HDTV .. what a gip!

watty

An HD DVD won't play at all on an upscalling player. Nor Blu Ray. It only plays regular DVDs ever.

Both sorts of HD films on disc this April to August for first release. Bigger catalog on BluRay as Sony backs Bluray and Sony owns a Hollywood studio, Toshiba doesn't.

watty

Latest HD TV news
http://www.hdtvuk.tv/

Watch out for LED backlights now instead of shortlived (in comparison) CF/EL panel/tube backlights:

CeBit just wouldn’t be a technology expo without some kind of record breaking mammoth telly. Luckily Samsung has been kind enough wheel out another ‘world’s largest’ for the show. Showing off an 82 inch TV with LED backlighting, Samsung has claimed itself another record and the backlighting technology helps boost the colour reproduction in the giant device by as much as 33%.

Improved contrast enhancement technology also means that it is now capable of a 7000:1 contrast ratio

One of these in 37" to 60" might be better than the new Sony for HD TV.

ixtlan

1huge1 wrote:

well i guess it must be upscalling then but the box was very misleading and i thought because it was Toshiba it would be
when will hd dvd movies start coming out? and will they still look class on a hdtv with a upscalling hd thing?

Don't worry about this too much... I suspect you paid something like €150? HDDVD players when they come out will surely be at least €500, and there won't be much content for them, as the studios will only be releasing a few titles per month, and they will be expensive.

You have something that will show off your existing DVDs to their best.

Ix.

Blaster99

Are these upscaling DVD players worth getting even with a TV that's not HD-Ready or even LCD? I have a 32" CRT, for instance.

Running Bing

eoinf wrote:

Alliance Electric on Georges st have a 43"/50" pioneer plasma and the hd panasonic 42" and a couple of other sets and they are showing the Olympics in HD via satellite from on a channel called HD-2 .They have the same stuff being shown on euro sport from SKY on a couple of other screens . I recommend anyone not convinced by HD to go in and see it. the difference between the two is unreal the stuff from euro sport looks good , but the same from HD2 is absolutely amazing.

I was in there the other day and must say I was not impressed at all. I would say 90% of the general public would not be able to tell the difference between that and normal tv(unless they were side by side). Very little difference between hd and sky digital imo. I was told the picture would blow you away when you see it, that its revolutionary, that its like looking out of a window the colours are so rich but when I saw it I just thought meh.



Just to clarify it is the screen down the back of the shop tucked into the corner right? I asked the fella in there and he told me but he was about as friendly and helpful as a hobbo after two bottles of Vodka(Defiantely wont be spending my 4grand in there now, just shows how poor service can hurt a business)

watty

Blaster99 wrote:

Are these upscaling DVD players worth getting even with a TV that's not HD-Ready or even LCD? I have a 32" CRT, for instance.

For NTSC users, yes as it removes the 3:2 pulldown artifact problem (converts to progressive scan).

For PAL DVDs upscalling or Progressive Scan DVD players are a waste of money

Upscalled DVD output won't work on an ordinary TV at all. You need a computer monitor or HDTV.

All HDTVs have upscalling built in, if the set is any good, for PAL there is no difference to doing it inside the DVD player (no interlace 3:2 artifacts on PAL). For NTSC there is a big improvement doing upscaling inside player.

Increasingly there is not much delay between NTSC and PAL region DVDs release. NTSC DVD are 30% lower resolution than PAL DVDs (480line rather than 576 line). So why buy NTSC DVDs?

Conclusion. Unless most of your DVDs are NTSC (30% lower quality than PAL DVD) OR you wish to use a Computer Monitor (no upscaling built in like HDTV has) there is no point to an upscalling player.

All PC video projectors have internal upscalling (for PAL composite, S-video and /or "PAL" RGB depending on conectors) to display a regular DVD player.

Some DVD players are not true upascalling, they just convert to Progressive. Unless you TV set is a 100Hz model with a PC input, or HDTV, or a PC monitor you can't use Progressive. It won't display on an ordinary TV. Again this is a feature really for USA/Japan where it gets rid of 3:2 Film to NTSC transfer artifacts that DO NOT EXIST on PAL DVD. No value for PAL DVDs.

The difference between an HDTV and computer monitor is that the computer monitor usually has no inbuilt rescalling, the lowest frequency signals it can handle are Progressive NTSC which is almost the same as Standard VGA. It can't display interlaced regular PAL or NTSC (even in RGB form) at all. An HDTV usually rescales everything to its native resolution (including ordinary NTSC /PAL). For a PC, if the monitor has a native resolution (LCD rather than CRT) then the newer graphics cards can upscale or rescale the current resolution of graphics to the Screen native resolution giving a better picture on LCD (pointless on a CRT).

_Kaiser_

This HDTV thing is just another way to get those with too much money to part with some more of it, and in Sky's case another way to milk some more money from its already overcharged user base.

I mean, when Sky Digital came out it was hailed as a brand new age in TV (well words to that effect) and for a while it was. Then everyone else jumped on the bandwagon and they started cutting back the bandwidth available to each channel until we get to where we are now.

So really then HDTV is just Sky Digital as it SHOULD/could be. As a guy who watches a lot of TV I like to have a decent reception of course, but I'm not prepared to fork out more money to replace my perfectly good 28" W/S CRT and throw more money at Sky to see the same (mostly rubbish and repeats) thing I'm getting now, albeit in a slightly clearer format.

I mean what's the problem really with a DVD on a decent 28/32" CRT? Fair enough, Watty and others undoubtably know the specs but - just as happened with PC's - TV is fast becoming an area where there's no need to upgrade anymore as what's out there is perfectly fine for todays (and the foreseeable future's) broadcasts.

The only way I can see this really taking off is if Sky close standard Digital - like they did with Analogue - and force us all to upgrade, but I can't see even them getting away with that. :rolleyes:

Blaster99

The only problem I have with either DVD's or digital TV is that you can often see compression imperfections. I think watty's and others point is that HDTV is of little use unless you have a 42" TV where the increased resolution will be noticable. 42" TV's are very common in the US and seeing as NTSC is a pile of dung, there's no surprise that they've been at HDTV for a while.

Running Bing

Blaster99 wrote:

The only problem I have with either DVD's or digital TV is that you can often see compression imperfections

What are they Blaster?

watty

Little crinkles visible on high contrast sharp edges, especially on a plain background. Happens more with Archtectural fetures, captions, logos, Graphic art than Nature / Natural subjects.

Becomes more severe as bit rate lowers from 5M to 2M for 720 x 576 video.

Depends on coder quality too. A cinematic two pass variable bit rate encoder will have much fewer and less obvious artifacts than a fast domestic single pass MPEG2 encoder in a Camcorder or home PVR at same average bit rate.

Niall1234

Just wondering, but the few channels that sky have HD at the moment.

I'm guessing these are just temporary channels being used for testing ?

Will every channel go HD eventually ?

watty

No.

For years and years most channels won't be be HD. Almost nothing on some channels is even available in HD.

There is only point to HD really firstly for films and secondly for Made in TV HD Sport, Nature and Major Drama.

Do you really need HD for Coronation Street or the Evening News?

Also at 9ft viewing distance you need 48" to 60" 16:9 screen to get the real benefit. Ordinary TV looks terrible on that size of screen in a living room.

There may only be 8 or 10 channels HD by this time next year with a large amount of worthwhile HD content.

If Sky1 or BBC1 or UTV was HD today, how much would be HD content and how much would be worthwhile as HD?

Mossy Monk

have the BBC set 2010 as a deadline for their content to be 100% HD? except for stuff already made obviously
the reason i ask is because someone mentioned it today
HD Eastenders is on the way

Blaster99

watty wrote:

Little crinkles visible on high contrast sharp edges, especially on a plain background. Happens more with Archtectural fetures, captions, logos, Graphic art than Nature / Natural subjects.

There's definitely that, but I also often notice problems where you have shades of a light colour, often noticable on walls in the background. I can't really explain what it looks like, but you can sort of see distinct areas of colour that don't merge into each other the way they should. It seems more prevelant on some stations than others.

watty

It is worse if your signal is low as then the image can't be recreated properly..

Anyway back to BBC HDTV

Third, the BBC is a pioneer in new technology. The BBC’s Research & Development arm has helped win a place for the UK at the forefront of broadcasting technology and engineering, recognised by seven Queen’s Awards for Industry and four Emmys. Working with partners, the BBC has been responsible for technical breakthroughs in many areas including the first fully compliant digital TV receiver chip, wireless digital cameras, subtitling, audio-description services and digital audio broadcasting (DAB). The BBC is currently developing plans to produce all its television output to meet High Definition Television (HDTV) standards by 2010.

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/thefuture/text/bbc_bpv_chap1.html
Similar mention of PRODUCTION in http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/4417202.stm

What this is saying is the aspiration to PRODUCE all new material in HDTV format by 2010. It doesn't say anything about the transmission.

TG4 aimed to produce and commission all material since they started in WS format. Only recently has there been any RTE WS transmissions (years later). And none FTA without a pay TV subscription.

Don't hold your breath for all the regular channels going HD at all, never mind the % of output when/if they do.

See also
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4793774.stm

High definition TV makes UK debut
Cable company Telewest has launched the UK's first high definition television (HDTV) service.

Mossy Monk

watty wrote:

What this is saying is the aspiration to PRODUCE all new material in HDTV format by 2010. It doesn't say anything about the transmission[/url]

the BBC i would imagine will have at least 1 fulltime HD channel in operation by 2010 so i would imagine that all the new stuff seen on BBC One and Two will at least be available in the HD standard

andrew3

I Can't wait for HDTV from sky! -- take a look at the samples from the vaio-club website using HDTV camera's it is truely fantastic! - I remember comparing the difference between the analogue and digital channels some time ago and I really thought we were loosing out because the sound on the digital system was muffled and the picture less sharp and pixelly! If you bothered to buy a half decent analogue system you were away!

Am most interested in the HDVHS system that has been brought out in the states from JVC -- 50GB on a HDVHS tape!!!! yum! good bye DVD!!

Oh my god nearly forgot - just over a year ago I got both the ntl and sky digital packages into the house to compare their performance! -- I noticed about two months into the contracts the dust on the ntl digital remote and the wear marks on the sky remote! --when I was asked why the ntl box hadn't been used the response I got was "its too hard to surf!" I had a look myself and gosh they were right! -- The guide is a pain you have to select each channel and then the guide lags by about an hour behind the current schedule! -It was also slow and suffered from heavy pixelation!
So anyway the year passed and with the ntl remote having gathered an inch of dust I decieded to cast away the rubbish and release a spare slot in the daisy chain of scart leads! --the next thing I met was ntl's cancellation department! --well ntl hinder cancellations to a huge extent - first I had to ring the 1800321321 number the call centre worker i got said I had to be transfered to the cancellation department -which only worked nine to five! - okey so I rang the following monday and got a know-it-all clerk after 15mins insesent holding music! -(the cancellation department must be very busy!) then the clerk asked me why i was cancelling so -i told her straight - NTL's epg sucks! The box is slow and pixelly! then she asked would I like a service call - I said no thanks! -we had decided to stick with sky - she then informed me that there were no problems with ntls epg and that she used it and thought it was very user friendly! -- I informed her the 5 people in my household begged to differ! - She then asked me for 30 days written notice! - I said is the 20min phone call not enough - she said this was the same with sky! - I then informed her that sky don't require written notice and she began arguing that they did --I said I had canceled numerous times when going abroad on work and never had to write to them! -- so anyway I got my pen and paper out after the 25min frustrating phone call and wrote to The cancellation dept, ntl, east point business park, dublin 3 -- I bet the letter will never get there!

bk

Mossy Monk wrote:

the BBC i would imagine will have at least 1 fulltime HD channel in operation by 2010 so i would imagine that all the new stuff seen on BBC One and Two will at least be available in the HD standard

While it certainly won't have 100% HD content, BBC1 and 2 will likely be avilable in HD next year, with SD content upscaled. HD is expected to be a major selling point for the BBC's new satelitte Freesat service.

bk

andrew3 wrote:

(the cancellation department must be very busy!)

Well NTL:Ieland have one of the lowest turnover rate (losing customers) in Europe. Sky on the other hand is quiet high (about 11%) but mostly probably to FTA/FTV in Ireland.

Your not wrong about anything else you said. However I will say that the Digital service has become much more reliable over the last 6 months, so maybe things are changing for the better under UPC.

watty

bk wrote:

While it certainly won't have 100% HD content, BBC1 and 2 will likely be avilable in HD next year, with SD content upscaled. HD is expected to be a major selling point for the BBC's new satelitte Freesat service.

Any links?

AFAIK the BBC / ITV Freesat box is SD only, though if they have decided to make it MPEg4/HD compatible that would explain the delay till 2007. BBC has only committed to test with posibility of World Cup in HD. I hadn't found anything regarding BBC1 & BBC2.

Initially it would more logical to have a Best of BBC in HD channel with current sport, film, and other material from all the BBC channels on one HD channel.

I wonder how long till an HD version or complement to BBC Prime is launched?

watty

If you want 32" forget about LCD or Plasma. The death of CRT is exaggerated:
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/03/13/samsung_hd_ready_crt_tv/
Because CRT is the only VARIABLE resolution display technolgy, it will display all resolutions, interlace or progressive perfectly without rescaling / artifacts up to its maximum resolution.

Just for SDTV WS & 4:3 a 36" model would be nice Anyone want to contribute?

watty

Telewest steals a march on Sky HD
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/03/13/telewest_tvdrive_reviewed/

But not much content (yet)!

andrew3

watty wrote:

If you want 32" forget about LCD or Plasma. The death of CRT is exaggerated:
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/03/13/samsung_hd_ready_crt_tv/
Because CRT is the only VARIABLE resolution display technolgy, it will display all resolutions, interlace or progressive perfectly without rescaling / artifacts up to its maximum resolution.

Just for SDTV WS & 4:3 a 36" model would be nice Anyone want to contribute?

Funny enough this is true -- LCD and Plasma Technologies still dont display fast moving pictures as good as CRT -- I bought a beautiful strong 42" Plasma display but I have to say the old Sony CRT appeared to have much more depth of picture than the others.
I think Sony did a premature exit from the CRT market and putting all their eggs in the one basket with LCD tv is in my opinion a big mistake - That bravia set looks terrible! - I haven't seen the same quality I would have expected from sony in this set! and its horrendously ugly whats the deal with the big speaker on the bottom! ughhh!

lalorm

It reminds me of the time back in the mid 90's and I wanted to get a WidescreeN Telly. Hardly anyone had them for sale and people said why bother, nothing is shown in WidescreeN anyway! I got one anyway and still have it today. It's a 32" Panasonic. Great picture and now most things are shown in widescreen.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, if you want to get a new Telly to watch HD movies etc, get it anyway. Eventually you will get it regardless and you will see the difference.

BTW, the hell with small 42" LCD or Plasma tv's get a HD ready projector! 106" baby!!!

Cheers
Mike.

Skyuser

You probably paid a small fortune for the widescreen tv back then?

lalorm

It was around £1300 back then. But it was a good one. Top marks in Home Cinema Choice at the time. Can't fault it with anything.

byte

It could be argued, that as TV's became cheaper, the internal components became cheaper also, and perhaps not as reliable as older TV's.

*shrug*