0
kevin922

Another few LCD/HDTV Questions

By kevin922, in The Bonfire

Recommended Posts

kevin922    0

kevin922
I didn't want to stray the other thread too much from it's intended purpose, so for all you LCD TV/HDTV buffs, a few questions:

1) I'm looking at the Sharp 37D90U (37 inch, 1080p, w DVI input). The size is right, and ultimately I want to run my computer into it via a DVI run through the wall so that I can use a wireless keyboard/mouse to have TV access in my living room.

With that in mind:

A) What is the best way to accomplish this run? I'll probably need 50 feet - I've seen mention of DVI over fiber, unsure about that. The 50 foot DVI cables i've seen are pretty pricey.

2) I'm thinking about hanging the tv on the wall - are there any suggestions on how to do a clean install with respect to all the cables for power, components, etc?

3) Any comments about that particular TV?

4) There was also a post about HD movies on DVD, I assume you need a special DVD player such as blue-ray in order to view those?

Thanks !

Kevin

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Armour666    0

Armour666
I didnt see the modle HDCP complient witch could present a problem if you want to use HD DVD on the set , It's still up in the air on how ridgid they will enforce it. HDCP would requier a complient Video card for your computer if you want to play back HD content.

This is a pain in the ass to say the least because most TV's are still not selling with HDCP just another DRM scheame to controle the consumer if you play back HD content to a non HDCP moniter it will down grad the resloution to DVD quality. this is dependedt of the flag on the content you want to play back so it's can vary by movie to movie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDCP
SO this one time at band camp.....

"Of all the things I've lost I miss my mind the most."

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

justinb138    0

justinb138
Quote

HDCP would requier a complient Video card for your computer if you want to play back HD content.



Most medium to high-end PC video cards ($150+) are now HDCP compliant, especially the Nvidia line, which are the most popular.

Edit: The new ATI XT1900 Pro is a great card for about $200 and is HDCP compliant. ;)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

DSE    5

DSE
Quote

I didn't want to stray the other thread too much from it's intended purpose, so for all you LCD TV/HDTV buffs, a few questions:

1) I'm looking at the Sharp 37D90U (37 inch, 1080p, w DVI input). The size is right, and ultimately I want to run my computer into it via a DVI run through the wall so that I can use a wireless keyboard/mouse to have TV access in my living room.

Bear in mind that anything smaller than 40" is displaying scaled-down 1080. Native 1080 resolves at 46" and larger. Depending on the scaling ability of the display (and I don't know this particular display) it may or may not look great with BD (Blu-ray) input.

With that in mind:

A) What is the best way to accomplish this run? I'll probably need 50 feet - I've seen mention of DVI over fiber, unsure about that. The 50 foot DVI cables i've seen are pretty pricey.
50 foot DVI isn't that pricey, but you'll do better with component over that distance. HDMI goes 60' with no signal loss, and is the new standard, plus regardless of what HDCP does in the future, you should be OK via HDMI.

2) I'm thinking about hanging the tv on the wall - are there any suggestions on how to do a clean install with respect to all the cables for power, components, etc?
Run a small cable trough either inside the wall (easily done with 2" cable housing lubricated inside) or run it outside the wall with snap cover. The 2" requires you cut a hole the size of a standard ulility box at both floor and display heights, run the cable, and use bat-wing utility boxes to hold the host terminating box. This is the most invisible, but least accessible means of installing the cables.

3) Any comments about that particular TV?

4) There was also a post about HD movies on DVD, I assume you need a special DVD player such as blue-ray in order to view those?
BD requires a BD player to view BD movies, yes. It's "special" indeed, but BD is where the future of DVD delivery is going over the next 7-10 years, just like DVD overtook VHS nearly 8 years back. You'll likely end up with a BD player in the near future if you're a tech geek, and you'll end up with one in the next year if you're not a tech geek.
if you're interested, I wrote a semi-related article for Studio Magazine last year on this subject.
http://www.vasst.com/search.aspx?text=1080 It might be helpful understanding the subject bit?

Thanks !

Kevin

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

DSE    5

DSE
Quote

So you are betting on BlueRay and not HD-DVD huh?



Absolutely.
BD was chosen by virtually all manufacturers because it's the long-term solution. It's also standard on PS3, and has a higher flexibility than does HD-DVD. HD-DVD wouldn't even exist if Bill Gates didn't have a personal issue with Sony, and if Microsoft hadn't signed on with Toshiba. Even Toshiba is making BD devices.
Pioneer's VP of marketing had a great line..."We're sticking with BD, because we needed to make an investment in the future, not an investment on what can come to market first."
Consider that BD can hold up to (so far) 7 layers, giving it a total capacity of over 200GB of storage at seek times of 70ms or faster. HD-DVD can't touch that in it's most wild aspirations. If it weren't for HDCP issues, we'd see BD as the standard already, but even that said, there are more BD movies available right now, today, than there are HD-DVD movies.
Add to that the fact that Sony, Time-Warner own most of the media in the world, and they're both the big proponents of BD, they're likely not going to license their content to HD-DVD, so they've got a serious market control.
Next, consider that there are several BD desktop burners available now, but no HD-DVD burners that are accessible to content creators.
There are several BD authoring solutions ranging from $88.00 to $50K available as well.
It was a tough decision for our post-house, because HD-DVD is here, now, ready to rock in almost all aspects except for the desktop burner, which we don't care much about. We've been sending in DLT masters for years anyway. But...BD is (to the insiders of the industry) the winner of this ridiculous circus that many of us experienced back in the days of VHS vs Beta, 1630 vs CD, 44.1 vs 48k audio, CD+R, CD-R, DVD+R, DVD-R.
Of course, we *could* be wrong....I was wrong about DVD+R....But that wasn't an expensive mistake. BD authoring at the professional end is.
God, did I really type all that?:$

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

grue    1

grue
BZZZZt

THe 37D90U is in fact a 1080p panel.

As for DVI vs HDMI... they're the same thing in terms of video. The only difference is that HDMI can carry audio, DVI cannot. The connector is physically different for that reason, but there are adapters. If you'd like to see one, look behind my computer ;)


(assuming DVI-D, not DVI-A, which is the bastard child of video connectors)
cavete terrae.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Icon134    0

Icon134
Quote

You are partially correct. And you are also thinking of Beta vs VHS. :D

yep... but the industry also sells a lot of videos to a lot of guys and the guys are usually the ones picking out the A/V systems in a household... :ph34r:
Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

DSE    5

DSE
Quote

BZZZZt

THe 37D90U is in fact a 1080p panel.

As for DVI vs HDMI... they're the same thing in terms of video. The only difference is that HDMI can carry audio, DVI cannot. The connector is physically different for that reason, but there are adapters. If you'd like to see one, look behind my computer ;)


(assuming DVI-D, not DVI-A, which is the bastard child of video connectors)



It is *not* a 1080p panel. Physically impossible. It can display a 1080 signal, but that doesn't give it the requisite 1920 x 1080 pixels in a horizontal/vertical measurement. Somwwhere, those pixels are rescaled up or down.
Video resolves at a rate of 72dpi in terms of how the image is "drawn" or measured on a plasma or LCD panel. Do the math. I cover this topic at length in my HD book; "HDV: What You NEED to Know".
1080 HD is broadcast in a non-square pixel aspect ratio of 1.333. That image in native format, requires a native display size of 59.6" for native pixel display, no horizontal or vertical compensation. It requires a display size of 51.6" if based on horizontal resolution-only, and a whopping size of 68.8" if you're basing on vertical resolution of the format.
720p is broadcast and displayed as square pixels-only, and has a fixed size of 46" for native display. Anything outside of those four size parameters is scaled at some level.
Any of those sizes can accept either a 720p or 1080i/p signal, but will scale one or the other accordingly.
DVI isn't the same as HDMI, HDMI has a scalable protocol which DVI doesn't have. We're now in the third protocol of HDMI. HDMI can carry a higher voltage level and instruction set that DVI cannot carry. However, due to backwards compatibiliy, HDMI can easily be converted to DVI via a small converter plug. Converting DVI to HDMI doesn't give you the addiitonal benefits (or detriments) of HDMI, but it is still convertible/compatible.
On the semi-professional broadcast side, HDMI is replacing HD/SDI as the transport medium, which makes HDMI even more development-dependent even though it's carrying an 8 bit stream in a 10 bit package (the last 2 bits are set to zero).
Back to topic, the quality of the display is of course, very important. More important, is the quality of the scaler built into the display. If it's poor quality, when it accepts a 1080i/p signal and downverts/scales to display size, it may or may not look great. Conversely, 720p is upscaled on displays larger than 46", and depending on the scaler, it may or may not look great. There are simple algorithms and complex algorithms used in scaling both up and down, and cost is a significant factor in which is chosen for various displays by manufacturers. Sony SXRD is incredible, Polaroid displays of equal dims are not. Price diff? About $1500.00.
Sony is losing bucks, according to most industry commentators, by putting BD in the PS3 to continue to batten down the hatches of BD vs HD-DVD, and it's a smart move, because it makes the PS3 the most affordable and accessible DVD display device with true 1080i/p output, and doesn't require the tech geek to have multiple boxes for game playing and DVD viewing.
When you are looking at displays in the store:
Be sure you're seeing 720p or 1080i/p content on the display, or that the salesperson can tell you what you're looking at. Consider investing 24.99 in your favorite DVD in BD format, and taking it to the store with you so you have a baseline to establish when viewing. Find a few critical scenes with high contrast/high motion to look at on each display.
Find out if the display accepts:
HDMI
Component
DVI
Firewire/USB2 is a plus, but not a necessity. Accepting camera mem cards ie; SD/QD/CF cards is a plus too.
Hopefully the device accepts more than one HDMI input. Imagine unplugging your DVD player each time you want to view video from your 1080 HDMI camcorder that you'll likely eventually own. Sony has 5 units with HDMI on them; Panasonic has 2, JVC has 4, and Canon has 1. It will become more common, so it's just as easy to have 2 HDMI inputs so you're not decoupling/reconnecting your DVD player.
If you live above 5k MSL, be sure that the display has a solid warranty if you're buying plasma. Plasma burns out faster at high altitudes. They're also significantly noisier. There are specific models made for high altitude use, BTW.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

grue    1

grue
Quote




It is *not* a 1080p panel. Physically impossible. It can display a 1080 signal, but that doesn't give it the requisite 1920 x 1080 pixels in a horizontal/vertical measurement.



Wanna bet? Go look at the specs. The physical size of the display does NOT dictate the resolution, unless you're making the utterly incorrect assumption that all pixels are the same size. You can buy a 2560 x 1600 30" panel if you're willing to spend the money.


Is there anything else you want me to prove you wrong about, or can we call it a day?
cavete terrae.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

DSE    5

DSE
you're right, pixels are different dims. However, for purposes of broadcast measurement, we refer to a 72 dpi benchmark (although dpi has no value in actual resolution)
Did you prove me wrong? Nope, you just applied a perspective that is marketing based, rather than reality based. Similar to how Panasonic claims 1920 x 1080 resolution from their HVX camcorders, stemming from a 960 x 540 imager. Ignorant buyers of the camera think they're getting one thing, but those that work with it understand what's taking place. It's all in what's displayed, and what's recorded that matters. Not in what is potential.
Native pixel count from point to point is what matters, not what they're contained in.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
0
Go To Topic Listing