General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 05:26:24 PM
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 05:26:24 PM
Curious. What is happening outside of the U.S. with HD (High Defination) TV?
We keep dragging our feet here and the date for all digital broadcasts has been moved to the end of 2006. It could move again.
I really have not kept up on the happenings outside of the U.S. Is the format the same or is the U.S. doing another exclusive thing again (PAL vs NTSC)? What are the timeframes for it to happen outside of the U.S.?
How many of you have already taken the plunge and purchased an HDTV? I bought one, but the native material for it is pretty lacking.
Just curious.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: BigGun on June 24, 2005, 05:29:23 PM
I have one, and wish they would quit pushing the date. Want all my programming in HD. Although, there is more & more channels being added all the time. I maybe get a total of15 channels that are 100% HD broadcast, including all the major networks.
HD is big difference & good.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Nilsen on June 24, 2005, 05:34:55 PM
I belive that we will get the first HD broadcasts form some european sports channel this fall (sattelite) and then the rest will follow on from there.
Our norwegian channels will start transmitting in HD from early 2007 and will completly take over from 2013 when the analog networks are shut down permanently.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 05:34:56 PM
Big, do you get your local channels over the air or other media?
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 05:36:41 PM
Nilseon, what format is HD in your area? 720p or i? or higher or lower? I am curious if the HD format is the same around the world.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Sandman on June 24, 2005, 05:37:59 PM
Whoa... Skuzzy started a thread and we aren't being admonished. Is this a first?
:aok :D
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 05:40:51 PM
Well, with the MP's about, I have a little time to actually get involved with the community, rather than being the big, ugly, stick which beats up stuff.
This particular topic is of interest to me.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: BigGun on June 24, 2005, 05:41:22 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy Big, do you get your local channels over the air or other media?
Not sure if directed at me or exactly the diff. I get cable through Comcast. Local network channels I get on different channels. Like Fox is on 2, Fox HD is on 702, ABC is on 7 ABC in HD is on 707. Several other HD only channels including discovery, pbs (5yr old watches zaboomapho in HD), espn to name a few.
And mine is in 1080 (i I think although could be p)
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 05:42:39 PM
So you have an antenna for the local broadcasts? Or do they come through your converter box over cable?
Easy to tell the difference between 'i' and 'p'. If you get a slight flicker/jitter in horizontal lines or horizontal breaks from one color to the next color, then it is 'i'.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Nilsen on June 24, 2005, 05:46:01 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy Nilseon, what format is HD in your area? 720p or i? or higher or lower? I am curious if the HD format is the same around the world.
I belive they will be 720p at first, but alot is yet to be decided and there will prolly take abit of time before all have settled for a standard. They are advicing people to go for 1080i to be on the safe side. I dont think there will be any other standards then those 2 tho.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: BigGun on June 24, 2005, 05:46:27 PM
It says 1080 when change to the channel, will pay attention tonight to see if it is i or p.
I get the whole service through cable box. It cost an extra $5 a month to rent the box from comcast which broadcasts in HD with the additional HD only stations.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: straffo on June 24, 2005, 05:46:55 PM
TVHD is suppose to start this year format should be 1080i.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: SOB on June 24, 2005, 05:47:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy Well, with the MP's about, I have a little time to actually get involved with the community, rather than being the big, ugly, stick which beats up stuff.
Not to worry, Skuzz, you'll always be big and ugly to me! ;)
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 05:47:42 PM
I take that as good news SOB. :D
straffo, why 1080i? 720p would look better, in terms of stable picture.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Meatwad on June 24, 2005, 05:49:42 PM
I do know for a fact that if choosing to watch HD channels via a satellite, C-band (those real big dishes) has overall higher picture quality on larger screen tv's then by using Voom, DirecTV, or Dish Network. Big dish signal is the actual real signal sent to cable headends, while mini dish is overcompressed and retransmitted. I am not exactly 100% sure how it compares with cable tv or OTA tv. I have a link for their forums if anyone wants to check it out.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: JB73 on June 24, 2005, 05:51:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy Well, with the MP's about, I have a little time to actually get involved with the community, rather than being the big, ugly, stick which beats up stuff.
BWhahahahaha!!!
that's almost good enough to make a new avatar for you ; ) i bigh flashing stick! ; )
we miss this skuzzy that is for sure.
on the HDTV topic, supposedly in Milwaukee you can get all the local's in HD with digital cable (so the cable provider
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 05:54:17 PM
A friend of mine has HD cable and it is awful. But it is the converter box they are using in his neighborhood/node. Some cheap no-name thing. He says his analog over cable looked better.
The best thing I like about my set, right now, is how good 16:9 DVD's play on it. I have yet to see any broadcast material which looks any better, but I have not gotten any HD material either. I am thinking about putting an HD antenna in the attic to get the local channels HD signal, but the native HD material is so spotty, I just do not know if it is worth the hassle.
EDIT: Yes JB, the local channels can be had here over cable, but they look terrible. Much worse than over DiSH or DirectTV, all due to the cheapo converter box they are supplying (I hope that is what the issue is).
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: JB73 on June 24, 2005, 05:59:37 PM
yeah, i have not heard anything good or bad yet about that, though all my friends are too poor for it anyway lol one friend doesn't even have plain cable.
the local morning radio show has a sports guy on each day steve czaban, from the DC area. he has cable, sattelite, and an HD antenna, and thye talk about watching sports on HD ALL the time. he swears by it, and gets all PO'd when the major sports event of the day is not in HD, so i am guessing his picture is great
yeas that's all hearsay from a radio jock, but thats the best i have to contribute on the conversation ; )
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Pongo on June 24, 2005, 06:05:57 PM
Lined up for a 40-50 inchish HDTV and NFL sunday ticket. Saw the HDTV broadcast of an nfl game last year in the store and it nocked me on my butt.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Eagler on June 24, 2005, 06:07:19 PM
we even have several pay per view in HD down here
all the broadcast, hbo, showtime, discovery, espn, tnt, hdnet & hdnet2
biggun, you shouldn't care if they push the date, you are already getting what has to be gotten by the date if you are geting your broadcast chs in hd
SA box (Scientific Atlanta), it even have the dvr that records hi def and the picture is awesome - add it the 5.1 sound and it doesn't get any better. PACE makes a super HD cable box also
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 24, 2005, 06:09:19 PM
The broadcasts are in HD, but most of the material being broadcast is just upconverted from the old format and not being produced in the native format.
The upconversion ain't that great. The native stuff looks really good, but it is a small percentage of the broadcasts.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: BigGun on June 24, 2005, 06:10:05 PM
Well i notice a huge difference with HD & noHD...just flip between same show and the difference is huge.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Eagler on June 24, 2005, 06:12:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by BigGun Well i notice a huge difference with HD & noHD...just flip between same show and the difference is huge.
part of that is that the "HD" channel is a digital channel where the other regular broadcast is still analog. analog is subject to a whole bunch of bad things resulting in crummy picture in cable plant that digital is not..
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: AmRaaM on June 24, 2005, 06:22:08 PM
A REAL MAN won't own HD digital tv, the slow channel surfing defies logic, if ya cant channel surf at a decent pace what good is HD ??
so who cares where HD ends up...
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Furball on June 24, 2005, 06:23:21 PM
Skuzzy stop beating about the bush... you just want to know if you will get your pr0n channels on it, dont you.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Chairboy on June 24, 2005, 06:26:59 PM
I've had HD for a couple years now. HD Cable, via a Motorola 6000 box. It's not BAD... but I hardly ever watch HD content. I'm so spoiled by PVRs that I... just can't watch live TV anymore.
So I have a big HD compatible big screen that I always watch TV via analog Never The Same Color instead of digimatic, quadraphonic bit, high-fi super res mode.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Rolex on June 24, 2005, 06:32:49 PM
Ooohh, a topic I know a little bit about since one of my clients manufactures the broadcast side hardware/encoding devices here in Japan.
But no time :( I have to do some work today...
First, there are 3 Digital standards:
European DVB system The US ATSC system The Japanese system ISDB which is related to DVB.
Technically, the Japanese system is better, but the US standard was developed just to be different, the same as 3G cell phone standards. The cell phone difference was more centered on IPRs, but the HDTV and DVB standards were set out of fear that the US would lose domestic market viability.
All can theoretically convert PAL and NTSC. Japan pioneered analog HDTV (1035i and called Hi-Vision, which is still around and looks great) in the earky 1990s. Yes, I said 1990s. I was shocked when I first came here and saw it. It's been around for over 10 years now and commonplace.
Japan started terrestrial digital 2 years ago. The market and approach is different, but I don't have time to explain why right now. Japan is already getting ready to jump a generation in technology and go to Ultra-High Definition TV, which is 16 times better than HDTV.
I've seen it and it's astounding. Most people in the US have never really seen 'true' HDTV (unless you've seen it in a lab) because the broadcast side cameras, coders and transmitters are not state of the art. They are mostly early generation stuff.
Got to go! I'm late!
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Waffle on June 24, 2005, 06:52:33 PM
Been kicking around the idea of the digital cable....jus too damn expensive right now here..but it looks good on everything I've seen so far. With the prices of widescreen LCDs coming down ($900 for a 30") I'm really interested to see one with the HDTV. Will give it some more time and see if the service prices drop any.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Chairboy on June 24, 2005, 07:31:18 PM
Remember, digital cable does not necessarily equal HDTV cable. Make sure that your cable company offers actual HDTV before springing for it. The vast majority of digital cable boxes are NOT HD.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Drifter1234 on June 24, 2005, 08:07:57 PM
Speaking of TV's
I got $1500-$2000 set aside for new TV.
Room is 14' x 20'
Figure I need 45-52ish" TV
What do I get for best results for the money?
Want HDTV etc.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Chairboy on June 24, 2005, 08:27:34 PM
Look into DLP.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Wolf14 on June 24, 2005, 08:59:12 PM
I hate HDTV. To many danged formats and conversions. Some pieces of equipment will only accept this type of format and this one will only take this format and to get from here to there you have to go here.
People on the consumer end have an understanding of the headaches involed at times in getting them their shows. HDTV and Digital TV are just royal pains in the butt compared to analog and you the majority of people really dont care as long as the program they like airs.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Drifter1234 on June 24, 2005, 09:26:02 PM
Wolf14,
Is that an endorsement of any particular TV or a general rant on the state of affairs in the TV market?
Title: Re: The state of HD TV
Post by: Boroda on June 24, 2005, 09:31:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy Curious. What is happening outside of the U.S. with HD (High Defination) TV?
Here in Russia, I mean - in Msk, we got the best cellular telephony provider killed because the band they used, 800MHz, is "reserved for future digital TV". Damn, they had the best quality and prices. They used CDMA-2000 at 800MHz.
Now I had to switch to some weird CDMA-450 standard, invented in Romania (!!!) and suported by some "world-famous brands" like Huawei. My cellular turned into a "digital pager", instead of receiving calls I get SMS messages like "you have been called from number 123-4567".
Digital TV on the air, not cable or sat, is promised in 2008. We have a beautiful Russian/Soviet concept: "to assimilate funds" (освоить средства). I bet - the funds will be assimilated by 2008, and we'll not have anything. The problem is that our communications minister has a serious share in GSM cellular operator compamies. So - kill CDMA operators who provide better service and use "digital TV" as an excuse.
Damn. I hate capitalism.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Wolf14 on June 24, 2005, 10:02:49 PM
Drifter I have worked in broadcast TV for going on 14 years now. Its more of a rant of the state of affairs of TV comming from one of many that make the magic happen for those at home to enjoy in a seamless and uninterupted fashion.
The decision to go to mandatory HD/Digitasl TV by a certain date seemed to be made by individuals who made the decision because it sounded good and great. They didnt have an understanding about how it all had to happen they just wanted it to happen now.
Kinda the reason the question of "When is everybody going HD going to happen?" and the dates keep changing. It wasnt as easy as they thought.
PBS stations by the way were operating fully digital broadcast before commercial. Partialy because the PBS stations had access to govermant grants that gave them the money to purchase the equipment needed. Commercial stations do not qualify for those grants and they had to raise the money on their own as well as paying for their own current operating costs.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: majic on June 24, 2005, 10:40:01 PM
I have a widecreen hdtv (tube not flat). DVD's look great and the hdtv signal from the cable company is awesome. Problem is, there is hardly any programming right now. In the last month, I have watched one thing in hdtv, the first half of game 7 last night.
ABC, PBS, and one other channel outside of the paid channels like HBO are all that's available here so far.
I can't wait until they settle on a high-def dvd format and get them on the market.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: 1K3 on June 24, 2005, 10:48:32 PM
The FORMAT WARS is only half of the issue with Digital TVs. There's also an issue on which connection we should use. Currently there's Component cable (green, blue, red), DVI (Digital Visual Interface - similar to PC monitor cable), and HDMI cable (same dimensions as USB, but this also delivers video and sound)
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: rpm on June 25, 2005, 12:03:41 AM
I have a 65in HDTV. The local programming is pretty sparse and I'm on the outer fringe of reception with a 40ft antenna and a signal booster. Having said that, the picture is amazing. I also have Dishnetwork but not their HD package, yet. Waiting for them to add more programming before coughing up the extra bucks.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: kevykev56 on June 25, 2005, 12:55:41 AM
My family have had HDTV 16:9 now for almost 2 years. We have a 55in Widescreen. I rent my HDTV set top box from Cox cable in NW Florida. My programing consists of the 70 standard analog channels , 50 DTV channels, and 12 HDTV channels. I only have one channel that is local programming (NBC). My format is 1080i and there is no flicker at all noticable.
The reason some of the HDTV programing looks bad is because it was recorded prior to the HDTV format and then converted. The resolution is just not as good as newly recorded material.
Without a doubt, true HDTV format is far superior than analog or DTV. I describe it to my friends as, "watching the TV is more clear than looking at you now." The colors are much more vibrant and details just pop out at you. I find myself watching wierd stuff just to see the cool effects of HDTV. Tonight I was watching a Duran Duran concert, I hate Duran Duran. Sporting events are the coolest thing to watch. Discovery HD is my favorite channel. Almost all the programs are true HD format and look great!
The worst part of all this is.....$160 Monthly cable bill!!!!!!...includes internet.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Dinger on June 25, 2005, 01:19:44 AM
Yeah, true HDTV is quite impressive. Last year, I went to viist my brother and his girlfriend. Went to a place her grandfather rents out to watch the baseball game, and they happened to have the live HD feed from Japan on one of the TVs. Impressive resolution. ... Of course, the best we can get for HDTV right now is to find someone who's managed to make a high-quality xvid recording of an HD television show.
Title: Re: Re: The state of HD TV
Post by: straffo on June 25, 2005, 02:28:59 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda Here in Russia, I mean - in Msk, we got the best cellular telephony provider killed because the band they used, 800MHz, is "reserved for future digital TV". Damn, they had the best quality and prices. They used CDMA-2000 at 800MHz.
Now I had to switch to some weird CDMA-450 standard, invented in Romania (!!!) and suported by some "world-famous brands" like Huawei. My cellular turned into a "digital pager", instead of receiving calls I get SMS messages like "you have been called from number 123-4567".
Digital TV on the air, not cable or sat, is promised in 2008. We have a beautiful Russian/Soviet concept: "to assimilate funds" (освоить средства). I bet - the funds will be assimilated by 2008, and we'll not have anything. The problem is that our communications minister has a serious share in GSM cellular operator compamies. So - kill CDMA operators who provide better service and use "digital TV" as an excuse.
Damn. I hate capitalism.
that's not capitalism that's corruption and nepotism.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Monk on June 25, 2005, 03:13:29 AM
HD what?
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Wolf14 on June 25, 2005, 03:42:38 AM
Some Sony reps came and demo'd some stuff before we bought our HDcams. One of the things they did was show us that with a 4:3 aspect ratio, the viewer was an observer of the action. In the 16:9 format they are wanting the viewers to be apart of the action.
The rep even went as far as to measure the distance of a 4:3 aspect monitor from top to bottom. He then multiplied that by 4 (why 4 he didnt say) and then he did the same with a 16:9 aspect ratio.
The 16:9 format puts you closer to the TV and because of the clarity it puts you in a position to be a "part" of the action where as the 4:3 still has you far enough away to be just an on looker.
Alot of stuff that I air on HD and analog that happens to be the same program, the HD blows analog outta the water. Problem is like mentioned alot of the shows have been majorly compressed form the original 1:1 master. After a certain point the colors still look good but the clarity and sharpness take on that of an analog signal. The other thing that can happen with heavy compression is pixelization when there is alot of fast movement. Hopefully the majority of stations have gotten past that point and optimzed their output.
The quality of what you see at home (off air) will always depend on how the broadcaster is managing their bandwidth. Broadcasters are only given one liscence for one channel. Within that channel they may choose to run an HD only channel or they may run a DT channel and an HD channel. Hence the ##-# channel format.
The station I work at, we were orginaly were going to run 3 channels, one HD and two DT channels. Adding the third DT channel was making the others look like crap so we opted to run two. So keep in mind that your picture will always be only as good as the amount of bandwidth the broadcaster is alloting for that channel.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: -tronski- on June 25, 2005, 05:59:52 AM
In Aus, tv channels broadcast SD, HD, and analogue signals...with a good slice of broadcasts (especially sport, and news) in digital 16:9 format
Digital tv on a widescreen tv (16:9) is far better than analogue anyday of the week...better still is like when the '04 rugby world cup was on, channel 7 which broadcast the rights, also had 2 dedicated HDTV channels..one with just running live stats and a smaller picture of the game in the corner...and another channel with just the crowd/game sounds - no commentators or adverts! Channel 10 which runs a heap of motoracing has been promising the same with it's racing coverage.
The current standard in aus is Standard Definition picture resolution of 576 lines x 720 pixels @ 50Hz interlaced (576i), and the minimum High Def picture resolution is 576 lines x 720 pixels @ 50Hz progressive (576p). I use just a el-cheapo set top box with our LG widecreen tv and it works great....
The date for switching off the analogue here has been pushed back a couple of years from 2008 to 2012.
Tronsky
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: Skuzzy on June 25, 2005, 07:53:31 AM
I suspect our date will get moved again.
DVI versus HDMI is a non-issue. The video portion of the two interfaces is identical. The only difference between the two is HDMI carries audio and DVI does not, and the connectors are different, but adapters are available for either interface to allow any set top box to be plugged into either interface.
Rolex, that is damn interesting about what is going on in Japan. Looking forward to hearing more about that.
Boroda, sounds like a bad situation, but really has little to do with capitalism. Corruption can happen in any society or governmental platform.
Wolf, that is interesting stuff. How does a station get thier content for HD broadcasts? Is it still satellite fed? Do you put it on tape for broadcasts? Or it is a live feed these days? I know local ads still need interjection into the stream, how is that handled for HD? Any differences there or is it all the same just higher resolution and more data to deal with?
I have been looking into Verizon's FIOS service for getting my digital content, but they are using some cheesy Motorola set top box. Shame, as over the fiber they have pretty much unlimited bandwidth available. My neighbor works for them and was over talking about it one night. They are looking at using, up to, 600Mhz for the broadcast bandwidth to each home. He was saying the fiber stuff is moving so fast they have no idea what type of bandwidth they will have available in a year from now.
Title: The state of HD TV
Post by: lazs2 on June 25, 2005, 08:29:43 AM
I will be looking into it... I have a "regular" 62" mitsubishi that has about the best picture I have seen especially on DVD's but...
my ex bought a mitsubishi wide screen DLP HDTV.. I think mine plays regular shows at least as well and DVD's too but..
She gets like 4 stations in HD.... they friggin look like they are in 3D or sumthin!! amazing!
Trouble is... the shows that she gets in HD I wouldn't watch for any reason anyway.
I will switch to HD when my 62" dies I want DLP too... Don't care about widescreen if I can get another 62" or bigger.
lazs
Title: on a great cable system...
Post by: Eagler on June 25, 2005, 11:15:10 AM
Explorer 8300HD (http://www.scientificatlanta.com/consumers_new/CableBoxes/8300hd.htm) (http://www.gearbits.com/images/8300HD1.jpg) it doesn't get any better
currently testing the Multi-Room DVR (http://hiddenwires.co.uk/resourcesnews2004/news20040507-01.html)