|
Progressive is definetly better than Interlaced
An interlaced signal with 1080 lines per frame has an actual vertical resolution barely half that. While a progressive signal of 720 lines per frame has an actual vertical resolution of nearly 720
Interlaced image uses a bi-directional prediction(bleeding) mechanism to double its actual vertical size yielding the 1080 lines per frame. This method definetly decreases the bandwidth to transmit the signal but increases cpu usage by the system to actually de-interlace the source. Which can produce artifacts in the end result.
Comparing a 1080I to a 720p, 1080I does not have higher resolution than the 720P format, and it has all the well known interlace artifacts. There is no quality advantage in using 1080I, and there are no valid reasons not to use progressive scan
The idea that 1080I has higher resolution than 720P has been shown to be false. The resolution actually achieved in the interlaced system is far below the nominal 1080x1920.
The fact that some interlace advocates are still pushing this obsolete technology shows that their viewpoints cannot be based on facts, but is almost surely due only to their last attempt to make the already developed 1125-line(interlaced) production equipment the appropriate equipment to use as HDTV broadcasting
|