Advertisement

Zibb

Brian DipertEDN Senior Technical Editor Brian Dipert exposes, analyzes and
opines on diverse topics in technology. Follow the Brian's Brain Twitter feed at www.twitter.com/BrianzBrain.



   Advertisement

Profile

RSS Feed

  • Add this blog to your RSS newsreader!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Most Commented On

Archives

By Category

Consumer Electronics Design Articles

Blog

Sunday, April 23, 2006

1080p: Don't Take the Hype Bait

Apr 23 2006 7:25PM | Permalink |Comments (7) |


Toshiba's sub-$500 first-generation HD DVD player is now shipping, with an RCA-branded counterpart poised to join it in the marketplace within a month. Meanwhile, Sony's first Blu-ray player is still listed at $1000, and won't be out until (at least) August 15th. Mark my words; Sony's marketeers are going to spend the next few months trumpeting their planned player's 1080p output capability, both in an attempt to blunt HD DVD's first-to-market momentum (these first few HD DVD players have 1080-line interlaced, 60 field-per-second outputs, not 1080-line progressive-scan, 60 frame-per-second outputs) and to justify the BDP-S1's 2x larger price tag.

Take my advice; don't buy into the Sony hype. Why? HDTVExpert covers the part of the answer; Peter Putman's writeup echoes the point I made in in my recent cover story, that "even if a display accepts 1080p, the video processor might immediately discard half of the information to simplify its job, effectively transforming the signal into 1080i" (editor's note: or 540p). But here's more ammo. The vast majority of 1080p content available at the moment (including, I might add, all of the first wave of HD DVD discs) is 24 frame-per-second source material, either initially captured on film and then digitized, or recorded by a 24 frame-per-second-capable HD digital camcorder. The remainder is 30 frame-per-second content, from a high-def 1080p30 or 1080i60 (60 field-per-second) digicam source. In all of these cases, a HD DVD player is capable of progressive-to-interlace converting (if necessary) the material into a 1080i 60 field-per-second output without any pixel content or temporal information loss. This transformation includes (again if necessary) doing a 24-to-30 frame-per-second telecine transformation prior to the frame-to-field slice-and-dice, again with no generational loss.

At the television, a chip such as National Semiconductor's AVC2510 or AVC5000 is able to reverse the process and recreate the exact source material. This is possible because, bottom line, 1080p60 digicams don't yet exist. Industry scuttlebutt claims that prototype cameras will be showcased this upcoming week at the NAB show I'm currently at, but by the time the content captured by such digicams enters the market, you'll be on your second (or third, or....) generation of high-def optical disc player. Again, as I said in my recent cover story, "Future HD DVD players will likely be 1080p-capable; the fact that they're not now is negligible." So buy away, if you must, and use this comic strip as amusement (and inspiration for purchase justification). Or follow my lead and keep your money in your wallet until the format confusion sorts itself out, via attrition, opposing-camp compromise, universal-format players or some other means.


Reader Comments



at 4/24/2006 12:58:31 PM, Dave said:
But wait there... I'm about to buy a TV that I hope will last for 5 years. It's might be the most expensive thing I've ever bought except for a car and a house... Are you saying that a 720 pixel HD set will be cutting edge for the next 5 years?



at 4/26/2006 12:40:16 PM, Mike Poindexter said:
Dude, there are reasons to want 1080p60 - first and foremost would be to utilize and external scaler that will undoubtedly be better than the one in the TV set. Such external scalers can deinterlace 1080i signals properly and do the 3:2 pulldown - some even if the material isn't flagged properly - a big problem on a lot of NTSC DVDs and likely to be a problem on some HD-DVDs/BlueRay discs as well.

Also, such a scaler would allow motion adaptive deinterlacing for material shot as 1080i60 from true interlaced video fields. With high horsepower scaler chips like the Realta HQV shipping now, it is a good idea to have 1080p60 input capability if you want to be able to use such devices without buying a new TV set. I already have multiple devices that do motion adaptive deinterlacing of 1080i60 source material in my house now. I can't think they will not become better and more commonplace - or at least less expensive in the future.



at 4/26/2006 1:45:24 PM, Brian Dipert said:
Dear Mike,
Dude, I wish I had your bank account balance ;-)



at 4/26/2006 10:05:46 PM, Jason said:
Brian, you're nuts. Have you actually SEEN a 1080p plasma or LCD using HDMI from a 1080p source? I have, and the difference between it and 720p is worth far more than a penny! "Tethering" a PC to a TV...you make it sound so ridiculous, but even an HD-DVD player runs Linux. Media Center PCs are becoming more and more commonplace, and any modern video card can do 1920x1080 at 60 Hz (aka 1080p).

What you should be saying is, if you buy a 1080p display, make sure it accepts 1080p from an external source other than VGA.

Personally, I think it's too early for 1080p, and I'll be waiting for later generation products with HDMI 1.3 and better black levels. But as it stands today, 1080p devices like the HP unit are clearly superior to 720p units.



at 4/27/2006 2:35:39 AM, Bradman said:
I disagree with your statement that it is possible to convert progressive to interlaced without any pixel information loss. The point of progressive pictures is to take advantage of the improved vertical resolution. Surely you have to vertically filter the progressive picture to prevent interlace flicker on true interlaced displays? There are a huge number of people who still have CRT-based displays who would be very annoyed at all the fine detail in their picture shimmering at 30Hz.



at 5/9/2006 12:57:57 PM, Bloke3 said:
Actually the Sony HDC-1000 was released in May 2005 and is capapble of 1080p60. The retail price is $100,000. But it is a studio qulaity camera I'm LucasArts owns a couple.



at 5/9/2006 3:04:08 PM, Brian Dipert said:
Bloke3, thanks for the heads-up. Although the CCDs in the HDC-1000 and HDC-1500 can capture 1080p50 and 1080p60 images, and the DSPs can process those images, my read of the specs is it uses those images to derive 1080i60 and 720p60 OUTPUTS. By googling around, you'll for example find the qualifier in the product brief that '1080/60P and 1080/50P signals can be output only from the HDC-1000/HDC-1500 camera
head' (implying that the infrastructure of equipment that connects to the camera head isn't 1080/50p or 1080/60p compliant) and Mark Shubin's explicit '(internal)' qualifier on the cameras' 1080/50p and 1080/60p modes

Post a comment



Display Name

Change Image
Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above.
Note the letters are NOT case sensitive.


ADVERTISEMENT

©1997-2010 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy