May i suggest a blind test for the magazine, put the HD ready tvs against their full HD siblings. Do it like for like panasonic HD ready 42" verus panasonic full HD 42". Feed them standard broadcasts and BBC HD and finally blu-ray. The purpose? is there any point in them making and us buying HD ready tvs? I currently have an HD ready set and dont get me wrong i love it but am aware that no matter what i watch pixels have been added or taken away, so am i really seing what the director intended?
What HiFi team Question HD ready or not?
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
How can you do a blind test of TVs?
Seriously, though, I think if you're going to watch a lot of HD broadcast TV or Blu-rays, and want a TV of 42in or larger, it's worth buying a Full HD set. In smaller screen sizes there's less of an advantage, IME.
Ok maybe not possible , how about just a direct comparison? or is there no point because HD ready is inferior at 42" and if so that brings me to my point of why make HD ready tvs at this size?
eremis6:is there no point because HD ready is inferior at 42"
Well, it's at about this kind of size that the advantage of full HD beome apparent when watching HD material, and at normal viewing distances.
eremis6:why make HD ready tvs at this size?
a) Cost, meaning you can sell them at lower prices
and
b) because some people just want a big telly at a low price, and aren't too concerned about HD.
Well, it's at about this kind of size that the advantage of full HD beome apparent when watching HD material, and at normal viewing distances.
eremis6:why make HD ready tvs at this size?
a) Cost, meaning you can sell them at lower prices
and
b) because some people just want a big telly at a low price, and aren't too concerned about HD.
Hi. We did that test last year with the help of three readers (the feature wasn't called The Big Question then, but that's essentially what it was). It appeared in our June 2008 issue: it featured a pair of Pioneer 50in sets, one 1366 x 768, the other 1920 x 1080.
All three readers could see the differences in the Full HD panel, but all three were unsure about whether they could justify spending the extra on the higher-resolution set. Having said that, the difference between the two panels at that time was a hefty £700.
All three readers could see the differences in the Full HD panel, but all three were unsure about whether they could justify spending the extra on the higher-resolution set. Having said that, the difference between the two panels at that time was a hefty £700.
Ooops! But then you have to admit it has more of a ring to it than The Sitting Over In The Ultimate Guides Office Archive...
Isn't film shot at higher resolution than blu ray has the capacity to display? If this is true, then even with Full HD, the pixel count is going to be lower than that of the film as originally filmed.
Does watching at a lower resolution alter that which the director intended? If so, then presumably, we never see films as the director originally intended. Given that the films are made for cinema, this is not surprising.
Then again, a final film may not be what the director intended due to, amongst other things, interference from studios/producers etc. (hence the director's cuts, final cuts etc which appear subsequently)
Converting an old black and white film into colour, or making a 2d film 3d or messing with the aspect ratio so the picture fits the screen thereby removing quite a bit of picture does alter the presentation as the director intended.
Does watching at a lower resolution alter that which the director intended? If so, then presumably, we never see films as the director originally intended. Given that the films are made for cinema, this is not surprising.
Then again, a final film may not be what the director intended due to, amongst other things, interference from studios/producers etc. (hence the director's cuts, final cuts etc which appear subsequently)
Converting an old black and white film into colour, or making a 2d film 3d or messing with the aspect ratio so the picture fits the screen thereby removing quite a bit of picture does alter the presentation as the director intended.
What you say is true but as a consumer i have no control over any of that but i can choose whether to watch on an HD ready tv or a full HD one. As for film being shot at a higher resolution than blu-ray until they produce tvs, players etc that are able to show at that resolution that is out of my control as well, all i can do is aim for the best around. My point is with that in mind are HD ready tvs really worth bothering with unless u are after a smaller tv!
I fully understand your point. What I was responding to, was the comment you made at the end:
"i love it but am aware that no matter what i watch pixels have been added or taken away, so am i really seing what the director intended?"
I appreciate that as a consumer you want to watch something in the best way possible with existing technology. My point is that, although you will get closer by getting a Full HD set, you're still not seeing the film in its full resolution, so presumably your question would still be valid even with a Full HD set. ie you will still have the sense that pixels have been added or taken away.
I personally don't see the resolution as that much of a factor in terms of seeing content as originally intended. In my mind, what the "director intended" is not affected by whether or not I view a film in sd, 720, 1080 or in the cinema. This may affect viewing experience, particularly the difference between watching at home and at the cinema and of course, watching in Full HD at home is more enjoyable than viewing sd tv, but the director's intention comes across equally in all formats. I see this term of "director's intention", more as a marketing tool used by promoters of blu ray, and in fact, it is used in blu ray adverts. Since Blu Ray transfers usually use some form of grain removal/ reduction measures, the original film is being somewhat altered.
In response to your point:
1. An HD Ready tv is usually cheaper.
2. If your viewing distance is such that you won't benefit from the added detail that Full HD affords you, then why spend the extra money on it?
3. Not everyone is interested in HD. They are the only tvs you can really buy these days, but most people still watch dvds and sd tv. Why would they need or want a Full HD set if they're not going to use HD content.
"i love it but am aware that no matter what i watch pixels have been added or taken away, so am i really seing what the director intended?"
I appreciate that as a consumer you want to watch something in the best way possible with existing technology. My point is that, although you will get closer by getting a Full HD set, you're still not seeing the film in its full resolution, so presumably your question would still be valid even with a Full HD set. ie you will still have the sense that pixels have been added or taken away.
I personally don't see the resolution as that much of a factor in terms of seeing content as originally intended. In my mind, what the "director intended" is not affected by whether or not I view a film in sd, 720, 1080 or in the cinema. This may affect viewing experience, particularly the difference between watching at home and at the cinema and of course, watching in Full HD at home is more enjoyable than viewing sd tv, but the director's intention comes across equally in all formats. I see this term of "director's intention", more as a marketing tool used by promoters of blu ray, and in fact, it is used in blu ray adverts. Since Blu Ray transfers usually use some form of grain removal/ reduction measures, the original film is being somewhat altered.
In response to your point:
1. An HD Ready tv is usually cheaper.
2. If your viewing distance is such that you won't benefit from the added detail that Full HD affords you, then why spend the extra money on it?
3. Not everyone is interested in HD. They are the only tvs you can really buy these days, but most people still watch dvds and sd tv. Why would they need or want a Full HD set if they're not going to use HD content.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
I'm a LiAV(!) and the future is Not Vinyl or CD, it's DAC / Streaming, what do yo think?- Started by Jasonovich
- Replies: 43
-
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram