ESPN. To me, this is the best looking HD game so far this season. I'll be shocked if it isn't 1080. If its 720, its the best 720 I ever saw :).

It is 720P

It looks extremely clean for 720p. Very slight softness.

It looks extremely clean for 720p. Very slight softness.

The main camera from the stands looks soft. All the other cameras ( sideline, endzone) looks clear.

ESPN. To me, this is the best looking HD game so far this season. I'll be shocked if it isn't 1080. If its 720, its the best 720 I ever saw :).

It's definitely 720p, exact same facilities and equipment as last year. Same exact crew. It does look good though, that high bit backhaul from Cincinnatti looks better than the Monday Night Countdown studio stuff.

By the way there is no MAIN camera from the stands. There are three high cameras up high one on both 25s and one on the 50. Each one becomes the game camera depending on where the play is at on the field.

For some reason this game is blackout out on our ESPN-HD channel but not the SD channel on Cox Cable in Phoenix.

Donald :)

Looks amazing. No macroblocking, and far more sharp than Fox's HD.

Looks terrible on DirecTV.

Looks terrible on DirecTV.

Agreed!

Agreed!

Looks great on D* here...perhaps you need to check your system out.

fafner

Looks great on D* here...perhaps you need to check your system out.fafner

Mosquito artifacts are numerous on all long shots.

Doesn't look good on E* either.

Mosquito artifacts are numerous on all long shots.
Yep, I think fafner needs to check his eyes out.

For some reason this game is blackout out on our ESPN-HD channel but not the SD channel on Cox Cable in Phoenix.

Donald :)

NFL blackout rules at work here. Only one MNF game for you since the Doubleheader has the ol' Cardinals in game 2

NFL blackout rules at work here. Only one MNF game for you since the Doubleheader has the ol' Cardinals in game 2
So then why would they black out the first game?

exactly. And only the HD channel is blacked out... Which doesn't make any sense. I think cox messed up.

Donald :)

Looks great on D* here...perhaps you need to check your system out.


fafner

Looks great on D* here as well [New Orleans]. I would have to agree that this is the best picture I have ever seen on ESPN. They must be doing some tweaking. :)

This is what I have. Pretty new to HDTV, so I'm not sure if it's good or not.

Every picture looks soft to me, lol.

http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/7830/espn1vp4.th.jpg (http://img376.imageshack.us/my.php?image=espn1vp4.jpg)

I agree that tonight’s Monday Night Football looks great. I am getting it on Cox OKC. I have been pleased with the PQ of ESPN HD’s football coverage all along and tonight’s Bengals-Ravens game is no exception.

It's good but nothing ESPN hasn't had for awhile.

ESPN has always been a solid HD channel

NFL blackout rules at work here. Only one MNF game for you since the Doubleheader has the ol' Cardinals in game 2

Umm... do you even know what the NFL blackout rules are?

Doesn't sound like it

I'm in the "bleh" camp via D* tonight. Whose set would this look good on? Pixelation with graphics, swimming grass, all the usual D* stuff is going on here. Closeups look decent and the stadium lighting is nice, but it's no better than any other HD-lite game I've seen on ESPN.

Looking pretty good in SD on D*, though.

It's good but nothing ESPN hasn't had for awhile.

ESPN has always been a solid HD channel

Maybe if you have cable... not on DirecTV.

I guess I am either lucky or confused...because I don't see any of the swimming grass artifacts on D*. I don't see any pixelation or anything. The picture is not that "wow" factor kind of picture I see on other channels...but not bad.

Maybe if you have cable... not on DirecTV.
Yup, on DirecTV for me.

I guess I am either lucky or confused...because I don't see any of the swimming grass artifacts on D*. I don't see any pixelation or anything. The picture is not that "wow" factor kind of picture I see on other channels...but not bad.What's the size of your display? And do you have 20/20 vision? :)

I think it's bad on DTV as well.

looks great on d tv to me...as good anything yesterday here. no blurring...micro whatever.

New rule: you can't say "it looks good to me" without stating your screen size. People with 70" and above screens see a hell of a lot more artifacts than people with 42" and below screens, and then we have to put up with countless "it looks good to me" messages. I have a 70" and a 50" and a 32" and golly gee, on the 32" widescreen SD "looks good to me" but anyone with 20/20 vision (something I also think is lacking by some posters) can see it looks like crap larger. [/RANT off]

I guess I am either lucky or confused...because I don't see any of the swimming grass artifacts on D*. I don't see any pixelation or anything. The picture is not that "wow" factor kind of picture I see on other channels...but not bad.
HD is supposed to have a WOW factor. If it doesn't then it isn't good HD.

Looks ok but not good on D*. Perfect by D*'s standards. :)

Meh. Nothing special, nothing "stunning" about this. Looks like your average 720p broadcast. At least there's no nasty grain or artifacting that I've seen from other 720p broadcasts on Fox and ESPN.

Watching via WOW cable Cleveland on a Panny 50" 1080p plasma.

Checked over on D* channel 73 on the HR20 and it's definitely artifact city on the long shots. Not unwatchable, but not great either. If I had to watch the D* feed on a 100" screen I would be pissed.

I agree with above post. Sideline camera shot of coaches look great with 46" screen. Long shots look a little soft.. Provider is Cablevision of NY, 4200HD box..

I agree this looks better than most of the College games on ESPN HD and better than any Fox HD game. I am getting mosquito artifacts but this is normal for grass HD shots. I am watching on D*.

WAY better than NBC's crap-@ss HD last night. ESPN is great.

ESPN. To me, this is the best looking HD game so far this season. I'll be shocked if it isn't 1080. If its 720, its the best 720 I ever saw :).

TW Dayton here -- cablecard. I agree that the picture quality looks great. Better than CBS-HD NFL coverage this past weekend.

New rule: you can't say "it looks good to me" without stating your screen size. People with 70" and above screens see a hell of a lot more artifacts than people with 42" and below screens, and then we have to put up with countless "it looks good to me" messages. I have a 70" and a 50" and a 32" and golly gee, on the 32" widescreen SD "looks good to me" but anyone with 20/20 vision (something I also think is lacking by some posters) can see it looks like crap larger. [/RANT off]

Absolutely right on, wiggo. I'm burdened with a 50" 1080p plasma and 20/10 vision so a lot of major network HD looks like crap to me. Also viewing distance is a big factor. If I sit back 8 feet on my couch, it covers up many sins of the broadcast. If I walk up to the screen at 2 or 3 feet away, I usually cringe. I can only imagine what the people with 70 and 100" screens have to look at.

Looks good to me on my 32" Sony LCD via Cablevison with my one near sighted eye with a contact lense and my one far sighted eye without a contact lense.:eek:

Absolutely right on, wiggo. I'm burdened with a 50" 1080p plasma and 20/10 vision so a lot of major network HD looks like crap to me. Also viewing distance is a big factor. If I sit back 8 feet on my couch, it covers up many sins of the broadcast. If I walk up to the screen at 2 or 3 feet away, I usually cringe. I can only imagine what the people with 70 and 100" screens have to look at.


Totally agree. All of these PQ threads should require source, display size and resolution, and viewing distance.

Absolutely right on, wiggo. I'm burdened with a 50" 1080p plasma and 20/10 vision so a lot of major network HD looks like crap to me. Also viewing distance is a big factor. If I sit back 8 feet on my couch, it covers up many sins of the broadcast. If I walk up to the screen at 2 or 3 feet away, I usually cringe. I can only imagine what the people with 70 and 100" screens have to look at.

That's because you aren't supposed to be 2 to 3 feet away from a 50 inch screen, even in HD.

It looks terrific for me on my 50 inch SXRD on D* sitting 8 feet away. And I have bitched a lot in the past. ESPN has really stepped it up a notch since late last football season.

Edit:

Size Min Max.(in feet)
26 3.3 6.5

30 3.8 7.6

34 4.3 8.5

42 5.3 10.5

47 5.9 11.8

50 6.3 12.5

55 6.9 12.8

60 7.5 15

65 8.1 16.2

Living in NY, I think this is the only MNF game that I could actually watch till the end. Too bad they can't start these games at 7:00 ET all the time.
In fact, that's what they should do every Monday night, have a doubleheader.
Early game starts at 7:00, later game at 10:00.
Wishful thinking.

looks great on d tv to me...as good anything yesterday here. no blurring...micro whatever.

sorry..new 60" sony tv

This is what I have. Pretty new to HDTV, so I'm not sure if it's good or not.

Every picture looks soft to me, lol.

http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/7830/espn1vp4.th.jpg (http://img376.imageshack.us/my.php?image=espn1vp4.jpg)

You need a different screen shot. Ravens always look soft.

Yup, on DirecTV for me.

I should have this caveat in my sig:

Of all the HD I watch, on D* and OTA, I will find pixelation (or macroblocking or artifacts or what have you) on EVERYTHING except my local CBS affiliate, which to the best of my knowledge is still brodcasting their HD signal at 18 Mbps+. It's a lovely reference standard to have (I can judge my PQ by how it looks compared to CSI) but it makes me all that more intolerant of a lower-quality signal.

Looks fantastic here.

Dtv
50" Plasma
1080i
distance of 12'

This was/is the first weekend I was able to watch HD NFL football since I bought my new HDTV last March (an Olevia 747i 1080p 47" LCD hooked-up to an SA-8300 HD-DVR from NYC's Time Warner Cable). Tonight's first "MNF" game on ESPN HD is the second-best looking HD game I've seen in the past couple of days. The best was the Patriots-Jets game on WCBS-HD (1080i) followed by tonight's "MNF" and then the Giants-Cowboys game on NBC (1080i but macroblocking and mosquito artifacts galore). The worst was the Chargers-Bears game on Fox (720p but too soft, almost like upconverted SD), which ESPN's current "MNF" completely destroys in sharpness and PQ. Guess not all 720p is created equal. :)

Guess not all 720p is created equal.
Not all HD is created equal, regardless of resolution.

Not all HD is created equal, regardless of resolution.

Also, if you are watching via D* or E*, please state if you are using MPEG2 or MPEG4 boxes. Methinks some of you are using MPEG2, which will always be bit-starved...

This SF/ARZ game looks a lot sharper from many camera angles than the earlier game. Except for the reds in the uniforms, the ol' MPEG2 encoder isn't doing too well with those.

WOW cable, Cleveland, 50" 1080p plasma, 8' viewing distance :D

Also, if you are watching via D* or E*, please state if you are using MPEG2 or MPEG4 boxes. Methinks some of you are using MPEG2, which will always be bit-starved...

D* by definition is MPEG2 for ESPN. The only MPEG4 is locals and local RSNs.

BTW, the second game looks bad. Stadium lighting means a lot. The lighting in Cincy is much better than SF (but not good enough for the ref to not make the right call in the end zone at the end of the game).

Also, if you are watching via D* or E*, please state if you are using MPEG2 or MPEG4 boxes. Methinks some of you are using MPEG2, which will always be bit-starved...

Isn't ESPN on D* always channel 73 and always MPEG2 regardless of the box ? We don't get MPEG4 ESPN on D* until they light up the new bird in a week or two (hopefully)

The earlier game looked average on Comcast in ATL. The SF ARI games looks amazing!!!

HD is supposed to have a WOW factor. If it doesn't then it isn't good HD.



This absurd "wow" factor is incredibly subjective. And it's completely meaningless.

BTW, I hate the term. I wish it had never been used. It's even worse than that other abominable term, "window effect".

"Wow factor" and "window effect" should be banned from any intelligent discussion. Come to think of it, it shouldn't even come up in intelligent conversation (general comment, not directed at anyone in particular). But that's just me.

Isn't ESPN on D* always channel 73 and always MPEG2 regardless of the box ? We don't get MPEG4 ESPN on D* until they light up the new bird in a week or two (hopefully)
Correct.

On my 106" projection screen the mosquito artifacing with ESPN on D* tonight (as usual) is somewhat annoying. Changed to 55" LCD and artifacts are still there albeit much subdued.

There was a few minutes when the SF/ARI game was on both ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD. On E* it was very obvious the picture was sharper and had more color on ESPN2, which is MPEG4. ESPN is MPEG2. Can't wait until all E* channels are MPEG4.

What's the size of your display? And do you have 20/20 vision? :)

I have a new Samsung 5271 (52 inch 1080p LCD TV) and the first ESPN game tonight looked beautiful. No macroblocking, no softness, no noise. Now I'm watching the 2nd game and its just as beautiful. I wish NBC/CBS/FOX were this good. Simply amazing, and justifies my purchase...or so I tell my wife. The picture actually blew her away. Finally a channel that looks as good as our local HD PBS channel to her.

There was a few minutes when the SF/ARI game was on both ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD. On E* it was very obvious the picture was sharper and had more color on ESPN2, which is MPEG4. ESPN is MPEG2. Can't wait until all E* channels are MPEG4.
I took this opportunity to compare both channels on DirecTV as well, even though they're both MPEG2. They looked virtually identical.

Didn't see the first game, but the Ari/SF game looks stunning.

Props to ESPN for this greatly improved PQ.
As good as any I have seen broadcast.

Still need to up the sound to 5.1 however.

D* H20 ch 73.
46" samsung LCD
12' viewing distance.

I think this (unaltered) graphic really sums up the second game.

SF-ARI game looked good on KTVK-DT sideconverted to 1080i from the 720p ESPNHD broadcast. PQ definitely blew away NBC's SNF, though the audio mix was lacking.

Can you guys saying D* looks bad with 50" and lower HDTV post what signal strenght and receiver you have? I got like 97% and i get no pixelation and is way better then the cable i had with charter, but charter sucks so I guess the comparison isn't fair.

Can you guys saying D* looks bad with 50" and lower HDTV post what signal strenght and receiver you have?
I could, but it would be pointless. Unless your signal strength is so bad that the picture is breaking up, it makes absolutely no difference in the picture quality.

PQ was terrible on my 92" PJ through my excellent cablesystem. ESPNHD is just nasty.

Looks great on Comcast. 55" CRT.

TWC was pretty sweet, no more grainy picture or blurriness with DTV:D
42'' Samsung DLP

I think this (unaltered) graphic really sums up the second game.

Tha't funny. "The 48ers".

Looks terrible on DirecTV.

Then you have something wrong. I look extreamly good on D*. HR20 and a 40" Sony Directv-View. I'm becommig more and more convinced that peoples displays are causing the problems.

I wish I knew what good HD looked like vs bad HD.

It looked good on my 57" rear proj with D* HR-20. Man, I love my new HR-20. Pause live tv, watch replays as many times as I like, then catchup to live action.
It even records live TV when nothing is turned on.

Anyone watch the Reed hit on Hous in HD super slow mo? That was awesome.

Living in NY, I think this is the only MNF game that I could actually watch till the end. Too bad they can't start these games at 7:00 ET all the time.
In fact, that's what they should do every Monday night, have a doubleheader.
Early game starts at 7:00, later game at 10:00.
Wishful thinking.


I'm in PA and I couldn't disagree more. All my sports watching life I've been able to watch every primetime game, but not anymore with a 10:10p.m. start time. I would love to see the numbers to see if they 'lose' more east coast watchers than gain west coast ones since that's why they are doing this to appease west coasters.

Then you have something wrong. I look extreamly good on D*. HR20 and a 40" Sony Directv-View. I'm becommig more and more convinced that peoples displays are causing the problems.

Or it could be your smaller screen size not showing all the little things that larger screens show?

I'm in PA and I couldn't disagree more. All my sports watching life I've been able to watch every primetime game, but not anymore with a 10:10p.m. start time. I would love to see the numbers to see if they 'lose' more east coast watchers than gain west coast ones since that's why they are doing this to appease west coasters.

But (in this hypothetical) you'd still get to see one game, and the west coast would finally get to see a game that didn't start as they were leaving work for the day.

I complain about the late start times, too, but at least we get to see the beginning of the game live. Some west coast folks are still at work when the games start, although they do get to see the end.

Or it could be your smaller screen size not showing all the little things that larger screens show?

Well if I can stand 1' away from my screen and see a perfect picture then no it's not the "smaller screen". I'm getting convinced it's the lcd's and rear projections showing motion blur. Go read the threads in the display sections complaining about that.

Alan....you nailed it. Ask ANY sports fan what they'd rather see, the beginning or end and they would say the end. I would just like to see the number of viwers lost compared to the number of viewers gained.

Tulsa....just wondering out loud.

It's good but nothing ESPN hasn't had for awhile.

ESPN has always been a solid HD channel
You should go dig up last years thread and look at some of the atrocities I posted then. :rolleyes:

Well if I can stand 1' away from my screen and see a perfect picture then no it's not the "smaller screen". I'm getting convinced it's the lcd's and rear projections showing motion blur. Go read the threads in the display sections complaining about that.
When you extract the video to your computer and post frame grabs it doesnt lie. You can see the problems even better and even on a 17" display.

Alan....you nailed it. Ask ANY sports fan what they'd rather see, the beginning or end and they would say the end. I would just like to see the number of viwers lost compared to the number of viewers gained.

Tulsa....just wondering out loud.

They lose more East Coast viewers than they gain from the West Coast with a later start time. The optimum balance is at 9pm or earlier - not later.

When you extract the video to your computer and post frame grabs it doesnt lie. You can see the problems even better and even on a 17" display.

And you did that with last night's MNF on ESPN from D*? I wonder why LCD manufactures are comming out with 120 mhz displays and spec'ing smaller refresh rate? Surely it's not because of motion blur :rolleyes:

They lose more East Coast viewers than they gain from the West Coast with a later start time. The optimum balance is at 9pm or earlier - not later.



That's what I figured. Makes no sense to me and they are losing future generations of fans....maybe not alot of them, but certainly some.
Heck the World Series is the worst and then baseball wonders where the fans have gone the last 8 years or so. And they continue to push the start times back even further:rolleyes:

My thoughts on last night's telecasts.

Ravens/Bengals picture was good but not great. It was HD quality, but not the best I've seen.

I thought the 49er/Cardinal game had excellent picture quality. The best ever, no. But I was very happy with it.

I have an epson 800 and 92" firehawk, viewing with an hr20 and D*.

It is a native 720p projector.

And I really do not understand the argument backed up by extracting images to a computer.

Tulsa said he stood a foot away from his screen (I assume 92" or probably larger) and the picture was perfect.

So how much closer do you have to be to see these atrocities?

And you did that with last night's MNF on ESPN from D*? I wonder why LCD manufactures are comming out with 120 mhz displays and spec'ing smaller refresh rate? Surely it's not because of motion blur :rolleyes:I found it at the begining of the College and Pro season last year then it got better.

New HR20 boxes (MPEG4 capable) to be delivered tomorrow in anticipation of "launch" of new capacity (kept cable HD -- Cablevision -- just in case). Can't wait to see if "quality" will improve or will HD-Lite continuuuuuueeee....

Tulsa said he stood a foot away from his screen (I assume 92" or probably larger) and the picture was perfect.

So how much closer do you have to be to see these atrocities?

My point was that people assume if you have a smaller display (my 40") these artifacts are not noticable then watching on a large display. To see wavey grass and motion blur, if your 1' away from a 40" screen or 12' from a 96" it should show up if it's the source. I have seen it on my 40" Sony XBR Direct-View, but last night it looked great from D* on ESPN. So to me if people thought the game looked terribel on ESPN from D*, then yes I question their display properly displaying the content.

Well if I can stand 1' away from my screen and see a perfect picture then no it's not the "smaller screen". I'm getting convinced it's the lcd's and rear projections showing motion blur. Go read the threads in the display sections complaining about that.
I have an LCD that does show motion blur, so I don't equate that to PQ. I know that is a downfall of the actual tv. I also have a 42" RPTV and even though that doesn't show motion blur, it does show the other things that are evident: swimming grass, mosquito noise, motion blocking to name a few. I know that neither tv can cause the PQ to display all these little blocks everywhere when there is a lot of movement on the screen. The only time I see a motion blur type scenario is on our local NBC station.

I do most of my viewing on the RPTV since that will give me a "truer" picture than the LCD will.

Well I hope my 1080p dlp can handle it, otherwise it's effectively a $2K paperweight.
So my belief is that is was the signal....or possibly my local provider, but other games on other channels both looked and sounded much better. except for ABC, whose PQ and AQ was aweful at best.

Looks terrible on DirecTV.

You better get a better TV then. It is amazing on my Mits Wd-73734.

Living in NY, I think this is the only MNF game that I could actually watch till the end. Too bad they can't start these games at 7:00 ET all the time.
In fact, that's what they should do every Monday night, have a doubleheader.
Early game starts at 7:00, later game at 10:00.
Wishful thinking.

I've been thinking the same thing all day. I watched an entire game on a Monday night and didn't pay for it the next morning.

Both games looked excellent on my 1080i, 50" Panny, sitting about 8 feet away. I'm using D*TV and an MPEG4 receiver through and HDMI connection.

I've been thinking the same thing all day. I watched an entire game on a Monday night and didn't pay for it the next morning.

I watched both games and went to bed at 2AM and got at up at 4:10 AM. No problems here. Toughen up people, football is more important than sleep :)

Oh and BTW, ESPNHD sucks. All these rookies that just bought their first HDTV and claim ESPNHD is "awesome baby" are hopeless. No one provides worse HD sports than ESPN/ABCHD. And no one delivers the worst sports HD channel worse than Directv. Give us all a break with how awesome ESPNHD was on D* last night. Its like claiming how awesome your chuck steak dinner was at Bob Evans.

I'm sorry but anyone who thinks ESPN HD looks great off of DirecTV either:

1) has a smaller and/or 720p set

2) doesn't know what good HD looks like

3) both 1 and 2

Watching D*TV on a 55" Mits Diamond CRT here....CBS games blow Fox and ESPN HD out of the water. NBC looks better than Fox and ESPN HD too, at least between major bouts of macroblocking and motion blur anyway (overall, not better due to the artifacts).

ENOUGH!

This is ridiculous.

When will people understand that the quality of CBS/NBC/FOX are all reliant on each local affiliate.... And all 3 + ESPN are reliant on you cable/sat provider and your TV!

EVERY SINGLE PERSON HERE sees something different.....

The way you see it is not universal!

So stop arguing over which network is better.

What exactly causes "swimming grass"? I was experiencing this problem off and on while viewing football games and it bugged me to no end. Finally, out of exasperation while watching a game, I started fiddling with the panel settings. After changing the picture mode from "Brilliant" to "Natural", voila! The swimming grass disappeared and hasn't come back since.

I guess my question is this: Was the "Brilliant" panel setting causing the swimming grass, or is the "Natural" panel setting compensating for a signal-based PQ problem? I have a 46" Mitsubishi LCD LT-46231.

ENOUGH!

This is ridiculous.

When will people understand that the quality of CBS/NBC/FOX are all reliant on each local affiliate.... And all 3 + ESPN are reliant on you cable/sat provider and your TV!

EVERY SINGLE PERSON HERE sees something different.....

The way you see it is not universal!

So stop arguing over which network is better.

There is no such thing as a cable/sat provider/television that makes ESPNHD look like outstanding HD. One provider may make it look better than another, but nothing is going to make ESPNHD look outstanding. Its a second rate HD channel that looks like crap on all providers.

Couldnt agree more on your points regarding the networks though. There are way to many variables to make any blanket statements regarding the quality of the HD on the networks.

Looks terrible on DirecTV.u right

I wish I knew what good HD looked like vs bad HD.

It looked good on my 57" rear proj with D* HR-20. Man, I love my new HR-20. Pause live tv, watch replays as many times as I like, then catchup to live action.
It even records live TV when nothing is turned on.

Anyone watch the Reed hit on Hous in HD super slow mo? That was awesome.
LOOK AT CBS HD THAT GOOD HD

LOOK AT CBS HD THAT GOOD HD

That would depend on your local affiliate.

There is no such thing as a cable/sat provider/television that makes ESPNHD look like outstanding HD. One provider may make it look better than another, but nothing is going to make ESPNHD look outstanding. Its a second rate HD channel that looks like crap on all providers.

Couldnt agree more on your points regarding the networks though. There are way to many variables to make any blanket statements regarding the quality of the HD on the networks.

So why dont these variables apply to ESPN? And speaking of blanket statements what in your knowledge makes ESPNHD a second rate HD channel? Your own perception?

These "looks great/looks terrible" discussions are always interesting, as they point out that the biggest varible in any PQ debate is the VIEWER. You could put two people in front of the exact same display, and one might think it's great, and the might think it's garbage. The differences in delivery methods are likely to be less of factor than the person making the observation.

That said, my opinion of that MNF game on ESPN (as delivered by D*) is that it looked like day-old dog meat. Viewed on both a 23-inch 720p LCD (from two feet), and a 42-inch 1080p plasma (from 8 feet), the compression artifacts were extremely heavy. This is one thing you can't blame on a display -- I've yet to see one that added compression artifacts.

So why dont these variables apply to ESPN? And speaking of blanket statements what in your knowledge makes ESPNHD a second rate HD channel? Your own perception?

The multicast variables dont apply because ESPN doesent multicast, at least not that Im aware of. Please correct me if I am wrong. (And please note that variables that may exist from provider to provider were noted in my post. None of those variables are going to turn poor network distribution into beautiful HD though).

And I have no idea why ESPNHD looks so bad on every provider Ive seen it on in the last 2 years (E*, D*, Charter West Michigan, Comcast Detroit), it used to look awesome a few years back. Whatever the problem is Im sure it can be traced back to saving a buck. I have been asking and reading around here for a good couple years now trying to figure out why ESPNHD looks like such garbage these days.

You are an employee arent you? Maybe you could shed some light on the numerous ESPNHD is garbage threads that have popped up in the last few years around here. It really did used to look awesome. They had to dramatically change something within their distribution system, but I am not nearly tech savvy enough to know what it may be.

What exactly causes "swimming grass"? I was experiencing this problem off and on while viewing football games and it bugged me to no end. Finally, out of exasperation while watching a game, I started fiddling with the panel settings. After changing the picture mode from "Brilliant" to "Natural", voila! The swimming grass disappeared and hasn't come back since.

I guess my question is this: Was the "Brilliant" panel setting causing the swimming grass, or is the "Natural" panel setting compensating for a signal-based PQ problem? I have a 46" Mitsubishi LCD LT-46231.IMO, the "swimming grass" is caused by the effect random noise in the original image has on a MPEG encoder downstream. It changes about every half second as that is the typical GOP length. I've observed that the swimming grass stops when a replay is in freeze mode. Changing one's panel setting may alter the contrast or sharpening setting which can make it look less visible.

You are an employee arent you? Maybe you could shed some light on the numerous ESPNHD is garbage threads that have popped up in the last few years around here. It really did used to look awesome. They had to dramatically change something within their distribution system, but I am not nearly tech savvy enough to know what it may be.The issues with ESPN on DirecTV are well established. The ESPN feed looks great at ~18Mbps, but some providers re-compress that to as little as 12-13Mbps.

With all the clout ESPN has, I am surprised they haven't mandated higher bitrates for more providers. It's not like a cable or satellite provider could refuse.

The issues with ESPN on DirecTV are well established. The ESPN feed looks great at ~18Mbps, but some providers re-compress that to as little as 12-13Mbps.

With all the clout ESPN has, I am surprised they haven't mandated higher bitrates for more providers.


Im not buying into any of that. Ive seen ESPNHD's PQ degrade over the last few years, and Ive seen it on numerous providers, as stated in my post. It may well look worse on Directv than many other providers, I dont doubt that at all.

But I have yet to see a provider where ESPNHD doesent feature swimming grass, artifacting, mosquito noise, and incredibly soft and blurry HD from any cam that shoots from a distance. Their main (distant) cams look like SD, and thats not just on Directv.

My current provider, Charter Cable of West Michigan, recently did a major upgrade of their QAM distribution system and made it so that no QAM frequency carries more than 2 HD channels. In the past every QAM frequency had 3 HD channels. While all the channels do look slightly better across the board because of this, ESPNHD still looks like crap a good 9 times out 10. Somehow they do manage to put out a quality HD production here and there, but those are rare.

So why dont these variables apply to ESPN? And speaking of blanket statements what in your knowledge makes ESPNHD a second rate HD channel? Your own perception?

Glad you said it, I have comcast and I would have to say that ESPNHD is the crispest looking HD channel on the whole dial. They don't bit starve it, at least I don't think they do, the last time I checked it ran around 18 or 19 Mbps constantly, and the picture always seemed to have the wow factor, with the exception of the SD stuff, which is definitely noticeable. :)

Glad you said it, I have comcast and I would have to say that ESPNHD is the crispest looking HD channel on the whole dial. They don't bit starve it, at least I don't think they do, the last time I checked it ran around 18 or 19 Mbps constantly, and the picture always seemed to have the wow factor, with the exception of the SD stuff, which is definitely noticeable. :)

I'm betting you have a 720p or 768p display. Either that or your display doesn't do that great of job converting 1080i to 1080p. It is simple fact that 1080i should look sharper than 720p on stills and slow moving footage, such as that on Discovery HD or HDnet.

I'm betting you have a 720p or 768p display. Either that or your display doesn't do that great of job converting 1080i to 1080p. It is simple fact that 1080i should look sharper than 720p on stills and slow moving footage, such as that on Discovery HD or HDnet.

Actually I have a Toshiba 42HL196 (http://www.hdtvsolutions.com/Toshiba-42HL196.htm) . It's not the most expensive or greatest TV, but it is 1920x1080, ESPN-HD looks very good and always has.

I agree that this was the best looking game on this weekend. I can't understand how people can make such blanket statements such as ESPN never looks good when in fact on my system it always has the best PQ of them all. There has to be a certain bias at play here because it totally goes against what I'm seeing on my end. Anyhow this is how I would rank this past weeks NFL telecast.

Source: Comcast Cable ( Boston ) Hitachi 55" 768P Plasma

1. ESPN ( Both MNF Games) Crispest, Most detailed
2. CBS ( Pats @ Jets ) Looked very good as usual
3. NBC ( SNF both Thurs & Sun ) still had some artifacts but getting better
4. FOX ( Bears @ Chargers ) Very soft as all their telecast are

all i know is i have a new sony 60" dlp 1080p tv. i have the new hr20 dvr

i recorded both espn games last night and several network and super fan games.

the espn games are the only ones WITHOUT motion blur or pixelation (whatever it's called)...

either different people are seeing different things throught their sets...or there is a lot of ignorance floating around here....or BOTH:)

all i know is i have a new sony 60" dlp 1080p tv.You don't know that. Sony doesn't use DLP technology.

TWC - Los Angeles - 52 ' Sharp Aquos 1080P LCD

1. ARZ vs SF ESPN ..... 9.5 / 10
2. BAL vs CIN ESPN ..... 8 / 10
3. NE vs NYJ CBS ..... 7.5 / 10
4. CHI vs SD FOX ..... 7 / 10
5. NYG vs DAL NBC ..... 6.5 / 10
6. PHI vs GB FOX ..... 6 / 10

Looked great to me on D* from Dallas. Not as good as the CBS SEC games on Saturday (1080 is obviously better) but better than the Fox 720 from this weekend.

You don't know that. Sony doesn't use DLP technology.

sorry...meant rear projection. doesn't change the facts though. espn was better on my tv than the network or SF broadcast...period.

During the 49ers-Cardinals game, did the helmets of Arizona have a slight yellowish and/or greenish tint to them close up? I notice the same thing when they show the San Francisco Giants uniforms. The white just doesn't look white. It always has this hue to it.

During the 49ers-Cardinals game, did the helmets of Arizona have a slight yellowish and/or greenish tint to them close up? I notice the same thing when they show the San Francisco Giants uniforms. The white just doesn't look white. It always has this hue to it.

I think that game started with the sun still up. My guess is the stadium lights burn warmer than daylight (especially late afternoon), but not enough to warrant a re-white balance, thus giving everything a slightly reddish tinge. CBS' stuff tends to be on the bluish side, but as a rule ESPN shows (especially the studio shows ) are a bit rosy for my taste.

In regards to the ESPN picture quality, I cannot speak for all providers. I personally have both D* and Comcast HD watching on a 56" Sony XBR3 in New York City. The difference isn't even close, Directv is absolutely unwatchable, Comcast actually generally looks pretty sharp to me (about as sharp as most of the other programming)...of course this is kinda like making a statement about who has the best cell phone network by judging what the person sounds like on your phone. ESPN's PQ has to me shifted over the last few years, but to me it seems like around January of this year (around the time all the construction and network traffic facilities were finished) that the PQ dramatically improved. I'm a freelancer not a staff employee so I can't shed light on how practices changed, but in the last few months I havent personally seen anything (via Comcast at least) on ESPN that i've scoffed at. This being said, I have seen the uplink and downlink raw and they are far superior to anything anyone is getting at home (but if ESPN is providing a good backhaul to the providers, that's about all they can do). Contrary to the silly things spread around on here, they are not using inferior equipment, nor can you attribute it to 720p (as there are numerous examples of stunning 720p television - just watch the Academy Awards or read the Super Bowl XL thread).

I thought the late game looked great and to me personally one of the better HD games I've seen from ESPN in a looooonnnng time. The first game was average; ok on the close ups, but the field cams were grainy. Who knows, maybe it was the lighting on the latter game but it was popping to me. Comcast Denver

...there are numerous examples of stunning 720p television - just watch the Academy Awards or read the Super Bowl XL thread.
..or watch "Lost" on ABC...

there are numerous examples of stunning 720p television - just watch the Academy Awards or read the Super Bowl XL thread
Wow, Super Bowl XL. I remember watching that and being absolutely stunned. I can't think of any HD broadcast that really grabbed me as much as that one did. WXYZ in Detroit turned off their subchannels and gave the HD channel full bandwidth, and it looked amazing. It's too bad ABC won't be broadcasting another Super Bowl any time soon.

Looked great to me on D* from Dallas. Not as good as the CBS SEC games on Saturday (1080 is obviously better) but better than the Fox 720 from this weekend.yes u right i live in dallas and DTV
1 CBS 2. NBC 3. ESPNHD 4.FOX 5.ABC i have a 1080i tv and 1080p.

OK. New member here. I am a senior video engineer and work NFL. I will try to help all of you understand HD video and 720P vs 1080I
The most important factor you all need to understand is your home display and your home reception, via cable, direct tv, or over the air, which will always be the best.
Fox and ESPN are native 720P and CBS and NBC are native 1080i which means what your home display is, is what you will get the best picture from.
More to come....

Boy that really clears it up. LOL

I'd love to know how to fix the swimming grass, I don't remember seeing it last season or the season before. RCA dlp 50", most of the time I view from 7' with corrected 20/20 vision, but there are plenty of times I'm viewing from 2-3', usually with arms flailing and lungs wailing. Comcast-Moto 6412 PIII, 1080i out.

KDKA (cbs) had a great picture of the Browns/Steelers game, but the audio is SO bad on CBS. They switch from 5.1 source/5.1 transmission to 2.0 source/5.1 transmission everytime they break to "JB in New York", it makes an echo sound in my receiver (Yamaha HTR 5960) and I also faintly heard it when I just used my TV Speakers. Also, the graphic at the bottom seemed stretched beyond the left and right of the screen and was tilted (closer to the bottom on the left, raised on the right).

FOXOV (fox) was softer for me and also had the swimming grass from the camera when the ball was inside the 20 yard line to the left, didn't appear anywhere else (Green Bay game). The audio on Fox has always been superior for me.

ESPN Balt-Cinci was a very, very pretty picture and great audio. The swimming grass was apparent from either endzone camera looking up/down field instead of sideline, very very noticeable.

I'd love to know how to fix the swimming grass, I don't remember seeing it last season or the season before. It's a transmission artifact. Excessive display sharpening and/or contrast can accentuate it.the graphic at the bottom seemed stretched beyond the left and right of the screen and was tilted (closer to the bottom on the left, raised on the right).This sounds like a display problem as the graphic is electronically generated and isn't tilted. Projection and direct view CRTs can have this problem.

Fox and ESPN are native 720P and CBS and NBC are native 1080i which means what your home display is, is what you will get the best picture from.
More to come....While native resolution of a fixed pixel display can have a big influence on PQ, it's far from the only influence. Good scaling and de-interlacing can also go a long ways to compensate for non-native display resolution. Many displays are 1366x768 so they don't fall directly under either HD standard. Another huge factor is how the video is set at each venue. It's clear that there is still a huge variance on color and enhancement, but it's always been that way.