|Originally posted by Xavier|
it is wasting bits on squares!!!.
|Originally posted by bdb|
If your HD signal looks that bad, complain to the local affiliate. Certainly multicasting can cause these problems, but affiliates aren't going to stop if no one complains. Our local affiliate dropped a 3rd multicasting signal after lots of complaints.
|Originally posted by BarryO|
Really? Is the HD picture better now? I haven't watched them in months, but I got pretty sick of the picture quality. Last year's Grammies were about the last straw for me.
|Originally posted by FrankS|
You are in the extreme minority of those who have the kinds of problems you are talking about. Outside of rare moments of pixilization HD for me and most others is incredible and without any flaws that you are experiencing. If ALL you local HD channels have these problems then either your equipment is faulty or mis-configured, you are to far away from the transmitters and have a low signal, or your local channels have a conspiracy to get you to hate HD!
For those of us in the Chicagoland area last years Grammys were absolutely outstanding in both video and audio!
|Originally posted by stephenC|
Interesting this thread popped up. I was wondering the other day while watching a HD show, if MPEG4 or H.264 encoding would result in fewer (none?) blocking problems than the currently used MPEG2?
balazer - Thank you for the terminology clarification. I can google DCT block.
|Originally posted by Nitewatchman|
HD is not "Free of little squares"(macroblocking/compression artifacts) If the source(say, a local station which is multicasting) isn't giving enough bandwidth to HD, and instead is allocating that bandwidth to other things, such as multicasting/datacasting(beyond any available "oppurtunistic" bandwidth).
Unfortuently, for the most part HD+Multicasting doesn't work well together(at the same time), but unfortunetly, many stations are doing it ...
|Originally posted by drhill|
but I believe MPEG4/H.264 are wavelet based.