[mythtv-users] OT: HDTV TV's

Mike Frisch mfrisch at isurfer.ca
Thu May 11 12:19:48 EDT 2006


On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 11:58:19AM -0400, Michael T. Dean wrote:
> Exactly.  And, technically, a 1920x1080 (1080p) display cannot fully 
> resolve a 1920x1080 input signal (whether 1080i or 1080p).  As a matter 
> of fact, a 1920x1080 (1080p) display cannot even fully resolve a 
> 1280x720 input signal (i.e. 720p).

I'm not following you here...  By "resolve", I mean that all 1920x1080
pixels are represented as a distiguishable, albeit very small, and
individually addressable point of light.  Is your definition of
"resolve" different than that?

This is also why people do not consider DLP displays that use
"wobulation" as a method of increasing pixel count as they're not
invididually addressable pixels.

> 1080p displays are a waste of money because you can't get a 1080p input 
> signal), and only those who have some familiarity with sampling theory 
> will realize that this is one of those cases where the marketers are 
> more correct than the reviewers (even if the marketers don't understand 
> why they're correct :).

But the signal is digital from the source, so sampling theory is long
"taken care of" by the time the HD signal hits the airwaves.  This was
only a concern from the sampling of light between the source and the
sensor on the HD camera.  

If we were representing an analog HD signal, I understand where you're
coming from but we are not..


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list