Looks like CES 2006 is a NON EVENT for HD

[Ilya]

In summary- I support HDTV downresing to 1280 Hpixels until the majority of viewers are using 1080P x 1920 monitors...

I am shocked! Don, I don't have time to argue with you line by line, though I totally disagree with many of your statements and conclusions. Let me just mention some most important points:

1. You make it sound that if the TV set is not the latest 1080p set, then it can only do 1280 horizontal resolution??? Totally wrong! Many of the most popular LCD and DLP-based TV sets, including those made a couple of years ago have horizontal resolution of 1366 or above, including the most popular Sonys. I am sure you know that.

2. It's not just the set's native resolution that matters. It's also how many conversions are done to the signal. To get the best possible resolution most of us have our receivers set to 1080i mode. When Dish Network takes a 1080i source and sends it to us without downreszzing it comes to our sets in its original resolution of 1920x1080 which is then converted by our TV set to its native resolution (e.g. 1366x768). Basically it is rescaled only once. Now let's see what happens with a VOOM channel: first it is converted by Dish from 1920x1080i to 1280x1080i. Then the 942 box converts it back to 1920x1080i, then my TV set converts it from 1920x1080i to its native 1366x768. Are you telling me that these two scenarios result in the same picture quality???

3. Following your logic about "majority of viewers" why even bother showing HD channels at all until most of the viewers have HDTV sets??? Imagine how much bandwidth could be saved? How many SD channels could be added?

4. Don, you are certainly entitled to your own opinion. (You must be one of those 9 who voted for 21 HD-lite channels in our poll.) And I respect that. The problem is that now Dish Network management may take your personal opinion as a representative opinion of this forum, and this is really frustrating for many of us...

 

[herdfan]

We've seen the erosion of SD channel picture quality despite the capability of virtually all viewers to discern the difference on their displays.

Interestingly enough, there was a double whammy going on here. Back in 1994 when I first got D*, I had a 31" MITS CRT. PQ was stunning. As people, myself included moved up to bigger displays, PQ was going to suffer even without over compression. It just so happen that D* was slowly degrading PQ from around '97 on. So as people got bigger TV's they accepted the lower PQ as a function of the bigger TV. I would not want to watch D* now on my old circa 1996 46" RPTV. It would be almost unwatchable.

So with the majority of HD displays being 720p, D* can get away with lowering PQ since most TV's can't resolve it anyway, but it will be interesting to see what happens when more and more sets become 1080p.

 

[CPanther95]

I can't speak for E*'s version of HD-Lite, but I can tell you there is a clear difference between full res HD and HD-Lite the way we are getting it from D*. From jaw-dropping presentations to pretty pictures "better than SD".

I'm with Ilya - HD'ers aren't the majority of viewers anyway, most of us bought into HDTV after seeing its potential. Even those that can't spot HD-Lite at first glance, may very well leave an HD-Lite presentation with no "WOW" moments, and have no idea why.

HD-Lite results in a self-fullfilling prophecy, as the original 4% HD'ers that have seen quality HD become watered down by new HD'ers who have only seen HD-Lite - fewer people (percentage) will be able to recognize HD-Lite as an inferior product.

I understand Consumer Reports or Better Homes and Gardens speaking for J6P, but when a group of HD enthusiasts concede PQ for content (when we already have 100 channels of "content" available) it makes me want to sell my HDTVs and move to a cabin in Montana - well, maybe all but one.

 

[SRW1000]

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.

By that logic, why not just down-rez HD content to 480P at this time? Heck, that's more than double the information most viewer's sets can handle today anyway. Once the majority of viewers have upgraded to a monitor that can display resolutions of 1280x1080i, maybe they could start broadcasting in that format. Then, in another 20 years after that, we might be able to get some actual HD content.

Most subscribers don't have surround sound either, so why bother broadcasting in 5.1? Just downmix everything to stereo, most people won't know the difference.

Scott

 

[langlin]

I disagree, alot of positive from Dish, Universal and ESPN2 as well as lil hd along with the rollout of MPEG4 with all the potential this brings. I can't imagine what you're looking for short of free tv that could be better. Some of us can use all of this, 25 HD channels plus several HD movie channels for purchase, that's amazing for such a young project as HDTV. I don't object to paying for the equipment, I am concerned with Rupert and D* moving toward $$$ for each program.

 

[VideoGrabber]

Interesting that there's no response from Don to either Ilya nor myself.

Further refutation to Don's comment:
> At this point in time the best source we have for quality is from E* D* and local broadcast/network OTA. <

This is an incorrect statement. The best quality source remains C-band via 4DTV, for those channels that haven't switched over to MegaPipe yet. Since most can't/won't do a C-band setup, the best remains many cable companies, still delivering full BW, non-downrezzed content at 1920x1080i.

Satellite sucks. With proponents making arguments like yours, perhaps all the cable cos. will follow them, and we'll have no source of real HD, beyond the HD-DVD formats. Then HD-Lite can become the "new definition" for HD. That way, in a few years they can start touting the "brand-new, improved" HD-Plus, which is what we already had and pissed away.

- Tim