OT - Plasma TV question

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
Do a lot of research. You won't believe how much misinformation is out
there. For example go to any TV store or a Costco. I noticed that all
the TV's looked equally good when they were all showing the same movie.
Couldn't figure out why anybody would pay an extra $1500-2000 for the HDTV
vs the EDTV. Then I learned that movies on DVD are not HD, they are ED.

Not only that (which is a good thing to keep in mind), while it's true that
"HD" describes a range of resolutions, and while the best resolution in the
"HD" specification has 1080 lines (interlaced or progressive scan), finding
HD content at that resolution is incredibly difficult right now. The
primary argument for getting a display with that resolution *today* would be
that one expects to use it as a high-resolution computer display as well.
For straight video content, something capable of 720 lines (eg, a 1024x768
resolution PC-compatible display) is going to handle the bulk of the HD
content available, and even that likely to be available in the next year or
so.

Some other thoughts:

For what it's worth, "ED" (aka "enhanced definition") isn't really all that
different from normal NTSC resolution. "ED" is really just a wide-screen
version of the standard-definition NTSC we've been using all these years
(which has the same vertical resolution as ED). The biggest improvement of
ED comes from switching from the interlaced format to a progressive scan
format. ED is 853x480 pixels, while SD is 720x480.

I haven't actually even seen an "ED" DVD. All of my widescreen DVDs are
actually anamorphic widescreen, which means they simply squash the 16:9
picture down to a 4:3 ratio in a standard NTSC stream, and then rely on the
DVD player to expand the width back out to the correct widescreen aspect
ratio.

Also, beware of in-store comparisons. For a variety of reasons, what you
see in the store isn't necessarily what you're going to get. The default
brightness and color settings are optimized for being consumer-friendly, not
for showing the true capabilities of the display, and the ambient lighting
and environment in many stores can cause misleading impressions as well.

I just assumed that DVD's were HD. After further research I found out the
you can not tell the difference between an HDTV and an EDTV when you are
watching an HD signal on a 42 inch plasma,

IMHO, this depends on the source content. As an example, I can easily tell
the difference between 480 lines of resolution and 768 lines of resolution
on a 15" computer display. At 42", the difference would be even easier to
discern.

Video content is different of course, and if you're starting with
low-resolution video content anyway, then the resolution of the display
isn't going to affect things as much. Just beware of blanket statements
that imply there is NO apparent difference. There is...depending on what
you're looking at. At 42", the display is easily large enough for
significant differences in resolution to be apparent, given the right
content.

Pete

It sucks to move though since it weighs around 200 lbs and the weight is
not
at a point that makes it easy for one person to easily carry... It's more
like pick it up and have someone else move the entertainment center
underneath it...

We have an old (1987) JVC color TV that fits that description. I pick it
up, and everything else gets moved/wired/unplugged/whatever while I stand
their straining, trying not to pop a blood vessel. Danged thing must weigh
200 pounds and surely it's made out of lead -- but it still looks as good
today as it did the day we bought it.

Too bad it's only 27 inches, cuz otherwise it's still great.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:9orMf.791632$x96.334720@attbi_s72...
I was truly enjoying that exchange, until the very end. Then you went
and piqued my curiosity yet again.

What's wrong with "Monster Cable" products??

The electrons don't care. You can get perceptually indistinguishable
results from cables that cost a fraction what Monster Cable's stuff costs.

There's nothing wrong with them, but people who pay the premium for them are
fooling themselves. It was perhaps an unfair jab at Matt's insistence that
you have to spend at least $5000 for a "decent" projector, since at least
with projectors you generally WILL get more benefit for your money, even if
less-expensive ones are quite good. But I couldn't resist.

By the way, thank you for spelling "piqued" correctly. Such a rare
occurrence, here on Usenet and elsewhere.

Pete

finding HD content at that resolution
is incredibly difficult right now. [...]
720 lines is going to handle the bulk of the HD content available,
and even that likely to be available in the next year or so.

I drop $5000 on a TV, I want it for more than "the next year or so".

Most DVDs are standard definition. Home video (the newest stuff) is
high definition - 1080i. Go figure. They're starting to play with HD
DVDs, but they haven't agreed on a format yet. But if you're putting
five grand into a screen, having two HD DVD machines shouldn't be an
issue. The content will come.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

By the way, thank you for spelling "piqued" correctly. Such a rare
occurrence, here on Usenet and elsewhere.

He probably piqued at a dictionary before he posted.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

By the way, thank you for spelling "piqued" correctly. Such a rare
occurrence, here on Usenet and elsewhere.

He probably piqued at a dictionary before he posted.

Ha ! Not.

Until recently, I even had my chell-specker disabled, as I considered it to
be a dishonorable literary crutch. By God, I didn't waste all that time
getting an English degree only to have some damned computer CHECK my
spelling!

Well, then my near-vision started to deteriorate, and I've been having some
problems proof-reading. "o"s now look an awful lot like "a"s to these
47-year-old, non-reading-glass-assisted eyes, and I had to turn the stupid
thing back on, just to catch my typos.

But, despite my advancing years, I picked "piqued" on purpose, sans
assistance, thank you very much...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jose" wrote in message
om...
I drop $5000 on a TV, I want it for more than "the next year or so".

Then don't buy a plasma.

Seriously, I agree with you and others. I buy a TV, I expect it to hang
around for awhile. But given the tenor of "you'll want to upgrade to the
latest tech in a few years anyway", the relative absence of 1080 content for
the next year or so is a significant issue.

Most DVDs are standard definition. Home video (the newest stuff) is high
definition - 1080i.

What home video stuff does 1080i? Last I looked, consumer-grade HD cameras
were only starting to appear, and they only did 720. As an added problem,
the HD data stream from the camera I played with (a JVC) didn't follow any
standard, and there weren't drivers available for capturing the video onto
the PC.

From your post and a previous one, I assume you have a 1080 camera that
captures to a PC just fine. Fill us in! I'm still not convinced that
equipment is available for the budget-conscious consumer, but I'm willing to
listen.

Go figure. They're starting to play with HD DVDs, but they haven't agreed
on a format yet. But if you're putting five grand into a screen, having
two HD DVD machines shouldn't be an issue. The content will come.

I'm still trying to get past the fact that the people who produce the bulk
of the video content are doing their damndest to take away every last "fair
use" right that the consumer has under copyright law. On the one hand, I'm
sorely tempted to simply boycott them, and refuse to purchase any
DRM-protected content. On the other hand, not everyone in my family would
likely be as enthusiastic about abandoning mainstream content as I am.

I did find one recent comment interesting: someone got up at a consumer
electronics panel and pointed out that the entire consumer entertainment
content industry (ie "Hollywood") is a fraction of the total revenue of the
consumer electronics and computer industries, and that those industries
ought to stop falling over themselves trying to implement the draconian
copy-protection schemes that Hollywood proposes, and instead just publish
their own DRM-free content. They could distribute the content free, and
still wind up making money as it helps sell the electronics. If anything,
free content would just fuel demand for the playback devices even more.

Sort of like the razor-blade business model in reverse.

Make sense to me. Now to get the consumer electronics people on board.

Pete

"Flyingmonk" wrote in message
oups.com...
Is it mechanically tilting the miroors?

Yes, it is (though, I'm not sure how one would physically move something
except "mechanically"...that is, via a mechanism). They are physically
moved, and in doing so adjust how much light is reflected toward the
projection screen.

If not, how? Interesting. Wonder how long that'll last...

If you mean how long before the component fatigues, that's a good question,
but so far they've been extremely reliable. If you believe TI (who makes
the DLP chips), the materials used are resistant to fatigue, and have only
slight susceptibility to other failure modes. One paper proposes at least a
25 year lifespan before failure. You can read lots more he
http://www.dlp.com/dlp_technology/dl...ite_papers.asp

Pete

On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:59:27 GMT, "Grumman-581"
wrote:

"Kobra" wrote in message
...

snip

You need to fix the clock on your PC (or perhaps your news server's
clock)... It's a couple of days fast (i.e. it says the 28th and it's only
the 26th right now)...

Hmmm... Here I've seen it take two to three days for posts to show up
even when the clock was correct, but I've never seen any show up
before I posted them. OTOH I often see answers in threads before the
original question shows up. These things rarely fall in logical order
by date posted.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

OK, so just testing, what's the winning number for this Tuesday's
Mega-Million drawing? keeping fingers crossed :^)

The Monk

Roger wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:59:27 GMT, "Grumman-581"
wrote:

"Kobra" wrote in message
...

snip

You need to fix the clock on your PC (or perhaps your news server's
clock)... It's a couple of days fast (i.e. it says the 28th and it's only
the 26th right now)...

Hmmm... Here I've seen it take two to three days for posts to show up
even when the clock was correct, but I've never seen any show up
before I posted them. OTOH I often see answers in threads before the
original question shows up. These things rarely fall in logical order
by date posted.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com