Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

"Smarty" wrote in message
...
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

In the late 1990's I saw reference ATSC vs MUSE at Sarnoff, MIT, CableLabs
and other development centers (including TV mfg corporate labs in Japan)
using the same fine pitch, professional quality Trinitrons, showing the
same kinds of full resolution, highest quality NHK programming you refer to.

Done right, ATSC was (and is) as beautiful as the analog MUSE Hi-Vision
system it replaced.

Done right --- the gotcha.

When you subtract overcompression, low dynamic range flat panel displays and
poor media quality in the first place, the comparison suffers.

Poor image quality is not the fault of ATSC - nor it is always the case. If
people would just crank up the bits, quality would improve.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

Mark Crispin wrote in
da.com:

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Jim Mack wrote:
As many have said, it isn't just the set that's off. If it's coming from
a hard drive then it's likely that it's re-compressed at a bit rate
around 12-15Mb/s, maybe even from an original off-air signal that was
broadcast at 18Mb/s. When you consider that the prime source used maybe
400Mb/s, you can see why it might suffer.

There is also a very real possibility that the set is being fed an analog
signal and thus is not HD at all. Not much attention is paid in these
mass market stores to proper grounding either.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Yes, I was in my local CC store today and told that ALL the HDTV's are fed
thru component vid cables.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

"Richard Harison" wrote in message
...
What is your source for Discovery? cable? satellite? OTA?

cable for both.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

People? As in transmission end or user end? The whole compression thing p$%%es
me off! There HAD to be other alternatives!

--
All the Best
Richard Harison
"R Sweeney" wrote in message
...

"Smarty" wrote in message
...
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

In the late 1990's I saw reference ATSC vs MUSE at Sarnoff, MIT, CableLabs and
other development centers (including TV mfg corporate labs in Japan) using the
same fine pitch, professional quality Trinitrons, showing the same kinds of
full resolution, highest quality NHK programming you refer to.

Done right, ATSC was (and is) as beautiful as the analog MUSE Hi-Vision system
it replaced.

Done right --- the gotcha.

When you subtract overcompression, low dynamic range flat panel displays and
poor media quality in the first place, the comparison suffers.

Poor image quality is not the fault of ATSC - nor it is always the case. If
people would just crank up the bits, quality would improve.




----== 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 =----

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

Interesting. I dumped cable ($$) for StarChoice satellite (Canada). One
wonders what compression ratios are used. Doubt either at this time is at least
MPEG4

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

"Richard Harison" wrote in message
...
What is your source for Discovery? cable? satellite? OTA?

cable for both.




----== 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 =----

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

R Sweeney wrote:

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

Not that I think analog is better, but I'd like to see an example of HD
that doesn't exhibit the characteristics I outlined.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

"Richard Harison" wrote in message
...
People? As in transmission end or user end? The whole compression thing
p$%%es me off! There HAD to be other alternatives!

People as in transmission end.

The problem we have is scarcity of bits in the HFC cable and DBS plants...
and a bit of Hollywood paranoia thrown in for extra low res.

If Comcast is to have their Comcast-owned home humidity and golf playing
moose channels in analog basic cable, they have to shave bits off of the HD
channels.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

Dave Oldridge wrote:
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.

That was a question. I was following your math and maybe misunderstood
it. You were saying "line-doubled 480P" which I interpreted as 480i
information. And I was then suggesting that if it were true 480P from a
very good source, since it has twice the information as the 480i line
doubled version, might it not be as good as the 1080i you were comparing
it to since you said the 1080i was only twice as good as what I took to
be 480i. Wouldn't 480P then equal your 1080i?

Bob Miller

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?


HDTV is a godsend, just never-ever-ever judge the quality [and usually the
lack of which] of _any_ display in a typical retail store.

Do you really like the way HDTV looks?
 

"Jim Mack" wrote
Unfortunately, what you saw _is_ as good as it gets for most people.
Squeezing high-bitrate video down a soda straw delivery 'pipe' robs HD of
what makes it shine. "Digital" in home TV terms means low-bitrate MPEG.
Yeah, it's noise-free. It's also quality-free.



That sounds exactly like the remarks I've read on the overseas forums.

Our 8' wide screen and HD front projector, showing immaculate
high-definition OTA signals, regularly draws gasps from newbie visitors.

After seeing it, most of our friends and relatives have either bought or are
in the planning stages of a HD home theater.