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

DirecTV Compressed Quality and Compression Artifacts

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by kenkraly2004, May 17, 2010.

Tags:
  1. camo

    camo Godfather

    1,169
    97
    Apr 15, 2010
    The main reason I went with a back lite LED (LG-55LH90) was the report that all plasma's, exception of the Pioneers that are out of my price range, had issues with the black levels lightening up rapidly. Panasonic's are the worst but reports say all of them do it.
     
  2. ccsoftball7

    ccsoftball7 Godfather

    354
    0
    Apr 2, 2003
    I'm glad to know it's only my imagination. ;) The truth hurts, huh?
     
  3. scoop8

    scoop8 Godfather

    490
    2
    Jul 18, 2009
    Dallas TX
    I'm not familiar with this issue regarding the Panny Plasma's.

    Hoosier, can you help me out with this one? I don't see any visual issues with black levels on my Panny.
     
  4. Carl Spock

    Carl Spock Superfly

    4,567
    0
    Sep 3, 2004
    If I can step in here, there was a negative report on one year's Panasonic plasmas. From whom and where, I can't remember. It was a few years ago. After that, Panasonic put a 100,000 hour spec on the black level on their plasmas, saying they won't go to less than half of their original brightness over that time.

    100,000 hours is 12 hours a day for over 22 years. It shouldn't be an issue.

    I have a Panasonic plasma (my second) and I've noticed no black level problems.
     
  5. GregLee

    GregLee Hall Of Fame

    1,702
    19
    Dec 28, 2005
    Black level won't go to less than half of original brightness? I don't know what that means. From what I read, Panasonic's problem with rising black levels was recent, and it is not clear that it is over. Here is a relevant discussion thread.
     
  6. dhkinil

    dhkinil Icon

    662
    2
    Dec 17, 2006
    Actually, I made some nasty comments over the winter, the absolute worst feed I ever saw was the Wild feed (only one available) of a game from the Excel Center when they played the rangers.
     
  7. Carl Spock

    Carl Spock Superfly

    4,567
    0
    Sep 3, 2004
    It was brightness won't go to less than half of its original level over 100,000 hours, not black level. Black level is a function of contrast. Contrast is a function of brightness. Keep your brightness up with time and you'll maintain good black levels.

    Yes, this seems to be something more recent than what I was talking about. Pardon me if I don't go down this AVS rabbit hole. Been there/wasted the time before. The thread you link to references a longer, more detailed black level thread that seems to go in a different direction, at least according to one poster, and that reducing black levels really aren't a problem. I bet that thread is dozens of pages long; AVS threads can get that way. There also seems to be a CNet review that would need to be researched. I'm just not that interested in slogging through all of that. If you do, Greg, let us know what you find.

    I have a 2008 plasma, anyway. :grin:
     
  8. Piratefan98

    Piratefan98 Icon

    685
    0
    Mar 11, 2008

    Totally agree. Motion blur and black levels are deal breakers for me when buying tv's. On those two counts, plasma is just better.

    Panasonic Plasma-loving Jeff
     
  9. Tom Servo

    Tom Servo Icon

    979
    13
    Mar 7, 2007
    Is it true that plasmas run hotter than LCDs? As it is, my bedroom is at 80-85°F when I go to sleep at night because of all the electronics. I really don't need another heat generator! :D
     
  10. Woochifer

    Woochifer Cool Member

    14
    0
    May 11, 2009
    From my vantage point, it seems that Directv's been monkeying around with the bandwidth on some of the local channels. My local CBS affiliate used to look immaculate in HD, and then right before the NCAA tourney last year, something happened and I began picking up a lot of macroblocking with the sports programs. Directv seemed to fix it this year, but the picture is still inferior to the OTA feed and even the cable feed (I have a bare basic cable subscription with just the broadcast channels for the other rooms in the house).

    Otherwise, the HD quality can vary a lot from channel to channel. ESPN and Versus can really look like crap, whereas my local RSNs and TNT look very nice. Generally, I like the picture quality on the HD channels, and they generally seem to look better than what I've seen with Dish.

    I don't know about the picture quality with digital cable, but it seems that for my local channels at least, the OTA antenna has the best HD picture quality and even my cable feed of the local digital channels looks slightly better than what I get from Directv.

    As far as SD goes, the issue with HDTVs is the fact that flat panel TVs all use fixed pixel formats. The Directv SD picture with CRT-based HDTVs looks fine, because CRTs are much better at handling rescaled images.
     
  11. Woochifer

    Woochifer Cool Member

    14
    0
    May 11, 2009
    I did a lot of A/B comparisons between the MPEG2 and MPEG4 channels. On "busy" images, I thought that the MPEG2 feeds showed a lot more visible macroblocking and softening of the image detail. The comparisons where this was most obvious was with the Sunrise Earth programs on Discovery HD Theater. It's a good source comparison because the program has a lot of stationary cameras, and not a lot of quick edits and panning.

    Different processor (both inside the box and inside the TV), different feed, different TV. A lot of variables outside of a simple Directv vs Cable comparison. Even different Directv boxes use different video processors, which might differ in how well they scale and/or deinterlace the picture.

    In my own OTA vs Directv tests, the OTA picture quality is generally better. My understanding though is that the bitrates might get further reduced if the broadcasters add more multicast feeds into their signal. Already, a lot of network affiliates put a full-time weather and traffic feed onto their DTV signal, and other feeds like sports, children's programs, and foreign language programs get added.

    Correct on the macroblocking artifacts. That's a processing and source signal issue, not a response time issue.

    But, there are tests for motion resolution that sites like HD Guru, CNET, Home Theater, and HDTV Test use. 60 Hz LCD sets consistently lose a significant amount of resolution with moving images, with most of them displaying less than 600 lines of resolution on a 1080p test signal. 120 Hz LCD sets can display closer to 800 lines, but only with the motion interpolation switched on (which most professional reviewers hate). The local dimming LED backlit LCD sets get closer to perfect motion resolution.

    The same motion resolution tests show that the 1080p plasma sets generally tested at 900 lines of resolution or more (with the newer models scoring close to perfect).

    Generally, plasmas do run hotter than LCD sets. But, plasmas' energy consumption and heat levels will vary with the calibration and the source. The brighter the source and settings, the greater the power usage and heat. The heat from a LCD will be constant, and vary only with the lamp level.
     
  12. wilbur_the_goose

    wilbur_the_goose Hall Of Fame

    4,523
    62
    Aug 16, 2006
    You have no idea how bad it used to be. NFLST games in 1997 were almost unwatchable - yard lines were jagged and graphics were poor.

    Just enjoy what we have today. It's SOOO good.
     
  13. cartrivision

    cartrivision Hall Of Fame

    3,862
    0
    Jul 25, 2007
    The problem is, macroblocking and other problems in the source signal are the cause of perceived blurred motion on a TV set, and the faster response times of plasma panels cannot and do not fix that, so there is no perceptible difference between LCD and plasma panels when it comes to "motion blur".

    That last sentence makes no sense and it demonstrate the basic lack of understanding by the people who perpetuate this “LCD motion blur” fallacy of some of the most basic principals in play here.

    If any TV panel can't properly display a moving object at a 60Hz refresh rate without blurring it, there simply is no way that doubling the frame rate could possibly make it better. If there is blur because the panel’s pixels can’t turn on and off fast enough at a 60Hz video signal refresh rate, an increase in the video frame rate (whether it comes from “real” or interpretive frames) could not possibly fix or improve that… in fact, it would make it worse. If a pixel of an LCD panel can’t physically turn off fast enough so as not to affect the next frame when it is due to be displayed 1/60th of a second later, how could the situation get better if the next frame is due to be displayed in half that time? That would cause more blur, not less.

    It’s actually amusing to see some of the illogical and nonsensical arguments that other people here have used to try to support their misinformation about these supposed motion blur issues, such as claiming for “proof” that 120Hz refresh and frame interpolation features exist to fix motion blur problems on LCD sets. Of course that’s complete nonsense, because plasma sets offer those features too.

    This subject seems to fall into similar territory as the claims about the benefits of Monster Cables. There are a lot of people who swear that they provide better sound/picture, but when you look at any supposed “science” (or even simple logic, and the lack thereof) behind such claims, it’s all just complete nonsense.
     
  14. Piratefan98

    Piratefan98 Icon

    685
    0
    Mar 11, 2008
    If you actually consider the issue of motion blur to be a "fallacy", as you put it .... then further conversation is pointless. Wow!

    Jeff
     
  15. Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    ...what? Motion blur is not a "fallacy". :lol::lol::lol:
     
  16. cartrivision

    cartrivision Hall Of Fame

    3,862
    0
    Jul 25, 2007
    This is typical of the people who believe in this motion blur fallacy. They can't counter any logical or scientific argument that invalidates their beliefs and claims, so they are only interested in hanging out with other "believers" so they can all pat themselves on the back and convince themselves that their plasma purchase is giving them less motion blur.

    As I said, it's like the Monster Cable people... you'll never convince them that what they think is better isn't, and when you provide them with a logical and scientific argument that completely contradicts their beliefs, they are unable to counter it logically, so they just try to avoid anyone who doesn't just share their unsupported and incorrect beliefs.
     
  17. Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    Once again...you have no idea what you are talking about. If you want science and proof, head on over to AVS for a healthy dose of both on the issue of motion blur. :rolleyes:
     
  18. cartrivision

    cartrivision Hall Of Fame

    3,862
    0
    Jul 25, 2007
    This coming from someone who stated that 120hz refresh rate and the interpretive "motion enhancer" functions on TVs exist to fix motion blur on LCD sets.... demonstrating a complete lack of knowledge about the purpose of such features, as well as laughably ignoring the fact that such an argument is completely invalidated by the fact that the same features are offered on plasma sets.

    ...but keep on believing if it helps you enjoy your plasma set.
     
  19. Piratefan98

    Piratefan98 Icon

    685
    0
    Mar 11, 2008
    Perhaps this will help: :D

    [​IMG]
     
  20. cartrivision

    cartrivision Hall Of Fame

    3,862
    0
    Jul 25, 2007
    On this subject there's the same level of "science and proof" over on avsforums as you have been able to provide here.... notably, none.

    The problem is, there are plenty of believers like you who barely understand the basics principals that apply to the subject who post the same nonsense over on avsforums too, but that doesn't make it true… although some of their arguments are better than your stating that features that are on BOTH LCD and plasma sets are there because of the motion blur problem that supposedly exist on LCD sets, and your trying to offer such illogical nonsense as “proof” of some problem that exists only on LCD sets.
     

Share This Page