1920x1080 pixel

  • Thread starter Thread starter Darrenlad
  • 21 comments
  • 2,554 views

Darrenlad

(Banned)
Messages
102
Scotland
U.K
Messages
Darren-lad
Hope this make sense am a bit tried .... Have got a new tv a 50 3D lg plasma got it cheap for around £500 out of pc world it's got a 1920x1080 screen but when a press the info button it comes up 1080p when am watching blu ray blu's or hd channels so why can't a get the full 1920 pixel ?
 
Darrenlad
Hope this make sense am a bit tried .... Have got a new tv a 50 3D lg plasma got it cheap for around £500 out of pc world it's got a 1920x1080 screen but when a press the info button it comes up 1080p when am watching blu ray blu's or hd channels so why can't a get the full 1920 pixel ?

1920 wide x 1080 tall

Progressive means it layers lines up each one stretching across the 1920. So progressively 1080 lines are produced.

Hence 1080p

That's the cliff notes.
 
1920 wide x 1080 tall

Progressive means it layers lines up each one stretching across the 1920. So progressively 1080 lines are produced.

Hence 1080p

That's the cliff notes.

You got the dimensions right, but that's not what progressive means; the even and odd fields in an image are drawn in sequence line by line, top to bottom, as opposed to interlaced (i) which draws the lines alternately from corner to corner: even, then odd.
 
That's 720p, and there's no such resolution as 1080x720 - you're thinking of 1280x720.
 
That's 720p, and there's no such resolution as 1080x720 - you're thinking of 1280x720.

This. 1920x1080 is a 16:9 aspect ratio. 1920 is the pixel count horizontal, 1080 is the vertical count, and as x is often horizontal and y vertical on an graph, it is X x Y or 1920x1080, then a p for pixels.
 
When a set shows you what mode it's in, it's telling you the number of scan lines being used, which is 720 or 1080. (Could be as low as 480 if you're viewing a non-HD picture.) The other number is irrelevant, as it's the horizontal resolution. It's there. If you're looking at a 1080 picture, you've got the 1920 across. If you're looking at a 720 picture, then it's 1280 across.

The rest is optional, explaining the reason for p or i at the 1080 resolution.

Do the math: a 1280x720 picture is just under a megapixel. A 1920x1080 picture is just under 2 megapixels. The digital broadcast standard only leaves room, with reasonable compression, for about a megapixel every 60th of a second, so a 1920x1080 picture can't be drawn in the time allotted. That "how-much-how-fast" issue is called bandwidth.

To broadcast a 1080 picture, they break it into two parts, alternating all the even lines in one 1/60th-second period, and then the odd lines in the next. The set mixes them together to give you a 1920x1080 picture every 30th of a second. (The times may be different where you are, like 1/50th and 1/25th.) That odd/even mix is called interlacing, and it allows a picture to be created that's more information than the bandwidth allows, by sacrificing frame rate in favor of resolution. That's what they mean by 1080i. The 720-line picture fits completely in a single 1/60th second time span, so it's scanned progressively, all lines in one sweep, for 720p.

Your Blu-ray player and game console do not have the broadcast bandwidth limitation, so it can fit the whole 2-megapixel picture in a single 1/60th second scan, so it gets 1920x1080 progressively, for 1080p.
 

Sorry, too much Photoshop time for me :lol: p for pixels, in for inches, dpi or ppi for resolutions. All makes sense when you are cropping for web for versus printing.

Doesn't make sense when talking progressive or interlaced.

I blame posting at 1am :dopey:
 
They say a picture is worth a thousand words.

As stated, 1080p = 1920x1080 Progressive.

Here is a nice diagram that shows the difference between progressive and interlaced.
coimag_scanning.jpg


In this diagram, the top row is showing what progressive does between frames 1 and 2. The second row shows what interlace does between frames 1 and 2.

The advantage of Interlaced is it takes roughly half the processing power to render the motion image where as progressive has to render each frame in it's full resolution. Essentially doubling the processing load.
 
Ya what these guys all said is why. I have a question released tho. What's the difference between 1080p and 1080i? I always heard 1080i was stupid, but do not notice a very big difference compared to 1080p or have any idea why it is bad/even made.
 
shmogt
Ya what these guys all said is why. I have a question released tho. What's the difference between 1080p and 1080i? I always heard 1080i was stupid, but do not notice a very big difference compared to 1080p or have any idea why it is bad/even made.

Clink my link. It shows you pictures of the difference if you don't want to read.
 
Ya what these guys all said is why. I have a question released tho. What's the difference between 1080p and 1080i? I always heard 1080i was stupid, but do not notice a very big difference compared to 1080p or have any idea why it is bad/even made.

1080i is stupid, 1080p is smart. :)

Just kidding. To break it down even further, Progressive (p) should produce a better, sharper, less blurry motion playback than Interlaced (i) because Progressive is basically displaying 60 full frame images per second where as interlaced is meshing images, basically only showing 30 full framed images when put together. The result is that interlaced video playback will look blurry in comparison.
 
But you won't see 1080p in broadcast, at least not until a new set of standards can be enabled, because it requires too much bandwidth for the allocated channel spaces. Your cable box or tuner will put your set into 720p or 1080i. (Unless you stay in the SD channels, in which case you'll be looking at 480i.)
 
wfooshee
But you won't see 1080p in broadcast, at least not until a new set of standards can be enabled, because it requires too much bandwidth for the allocated channel spaces. Your cable box or tuner will put your set into 720p or 1080i. (Unless you stay in the SD channels, in which case you'll be looking at 480i.)

This is what I have found as well. Most things are 720p or 1080i. Only bluerays and the occasional other things does full 1080p so is it really worth spending more money on a 1080p rather than a 1080i?
 
shmogt
This is what I have found as well. Most things are 720p or 1080i. Only bluerays and the occasional other things does full 1080p so is it really worth spending more money on a 1080p rather than a 1080i?

Yes. IMO if you are going over 42"

Honestly 720p > 1080i for most guys usage.

Progressive signal is better for any action aka fast movement on tv.

As well 1080p is really not needed till 42"+ TV
 
Yes. IMO if you are going over 42"

Honestly 720p > 1080i for most guys usage.

Progressive signal is better for any action aka fast movement on tv.

As well 1080p is really not needed till 42"+ TV

Well...that's subjective of course. If I am using it for a monitor or close gaming, I want 1920x1080.
 
As well 1080p is really not needed till 42"+ TV

My 21 inch monitors are 1080p, and I'd lose my mind otherwise. Gaming, image viewing, and blu-rays it does matter.

For TV use, 1080p is useful anyhow. And it isn't like 42" inch 1080p televisions are expensive these days, same for lower end models. Plus adds some future proofing and flexibility if you decide to use a computer on that display or what not.
 
Yes. IMO if you are going over 42"

Honestly 720p > 1080i for most guys usage.

Progressive signal is better for any action aka fast movement on tv.

As well 1080p is really not needed till 42"+ TV

720p > 1080i : Yes, completly

1080p only on 42"+.
NO!!!!!
You can't have enough resolution. I fondly remember the good old CRt type days where resolution was way higher than now the standard.
Thus, the advancement of the 4K standard in the next years.

Though I really don't see the point of having 1080p or even more on a 7" cell screen
 
Back