Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest_ianbe_*

Totally Unimpresed With Freeview Hd

Recommended Posts

So, is it just me, or is high definition TV one of the biggest cons inflicted on the British public since IO mortgages?

HD TVs I think are pretty good, especially those that make a good job of SD broadcasts. Some friends have a Sammy 32" that I've watched quite a lot and I'm very impressed with it.

Freeview HD TV transmissions (which is what you were talking about) I dunno, the HD channels my friends get via Virgin Media seem OK, but they're not Freeview. Maybe they've got better bit rates than the Freeview versions?

Are you in an area where the digital switchover has occurred already (it's this month for my area). Wasn't that supposed to free up some bandwidth for Freeview HD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the upshot? I'll be sticking with my Loewe CRT and enjoying a decent high quality picture that's beautifully crisp, smooth and flicker free with excellent sound to boot. The masses can keep their wafer thin HD screens that only look great as long as they're never switched on.

Rant over.

Technical bit (after some research): BBC HD was originally broadcast at 16Mbs until Aug 2009 when it was dropped by 40% to 9.7Mbs (European Broadcast Union recommends 12-14Mbs for 1080i HD). Since then the rate has fallen further to around 6Mbs. The BBC claims that these rate drops have been made possible by encoder improvements. Based on the quality of their output I would have to disagree.

Bearing in mind that BBC1 standard definition has a bit rate in the region of 4Mbs it doesn't take a genius to realise that BBC HD can at best be only marginally better than SD.

I agree with you. I really miss my old CRT tube cheap Beko Tv,! now that I have a Samsung 32" HD flat screen blahdy blah..I think the biggest reason for pushing these flat screens onto an unwitting public is lower shipping costs...weight and volume are far less..It seems to me that Joe Public will accept anything if they are told it long enough and hard enough with some special effect propoganda...the subject smears when moving and detail is not so superior even when the subject is stationary...I only bought a 32" because could not for the life of me find a 28" and thought 26" might be too small......I wish I had bought a 26" now...the olny thing I find better is its memory and so being able to watch a programme and read news items at the same time..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see the difference between broadcast HD and normal TV. I've got one of the modern tvs - no choice really as the old Sony died.

You can clealy see the difference between blu-ray and DVD, the only downside is that I find most blu ray films visually exhausting. Real live doesn't have that sort of contrast and producers turn up the effects to the max. Of course blu-ray has about 20 mbit to play with, so not surprising it is better than broadcast HD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a chap who's been selling TV's for years, although he's had to branch out a lot 'cos there just isn't enough margin in spending an hour selling someone a telly just to have them go any buy it cheaper at Amazon.

Anyway.......... he swears that there is nothing on the market, or even that he's seen on the horizon at trade shows that compares with the picture quality of a top of the range CRT. I can confirm this from two perspectives.

First, my spanking great 50" top of the range Panasonic plasma isn't a patch on the 32" CRT it replaced and that my son now has. Not for TV, but it does look magnificent for DVD's. Second, I've got a pair of beautiful, big, carefully chosen Samsung flat panel monitors in my study. But in the other corner I keep a 10 year old 24" Sony CRT. It's miles better for clarity and colour balance. I can't bring myself to throw it away and prefer to use it for CAD work.

The other obvious point is that neither Freeview HD or Sky HD are the full 1080p version that your TV is capable of displaying. I believe they are only 720p quality, hence the reason why many people can't tell the difference and why I refuse to spend an extra £10 a month for Rupert's latest con.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I recall reading HD TV was primarily for the NTSC market whose TV picture quite frankly was dire. Check out any old US TV show, the quality is crap.

We had PAL a far superior system so we don't really see much difference.

So yes it was a huge con for those with PAL, however it was a massive improvement for the US. However the other issue I think it was to sell TV's and get people upgrading.

Our 1st LCD I was a bit disappointed with especially with watching football, however I'm far more impressed with the Samsung LED that I've got football is much better.

As for HD I'm still waiting for Freeview HD broadcasts to begin which should be in 2012...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Totally Unimpressed With Freeview Hd

I`m totally unimpressed with Freeview period. Since the downturn they just repeat everything and when finished they swap programmes among the other channels and the circle is repeated. Can`t believe the vast number of adverts they carry, surely they must be coining it in for little outlay. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fast moving footage like football needs to be broadcast at 720p, slower moving footage can be broadcast at 1080i, I think its down to how fast a telly can process the data.

I'm not sure this is the reason - the telly isn't really calculating anything, it is just throwing the image on screen, and that is hard whether it is slow moving or fast moving. It isn't like game playing rendering where the graphics card does more work with greater changes. Fast moving scenes in films work just fine - it is probably more down to network bandwidth for broadcast. If they've only got a 6 Mbit pipe, then refreshing the entire screen with new data every 1/100th of a second will stuff the bandwidth.

I think the root cause is that the tellies are bigger, so you can see the image more clearly - and realise that the quality is actually pretty poor. A bit like watching youtube in a window, and then switching to full screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

buy philips ( LG) or LG screens.

our very large screen is excellent on sky HD, football and tennis, the ball is not a blur but a ball.

5ms is our pixel refresh rate, just a couple of years ago 15ms would have been good....but blur is clearly visible.

None of the digital transmissions cope with strip clubs...all the flashing spots turn into big squares...and that was on a CRT too.

So me, id blame the input box if you have a good telly and crap picture on HD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you. I really miss my old CRT tube cheap Beko Tv,! now that I have a Samsung 32" HD flat screen blahdy blah..I think the biggest reason for pushing these flat screens onto an unwitting public is lower shipping costs...weight and volume are far less..It seems to me that Joe Public will accept anything if they are told it long enough and hard enough with some special effect propoganda...the subject smears when moving and detail is not so superior even when the subject is stationary...I only bought a 32" because could not for the life of me find a 28" and thought 26" might be too small......I wish I had bought a 26" now...the olny thing I find better is its memory and so being able to watch a programme and read news items at the same time..

We've got a fairly new 32" Panasonic with HD. It keeps offering me the HD version and the bog standard of a particular programme - TBH I can't see the slightest difference. Picture is good anyway.

I thought the 32" would be too big - I hate massive TVs dominating a room, but it fits fine in the corner where the 15 year old 24" sat. I did have a complete fit when I saw the size of the box, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just bought a mid-range 32" Sony TV (KDL-32-524 something or other) LCD TV that has Freeview HD built in. I can definitely see the difference between SD and HD. With something like live athletics shot in HD, I think the picture is the best I have seen on TV so far, with artefacts almost completely absent.

On the other hand, SD content sometimes looks worse on my new TV than it did on my old SD LCD TV. The sound quality on the new TV is also very lacking in bass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However with the improved picture quality you will be able to see all the spots and pimples of those on tv which might detract from your viewing experience, where as a traditional tv is like watching the tv personality in an airbrushed form ie you dont see their spots and pimples.

I was watching Moonraker in HD the other day and Roger Moore's face certainly had more (Moore?) creases in it than I remembered.

Apparently you can also see strings holding up Drax's space station but I couldn't see them.

Can`t believe the vast number of adverts they carry

The World at War gets around 5 minutes cut out of it on Freeview, as I discovered when watching the DVDs. Now WaW was an ITV program so they had already allowed for a certain number of adverts during the hour when it was made. However, that was a 1970s advert break, not a modern Freeview advert break.

I can definitely see the difference between SD and HD. With something like live athletics shot in HD, I think the picture is the best I have seen on TV so far

I would agree with that, based on my viewing of my friend's Sammy 32" TV. This may be heresy in some quarters but I wouldn't go back to an SD CRT if I had to buy a TV (even if the CRT was a tenner and the HD TV was £400).

Thankfully I don't really want a TV any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im totally unimpressed with TV in general now. around 03 it began to wain. now 4 out of 7 days i dont even turn it on. if i want to see something ill utube it. all they are offering on tv now is crap. theres the occasional thing on thats good, but i am also older and have 'seen it all before'

combination of the internet and that i think - for me personally.

how many times can you watch coast. its like they are on a fµcking roundabout of ********.

and its bleeding freezing mostly. grumpy and full of cant park there yellow jackets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im totally unimpressed with TV in general now

The full list of 2011 TV shows that I must watch:

The Apprentice

Doctor Who

Have I Got News for You

Formerly on the list were

The Inbetweeners (ended)

Life on Mars/Ashes to Ashes (ended)

Mock the Week (deteriorated)

All of these were watched using catch-up TV services. No TV licence for me.

This week for example I've mostly been watching old Men Behaving Badly episodes on See Saw.

"Future generations will look back on TV as the lead in the water pipes that slowly drove the Romans mad."

Kurt Vonnegut

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been watching Single Handed on the PVR and skipping through the adverts. Seems like the hour long programme ends up at about 45 minutes of programme without the adverts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a cheapo LG LCD flat screen TV and Humax Freeview HD PVR. The HD channels are a noticeable improvement on standard (576i?) transmissions.

Some films, particularly on C4HD such as Transformers and Iron Man on HD have been outstanding.

Think we need to reserve judgement until analogue is switched off and the transmitters are able to boost power to the HD Mux's

One annoyance is the BBC1HD switching for local news, they are unable to show BBC Look North, so you get a announcement screen forcing you to switch to normal BBC1. ITV1HD on the other hand just show you London News.

One weird thing my LG Blu Ray Player can now only do 720P. I'm sure it was able to do the full 1080P when I first bought it.

Also to add that on some channels, especially ITV1HD there is a lot of upscaled std definition content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using and Sony Bravia with builtin Freeview and very happy with the quality of the picture and can see a definite improvement over SD when viewing HD.

However, I have to agree the majority of content these days is 'pants' with very little "must see" TV, but in some ways I think that's a good thing as I have less of an excuse to veg in front of it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you. I really miss my old CRT tube cheap Beko Tv,! now that I have a Samsung 32" HD flat screen blahdy blah..

Same with PC monitors. I hung on to my old 22" Iiyama as long as I could as I liked being able to change the resolution without everything going pixillated. With flat-screen TV the first thing I noticed was the AWFUL sound quality - no room for even half-way acceptable speakers. Solved by hitching it up to sound system but then it's no longer readily movable....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using and Sony Bravia with builtin Freeview and very happy with the quality of the picture and can see a definite improvement over SD when viewing HD.

However, I have to agree the majority of content these days is 'pants' with very little "must see" TV, but in some ways I think that's a good thing as I have less of an excuse to veg in front of it now.

HD is better for films. If they bother to show any decent ones. Pity Film4 HD and ITV4HD are not on Freeview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So yes it was a huge con for those with PAL, however it was a massive improvement for the US. However the other issue I think it was to sell TV's and get people upgrading.

1080i HD has about five times as many pixels as PAL; so it's certainly not a 'huge con' in principle.

However, most TVs are either 720P which only has about twice as many pixels as PAL, or they deinterlace the 1080i image so you still end up with only about twice as many pixels after you've thrown away half of them. Pushing interlacing on the highest HD resolutions was retarded when interlaced CRTs were dying out by the time it hit the market.

The other problem, if UK HD is anything like Canadian, is that about two thirds of the shows are just upconverted SD, so they look like crap by the time they've been scaled up by the broadcaster and then scaled again by the TV (because few of them will actually display the HD picture without scaling even if it's the same resolution as the TV).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1080i HD has about five times as many pixels as PAL; so it's certainly not a 'huge con' in principle.

However, most TVs are either 720P which only has about twice as many pixels as PAL, or they deinterlace the 1080i image so you still end up with only about twice as many pixels after you've thrown away half of them. Pushing interlacing on the highest HD resolutions was retarded when interlaced CRTs were dying out by the time it hit the market.

You would have to buy a "1080P" Ready as opposed to a "HD Ready" TV to avoid that. Its a bit of minefield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As my Mum so perceptively put it, why did the rioters bother stealing TVs when there was nothing worth watching on them.

:lol: Everyone should have a mum as sensible as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.