What is the difference between 480i and 1080i

But higher resolutions will be more expensive too. It is best to select the optimal resolution according to your needs. Please note that while resolution is not the only factor for clearer and sharper images, it is definitely an important factor.

When you are selecting a resolution, you should take other factors in consideration like the quality of content you are watching, the position at which you are watching and the distance between you and the screen. The numbers in the resolution for 4K and 8k in the image are switched. Nice article by the way. Would prefer if my comment is not public. Of course, your contents cleared many concepts regarding pixels rather than little doubt with the mentioned issue. Quick Summary show.

Itechtics Staff Itechtics staff is a team of technology experts led by Usman Khurshid. We verify everything we write so that our users can be sure to trust us in everything we write. The idea behind this process is to insure the fluid nature of the perceived motion a field contains half the lines found in a frame ; One of the fields is shown first, then, and with rapid succession, the second field from the same frame is shown.

It is important to point out that the second field of the first frame, and at a certain instant, may appear to be merged with the first field of the second frame. With that sense, if an upper field is shown first, the second field will naturally be a lower one, and so on.

Not to mention that the encoding becomes hard since the coder is never able to work with a full-frame. There is no i. The reason I recommend using p for recording is to greatly simplify the edition process when every frame is complete with no interlacing throwing out every other line at the end is easier than creating the missing lines if you need them and you have some extra resolution to work with so you can for example zoom the image slightly without making the result look blurry.

These are the parts that I found in the answers and comments here that I think need some explanation:. I think that progressive scanning is indeed better in every respect, but if we are not talking theoretically about the idea of interlacing but specifically about p and i standards as used today, then one has to take into account the fact that i is often required for TV broadcasting and converting p to i would result in jerky motion.

Again, yes, progressive is better than interlaced all other things being equal, but progressive video with frame rate that is two times smaller than the field rate of interlaced video which is the case with p and i is something very different, especially if interlaced video with high field rate is required for TV broadcasting and the high field rate cannot be reproduced from progressively recorded material with lower frame rate. For LCD all lines are always displayed, for CRT displays usually much less than half of of the lines are displayed at any given time which is equally true for both i and p.

This is what I consider the best resource on the subject of field-based aka interlaced or interleaved and frame-based aka progressive-scan video:. Have something to add to the explanation? Sound off in the the comments. Want to read more answers from other tech-savvy Stack Exchange users?

The point of buying a progressive-scan DVD player is that there are some cases where looking at the video stream alone isn't enough to make the right deinterlacing choices -- the MPEG2 flags aren't passed over your video cables.

Also, their overall output quality tends to be a lot higher than cheapo players that only do s-video. Not really. Interlacing was invented as a way to maintain the appearance of smooth motion while requiring less bandwidth. What you're losing is half of your vertical sharpness.

Things like straight lines and text will look much much better at p. As previously suggested, your TV is most likely de-interlacing. I recently joined the progressive scan 'revolution' and it's definitely worth it. The difference is immense.