AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 102 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was watching HBO on Dish tonight, and noticed that they've dropped HBO-HD on 110W to 1440x1080. I checked Showtime (on the same transponder) - Same deal - Also 1440x1080.


I subscribe to dish because their quality is higher that DirecTv - Now they pull this crap?! Come on Dish - You can do better than this!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,191 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by THardie /forum/post/0


I was watching HBO on Dish tonight, and noticed that they've dropped HBO-HD on 110W to 1440x1080. I checked Showtime (on the same transponder) - Same deal - Also 1440x1080.


I subscribe to dish because their quality is higher that DirecTv - Now they pull this crap?! Come on Dish - You can do better than this!!

That expalins it! I could not get my 169time to work last night. Normally I switch to HBO to get it to lock on a full 1920h signal then onto to the 1280 channels.


I guess I now need a 169time update or an R5000.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,493 Posts
They made this change last Thursday.


Surprisingly up until now no one has really said anything about it.


The question now is, is anyone watching TV, or Dish Dish Networks MPEG2 encoders get better?


Almost no one has noticed any change, which actually surprises me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,325 Posts
This switch might very well improve the quality of the picture. For any given bit rate, there is a (subjectively) optimal resolution that gives the best trade-off between sharpness and compression noise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,613 Posts
Its a sad day when we percieve the solution to improving HD picture quality is decreased resolution to compensate for overcompression and low bitrates. Unfortunately there is little reason for either DBS provider to provide outstanding picture quality. As much as I like my dish622, the HD picture quality from my local cableco was much better.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
48,895 Posts
So who can actually SEE a difference on a 42" or a 50" set?


Forget the measurements and charts.


This apparently started some days ago. So who can see the difference?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts
Stevie Wonder (he has a touch screen)


1440x1080i is still HDCAM resolution, which is what's used for much of the video that members rave about on The Discovery Channel. However this is a conversion and there is potential loss from this process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,613 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredfa /forum/post/0


So who can actually SEE a difference on a 42" or a 50" set?


Forget the measurements and charts.


This apparently started some days ago. So who can see the difference?

Unless someone were to watch two displays side by side or the same content back to back, its unlikely a subtle change would be noticeable. Does that make it right for them to downrez HD content?


I have recordings which I could compare before and after the switch if the same programming is shown although its quite likely other variables other than just resolution were changed in the interval so while possibly interesting, the comparison wouldn't be entirely apples to apples. More importantly, I have no desire to do such a comparison and I'm guessing not many others will as well. Honestly if you compare to the picture quality of the majority (not all) of the HD satellite content to the same content on HD-DVD or Blu-ray, there isn't much of a comparison.


I agree with your comments about screen size except I'm one of those with a screen bigger than 50"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,130 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredfa /forum/post/0


So who can actually SEE a difference on a 42" or a 50" set?


Forget the measurements and charts.


This apparently started some days ago. So who can see the difference?

Everybody and nobody. The bitrate was never sufficient to achieve transparency begin with so there's not much of difference one way or the other. At broadcast bitrates the high-frequency detail you'd see at 1920 and not 1440 would by thrown away by the mpeg2 encoder except in a very, very static scene.


Now if you want to challenge me to A/B a Blu-ray to an HD broadcast, I'd expect to get the answer correct every single time even on a 32" set.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
444 Posts
I can see a huge difference in picture quality between a bluray and satellite hd. If you can't then you must have a vision problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,985 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeLV /forum/post/0


Everybody and nobody... At broadcast bitrates the high-frequency detail you'd see at 1920 and not 1440 would by thrown away by the mpeg2 encoder except in a very, very static scene...

I have to disagree. I've seen the same episodes of Desert Speaks, Smart Travels, etc on PBS at full rez and then when they are shown on V* Equator they look like crap. It's almost like I can see what some describe as scanlines or tiling or jaggies when I'm watching any V* channel.


I can see the difference on my 1999 56in Panasonic crt rptv. Sadly there's nothing I can do about it. I don't have any movie channels, but if I did I would complain and cancel them until they are returned to full rez.


Hammer
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
35,924 Posts
I think a portion of the quality perception may have to do with the source material. I've seen some stuff from that Japanese company(can't think of the name right now - starts with an "N") that has looked stunning on Equator, even with the lower bitrate/res.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,354 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredfa /forum/post/0


So who can actually SEE a difference on a 42" or a 50" set?

No one can. How did the OP discover the change ? His post doesn't suggest that he noticed a visual or PQ problem. He obviously has tools that tell him the resolution 'cause no one's eyes do !
Quote:
Forget the measurements and charts.

I argue that all the time. The saying "what you don't know won't hurt you" firmly applies. I'm not defending the practice but 99% of the time people don't KNOW something's changed from watching. We've got people constantly monitoring this stuff 24/7 and posting to forums when a minute bit changes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,130 Posts
It's be proven on this forum time and again that it's useless to argue with the HD-lite evangelists, but the vast, vast majority of PQ woes are directly related to bitrate NOT reduced horizontal resolution.


If you try to understand how mpeg2 coding works (especially the DCT basis transform and quantization) you'll realize how little downrezzing affects the picture at broadcast bitrates.

In fact, DCT-based lossy compression (mpeg2) is around precisely because it happens to be a mathematical way of throwing away resolution in an aesthetically pleasing manner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts
So there's a reason the higher frequencies in the quantizing matrix have larger values?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,345 Posts
Bit rate is more important than resolution.
 

·
AVS Forum Special Member
Joined
·
11,139 Posts
In the beginning there was darkness. Then the ATSC created 1920X1080i. In late-'95 it spaketh (2.1 Resolution ): The Expert Group assumed that " ...horizontal resolution would be

limited to about 80 % of the number of active samples because of filtering,..." (Active sampling along each HDTV scan line is at ~74 MHz with TV cameras or telecines.)


Since HDTV is all about higher resolutions, seems logical to ask whether ~80% of 1920 is preferable to ~80% of 1440 (or even 1280 with HDLite). Should also ask, since most here report measuring only ~1300 resolvable lines horizontal resolution ( effective resolution ), using HDNet test patterns with various set-top boxes, how this factors in. (Here's just one report of >1900 resolvable lines with a 1080p display and 8300HD STB from a smaller cable system.) Also, ought to factor in earlier reports of only 800--1000 resolvable lines equivalent maximum horizontal resolution from typical movie master tapes (see quotes/sublinks ). -- John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,032 Posts
i watched a movie on hbo over the weekend and did notice that the pq was not as good as past movie broadcasts. before, hbo on e* was one of my best hd pq sources. now they've dropped it down to hd lite. bummer.


at least i got both star wars trilogies in non hd lite from hbo before they gutted the signal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
865 Posts
Also when they lowered the resolution of the HBO and Shotime, they added a FOURTH signal to the transponder so the bitrates were decreased, and now run in the 7-9 Mbps per signal. The HDNet transponder also had a fourth signal added so the bitrates dropped on those signals also. Maybe this is the beginning of switching them to Mpeg4 encoding.
 
1 - 20 of 102 Posts
Top