Comments on: The trouble with a new HDTV http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/ Sat, 10 Jan 2009 01:41:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Jon Belson http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5317 Jon Belson Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:14:22 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5317 Luis: the improvement that native 24Hz makes is most obvious in panning or fast moving scenes. Agree that some people might not notice the difference, but others can. I would certainly pay more for a set with native 24Hz support rather than relying on 3:2 pulldown. --Jon Luis: the improvement that native 24Hz makes is most obvious in panning or fast moving scenes. Agree that some people might not notice the difference, but others can. I would certainly pay more for a set with native 24Hz support rather than relying on 3:2 pulldown.

–Jon

]]> By: Eugenia http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5298 Eugenia Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:34:45 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5298 Yeah, but I don't care if something is 120Hz (LCDs) or 72Hz (plasmas). I just want an integer multiplier for 24p. I did watch the Kuro last night playing "Die Hard" using 72Hz and their "film motion" algorithm, and IT WAS smoother than on my TV. Yeah, but I don’t care if something is 120Hz (LCDs) or 72Hz (plasmas). I just want an integer multiplier for 24p. I did watch the Kuro last night playing “Die Hard” using 72Hz and their “film motion” algorithm, and IT WAS smoother than on my TV.

]]> By: Luis http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5297 Luis Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:10:13 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5297 ><i>It does matter</i> No, you're talking about something different. At 60 Hz there is flickering and it's clearly visible. Above 72-75 Hz it disappears and it's hard to tell the difference between 80 Hz and 100 Hz (though you might somehow feel more comfortable with 100 Hz). However, we're not talking about the TV frequency here but about the conversion from the source framerate to the TV's frequency. At high frequencies the fact that the multiple is not exact is irrelevant for the human eye. An easier example to try: If you have a screen at 75 Hz, try to play two videos: one at 25 fps and one at 30 fps. The first one multiplies perfectly (25*3=75) while the second one doesn't (30*2.5=75). Now, if you can notice the 25 fps video smoother than the 30fps one, I can only take my hat off to your incredible perception. By the way, what Thom said about the framerate being predefined is correct. He was referring to the *source* framerate (the video), so yes, if you want each frame to display for a shorter period of time than it should you'd have fast forward (unless you fill up the space with black frames in between, which is a horrible idea). The difference between having a 75 Hz TV and a 100 Hz TV playing a 25fps movie is that in the first case each frame will be displayed 3 times while in the second it will be displayed 4 times. But in the end each frame will be displayed exactly the same time in both cases (1/25 secs.) >It does matter

No, you’re talking about something different. At 60 Hz there is flickering and it’s clearly visible. Above 72-75 Hz it disappears and it’s hard to tell the difference between 80 Hz and 100 Hz (though you might somehow feel more comfortable with 100 Hz).

However, we’re not talking about the TV frequency here but about the conversion from the source framerate to the TV’s frequency. At high frequencies the fact that the multiple is not exact is irrelevant for the human eye. An easier example to try:

If you have a screen at 75 Hz, try to play two videos: one at 25 fps and one at 30 fps. The first one multiplies perfectly (25*3=75) while the second one doesn’t (30*2.5=75). Now, if you can notice the 25 fps video smoother than the 30fps one, I can only take my hat off to your incredible perception.

By the way, what Thom said about the framerate being predefined is correct. He was referring to the *source* framerate (the video), so yes, if you want each frame to display for a shorter period of time than it should you’d have fast forward (unless you fill up the space with black frames in between, which is a horrible idea). The difference between having a 75 Hz TV and a 100 Hz TV playing a 25fps movie is that in the first case each frame will be displayed 3 times while in the second it will be displayed 4 times. But in the end each frame will be displayed exactly the same time in both cases (1/25 secs.)

]]> By: Eugenia http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5295 Eugenia Wed, 09 Jan 2008 20:33:45 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5295 > <i>I understand that in theory it sounds good to have a perfect multiple but in practice I don’t think it matters.</i> It does matter. YOU DO notice. We went to Best Buy last night to watch the Kuro play a movie at 72Hz, and it felt smoother than in our old TV at 60Hz. Personally, I even VERY WELL feel the difference between 60Hz CRTs, 75Hz and 85Hz. Over my lifetime I had many CRTs who could do one or the other resolution/Hz, and I could very well tell the difference because of the flickering. > I understand that in theory it sounds good to have a perfect multiple but in practice I don’t think it matters.

It does matter. YOU DO notice. We went to Best Buy last night to watch the Kuro play a movie at 72Hz, and it felt smoother than in our old TV at 60Hz.

Personally, I even VERY WELL feel the difference between 60Hz CRTs, 75Hz and 85Hz. Over my lifetime I had many CRTs who could do one or the other resolution/Hz, and I could very well tell the difference because of the flickering.

]]> By: Luis http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5293 Luis Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:29:15 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5293 But do you think that it's human visible whether you're displaying a fixed number of frames per cycle (refresh) or a variable one? I understand that in theory it sounds good to have a perfect multiple but in practice I don't think it matters. For example, do you think that you would notice any difference in watching a 24p movie in a screen at 100 Hz or in one at 96 Hz? Sure, at 96 Hz you would display 0.25 frames per refresh cycle - or to say it better, each frame would display during exactly 4 refresh cycles, while at 100 Hz 20 of those 24 frames per second would display in screen during 4 refresh cycles while the other 4 frames would display during 5 cycles. But can any human see the difference? I believe that above 72 Hz you shouldn't worry that much about exact multiples. But do you think that it’s human visible whether you’re displaying a fixed number of frames per cycle (refresh) or a variable one? I understand that in theory it sounds good to have a perfect multiple but in practice I don’t think it matters.

For example, do you think that you would notice any difference in watching a 24p movie in a screen at 100 Hz or in one at 96 Hz? Sure, at 96 Hz you would display 0.25 frames per refresh cycle - or to say it better, each frame would display during exactly 4 refresh cycles, while at 100 Hz 20 of those 24 frames per second would display in screen during 4 refresh cycles while the other 4 frames would display during 5 cycles. But can any human see the difference? I believe that above 72 Hz you shouldn’t worry that much about exact multiples.

]]> By: Stacy http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5289 Stacy Wed, 09 Jan 2008 00:05:27 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5289 Oh what horrible problems you have! ;) Why don't you each buy a TV and be done with it! Oh what horrible problems you have! ;)

Why don’t you each buy a TV and be done with it!

]]> By: Eugenia http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5284 Eugenia Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:32:41 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5284 >Sure, so any 120 Hz (24*5) display should be fine there, right? Yes, an 120Hz LCD does what I want, but so does 72Hz on Plasmas. But no LCD can match the plasma in overall quality. Read a recent article linked from gizmodo about a review of the BEST plasma against the BEST LCD. Plasma won easily. >Sure, so any 120 Hz (24*5) display should be fine there, right?

Yes, an 120Hz LCD does what I want, but so does 72Hz on Plasmas. But no LCD can match the plasma in overall quality. Read a recent article linked from gizmodo about a review of the BEST plasma against the BEST LCD. Plasma won easily.

]]> By: Billy http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5283 Billy Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:19:31 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5283 >This creates jerky movements, because the 2.5 number is not a “clean” number that divides exactly with “60″. If you have a TV that does 72Hz, it can do 24*3, and so all frames are duplicated equally, and so it looks more smooth to the eye. Capito? Sure, so any 120 Hz (24*5) display should be fine there, right? >Billy, I think he’s mostly interesting in games. OK, but what games pump out that sort of framerate? 4ms is 250 FPS. ;) It could just be me, but my PS3/360 games look great on my 4ms LCD, even when I don't enable the "fast mode" (for games) option. > As for “smart stretch”, it’s our favorite algorithm for 4:3 content, we use it a lot in our Sharp. Yeah, my bad. I had initially (incorrectly) read your sentence to mean that you didn't like that feature, so I was attempting to be helpful and let you know you can turn it off. ;) >This creates jerky movements, because the 2.5 number is not a “clean” number that divides exactly with “60″. If you have a TV that does 72Hz, it can do 24*3, and so all frames are duplicated equally, and so it looks more smooth to the eye. Capito?

Sure, so any 120 Hz (24*5) display should be fine there, right?

>Billy, I think he’s mostly interesting in games.

OK, but what games pump out that sort of framerate? 4ms is 250 FPS. ;) It could just be me, but my PS3/360 games look great on my 4ms LCD, even when I don’t enable the “fast mode” (for games) option.

> As for “smart stretch”, it’s our favorite algorithm for 4:3 content, we use it a lot in our Sharp.

Yeah, my bad. I had initially (incorrectly) read your sentence to mean that you didn’t like that feature, so I was attempting to be helpful and let you know you can turn it off. ;)

]]> By: Eugenia http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5282 Eugenia Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:20:10 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5282 Bob, that Panasonic looks interesting. It seems to have the features we are after, and looking around Panasonic has good prices overall. However, while they mention 24p support, they don't mention if it's at 48Hz or at 72Hz or at 120 Hz. If it's at 48Hz then it's not such a good idea because the screen will flicker too much. Bob, that Panasonic looks interesting. It seems to have the features we are after, and looking around Panasonic has good prices overall. However, while they mention 24p support, they don’t mention if it’s at 48Hz or at 72Hz or at 120 Hz. If it’s at 48Hz then it’s not such a good idea because the screen will flicker too much.

]]> By: Eugenia http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5281 Eugenia Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:13:19 +0000 http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/01/07/the-trouble-with-a-new-hdtv/#comment-5281 >Right? So what’s the point? hehe, no... :D If a movie is 24fps, and the TV can only do 60hz (or in the PAL world, 50Hz), then frames will have to be duplicated to reach 30p or 60i. Because of legacy in the technology, 1 Hz meant 1 frame. Today, we don't care about the Hz of the electric current and we can display any frames we want, but back in the day, in order to make frames to display, they had to play ball with the electric current. And this limitation is stuck with us today too on the cheaper TVs. So 1 frame from a 24p movie, has to be duplicated 2.5 times during 1 second to reach 60i. This creates jerky movements, because the 2.5 number is not a "clean" number that divides exactly with "60". If you have a TV that does 72Hz, it can do 24*3, and so all frames are duplicated equally, and so it looks more smooth to the eye. Capito? :) Billy, I think he's mostly interesting in games. As for "smart stretch", it's our favorite algorithm for 4:3 content, we use it a lot in our Sharp. >Right? So what’s the point?

hehe, no… :D
If a movie is 24fps, and the TV can only do 60hz (or in the PAL world, 50Hz), then frames will have to be duplicated to reach 30p or 60i. Because of legacy in the technology, 1 Hz meant 1 frame. Today, we don’t care about the Hz of the electric current and we can display any frames we want, but back in the day, in order to make frames to display, they had to play ball with the electric current. And this limitation is stuck with us today too on the cheaper TVs. So 1 frame from a 24p movie, has to be duplicated 2.5 times during 1 second to reach 60i. This creates jerky movements, because the 2.5 number is not a “clean” number that divides exactly with “60″. If you have a TV that does 72Hz, it can do 24*3, and so all frames are duplicated equally, and so it looks more smooth to the eye. Capito? :)

Billy, I think he’s mostly interesting in games. As for “smart stretch”, it’s our favorite algorithm for 4:3 content, we use it a lot in our Sharp.

]]>