You have digital set up scope and waveform monitor now. Not much use for vector scope. http://www.tek.com/industry/broadcasters
Actual HD Resolution
- Thread starter kdarcangelis870
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 55
- Views 17K
And if you don't like the equipment, don't like the customer service, don't like the color of the Dish, can't afford the service, what good is PQ? The discussion is (was) a simple one, about PQ asked by the OP. I'm sure he has or will take into account other factors. It's just sometimes posts take a thread completly away from the title and original post. You can say that about programming in virtually every thread when a question is asked about a carrier.
You can, but when the question is about PQ, and the quality is very good, it really is a moot question, isn't it? Do many think the PQ with Dish is an issue anymore? As I said, for me, programming is the most important factor in choosing a provider. That doesn't mean that PQ doesn't matter, just that it isn't my first consideration. What's wrong with me expressing that opinion? Others answered the question about the resolution quite well, I was simply adding what I feel is an important consideration. Sorry if that offended you.
Yes, it's still true. I wouldn't expect it to ever improve or go back to "full" HD resolution either. In combination with MPEG4, reducing the resolution like this is a necessary evil to be able to deliver as much HD programming as Dish does.
Problem comes in when people know there's a technical difference and convince themselves that they can see (or hear or feel) a difference in something. I'm referring to things beyond Dish's "HD Lite" as well !
I guess the bottom line is the picture is very good. I have seen multiple posts, mine included, who have a difficult time seeing a difference between a local OTA and on Satellite. That said however, even OTA channels with their sub channels are losing some PQ. Recently the local Ct. CBS dropped an SD sub channel, and before I realized it was gone I thought their picture actually looked a little better. Not that it was ever bad, just somehow a little more crisp. And there are so many things that go into the final result, like the original source that simply judging by the numbers doesn't tell the whole story.
They are compressing without a doubt. But I do not believe their "processing" changes the overall improved color/contrast of source material, as was the subject at the moment.
Doesn't mean the average person's eyes can actually SEE a difference though. People are biased when they know too much information. Someone spends $80 on an HDMI cable from Monster and they WILL (think) they see an improvement. As I said above, some people know Dish's resolution is lower and are convinced they can see this. Can they? Some may be able to... I suspect most can't though.
To me, bitrate is more important than resolution. For instance, I would rather watch a high bitrate 480p source like a DVD on my 1080p TV than a 1080p video on youtube that has been mangled by compression to reduce the bitrate enough to stream it over the internet. I know it's an extreme example, but it should still serve to make my point. We're dealing with lossy compression formats here. There is no way around that.
The difference in picture quality between 1440x1080i and 1920x1080i isn't all that much, and at the exact same bitrate 1440x1080 could actually serve to produce a slightly better image with less compression artifacting (depending on a number of variables in the compression process). In fact, the macroblocks tend to make the exact resolution of the display irrelevant since they are larger than the individual pixels. Remember... lossy compression!
It can be confusing because so much of the sales and marketing focuses on the resolution and refresh rate of the displays and the content. What gets left out is the fact that all video content that we consume is compressed with lossy compression techniques (even blu-ray disks). Why do blu-ray disks look so good? bitrate! They're anywhere from 2-5 times the bitrate of what you get from your TV provider. Hi bitrate 1080p video? Beauty!
It is also important to note Dish doesn't give every channel the same amount of bandwidth on their system. Some channels are delivered to us at higher bitrates than others. This variation from channel to channel makes a difference. ESPN's 720p signal looks much better than many of the 1080i channels out there due to the fact that it is transmitted at a higher bitrate. I remember looking at a chart of bitrates for each HD channel on DISH a few months ago, but I can't find it now. If I can locate it, I'll edit this post with a link. If anyone else has the link to the chart (I'm pretty sure I found it in a thread on this forum), please reply with the URL!
I've found that how the TV is calibrated makes a huge difference in picture quality from any source. If you haven't taken the time to calibrate your TV, you should! I don't mean by just adjusting the sliders until it "looks right". I mean, by actually calibrating it with the right tools. At the very least, get a disk with the calibration patterns and the blue filter glasses (to adjust color) and tweak your TV. You'll probably be amazed at how far off of optimal your settings are.
So, in short... it isn't nearly as clear cut as we would like it to be. Don't get too hung up on the exact resolution of the video source. Due to a number of factors, picture quality from each 1920x1080, 1440x1080, or 1280x720 sources could look better or worse than the other two.
Make sure your TV is calibrated, and enjoy the content!
-SF
The difference in picture quality between 1440x1080i and 1920x1080i isn't all that much, and at the exact same bitrate 1440x1080 could actually serve to produce a slightly better image with less compression artifacting (depending on a number of variables in the compression process). In fact, the macroblocks tend to make the exact resolution of the display irrelevant since they are larger than the individual pixels. Remember... lossy compression!
It can be confusing because so much of the sales and marketing focuses on the resolution and refresh rate of the displays and the content. What gets left out is the fact that all video content that we consume is compressed with lossy compression techniques (even blu-ray disks). Why do blu-ray disks look so good? bitrate! They're anywhere from 2-5 times the bitrate of what you get from your TV provider. Hi bitrate 1080p video? Beauty!
It is also important to note Dish doesn't give every channel the same amount of bandwidth on their system. Some channels are delivered to us at higher bitrates than others. This variation from channel to channel makes a difference. ESPN's 720p signal looks much better than many of the 1080i channels out there due to the fact that it is transmitted at a higher bitrate. I remember looking at a chart of bitrates for each HD channel on DISH a few months ago, but I can't find it now. If I can locate it, I'll edit this post with a link. If anyone else has the link to the chart (I'm pretty sure I found it in a thread on this forum), please reply with the URL!
I've found that how the TV is calibrated makes a huge difference in picture quality from any source. If you haven't taken the time to calibrate your TV, you should! I don't mean by just adjusting the sliders until it "looks right". I mean, by actually calibrating it with the right tools. At the very least, get a disk with the calibration patterns and the blue filter glasses (to adjust color) and tweak your TV. You'll probably be amazed at how far off of optimal your settings are.
So, in short... it isn't nearly as clear cut as we would like it to be. Don't get too hung up on the exact resolution of the video source. Due to a number of factors, picture quality from each 1920x1080, 1440x1080, or 1280x720 sources could look better or worse than the other two.
Make sure your TV is calibrated, and enjoy the content!
-SF
I agree with WFSB's ota quality, it's not very good, but improving. Aren't many of the feeds for satellite from the locals fed by fiber at full resolution, not the compromised ota signal?
Totally agree. I was having a discussion over on avsforum regarding the record modes of the Magnavox HDD/DVD recorder, where 2-hour SP mode is full-D1 resolution (704x480) and 2.5-hour SPP mode is half-D1 (352x480). I made the suggestion that recording sports at SPP mode might look better (less compression artifacts/motion blur) than SP mode, due to the fact that while the resolution was 50% less, the bitrate was only reduced 20%. Still, most still clung to the full-resolution idea, despite the more bitstarved signal.
I don't know the answer to that. Another words, is the signal Dish receives unaffected by the sub channels. Very likely.
I had DirecTV when I first got HD and the picture looked great. I then went to Comcast, which in my area had a great lineup and great PQ. Now I'm with DISH and I have great PQ, even on the satellite HD locals. They all look good and any differences are small, I think DirecTV's HD is a bit more washed out whereas DISH and Comcast have deeper colour. DISH pixelates on the opening of "The Big Bang Theory," but it goes so fast at the end it can't not pixelate. It may be because I set up my TV on a channel that I worked at and knew the colours of the set, but they all look the same to me.
I'm not sure what you mean by "changes the overall improved color/contrast". But, their processing certainly affects the quality of the image. It's just a matter of how much or how little it is affected. That is why the same channel will look different on OTA as it does on Dish, which looks different than it does on DirecTV, which looks different than it does on Comcast, which looks different....
I've recently captured various programs from Dish Network with a R5000hd add-on and from a friend's Comcast Motorola box via the firewire method described here.
I don't see too much of a difference between the two providers when it comes to the 720p stuff (ex FOXnews, A&E). But the video can vary a lot between channels broadcasting in 1080. I can finally see the pixelation, macroblocking in the Comcast video that a lot of subscribers are complaining about - not too bad in static scenes, very noticeable in fast moving scenes (as bad as my local NBC/CBS OTA stations.)
But then Dish looks like it adds this very thin layer of vaseline with their 1440x1080 HD-lite:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/148173
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/148170
I'm curious to see how Directv stacks up PQ-wise as I would like to switch to a provider carrying AMC once my free HBO sub expires from Dish.
I don't see too much of a difference between the two providers when it comes to the 720p stuff (ex FOXnews, A&E). But the video can vary a lot between channels broadcasting in 1080. I can finally see the pixelation, macroblocking in the Comcast video that a lot of subscribers are complaining about - not too bad in static scenes, very noticeable in fast moving scenes (as bad as my local NBC/CBS OTA stations.)
But then Dish looks like it adds this very thin layer of vaseline with their 1440x1080 HD-lite:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/148173
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/148170
I'm curious to see how Directv stacks up PQ-wise as I would like to switch to a provider carrying AMC once my free HBO sub expires from Dish.
Last edited:
