No, I’m not talking about your New Year’s resolution, I’m talking about the resolution you see when you look at your TV screen. For years we have been trying to achieve a crystal clear television picture, capable of looking like the real thing. Remember when we thought a better picture was purely a function of the picture tube? That seems like so long ago. Let’s talk resolution the way it is looked at today.

I have to start off by apologizing to my nephew Kendall. We had a conversation about this the other day and I defended my opinion in error. Sorry man.

One thing to know right off the bat is resolution can be stated in either lines or pixels.  Fore the purpose of this discussion think lines of resolution and leave the pixel count to your computer monitor.  It is important to not get too caught up in all this though.  I think it is best to understand a little and let your eye tell you the rest since what you see when you watch TV is where pleasure is derived from.

What you see on your TV screen is made up of scan lines which means the whole image isn’t actually put on the screen at one time.  Each line is put on the screen (horizontally) from top to bottom in one of two ways: interlaced scan or progressive scan. 

An interlaced scan is completed when the lines are split into two fields in which all of the odd numbered lines are displayed first and then all of the even numbered lines are displayed next.  This process produces a complete frame.

When progressive scan is used the lines are displayed sequentially instead of being divided into two fields.  This means both the odd and even numbered fields are displayed in numerical sequence.

The number of lines is what you may see on the spec sheet for that new LCD TV you are considering and that is where some of the confusion comes in.  1080i was the big feature virtually every company used to show their product was hi-def (HDTV).  The part of this I had wrong the other day was when I thought DVD was hi-def.  DVDs produce up to 540 lines of resolution.  The lowest resolution considered hi-def is 480p so technically a DVD can produce hi-def, but from what I’ve learned the (storage) capacity of a DVD would only allow about 20 minutes of hi-def video - not quite what you are getting from that DVD you bought at Wal-Mart huh?  So, DVDs aren’t hi-def, at least not the DVDs we buy and watch.

480p, 720p and 1080i were the standards advertised on most HDTVs until recently (the last couple of years).  Now 1080p is the highest standard normally advertised, the “Holy Grail” of hi-def resolution.  The only problem I see is the fact that you need a blu-ray player and disk to get 1080p.  Guess what one of the cheapest blu-ray players is?  Sony’s PS3 gaming system!

So, remember how I said DVDs aren’t really hi-def and they produce up to 540 lines of resolution?  There is something called resolution upscaling which outputs a video signal in the 720p or 1080i format; the DVD player itself does this.  This isn’t the same as watching a blu-ray disk (go to a store and watch a blu-ray disk, they are phenominal) in true hi-def, but it will provide increased detail and color.

With the whole issue of analog TVs not working over-the-air in February 2009 I think this is a relevant subject.  I also hope this helps some wives and girlfriends understand why your significant other wants to buy that new TV before the football season!

According to Wikipedia: Reality television is a genre of television programming which presents purportedly unscripted dramatic or humorous situations, documents actual events, and features ordinary people instead of professional actors.[citation needed] Although the genre has existed in some form or another since the early years of television, the term reality television is most commonly used to describe programs of this genre produced since 2000. Documentaries and nonfictional programming such as news and sports shows are usually not classified as reality shows.

In my opinion, Who Wants to be a Millionaire and Survivor started what we currently know as reality TV. There were other shows like Cops that could easily fit into this genre, but Millionaire and Survivor are what really got people talking and watching. There was a time, like many other Americans, when I knew the reality TV schedule by heart. I knew the station and time of my favorite shows and adjusted my schedule accordingly. Even though it wasn’t the same as a fictional show or movie, reality TV served as an escape – there is something inviting about watching real people risk life and limb for money. We just seem to get a kick out of watching human interactions go bad on national TV.

In some cases, the people on reality TV seem to be normal people like you and I. They have the same problems, jobs and family issues we all do. I just seem to have a problem with the casting department for many of these shows and I will gladly (you knew this was coming) tell you why.

If you leave your house right now and randomly select 12-20 individuals will the demographics of those people always be the same or similar? I would think not. That being the case, why do these groups always have 1-3 minorities, one homosexual individual and at least two females that someone seems to think are attractive? I know it is all about attracting the most diverse group of viewers, but sometimes it just seems stupid to me. Will I stop watching if nobody black is on the show? Probably not. Is is realistic to have one homosexual in almost every group? I don’t think so. Do I need what someone else considers eye candy to tune in every week? Not at all. Hey casting directors, get it together and find an interesting group of people without trying to meet your quota.

Besides your typical cast, these shows have lost some of their luster and it could be because they almost seem to be staged. Take the Real World for example. During the latest reunion show, the cast mentioned how much of what the show revealed wasn’t real and certain situations were taken out of context. Hello! The editors are the real creators of this show. They get raw/real footage and make it interesting. I think that defeats the purpose and is kind of manipulating. Something else revealed during the Real World reunion were the procedures necessary to go out and about. Apparently, if they want to go someplace, an animal shelter was mentioned, the show’s producers must get it cleared. So the exact situation goes something like this: one of the cast members was an alcoholic and they couldn’t go to an animal shelter, but they could go to many bars. This cast member eventually left the show because the environment wasn’t healthy for his ongoing treatment. Ya think?

These shows have become so popular to the point of network throwing virtually anything on TV as long as it is a reality show. I literally just finished watching a show where contestants compete with their dogs. The show is called Greatest American Dog and it airs on CBS. Hey, I will do anything once and the show was actually cute considering there wasn’t anything else on to watch. This show did run my wife right out of the room though!

In your opinion, have these reality shows become over-used and irritating? Many of them should never even make it to network television, but I guess they figure anything could catch on and get those advertisers spending money. I say enough is enough. Oh, but I need you to leave Survivor, Big Brother, Real World, The Amazing Race, So You Think You Can Dance and American Idol alone. Seriously.