HD Picture Quality

P

primetimeguy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Oct 4, 2006
1,003
39
St. Paul, MN
Still waiting on the pictures as proof. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words, or one of Jeff's posts. :)
 
Last edited:
Modwild

Modwild

SatelliteGuys Family
Dec 22, 2007
55
2
I just switched from a 622 to a 722. The picture quality is quite different. It feels like I got a new TV. Absolutely love it. I tried to talk them into letting me beta test the 922 (I was actually a Tivo tester back in the day), but couldn't make that happen. But, the 722 has absolutely awesome picture quality, all of the time, in my book.
 
KAB

KAB

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 20, 2005
20,841
4,176
Fishers, IN
I just switched from a 622 to a 722. The picture quality is quite different. It feels like I got a new TV. Absolutely love it. I tried to talk them into letting me beta test the 922 (I was actually a Tivo tester back in the day), but couldn't make that happen. But, the 722 has absolutely awesome picture quality, all of the time, in my book.
In reality, the only difference between the 622 and 722 is HD size and color. Performance specs & components are the same. Now if you are talking about a 722K, some folks think it is better, others (like me) see no difference.
 
P

primetimeguy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Oct 4, 2006
1,003
39
St. Paul, MN
I just switched from a 622 to a 722. The picture quality is quite different. It feels like I got a new TV. Absolutely love it. I tried to talk them into letting me beta test the 922 (I was actually a Tivo tester back in the day), but couldn't make that happen. But, the 722 has absolutely awesome picture quality, all of the time, in my book.

Amazing what the mind "sees" when you think you swapped out for better equipment.
 
S

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,332
1,140
Lexington, ky
Jeff, since you like quoting articles so well that (at least the last one) have nothing to do with making pictures, try reading this... Signal Meters & Bit Error Rate

Some key comments...
From 0, signal must be increased to a high enough point on the signal meter to produce a picture. Until that point, there is not enough information for the digital-to-analog converter (DAC) to produce a picture at all. The result is a "loss of signal" message.

Just above the failure point (FP), you will see a relatively stable, but slightly degraded picture.

When you increase the signal on the signal meter a little more, there comes a point where signal is strong enough to overcome the noise in the system and produces a low enough BER to present the digital picture , uncompromised. This is referred to as the quasi error-free (QEF) condition.
I bolded that key word in case you missed it.
And last but not least...
The amount of signal in excess of the QEF condition, is the signal power margin. The signal power margin is the amount of signal you have "left over" to compensate for signal drops that occur from atmospheric disturbances - like storms and sunspots.


Now, look at this picture...
graph.jpg

This is from a publication on digital 2Ghz microwave reception... FOR VIDEO! It charts signal to noise in the video (can also be called "image quality". Notice how as the signal strength increases (moves right to left on the scale), a digital signal's V-SNR, once you attain a set RF-SNR, doesn't change.

Now, either a) start quoting articles specific to video (talking about a "generic" RF link doesn't prove anything about video, b) post pictures showing how a minor difference in signal strength affects the picture, or c) STFU.
 
S

--sexy-warlock--

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 8, 2009
489
0
Chattanooga
In reality, the only difference between the 622 and 722 is HD size and color. Performance specs & components are the same. Now if you are talking about a 722K, some folks think it is better, others (like me) see no difference.

I thought the 722/k used a different video processing chip than the 622?
 
J

JohnDillinger

Active SatelliteGuys Member
Dec 8, 2009
21
0
California
chill homefries. Just stating that no way the meter would go that high anymore. I dont have a problem...just stating a fact.

ya never know. Always Wrong Jeff seems to say you need a higher signal for a cleaner picture which is BS ;)
shows you obviously are trolling.....and flaming is not tolerated here. :)
It's not the content, it's how you go about saying it. People (for the most part) are able to deduce from your posts whether or not you know your stuff....To put undo emphasis on your point of view seems much too strong.
-Just an observation.

Just so YOU know, a troll goes around forums/threads looking to provoke and stir sh!t up....Not my intent, nor was it. I came here to learn and join in...
Your peers' were the ones trolling as I recall. Do you know what Elitist means?

Exhibit A:


I laugh at your silly statements; nit nit. Elitist pig oink oink. Did the noob get his feelings hurt silly man :D:haha Stick around and you too can become elitist as well. You really are funny now that I know you weren't just a troll here to stir up trouble. Besides I apologized for that and you still have not gotten over it. Grow a pair and get over it. Some days you will get chided some days you will get praised hang around and have a bit of fun as we make mistakes too. School's out now children! :haha:haha:haha

I laugh at your ineptitude and lack of understanding.
Yeah, I'm a noob at life because I don't have countless posts (like you) haha.
This makes perfect sense, and is a testament to your thinking you're better than *

Grow a pair. Nice touch. You've got class, that's for sure.
Schools out, huh? K....

I feel 10 times wiser/smarter now that I've read this enlightening post.

Thank you very much, really. You've done this thread a huge service. Congrats:up




What IS rather interesting is how HiDefJeff says something.......
Then ALL or most of you refute his posts with contempt and and attempt to denigrate his character.:rant:

What a bunch of classy guys, real class acts as they say.....:rolleyes:
 
P

primetimeguy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Oct 4, 2006
1,003
39
St. Paul, MN
What IS rather interesting is how HiDefJeff says something.......
Then ALL or most of you refute his posts with contempt and and attempt to denigrate his character.:rant:

What a bunch of classy guys, real class acts as they say.....:rolleyes:

Give it time and you will see there is nothing behind what he keeps posting over and over again.
 
whatchel1

whatchel1

SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 30, 2006
9,099
48
Great High Plains
I laugh at your ineptitude and lack of understanding.
Yeah, I'm a noob at life because I don't have countless posts (like you) haha.
This makes perfect sense, and is a testament to your thinking you're better than *

Grow a pair. Nice touch. You've got class, that's for sure.
Schools out, huh? K....

I feel 10 times wiser/smarter now that I've read this enlightening post.

Thank you very much, really. You've done this thread a huge service. Congrats:up


What IS rather interesting is how HiDefJeff says something.......
Then ALL or most of you refute his posts with contempt and and attempt to denigrate his character.:rant:

What a bunch of classy guys, real class acts as they say.....:rolleyes:

You make me laugh that's what the laugh icons were about. I've that many posts because I've been here a long time. That's over 3 yrs guy. We say what we say about highdefjeff due to what he post it is a "broken record" of signal strength is almost the only thing that counts. Like I said hang around have some fun and see what goes on around here. We are pretty open to all kinds of things. Thing is if you are trying to prove a point with graphs & charts they better be right or we will jump you about it. If it's not your "cup of tea" then you don't have to stay it will not hurt my feelings. I know what my degree is in and if that makes you think I think I'm better than others well that's your opinion and your welcome to it. :D
 
Last edited:
TheKrell

TheKrell

A mighty and noble race originating on Altair IV.
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 4, 2007
33,807
29,039
Fairfax, VA
Again I hesitate to stick my nose in here, but...
Jeff, since you like quoting articles so well that (at least the last one) have nothing to do with making pictures, try reading this... Signal Meters & Bit Error Rate
Most excellent ref; thanks.

Now most of you seem to think that Jeff is talking about signal levels well into the QEF regime. I haven't read every word of his posts, so I don't know. But I always thought he was talking about this which I quote again from your ref:
Just above the failure point (FP), you will see a relatively stable, but slightly degraded picture. At the threshold of visibility (ATSC) there is still a relatively low signal-to-noise ratio and high bit error rate (BER) that compromises the picture quality.
This would occur in a very narrow range of signal levels, right at the top of the cliff in the graph. Such a picture is visible only because of error compensation, whereas getting into the QEF regime would be complete error correction. Now, what does that look like exactly? Can we tell it apart from crappy compression? I say "No, we cannot." So, when you and I are both looking at a digital picture, and I say it looks like s*&^ and you think it looks excellent, then just maybe I'm below the QEF regime and looking at a "slightly degraded picture."

In this case, Jeff is right in principle; he merely expresses himself badly. And all I need is just a little more signal to get into the QEF regime.
 
P

primetimeguy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Oct 4, 2006
1,003
39
St. Paul, MN
So you think all of the people complaining about PQ happen to be in that ever so tiny region on the signal?
 
P

peano

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 6, 2004
849
0
Not only is it tiny but the signal is also fluctuating. It would be nearly impossible to always be on the edge of the cliff and not fall off constantly.
 
S

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,332
1,140
Lexington, ky
Again I hesitate to stick my nose in here, but...
Most excellent ref; thanks.

Now most of you seem to think that Jeff is talking about signal levels well into the QEF regime. I haven't read every word of his posts, so I don't know. But I always thought he was talking about this which I quote again from your ref:
I'm pretty sure he's talking about signals up in the QEF range. After all, he talks about the "digital cliff" being a "hoax". But on the off chance he's not... Jeff, can you clarify what part of the signal strength range you're talking about? Do you really believe that ANY signal strength increase/decrease will affect the picture, or are you just talking about the part just past the "cliff"? If Jeff is referring to the part at the edge of the "cliff", I will apologize. However, I don't think that's the case.

This would occur in a very narrow range of signal levels, right at the top of the cliff in the graph. Such a picture is visible only because of error compensation, whereas getting into the QEF regime would be complete error correction. Now, what does that look like exactly? Can we tell it apart from crappy compression? I say "No, we cannot."
Actually I think you can. Crappy compression will display as "rough" edges, and "blocking" in similar colors (picture looking at facial tones, grass of a field, or a solid background), along with a loss of detail. Bad signal will display as "out of place" macroblocking and occasional "loss of signal".

In this case, Jeff is right in principle; he merely expresses himself badly. And all I need is just a little more signal to get into the QEF regime.
Don't forget the last article he talked about mentioned a "gradual rolloff" as signal strength decreases.

This is actually fairly easy to test... find a bunch of 10db attenuators. Pick your favorite station, take a screen capture. But an attenuator on the line. Another picture. Keep adding attenuators and pictures. If we're understanding Jeff correctly, as soon as you put that first attenuator in line you'll see a decrease in picture quality. hmmmm... I might be able to do this next weekend.
 

Similar threads

N
Replies
73
Views
9K
kstuart
kstuart
F
Replies
40
Views
4K
Flipperdoodle
F
kokomogator
Replies
7
Views
1K
BrianMis
BrianMis
D
Replies
5
Views
2K
Carl B
Carl B
R
Replies
0
Views
1K
richiephx
R

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top