home
products
contribute
download
documentation
forum
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
All posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
HTPC Projects
Hardware
Displays
Choosing an LCD tv
Contact us
RSS
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="knutinh" data-source="post: 95770" data-attributes="member: 14776"><p>I am a bit uncertain here, but the test was done with still-images with plenty of high-frequency content. And apparently it is in line with previous tests on the limit of the eye to resolve details. I was under the impression that once you cross that line, adding more spectral detail gives exactly no difference regardless of content.</p><p></p><p>I agree that this "visual resoulution limit" should be higher for textual content than typical video content simply because text typically contains more high-frequency content than video.</p><p></p><p>But once that line is crossed, it should be impossible to spot any difference between true 1080p material, and 1080p computer images that are scaled down to a 768p screen of similar quality. Agree?</p><p></p><p>Philips are expensive and theyve got that silly back-lighting. But they are at the forefront of video dsp for tv use. Sadly, most of that dsp power will sit idle when you are using purely HTPC as a source, but it may come to good use if you want to watch poor-quality analog cable tv (and many lcd buyers actually do that).</p><p></p><p>What is "logos"?</p><p></p><p></p><p>One forum user has the Amoi 37" 1:1pixel 1080p display. It will do 50Hz and 60Hz, not shure if it can do nx24Hz thou. And given its price, it is surely worse than alternatives mentioned by you when it comes to other things like contrast etc.</p><p></p><p>-k</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="knutinh, post: 95770, member: 14776"] I am a bit uncertain here, but the test was done with still-images with plenty of high-frequency content. And apparently it is in line with previous tests on the limit of the eye to resolve details. I was under the impression that once you cross that line, adding more spectral detail gives exactly no difference regardless of content. I agree that this "visual resoulution limit" should be higher for textual content than typical video content simply because text typically contains more high-frequency content than video. But once that line is crossed, it should be impossible to spot any difference between true 1080p material, and 1080p computer images that are scaled down to a 768p screen of similar quality. Agree? Philips are expensive and theyve got that silly back-lighting. But they are at the forefront of video dsp for tv use. Sadly, most of that dsp power will sit idle when you are using purely HTPC as a source, but it may come to good use if you want to watch poor-quality analog cable tv (and many lcd buyers actually do that). What is "logos"? One forum user has the Amoi 37" 1:1pixel 1080p display. It will do 50Hz and 60Hz, not shure if it can do nx24Hz thou. And given its price, it is surely worse than alternatives mentioned by you when it comes to other things like contrast etc. -k [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
HTPC Projects
Hardware
Displays
Choosing an LCD tv
Contact us
RSS
Top
Bottom