Digital vs HD

I know little about this subject, but as far as I can tell, HD is a subset
of digital - it's possible to have digital without HD but not the other way
around. I have seen some HD TV and the clarity is amazing compared with
alleged digital programs - some of them seem little different from the
previous high quality analogue programs. I live in central Scotland, where
there was a switchover on 1 June - supposedly only BBC2 was affected. The
next phase is on 15 June and, according to digitaluk.co.uk, a few HD
channels will suddenly appear, such as BBC1 HD.

HD is very obvious when you see it, but is there a way to tell the
difference between a digital transmission and a high quality analogue
transmission?

On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 10:23:41 +0100, "wulfit"
wrote:

I know little about this subject, but as far as I can tell, HD is a subset
of digital - it's possible to have digital without HD but not the other way
around. I have seen some HD TV and the clarity is amazing compared with
alleged digital programs - some of them seem little different from the
previous high quality analogue programs. I live in central Scotland, where
there was a switchover on 1 June - supposedly only BBC2 was affected. The
next phase is on 15 June and, according to digitaluk.co.uk, a few HD
channels will suddenly appear, such as BBC1 HD.

HD is very obvious when you see it, but is there a way to tell the
difference between a digital transmission and a high quality analogue
transmission?

The flippant answer is that you won't receive a high quality analogue
transmission as the analogue service will be switched off! The real
question is whether you will notice a difference between HD and SD
(standard definition).

I assume you don't receive your TV from Blackhill as the switchover
stage one is next Wednesday (8 June) with stage two on 22 June. Is it
Craigkelly or somewhere? Blackhill already has a temporary HD service
and I have an HD television. I really like the HD picture and I think
the sound is probably slightly better as well.

There seem to be two theories: some say HD is much better and some say
they cannot tell the difference. It is claimed that it depends on
whether you are the type of person who concentrates on the picture
quality or on the programme. It is very much a matter of personal
preference and probably depends on your eyesight too. All I can
suggest is that you find someone with HD and ask to spend an evening
watching their TV. Make sure you look at the BBC HD channel as you
can be sure you are seeing programmes made in HD and not just
converted (upscaled) to HD.

In article ,
Scott wrote:
There seem to be two theories: some say HD is much better and some say
they cannot tell the difference. It is claimed that it depends on
whether you are the type of person who concentrates on the picture
quality or on the programme. It is very much a matter of personal
preference and probably depends on your eyesight too. All I can
suggest is that you find someone with HD and ask to spend an evening
watching their TV. Make sure you look at the BBC HD channel as you
can be sure you are seeing programmes made in HD and not just
converted (upscaled) to HD.

It also depends on the material viewed. Dramas are usually shot using
filters in the cameras which have the effect of softening the picture.
Full HD closeups ain't too kind on the actors. So the actual definition is
often poorer than straight SD without filters.

Sports, etc, would normally be shot without such filters.

--
*Why do overlook and oversee mean opposite things?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

My signal comes from the Craigkelly transmitter. What is standard
definition? I have BT vision and have downloaded some HD programs from
them, which is how I've been able to see and hear the superb quality of HD
programming. Someone I spoke to at digitaluk.co.uk told me that digital
programs have been transmitted from Craigkelly for a while, which confused
me even more. On 1 June, after re-tuning, I expected there would be a
massive change in quality but it hasn't happened, except that BBC2 is of
excellent quality.

I'm looking forward to watching Wimbledon this year in HD.

"Scott" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 10:23:41 +0100, "wulfit"
wrote:

I know little about this subject, but as far as I can tell, HD is a subset
of digital - it's possible to have digital without HD but not the other
way
around. I have seen some HD TV and the clarity is amazing compared with
alleged digital programs - some of them seem little different from the
previous high quality analogue programs. I live in central Scotland,
where
there was a switchover on 1 June - supposedly only BBC2 was affected. The
next phase is on 15 June and, according to digitaluk.co.uk, a few HD
channels will suddenly appear, such as BBC1 HD.

HD is very obvious when you see it, but is there a way to tell the
difference between a digital transmission and a high quality analogue
transmission?

The flippant answer is that you won't receive a high quality analogue
transmission as the analogue service will be switched off! The real
question is whether you will notice a difference between HD and SD
(standard definition).

I assume you don't receive your TV from Blackhill as the switchover
stage one is next Wednesday (8 June) with stage two on 22 June. Is it
Craigkelly or somewhere? Blackhill already has a temporary HD service
and I have an HD television. I really like the HD picture and I think
the sound is probably slightly better as well.

There seem to be two theories: some say HD is much better and some say
they cannot tell the difference. It is claimed that it depends on
whether you are the type of person who concentrates on the picture
quality or on the programme. It is very much a matter of personal
preference and probably depends on your eyesight too. All I can
suggest is that you find someone with HD and ask to spend an evening
watching their TV. Make sure you look at the BBC HD channel as you
can be sure you are seeing programmes made in HD and not just
converted (upscaled) to HD.

wulfit wrote:

HD is very obvious when you see it, but is there a way to tell the
difference between a digital transmission and a high quality analogue
transmission?

Basically the way they fail. Analogue signals will show ghosting and
snow if the reception is anything but perfect. Digital ones will start
breaking up into blocks and you will get old parts of the picture moving
around with the subject of a new scene, if the reception is failing.
Digital ones fail very quickly when the reception is poor, whereas
analogue ones just get more and more difficult to view. If the
reception is only slightly better than failing, digital transmissions
will reproduce the same on every receiver.

Digital pictures can also show JPEG like artifacts, whereas analogue
artifacts tend to be the form of cross-colour (stripey objects appearing
coloured).

Digital systems get many channels into the radio spectrum space taken by
one analogue channel.

All TV pictures eventually end up as analogue at the display. This
includes HD, however, the radio spectrum doesn't have the capacity to
transmit HD in analogue, although it would, theoretically, be possible.

You also get things like now and next displays, and electronic programme
guides.

A lot of older material was recorded in analogue form, and may be
limited by the recording/film quality.

"wulfit" wrote in message
...
My signal comes from the Craigkelly transmitter. What is standard
definition? I have BT vision and have downloaded some HD programs from
them, which is how I've been able to see and hear the superb quality of HD
programming. Someone I spoke to at digitaluk.co.uk told me that digital
programs have been transmitted from Craigkelly for a while, which confused
me even more. On 1 June, after re-tuning, I expected there would be a
massive change in quality but it hasn't happened, except that BBC2 is of
excellent quality.

I'm looking forward to watching Wimbledon this year in HD.

"Scott" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 10:23:41 +0100, "wulfit"
wrote:

I know little about this subject, but as far as I can tell, HD is a
subset
of digital - it's possible to have digital without HD but not the other
way
around. I have seen some HD TV and the clarity is amazing compared with
alleged digital programs - some of them seem little different from the
previous high quality analogue programs. I live in central Scotland,
where
there was a switchover on 1 June - supposedly only BBC2 was affected.
The
next phase is on 15 June and, according to digitaluk.co.uk, a few HD
channels will suddenly appear, such as BBC1 HD.

HD is very obvious when you see it, but is there a way to tell the
difference between a digital transmission and a high quality analogue
transmission?

The flippant answer is that you won't receive a high quality analogue
transmission as the analogue service will be switched off! The real
question is whether you will notice a difference between HD and SD
(standard definition).

I assume you don't receive your TV from Blackhill as the switchover
stage one is next Wednesday (8 June) with stage two on 22 June. Is it
Craigkelly or somewhere? Blackhill already has a temporary HD service
and I have an HD television. I really like the HD picture and I think
the sound is probably slightly better as well.

There seem to be two theories: some say HD is much better and some say
they cannot tell the difference. It is claimed that it depends on
whether you are the type of person who concentrates on the picture
quality or on the programme. It is very much a matter of personal
preference and probably depends on your eyesight too. All I can
suggest is that you find someone with HD and ask to spend an evening
watching their TV. Make sure you look at the BBC HD channel as you
can be sure you are seeing programmes made in HD and not just
converted (upscaled) to HD.


Craigkelly has been "digital" since 1998 on standard definition. On 1 June
the BBC set of channels changed frequency - (and analogue BBC2 went off
permanently). Nothing else happened. The main changes occur on 15 June
when we retune again.

On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 10:56:35 +0100, "wulfit"
wrote:

My signal comes from the Craigkelly transmitter. What is standard
definition? I have BT vision and have downloaded some HD programs from
them, which is how I've been able to see and hear the superb quality of HD
programming. Someone I spoke to at digitaluk.co.uk told me that digital
programs have been transmitted from Craigkelly for a while, which confused
me even more. On 1 June, after re-tuning, I expected there would be a
massive change in quality but it hasn't happened, except that BBC2 is of
excellent quality.

I'm looking forward to watching Wimbledon this year in HD.

Again at the risk of being slightly flippant, standard definition is
all digital television that is not high definition. Sticking with
Freeview, there are four HD services: BBC One HD, BBC HD, STV HD and
Channel 4 HD. All the other channels are SD.

Digital TV has been transmitted from the main transmitters (not
relays) for a long time - right back to when ONdigital (later ITV
Digital) started in the late 1990s. This was replaced by Freeview
when ITV Digital went into administration. The changes at digital
switchover a

1) When analogue is switched off, there is a large power increase in
the digital services
2) Digital services will be available from relay transmitters also
(not all digital channels though)
3) HD available from all transmitters (not just the Blackhill for
Scotland)
4) Technical changes in transmission standards which I will leave to
the experts

Fundamentally the picture quality does not change with the switchover.
If you were receiving satisfactory digital reception from Craigkelly,
you probably won't notice any difference. If you were having problems
with pixellation (picture breakup) these should be resolved by the
higher power.

If you are happy with BBC2 (digital) it may be that the extra cost of
HD is not warranted.

I would wait for the final switchover and watch all the channels
(maybe not all right enough!!) and see if you are happy. I would also
find someone with HD and look at that also.

What size is your set? I think received wisdom (excuse pun) is that
HD only offers benefit from about 32 inches upwards.

On Saturday, June 4th, 2011 at 10:23:41h +0100, wulfit wrote:

I know little about this subject, but as far as I can tell, HD is a
subset of digital - it's possible to have digital without HD but not the
other way around.

Actually, it *was* possible to receive HD TV without having digital,
but only if you lived in Japan which had the world's only analog
HD TV service.

The plan in Europe was to have HD TV transmitted with HD-MAC via
satellite, but before the European broadcasters had got their act
together, digital TV had arrived on the scene.

See the sections on MUSE (system in Japan) and HD-MAC (system for
Europe) at

http://en.wikipedia.ORG/wiki/Analog_high-definition_television_system

On Saturday, June 4th, 2011 at 11:38:01h +0100, David Woolley wrote:

the radio spectrum doesn't have the capacity to
transmit HD in analogue, although it would, theoretically, be possible.

As I said that Japanese had a terrestrial analog HD service 1125
lines (MUSE) so it is not just theoretically possible, but possible
in practice.

So tempting isn't it?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"wulfit" wrote in message
...
I know little about this subject, but as far as I can tell, HD is a subset
of digital - it's possible to have digital without HD but not the other way
around. I have seen some HD TV and the clarity is amazing compared with
alleged digital programs - some of them seem little different from the
previous high quality analogue programs. I live in central Scotland, where
there was a switchover on 1 June - supposedly only BBC2 was affected. The
next phase is on 15 June and, according to digitaluk.co.uk, a few HD
channels will suddenly appear, such as BBC1 HD.

HD is very obvious when you see it, but is there a way to tell the
difference between a digital transmission and a high quality analogue
transmission?