D*HD-Lite vs E* HD screenshot thread *WARNING - LARGE PICTURE FILES TO LOAD* - Page 4 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 346 Old 08-01-2006, 07:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HDTVChallenged's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Googer View Post

... but the main difference is that almost all of the fine detail and texture that's visible in the E* picture has been smoothed over in the D* one.

I have a feeling that as real-time MPEG4 (re)encoding usage increases, so will this type of PQ degradation - especially in the background of the image. Is visible film grain a thing of the past?
HDTVChallenged is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 346 Old 08-01-2006, 07:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Googer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 1,044
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked: 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPanther95 View Post

The steps are obvious, but if you must look at the pretty flame, check out the top of the flame just above the 3rd step (looks like a wave cresting towards the victim). The E* screenshot shows a distinct "v" notch that is almost completely smoothed out in the D* screenshot.

Another clear difference is the shooters left arm - looking at the jacket's wrinkles in the fabric from inside the elbow all the way down to the end of the sleeve.

If those aren't apparent, increase the resolution of your monitor.

I didn't want to point anything like that out because I'm not 100% convinced that the two shots are from the exact same frame, and in fact, the more I study the differences in the flames in the two shots, the more I'm convinced that they are probably 1 frame off from each other sequentially. This likely doesn't matter much for purposes of this comparison for most of that frame though since most of it should be relatively static...
Googer is offline  
post #93 of 346 Old 08-01-2006, 07:46 AM
Moderator
 
CPanther95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 23,813
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Googer View Post

I didn't want to point anything like that out because I'm not 100% convinced that the two shots are from the exact same frame, and in fact, the more I study the differences in the flames in the two shots, the more I'm convinced that they are probably 1 frame off from each other sequentially. This likely doesn't matter much for purposes of this comparison for most of that frame though since most of it should be relatively static...

I think you're right, the small spots of flame to the left of that wave aren't consistent with them being from the same frame.

However, looking at the sleeve, it shows the degradation typical of bandwidth/resolution reduced HD. Even if the comparison isn't 100% accurate between D* vs. E*, it does provide a good example of HD vs. HD-Lite.
CPanther95 is offline  
post #94 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 01:52 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason View Post

What areas, exactly, should I be comparing for macroblocking and absent details? Not seeing this on my Dell 20" LCD set to 800X600. Sure appreciate all the effort needed for image comparisons, but just not seeing differences. Not saying D* doesn't screw up PQ (from all the complaints), but just can't see it here. -- John

Set your 20" Dell to 1280x1024. Then report back.
Xylon is offline  
post #95 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 04:35 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
D* AVB 8.30 Mbps

E* AVB 12.50 Mbps


D*

E*


D*

E*
Xylon is offline  
post #96 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 04:36 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
D*

E*


D*

E*


You guys still need a hint what to look for?
Xylon is offline  
post #97 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 07:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
talbain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 5,015
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
no, the differences there are pretty apparent. holy crap though that little girl looks creepy...

---Mr. Met---

J-E-T-S-JETS JETS JETS!!!!!!! --- LETS GO DE-VILS!!!!!!! --- LETS GO METS!!!!!!! --- LETS GO NETS!!!!!!!
talbain is offline  
post #98 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 07:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bonscott87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Wilds of West Michigan
Posts: 3,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post


You guys still need a hint what to look for?

So what you're saying is if I smash my face up on the screen then I'll see the difference or at super zoomed screen caps. Ok, I'll give you that. But at *normal* viewing distance of 10 feet or more then I doubt most will see the diff.

Scott
bonscott87 is offline  
post #99 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 07:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GoldenBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,196
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
In all honesty, neither one of them is perfect as there is macroblocking in both, but the E* captures definitely suffer from significantly less.

The most obvious differences are in the explosion scene and the close up on Dakota Fanning. Look at the fur on her collar and under her right eye (on the left as viewed here).

Brandon A. DuHamel
Founder & Editor-in-Chief
Blu-rayDefinition.com
 

GoldenBoy is offline  
post #100 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 07:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Googer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 1,044
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked: 212
bonscott, you're kidding right? I mean, just look at War of the Worlds comparison shot #3. In the D* one, it's blocking so badly in areas that the effective resolution in those spots would be down to probably around 240x135 if the entire screen looked like that. I don't care how far back you sit, you will notice that. Granted, these latest shots are abusive enough that the E* shots are far from perfect themselves, but the blocking in them is far less noticable...
Googer is offline  
post #101 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 07:56 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 29,469
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1044 Post(s)
Liked: 746
Wow, those are pretty bad, imagine what they would look like on say a 10' screen.
Keenan is offline  
post #102 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 07:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bonscott87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Wilds of West Michigan
Posts: 3,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Like I posted earlier, in the screenshots on the first couple pages I just see no difference. On the zoomed in ones just above, yea sure, I see a difference. Which was part of my (failed obviously) point. If I sit 2 feet from the screen sure I see macroblocking. I even see that on OTA HD. But sitting back 10 feet I just don't see the "hd-lite" on D* that others see. But then perhaps it's my bad eyes and my "tiny" 43" screen. I also don't have E* and have never seen E* HD in action (I don't know anybody with E*) and that's why I never claim D* is better then E* or the other way around, I don't have a way to compare with my own eyes.

All I'm saying is that sure, a lot of the guys here on this forum are videophiles where 60" screens a tiny. Thus they are picky and we all know the bigger the screen the easier you'll see any artifacts and blocking. But Joe Sixpack doesn't have those 100" projectors and just sits back and enjoys the movie or American Idol. Unless the artifacts are really, really noticeable on a less then 60" screen they just aren't going to notice. Anyway, these arguements are always doomed to "yes it is! no it's not!" so perhaps it's time to lurk on the thread once again...

Scott
bonscott87 is offline  
post #103 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 08:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Googer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 1,044
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked: 212
bonscott, those shots aren't zoomed in any shape, way, or form - they're 1920x1080, the original resolution. So if you happen to have a 1080p display, WYSIWYG in this case. Even with a lesser-resolution display, though, those artifacts are obvious. I dare say they'd even be visible on many SD sets through an HD box's down-converted S-Video or composite output...
Googer is offline  
post #104 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 08:10 AM
Moderator
 
CPanther95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 23,813
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Title edited to add warning.
CPanther95 is offline  
post #105 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 09:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
vurbano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 7,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonscott87 View Post

So what you're saying is if I smash my face up on the screen then I'll see the difference or at super zoomed screen caps. Ok, I'll give you that. But at *normal* viewing distance of 10 feet or more then I doubt most will see the diff.

Wow thats ignorant.
vurbano is offline  
post #106 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 09:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
vurbano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 7,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Some screen shots of the Kingdom of Heaven would be a good comparison that 2.5 hour movie comes in under 9.5 GB on D*
vurbano is offline  
post #107 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 10:01 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
John Mason's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 10,738
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

Set your 20" Dell to 1280x1024. Then report back.

SIR, reporting as ordered. ;-)

The macroblocks on Fanning's fur collar and under her eye were visible even at 800X600, but going back to the AvP flame/steps shots with the bump up to 1280X1024 didn't help; still can't see significant differences. Thanks again for all the comparison efforts. Maybe it's not possible, for some reason, to compare E*/D* images of HDNet's Tuesday 6 am ET resolution wedges , run in such a way to contrast the 'blur' points on the largest center vertical wedges (horizontal resolution, X100 for rez/PH, then X1.78 for rez/16X9 PW). -- John
John Mason is offline  
post #109 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 10:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Aliens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 8,414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 595 Post(s)
Liked: 759
I'd like to suggest an appointment at your local optometrist for those who see little or no difference. Now we know who buys those crappy TVs and why.
Aliens is offline  
post #110 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 10:31 AM
Moderator
 
CPanther95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 23,813
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post

The e are consistently bettr than the d in my monitor.

Did D* make your keyboard?
CPanther95 is offline  
post #111 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 10:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audiomagnate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Western Colorado
Posts: 2,194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I recently switched from D* to E* and seemed to notice a big step up in quality, especially on HBO and HDNETMovies. I was starting to think I was imagining it all after looking at yesterday's screen shots, but come on guys, look at the one of Dakota Fanning's face (the second shot, not the first washed out one)! Each one of those blocks would be about 1/2 in x1in wide on my screen. I sit about ten feet back, but I can sure as hell resolve 1/2 in x 1in. Hell, a few feet closer and I can start to see individual pixels, which are microscopic in comparison. Case closed. Well done Xylon!
audiomagnate is offline  
post #112 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 10:57 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 29,469
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1044 Post(s)
Liked: 746
The DirecTV shot of Fanning is reminiscent of what SciFi Channel looks like much of the time, but hey, it's a 16x9 image, so at least DirecTV has that part of HDTV right.
Keenan is offline  
post #113 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 12:17 PM
Member
 
radius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This is getting bad now even the E* captures look like crap and if you were getting this for your HD as a E* subscriber you would be calling up to cancel. They just do not display like this on either D* or E* with any display.
So whats the POINT
radius is offline  
post #114 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 12:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
vurbano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 7,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by radius View Post

This is getting bad now even the E* captures look like crap and if you were getting this for your HD as a E* subscriber you would be calling up to cancel. They just do not display like this on either D* or E* with any display.
So whats the POINT


Its even worse than that. Remember that before this crap starts blocking to the point where we can post screen shots of it in a thread so that hard headed people will admit that its there, the picture loses some sharpness, vibrance, pop and color saturation long before the blocking occurs. But still people make comments about sitting far enough away to where they wont see the blocking.
vurbano is offline  
post #115 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 12:44 PM
Member
 
timify10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Macedon, NY USA
Posts: 84
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by keenan View Post

I want to know what Dave is doing, is he looking for something he lost down there?

Oh Dave was being Dave...he was checking out her teeth.

Tim
timify10 is offline  
post #116 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 01:18 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason View Post

SIR, reporting as ordered. The macroblocks on Fanning's fur collar and under her eye were visible even at 800X600, but going back to the AvP flame/steps shots with the bump up to 1280X1024 didn't help; still can't see significant differences. Thanks again for all the comparison efforts. Maybe it's not possible, for some reason, to compare E*/D* images of HDNet's Tuesday 6 am ET resolution wedges , run in such a way to contrast the 'blur' points on the largest center vertical wedges (horizontal resolution, X100 for rez/PH, then X1.78 for rez/16X9 PW). -- John

Acknowledged. 10-4
Xylon is offline  
post #117 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 01:23 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 29,469
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1044 Post(s)
Liked: 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by timify10 View Post

Oh Dave was being Dave...he was checking out her teeth.

Tim

Okay, I though maybe he was checking for some structural or capacity issues that might arise during some possible off-camera GreenRoom activity after the show.
Keenan is offline  
post #118 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 05:37 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonscott87 View Post

So what you're saying is if I smash my face up on the screen then I'll see the difference or at super zoomed screen caps. Ok, I'll give you that. But at *normal* viewing distance of 10 feet or more then I doubt most will see the diff.

Before they say the pix are too small so I made it bigger now its too big? The 1920x1080i screen caps are not even necessary to see the difference for this movie.

Gimme a break here
Xylon is offline  
post #119 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 05:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by vurbano View Post

Some screen shots of the Kingdom of Heaven would be a good comparison that 2.5 hour movie comes in under 9.5 GB on D*

Working on it
Xylon is offline  
post #120 of 346 Old 08-02-2006, 07:53 PM
Member
 
nyupipe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 32
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am a D* sub. I called today inquiring about bitrates. Spoke to five CSRs before one understood the question (three were in advanced technical department). The one that understood said D* does not even tell them the exact bitrates. However he knows they fluctuate and MPEG4 will be cut basically in half. Asked him if there are any plans to raise to compete with dish and cable. He searched some internal forums, and then said he doesnt see anything. I asked if there was any way to ask the engineers/architects such a question. He said they dont have any contact or means to pass questions to them.
nyupipe is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread HDTV Programming

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off