Is 720p Real High Definition ?
 

Not according to Sony. Sony says real high definition starts with 1080i. 720p is only extended definition. What about the progressive scan capabilities of 720p? Sony says the real future is 1080p and 1080i is the stepping stone to 1080p so 720p is dying. Even 720p diehards like ABC Fox and ESPN will dump 720p in favor of 1080p.

Pretty hardline attitude isn't it ? Sony predicts they will have a 90 percent market share in HDV. Bigger numbers sell so does JVC have any bigger numbers to offer ?

Is 720p Real High Definition?

Well now, that depends on who you ask and how you frame the question, doesn't it? ;-)

Obviously, this topic has already been beaten-to-death around here, so I don't see any need to go open that can-o-worms again.....but I'm responding in this thread to ask you a question: WHERE did you see/hear/read SONY say that "real high definition starts with 1080i" and that "the real future is 1080p..."???? I mean, maybe I just missed it somewhere (I'm certainly not omniscient, so it's quite possible I missed it) but so far all I've seen/heard/read is SONY touting the 1080i capability of thier new HDV cams, rather than speaking out against 720p.

So did SONY actually SAY those things, or are you just inferring that as an assumption?

720p
 

Personally I prefer 720p over 1080i, but it only stands to reason that 1080p will be even that much better then 720p. Eventually I think people will choose 1080p, but where does that leave 1080i?

Typical marketing bruhaha. 720p is higher definition than 480p, and certainly 480i, and is an HD standard, regardless of what any company says.

Properly displayed with suitable bandwidth:
at 24p, 1080p looks better than 720p
at 30p, 1080p looks better than 720p.
at 60i, 1080i ais very comparible both spatially and temporally to 60p 720p.

In my opinion, people should be striving for 1080(i/p) content, as it delivers superior or equal performance to 720p in all cases. The 1080 format is inherently more expensive due to higher bandwidth requirements and the higher pixel density of the displays.

Considering all the content I actually am interested in watching for picture quality is recorded at 24p or 30p, I couldn't care less about 60i/p, and for me that makes the 1080 format a winner.

-Steve

1080i vs. 720p...or if you look at it reduced to standard definition that we are all used to seeing ....480i vs. 320p.

Would you rather work with 480i footage or 320p?

I don't know that Sony did or didn't say that HD starts with 1080, however...
HD standards were set by NHK. NHK defined HD as 1080 in 1971. In 1987, the FCC adopted the NHK-submitted standard, and further defined it. Since NHK is a Japanese broadcaster, since Sony is a Japanese-owned company...it would stand to reason that Sony would make a comment along those lines.
No one can argue that 1080p isn't the most superior format available in our sight today, unless they're just simply blind. Arguments will always be had of 720p vs 1080i, and they're very legitimate arguments. On the other hand, if the focus is put on 720p, then it leaves yet another leap in the reasonably near future, or consumers will have to deal with scaled down vid. Neither is very appealing to anyone.

JVC argues that 1080p is not the most superior high definition format available today but rather 1500i. And yes 1500i televisions have been available for years not as plasmas which would be too expensive to use but rather as cathode ray projectors a relatively inexpensive technology. These televisions give the full 2560 x1440i resolutions and as no native programming exists they by using Digital image scaling technology and 3 dimensional interpolation upconvert all signals to 1500i. This is no different and no more radical than the 1080p televisions that are appearing on the market that lack 1080p native programming but upconvert. So it would seem that 1080i is not the only format that is future proof 720p is also future proof and natively upconvertable to the new real high definition specifications.

1440i broadcasting
 

Actually 1440i broadcasting could be legally done in the united states. Since with digital television involves the use of multiplexing two 720p signals would be broadcasted. on 2 subchannels. Each image would be identical except for the fact that the pixels in one image would be offset from the other image by half a pixel. an ultra high definition television would then combine the 2 fields and create a super high definition picture. A single HDV camera using pixel shifting technology could generate the two fields

I feel its a bit of a shame that 720 was brought in. Mostly due to the fact that technology moves so fast... i cant understand why we'd chose to take baby sidesteps when we could have easily just went 1080p50/60 and had less consumers get pissed off after their 720 displays last only 6 months (and yes irealise "if it works and does the job its not absolete" but thats beside my point).

Having said that, i'm not knocking the format and its benifits in itself. But i'd much rather take a decent step forward and get a much more solid benifit or "upgrade": 1080p50/60, 1:1PAR! AFter all.. its easy to take away 'material' (downconvert anyone?) then it is to create or have to add it (spot the person that works in the design/manufacturing industry :P).

So it makes me torn. On one hand 720p has the benifits of the future (progressive, high frame rate,higher quality). But just makes you go "argh doh" because the potential to save so much hassle and angst was just missed and seems to be a no-brainer decision (why not just go all the way?).

:)

"Actually 1440i broadcasting could be legally done in the united states. Since with digital television involves the use of multiplexing two 720p signals would be broadcasted. on 2 subchannels. "

And the point is?....Of course it could be done legally, but what's the point in even bothering to discuss it in this particular context or thread? We have 2 accepted/designated standards for delivery. Regardless of what JVC or anyone else argues/debates/puts forth, the bottom line is the ATSC isn't likely going to change anytime soon, and unlikely that broadcasters, manufacturers, or industry folks are open to other formats. Ubiquity. That's what counts these days.

So uh, I guess I'll just ask again.....

Tommy, where did you see/hear/read SONY say that "real high definition starts with 1080i" and that "the real future is 1080p..."? Did SONY actually say those things, or are you just inferring that as an assumption?

Actually there was a Sony representative on a Sony HDV Forum who touted the Sony hard line that stated " I suppose 720p could be called high definition but real high definition starts with 1080i which is the stepping stone to the ultimate standard 1080p".
I don't know if its included in Sony's product literature but their representatives are the most aggressive in the business and they have the market share that proves the effectiveness of their tactics.

The worst thing that can happen to a JVC owner is buyers remourse when he is told that 720p is not real high definition and that the format is dying in favor of 1080i and 1080p. Many JVC owners sold their cameras when the Sony camera was introduced and the same will happen when
Sony introduces a shoulder mounted camera.

So in order for the 720p format to stay alive it has to have room to grow. Broadcasters may not like any changes however in the Digital Cinematography business it is widely agreed that not even 1080p will have the resolution to replace 35mm film. Both 1440p and 2160p will be considered vialable cinematography formats. Not only do JVC home theater televisions support the 1440i format but the Apple 30" cinema display supports the 1440p format. And I bet had a lot of JVC camera owners known about the 1500i television they could have used that as way to upgrade their video camera rather than auctioning them off at E-Bay.

I think that the 720p format has a lot of chance for sucess if people realize that they are buying a camera that can be upgraded and can grow with future advances in technology.

Tommy,
I can tell you straight up that if a Sony rep posted this statement anywhere, he/she could be terminated for cause. Sony has a written, signed policy that employees cannot participate in communities at that particular level, nor make those kinds of comments. While Sony might posit in such a manner, I'd question someone who said they were a Sony rep making such a comment. Even as an independent contractor who does a LOT of work for Sony at 3 different sub-corp levels, I'm reasonably leashed in what I'm permitted to say and not say as a "representative" of the company. I for one, would surely love to see that post.
BTW, there IS NO Sony HDV forum. Never has been, never will be. Sony does not like, want, nor offer corporate-sponsored forums on any product except Sony software, and those forums existed for years before Sony bought Sonic Foundry. Sony has clamped those down very tightly as well.

720 just isn't a big jump up over PAL... it's, what, 75% more pixels? Nice, but that's about it. Certainly I can easily tell the difference between 720p and 1080i footage when they're displayed side-by-side or one after the other, though I'm not sure I could look at a single monitor and tell you whether it was displaying 720p or 1080i with more than about a 60% success rate (unless it was obviously interlaced :)).

Compared to NTSC, obviously it's a much larger improvement.

That's pretty much waht I've been thinking all along...that if anyone from SONY said something like as a representative of the company, they wouldn't be a representative for very long. LOL!

Of course, I certainly DO believe that someone who works for SONY could/would say that off-the-record. ;-)