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

SD Quality...it is true!

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by Sea bass, Feb 17, 2013.

  1. HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,135
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    The problem I have with placing the blame on scaling is that if this technical description is correct, scaling should be a rather simple straightforward process that all to even the cheapest HD sets today shouldn't screw-up;

    http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2743211#post2743211

    Thanks to TomCat for the tutorial info.
     
  2. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    The source has a lot to do with it, but what you do with it does also.
    My Sony XBR can zoom a letterbox SD to fill the screen and the PQ isn't that bad. It isn't HD [duh], but for the 480i resolution it can look surprisingly good considering only 1 out of 9 pixels comes from the source.
     
  3. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    And here's my counter point with pictures:

    http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=2743430&postcount=37

    Maybe you can't see the difference, but I can.
     
  4. bobnielsen

    bobnielsen Éminence grise

    8,473
    92
    Jun 29, 2006
    Bainbridge...
    Several months ago a new local SD channel (KVOS) was added to the Seattle DMA but it is on one of the newer sats with MPEG-4 compression. This looks much better than the MPEG-2 stuff on 101.
     
  5. raott

    raott Hall Of Fame

    2,267
    61
    Nov 23, 2005
    I have no doubt that what you are saying is correct regarding scaling. My point was that I have two TVs where nothing is being done to it (32 inch and 36 inch SD TVs) and the quality certainly isn't what it used to be years ago and IMO, the source is the major issue. In fact, the quality on some of the channels is outright terrible.

    I'd get rid of the TVs but the 36 inch is too heavy to move until it dies and I absolutely have to.
     
  6. kenglish

    kenglish Icon

    973
    2
    Oct 2, 2004
    Salt Lake...
    I was looking at some old stuff from a hard-drive on my FTA receiver last night, and saw part of a special from GKW (that's "God Knows Where",....I think it might have been a Russian TV channel) that originally aired many decades ago.
    It showed a tech loading an Ampex 2" Quad (Quadruplex) VTR, with those big reels of tape, and looking at the video on a CRT monitor.
    I chuckled as I realized just how good the "old" analog stuff can be. Old Vidicon cameras (or, even, Image Orthicon), a well-maintained quad machine, and a properly set up CRT monitor, can look pretty darned good, even by today's standards.
    Just don't ask me to lift them.
     
  7. PCampbell

    PCampbell Icon

    1,639
    98
    Nov 18, 2006
    VHS looks bad to me on my 46 Samsung but so do the OTA sub channels, they look very good on an old 19 inch Zenith with a converter box. Part of it is blowing up a SD to fit a big display. Also IMHO Directv SD was almost DVD like back in the 90s not so good today.
     
  8. raj2001

    raj2001 Icon/Supporter

    929
    0
    Nov 2, 2002
    SD used to be really, really good until they began stuffing LiL into the mix. It all went rapidly downhill from there.

    In fact at one time all LiL used to be CONUS beam before they had spots.

    Even before that they just had one national feed for the big 4 until the FCC shut them down.
     
  9. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    My last SD TV was only 27", and is long dead by now.
    I really hated when my cable changed from analog to digital as the picture looked like crap.
    DirecTV does compress what might be 640x480 to 480x480 and then scale it back to something close to 560x480.

    It's been many years since I used a VCR, but when I did I have both VHS & Betamax, and the Betamax was much better than VHS, so I find it hard to believe an old VHS tape looks better than the "over compressed" SD from DirecTV.
    Maybe this isn't "apples to apples" as everything was analog then and everything is digital now. :shrug:
     
  10. HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,135
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Oh I don't dispute there are apparent qualitative differences in the display of up-scaled SD images among various HDTV sets. Just hard (for me anyhow) to see the fault for such differences lying in the particular scaler circuity used by the different sets if the process is as relatively simple to implement as TomCat illustrates.
     
  11. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    His "illustration" doesn't match my screen shots, which was my point, and not the first time I've had to post screen shots to show TC isn't addressing everything involved.
     
  12. HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,135
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Just for clarity both DVD and VHS formats are in 480i with pixel resolutions 720 x 480 (540 l/ph) and 330 x 480 (250 l/ph) respectively.
     
  13. Phil17108

    Phil17108 Mentor

    85
    0
    Apr 10, 2010
    Orange...
    I am with V.O.S on the betamax, vhs and back in the 80's they were not that great. I have a lot into the Hi Def equipment even the type and placement of furniture, so I never watch anything thats not H.D. I have 1 dvd, hunt for red october, an upscaling 3D blue-ray and that looks OK on a 65 inch led from 15 feet away but very grainy from half of that. I was happy with the F1 stuff, the Tour De France, and then when they went H.D. it really came to life.
     
  14. fleckrj

    fleckrj Icon

    1,562
    142
    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    Betamax was definitely the better format, but Sony doomed it because of their refusal to license the technology to other companies. VHS won out, not because it was better, but because Phillips was more reasonable about allowing others to use the technology.
     
  15. HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,135
    171
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Phillips?

    I always thought the VHS format was originally created and distributed by JVC all this time ... ;)
     
  16. bobnielsen

    bobnielsen Éminence grise

    8,473
    92
    Jun 29, 2006
    Bainbridge...
    You are correct.
     
  17. fleckrj

    fleckrj Icon

    1,562
    142
    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    My mistake. I will attribute that to a senior moment. Phillips and Sony were Compact Disc, and Phillips, Sony, Toshiba and Panasonic were DVD. VHS was JVC.

    My point regarding the failure of Betamax is still correct. Sony tried to keep it in house, and JVC licensed VHS to multiple players. Sony learned from that mistake and worked with others on CD and DVD
     
  18. PCampbell

    PCampbell Icon

    1,639
    98
    Nov 18, 2006
    I loved my Betamax. It was very hard to use VHS after it died.
     
  19. CCarncross

    CCarncross Hall Of Fame

    7,058
    60
    Jul 19, 2005
    Jackson
    But the actual success of the VHS format was its adoption by the porn industry....:lol:

    Also the deciding factor in the HD-DVD/BD format war.
     
  20. fleckrj

    fleckrj Icon

    1,562
    142
    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    It was a chicken and egg thing. Movie studios, including the porn industry, supported VHS because the royalties were lower and because the market penetration of the players was higher for VHS. Once there were more titles available on VHS than Betamax, consumers who were not early adoptors went for VHS because that was where the content was.

    HD-DVD/BD is somewhat similar in that HD-DVD was just Toshiba and Microsoft, while Blu-ray was developed and supported initially by nine companies - Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, Philips, Thomson, LG Electronics, Hitachi, Sharp, and Samsung, with many more companies coming on board in late 2004. What really doomed HD-DVD was Sony deciding to include a blu-ray player in its PlayStation 3. Content providers picked the option that had the most potential viewers.
     

Share This Page