Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

HiC wrote:
Went into a local Circuit City and took a good long look at their HDTV
selections. They had several including 2 1080p sets that I was told were set
up correctly and what I was seeing was as good as it gets. Everything HD
from the cams to the screen. Both the 1080p's were running some sort of hard
drive unit, not off a broadcast.

I've been hearing how amazing HDTV is. Well....while there's a certain "pow"
when you first see them, I get the sense it's due to some artifically
induced phenomena. The colors seem vivid, but it seems to me in an
enhanced - i.e. forced way. There seems to be an excessive "whiteness" to
the image that adds a certain kind of sparkle/sharpness, but again it seems
artificial. The real world as viewed by eyeballs doesn't seem that "sharp"
or vivid. The demos that were showing were clearly intended to take
advantage of this, all these closeups of brightly colored flowers,
snowboarders on glaring snow etc. I don't believe a sky exists anywhere the
shade of blue they were depicting in that demo.

I see all kinds of artifacts in the images. Yeah, okay, they're not meant to
be viewed from 6 inches away. But when I back off to 8 - 10 feet, I still
see this odd graininess, especially when the image pans. Plus all these
other odd things that happen to the image. Overall I find it harder on my
eyes than a sharp picture on a good analog tv.

As I understand it, in a few years we're getting all digital whether we like
it or not. Is the whole HDTV thing just a bill of goods we got sold/crammed
down our throats?





Well, watching just about any nature show on Discovery HD is like being
there. I recall the some of the Olympic's broadcasts were so astounding
clear that it was like being in a luxury box at the event itself.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

Ray S wrote:
HiC wrote:
Went into a local Circuit City and took a good long look at their HDTV
selections. They had several including 2 1080p sets that I was told
were set
up correctly and what I was seeing was as good as it gets. Everything HD
from the cams to the screen. Both the 1080p's were running some sort
of hard
drive unit, not off a broadcast.

I've been hearing how amazing HDTV is. Well....while there's a certain
"pow"
when you first see them, I get the sense it's due to some artifically
induced phenomena. The colors seem vivid, but it seems to me in an
enhanced - i.e. forced way. There seems to be an excessive "whiteness" to
the image that adds a certain kind of sparkle/sharpness, but again it
seems
artificial. The real world as viewed by eyeballs doesn't seem that
"sharp"
or vivid. The demos that were showing were clearly intended to take
advantage of this, all these closeups of brightly colored flowers,
snowboarders on glaring snow etc. I don't believe a sky exists
anywhere the
shade of blue they were depicting in that demo.

I see all kinds of artifacts in the images. Yeah, okay, they're not
meant to
be viewed from 6 inches away. But when I back off to 8 - 10 feet, I
still
see this odd graininess, especially when the image pans. Plus all these
other odd things that happen to the image. Overall I find it harder on my
eyes than a sharp picture on a good analog tv.

As I understand it, in a few years we're getting all digital whether
we like
it or not. Is the whole HDTV thing just a bill of goods we got
sold/crammed
down our throats?





Well, watching just about any nature show on Discovery HD is like being
there. I recall the some of the Olympic's broadcasts were so astounding
clear that it was like being in a luxury box at the event itself.


Discovery HD is mostly composed of slow pans and virtually still shots.
They also have the luxury of encoding in non real time.

What I remember of the Olympics was divers coming off the high board and
turning into so many pixels. Where ever there was intense action there
was macroblocking. When they hit the water it looked like a pixelated blob.

Postcard shots are great in 1080i with MPEG2 at 18 Mbps stuffed in a 6
MHz channel but it can't handle action.

Countries like China, the UK and France will have a better codec, MPEG4,
better modulation such as DVB-T/H or CDMB-T/H and will also, hopefully,
make their OTA receivers upgradeable so that they are not obsolete in a
few years like ours are now.

The Olympics in 2008 will look great in China but probably not while
being watched from China in the US.

http://www.hometheaterfocus.com/blog...05/29/207.aspx

Bob Miller

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

Bob Miller wrote:
Ray S wrote:
HiC wrote:
Went into a local Circuit City and took a good long look at their HDTV
selections. They had several including 2 1080p sets that I was told
were set
up correctly and what I was seeing was as good as it gets. Everything HD
from the cams to the screen. Both the 1080p's were running some sort
of hard
drive unit, not off a broadcast.

I've been hearing how amazing HDTV is. Well....while there's a
certain "pow"
when you first see them, I get the sense it's due to some artifically
induced phenomena. The colors seem vivid, but it seems to me in an
enhanced - i.e. forced way. There seems to be an excessive
"whiteness" to
the image that adds a certain kind of sparkle/sharpness, but again it
seems
artificial. The real world as viewed by eyeballs doesn't seem that
"sharp"
or vivid. The demos that were showing were clearly intended to take
advantage of this, all these closeups of brightly colored flowers,
snowboarders on glaring snow etc. I don't believe a sky exists
anywhere the
shade of blue they were depicting in that demo.

I see all kinds of artifacts in the images. Yeah, okay, they're not
meant to
be viewed from 6 inches away. But when I back off to 8 - 10 feet, I
still
see this odd graininess, especially when the image pans. Plus all these
other odd things that happen to the image. Overall I find it harder
on my
eyes than a sharp picture on a good analog tv.

As I understand it, in a few years we're getting all digital whether
we like
it or not. Is the whole HDTV thing just a bill of goods we got
sold/crammed
down our throats?





Well, watching just about any nature show on Discovery HD is like
being there. I recall the some of the Olympic's broadcasts were so
astounding clear that it was like being in a luxury box at the event
itself.


Discovery HD is mostly composed of slow pans and virtually still shots.
They also have the luxury of encoding in non real time.

What I remember of the Olympics was divers coming off the high board and
turning into so many pixels. Where ever there was intense action there
was macroblocking. When they hit the water it looked like a pixelated blob.

Hmmm, I never experienced that. Off the top of my head I think
TimeWarner WI broadcasts in 720P. NFL games are brilliant and clear
without breakup, much to my dismay watching the Packers last weekend.

I recall watching one of the ubiquitous shark shows on Discovery and
being amazed at the detail when they had sharks flying up out of the
water to grab food. The spray of individual drops was clear and detailed.


Postcard shots are great in 1080i with MPEG2 at 18 Mbps stuffed in a 6
MHz channel but it can't handle action.

Countries like China, the UK and France will have a better codec, MPEG4,
better modulation such as DVB-T/H or CDMB-T/H and will also, hopefully,
make their OTA receivers upgradeable so that they are not obsolete in a
few years like ours are now.

The Olympics in 2008 will look great in China but probably not while
being watched from China in the US.

http://www.hometheaterfocus.com/blog...05/29/207.aspx

Bob Miller

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:37:19 +0000, Bob Miller wrote:

Jim Mack wrote:
[quoted text muted]


The combination of MPEG2, 1080i and 8-VSB is going to kill free OTA TV for
channels 2-51 IMO.

Bob Miller

Dude! Where do you buy your dope! You need to connect with reality.

With all the hype of how good MPEG4 looks at NAB this year, nobody was
able to show a MPEG4 encoder that looked as good as the best MPEG2
encoders at 18Mbs. In fact, I would say that MPEG4 (without the production
extensions) is what is killing HDTV as it is being implemented at such low
bitrates (8-12Mbs) that there is hardly any benefits over SDTV other than
a wider screen. Watch any HDTV program on Dish and DirecTV for a few
minutes to find out.

I have yet to find any average consumer that picks 720p over 1080i (on
the proper monitor) as looking the best. On an A-B comparison, they
complain that the 720p picture is always soft or out of focus. Never a
complaint about motion artifacts of interlace but tons of complaints about
720P flickering or stuttering.

MPEG4 and 720P are the corporate screwing of the public for bandwidth at
the cost of picture quality. (smells like MPAA trying to protect theater
attendance to me)

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

Bob Miller wrote in
link.net:

Dave Oldridge wrote:
"HiC" wrote in
ink.net:

Went into a local Circuit City and took a good long look at their
HDTV selections. They had several including 2 1080p sets that I was
told were set up correctly and what I was seeing was as good as it
gets. Everything HD from the cams to the screen. Both the 1080p's
were running some sort of hard drive unit, not off a broadcast.

I've been hearing how amazing HDTV is. Well....while there's a
certain "pow" when you first see them, I get the sense it's due to
some artifically induced phenomena. The colors seem vivid, but it
seems to me in an enhanced - i.e. forced way. There seems to be an
excessive "whiteness" to the image that adds a certain kind of
sparkle/sharpness, but again it seems artificial. The real world as
viewed by eyeballs doesn't seem that "sharp" or vivid. The demos
that were showing were clearly intended to take advantage of this,
all these closeups of brightly colored flowers, snowboarders on
glaring snow etc. I don't believe a sky exists anywhere the shade of
blue they were depicting in that demo.

I see all kinds of artifacts in the images. Yeah, okay, they're not
meant to be viewed from 6 inches away. But when I back off to 8 -
10 feet, I still see this odd graininess, especially when the image
pans. Plus all these other odd things that happen to the image.
Overall I find it harder on my eyes than a sharp picture on a good
analog tv.

As I understand it, in a few years we're getting all digital whether
we like it or not. Is the whole HDTV thing just a bill of goods we
got sold/crammed down our throats?

When I bought an HDTV-ready TV, I bought a CRT model. CRT and rear
projection CRT are proven technologies that can reproduce signals at
these resolutions. They've been in use for some time in the computer
industry, doing just that.

The difference is not HUGE, but my SD signals are actually received,
often, at EDTV resolution from a satellite, so what I'm actually
comparing is the line-doubled 480p signal from the satellite to the
1080i signal from the same source. My estimate is that the picture
clarity is 3db better on the HDTV signals, especially the good ones.

That's about twice as good as the SDTV signals.

Might that suggest that if the EDTV signal was actually true 480P and
had been captured with a good 720P camera that it might be as good as
the 1080i signal?

Actually, you might suggest it, but it runs counter to my actual
experience. I see materials that are converted from HD cameras all the
time and, while they are 1000% better than regular SDTV signals, they are
still about 3db short of a 1080i or 720p production over the 1080i path
from my satellite. Even the best DVD films are about 3db worse. For
example, I have the entire LotR trilogy in anamorphic widescreen. It is
good, but it still has that 3db clarity loss from the 1080i version
broeadcast by my movie supplier.

--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

My first exposure to high definition TV was in the Shinjuku subway station
in Tokyo Japan in 1991, when Sony had deployed an analog HD system long
before the advent of MPEG, digital broadcasting, or flat panel TVs. It was
called the MUSE system, and was installed in train / subway stations to
attract consumer attention and build market demand. It blows away anything
subsequently introduced based on my recollection.

The analog modulation scheme did not rely on macroblocks, compression, or
other digital conveniences. The CRTs, extremely fine pitch Trinitrons, were
wide aspect ratio, gorgeous displays, which make current LCDs look like the
non-linear, smeared displays they truly are.

ATSC and the engineering efforts associated with bringing digital
broadcasting to the U.S. have made a lot of great achievements, but
unfortunately, delivering a truly superb quality end-product is not among
them, IMHO. There are enough improvements over standard definition TV that
most people, myself included, still buy into the upgrades for lack of better
options.

Smarty


"Dave Oldridge" wrote in message
9...
Bob Miller wrote in
link.net:

Dave Oldridge wrote:
"HiC" wrote in
ink.net:

Went into a local Circuit City and took a good long look at their
HDTV selections. They had several including 2 1080p sets that I was
told were set up correctly and what I was seeing was as good as it
gets. Everything HD from the cams to the screen. Both the 1080p's
were running some sort of hard drive unit, not off a broadcast.

I've been hearing how amazing HDTV is. Well....while there's a
certain "pow" when you first see them, I get the sense it's due to
some artifically induced phenomena. The colors seem vivid, but it
seems to me in an enhanced - i.e. forced way. There seems to be an
excessive "whiteness" to the image that adds a certain kind of
sparkle/sharpness, but again it seems artificial. The real world as
viewed by eyeballs doesn't seem that "sharp" or vivid. The demos
that were showing were clearly intended to take advantage of this,
all these closeups of brightly colored flowers, snowboarders on
glaring snow etc. I don't believe a sky exists anywhere the shade of
blue they were depicting in that demo.

I see all kinds of artifacts in the images. Yeah, okay, they're not
meant to be viewed from 6 inches away. But when I back off to 8 -
10 feet, I still see this odd graininess, especially when the image
pans. Plus all these other odd things that happen to the image.
Overall I find it harder on my eyes than a sharp picture on a good
analog tv.

As I understand it, in a few years we're getting all digital whether
we like it or not. Is the whole HDTV thing just a bill of goods we
got sold/crammed down our throats?

When I bought an HDTV-ready TV, I bought a CRT model. CRT and rear
projection CRT are proven technologies that can reproduce signals at
these resolutions. They've been in use for some time in the computer
industry, doing just that.

The difference is not HUGE, but my SD signals are actually received,
often, at EDTV resolution from a satellite, so what I'm actually
comparing is the line-doubled 480p signal from the satellite to the
1080i signal from the same source. My estimate is that the picture
clarity is 3db better on the HDTV signals, especially the good ones.

That's about twice as good as the SDTV signals.

Might that suggest that if the EDTV signal was actually true 480P and
had been captured with a good 720P camera that it might be as good as
the 1080i signal?

Actually, you might suggest it, but it runs counter to my actual
experience. I see materials that are converted from HD cameras all the
time and, while they are 1000% better than regular SDTV signals, they are
still about 3db short of a 1080i or 720p production over the 1080i path
from my satellite. Even the best DVD films are about 3db worse. For
example, I have the entire LotR trilogy in anamorphic widescreen. It is
good, but it still has that 3db clarity loss from the 1080i version
broeadcast by my movie supplier.

--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
In article ,
Ty Ford wrote:

My fear is that by the time enough HD sets are bought by consumers, the good
video I saw in the Utah games will be a distant memory.

Absolutely.

It happens in every industry.


Giggle.

Now elmo is an expert in _every_ industry.

It's pretty apparent, reading his posts, that he isn't an expert in
*any* industry.

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

"HiC" wrote in message
ink.net...
Went into a local Circuit City and took a good long look at their HDTV
selections. They had several including 2 1080p sets that I was told were
set
up correctly and what I was seeing was as good as it gets. Everything HD
from the cams to the screen. Both the 1080p's were running some sort of
hard
drive unit, not off a broadcast.

I've been hearing how amazing HDTV is. Well....while there's a certain
"pow"
when you first see them, I get the sense it's due to some artifically
induced phenomena. The colors seem vivid, but it seems to me in an
enhanced - i.e. forced way. There seems to be an excessive "whiteness" to
the image that adds a certain kind of sparkle/sharpness, but again it
seems
artificial. The real world as viewed by eyeballs doesn't seem that "sharp"
or vivid. The demos that were showing were clearly intended to take
advantage of this, all these closeups of brightly colored flowers,
snowboarders on glaring snow etc. I don't believe a sky exists anywhere
the
shade of blue they were depicting in that demo.

I see all kinds of artifacts in the images. Yeah, okay, they're not meant
to
be viewed from 6 inches away. But when I back off to 8 - 10 feet, I still
see this odd graininess, especially when the image pans. Plus all these
other odd things that happen to the image. Overall I find it harder on my
eyes than a sharp picture on a good analog tv.

As I understand it, in a few years we're getting all digital whether we
like
it or not. Is the whole HDTV thing just a bill of goods we got
sold/crammed
down our throats?




the difference between Discovery Channel (SD) and DiscoveryHD is staggering.
jaw dropping. period. if you can't see the difference, it's probably time
to see an optometrist. that said, I'm not impressed in the least with "HD"
movies. cable, satellite, hd-dvd, and especially blu-ray aren't
particularly stunning.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

"HiC" wrote in message
ink.net...
Went into a local Circuit City and took a good long look at their HDTV
selections. They had several including 2 1080p sets that I was told were
set
up correctly and what I was seeing was as good as it gets. Everything HD
from the cams to the screen. Both the 1080p's were running some sort of
hard
drive unit, not off a broadcast.

I've been hearing how amazing HDTV is. Well....while there's a certain
"pow"
when you first see them, I get the sense it's due to some artifically
induced phenomena. The colors seem vivid, but it seems to me in an
enhanced - i.e. forced way. There seems to be an excessive "whiteness" to
the image that adds a certain kind of sparkle/sharpness, but again it
seems
artificial. The real world as viewed by eyeballs doesn't seem that "sharp"
or vivid. The demos that were showing were clearly intended to take
advantage of this, all these closeups of brightly colored flowers,
snowboarders on glaring snow etc. I don't believe a sky exists anywhere
the
shade of blue they were depicting in that demo.

I see all kinds of artifacts in the images. Yeah, okay, they're not meant
to
be viewed from 6 inches away. But when I back off to 8 - 10 feet, I still
see this odd graininess, especially when the image pans. Plus all these
other odd things that happen to the image. Overall I find it harder on my
eyes than a sharp picture on a good analog tv.

As I understand it, in a few years we're getting all digital whether we
like
it or not. Is the whole HDTV thing just a bill of goods we got
sold/crammed
down our throats?

Mass merchandisers virtually never display HD as it really is.

The sets are normally adjusted to "torch mode" - max brightness, max
contrast, max saturation with hightened reds. WhoreTV

My local Circuit City has a multi-drop component distribution system that
adds ghosting and noise to the displayed images.

RP and FP displays are almost never converged.

Media is most often selected to show the extremes of imagery -
colors/dynamic range. It's called "eye candy".

But at home, with proper adjustment, there is NOTHING like HD. I have had HD
for about 4 years now and it has changed my TV viewing habits dramatically.

If you think analog is better, I suggest you watch Starship Troopers or
better yet, Finding Nemo in HD.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

What is your source for Discovery? cable? satellite? OTA?

--
All the Best
Richard Harison
"Khee Mao" wrote in message
...

"HiC" wrote in message
ink.net...
Went into a local Circuit City and took a good long look at their HDTV
selections. They had several including 2 1080p sets that I was told were set
up correctly and what I was seeing was as good as it gets. Everything HD
from the cams to the screen. Both the 1080p's were running some sort of hard
drive unit, not off a broadcast.

I've been hearing how amazing HDTV is. Well....while there's a certain "pow"
when you first see them, I get the sense it's due to some artifically
induced phenomena. The colors seem vivid, but it seems to me in an
enhanced - i.e. forced way. There seems to be an excessive "whiteness" to
the image that adds a certain kind of sparkle/sharpness, but again it seems
artificial. The real world as viewed by eyeballs doesn't seem that "sharp"
or vivid. The demos that were showing were clearly intended to take
advantage of this, all these closeups of brightly colored flowers,
snowboarders on glaring snow etc. I don't believe a sky exists anywhere the
shade of blue they were depicting in that demo.

I see all kinds of artifacts in the images. Yeah, okay, they're not meant to
be viewed from 6 inches away. But when I back off to 8 - 10 feet, I still
see this odd graininess, especially when the image pans. Plus all these
other odd things that happen to the image. Overall I find it harder on my
eyes than a sharp picture on a good analog tv.

As I understand it, in a few years we're getting all digital whether we like
it or not. Is the whole HDTV thing just a bill of goods we got sold/crammed
down our throats?




the difference between Discovery Channel (SD) and DiscoveryHD is staggering.
jaw dropping. period. if you can't see the difference, it's probably time to
see an optometrist. that said, I'm not impressed in the least with "HD"
movies. cable, satellite, hd-dvd, and especially blu-ray aren't particularly
stunning.




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----