Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of DBSTalk by signing in or creating an account.
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Any chance for better SD?

sat-go

  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#41 OFFLINE   CCarncross

CCarncross

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 7,037 posts
  • LocationJackson
Joined: Jul 19, 2005

Posted 13 February 2010 - 11:47 AM

That's not true. Un uncompressed sd signal is much better than the crappy SD picture on D*. You probably never saw a SD channel on a FIOS or even on an old BUD installation. Just put less SD channels on each transponder, like we had in the past .


I am viewing SD sub-channels via OTA from the station...it doesnt get any better than that to your house with a good signal, and they still look absolutely terrible on an decent size HDTV. I dont need to see it on FIOS or BUD, I'm getting it directly from the antenna feed. Please re-read my post...

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#42 OFFLINE   BattleScott

BattleScott

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,346 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2006

Posted 13 February 2010 - 12:02 PM

I am viewing SD sub-channels via OTA from the station...it doesnt get any better than that to your house with a good signal, and they still look absolutely terrible on an decent size HDTV. I dont need to see it on FIOS or BUD, I'm getting it directly from the antenna feed. Please re-read my post...


I thought most OTA stations, especially those who are sending more than one sub-channel were compressing as well to fit them into their available slot.

I never really watch the OTA local SD sub-channels, but I can tell you first hand that the SD Nationals look WAY better on UVerse on a 50" plasma (inlaws pannasonic 720p) than the same channels do with DirecTV on my 42" plasma (same 720p pannasonic at 42"). So it is definitely not the source.
HR24-500 / AM-21 / WGA54AG
42" Pannasonic Plasma
HR22-100 / 26" LG LCD
Slimline 5-LNB

#43 OFFLINE   raott

raott

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,106 posts
Joined: Nov 23, 2005

Posted 13 February 2010 - 12:15 PM

I am viewing SD sub-channels via OTA from the station...it doesnt get any better than that to your house with a good signal, and they still look absolutely terrible on an decent size HDTV. I dont need to see it on FIOS or BUD, I'm getting it directly from the antenna feed. Please re-read my post...


If you are viewing sub-channels, of course they look terrible. But this is not what the discussion is about.
SONY KDS-55A3000 and a couple of Vizios; SWM16; HR34 NR; HR22 NR; HR20-700 NR; H23-600 NR; R22 NR

#44 OFFLINE   oldcrooner

oldcrooner

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 268 posts
Joined: Feb 23, 2004

Posted 13 February 2010 - 02:31 PM

Sub-channels look bad if they are being over-compressed and bit starved. It's the same situation as with Directv. OTA sub-channels don't look bad simply because they are sub-channels. There simply is not enough bandwidth available in an OTA signal to get a really good HD picture and several sub-channels of good quality. Something has to suffer when they try to do this.

Edited by oldcrooner, 13 February 2010 - 02:40 PM.

Men become civilized, not in proportion to their willingness to believe, but in proportion to their readiness to doubt.
--Ambrose Bierce

#45 OFFLINE   loveshockey

loveshockey

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 358 posts
  • LocationLancaster, NY
Joined: Feb 24, 2008

Posted 13 February 2010 - 02:36 PM

people still watch SD?

:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

#46 OFFLINE   kevinturcotte

kevinturcotte

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,940 posts
  • LocationOutside Portland, ME
Joined: Dec 19, 2006

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:04 PM

people still watch SD?

:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:


Unfortunately, there are still some channels that are SD only

#47 OFFLINE   Tom Robertson

Tom Robertson

    High tech and loving it.

  • Super Moderators
  • 20,245 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:22 PM

I know most here are concerned with HD, and so am I. But there are some channels that are still SD and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Additionally, my parents, who are Russian-speaking, subscribe to the RussianDirect II package, and those eight Russian SD channels look terrible. We all know DirecTV's SD quality has become nearly unwatchable, especially as compared with HD. But even other providers' SD channels look comparatively better. So, while everyone's priorities are understandably with HD right now, I wonder if D12 means anything for improving SD quality?


Well...

D12 likely won't directly help internationals or other SD channels.

That said, there might already be movements underway that could help if we're guessing correctly.

As we know, there are some important parts to SD PQ. (And HD for that matter.)

The Source PQ. Very hard to improve upon that, tho there are some smoothing and enhancements that actually can make it appear better. I don't know if there are any efforts on those lines. So I'm not guessing about this part. :)

Bandwidth back to the home. As I recall, the internationals are mostly on an older, less powerful leased satellite. Less powerful typically means more bandwidth is used to replace missing bits via error correction. More error correcting bits, leaves fewer real data bits.

Receiver video shaping. The next generation of SD receivers (will actually most likely be HD receivers...) might have better SD shaping and reproduction abilities. As video shaping chips continue to mature and get less expensive, SD shaping can improve.

Ok, so my real main point--As the MPEG2 HD channels are turned off, the internationals might (are expected?) to be moved to the more powerful satellites at 110° and 119°. If that happens, that might translate to more bandwidth available for those channels. Woohoo!

The reason I don't expect D12 to make any difference is that the MPEG2 HD channels are already up on MPEG4. I'll leave it to the readers to think about who might still be using the MPEG2 channels: HBO, ESPN1&2, and TNT.

One hint--we're not talking homes...

Anyway, when they are finally turned off, if Internationals do move, that might have more bandwidth and look better.

Cheers,
Tom

PS: MPEG2 to MPEG4, an off topic discussion in this thread, is not going to happen until the 40M or so SD receivers are replaced--at a huge cost. Think $100 per, plus installation, support, waste disposal, and shipping.
Go Packers!

My real treasures: 5 Grandchildren - S, D, M, M, C ; Now 5! Great-Grandtibbers - B, H, J, A, and M (Born 7/31/2011)

#48 OFFLINE   pablo

pablo

    Icon

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 892 posts
Joined: Oct 11, 2007

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:32 PM

Hey Tom, thanks for your input. That really answered my original question, I think. I'm not only concerned with the internationals for my parents; there are plenty of channels I'd watch if the SD quality wasn't so crap. Of course, in a perfect world, every channel would either be HD or broadcasting upconverted SD. Maybe in a decade...

#49 OFFLINE   kevinturcotte

kevinturcotte

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,940 posts
  • LocationOutside Portland, ME
Joined: Dec 19, 2006

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:35 PM

Hey Tom, thanks for your input. That really answered my original question, I think. I'm not only concerned with the internationals for my parents; there are plenty of channels I'd watch if the SD quality wasn't so crap. Of course, in a perfect world, every channel would either be HD or broadcasting upconverted SD. Maybe in a decade...


In a decade, we'll probably be going through the same thing again with Ultra HD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_HD

#50 OFFLINE   Tom Robertson

Tom Robertson

    High tech and loving it.

  • Super Moderators
  • 20,245 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:37 PM

Hey Tom, thanks for your input. That really answered my original question, I think. I'm not only concerned with the internationals for my parents; there are plenty of channels I'd watch if the SD quality wasn't so crap. Of course, in a perfect world, every channel would either be HD or broadcasting upconverted SD. Maybe in a decade...


Happy to help.

As for conversion to HD, I contend that two things really, really got the ball rolling: 1) OTA conversion to HD by the FCC. (That's the easy one.) :)

and 2) DIRECTVs huge, huge commitment to having plenty of bandwidth and working with providers. Once they saw an audience and a commitment like that, the providers had motive and opportunity to jump on the HD bus. :)

Thus, I think more and more channels have gone HD sooner and more and more will continue to go HD quicker than they might have thought 3 years ago. :)

All really, really good for us! :)

Cheers,
Tom
Go Packers!

My real treasures: 5 Grandchildren - S, D, M, M, C ; Now 5! Great-Grandtibbers - B, H, J, A, and M (Born 7/31/2011)

#51 OFFLINE   Tom Robertson

Tom Robertson

    High tech and loving it.

  • Super Moderators
  • 20,245 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:38 PM

In a decade, we'll probably be going through the same thing again with Ultra HD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_HD


Might be why DIRECTV is so aggressively looking at the new range of satellite to home frequencies. They will need it :)

Cheers,
Tom
Go Packers!

My real treasures: 5 Grandchildren - S, D, M, M, C ; Now 5! Great-Grandtibbers - B, H, J, A, and M (Born 7/31/2011)

#52 OFFLINE   pablo

pablo

    Icon

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 892 posts
Joined: Oct 11, 2007

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:40 PM

Ultra HD? But will it be in 3-D? :)

#53 OFFLINE   kevinturcotte

kevinturcotte

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,940 posts
  • LocationOutside Portland, ME
Joined: Dec 19, 2006

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:41 PM

Might be why DIRECTV is so aggressively looking at the new range of satellite to home frequencies. They will need it :)

Cheers,
Tom


Do you think there's any need to go beyond UHD? How many typical households REALLY have need for a Tv large enough to take advantage of it? lol Speaking of which, what size screen WOULD you need to actually see an advantage over regular HD?

#54 OFFLINE   Tom Robertson

Tom Robertson

    High tech and loving it.

  • Super Moderators
  • 20,245 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:44 PM

Do you think there's any need to go beyond UHD? How many typical households REALLY have need for a Tv large enough to take advantage of it? lol Speaking of which, what size screen WOULD you need to actually see an advantage over regular HD?


Since I want my next screen to be 140" (or larger), I suspect I would be able to tell--though by then I'll likely need cataract surgery as well. :)

As for beyond UHD... I suspect it will be UH3D and look so solid you can't really tell...

Cheers,
Tom
Go Packers!

My real treasures: 5 Grandchildren - S, D, M, M, C ; Now 5! Great-Grandtibbers - B, H, J, A, and M (Born 7/31/2011)

#55 OFFLINE   kevinturcotte

kevinturcotte

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,940 posts
  • LocationOutside Portland, ME
Joined: Dec 19, 2006

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:48 PM

Since I want my next screen to be 140" (or larger), I suspect I would be able to tell--though by then I'll likely need cataract surgery as well. :)

As for beyond UHD... I suspect it will be UH3D and look so solid you can't really tell...

Cheers,
Tom


In home Holodecks should be next!

#56 OFFLINE   Davenlr

Davenlr

    Geek til I die

  • Registered
  • 9,082 posts
Joined: Sep 16, 2006

Posted 13 February 2010 - 03:49 PM

20 minutes would take 4TB of storage? Better get those stacks of 2TB Raid Drives ready to plug into your new DVR.




spam firewall