125 HDTVs tested for resolution performance
The monoscope pattern is used to test for motion resolution.
(Credit: CNET)HDGuru.com has published a survey of the resolution capabilities of 125 high-definition televisions.
The survey was conducted by HDGuru's sole proprietor, Gary Merson, who subjected the sets to a variety of test patterns and recorded the results in a handy PDF table. The patterns tested for 1080i de-interlacing performance of both video and film-based sources, still resolution (bandwidth) and motion resolution.
The results of the tests make interesting reading for people who follow the evolution of HDTV technology. More TVs than ever are passing the de-interlacing tests, most 1080p TVs pass every line of 1080i and 1080p still resolution, and big differences emerge between TV technologies in terms of motion resolution. In general, Merson found that plasmas scored best on the motion resolution tests, 120Hz LCDs scored lower, and standard LCDs (along with one rear-projection DLP) the lowest. The overall motion resolution winner was Samsung's LN46A950, an LCD with 120Hz processing and LED backlighting.
I think it's important to understand, however, that resolution, while an important factor in HDTV picture quality, isn't as important as factors like black level (contrast ratio) and color accuracy. Yes, high-definition wouldn't be what it is without high resolution, but once you get to high-def, the ability of human perception to notice any additional resolution increases drops drastically, in my experience, and those other factors become much more important.
In many side-by-side tests using real program material such as Blu-ray movies and HDTV broadcasts, I've placed 50-inch plasma HDTVs next to one another--one with 1080p resolution and another with 1,366x768--and been unable to see any real difference in detail between the two. We've found it similarly difficult to perceive differences in motion resolution between two sets placed side-by-side viewing normal, non-test-pattern material. Conversely, side-by-side comparisons routinely reveal significant differences in black levels, color accuracy and saturation, viewing angle, uniformity, and video processing, such as noise reduction and de-judder.
That's not to say that resolution tests are worthless by any stretch, especially since different viewers have different levels of perception and may be more or less sensitive to resolution differences or to motion blur (in the form of insufficient motion resolution), for example. In fact, CNET conducts the same tests Merson does on HDTVs I review, and he deserves a lot of credit for pioneering their use and for giving buyers another measure by which to differentiate between scads of HDTVs. But I also believe undue emphasis has been placed on the importance of resolution by manufacturers, the press, and salespeople who should know better.
What do you think? How important is HDTV resolution to you compared with other picture quality factors? Are we just crying sour grapes or has resolution truly been overblown as a contributor to picture quality? Sound off below.
David Katzmaier reviews HDTVs for CNET. 
While resolution is important on performance, when it comes to HDTVs, color accuracy, black level and viewing angle have by FAR greater impact on image quality. Outside those it is virtually impossible to tell the difference when it comes to HDTV image quality.
In my experience viewing angle and black level are the two BIG ones. It is amazing the difference it makes. If you are not buying a projection, then, viewing angle is not as glaring.
If you want to wow your friends, pay attention to black levels and contrast ratios. Nothing will impress more than bright, colorful pictures. Unfortunately, the only way to really see it is a side-by-side comparison since there's no standard between companies.
- by montrealguy October 1, 2008 3:37 PM PDT
- Ok I just bought a SAMSUNG ln46580, I could not find any reviews on it anywhere and believe me I've checked! I was going for the 6 series at first because of the 120 HZ thing, but after looking at Sharp, Pioneer and all the others, a salesman showed me the 580 side by side with a Sharp( with 120 HZ) and a sam 650 all are 1080p. For the $700 or so difference I did not see much picture diff. so I bought it, Ihave had it a Whole week now and even after watching Hockey and NASCAR I am glad I did save the $700.00. I could see no reason for the 120HZ and with the money I saved I was able to buy a bluray player.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(9 Comments)As far as Cnet favoring samsung, maybe there is a good reason I have 3 PC monitors, 1 Microwave, 2 MP3 players and a washer and Dryer. All Samsung (no I do not work for them)