HD Ready Or Full HD .... Confused.... Pl Help

[marsilians]

It only has component-in right? So you cannot upscale ordinary DVD videos when viewing on this TV. Correct? Unless you get a player like Oppo that upscales via Component?

TIA
Regards

Oppo only upscales over component under very strict conditions.

- Only for SD Movies
- Only unencrypted DVD discs (so does not cover most commerical DVDs unless you make a copy without protection)
- And all this is done through a supported hack

This is just to clarify.

 

[venkatcr]

Gobble, Marsilians, the Philips 29PT8836 is a CRT. So why talk about upscaling at all?

Cheers

 

[marsilians]

Gobble, Marsilians, the Philips 29PT8836 is a CRT. So why talk about upscaling at all?

Cheers

Venkat - Thanks for pointing out - I missed that. My note is still valid as far as Oppo is concerned.

 

[gobble]

Gobble, Marsilians, the Philips 29PT8836 is a CRT. So why talk about upscaling at all?

Cheers

Uh I don't get it ... so what if its a CRT? How does one benefit from a 720p capable TV if SD content is not upscaled?

Regards

 

[moserw]

Gobble, Marsilians, the Philips 29PT8836 is a CRT. So why talk about upscaling at all?

Cheers

Venkat,

I remember reading somewhere that this is a HDTV CRT TV with support up to 1080p but without HDMI, but with Component.

 

[venkatcr]

I remember reading somewhere that this is a HDTV CRT TV with support up to 1080p but without HDMI, but with Component.

Whoever is quoting this is pulling a real fast one.

I have explained this before, buy let me do it again.

First let us understand Progressive scanning. How does a film show a motion? It does this by shooting a series of still pictures that have small changes in the players physical state. For example, if a man is walking, his body movement is captured by a series of still pictures that capture the various positions of his legs, arms and other parts of his body. Each of this still picture is a frame. These frames are then projected at the rate of 24 frames per second (fps) on to a screen. The human eye perceives this as motion. Actually the human eye can perceive motion at 16 frames a second, but 24fps was adopted for various historical reasons when the motion picture camera was invented and accepted by the producers.

Coming to a CRT, it is first of all an analogue device. In all CRT monitors, the image is painted on the screen by an electron beam that scans from one side of the display to the other drawing thin lines. This scan is used to display the transitions in color, intensity and pattern, and each complete pass of the electron gun is called a FIELD. Analogue TV uses a process that relies on the brain's ability to integrate gradual transitions in pattern that the eye sees as the image is painted on the screen. Each picture or frame on a television screen is composed of 525 lines, numbered from 1 to 525. During the first phase of screen drawing, even-numbered lines are drawn - 2,4,6,8 and so on. During the next phase, the odd lines are drawn 1,3,5,7 and so on. The eye integrates the two images to create a single image as shown in the image below. The fields are said to be interleaved together or interlaced. A frame or complete picture consists of two fields.

Thus a CRT can never display a Progressively scanned image or a full frame. It breaks it down into two fields and then scans the fields alternatively on the screen. Secondly, a CRT has a max of 525 lines. So the max resolution it can display is 480 in interleaved format (480i).

Unless a manufacturer has changed the very concept of a CRT or is referring to a rear projection TV, I don't understand how you can display anything more than 480i on a CRT.

Cheers

 

[moserw]

Yup, even I am aware that CRT's are limited to 480i for NTSC and 576i for PAL, but I did read that this Philips model does 1080p and also another Samsung 30" CRT HDTV model displays up to 1080i. This was around 2-3 years ago when LCD/Plasma TVs were way too expensive and everyone was ready to jump onto the HD bandwagon myself included!!! CRT TVs were made HD Ready and could handle 760/1080i or so I read online, but I must admit here I never personally saw them. Let me see if I can find anything on the internet about CRT HDTV...

Edit - Found a link for the Philips Tech2.com India > Philips 29PT8836/94 CRT HDTV > Reviews > HiFi & TV > CRT but not really sure about the quality of the reviewer/website etc., but it is claimed it does 1080P.

 

[venkatcr]

Edit - Found a link for the Philips Tech2.com India > Philips 29PT8836/94 CRT HDTV > Reviews > HiFi & TV > CRT but not really sure about the quality of the reviewer/website etc., but it is claimed it does 1080P.

What he says is this:

'Though the TV has support for resolutions up to 1080p (more on that in a bit), the output it gives is still pretty much analog, because of which it doesn't have any digital inputs like HDMI or DVI. In fact it only supports component, composite and RF inputs, which can get a bit limiting. '

He never explains the 1080P later, and I have strong feeling he does not know what he is talking about, or has purposely left the conclusions vague. You can feed a signal of any resolution to an CRT, but it will only display it up to a max of, as you said, 480i for NTSC, and 576i for PAL. You need digital technology for higher resolutions as well as for Progressive scanning.

When a manufacturer says his TV has component video and is compatible to HD signals, technically a component cable can carry 1080p signals. What this means is that you can feed 1080p signals to the TV using component connection. But a CRT displaying 1080P? That is impossible.

Cheers

 

[ajinkya]

Thus a CRT can never display a Progressively scanned image or a full frame.
Cheers

Hi Venkat,

I don't think CRT technology is limited in its abilty to display progressive scans. In fact, I remember Silicon Graphics monitors and workstation units having this ability in the 1980's. I think they called it 'raster scan' and the video chip had the ability to store and paint a full screen at a time on the CRT.

I think the interleaved signal is more a function of the PAL/NTSC standard than any inherent limitation in CRT technology. Having said that, I agree with you that Full HD may not be feasible using CRT since the scan lines are limited to 525 or such number.


-Jinx.

 

[gobble]

I believe CRT monitors that support progressive actually de-interlace at twice the refresh rate to make it almost on par with real progressive PQ.

The PT8836 support 1080i not 1080p but people confuse this.

It will be interesting to find out if the combination of Oppo upscaling for SD/DVD content and the 8836 1080i lets it exercise its full capabilities.

Regards

 

[venkatcr]

Hi Venkat,

I don't think CRT technology is limited in its abilty to display progressive scans. In fact, I remember Silicon Graphics monitors and workstation units having this ability in the 1980's. I think they called it 'raster scan' and the video chip had the ability to store and paint a full screen at a time on the CRT.

I think the interleaved signal is more a function of the PAL/NTSC standard than any inherent limitation in CRT technology. Having said that, I agree with you that Full HD may not be feasible using CRT since the scan lines are limited to 525 or such number.


-Jinx.

Ajinkya it is actually in reverse order. PAL and NTSC standards were based upon the technology of a CRT. In the initial days, a CRT was used both for display and for image capture. A CRT was used upside down so to say as a camera. The light falling on the CRT face was captured by a electron beam that scanned the screen constantly. These electrons beams would identify the difference in brightness and grey scale and create electrical signals which would stored on a tape or for transmission. Cameras, of course, did not work like this for a long time, as CCDs and CMOS chips came in.

But CRTs as a display unit continued for a long time till the recent past.

The process where a electron beam scans the coated CRT surface is called Raster Scan. The word Raster comes from the Latin word that mean Rake. When a rake is used on a field, it leave parallel lines across the face of the field. The farmer keeps moving backwards to cover the field. Similarly, a electron beam scans the CRT surface in parallel lines starting from the top left corner to the bottom right corner.

CRT works by heating a cathode which causes electrons to flow. Accelerating and focusing anodes turn the electrons into a fine beam that is directed to the phosphors by magnetic fields that are generated by steering coils. The face of a color CRT tube is coated with red, green and blue phosphor dots, and separate "electron guns" bombard their respective colors a line at a time in a prescribed sequence. CRT has huge transformers that generate 10,000 to 20,000 volts for the electron beam to be generated.

Since the CRT uses a process of displaying images by 'lighting' up the screen using thin lines, it can never display a full image. As I said PAL/NTSC standards were developed to store and transmit images created by the CRT scanning.

Companies such as Silicon Graphics developed chips that could paint a CRT at very high speed. In addition, the distance between the lines would be non-existant as the lines would nearly overlap each other. This would create a near perfect image for text and graphics. In addition they would also internally scan the image vertically to create a matrix of data that would represent the brightness and grey scale of a all xy cordinates across the screen. This data was stored as digital data.

This way of bifurcation of the screen is what we now know as PIXELS.

Cheers

 

[sandip_d]

The Philips product information for PT298836/94 mentions following Supported Display resolutions. 480p(60Hz),720p(50,60Hz),1080i(60Hz) & 1080p(60Hz).
www.p4c.philips.com/files/2/29pt8836_94/29pt8836_94_pss_aen.pdf
I am using Philips DVD player DVP-3166(Progressive Scan Enabled) and connected to TV by Profigold PGV332 Component Cable for watching DVDs. 480p & 576p apeear on TV screen for NTSC & PAL Dvds respectively. As far as the display resolution of the picture shown on TV Screen is concerned, I am not sure whether this TV is capable only of accepting 720p/1080i/1080p
signals but can display only 480i untill I get my hands on DVD player(Oppo I wish) upscaling to 720p/1080p via Component. Whatever I can say is, Stunning picture,great blacklevels, good contrast and flicker free TV Viewing.

Whether a CRT can display anything more .......... found some interesting information

1080p - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://www.highdefforum.com/direct-view-tube-tvs/22067-1080p-tube-tvs.html
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=828803
Warm Regards

 

[psychotropic]

I know I am pitching in a little late into this discussion, but as Venkat said in terms of technology Full HD is inarguably superior to HD Ready, but what you need to ask yourself is this..assuming you have a viewing distance of 8 to 10 feet and want a nice big immersive experience should you spend 45k on a 42" PV8 or A410 or spend 65k on a 40" FUll HD TV? The differences will be visible but not very significant (42 is the size at which the differences start to become noticeable), so what you need to decide is whether the 20k extra is worth it for the improvements that you see. It's a pretty simple decision if you look at it that way. While I agree that at the top end of the price spectrum LCD has some breathtaking options, at the budget end the LCDs are noticeably inferior to the Plasmas with regard to colour reproduction, skin tones, contrast levels, and the handling of motion. The Plasmas however have irritants such as the reflectiveness of the display, and temporary image retention, which make owning an LCD are more "hassle-free" experience.

With regard to CRTs I've always been under the impression that they are capable of displaying 1080p, let me dig around and see if I can find any authorities for that.

 

[adder]

at the budget end the LCDs are noticeably inferior to the Plasmas with regard to colour reproduction, skin tones, contrast levels, and the handling of motion.

once again it depends on which lcd u are comparing, lcds from sony and samsung be it S series or series 5, easily have a huge advantage in contrast, (i.e the actual measured ANSI contrast,not the adverstised contrast) compared to plasmas like PV8/80 and similar plasmas.motion handling,is once again debatable.and nowdays no one complains about color reproduction capabilities of lcd atleast, no solid proof.

 

[sandip_d]

I agree to superiority of 1080p over 720p. It is matter of individual's choice to go for either of them with respect to his/her requirements & budget. The High End 1080p LCD/PLASMA will sure be within reach of many people(including myself) as the time passes. When I went for shopping, the Entry Level 40" 1080p LCD Samsung was not as good as mid Range Sony W series and had no opportunity to compare them with high end Sony X Series. Now sony has launched new 100Hz & 200Hz models which must be more expensive. So I thought It will make more sense to wait till the prices of todays mid/high end 1080p models falls to manageble levels and purchased a 29" CRT for the time inbetween.
Regards

 

[ajinkya]

Since the CRT uses a process of displaying images by 'lighting' up the screen using thin lines, it can never display a full image.
Cheers

Venkat,

Thanks for the informative post. However, I believe there is a difference in the way you and I define 'progressive scan'. I'm posting a link to a wikipedia article that more clearly explains what I mean:

Progressive scan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An excerpt from another online article:
Progressive Scan - What You Need To Know About Progressive Scan and How It Affects What You See on a Television Screen

"Progressive scan differs from interlaced scan in that the image is displayed on a screen by scanning each line (or row of pixels) in a sequential order rather than an alternate order, as is done with interlaced scan. In other words, in progressive scan, the image lines (or pixel rows) are scanned in numerical order (1,2,3) down the screen from top to bottom, instead of in an alternate order (lines or rows 1,3,5, etc... followed by lines or rows 2,4,6). By progressively scanning the image onto a screen every 60th of a second rather than "interlacing" alternate lines every 30th of a second, a smoother, more detailed, image can be produced on the screen that is perfectly suited for viewing fine details, such as text, and is also less susceptible to interlace flicker. "

I think the confusion is arising with the way we both are defining the term 'progressive scan'. So again, I don't see why CRT cannot display progressive. Infact, the wiki article mentions some CRT models in the past which had supported this feature.

Thanks,
Jinx.

 

[psychotropic]

i don't have the means to measure the actual contrast, but a side by side comparison of a 5-series or S-series LCD and a PV8/PV80 will show a decidedly superior picture on the PV8/PV80 with better blacks and better colour. The Samsung Plasma's black levels are not that great, and are probably more comparable to LCDs.

I was initially planning to buy an LCD, and the S-series and the 4-series were the models that I was considering, and I viewed them. They were quite good, but IMHO didn't really have the "pop" that the pictures on the plasmas that i saw (both samsung and panasonic) did. And when you throw in the value that you get in terms of screen size and immersive viewing experience, it was a no-contest.

Essentially if you're looking to spend up to 50k on a flat panel display, a 42" plasma virtually chooses itself, unless you have compelling reasons against it, such as a brightly lit room / windows facing the screen / lot of gaming use.

once again it depends on which lcd u are comparing, lcds from sony and samsung be it S series or series 5, easily have a huge advantage in contrast, (i.e the actual measured ANSI contrast,not the adverstised contrast) compared to plasmas like PV8/80 and similar plasmas.motion handling,is once again debatable.and nowdays no one complains about color reproduction capabilities of lcd atleast, no solid proof.

 

[frnd08]

i don't have the means to measure the actual contrast, but a side by side comparison of a 5-series or S-series LCD and a PV8/PV80 will show a decidedly superior picture on the PV8/PV80 with better blacks and better colour. The Samsung Plasma's black levels are not that great, and are probably more comparable to LCDs.

I was initially planning to buy an LCD, and the S-series and the 4-series were the models that I was considering, and I viewed them. They were quite good, but IMHO didn't really have the "pop" that the pictures on the plasmas that i saw (both samsung and panasonic) did. And when you throw in the value that you get in terms of screen size and immersive viewing experience, it was a no-contest.

Essentially if you're looking to spend up to 50k on a flat panel display, a 42" plasma virtually chooses itself, unless you have compelling reasons against it, such as a brightly lit room / windows facing the screen / lot of gaming use.

thats true, infact i checked out the series T and series S models in the 26" range. they have exactly the same panels. the sony S series costs more coz of the fact that it has better connectivity and adjustment options.

to be frank, i had tested a HD disk (the one sony centre has) on both of them in the showroom, and they looked just as brilliant!

 

[adder]

i don't have the means to measure the actual contrast, but a side by side comparison of a 5-series or S-series LCD and a PV8/PV80 will show a decidedly superior picture on the PV8/PV80 with better blacks and better colour. The Samsung Plasma's black levels are not that great, and are probably more comparable to LCDs.

again those who do a side by side comparsion with a HD source will find the lcds better, for SD source its obvious that HD plasmas fare better(FHD plasma suck the same way as FHD lcd in SD content).also the lcds like sony S,V series and samsung series 5 and upwards have greater detail in dark scenes ,which isnt a suprise since they have more contrast then the panny pv8/80 plasmas.

thats true, infact i checked out the series T and series S models in the 26" range. they have exactly the same panels. the sony S series costs more coz of the fact that it has better connectivity and adjustment options.

that applies only to the 26inch segment,where as in the 32inch segement the sony S series uses a SPVA panel where as 32inch T series uses a AMVA panel.

BTW was just checking the sony X series in grey market a 40inch costs 1.17lakh which is a huge difference compared to showroom prices,easily the best lcd out there.

 

[frnd08]

again those who do a side by side comparsion with a HD source will find the lcds better, for SD source its obvious that HD plasmas fare better(FHD plasma suck the same way as FHD lcd in SD content).also the lcds like sony S,V series and samsung series 5 and upwards have greater detail in dark scenes ,which isnt a suprise since they have more contrast then the panny pv8/80 plasmas.



that applies only to the 26inch segment,where as in the 32inch segement the sony S series uses a SPVA panel where as 32inch T series uses a AMVA panel.

BTW was just checking the sony X series in grey market a 40inch costs 1.17lakh which is a huge difference compared to showroom prices,easily the best lcd out there.

whats the difference between S-PVA and AMVA panels? can i spot any visible change while watching video? or is the difference purely academic?