1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

HD compression

Discussion in 'DISH™ High Definition Discussion' started by hoopsbwc34, May 26, 2010.

  1. Jun 17, 2010 #41 of 257
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,745
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Some people refuse to accept industry standards. I assume they are outside of the industry?

    Anyways, tsmacro is right about these threads. The conversation just occurs over and over.
    Sometimes the protagonist changes, but the story reads the same.
     
  2. Jun 17, 2010 #42 of 257
    tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    2,374
    57
    Apr 28, 2005
    East...
    I'm sorry but it just doesn't matter. I'll admit that it was my own fault for taking the time to read this thread I could've chosen not to. When I started it I was hoping maybe i'd learn something new and interesting, maybe some intelligent debate would occur but it just became yet one more thread of my definition of HD is better than yours. All that really matters is if your happy with your picture. I do think it would be interesting to try an experiment where you set up several identical tv's all with a different "flavor" of HD on them and see if anyone could really tell the difference. I sort of have a funny feeling here that some people only think they can tell the difference because somebody once told them there was a difference in pixels and now they've convinced themselves they can see it. Anyway I suppose maybe it was worth one discussion once upon a time but over and over again, really?
     
  3. Jun 17, 2010 #43 of 257
    l8er

    l8er Icon

    624
    1
    Jun 18, 2004
    And I would say you're pulling that out of your arse because to say HD has to be one of those 2 resolutions (or it's not HD) is simply not true.

    There's a good article here from 2 years ago but it's still relevant.

     
  4. Jun 17, 2010 #44 of 257
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,010
    307
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    Well everyone is an authority on the subject. But I find reliable related information in two different Wikipedia entries about two different subjects: High-definition television and High-definition video.

    Both articles are interesting. But it's important to note that at the top of the High-definition video entry it says "For high-definition video in broadcasting, see High-definition television." In other words, the Wikipedia folks came to an agreement that they two terms are not synonymous.

    And then, of course, ATSC is a different entry. And if you really want to understand that there is no single set of standards for any of this, they offer this handy map:

    [​IMG]

    I'm absolutely certain that the only HD standard that is relevant and has any meaning in my world is what appears on my old Pany plasma.:D
     
  5. Jun 17, 2010 #45 of 257
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,745
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    DVB-S would be the most appropriate here, since we're discussing satellite.
     
  6. Jun 17, 2010 #46 of 257
    Bigg

    Bigg Godfather

    433
    23
    Feb 26, 2010
    Or you could just look at the rest of the industry. They are all using 1920x1080 to mean 1080i, not anything less. If you go by the 1080 lines argument, if you want square pixels, you have to have 1920x1080.
     
  7. Jun 17, 2010 #47 of 257
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,745
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    This is a DBS forum ... DBS standards will work fine.
     
  8. Jun 18, 2010 #48 of 257
    Bigg

    Bigg Godfather

    433
    23
    Feb 26, 2010
    DBS doesn't get a pass on following the same picture standards that terrestrial, cable, IPTV, and fiber providers, as well as archrival DirecTV follow just because their infrastructure is 23k miles away and not in the Ka band like DirecTV's system. If DISH wants to do HD-Lite, that's fine, but they shouldn't be allowed to advertise it as HD, or should be required to have in the fine print that it visually approximates HD, and is not, in reality, HD.

    Name one other provider who calls 1440x1080 "HD". DirecTV eliminated the practice of using 1280x1080 as soon as was technically possible because they knew that it wasn't HD from day 1, and as soon as they got the equipment out there for Ka-band MPEG-4, the days of fake HD were over for them.
     
  9. Jun 18, 2010 #49 of 257
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,745
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    :rolleyes:
     
  10. Jun 18, 2010 #50 of 257
    ruralruss

    ruralruss AllStar

    54
    0
    Feb 5, 2010
    LCD and plasma televisions do not have square pixels.

    Russ
     
  11. Jun 18, 2010 #51 of 257
    RasputinAXP

    RasputinAXP Kwisatz Haderach of Cordcuttery

    3,145
    12
    Jan 23, 2008
    Square pixels: most plasmas don't, but most LCDs do.
     
  12. Jun 18, 2010 #52 of 257
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,010
    307
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    I don't know why we have two threads going at the same time over this complicated issue. But IMHO the argument is irrelevant without discussing the context - what the viewer "sees" on the screen which is the brain's interpretation of colors and "brightness/contrast."

    Not only can you wander down the aisle of an electronics store and see the differences between the displayed image from the same BD from the same BD player on different TVs, but people respond differently to what their brain "sees."

    Frankly, I don't like most "live action" TV series and movies shot with HD video cameras and retained in that format for distribution to viewers, even more particularly if it is displayed on a high contrast display that tends to towards higher color saturation. Yeah, the credits are easy to read. Big deal.

    To me this is an area where art meets science meets my brain. To start off with, I'm put off by HD displaying the pores in the skin of most actors. In my brain, fuzzy isn't inherently bad here.

    Bigg's brain apparently must have the crispest, most well-defined, ideal picture. That ideal leaves only a lossless-compressed 1080p digital stream coming straight from the video camera which isn't available. If it were, it couldn't be displayed on my 42" 720p Pany plasma and if I had a display that could display it, my brain probably wouldn't "like" it because it seems to force me to "see" things that I wouldn't "see" in person and which I find distasteful in the art.

    Or, to simplify, this whole thing about picture quality is a matter of opinion, not some universal truth.
     
  13. Jun 18, 2010 #53 of 257
    Bigg

    Bigg Godfather

    433
    23
    Feb 26, 2010
    I'm not arguing that everyone should have or want actual HD content. What DISH is doing absolutely makes sense from a bandwidth perspective, and it's a better option than leaving it at 1920x1080i and smashing the heck out it. However, they shouldn't be allowed to advertise it as HD, because it is not HD.

    Personally, however, I would prefer if everything were transmitted in 2160p (4K) at over 100mbps MPEG-4AVC, and if we had the displays to show it properly. In that world, I would kill all the locals, and have one set of networks per time zone, and I'd cull out the junk out of the cable networks, and have 30 channels left that actually put out high-value content. There is no need for 13 Discovery channels, and most of the rest of the stuff out there is just garbage. Sadly, all that crap up there is constipating our TV experience's bandwidth.
     
  14. Jun 18, 2010 #54 of 257
    ruralruss

    ruralruss AllStar

    54
    0
    Feb 5, 2010
    Actually if you look at LCD pixels with a magnifying glass you will find that most are actually chevrons.

    Russ
     
  15. Jun 18, 2010 #55 of 257
    tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    2,374
    57
    Apr 28, 2005
    East...
    Sheesh, obsess much? :lol: How many times and how many ways do you think you need to post this before it's enough? At this point I think it's pretty safe to say we all get how you feel on the matter.
     
  16. Jun 18, 2010 #56 of 257
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,975
    177
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    Those three colors in 'chevron' fashion creating one square pixel.
     
  17. Jun 19, 2010 #57 of 257
    ruralruss

    ruralruss AllStar

    54
    0
    Feb 5, 2010
    Yes I know but it is not exactly a square, nor are plasma's exactly square so in reality they shouldn't be advertised as square. Just playing the devils advocate here!

    Russ
     
  18. Jun 19, 2010 #58 of 257
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,975
    177
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    Practically close to the square shape, in opposite to that ratio of 1440x1080i format what no one TV supports and should be scale up inside of dish receiver.
    Worst thing is here - artifacts, because of missing info what was cut during downsizing at provider site and the data cannot be restored without adding artificial data.
     
  19. Jun 19, 2010 #59 of 257
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,010
    307
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    Which to my brain's view seems to work fine on my 42" Pany from 7' away.
     
  20. Jun 19, 2010 #60 of 257
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,975
    177
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    While I'm agree with individual perception I can't accept it when I'm doing test verification or writing test plans.
    It is imperative to get technical criteria to verify signals include HD video. That equipment - encoders, scalers, etc using for providers and customers has certain physical characteristics (measurable !) include the resolution part.
     

Share This Page