Directv 4K quality

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by captaink5217, Apr 4, 2016.

  1. Apr 7, 2016 #41 of 270
    OlderNDirt

    OlderNDirt Mentor

    134
    3
    Mar 16, 2007
    I have Amazon Prime, so have a lot more to check out. Currently watching some of the Masters in 4K right now and may have to amend my previous comments as it is quite amazing. Will get a better idea of how much so when I tune to the ESPN broadcast when it starts. I will definitely have to give strong consideration to upgrading by football season if they will be doing football, or a fair part of it in 4K.
     
  2. Apr 7, 2016 #42 of 270
    Orgone1

    Orgone1 New Member

    5
    0
    Aug 9, 2014
    Ohio
    Yup 106 was terrific!
     
  3. Apr 8, 2016 #43 of 270
    I WANT MORE

    I WANT MORE CowboySooner

    1,655
    120
    Oct 3, 2006
    Northern plains
    Meh.....
     
  4. Apr 8, 2016 #44 of 270
    dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,344
    505
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    Is that for the picture quality or the content?
     
  5. Apr 8, 2016 #45 of 270
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    35,229
    1,811
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    I was thinking about this while watching yesterday's Yankees game. The PQ on my 4K set is so good on sports that I really don't care about the 4K setup.

    Rich
     
  6. Apr 8, 2016 #46 of 270
    OlderNDirt

    OlderNDirt Mentor

    134
    3
    Mar 16, 2007
    I'm going to have to agree. When I switched from some news channel to the Amen Corner 4K, of course my jaw dropped in amazement. That's when I made my last post about hoping for football in 4K. But then I switched directly from the 4K to the regular telecast on ESPN, again almost making my jaw drop. Not at the difference, but what littler I could tell between 4K and up-converted. I'm not saying I am done and will never convert to true 4K, But I am very happy with up-convert and my patience level is on high mode.

    Disclaimer: This is the sole opinion of one old fart with less then stellar eyesight viewing a picture on a 48" Sammy. Any dependence on provided opinion is in the sole discretion of the reader and said opinion carries no warranties, implied, intended or otherwise. :righton:
     
  7. Apr 8, 2016 #47 of 270
    Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    35,229
    1,811
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    I think your opinion has a great deal of merit. I have a hard time believing the 4K version of the Yankees game would be better enough to make me spend money on the 4K upgrade. I just got thru watching today's game and the PQ was superb. So much better than my 1080p 60" plasma that sits in my bedroom unused. Kinda sad, that makes me. :nono2:

    Rich
     
  8. Apr 8, 2016 #48 of 270
    fleckrj

    fleckrj Icon

    1,569
    146
    Sep 4, 2009
    Cary, NC
    On a 65 inch or larger TV, I can see where 4K might be better, but at normal viewing distances with a 55 inch or smaller TV, I do not think the difference could be great enough to justify the expense.

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
     
  9. Apr 8, 2016 #49 of 270
    inhd40

    inhd40 Mentor

    120
    5
    Jan 26, 2013
    I cant see paying extra for 4K anytime soon. The difference between the up converting and actual 4K looks to be very small, at least to me.
     
  10. Apr 8, 2016 #50 of 270
    CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,650
    103
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    So I guess the size of a 4k TV isn't a problem anymore to notice a difference? Before they said you needed at least a 65" 4k to notice any difference and sit really close to it.
     
  11. Apr 8, 2016 #51 of 270
    dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,344
    505
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    I noticed a difference right away on my 55", going from a Panny Plasma.
     
  12. Apr 8, 2016 #52 of 270
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,924
    273
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    But of course the big mystery for those really interested in the technical side of this aspect of 4K TV continues to be, ... why?

    Theoretically, upscaling should make no difference in PQ. You simply can't invent quality through scaling or anything else in a picture which was not there originally in the image to begin with. Read "GIGO"

    So if DIRECTV HD feeds really look better upscaled on a 4K set than on a 1080P model, there is really no technical explanation for it unless the scalers in 1080P sets are inferior to 4K ones. And why would that be?

    Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk
     
  13. Apr 8, 2016 #53 of 270
    Smuuth

    Smuuth Well-Known Member

    2,403
    63
    Oct 4, 2005
    Having watched an actual 4K broadcast today with a chance to compare upconverted HD coverage of the same event being broadcast at the same time, I can tell you I could see the difference! At one point, there was a closeup of a golf ball rolling to a stop on the green and I could literally read the label on the ball. Virtually the same shot on the upconverted HD on ESPN yielded an unreadable black line.
     
  14. Apr 9, 2016 #54 of 270
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    26,146
    533
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    what reliable facts brought you to the conclusions ?
     
  15. Apr 9, 2016 #55 of 270
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,924
    273
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    Think it was the earlier testimony by OlderNDirt of the "jaw-dropping" difference in 4K he could see from just a 48" version of the 4K Samsung JS8500 (specifically the UN48JS8500).

    Though before anyone is quick to dispute him, in fairness OlderNDirt did qualify his opinion before with a disclaimer ...

    Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk
     
  16. Apr 9, 2016 #56 of 270
    I WANT MORE

    I WANT MORE CowboySooner

    1,655
    120
    Oct 3, 2006
    Northern plains
    Quality.
    I will say that I thought that Friday looked a little better than Thursday.
    There is without doubt a difference it just isn't enough difference to WOW me.
    To be fair I am not WOWed by 4K UHD Bluray either. Is it an improvement, Yes. Does it blow me away, No.
     
  17. Apr 9, 2016 #57 of 270
    inhd40

    inhd40 Mentor

    120
    5
    Jan 26, 2013
    Thanks, that's good to know. I don't have dtv 4k equipment yet. Could be better getting it over satellite as opposed to streaming.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
     
  18. Apr 9, 2016 #58 of 270
    CraigerM

    CraigerM Well-Known Member

    1,650
    103
    Apr 15, 2014
    St. Louis
    It was in the reviews of the 4k TV's when they first came out. They were saying you wouldn't see that much of a difference with 4k unless you got a 65" and sat really close to it. I forgot if they meant between a 4k 55" and a 65" 4k or a regular HD 55" and a 65" 4k.
     
  19. Apr 9, 2016 #59 of 270
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    26,146
    533
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    That what I keep in my mind, it came from first days of 4K TV ... 60"+ diagonal size is necessary to view 4k at certain distance
     
  20. Apr 9, 2016 #60 of 270
    patmurphey

    patmurphey Godfather

    1,022
    86
    Dec 21, 2006
    You really need to do some research on upscaling and how pixels are interpolated and also how compression and decompression works. Your point is in error.
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page

spam firewall