PS3 pricing announced
05-20-06 | 08:36 AM
#126
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Spiky
Then why make a new system at all? The Wii is just silly. I have no idea what Nintendo is doing. This may be the first system of their's that I don't buy.
05-20-06 | 09:07 AM
#127
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by Jimmy 345
You can so buy a current gen console. Buy an original Xbox. You get more games and some high definition ability. When you go to next generation it has to offer signifigant improvements over the previous generation. A new controller isn't enough. Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 are both true next gen consoles with a signfigantly improved gaming. Wii is just as crappy as its name.
And to those who responded to Jimmy 345, your comments DID NOT HELP. When you post something that leads to someone else posting something suspension-worthy in response, that puts YOU one step closer to a suspension. DO NOT BE AN INSTIGATOR. Many instigators have been suspended in the past; based solely on their posts, they could/would not have been suspended, but they were suspended due to the problems their posts caused.
namja
Moderator, DVD Talk Forums
05-20-06 | 10:25 PM
#129
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Bay Area
Actually it will be interesting to see how well the Wii is doing in Japan. With the high price point of PS3 they might go for Nintendo. It could end up like with the PSP and DS.
05-21-06 | 12:29 PM
#130
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Nintendo released their classic back catalogue of games on the DS for the first time on a handheld system and outshone the PSPs technical advantages. They don't have that trick to play in the main console war.
05-22-06 | 03:02 PM
#131
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by Jimmy 345
Of course my opinions are biased. They are my opinions and its how I feel. I was very unimpressed with the Wii. I think the graphics are crap. They look several steps below the real next gen consoles the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3. Ohh it has a different controller that makes up for its pitiful graphics. What are message boards except places to give our opinions.
Most of your posts though sound like you are spouting facts versus your opinions.
I think your problem is that you just need to state things as opinions and not as facts.
For example, dont say "1080p is better than 1080i"...say, "In my opinion, I think 1080p is better than 1080i". Then, tell us why you think that. Just my 2 cents.
05-22-06 | 03:35 PM
#132
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Boston, MA
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
For example, dont say "1080p is better than 1080i"...say, "In my opinion, I think 1080p is better than 1080i". Then, tell us why you think that. Just my 2 cents.
05-22-06 | 03:42 PM
#133
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: A far green country
Originally Posted by BobDole42
I hate to take Jimmy's side, but 1080p *is* better than 1080i, no question. Whether or not the PS3 will emerge the superior console and/or BR the winner of the format war is an entirely different (and, at this point, subjective) matter.
05-22-06 | 05:59 PM
#134
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Boston, MA
Originally Posted by RoboDad
No, actually it isn't, at least not as an interface mechanism. If the player or display device are not up to the task of performing the interlace/de-interlace steps, then yes, 1080p is better. But I can provide 100% assurance that on my 1080p TV, which does an excellent job of de-interlacing, the image I see is identical to the image that left the 1080p disc in my 1080i player.
05-22-06 | 06:26 PM
#135
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All things equal, 1080P is definitely superior to 1080i. Jimmy's assertation was that PS3, by mere fact that it is 1080P will be better than the 1080i Toshiba. Total apples and thumbtacks comparison, since not every 1080p presentation will be equal.
05-22-06 | 06:52 PM
#136
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: A far green country
Originally Posted by BobDole42
These threads are full of speculation and opinion, but this is one thing that shouldn't be subject to debate. 1080p is better than 1080i in the same way that 10 is a bigger number than 5. Of course, the quality of the DVDp, TV, scaler, etc. have a huge impact on the picture, but, from a purely technical standpoint, 1080p is the superior resolution, provided that the media is properly encode, the player is capable of outputting a high quality 1080p signal and the TV can display it.
05-23-06 | 08:21 AM
#137
Banned
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RoboDad
No, actually it isn't, at least not as an interface mechanism. If the player or display device are not up to the task of performing the interlace/de-interlace steps, then yes, 1080p is better. But I can provide 100% assurance that on my 1080p TV, which does an excellent job of de-interlacing, the image I see is identical to the image that left the 1080p disc in my 1080i player.
05-23-06 | 08:24 AM
#138
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 4,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Dallas, TX
Originally Posted by Jimmy 345
Since there are no 1080p disc players on the market how do you know that there will be no difference? Does your television have native 1080p inputs or is it just an upconverter?
05-23-06 | 10:21 AM
#139
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: A far green country
Originally Posted by Jimmy 345
Since there are no 1080p disc players on the market how do you know that there will be no difference? Does your television have native 1080p inputs or is it just an upconverter?
05-23-06 | 10:34 AM
#140
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Mpls, MN
Originally Posted by RoboDad
the image I see is identical to the image that left the 1080p disc in my 1080i player.
Unless you are like Cypher and just read the DVD directly.
05-23-06 | 10:38 AM
#141
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Mpls, MN
Originally Posted by Jimmy 345
Since there are no 1080p disc players on the market how do you know that there will be no difference? Does your television have native 1080p inputs or is it just an upconverter?
05-23-06 | 11:13 AM
#142
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: A far green country
Originally Posted by Spiky
I don't want to start this debate again, either. But I must point out that you have no way of verifying this. This is just more assumption because it looks so nice.
I'm not going to debate anything, because there is nothing to debate. Interlace artifacts are not impossible to see. If you can see them, then there is a problem. If you can't, then you can assume (with a high measure of confidence) that the image has been correctly de-interlaced to its original form.
But, if you won't believe me, perhaps you'll believe this review of Toshiba's player, that was posted to this forum not long ago.
Specifically, this quote:
In the last couple of days, several technical issues have been put to rest, at least for me. The first was the common accusation that the initial HD-DVD players like the Toshiba HD-A1 are deficient because they don't output "full 1080p" resolution, that they are "1080i only." I don't see this as a practical concern. All HD-DVD and Blu-ray discs will encode film-sourced material in full 1920x1080 progressive scan resolution at 24 frames per second, which is the film industry standard.
Unfortunately many folks are confusing 1080i acquisition with 1080i transmission. The primary reason we get interlacing artifacts in a 480i, 576i, or 1080i signal is that the frame was originally captured in interlaced format, with the odd scan lines and even scan lines being recorded at two different moments in time. When you reassemble two fields that are offset in time, you get jaggies, moire patterns, barber pole effects, and line twitter. That is not true of either HD-DVD or Blu-ray film transfers since the image is scanned progressively from a film frame that represents a single moment in time.
Therefore we would expect to see none of the common evidence of deinterlacing when watching HD-DVD or Blu-ray movies that are being transmitted via 1080i. Our first look at HD-DVD in 1080i confirms this expectation. After hours of viewing three different HD-DVD movies there is simply no evidence of any artifact that might be attributed to the fact that the signal was transmitted in 1080i format. The picture is as clean, stable, and as artifact-free as it could be. There is no visible defect in the image that would be eliminated by switching to 1080p transmission.
Unfortunately many folks are confusing 1080i acquisition with 1080i transmission. The primary reason we get interlacing artifacts in a 480i, 576i, or 1080i signal is that the frame was originally captured in interlaced format, with the odd scan lines and even scan lines being recorded at two different moments in time. When you reassemble two fields that are offset in time, you get jaggies, moire patterns, barber pole effects, and line twitter. That is not true of either HD-DVD or Blu-ray film transfers since the image is scanned progressively from a film frame that represents a single moment in time.
Therefore we would expect to see none of the common evidence of deinterlacing when watching HD-DVD or Blu-ray movies that are being transmitted via 1080i. Our first look at HD-DVD in 1080i confirms this expectation. After hours of viewing three different HD-DVD movies there is simply no evidence of any artifact that might be attributed to the fact that the signal was transmitted in 1080i format. The picture is as clean, stable, and as artifact-free as it could be. There is no visible defect in the image that would be eliminated by switching to 1080p transmission.
05-23-06 | 12:05 PM
#143
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Boston, MA
Originally Posted by RoboDad
People keep saying they don't want to start the debate again, just before they start the debate again.
I'm not going to debate anything, because there is nothing to debate. Interlace artifacts are not impossible to see. If you can see them, then there is a problem. If you can't, then you can assume (with a high measure of confidence) that the image has been correctly de-interlaced to its original form.
But, if you won't believe me, perhaps you'll believe this review of Toshiba's player, that was posted to this forum not long ago.
Specifically, this quote:
I'm not going to debate anything, because there is nothing to debate. Interlace artifacts are not impossible to see. If you can see them, then there is a problem. If you can't, then you can assume (with a high measure of confidence) that the image has been correctly de-interlaced to its original form.
But, if you won't believe me, perhaps you'll believe this review of Toshiba's player, that was posted to this forum not long ago.
Specifically, this quote:
05-23-06 | 02:44 PM
#144
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: A far green country
Originally Posted by Spiky
The real issue will not be the de-interlacing/interlacing. It will be upconverting the 1080p24 signal to 1080p60 found in most TVs, current or future. This will be true even when there are both 1080p outputs and inputs available. Hopefully some mfgrs will get smart and switch to 72Hz-capable TVs. They should also be capable of 60Hz to remain compatible with TV signals. It's really an obvious, fairly simple task for them to do this, the technology has been used in PC monitors for decades.
05-23-06 | 02:55 PM
#145
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: A far green country
Originally Posted by BobDole42
I have to agree with Spiky on this one. Until we can compare the pictures of a DVDp outputting 1080p natively vs. one that outputs 1080i, we have no way of verifying this.
Originally Posted by BobDole42
In the end, it may be a wash, with TVs with good interlacers performing just as well with 1080i content as 1080p content. But, for TVs that don't do a good job deinterlacing the 1080i signal, a DVDp that can pass the 1080p signal will likely be crucial to achieving the best PQ.
My only beef in this whole debate is the way almost everyone keeps saying that using a 1080p transmission of the signal will be better in every case. That claim is simply not true.
05-23-06 | 03:13 PM
#146
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Originally Posted by RoboDad
The only issue there would be that the players would also have to be aware of the 72 Hz frame rate. In a full 1080p environment with today's equipment, the player won't be sending a 1080p24 signal to the TV. It will be sending a 1080p60 signal, after already performing the frame rate conversion. So the player would have to be capable of either generating a 72p signal, or else suppressing any frame rate conversion, and sending the 24p signal, which would then be converted by the TV.
Last edited by Burnt Thru; 05-23-06 at 03:15 PM.
05-23-06 | 05:45 PM
#147
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Burnt Thru
DVD players have a set up screen where you can decide 4:3, widescreen, pan-and-scan, etc. Is there any reason there shouldn't be a similar set up on these next gen players? Perhaps an option to output at the frame rate encoded on disc (to allow for discs encoded at 24, 25, and 30 fps) and an option to output at only 60 (having performed pulldown in player) for TVs that can't handle any other type of signal. To be frank though this should never have become an issue with TVs, as my one already handles 50/60/100Hz. Shouldn't be any great shakes to add 72Hz in there as well for future models. Here's hoping, huh?
05-23-06 | 06:10 PM
#148
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: A far green country
Originally Posted by darkside
You can't watch a movie in 1080p/24. The screen flicker would drive you ape.
05-23-06 | 06:42 PM
#149
Banned
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 673
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think anyone would literally say that a 1080p and 1080i signal would be the same. That would truely be silly. 1080p is the True killer app for the next 5+ years. Anyone who says otherwise is in denial and fooling themselves.
05-23-06 | 06:47 PM
#150
Banned
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: NYC
Originally Posted by Blitz6Speed
I dont think anyone would literally say that a 1080p and 1080i signal would be the same. That would truely be silly. 1080p is the True killer app for the next 5+ years. Anyone who says otherwise is in denial and fooling themselves.
Last edited by digitalfreaknyc; 05-23-06 at 07:06 PM.