It wasn't me who suggested HDTV was ever 1200x1920. BTW, a lot of computer monitors can display the progressive TV formats with a simple analog component video to RGBHV converter box and the displayed format is unchanged. I am doing this now with one of the Dell P991s I bought. I have it connected to the 480P analog component outputs on my Sony DVD recorder.... jco
-----Original Message----- From: Gaurav Aggarwal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 10:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Modern PC hardware, Was: Re: Full Frame There are two types of standards: one for TV and one for computers. A lot of flatpanel monitors can handle both these but not all. Most TV can still handle only TV formats and most computer monitors cannot display TV formats. Let us distinguish these so that we do not misuse the terms and confuse everyone: There is no HDTV (uncompessed or otherwise) that is 1920x1200. HDTV is often referred to as 1920x1080 or 1280x720. The TV formats are as follows: 480i or NTSC: 720x480 interlaced 480p: 720x480 progressive 576i or PAL: 720x576 interlaced 576p: 720x576 progressive 720p: 1280x720 progressive 1080i: 1920x108i interlaced In addition, 720p and 1080i have two versions for 60 hz (Japan, US) and 50 hz (Europe). Where have you guys heard of 1920x1200 and down-conversion? I am pretty sure there is no such thing. Computer formats and sizes are a different story. They go as VGA: 640x480 SVGA: 800x600 XGA: 1024x768 SXGA: 1280x1024 UXGA: 1600x1200 WSXGA: 1650/x1050 WUXGA: 1920x1200 (if you refer to this then this is a computer format and not HDTV) Hope this clears some of the doubts. Gaurav On 11/12/05, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Or you just might be wrong, that's a third and most > likely possibility because it wouldn't make > any sense to do be doing those things. > interlacing doesn't distort or crop which > is very different animal.. > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 9:31 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Modern PC hardware, Was: Re: Full Frame > > > Well, given that Uncompressed HD is 1920x1200 and 1080i is 1920x1080, > they must be doing one of the two (note that they're also interlacing > the signal at the same time, since straight uncompressed HD is also > Progressive-Scan) > > -Adam > > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > >I don't follow that logic. you cant downconvert > >1920x1200 to 1920x1080(HDTV) without either cropping > >or stretching, neither of which would be acceptable. > >jco > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 9:11 PM > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: Re: Modern PC hardware, Was: Re: Full Frame > > > > > >1080i is downconverted from 1920x1200, which is what uncompressed HD > >is, one of the big advantages of the 23" panels is they display > >uncompressed HD pixel-for-pixel. There's a reason I specified > >uncompressed HD. > > > >You are correct about the pixel format, I got old-fashioned NTSC > >mixed up with HD for a second. > > > >-Adam > > > > > > > > > >
