Ok, so I admit it. I don't understand ANYTHING about Hi Def content. I currently own a CRT TV, which is suitably large and has an excellent picture. I also own an Xbox 360 and a shiny new MacBook Pro.

The reason I bring this up now is actually twofold:

(1) The wife has mentioned maybe getting a flat screen TV with ideas of mounting it on a wall to create space in the living room. As long as we can get round the pain-in-the-neck problems this excites me somewhat, but I expect with baby on the way this will fall down the list of priorities and is therefore more of a pipe dream.

(2) There are rumours circulating that the new iMacs which are round the corner will be able to have Blu-Ray drives added to them, which would mean that presumably external Blu-Ray drives might start being available to us Mac users.

My question is this:

If such thing as a Blu-Ray external drive becomes available, and my Mac can decode it, on a 13" screen with 1200x800 resolution is there any point? I have no concept of 1080p or 720p or 840i or 423bill or 999dave or whatever.

Also, anyone willing to fill me in any other relevant details will be doing me a large favour too.

Love and kisses,

Your friendly neighbourhood Mantrain

Macs probably won't have Blu-Ray for a while. They do have some third party drives, which require very specific software, which your Macbook Pro should be able to play, but it's expensive, and a hassle.

While you obviously won't see the full quality on a 1280x800 screen (that's slightly more than 720p, you'll have small black bars on the top and bottom), it is still much, much higher quality than 480i standard def television, or 480p DVDs (or whatever resolution you crazy PAL people run your DVDs at).

You can actually see what the difference would be yourself. Go into your monitor options and change the resolution to its lowest setting, hopefully 640x480 (854x480 if you want to avoid stretching due to aspect ratio). See how the screen looks all god-awful blurry? That's what happens with a DVD on your PC. Compare that to how the screen looks normally at your usual resolution. That's the quality difference you can expect, in a nutshell.

Also, in case you didn't know, that CRT TV, unless it specifically says HD and has component or HDMI input, will not be worthwhile for HD.

Oh I know the CRT TV won't do Hi Def - it's ooooold (but it's a widescreen Toshiba with a cracking picture) - I was more trying to get a handle on standard DVD to Blu-Ray as a concept.

I had no idea that DVDs ran at just 640x480 - that's the resolution my old Nokia N95 recorded video at!!

So if the "basic" resolution of old DVD is 480p and that stands for 640x480, what is the "basic resolution of Hi Def?

NTSC DVDs are 720x480, PAL DVDs, which I guess is what you're used to, are 720x576. A lot of resolutions are supported but those are the most common.

Bluray discs use 1080p, which is 1920x1080. Some broadcast HD is 1080i, which is interlaced and has half the number of rows, so half the definition. But with a TV with a good deinterlacer it's pretty hard to tell the difference.

Another common HD format is 720p, which is 1280x720. The p or i just means progressive or interlaced. Progressive is "normal" in that you get the full resolution, i is interlaced. You get the number of rows by multiplying by the aspect ratio, which for 720p and 1080p is usually 16:9, yielding 1280 and 1920, respectively.

So on the off chance I actually do get to play the "pick a hi def flat screen tv" game, I'm aiming for 1080p for the highest resolution? I take it there are other variables that infulence the picture too?

1080p is great, especially if you plan on hooking your laptop up and working on it a bit.

That being said, I've been told that probably under a 42 or 46" set, a couple feet away, 1080p and 720p for normal viewing won't make a huge difference... it's the bigger sets that really make the difference. It depends on how far away you'd be sitting.

But even 32-42" 1080p LCD's have come down in price a lot. I would recommend a 1080p.

Yeah, we's only be a couple of feet away from it (well, actually about 2 metres or so) because our living room is narrow. It's something to think about.

It's not worth getting an hdtv if you don't also invest in an upconverting dvd player (to make your dvds not look like complete crap), hd programming (cable, satellite, or over-the-air -- at least around here we can get channels in 720p over the air), and hopefully a blu-ray. If you try to watch normal tv/cable/dvd on an hdtv it will just look crappy and blurry and lame. You can get a ps3 which includes bluray and an upconverting dvd player (plus you can play a few cool games). I've been seeing deals at newegg for blu-ray players around $120 or something.

Oh, also, 720p still looks totally awesome. I can tell the difference if I try, but under normal viewing, 720 vs 1080 doesn't seem to make a huge difference (I have a 50" screen).

I agree with everything except upconverting DVD player. I find it completely unnecessary, as TVs already scale it themselves pretty well anyway. It's not important anyway as it's still nothing close to actual HD video.

Also, Emon, DVDs do run at 720x480 on a TV, yes, but the actual resolution comparison on a PC is 640x480. You need to take into account that DVDs are formatted for non-square pixels, while computer monitors/LCDs/etc use square pixels.

he has an xbox 360...


anyway if you do get a new TV

things to remember Plasma > LCD

because it requires a backlight LCD cannot display true black
there are motion blurring issues with LCD (they have been massively reduced but can never be eliminated)
plasmas maintain proper colors and contrast viewed from even the most extreme angles (LCD isn't as bad about this as it used to be but it's still not perfect... just like the black level thing it's cause by the backlit nature of the screen)

now LCDs cannot get burn in at all (image retention can happen but will go away after a short time) while plasmas just like CRTs can that said i've never had burn in on any CRT TV and recent plasmas have various safeguards against burn-in

and before anyone says LCDs use less power... out of the box most certainly... the factory settings for a TV are for boosted contrast and colors properly calibrated the power consumption of a plasma is closer to that of an LCD

LCDs do traditionally perform better in rooms that are brightly lit however some plasmas have anti reflective screens which help alot in such situations

you want to wall-mount so i won't bother mentioning DLP

Should we even get into the 120/240hz discussion? or just let him be happy knowing that 1080p is what hes shooting for?

Also, as a tip, things are generally migrating to HDMI, so try to get a TV with at least TWO of those.



That's really a matter of opinion. Plasma TVs have differences some people don't like. Power Consumption, Heat, potential bulb life issues, weight, ect ect...

Cheap LCDs will have black issues, but the nicer models ($1000+) usually have good blacks.

Probably best for him to go by a Best Buy or other store and see if he even likes the 120hz TV's. Then he can see if he likes Plasma or LCD better as well.

It's really hard for me to even tell a difference personally in the 120hz and older TVs. I really only see issues in my TV with white colors.

Really?? To me the 120hz TV's are so fluid.... it's like it's kind of fake looking.

In regards to the 60hz/120Hz thing, there is a definite difference, especially if you watch a bluray with 120Hz (or what my TV Calls "Automotion") on, and off.

My only way to describe it is at 120Hz, it starts to look like everything is so silky smooth in terms of movement, as if you are watching your TV/movie right on the camera it's being shot with (which makes sense, you are getting higher frames per second). A lot of people who have never seen the difference usually end up saying "Wow, it's like i'm watching a play or something".

I don't think there is anything we can really say to him other than that if you have the opportunity to go higher refresh rate (and it's not THAT much more expensive), you might as well do it. It definitley won't hurt the picture, and it will at least future proof some of the hardware you may choose to get in the future, as bluray really takes advantage of the higher refresh rates.

Wow, that's loads to take in! Thanks one and all

Oh yeah, forgot about xbox -- that was my main motivator. My brother-in-law bought a 50" plasma and I brought my xbox to his house and played some gears of war. When I brought it back home, I didn't even bother to hook it up until I got my own hdtv. It's just night and day.

i already explained about power consumption... try reading the whole post
heat... sure they generate a little more heat but again properly calibrated they generate less heat than out of the box
bulb life issues? there's no bulb... maybe you mean panel life? current plasma panels can last just as long or longer than LCDs
weight... i've lifted some LCDs that are just as heavy as some plasmas of the same size



the nicer models have better dark greys... but still cannot (due to being backlit) display true black

the plasma>LCD is not just opinion it's fact... contrast, color accuracy, and all those other wonderful things that add up to the overall picture quality of a TV can be measured and where it matters most (picture quality) Plasma>LCD

Yeah the Plasma/power consumption thing is pretty overrated, I used my 50" panasonic plasma a lot and my powerbills haven't gone up noticably at all since I got it 3 years ago.

I'll also echo Brian's comments on 720p vs 1080p. 1080p requires a big screen and you to sit close to it to get any extra detail out of it. Of course 1080p is best hands down but if you're buying a small tv and not sitting really really close to it, bit pointless. See the link below, very handy!

http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/12/09/1080p-charted-viewing-distance-to-screen-size/

Actually, consumer reports constantly recommends plasma over lcd, their latest report states that the power differences are not noticeable anymore. Also, their viewing angle stomps the lcds, the screens themselves are more durable (glass), and of course they have much better blacks. Plus, for gaming, there is no motion blur, even on the older models.

I laughed at "The Wife", It just sounded to me like you were referring to her like a gnat in your ear.

I would recommend going to the AVS forums for HDTV advice. Those guys really know what they're talking about. If price isn't too much of an issue, the Samsung LED 8500 looks really nice. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1166956

those new led tvs are badass..

What about price between LCD and plasma?

I was looking at 50", you can generally get a 52" lcd for the same price as a 50" plasma, at least, that's what it was when I was shopping. I ended up paying a bit more for a panasonic because it had anti-reflective coating on it. It helps because I have some windows in the room where the tv is.

they are still just LCDs

the only difference is they have a better backlight

they're sweet. i was impressed

I thought the entire purpose was that it could actually regionally disable the blacklight, allowing it to achieve the same sort of black that plasma would.

At least I know that's how OLED works. The Zune HD's screen is gorgeous for it.

only some models and the local dimming is still quite limited

alot of LEDs seem to have gone the direction of edge lit super thin TVs

also OLED is a very different tech from LED backlit TVs and it, like plasma, is self illuminating (no backlight)