It came as a little bit of shock to me, but an average current DVD is often superior to an average HD broadcast feed (at least from my cable provider), at least from one major perspective.

I'm on Rogers Cable in Toronto, and liked its broadcast HD on my 42" LCD. Now that I have a 720p projector, I've got a 90" 16:9 image from the same seating distance (9').

Suddenly, every little digital artifact is now totally obvious. It's really, really, really distracting. I could see them before, but at that seating distance it didn't really bother me that much. OTOH, DVD upscaled looks fuzzy, but at least it (usually) isn't as riddled with artifacts these days. The only channel that consistently looks good is my provider's HD demo channel, but even that isn't perfect, and it doesn't actually have any real content (as it's just a demo channel after all).

In contrast, HD DVD looks absolutely stellar. I think as TVs continue to get larger (esp. 46" and above) and some start to get into projectors even, HD DVD (and Blu-ray) will continue to become much more popular. The visible differences between those HD optical formats and broadcast HD is astounding.

Now, I think this may be stating the obvious to many of you, but despite being an AVSer this did surprise me a bit.

You just explained how some providers are aweful. A good providers' HD programming will blow away 95% of even upconverted dvd's.
D*'s HD(real HD, not strrectovision) programming looks 10 fold better than dvd's.

You just explained how some providers are aweful. A good providers' HD programming will blow away 95% of even upconverted dvd's.
D*'s HD(real HD, not strrectovision) programming looks 10 fold better than dvd's.
Well, it's been claimed that Rogers HD is better than average when it comes to HD. It may not be the best, but like I said it's supposed to be in the top half of providers for video quality.

Those claims may be wrong though. Either way, it's time for the providers to improve their HD quality, but unfortunately I don't see that happening soon. My 42" LCD is already considered a relatively large direct view TV, and truthfully broadcast HD from Rogers looks OK on it.

BTW, there were a couple of SD channels that actually sorta looked better. No detail, but few artifacts too.

time for an HDMi Flea. It does wonders with the broadcast sources.

PLEASE FIX THE TITLE! IT SHOULD READ:

DVD looks better than *my* broadcast HD. And both look like crap compared to HD DVD & Blu

I have Comcast HD CBL and it is stunning when the transfer is done right:

Crimson Tide
Star Trek IV
All the Star Wars Movies
Pitch Black
Cars
The Prestige

ALL in OAR

PLEASE FIX THE TITLE! IT SHOULD READ:

DVD looks better than *my* broadcast HD. And both look like crap compared to HD DVD & Blu

I have Comcast HD CBL and it is stunning when the transfer is done right:

Crimson Tide
Star Trek IV
All the Star Wars Movies
Pitch Black
Cars
The Prestige

ALL in OAR
True, and the same is true on Rogers HD. However, I should clarify that for broadcast HD I was talking about broadcast TV shows.

As I understand it should look basically the same as Comcast. And they're riddled with artifacts. Instantly obvious on a 90" screen from 9', but not so obvious on a 42" screen from 9'.

True, and the same is true on Rogers HD. However, I should clarify that for broadcast HD I was talking about broadcast TV shows.

As I understand it should look basically the same as Comcast. And they're riddled with artifacts. Instantly obvious on a 90" screen from 9', but not so obvious on a 42" screen from 9'.


Not all CBL providers have the same quality. And you keep moving the goal posts.

I don't see any artifacts when I watch "till death" or "Heros" or "Dexter"

You have a crappy CBL company.

I watch Rogers HD using the SA 8300HD PVR via HDMI to receiver, and HDMI from receiver to Optoma HD80 at 120". I used to have quality issues like yours, but 2 months, 4 trips by the cable guy, and about a zillion phone calls later, my issues were finally resolved. There is no reason why your broadcast HD (of real HD material) shouldn't be better than the best SD reference disks out there. Even the last year of Trailer Park Boys recorded in HD video looks good. But my fav is that crazy Quebec guy with the Madagascar bugs on Discovery HD. Yummy stuff!

I just finished watching the movie Hostel last night that I previously recorded from one of the HD movie channels on the PVR. Even that looked better than the SD version and was obviously not just the upconverted SD DVD.

Time to call the cable guy.

I have Time Warner cable in Michigan and many HD broadcasts (Discovery, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc.) often blow away the best SD DVDs on my PS3 or HD-A2. My display is a 60" Sony SXRD A3000. But, yes, BD and HD DVD are better than the broadcasts. Artifacts from broadcasting are more visible for sure, but the increase in sharpness, detail, resolution, and color rendition still usually exceeds DVD and gives an overall better presentation.

For reference, at the moment my seating distance to screen width ratio is 1.38X. (Most of the time it will be closer to 1.45X, but you get the idea.)

For comparison, a 60" SXRD at say 8' seating distance would be about 1.84X.

A 120" image at 13' seating distance is about 1.5X.

Not all CBL providers have the same quality. And you keep moving the goal posts.
No, you have your own goal posts, which is fine.

I don't see any artifacts when I watch "till death" or "Heros" or "Dexter"
I don't get Dexter and don't watch 'Till Death'. For Heroes, I haven't watched it on the projector yet on broadcast TV. (I've watched bits of the HD DVD Heroes Season 1 set on the projector and yet it looks very good.)

You have a crappy CBL company.
That would make Comcast crappy too, since reports are that Comcast isn't really better than Rogers.

BTW, as I understand it, some of the feeds on Comcast are the exact same ones that Rogers gets. I'm specifically talking about the American channels. We get direct ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. feeds, unaltered.


Artifacts from broadcasting are more visible for sure, but the increase in sharpness, detail, resolution, and color rendition still usually exceeds DVD and gives an overall better presentation.
Yes, and that was my point. I find artifacts extremely distracting. I think the biggest benefit of HD optical discs is the loss of artifacts.

I just didn't realize just how huge that difference was until I was able to compare on such a large screen (relative to seating distance). I think comparisons like this in stores would help push the HD optical formats. While most people would never sit four feet away from a 42" TV, many people would sit 9' away from a 92" screen.

Cable HD is what alarmed me to stop buying DVD's years ago. When I saw how much better every movie I had looked on Cable HD vs. the Disc I bought I was like WTF????

I didn't know anything about Resolution of DVD back then.

Your Thread Title:

DVD looks better than broadcast HD. And both look like crap compared to HD DVD & Blu

I asked you to change it and you stated:

However, I should clarify that for broadcast HD I was talking about broadcast TV shows

You just moved the goal posts sir.

That would make Comcast crappy too, since reports are that Comcast isn't really better than Rogers.

Link?

Your Thread Title:

I asked you to change it and you stated:

You just moved the goal posts sir.
My friend, if you wish to focus on movies that's fine, but some of us watch TV... to watch TV.

If you don't like my clarification or my thread, you don't need to post here.


Link?
No link. Just various stuff I've read over the years including from those who have lived in both countries. And I've already said it could be wrong. That said, I have seen Comcast myself before, I can't say it looked anywhere near as good as HD optical discs. It looked just like it did on Rogers HD. Artifacts that I could see in TV shows that I saw on Rogers HD also existed on Comcast HD. And yes these are recent shows like CSI Miami.

They just never looked as bad as it now does with my viewing distance of 1.38X screen width with the projector.

---

Just to reiterate... I think the biggest advantage of the HD disc formats is the loss of artifacts. Some of you will disagree, but I find it's easier to watch a fuzzy non-detailed DVD without many artifacts than it is to watch ultra-crisp detailed artifact-ridden broadcast HD TV show feed.

And to bring it into format war territory: If HD DVD already looks stellar, I don't see Blu-ray's increased storage space as being a real-world advantage with 99% of movies. There is the argument to be made though that it could be an advantage for some very, very long movies.

So lets bottom line it. What is your agenda? You have one but you have been vague about disclosing it.

I have Bell ExpressVu here in Canada and they seem to be compressing the HD signal more lately. That being said most movies I catch on HD-NET are easily better than the upconverted DVDs. Like another poster said seeing HD movies from my provider has piqued my interest in HDM. My wife gets blown away by some of the HD movies I PVR and then I tell my wife that HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are even better! She thinks this "war" is really stupid and wants us to hold off. I talked to her about the upcoming dual format players from Samsung and LG. She is a go when the pricing gets closer to $500 for a dual format player!:)

I'll be joining you guys soon enough and I will definately go format neutral as there are killer titles on both formats that I want.

Oh, and back on topic. Playing something like The Incredibles or Monster's Inc on upconverted DVD can look better than some of the worse HD that I get. However, I compared both Madagascar and Shark's Tale on PVR'd Hd when they were playing to my upconverted DVDs and the recorded HD definately had more detail. To think that HDM will be even better!:D

Count me in when the dual format players are stable and we are around a $500 price point. Come on Oppo and get in the game!

DTV hd KILLZ regular dvd

So lets bottom line it. What is your agenda? You have one but you have been vague about disclosing it.
Huh? I have no specific agenda, other to say what I already have. :confused: Perhaps your issue here is you can't take a post at face value? ;)

My point is that HD DVD and Blu-ray show a humungous advantage over broadcast HD, but sometimes you may not see that humungous advantage until you have the right conditions. I already knew that was true before, but the extent of the difference surprised even me, an AVSer.

A lot of people don't care much about HD DVD or Blu-ray because they don't see much benefit. Under certain conditions, even DVD has a few advantages over broadcast HD. So, what people are saying is true: When HD is very good (like Rogers' HD demo channel) it can pique their interest in HD. However, bad HD (which is very common) doesn't really help the HD cause that much. And if you've never seen HD DVD or Blu-ray on a great big screen, you may not know what you're missing. The stores might sell more HD if they actually demo'd HD better. (I know I'm speaking to the choir.) It reminds me of the time I saw an Optoma HD70 hi-def projector at Future Shop. It was projected onto a screen about 20" in diameter. Yes. 20 inches, and under bright lights. WTF?

The other problem though is of course many people simply don't care. If you don't want to have a big screen then all this stuff is moot.

Hmmm... could be deinterlacing issues with your 720p projector, considering your problem seems to lie with 1080i broadcast video shows rather than movies. What kind of artifacts specifically are you experiencing that make your PQ worse than SD DVD?

But I sill suspect your problem lies with your cable signal as mine used to. Ensure the cable guy scans the signal strengh on the full range of channel frequencies. And for the record, we sit about 11' from the 120" screen.

And if you think that silly demo channel with the terribly edge-sharpened MuchMusic Awards looks "good" compared to other HD channels, you've definitely got a signal problem IMO. Again, call Rogers and get someone over ASAP, since you're paying for it.

Huh? I have no specific agenda, other to say what I already have. :confused: Perhaps your issue here is you can't take a post at face value? ;)

My point is that HD DVD and Blu-ray show a humungous advantage over broadcast HD, but sometimes you may not see that humungous advantage until you have the right conditions. I already knew that was true before, but the extent of the difference surprised even me, an AVSer.

A lot of people don't care much about HD DVD or Blu-ray because they don't see much benefit. Under certain conditions, even DVD has a few advantages over broadcast HD. So, what people are saying is true: When HD is very good (like Rogers' HD demo channel) it can pique their interest in HD. However, bad HD (which is very common) doesn't really help the HD cause that much. And if you've never seen HD DVD or Blu-ray on a great big screen, you may not know what you're missing. The stores might sell more HD if they actually demo'd HD better. (I know I'm speaking to the choir.) It reminds me of the time I saw an Optoma HD70 hi-def projector at Future Shop. It was projected onto a screen about 20" in diameter. Yes. 20 inches, and under bright lights. WTF?

The other problem though is of course many people simply don't care. If you don't want to have a big screen then all this stuff is moot.

Your setup represents 1% of the total population of HDTV HT's . . . if that. So yes your observations will be valid for your setup - but may not be vaild for the other 99%.

And what are you comparing? Are you watching CSI Miami on HD CABL against CSI Miami on HDM?

Hmmm... could be deinterlacing issues with your 720p projector, considering your problem seems to lie with 1080i broadcast video shows rather than movies. What kind of artifacts specifically are you experiencing that make your PQ worse than SD DVD?

But I sill suspect your problem lies with your cable signal as mine used to. Ensure the cable guy scans the signal strengh on the full range of channel frequencies. And for the record, we sit about 11' from the 120" screen.
11' from a 120" screen is very close. Only 1.26X screen width. Monster image! :D

It's not the cable signal strength. I've experienced poor cable signal before at my previous house with dropouts and such, and this is not it. Also, it's a new install, and with the frequencies fully scanned before the guy left.

The artifacts consist of mainly blocking... especially in fast scenes. For example, flowing water, or a car driving past forest foliage. The MPEG2 blocking becomes instantly obvious. Definitely not de-interlacing issues.

Note also that I can see the exact same thing if I stand a couple of feet away from my 42" LCD TV. However, I of course never watch that TV standing a couple of feet away from it. I can still see it at normal seating distances with the 42" LCD, but it's much less obvious, and less obvious enough that I don't mind that much.

Also, some channels are better than others, and some shows are better than others. Many of the Discovery Channel HD shows are pretty good but some aren't.

I subscribe to ExpressVu satellite TV and I can say that the HD picture quality is significantly better that that of regular DVDs and very much like the one of HD DVDs (just a tad softer). I even made a comparioson when Hot Fuzz was broadcast on PPV and I also had the HD DVD disc rented. As I mentioned, the PQ was comparable in both cases, with satellite image being a little softer. Of course, SD DVDs look worse than any HD signal, somehow like being out of focus.

I should mention that I saw Rogers cable HD images in a few electronics stores and I noticed a lot of compression artifacts and macroblocking on fast moving scenes. I would regard such signal as totally unacceptable. I do not have and never had any kind of artifacts whatsoever on Express Vu, nothing. In fact, even Rogers cable SD pictures look much, much worse than those on ExpressVu.

Michael

Note: I have a 133" diagonal (10 ft wide) screen and a Sony Pearl projector. Seating is 12-14 feet away from the screen.

Hmm... My friend has ExpressVu and I've noticed significant artifacts (when standing close to the screen)... but that was a while back. I haven't tested ExpressVu lately. Maybe it's indeed true that ExpressVu HD these days is better than Rogers HD.

Maybe it's time to test them out... although I don't want a dish on my roof.

The artifacts consist of mainly blocking... especially in fast scenes. For example, flowing water, or a car driving past forest foliage. The MPEG2 blocking becomes instantly obvious. Definitely not de-interlacing issues.

Awwww... okay, I get it now. I also often get blocking on such scenes. But I'll still trade the occasional blocking artifacts seen on more challenging scenes over ANY SD DVD. HD broadcast was what got me into HD DVD to begin with. After seeing HD material on Rogers, I told myself I wanted to see my favorite movies as clear and detailed as that (minus the compression artifacts of course).

Blocking is there sometimes, but it's not a huge issue for me in good programming sources. Blocking may be more annoying depending on your projector settings, which may exaggerate it. Ensure you are applying zero sharpening in your menu, which often means a setting of -5 or whatever sharpness for particular models. Ensure your contrast isn't set too high, and that your colour saturation settings aren't set too high as well.

There is nothing crappy about HD broadcast compared with HD/BD. Planet Earth looks perhaps a tad better on HD DVD than my Comcast cable, but not much. DiscoveryHD is always spectacular. PQ is really down to the individual channels, even OTA HD is excellent here.

Today's DVDs can look very nice, I certainly don't consider them crap, not as nice as HD, but far better than what it was before.

HD and BR look the best but I would still put HD Broadcast quite a few levels over SD DVD.

Yep. Differing opinions for sure. In truth, I hate the low-rez almost out-of-focus fuzzy look of DVD too, but artifacts are very irritating. Apparently more irritating for me that others. :)

There is nothing crappy about HD broadcast compared with HD/BD. Planet Earth looks perhaps a tad better on HD DVD than my Comcast cable, but not much. DiscoveryHD is always spectacular. PQ is really down to the individual channels, even OTA HD is excellent here.

Today's DVDs can look very nice, I certainly don't consider them crap, not as nice as HD, but far better than what it was before.

That's almost my experience as well with HD DVD vs Comcast HD. Granted I'm also not watching in as critical an environment as I could be (768p screen at ~2x screen widths), and I assume that having a larger 1080p screen would make the differences even more pronounced (so maybe that's where the 'crappy' part comes up to those with 1080p FPJ systems). I find the differences are mainly a channel to channel/ program to program thing (some of which is more than likely driven by my comcast moto DVR *STILL* not having a bypass output mode!!), and that quantization artifacts where the CBR stream isn't high enough for the detail required in the scene(fades/fire/moving water/high action etc), are the most distracting to me.

Agreed on modern DVDs looking overall pretty good as upconverts. The differences can be subtle (on my screen) and I have found I generally notice the lacking of DVD only once you get used to watching razor-sharp HDM and then go back and wonder why the picture now looks so washed out and fuzzy. The differences in color (in terms of depth, resolution and "pop") is really a big driver of PQ to me with HDM vs DVD.

That being said, to me the biggest difference in HDM vs broadcast is the night and day of the SOUND. The pathetic low bitrate AC-3 streams of broadcast in no way compare to even the DD+ soundtracks on HDM. And this is over my sad, toslink 1.5mbps connection (no HDMI AVR sadly)!

All in all, I know that when I upgrade my equipment I will appreciate the full potential of HDM that much more! But in the meantime- at least I don't throw up a bit inside my mouth when watching the HD channels I get via Comcast (now if they just didn't rape me for my monthly charges and would push out even more HD channels, I'd be a happier camper in general).

Hmm... My friend has ExpressVu and I've noticed significant artifacts (when standing close to the screen)... but that was a while back. I haven't tested ExpressVu lately. Maybe it's indeed true that ExpressVu HD these days is better than Rogers HD.

Maybe it's time to test them out... although I don't want a dish on my roof.

I have three model 6000 satellite receivers (which will, unfortunately, become obsolete once ExpressVu deploys the MPEG4 stream). I remember seeing some macroblocking from up close on my Sony KV-40XBR800 CRT TV while watching the FIFA World Cup back in the summer of 2006. Then, I got my Sony Pearl projector in December 2006 and I haven't watched too much HD on the CRT TV since. But, again, I have never seen any macroblocking or obvious artifacts on the large projected picture. Perhas ExpressVu is better now, or it is the Pearl's video processor that does the "cleaning", I don't know. The PJ is connected to the satellite receiver using component cables and the only problem with the 6000 receivers is that their level of black is slightly too high and, hence, I need to have a different brightness setting when watching satellite TV.

This does not mean that all HD satellite signal is great. I was in a Best Buy store in FL in September and there was enormous macroblocking on all their display TVs showing HD programming. I was told the feed was a DirecTV High Definition signal. Now, this one looked really bad.

I watch NASCAR and NHRA - one at 200 MPH and the other at 330 MPH - I don't see any macroblocking. I can read the stickers on the vehicles!

I watch NASCAR and NHRA - one at 200 MPH and the other at 330 MPH - I don't see any macroblocking. I can read the stickers on the vehicles!

I'm guessing that this is a 720p broadcast. I've never seen blocking on any 720p broadcast that I can remember for some reason. The blocking that I xometimes see is rather subtle, but noticeable on occasion on fast moving complex images on 1080i broadcasts, especially when I pause the image. But again, it's uncommon (I use Rogers), and at its worst is still better than my best reference quality SD DVD with everything considered.

It just goes to show that arguing about bandwidth between HD DVD and Blu-ray that both have higher bandwidth than HDTV PLUS more efficient codecs is rather silly. Both HDM formats have more than enough bandwidth to prevent macroblocking and other compression artifacts IMO.

I watch NASCAR and NHRA - one at 200 MPH and the other at 330 MPH - I don't see any macroblocking. I can read the stickers on the vehicles!
It seems a lot of live sports may have good feeds. I do note that some of the CBC broadcasts of hockey games are often pretty good.

Unfortunately, I'm not a huge sports fan.

And I also wonder about that 720p comment. Perhaps reduced bandwidth requirement for 720p compared to 1080i means they can pump more bits into reducing MPEG2 artifacts. Mind you 1080i sports channels often look OK too, especially for the major games.

I'm just kinda guessing here now though, since like I said I don't watch much sports (and hence haven't checked out much sports on my projector).


I have three model 6000 satellite receivers (which will, unfortunately, become obsolete once ExpressVu deploys the MPEG4 stream). I remember seeing some macroblocking from up close on my Sony KV-40XBR800 CRT TV while watching the FIFA World Cup back in the summer of 2006. Then, I got my Sony Pearl projector in December 2006 and I haven't watched too much HD on the CRT TV since. But, again, I have never seen any macroblocking or obvious artifacts on the large projected picture. Perhas ExpressVu is better now, or it is the Pearl's video processor that does the "cleaning", I don't know. The PJ is connected to the satellite receiver using component cables and the only problem with the 6000 receivers is that their level of black is slightly too high and, hence, I need to have a different brightness setting when watching satellite TV.

This does not mean that all HD satellite signal is great. I was in a Best Buy store in FL in September and there was enormous macroblocking on all their display TVs showing HD programming. I was told the feed was a DirecTV High Definition signal. Now, this one looked really bad.
Hmmm... There is a guy in the HD DVD forum making the same complaints I have (compared to HD DVD), but about ExpressVu's HD. I suppose it really depends on the specific shows viewed.

I'm guessing that this is a 720p broadcast. I've never seen blocking on any 720p broadcast that I can remember for some reason. The blocking that I xometimes see is rather subtle, but noticeable on occasion on fast moving complex images on 1080i broadcasts, especially when I pause the image. But again, it's uncommon (I use Rogers), and at its worst is still better than my best reference quality SD DVD with everything considered.

It just goes to show that arguing about bandwidth between HD DVD and Blu-ray that both have higher bandwidth than HDTV PLUS more efficient codecs is rather silly. Both HDM formats have more than enough bandwidth to prevent macroblocking and other compression artifacts IMO.

Yep = all 720P broadcasts - ABC and ESPN(s)

A topnotch upconverting player with a well-encoded DVD can still give HD-cable or HD-satellite a run for it's money.

A topnotch upconverting player with a well-encoded DVD can still give HD-cable or HD-satellite a run for it's money.

No way! Under no circumstances could an upconverting player create more detail than what is on an SD disc. Interpolation, even if done smartly, cannot add missing detail. But I agree that cable or satellite TV providers could make an HD signal look pretty bad. In my mind, macroblocking and other digital compression artifacts have no place in an HD signal. Such signal should be pristine.

No way! Under no circumstances could an upconverting player create more detail than what is on an SD disc. Interpolation, even if done smartly, cannot add missing detail. But I agree that cable or satellite TV providers could make an HD signal look pretty bad. In my mind, macroblocking and other digital compression artifacts have no place in an HD signal. Such signal should be pristine.

It depends on the movie that cable is showing. Some of them are definitely not true High Definition. An upconverted image, while not adding more detail, is noticeably sharper, which creates the Illusion of greater detail.

Broadcast HD PQ on my cable system is MILES and MILES above standard DVD PQ.

Oh Please...it is not even close.

As I understand it should look basically the same as Comcast. And they're riddled with artifacts. Instantly obvious on a 90" screen from 9', but not so obvious on a 42" screen from 9'.
Cable HD broadcasts are also riddled with commercials and watermarks, which are visible on any television! For me, watching a program commercial-free and uninterrupted, without a watermark in the corner, on DVD outweighs the resolution advantage offered by HD cable.

Cable HD broadcasts are also riddled with commercials and watermarks, which are visible on any television! For me, watching a program commercial-free and uninterrupted, without a watermark in the corner, on DVD outweighs the resolution advantage offered by HD cable.

Try Universal, HBO, Starz, Cinemax and Showtime HD - none use the corner icon.

Japanese BS-HD broadcast are @ 24 Mbps and it rocks.

Not all CBL providers have the same quality. And you keep moving the goal posts.

I don't see any artifacts when I watch "till death" or "Heros" or "Dexter"

You have a crappy CBL company.

I'm on Cox cable in Gainesville FL where they have the NBC, PBS, Fox channels all on one QAM channel. I can definitely see blocking on Heroes during motion scenes.

NBC HD is not available OTA here so I can't compare that.

- Tom

Cable HD broadcasts are also riddled with commercials and watermarks, which are visible on any television! For me, watching a program commercial-free and uninterrupted, without a watermark in the corner, on DVD outweighs the resolution advantage offered by HD cable.

Somebody has to buy you more than the basic cable package for Christmas this season.

I'm on Cox cable in Gainesville FL where they have the NBC, PBS, Fox channels all on one QAM channel. I can definitely see blocking on Heroes during motion scenes...
Wow, that is bad! Here in SF Comcast, most stations use full bandwidth for HD (two HD channels in one QAM channel), and PQ is excellent. PBS does simulcast, its PQ is noticeably poorer.

It came as a little bit of shock to me, but an average current DVD is often superior to an average HD broadcast feed (at least from my cable provider), at least from one major perspective.
Not the case here... I have the HBO HD version of episode 3 copied to DVHS and it clearly outshines the DVD upscaled in my setup.

To me there appears to be a quality threshold. Most any good HD broadcast outshines anything you can do with a 480p DVD. But below a certain bit rate the annoying blocks and noise on HD make me prefer the slight softness of the better properly upscaled DVD's. So there is no quality gain in HD if you are not willing to dedicate enough resources deliver it mostly block-free on all but the hardest scenes.

This simply says don't try to put 10 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag. If you don't have the channel then yes, reduce the resolution and it will look better. Harsh words but I stand by them.

- Tom

Try Universal, HBO, Starz, Cinemax and Showtime HD - none use the corner icon.
Let me rephase - the majority of content I want to watch has commercials and/or watermarks on HD cable. That includes series like Lost and Heros. I enjoy watching those series on disk much more than on HD cable. Even though I rented the HD PVR from my cable company (an Explorer 8300HD), the experience still doesn't compare to disk.

Somebody has to buy you more than the basic cable package for Christmas this season.
Feeling confrontational?

To me there appears to be a quality threshold. Most any good HD broadcast outshines anything you can do with a 480p DVD. But below a certain bit rate the annoying blocks and noise on HD make me prefer the slight softness of the better properly upscaled DVD's. So there is no quality gain in HD if you are not willing to dedicate enough resources deliver it mostly block-free on all but the hardest scenes.

This simply says don't try to put 10 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag. If you don't have the channel then yes, reduce the resolution and it will look better. Harsh words but I stand by them.
Yes, there are some digital SD cable channels that do look better. Depending on the shows/stations, there may be very, very little in the way of compression artifacts, and I'd much rather watch those than some of the so-called HD feeds. However, then again, there are some SD channels that are unwatchable IMO. :p

P.S. As for DVDs... I tried taking a glance through some more DVDs. Many were relatively free of artifacts, but unfortunately some were significantly edge-enhanced, which of course looks like like crap on a projector.


Let me rephase - the majority of content I want to watch has commercials and/or watermarks on HD cable. That includes series like Lost and Heros. I enjoy watching those series on disk much more than on HD cable. Even though I rented the HD PVR from my cable company (an Explorer 8300HD), the experience still doesn't compare to disk.
I agree, but the Explorer 8300HD PVR does go a long way to help.