DBSTalk Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
41 - 58 of 58 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,718 Posts
DP1 said:
But whats wrong with simply referring to it as HD-Lite if and when the provider(s) choose to do that?
Because the people who coined that term and use it most often are using it in a derogatory manner. Similar to what Michael Richards (actor who played Kramer) said but not to the same level. The people calling the downrez sampling of HD "HD Lite" generally mean it as an insult - not as a description of technology.

If you want to live your life on derogatory labels I suppose one more won't kill you.
 

·
Godfather
Joined
·
297 Posts
James Long said:
Because the people who coined that term and use it most often are using it in a derogatory manner. Similar to what Michael Richards (actor who played Kramer) said but not to the same level. The people calling the downrez sampling of HD "HD Lite" generally mean it as an insult - not as a description of technology.

If you want to live your life on derogatory labels I suppose one more won't kill you.
Oh brother. Now I have to worry about not only being politically correct in regards to possibly offending humans, now I have to worry about it in regards to machines and the way they're set up to spit out data?

Is it ok with you if I stare my car in the headlights and call it the biggest POS ever made the next time it wont start.. or no? ;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,657 Posts
The problem I have with the term "HD Lite" is twofold.

#1 It is often used to refer to things incorrectly, i.e. the aforementioned actual standards that some people don't know are standards... and used incorrectly, it gives the impression that it is wrong rather than being undesirable. We may not like the lower resolutions, and can complain about them for sure... but complaints are better heard when they are made from informed and accurate people. I've said it often, that when folks who don't know what they are talking about rant and complain, the big companies figure they don't really know what they are talking about and ignore the complaints.

#2 It seems to have a floating definition that means whatever the person using it means to say at that moment. This makes it fairly ambiguous as a term and relatively useless since no one at any given time really knows what the phrase is intended to mean by the person using it.
 

·
Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
24,965 Posts
HDMe said:
The problem I have with the term "HD Lite" is twofold.
You must get a real kick out of the word "tivo".

HD Lite does indeed have several applications and you just have to figure out which one from the context. In any event, it is a derogatory reference to using lossy compression methods overzealously to save bandwidth.
 

·
Godfather
Joined
·
297 Posts
Funny that nobody ever coined the term SD-Lite.

Afterall, some of the same things that are plaguing HD now have plagued SD channels all along too. With the bottomline being that the providers dont see fit (due to legimate tradeoffs or otherwise) to offer PQ as good as it can be.

From that perspective nobody should be surprised with whats happened in HD. And in defense of the providers, even if they wanted to do the "right thing", it'd be harder now than ever before anyway. Not only because theres more channels than ever before but they're having to double dip with HD and SD versions at the same time.
 

·
Icon
Joined
·
511 Posts
DP1 said:
Funny that nobody ever coined the term SD-Lite.

Afterall, some of the same things that are plaguing HD now have plagued SD channels all along too. With the bottomline being that the providers dont see fit (due to legimate tradeoffs or otherwise) to offer PQ as good as it can be.

From that perspective nobody should be surprised with whats happened in HD. And in defense of the providers, even if they wanted to do the "right thing", it'd be harder now than ever before anyway. Not only because theres more channels than ever before but they're having to double dip with HD and SD versions at the same time.
Good point. True, full resolution, SD can look almost as good as some HD. My DVD player looks outstanding on my 61" HDTV. Nearly as good as many "HD" channels.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,718 Posts
DP1 said:
Funny that nobody ever coined the term SD-Lite.
True. Especially since one of the first things done to a SD signal for satellite broadcast is to sample it at 480x480 resolution ... not 640x480. The issue that brought "HD Lite" in to use has been going on for years with SD. :D
 

·
Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
24,965 Posts
DP1 said:
Funny that nobody ever coined the term SD-Lite.
It is out there. We call it Comcast. On some of the "throw-in" channels like MTV and VH1, you'll find that some distribution organizations offer VHS resolution (320x240?).
 

·
Cool Member
Joined
·
21 Posts
dave1234 said:
Good point. True, full resolution, SD can look almost as good as some HD. My DVD player looks outstanding on my 61" HDTV. Nearly as good as many "HD" channels.
It is frustrating that many complaints could be eliminated, and the level of enjoyment and value of the sat providers could be greatly enhanced, if they would just provide that increased level of bandwidth for the SD channels.

While HD (or HD-Lite) is the ultimate experience with them now, most viewers still watch a great deal of SD. With the popularity of HDTV sets, this could be a fantastic marketing strategy for them as well. Lots of good PR would be generated.
 

·
Legend
Joined
·
221 Posts
ilkjh said:
It is frustrating that many complaints could be eliminated, and the level of enjoyment and value of the sat providers could be greatly enhanced, if they would just provide that increased level of bandwidth for the SD channels.

While HD (or HD-Lite) is the ultimate experience with them now, most viewers still watch a great deal of SD. With the popularity of HDTV sets, this could be a fantastic marketing strategy for them as well. Lots of good PR would be generated.
I only watch HD so they could eliminate SD altogether and devote all available bandwidth to HD. :D I would love to see MPEG4 1920x1080p 24fps 30mbps with TrueHD or at least 1.5 mbps DD+.:eek2:
 

·
AllStar
Joined
·
68 Posts
Can someone post sample photos of the difference in PQ?
 

·
Legend
Joined
·
138 Posts
HDMe said:
Not HD. :)

Every once in a while there is an old movie (like on one of the Voom channels) that has been been scanned from original film and the original aspect ratio was 4:3. In that case, the movie is still in HD just not 16:9 widescreen.
for the short time I had HD on D*, I was able to catch a showing of 'northern exposure'. clearly, a tv series way before HD came out.

they did seem to rescan the film or video and produce something really close to HD quality. yes, still 4:3 but the resolution was much better than any SD, coming close to what I'd get from a well-done dvd, locally played over component or hdmi.
 

·
Icon
Joined
·
749 Posts
NYSat said:
Can someone post sample photos of the difference in PQ?
Look here:

http://www.widemovies.com/directvcomp.html

Maybe this can help. I'm not sure how the test was conducted and how current the information is. Capturing the pictures must have been a tedious process.

My analysis -- The number of effective pixels is the smaller part of the problem. When there is frame to frame motion, those compression induced macroblocks are what's really ruining the image. MPEG compression works on both the space and time.

I recently visited the local tech store and took an up-close look at BlueRay. I couldn't see a patchwork of macroblocks but the image was still not crystal clear. There was a slight smearing effect that that shimmered over the image. I'm being extremely critical here but it looked much better than anything I've seen on satellite.

--- CHAS
 

·
Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
24,965 Posts
HIPAR said:
I couldn't see a patchwork of macroblocks but the image was still not crystal clear.
Something that I noticed was that the local stores seem to choose the lowest resolution displays to hook the disc players up to (if they hook them up at all; HD DVD players are selling largely sight unseen).

My local BB has the Samsung unit hooked up to a 32" 720p LCD. It looks good, but not great. The Sony is connected to a Sony 40" BRAVIA LCD flat panel too, but at least it is a 1080p.

Hook these players up to a >=60" LCoS via HDMI and we'll start discussing picture quality.
 
41 - 58 of 58 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top