Why 1080p Is A Magic Number (And Letter)
January 24th, 2005 | by Mark Fleischmann
Scan through coverage of the recent Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas—a city I loathe with all my heart and soul, but never mind that—and you'll see the mysterious recurrence of four numerals and a letter. By the first day of the show, several manufacturers were boasting that their next-generation video displays would support the 1080p signal format.
The list included not only established brand names like JVC, LG, Samsung, Sharp, Toshiba, and Vidikron but also up-and-coming names like Optoma, Syntax, and Westinghouse—and I've undoubtedly missed a few. Evidently all these companies believe 1080p is the next big thing in HDTV. But what exactly is 1080p and why is it worth bragging about?
Let's cut to the chase: It's the highest of high-definition signal formats, with 1080 vertical pixels by 1920 horizontal pixels, and uses progressive scanning. There are no 1080p signal sources yet—at least, none available to consumers—but it's still handy as a picture-enhancing upconversion format. If you know what I'm talking about, you might as well skip the rest of the column and click on "discuss this article." For the rest of you, I'll generate some more words, as I so often do.
The DTV standard used in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico is named ATSC, after the Advanced Television Systems Committee, the industry-led group that originated it. ATSC allows resolution as high as 1080 by 1920 pixels, but only in an interlaced format. That means the picture is scanned in two passes, or "fields," each lasting 1/60th of a second. The first pass leaves blank spaces between lines, which are filled in by the second pass. Because each field takes 1/60th of a second, and there are two of them, 1080i actually needs 1/30th of a second to convey a full frame—it is a 30-frames-per-second medium. Fixed-pixel displays don't need to use scan lines but approximate the same thing in dots.
The upside of interlaced scanning is that it conserves bandwidth while still providing more than two million pixels onscreen (1080 times 1920 equals 2,073,600). The ATSC adopted interlacing for the 1080-line format specifically to fit over-the-air HDTV into the same 6MHz bandwidth as an analog TV channel (though 1080i also travels via cable and satellite). The downside of interlacing is that it induces motion artifacts and other forms of distortion. The best example would be a horse race. With interlacing, the horses' legs become a blur.
Post Your Comment...Comments
ralph on Sep 15th, 2005 at 9:18 AM:
Good info. If I have it right, tv's that convert 1080I to 1080p is somewhat a waste in that both is 2Mp
display and both will be presented to
viewer in 1/30th of a sec.
Or will the upconvert store both frames of interlace and then present the picture in 1/60th of a sec. If the latter -live broadcast would be one frame delayed from live,but could
present a complete picture in 1/60 sec. If so, resulting in 2Mp picture and no bluring.
Steve Flambert on Dec 25th, 2005 at 2:04 AM:
What? "Anythings better than analoque television"...maybe in the states that can be true, but here in the UK?
Since going over to sky tv digital and looked at the UK Freeview digital system, give me analoque everytime. The main thing with digital is the appauling problem of pixilization on scene change and any movement. I know this is usually a problem of trying to preserve bandwidth, but is it the way of the future. Some DVD releases the picture looks as if it was created on Deluxe paint IV with 16 bit resolution! If this is the way of the future then bring back Analogue with its infinite resolution! When off-line editing I use low resolution, but I do not expect my TV transmissions to use the same.
nora on Oct 24th, 2006 at 6:38 PM:
I can't decide between a 720P 40" LCD Samsung or the Sharp 1080P 42" LCD anybody have any feedback for me. Thanks
Joe on Oct 26th, 2006 at 9:53 PM:
There's something to keep in mind with 1080p, and a few things to note.
There's two generally accepted forms of 1080p: 1080p @ 24FPS/Hz and 1080p @ 60FPS/Hz. (Hz = Hertz, or one display cycle; typically equivilent to frames per second)
That being said, much film is 24 FPS Having a display capable of natively displaying 1920x1080@24Hz would be adventagous for displaying media that is directly transferred from film. You wouldn't have to do any tricks to fit the 24 fps into a 60 fps display cycle, or by introducing interlacing.
However, 1080p60 is more useful. Consider a computer system, such as an "HTPC" (Home Theater PC) which is basically just a PC connected to a TV. Usually you'd have some sort of tuner in the PC to perform TiVo-like functions, but you could also just use it to play videos and games. Since computers output in progressive frames on any normal PC display and at high frame-rates, 1080p60 is a perfect match. Your games will play at high resolution and high frame rates with no interlacing issues, and any media player has a lot of frames to play with to make things look good on the TV.
New Blu-Ray players will be able to output in 1080p for the best quality picture, and even the Xbox360 (feature announced) as well as the upcoming PS3 will output in 1080p if available.
While it's true that over-the-air and cable/satellite video will likely be stuck in 1080i land (which is fine, 1080i is perfectly acceptable for it, and looks great) you will have a use for 1080p some day. It's not just marketing hype; it's an ability that many, many people have been asking for since the introduction of non-CRT 1080 displays.
That's my 2.
Joe on Oct 26th, 2006 at 9:56 PM:
ps Nora: Go with the Sharp 46" LCD. The 42 isn't the same generation LCD as the new 46 and 52, although it's still a nice TV. I'd save up and get the 46.
Otherwise, the Sharp 42 is fine and Sharp support for me has been really great. (I had a lot of issues with my last Sharp LCD TV, but Sharp took care of me and that's all that matters.)
JTK on Jan 16th, 2007 at 7:51 PM:
Great article Mark! Is there anything in the near future for longer product life in DLP(better/cheaper lamps), LCD (anything close to Philips Zero Black Dot Effect), or plasma (burn-in protection)?
Comment on this article
Please keep your comments relevant to this article. Email addresses are not displayed, they are only required to verify you are human.
When you submit your comment, an email will be sent to your email address with a confirmation link. Once you have clicked on that confirmation link your comment will be posted.
HTML is not allowed.

Sergio on Sep 12th, 2005 at 7:09 AM:
I've heard that the first DLP based home theatre projectors featuring 1080p chip by TI will be shown at CEDIA Indianapolis this month. Is this true according to your information, and who is the manufacturer?
Sergio