On Jun 27, 8:00 am, Mark Lloyd wrote:


You may not have read all of what I wrote. I did see a huge
difference. It was just that the majority of it was with something
other than spatial resolution.

I read it and here it is. I stated that an HD picture puts to shame
regular NTSC:

Yes, some will be worse off, but not by much. There is a small
minority that receive NTSC today over the air and don't accept the
value proposition of having an HD picture that puts to shame what they
are watching now,


And you responded with:

"Strangely, I find the difference (HD resolution compared to 480
lines)
to be nearly insignificant. There is a considerable difference, but
most of that is in ATSC, rather than HD. "

Which perhaps you could explain? Certainly if you look at an HD
image, the image detail is far superior. If you look at a flower, on
std TV there is no detail, on HD, you can see the pollen and small
hair like plant material. . And that is directly attributable to
the fact that it is either 720P or 1080i, both of which have more
lines of resolution. That was why they went to higher resolution in
the first place. No different than looking at a picture on a VGA
computer screen vs XGA, where you also saw a big improvement in
detail.

At least it appears we agree on one thing, and that is that HD is a
big improvement over std TV.