Plasmas & Rectangular pixels with MCE

[crayons]

Hello all,

I have looked but can't find a great deal of info on this... can anyone throw some light on it for me? ...

Seems like a lot of Plasmas have odd resolutions (by 16:9 standards) ... 1024x768, 1024x1080, etc.

What are the experiences running MCE with these? I am guessing that Video looks OK? (not as great as a high res display with square pixels though it would seem from Mike's sticky note on widescreens "rectangular pixels: keep walking"? Right?)

... but what about the MCE interface and particularly photos? If the PC thinks it's running at, say 1024x1080 and therefore assumes the display is nearly square don't the photos get all stretched?

Or... am I out of whack here? Perhaps you just tell the video driver you have a TV on the end of the HDMI cable and tell it to run at 1080 or 720 and not worry about the actual res?

[gibbo9000]

You have the two options covered pretty well:

Option1 > Send TV an HDTV signal and let the TV scalers sort out the rest. You will get pictures and photos in the right aspect, but get the standard TV overscan that will make the edges of Windows desktop fall off the screen (same happens with TV, but you don't notice). On some graphic driver software, talking to some TVs, overscan compensation at computer end fixes this.

Option 2 > Send TV a 'Resolution' (like 1280 x 720) and, if the TV scalers let it through as a pure resolution (doesn't always happen - TV frequently seizes and process as TV signal anyway), and it fits within the pixel layout of the screen, you get all the complexities you outline and out of aspect pictures if you have rectangular pixels. Hence Mike's warning.

Many (including me) prefer ideal of square pixels and 1:1 mapping through resolution, but it can be just too hard - or rectangular pixels screw it up. If you don't use Windows desktop it probably isn't worth the effort.

Gibbo

[GlenR]

Gibbo's given you the good oil. If your MCE is just for MCE (as mine is) tell the graphics card to treat the display as a HDTV and set it to 720p or 1080i. Don't worry about overscan or distorted desktop, just let the TV do the work.

[vlad]

My panel has 1024x1024 native resolution, but I am happy with it

[crayons]

Thanks everyone. That all makes sense. Reason I ask is that I currently have a Bravia X 1920x1080 that I am swapping for something because I'm sick of trying to find one without serious Mura issues (clouds and light areas) and it seems there are problems with all the 1080 LCD panels. Shame because 1:1 mapping on HDMI at this resolution is so crisp I am worried anything less is going to disappoint. Neighbour just bought a 1024x1080 plasma...think I'll take the lappy over and try it out.

[crayons]

Hmmm... so... just thinking about this... when we talk about TV image formats we're talking lines or rows... 576, 720, 1080... the Y axis as I would refer to it.

With each of these formats does it follow that there is a corresponding amount of X axis information? ... i.e. does 1080 actually have an increased amount of horizontal info = 1920 actual dots of information across? and for 720, roughly 1300 pixels of info? or is it less horizontally than that? Therefore it doesnt matter that a panel is, say, 1024x1080? i.e. on a 1920x1080 the information is stretched horizontally across more than one pixel anyway so they might as well be rectangular?

[gibbo9000]

Originally Posted by crayons

Hmmm... so... just thinking about this... when we talk about TV image formats we're talking lines or rows... 576, 720, 1080... the Y axis as I would refer to it.

With each of these formats does it follow that there is a corresponding amount of X axis information? ... i.e. does 1080 actually have an increased amount of horizontal info = 1920 actual dots of information across? and for 720, roughly 1300 pixels of info? or is it less horizontally than that?

Varies by broadcaster. Some useful info here

http://www.dba.org.au/index.asp?sectionID=15

Gibbo