Results 13 to 18 of 26
01-06-2006 12:47 PM #13
The TV world should be catering to the couch potato in all of us. It's CES, not a mountain climbing trade show - although it's good to know that if we do take up mountain climbing, we'll soon be able to catch Dancing with the Stars via D* or E* on our portable devices while hanging upside-down off a cliff.
01-06-2006 12:47 PM # ADSRegister Today & This Ad Goes Away! Syndicated Advertisement
- Join Date
- Advertising world
01-07-2006 02:20 AM #143D Stereographer
Oh Hell! Time to jump in on this whining session-
OK, I like high quality HDTV like the rest of you but I also like it to be a balance between quantity and cost. I also respect the established common sense facts about HDTV and television broadcast.
Our TV in HDTV is not about just what res D* or E* sends, It's about what res we can actually use. If the source HDTV is only at 1080i x 1440 pixels all the complaining about not getting 1920 is meaningless. If your monitor and the majority of monitors out there are just 720p x 1280, even the HDCAM sourced program at 1440 Hpixels is being lost. So why even spend your money to transmit it to you since as soon as the signal gets to you the first thing you do is toss out the 1280 to 1440 pixels anyway as your monitor can't resolve them?
Several years ago a forum friend was complaining about D* downresing, his point was that since the ATSC allows for 1080i x 1920, all HDTV should be in that maximum resolution. To end the whiniong, I asked him what sort of 1080i x 1920 monitor he was using? His answer - a 32" CRT. In that tube the dot pitch alone limited the display to under 550 pixels! Yes, we now have monitors we can buy that displays 1080p x 1920 and the picture using a true 1080p source does look great. But, that is what we see at CES2006, not what the whiners have at home.
What DishNetwork and DirecTV as well as the Broadcast networks understand, is that they can offer a resolution that is at best 1280 and please nearly all the HDTV viewers with a great picture. Offer a limit of 1000 Hpixels and valid complaints of image softness will surface from those with large screen 1280 displays. Those using Plasmas and LCD's may not ever notice the difference but probably will just complain because they are a complaining type personality, a true whiner. If you have a true 1080p x 1920 display then you need to consider that you are the extreme exception and not the bulk general population. Your display device is the strongest link in the chain and you should learn the HDTV process by how you get a picture to understand if your whine is valid. Meaning that if a program was produced in HDCAM, no amount of whining will add pixels of image detail for your Picture improvement. Yes, pixels will be added if they want in an upconvert process but those upconverted pixels never add more image pixel detail, just numerical bandwidth! Those with average HDTV's will not realize any gain in resolution beyond the 1280 you now have.
Today, when the discussion came up among the "satelliteguys" meeting at the E* booth, I said I'll worry when they downres HDTV to that of a DVD or about 600-800 Hpixels. In the meantime, until 1080p x 1920 monitors become mainstream, I don't care if E* and D* wish to limit the bandwidth to 1280Hpixels, especially if it means I can have more content at a reasonable cost. I certainly do not wish to double my sub rates just so a dozen or so 1080P x 1920 monitor owners will stop complaining. And, I don't want to limit variety and pay more so poeople with low res HDTV monitors that barely do DVD resolution will stop whining. Let them buy a proper monitor first.
At this point in time the best source we have for quality is from E* D* and local broadcast/network OTA. When BlueRay / HDDVD is released these broadcast HDTV channels will become second to the hard media formats. Then it will be time
for E* and D* as well as the local stations to adjust their attitudes toward this down resing policy. When, I believe it was Scott who was reporting to us that E*'s policy was they will downres all HDTV and "never" go back to full bandwidth. (paraphrasing) I disagreed since I believe, #1 "Never" is an unrealistic limit to future events, and #2 As long as these guys are in business, they will adjust their policy to hat the market will bare. If people will pay for the quality they will deliver ity to us. This in fact is the whole proof as to why the success of HDTV in the first place. We consumers have proven to the providers that we are willing to pay for improved quality. The next question is how much?
So when you are about to post a complaint about not having HDTV at 1920 just remember this:
FILM to HDTV tape is scanned at 1920 Hpixels (down res from film) for D5 recording master and then usually dubbed down to HDCAM for distribution at 1440pixels. If all is untouched at that point YOU downres it at your end to 1280 for display. IF E* does it at their end to conserve TP bandwidth limiting the detail to 1280, then who cares?
If a live program was shot using HDCAM, then it was shot and recorded at a maximum of 1440 Hpixels (eg. HDNET event programming)
HDPPV, Showtime HD, and HBO HD is nearly all using D5 distribution tapes today, but they have no need to suffer resolution reduction since they are not bandwidth starvedfrom their sources to the MSO. D* and E* are starved so if they can manage to limit this before YOU do, they can save you money and offer more content.
In summary- I support HDTV downresing to 1280 Hpixels until the majority of viewers are using 1080P x 1920 monitors. At that time, I think the right thing to do would be to pass the full resolution of the program source, meaning for the most part, 1440 HDCAM Hpixels or when originating from D5 tape, 1920 H pixels assuming that cost and content variety are respected in that offering.My You Tube Channel:
01-07-2006 05:27 AM #15
Well 99% of the population never saw how good HD programing looked on the original VOOM. It never has looked that good after DISH picked it up, and now it doesn't look as good on some channels as it did just a few weeks ago. Going to MPEG4 will not do anything for the picture quality on our 1080i sets we most use, and those that have 1080p or are interested in true full-definition 1,920X1080 sets like the SED technology will have to use a DVD to be happy! Does anyone care? Yes a few of us that know it could be much better. DISH has dropped the ball. They could be a true leader that we could recommend, instead they are now the same as cable or DirecTV. Why up-grade your present set, or switch to DISH? No reason I see. What a shame.Samsung HL67A750 RPTV, TWO 2013 Hoppers w/Sling, OTA Digital Dongle, My Book Essential 750Gb EXTERNAL hard drive, ONKYO HT-S9100 THX speakers & 1080P A/V receiver, ONKYO DV-BD606 Blu-Ray Disc Player, Harmony ONE Remote, GOOGLE TV, w 4 other TV's (LCD & LED).
01-07-2006 09:04 AM #16
I understand what you are saying but the picture looks noticeably softer on my 720p DLP. Are you saying that 1280 x 1080 could look very good if the encoders at Dish are properly adjusted?
01-07-2006 09:42 AM #17Originally Posted by Don Landis
If they can go to 1280x1080 - why not 1280x720? With no firm long-term view into what our provider's intentions are, we have no idea of the actual impact - whether this is the result of necessity, or the beginning of a worsening trend.
That's my concern anyway.
01-07-2006 01:40 PM #18
Originally Posted by jsb_hburg
I have a 30" diagonal 16x9 screen 1280 x 1024 monitor that receives native 1080i or 720p. My 811 is set to 1080i. Voom looks softer after the downrez. As 2 examples, I can no longer see the detail on paintings on Voom Gallery and the facial detail is gone on Soundstage Voom Rave.
Do you have any explanation as to why this may be even though my set is not 1920 x 1080i ? TIA
Last edited by JH1949; 01-07-2006 at 01:44 PM.