, and I also said it before, the Qualia does not show $13K of quality, and certainly does
not show a relative 3/4 times the quality of the DLP competitors, so prices will come down and fast,
and JVC is showing the first sign of that pressure, look at the anticipated MSRP of their DILA
(LCoS) 71" at CES for September, and look at severe drop in their price as stated on their CEDIA
press release now when the product is ready to go out.
Best Regards,
Rodolfo La Maestra
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Anthony Rizzuto
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 1:00 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: 1080P per Pete Putnam
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Rodolfo,
This past Saturday I saw a Sony Qualia at the Sony Store in the Melinia Mall
in Orlando. At the 13K price point I was not impressed. Truthfully even if
they were selling it for half that price I would not have been impressed.
The image (which was HD) looked flat and had a lot of artifacts in it. To
be fair, I believe that the signal that was being fed to it had been
multiplexed throughout all displays. Further when I asked one of the sales
people whether the display had been calibrated, his response was, "There is
no convergence to be set on the Qualia". I told him that was not what I was
referring to. He asked if I meant" Putting a suction cup on the set to make
adjustments?" I replied that that was part of it and he finally said that
the Qualia they had on display had not been calibrated. I asked him about
the Qualia's ability to accept and display and 1080P native signal and he
replied that yes the Qualia could accept and display a 1080P signal and was
one of only two 1080P displays currently being manufactured that had that
capability. He said he thought that Mitsubishi manufactured a 1080P display
that also had this capability. I don't know about the Mits but I thought
the Qualia did not have this capability.
He also told be that the technology Sony was using in the Qualia was based
on LCOS but was a variation as LCOS had proved to be too expensive to
manufacture.
Anthony R.
Orlando, FL
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Rodolfo La Maestra
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 11:13 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: 1080P per Pete Putnam
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Hugh,
I agree about using the eyes past the numbers.
In fact that was the way I compared the technologies, ignoring wobulation
and the bla-bla-bla, some
numbers were not even available at that time, and most are not even
available now.
After the viewings (since January), the numbers confirmed my viewing
experience (like the 240i
upscaling technique), and remarked the importance of having 1080p acceptance
to been able to control
the video processing issue, and be a bit better on the future proof side,
with 1080p Hi Def DVD for
example.
The extended viewing I did of the Qualia was the one that convinced me that
SD demanded a lot of
processing and it showed, on that $13K piece.
Almost a year later, some of those 1080p sets have been reviewed, and the
issues I anticipated, such
as some large LCD panels still lagging even at 12ms, not accepting 1080p
inputs, weak upscaling of
SD, deinterlacing 1080i without motion adaptive processing, only one HDMI,
no 1394 outputs, Cable
CARD nightmares, elevated cost of integration, etc. are all brough up to
surface one by one.
There is only one problem with the approach of just using the eyes, many
people on this list have an
idea of what to look for on the viewing to make the decision, but most
people out there do not
notice video processing aberrations (or the source/reason for them, it might
not be the set), until
some one make them pay attention to those.
Unfortunately, that generally happens when the set is already home and the
uninformed buyer is
showing off the set to a visitor that knows (if that person have the guts to
tell the friend in the
middle of his enjoyment), sometimes is better not to know that much.
My approach with requested personalized advice is to first inquire "how much
do you want to know?"
Best Regards,
Rodolfo La Maestra
-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Hugh Campbell
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 9:17 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: 1080P per Pete Putnam
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Russell,
Much truth in your statement about looking past the numbers and using your
eyes. I've got one question how did analog or SD compare between the two
sets you mentioned?
Hugh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Russell Simpson" <
[email protected]>
To: "HDTV Magazine" <
[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 8:28 AM
Subject: Re: 1080P per Pete Putnam
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I set up and install home theaters for clients all of the time, I see
> plasma, LCD and DLP often and in real "home" settings...
> I recently brought home (2) 61" Samsung DLPs one HLR6167W and one
> HLR6168W, set them up side by side viewed CATV, OTA and Sat...
> I would take the 1080P over the other anyday, In fact I did wind up
> keeping the 6168 for myself... (sharper picture, better blacks etc)
> ...sometimes you just have to look past the numbers and open your eyes
>
> no offense
>
> Russell
> On Sep 11, 2005, at 3:58 PM, FJ wrote:
>
>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>> I respect what Pete has to say about 1080P. He's one of the experts here
>> and I have read several things by him from which I have learned a lot. I
>> think there's a whole different perspective, though, from a simple
>> viewer.
>>
>> Purchasing a newer big screen display of any type is something like
>> buying a newer car. I have access to all the consumer and enthusiast
>> magazines and do my homework before making the actual purchase, but
>> before that happens other "human" factors come into play. So I shouldn't
>> really buy that smaller SUV because I've learned I'll get better gas
>> mileage from a hybrid or a smaller sedan. But the latter lack features
>> that I'd really like to have. Darnit! I am simply suggesting that all
>> the tech knowledge in the world can fly out the window when I am
>> purchasing something that I don't really need at all, but simply would
>> like to have.
>>
>> I own a nearly three year old 51" Hitachi RPTV which I enjoy the heck
>> out of. It provides good displays of whatever kind from my distance of
>> 12 to 15 feet. It's huge and unwieldy whenever I want to check or change
>> connections. I'm thinking about a newer and larger DLP or LCD. In that
>> context, I may well go with one of the new 1080P's. I assure you that
>> before I actually make such a purchase I will do whatever I can to
>> ensure that I am not going to be disappointed.....even if that means
>> purchasing it from a big box store that can come and take it back before
>> the 14 to 30 days of buyers remorse period is up.
>>
>> After reading Pete's article, I will not be buying it because it images
>> will be technically superior to 1080i or 720p, but I'll bet they'll be
>> as good or better than what I have now....just a little bigger.
>>
>> Jack
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Martin"
>> <
[email protected]>
>> To: "HDTV Magazine" <
[email protected]>
>> Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2005 4:15 PM
>> Subject: Re: 1080P per Pete Putnam
>>
>>
>>
>>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>>
>>> There is a big difference between line doubling (particularly for film
>>> sources were 3:2 pulldown is employed) and scaling.
>>>
>>> The benefits of 480i -> 480p or 1080i -> 1080p line doubling are
>>> obvious as you are reconstructing the original film frames and
>>> displaying them progressively.
>>>
>>> 480p -> 1080p is scaling and will not improve the resolution spatially
>>> or temporally and may add scaling artifacts. The primary benefit in
>>> my opinion of converting 480i -> 1080p is the same benefit that would
>>> be achieved converting it to 480p.
>>>
>>> The only caveat to that is that if your screen size is large enough
>>> that you could discern pixel or line structure at 480p, displaying
>>> that at 1080p would reduce the appearance of lines/ pixels but you have
>>> to realize that you aren't getting a more detailed or higher
>>> resolution image, just less space between the pixels.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 11, 2005, at 4:01 PM, Richard and Carrie Bray wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Broadcasters don't use 480p. But, how many people don't believe
>>>> deinterlacing 480i for showing as 480p on their display isn't a good
>>>> idea? If it didn't work, a lot of people wasted money buying
>>>> progressive CD players.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steve Martin
>>>
[email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
>>>
>>> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
>>> same day) send an email to:
>>>
[email protected]
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
>>
>> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
>> same day) send an email to:
>>
[email protected]
>>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
>
[email protected]
>
To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click:
[email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected] 