Still possible to get a good, large 1080p TV?

[hornetstinger]

I must have misunderstood, I have a humax fox t2 (free), I would use it on auto, so it would send the original uncompressed format direct to the 4k tv for upscaling,
(and I would be connecting the hdmi1.4 from the humax to the hdmi2.0 on the 4k tv). ... so there is no practical problem exploiting a 4k TV ?

Equally you could send 1080p from your existing gaming machine to a 4k tv ?


Also - I recently found 1080p tv PQ is better if you let the tv dnla access the original compressed stream on the humax, as I commented in another thread.

No that'll look bad as non native res and scaled up.

 

[VincentHanna]

It doesn't look that bad

PS4 and Xbox are only 1080p and look fine.

TVs are a lot better at scaling up HD than a PC monitor. It's one of the reasons they cost a lot more.

 

[hornetstinger]

Yes it does. It's like using 1280x800 on my 1920x1080 monitor then let the monitor scale up. It's look horrid.

Guess you're used to console graphics.. :-/

 

[jpaul]

Yes it does. It's like using 1280x800 on my 1920x1080 monitor then let the monitor scale up. It's look horrid.

as he says

TVs are a lot better at scaling up HD than a PC monitor. It's one of the reasons they cost a lot more

so sending 1280 to a 4K tv will look fine -

For a panasonic fhd tv anyway, it scales much better (eg 576/720) than my humax fox free-view box, and the image is best if I give the TV the original compressed video stream (mpeg2/4), since, as well as the scaling, there are some superior tv mpeg noise reduction algorithms
I now watch live freeview on the TV's tuner not on the humax box, as I used to.

 

[Armageus]

Why would 1080P look worse upscaled to 4k than it would on a native 1080P screen? it is simply pixel doubling in both directions (i.e. so 4 pixels for every 1 in the source). 720P should also upscale well, as it is just 3x the source

That was one of the reasons why TV "4k" is only 3840 × 2160 rather than 4096 × 2160 for example,

 

[jpaul]

Evolution of the panel technology at 4K (contrast, reliability ?), with increased processing power for good upscaling (4K is after all 2x 1080P, so the upscale of SD channels should not be any worse than a 1080p) means PQ should be improved, and a thus a 4K better value for money than a last generation 1080p, even 20% cheaper.

it won't look worse, we agree

 

[VincentHanna]

Yes it does. It's like using 1280x800 on my 1920x1080 monitor then let the monitor scale up. It's look horrid.

Guess you're used to console graphics.. :-/

Lol

Yeah I've got dual Titan X's for "console graphics"....

If 1080p HD looked that bad on 4k TVs, Blu-ray's would be unwatchable.

 

[Armageus]

Yes it does. It's like using 1280x800 on my 1920x1080 monitor then let the monitor scale up. It's look horrid.

Last time I checked 1920 doesn't divide by 1200. Unlike 4k which divides perfectly.

 

[glitch]

Looks like I have a choice of two, if I’m going down the route of buying new.

In the Sony corner is the Bravia 49WE753 @ £590, which has a Triluminous display and HDR but a bloody silly external PSU brick.

And in the Panasonic corner is the TX49ES500B @ £499 which has Adaptive Backlight Dimming, no HDR but a normal figure-8 plug that goes in the back of the TV.

HDR would be nice as I have a PS4, so I’d assume the screen would support that output? But the PSU annoys me and there’s no easy way to hide it behind the TV once wall mounted.

But... is the Panasonic the better quality screen, with its ABD? And it’s £100 cheaper.

I’m trying to find a store with both on display so I can see them side-by-side, but that is proving... tricky.

 

[hornetstinger]

Last time I checked 1920 doesn't divide by 1200. Unlike 4k which divides perfectly.

I watch videos of many different resolutions, they all have to be scaled up to 1080p.