And I would like smell-o-vision so I can really experience the movies loaded with fart jokes. Right now its probably just as likely.
Dish 1080P
- Thread starter azfrankp
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 40
- Views 14K
And I would like smell-o-vision so I can really experience the movies loaded with fart jokes. Right now its probably just as likely.
Right now does not matter if you want to see things in 1080p you half to watch Blu-Ray. Right now its not really on Dish end or any other provider due to most National HD Channels do not broadcast in 1080p. Heck most do 720p there is on a few that do 1080i at this point so until HD Channels start to broadcast in 1080p right now it does not really matter. Right now most TV Networks are just trying to get a HD version of their channel up and running. Until most of the National Channels get a HD version of their channel up and running. I dont see most of them trying to do 1080p for another year or two we might see some of them get to 1080p.
But for now just getting them to get their HD Channel up and running is the main thing right now..
But for now just getting them to get their HD Channel up and running is the main thing right now..
NOw if you could have them in smell-o-vision and HD 3D /1080p you would be in heaven.
Agreed. If you're seeing a noticable perceptual difference between your 1080i DISH picture and a 1080p BluRay picture then there must be some settings that are wrong, or you're double-scaling the image.
Apart from the 1920 v. 1440 issue, a 1080i60 picture should have almost the exact same amount of visual information as a 1080p24 signal.
The big difference is in the CONTENT itself, not the delivery method. DVD authors have the luxury of time to master the information properly to optimize the mpeg compression and take full advantage of the bandwidth at their disposal. Television broadcasters inefficiently mpeg compress that stuff on the fly, that may be why you percieve a difference. Changing the television broadcast process from 1080i to 1080p over the entire path from camera to display won't fix that.
Ill have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. There is a huge difference between HD DVD/Blu Ray and E*, D*, or any cable provider in terms of PQ. E* and D* completely compress the hell out of the signal to the point where some shows have so much grain and blockiness in them that upconverted SD DVD would look comparable.
The fact is that most movies that are transferred at 1080p to HDM will look far superior to the same movie on HBO-HD, SHOWHD, etc. Not to say that the E*/D* picture is terrible, just that HD DVD and Blu look that much better.
john
1080p24 actually takes LESS bandwidth than 1080i30 and it IS already in the ATSC spec.
Your 1080p TV will display it if the station would broadcast it.
Your 1080p TV will display it if the station would broadcast it.
It's nice to read a post with inaccurate information.
1080p24 and 1080p30 are in the ATSC standard. Also, 1080p24 (or any progressive format) generally takes less bandwidth than an interlaced format. (like 1080i60).
And from a decoding standpoint, there's less work to do for progressive than is required for interlaced.
That's only half right. The last I checked all 2nd & 3rd Generation HD-DVD players are perfectly capable of displaying 1080p with a firmware update (Gen 2) or out of the box (Gen 3).
It's actually the other way around, more stations are in 1080i than 720p.
It is likely that this will take 5 or more years.
You mean 1080i60
A good deinterlacer gets back the original frames from film based sources.
There is no 1080i60 ota, maybe on old HD-DVD players before they went to 1080p60.
My assertion was and is correct.
1080i30 is the broadcast norm for all 1080i OTA.
My assertion was and is correct.
1080i30 is the broadcast norm for all 1080i OTA.
Last edited:
Nothing that is converted from one resolution to another (at the TV or receiver) is "true".
It's a semantics issue, but when talking interlaced the number after the "i" is assumed to be fields where as for progressive the number after the "p" is assumed frames.
So 1080i60 is what is most often used in regard to discussing OTA. Meaning 60 unique fields/sec, each field being 1920x540. Putting consective fields together yields 30 frames/sec at 1920x1080.
Sigh. So much misinformation in this thread.
Jim S
Smith, P.
David_Levin
Paradox-SJ
and ewitte tried to straighten out the clueless (Poke, johnpak73, many others), but some people just aren't capable of grasping this simple concept, and insist on propagating misinformation.
24fps 1080p can be completely recovered from 60field/sec 1080i by a correctly functioning deinterlacer. My JVC HD-ILA does this perfectly from its HDMI input. The difference between the best 1080p24 from OTA and Blu-Ray has nothing to do with 1080p vs. 1080i, and everything to do with the quality of the original content (including the downsampling performed by Dish before encoding), amount of compression/bit rate, encoding method and encoder quality.
Jim S. got it right in the fifth post of this thread and it should have ended there. Instead we get two pages of crap spewed by clueless idiots who don't know what they're writing about.
Jim S
Smith, P.
David_Levin
Paradox-SJ
and ewitte tried to straighten out the clueless (Poke, johnpak73, many others), but some people just aren't capable of grasping this simple concept, and insist on propagating misinformation.
24fps 1080p can be completely recovered from 60field/sec 1080i by a correctly functioning deinterlacer. My JVC HD-ILA does this perfectly from its HDMI input. The difference between the best 1080p24 from OTA and Blu-Ray has nothing to do with 1080p vs. 1080i, and everything to do with the quality of the original content (including the downsampling performed by Dish before encoding), amount of compression/bit rate, encoding method and encoder quality.
Jim S. got it right in the fifth post of this thread and it should have ended there. Instead we get two pages of crap spewed by clueless idiots who don't know what they're writing about.
1080i60 yields 1080p30 on deinterlacing. 1080i30 yields 1080p15.
You can assert all you want, but it doesn't make your statement correct.
1080i30 would look terrible due to the low frame rate.
Very few deinterlacers will do the job judder free, as they don't go back to 24p. They show it as frame doubled 60p.
There are some high-end standalone scaler/deinterlacers that will do this.
It doesn't do the frame rate conversion; so it isn't perfectly fluid.
Quite right.
It should be pointed out that we are generally encoding at between 1 - 2 % of the original information with current codecs.
Cheers,
