NEWS: Industry declares 720p better than 1080i

I suppose its now "official" but I think most of us already knew that progressive signals knock the socks off interlaced. I have a panasonic TX36PD30 80kg bethemoth crt with much lower def progressive than 780p. It still shows wonderful images that still beats a lot of the newer high tech stuff in the shops. Looking forward to my new flatscreen in 1080p - what shall I get ?? I think I'll wait a tad for the ace reviews.

Clive

one question what are they going to do about the fact that sport looks rubbish in all progressive signals be cause its to slow were is interlace can handle it with no problem then you have your actions movies so its a choice of good looks against  

performance

Most people would say the opposite is the case, and I'd agree with them. Progressive pictures, done properly, suffer less from motion problems of juddering etc. Each frame is rendered on screen in one go, and not as two distinct 'passes', as happens with interlacing. Interlacing was always a bit of a fudge, and was only invented  to increase the refresh rate without increasing bandwidth. With today's higher scan rates – eg 100 Hz – flicker free smooth motion with progressive scan is perfectly possible.

WOW... Really... i mean... can it be true?

Can a 720p (progressive) signal showing a full 720 lines of information at any one time, actually be better than a 1080i (interlaced) image, that only shows half of its 1080 lines of information at any one time?

Ofcourse 720p looks better than 1080i, as the latter only equates to a total of 540 lines of information on the screen as it two halves are drawn alternately.

So, Should I have my Sky HD box set to 720p rather than 1080i ?

I get very occasional judder when watching football,

I have a Pioneer LX608D connected via an Onkyo 875.

Many thanks, Brian.

Hi Brian - no, i'd set the Sky box to automatic and let the Onkyo's upscaling do the rest. Assuming, that is, that your Pioneer can accept and downscale 1080p? (Not sure on that set...)

1. Never use interlaced as an option if you have progressive.

2. Interlaced images will produced a  some degree of flicker as well as jaggies.

3. A progressive signal is always  better for fast paced as well as still images.

4. Unless i am totally mistaken

When using either my PS3 or my upscalling DVD player I should be running in 720p instead of 1080i?

I have a Sony Bravia 26in LCD TV which does not support 1080p.

Thanks

@ su7477, your Sony Bravia 26 inch HDTV most likely  has a  native screen resolutuion of 1366 x 768, So while it can indeed upscale to 1080i, this is pretty pointless as there are not enough pixels on the screen to show the entire picture.

A 720p signal will show its entire image on your type of tv screen, with no cut off.

So unless you have to view a 1080i image, you're better off sticking to 720p

I always use 720p as to my eye its better. Also I have been doing a bit of research into the 720p/1080i/1080p debate! Apparently a few experiments have proven that unless you have at least a 60 inch screen sat at least 9 feet away the human eye cannot distinguish between 720p and 1080p! My friend recently asked me to help finalise his set up after the Sony Centre convinced him he needed a 1080p 40 inch LCD. He has the smallest Lounge in the world. He was telling me how amazing 1080p was. When I went round there I didn't have the heart to tell him that it was standard broadcast interlaced as he does not have SKY HD! So what am I saying. Whatever your eye tells you is better, is better, not what someone tells you!

h4rdy - While i do agree somewhat with what you've said regarding size & viewing distances,

I have definately seen an improvement in picture quality having made the jump from 720p to 1080p.

I've had several 40 inch HDTV in the last couple of years (Four if you want to be pedantic)

Two of which were only 720p native screens.

However my old Samung M86 & my current Samsung F86 both being 40 inch full HD 1080p, produce a level of detail that was not present on the other two 40 inch  720p screens at the same viewing distance.

While i would say 1080p is not as huge a jump over 720p as some people make out,

I guess you have a point when you say ''whatever your eye tells you is better, is better, not what someone else tells you''

Personally, I agree that 720p is better than 1080i as it's easier on the eye.  Progressive signals seem to have a more 'natural' feel to me (is that a fair description??)   It would be great to hear the industry investing in 1080p although I've read that many live broadcasts (particularly sports) would require rather heavy bandwidth loading to deal with the dynamic properties of live footage.  On films, pre-recorded shows and movies however, it would be far better to see these in 1080p - but I would certainly settle for 720p for the time being.  Stick to progressive signals - that's the key win being communicated here.

@Brian Hussey

You're much better off outputting from your Sky box at 1080i than 720p. If you move to 720p output, your Skybox will be internally converting from1080i to 1080p, then awkwardly downscaling to 720p for output to the TV; then either your TV or your amp will be upscaling back 1080p. In case you can't tell, that's not good.

With a 1080i signal being output at 1080i, your TV has only one transformation to do to turn it into a gorgeous 1080p (basically, a bit of buffering). Much better.

@Clare Newsome

The Pioneer LX608D is the 60" version of the LX508D. See your Ultimate guide, and also What Hi-fi circa Nov 2007, for awards galore. The "8" signifies Pioneer Kuro, the eighth Pioneer generation, which picked up every award in town from WHFSV and all the competition too. LX signifies its the True-HD version, so yes it can accept a 1080i signal. It's a beautiful piece of glass.

MalcolmH: I thought that Sky HD broadcasts are in 720p rather than 1080i so why would the Sky box convert 1080i to 1080p?