Whats the differance

[Drunkonjack]

Between 720p 1080i and 1080p

Are 720p and 1080i simular and 1080p more supurior ?

I was arguing with a guy that said 1080i and 1080p are the same.

[Mep]

With a good deinterlacing chip 1080i is the same as 1080p, with a bad chip, not so much the same.

Basically 1080i is 60fps, interlaced, while 1080p is 30fps full frames. Of course you also have 1080p/24fps too. I have no freakin idea why 1080i was ever done but it is out there.

[bp2007]

Between 720p 1080i and 1080p

Are 720p and 1080i simular and 1080p more supurior ?

I was arguing with a guy that said 1080i and 1080p are the same.

720p has 720 lines of vertical resolution. Both 1080i and 1080p has 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

1080i and 1080p are kind of similar in a way that both have 1080 lines of vertical resolution. They are different in a way that
the way the image is displayed on the screen. In 1080i (interlaced) the screen is displayed in 2 passes - one pass paints all
odd lines and other pass paints all even lines. In 1080p (progressive scan) the entire image is displayed in one pass. Obviously 1080p
requires more video bandwidth to do this.

[Drunkonjack]

So , with the one being 60fps and the other 30fps wouldn't that make it twise as good then ?

Or just in theroy ?

[bp2007]

So , with the one being 60fps and the other 30fps wouldn't that make it twise as good then ?

Or just in theroy ?

In fact a new 1080p 50/60 frames/sec format is in development and is supposed to be better than current 24/30 frames/sec format.
This will require even more bandwidth and also the whole set of new video production, editing, storing equipments etc. capable of handling this rate.

[Mep]

Just like old tvs, 1080i only have half a frame's worth of information per frame. So 1080i and 1080p have the same amount of information, just one is interlaced and broken down to 60 fps and then converted internally by the tv back to 1080p. It's at the same frequency as our power, 60 Hz, which is completely meaningless for digital devices. There may be some compression advantages and ability to send it analog, but otherwise no reason to exist.

[Ray3]

Form another perspective, the difference isn't compelling.

Unless you are parked close to the screen, telling the difference between 720p/1080i and 1080p isn't dramatic. If you are drinking, say Jack Daniels, then the difference isn't noticeable at all.

[PhenomeNhan]

720p has 720 lines of vertical resolution. Both 1080i and 1080p has 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

Don't forget about the horizontal resolution.

720 = 720 x 1280 (about 1Million pixels)
1080 = 1080 x 1920 (about 2Million pixels)

[PhenomeNhan]

So , with the one being 60fps and the other 30fps wouldn't that make it twise as good then ?

Or just in theroy ?

What bp said. Plus the 60fps in 1080i contains alternating lines per frame (I think that's the correct lingo). i = interlaced. So an interlaced frame contains alternating # of lines. For example, frame 1 contains 540 horizontal lines of information (odd lines only), while frame 2 contains another 540 horizontal lines of information (even lines only).

1080p...p = progressive, contains all 1080 horizontal lines of information per frame.

[Mac 11700]

It's all about how much information that is in the bit stream is displayed. If you have a good display that can show all of it,1080p should display it all, all others won't.

Many folks will try to tell you you can't tell any difference in the picture beyond a few feet for any screen size..That's Bull **** Bullwinkle...don't believe it...While size does matter...I can stand at 24 feet and see the difference in the amount of detail between all the resolutions..on a 58" real easy and if I am looking at a larger display say 65" and up....then I can see these differences from even a futher difference away.Now if it is a real small display say 18-27" screen...then it might be real difficult for many to distinguish the rersolution differences..but the larger sets are becoming the norm,since the prices have come down from when they fisrt were available.....FWIW...I can see the differences on a 37-42" set from that distance too..so.. If you want the best picture..get a 1080p display..simple as that..

Mac

[PhenomeNhan]

It's all about how much information that is in the bit stream is displayed. If you have a good display that can show all of it,1080p should display it all, all others won't.

Many folks will try to tell you you can't tell any difference in the picture beyond a few feet for any screen size..That's Bull **** Bullwinkle...don't believe it...While size does matter...I can stand at 24 feet and see the difference in the amount of detail between all the resolutions..on a 58" real easy and if I am looking at a larger display say 65" and up....then I can see these differences from even a futher difference away.Now if it is a real small display say 18-27" screen...then it might be real difficult for many to distinguish the rersolution differences..but the larger sets are becoming the norm,since the prices have come down from when they fisrt were available.....FWIW...I can see the differences on a 37-42" set from that distance too..so.. If you want the best picture..get a 1080p display..simple as that..

Mac

Remember Mac--Some people have more discerning eyes than others.

[Mep]

If you are drinking, say Jack Daniels, then the difference isn't noticeable at all.

but in that case the whole world is interlaced.

[Groch]

...I can stand at 24 feet and see the difference in the amount of detail between all the resolutions..on a 58" real easy and if I am looking at a larger display say 65" and up....then I can see these differences from even a futher difference away.........I can see the differences on a 37-42" set from that distance too..so.. If you want the best picture..get a 1080p display..simple as that..Mac

Absolutely right Mac.......if you are an eagle or an osprey. Fact: humans don't see detail that good from those distances. This is not a "some people say" thing. Its science.

Here is a chart from a guy who is a strong advocate of 1080P:
CHART HERE

Granted, the chart is for someone with 20/20 vision, and you may do better than that.....but not so much better you could see the difference between 1080i and 1080p from 24 feet on a 58" screen.

I am not saying you do not see a difference. Manufacturers tend to put their best technological goodies into the 1080P sets...higher contrast, detail enhancement, wider color palette, etc. You can see that stuff, but you can't see pixels from that far away.

What makes you think the difference you are seeing is pixel count rather than somthing else...Seeing more detail in hair etc has nothing to do with it...that is tied into noise reduction/detail enhancement circuits etc.

Sorry, I don't believe it.... I can't know what you see, but I also don't think the rest of the scientific world is B.S. just cause you say it is.

[Mac 11700]

Absolutely right Mac.......if you are an eagle or an osprey. Fact: humans don't see detail that good from those distances. This is not a "some people say" thing. Its science.

Here is a chart from a guy who is a strong advocate of 1080P:
CHART HERE

Granted, the chart is for someone with 20/20 vision, and you may do better than that.....but not so much better you could see the difference between 1080i and 1080p from 24 feet on a 58" screen.

I am not saying you do not see a difference. Manufacturers tend to put their best technological goodies into the 1080P sets...higher contrast, detail enhancement, wider color palette, etc. You can see that stuff, but you can't see pixels from that far away.

What makes you think the difference you are seeing is pixel count rather than somthing else...Seeing more detail in hair etc has nothing to do with it...that is tied into noise reduction/detail enhancement circuits etc.

Sorry, I don't believe it.... I can't know what you see, but I also don't think the rest of the scientific world is B.S. just cause you say it is.

If you can't see the difference on a 58" scrteen at 24 feet when they do a close up of an object my friend,,then you might want to have you eyes checked. It is that obvious. Better yet..drop by my house and I''ll be glad to show you on my set up. The amount of detail that is shown in a picture on a 1090P display is plainly visable.Start dropping down in resolution and that detail starts to disappear.The edges become softer and less distinct..Same for the background behind the image of the close up..Sorry...that sir is just the facts..

Mac

[Jason]

With a good deinterlacing chip 1080i is the same as 1080p, with a bad chip, not so much the same.

Basically 1080i is 60fps, interlaced, while 1080p is 30fps full frames. Of course you also have 1080p/24fps too. I have no freakin idea why 1080i was ever done but it is out there.

Now I could be wrong, but I thought that all "i" forms were a standard raster scan. Every 1/60th second the screen "paints" lines 1,3,5,7,9, etc and then the 2nd 1/60th of a second it came back and "painted" lines 2,4,6,8, etc. So you would have a complete picture every 1/30 of a second, in other words 30 fps.

Progressive scans paints all lines consecutively, and therefore 60 fps.

The difference between "i" and "p" is just the way the scan lines are produced. Since progressive scan doubles the frame rate, it is smoother especially on fast moving scenes, like sports.

Someone more educated than me feel free to correct me here if I haven't explained right.