High Definition Television

Biggins

Biggins wrote: »

I'll take your word of it.
Al I can say is that I've seen HDTV's connected up to exact same HD disk players, laid out beside each other in a shop display. the monitors were also the same.
The only difference between the player and the HD TV's was the quality in HDMI cabling.
It was a set-up to demonstrate how important cabling was - and the difference was very clear.

Those setups are often rigged. Monster once showed one, comparing composite to component, without mentioning that in the description. They simply said their cable was better.

Voodoomelon

The could've been running a lower quality clip or had the settings changed around a bit to demonstrate a difference that isn't there.

starbelgrade

Biggins wrote: »

I'll take your word of it.
Al I can say is that I've seen HDTV's connected up to exact same HD disk players, laid out beside each other in a shop display. the monitors were also the same.
The only difference between the player and the HD TV's was the quality in HDMI cabling.
It was a set-up to demonstrate how important cabling was - and the difference was very clear.

It wouldn't surprise me if they fiddled with the set up in some way just to sell expensive cables... the guys in music shops do the same thing all the time & I know from years of playing music that the cheap cables often out perform and outlast the more expensive ones.

Biggins

starbelgrade wrote: »

It wouldn't surprise me if they fiddled with the set up in some way just to sell expensive cables... the guys in music shops do the same thing all the time & I know from years of playing music that the cheap cables often out perform and outlast the more expensive ones.

Possible. All possible.
Better people than I might be able to confirm your knowledge.
(The store was a huge Dixons by the way)

Freddie59

starbelgrade wrote: »

I was in a mate's house over the Christmas & he was boasting about his new HD Sky box and how brilliant everything looked on it. I was staying the night so ended up watching quite a bit of HD TV... to me, it looked bloody awful - admittedly, the football looked good, but it made everything look hyper-real and over digitalised. It even made The Bourne Identity look like a dodgy made for TV movie.

But the worst was an ad I saw for new HD versions of classic 60s movies... here, you had glorious films that were painstakingly shot on real film absolutely destroyed by some idiot who thought that digitising some of the most beautiful photography in cinematic history was a good idea.

I nearly put my foot through the high definition screen and by the time I went to bed, my head hurt & my heart had sunk... all I wanted to know was why... why? Why?!?!!!

So, what's your opinion on HD, or have you even seen any HD TV yet? I have and the future looks grim.

Starting to convert my (small amount of) Blu-rays to a media player for convenience. Films not originally made in HD have a weird look about them alright. Have it from UPC but very rarely use it. As someone else said, it's at its best on Nature programmes.

starbelgrade

Biggins wrote: »

Possible. All possible.
Better people than I might be able to confirm your knowledge.
(The store was a huge Dixons by the way)

Maybe one of the TVs was on the Job Bridge scheme.

Biggins

I find now that I can't watch a film that contains special effects now unless its in HD.

Serenity, the film is unreal in true full HD.

I also have noticed the difference between HD LED TV's and other non-LED types.
Someone remarked on the refresh rate too. I have noticed this.
My parents have a HD TV with a much lower refresh rate (than mine) and you can see what referred to as 'ghost imaging'.

TPD

Biggins wrote: »

Possible. All possible.
Better people than I might be able to confirm your knowledge.
(The store was a huge Dixons by the way)

http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/23/monster-hdmi-difference-scam-still-kickin-in-frys-electronic/

The HDMI cable debate has been going a while. Above is one store which is running a not so obvious scam, to the average consumer. Been going more than a year apparently.

HDMI quality choice should be based on length and how much you're going to move it about. I have a 2m, crappy $5 cable hooked up from my pc to my tv, and the picture quality is perfect. If I was going to be moving it about often, I'd have bought a more robust one.


That aside, I think much of the hate towards HD comes from interpolation - blending of two frames to make a third, in-between frame, to fill up the tv's refresh rate. Makes everything look very cheap.

Toby Take a Bow

Voodoomelon wrote: »

For 1080p, things like Motion effects and refresh rate on the TV can create a fake "soap opera" or "camcorder" effect. It may be necessary to fiddle with your settings, literally for each HD piece you're watching, or have pre-set templates you can apply.

These effects are less noticeable with 720p and often retains the "film" like qualities of movies. Most people can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080 anyways, that is on an average sized screen.

Any of the HD tvs I've seen (in my da's house mainly) have had that effect. It kind of put me off the whole thing (not that I could afford one at the moment anyway) but maybe it's just cos it was set up incorrectly?

Sounds kind of annoying to adjust the settings for every HD film you're watching though.

gcgirl

Eamon Dunphy and Johnny Giles in HD I'm scared that's all I'll say

Biggins

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

Any of the HD tvs I've seen (in my da's house mainly) have had that effect. It kind of put me off the whole thing (not that I could afford one at the moment anyway) but maybe it's just cos it was set up incorrectly?

Sounds kind of annoying to adjust the settings for every HD film you're watching though.

I recommend the Sumsung range of LED TV's for that becoming not a problem ever more.
They have a very high refresh rate, far above others.
Your da's problem would become none existent.

Here is a typical review of the one I've got: http://wccftech.com/review/samsung-led-series-6-review/

Picture quality:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koapQrNPkJs

You should see 'Avatar' on it.
Its like watching a moving work of art.

starbelgrade

I've had a HD ready TV in the sitting room for around 4 few years & never watched any HD stuff on it. I might invest in something to hook up to it now!

Irish Guitarist

I've never seen HD and I have no desire to. If the picture is clear and the sound is audible what more do you want? I especially don't see the point in looking at television programmes in HD. Who the hell wants to see Argumental or Eight Out Of Ten Cats in high definition?

subway

Your mate needs to turn off whatever poxy 100hz type processing his screen came with

I love HD, its far far superior to standard def even for watching normal tv programs but its especially good for sport (golf and soccer are fantastic in HD), movies and nature etc.

I see no point in investing in a big screed lcd or led tv unless you are going to watch HD programming. The sky HD add on is worth every cent of the 15 euro too, maybe if you just have very basic pack it might appear a waste but when you paying the guts of 80 quid for the full pack the extra 15 euro makes a huge difference as so many channels are HD.

As someone mentioned earlier the biggest draw back with HD is when you are watching channels not available in HD they look so crap.

subway

Karsini wrote: »

Could it be that they have 100Hz or higher TVs? I remember thinking this when seeing a Sony 100Hz TV in action.

This, the amount of times I've seen this is unbelievable. People just don't turn it off

UglyBolloxFace

Biggins wrote: »

I recommend the Sumsung range of LED TV's for that becoming not a problem ever more.
They have a very high refresh rate, far above others.
Your da's problem would become none existent.

Here is a typical review of the one I've got: http://wccftech.com/review/samsung-led-series-6-review/

Picture quality:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koapQrNPkJs

You should see 'Avatar' on it.
Its like watching a moving work of art.

"Screen images simulated"...so how do we know if that's actually the quality we would get if we bought one? It pisses me off how companies do this - "Filmed with lash inserts". Cunts.

Biggins

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

"Screen images simulated"...so how do we know if that's actually the quality we would get if we bought one? It pisses me off how companies do this - "Filmed with lash inserts". Cunts.

You will just have to trust me, the quality of the image in the advert IS the quality of that range of TV's.

It is absolutely beautiful.

You wouldn't believe some scenes of underwater with fish, etc swimming about.
Absolutely astounding!

Go to a nearest TV store with one and ask for a demonstration.
Then come back and say I lie (you won't).

(If anyone is in the Louth area and wants to see such things on my own, PM me.)

I also recommend comparing an LCD HD TV (far more common) to a LED HD TV.
Another big difference yet again.

TPD

Watching advertisements of a screen's picture quality, through a presumably lower quality screen, seems pretty redundant to me. Like watching an ad for a 3d film on a 2d screen. These things can only be gauged in person.

Jimoslimos

Biggins wrote: »

I also recommend comparing an LCD HD TV (far more common) to a LED HD TV.
Another big difference yet again.

The biggest advantage of LED (which is actually an LCD screen - just with LED backlighting instead of fluorescent tubes) is the vast improvement in contrast, especially deep black reproduction - still only brings it up to a par with plasma and a little behind CRT

Biggins

TPD wrote: »

Watching advertisements of a screen's picture quality, through a presumably lower quality screen, seems pretty redundant to me. Like watching an ad for a 3d film on a 2d screen. These things can only be gauged in person.

Very true. The best some can do is TRY and show you how good things are.
Sometimes, just sometimes things are true.
Like I said above, a shop demo will soon set a person clear.

Watch a LCD HD demo FIRST - then try an LED HD TV - then go back to a standard home low res' TV.
You might be (should be) awakened as to the possible huge differences with the right manufacturer of high end quality TV's.

Biggins

Jimoslimos wrote: »

The biggest advantage of LED (which is actually an LCD screen - just with LED backlighting instead of fluorescent tubes) is the vast improvement in contrast, especially deep black reproduction - still only brings it up to a par with plasma and a little behind CRT

I would strongly disagree when it come to the Samsung range as mentioned previous.
Have you actually seen a Samsung series 6 (or higher) in operation?

The lastest range of LED TV's blow CRT right out of the water.

By the way, I DO NOT work for Samsumg in anyway or have any connection to them.

The proof is in the pudding. Go see a Samsung LED TV range six or higher.
There is now no comparison.

If you thought HD was pin sharp - Samsung LED makes it 100 times even sharper.
BUT don't take my word for it.
Go to a shop for a demo.

Until then - just read many independent online reviews!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzcCPIpS144

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPFtZhigvnI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-PD2ivXDoc

IF you only watch one - watch the following - explains a bit of the tech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NGEN4PPEU4

Jev/N

If you get a new tv, best to get onto avforums to get the best settings for movie, game, tv etc. I used it for our Samsung and it made a massive difference

Also *saw

Cantona's Collars

Biggins wrote: »

I would strongly disagree when it come to the Samsung range as mentioned previous.
Have you actually seen a Samsung series 6 (or higher) in operation?

The lastest range of LED TV's blow CRT right out of the water.

By the way, I DO NOT work for Samsumg in anyway or have any connection to them.

The proof is in the pudding. Go see a Samsung LED TV range six or higher.
There is now no comparison.

If you thought HD was pin sharp - Samsung LED makes it 100 times even sharper.
BUT don't take my word for it.
Go to a shop for a demo.

Have a Samsung LED full HD tv myself and the picture is amazing,pin sharp HD pictures.
My missus was part of the "sure what's the difference" brigade until we got this tv and now even watches Emmerdale in HD.
I now find it hard to watch sport in lego-vision SD after being spoiled with HD,ESPN has super HD pictures and really shows off the quality compared to SD.
Watched Star Wars Blu Ray on it and for a movie made in 1977 the quality is amazing,anyone who says they can't see the difference is blind or lying,it makes watching SD look like watching something after smearing vaseline on the screen.

Thrill

Biggins wrote: »

I would strongly disagree when it come to the Samsung range as mentioned previous.
Have you actually seen a Samsung series 6 (or higher) in operation?

The lastest range of LED TV's blow CRT right out of the water.

By the way, I DO NOT work for Samsumg in anyway or have any connection to them.

The proof is in the pudding. Go see a Samsung LED TV range six or higher.
There is now no comparison.

If you thought HD was pin sharp - Samsung LED makes it 100 times even sharper.
BUT don't take my word for it.
Go to a shop for a demo.

Until then - just read many independent online reviews!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzcCPIpS144

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPFtZhigvnI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-PD2ivXDoc

IF you only watch one - watch the following - explains a bit of the tech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm2wsDRFWj0

I've got one. 46". Picture quality is stunning.

Biggins

Thrill wrote: »

I've got one. 46". Picture quality is stunning.

zerks wrote: »

Have a Samsung LED full HD tv myself and the picture is amazing,pin sharp HD pictures.

People don't believe me all the time - till they see one in action.
The usual reaction then is just "WOW!"

Jimoslimos

Biggins wrote: »

I would strongly disagree when it come to the Samsung range as mentioned previous.
Have you actually seen a Samsung series 6 (or higher) in operation?

The lastest range of LED TV's blow CRT right out of the water.

By the way, I DO NOT work for Samsumg in anyway or have any connection to them.

Yes, indeed I have;). Aswell as the Series 8s. Used to sell them at a time when themselves and Sony were pretty much the only manufacturers doing LED (aswell as higher Hz rates - 200 at the time)

I wasn't making an overall comparison with CRTs just pointing out some of the current deficiencies, and contrast has long been one of LCDs weak points - much improved now granted.

Biggins

Jimoslimos wrote: »

...much improved now granted.

True, The LED's alone from Samsung have improved massively. They are now top of the quality out there.
They are well recommended. None better for me.
They do NOT come cheap but sometimes the best quality does mean you have to pay a little bit extra too.

Another thing that people might not be aware of.
Our HD/DVD/CD player is also Samsung (as is the 5.1 surround) when you plug the lot all into each other, like a Windows operating system, they all are instantly set-up. They all recognise each other from plug in.
In other words your one control for the TV will automatically work everything else attached to boot!
No messing about with multiple remotes and/or having to set them up.
Just turn on and away you go.

Bullseye1

Brilliant deal on a Panasonic 50" Smart 3D Plasma in Currys. As a fan of movies I'd pick a Plasma every time.

Jimoslimos

One thing people should ALWAYS do when buying a new TV, is ask to view something on it that you would normally watch, whether that be sports, films, soaps - and try for live broadcasts as well as recorded material.

Beware of anywhere only showing animated Pixar blu-rays!

Biggins

Jimoslimos wrote: »

One thing people should ALWAYS do when buying a new TV, is ask to view something on it that you would normally watch, whether that be sports, films, soaps - and try for live broadcasts as well as recorded material.

Beware of anywhere only showing animated Pixar blu-rays!

Very true.
I would suggest even bringing along one of your own HD DVD's (borrow one from a friend if you don't have one?).
Be it sports or a live concert. It helps to see true honest quality.

AlmightyCushion

HD is awesome especially some of the BBC footage out there (even the stuff filmed for top gear is jaw dropping). A 5.1 surround sound system is also a must. Films and games just aren't the same without it.

Biggins

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

HD is awesome especially some of the BBC footage out there (even the stuff filmed for top gear is jaw dropping). A 5.1 surround sound system is also a must. Films and games just aren't the same without it.

:pac:

First time I watched (and listened) to "Saving Private Ryan" on my 5.1 sound system, I nearly crapped myself.
I sat down centre to the surrounding speakers, turned up the volume and in the beach landing scenes alone, I swear to heck, the bullets really sounded clear, sharp and sounds like they were wizzing aound the room and around my head! :pac:

...And amazingly, after a while you could start to tell the difference in the bullet sounds from different guns - and not just the loud ones!

Mad stuff!

...As for 'Apocalypse Now' when the infamous scene of the helicopters coming in from the coast playing their classical music, f-ing brilliant!

---

Someone mentioned earlier about the top range in HD quality of broadcasts.
I was told by a number of places that the best that is available is by Sky who broadcast up to 720 in quality.
NO broadcasting station as of yet is broadcasting yet in FULL HD.

If you want to see TRUE full HD, you will for the moment have to watch from HD DVD's.

Captain_Generic

Biggins wrote: »

:pac:

First time I watched (and listened) to "Saving Private Ryan" on my 5.1 sound system, I nearly crapped myself.
I sat down centre to the surrounding speakers, turned up the volume and in the beach landing scenes alone, I swear to heck, the bullets really sounded clear, sharp and sounds like they were wizzing aound the room and around my head! :pac:

...And amazingly, after a while you could start to tell the difference in the bullet sounds from different guns - and not just the loud ones!

Mad stuff!

...As for 'Apocalypse Now' when the infamous scene of the helicopters coming in from the coast playing their classical music, f-ing brilliant!

You'll know you're systems good when the flashbacks start

andy1249

I'll take your word of it.
All I can say is that I've seen HDTV's connected up to exact same HD disk players, laid out beside each other in a shop display. the monitors were also the same.
The only difference between the player and the HD TV's was the quality in HDMI cabling.
It was a set-up to demonstrate how important cabling was - and the difference was very clear.

This was a well documented scam , one set was using scart , the other HDMI. They were pulled up for it by the ASA.

Subtle differences in sound or picture with HDMI cables is totally impossible , thats a fact , I have a post in a cable sticky somewhere on here where I lay out exactly why , maths included.
Chip design and HDMI integration is currently my job , a speciality of mine.

I also recommend comparing an LCD HD TV (far more common) to a LED HD TV.
Another big difference yet again.

True LED TV's (OLED) are due at CES this year , and this year only , they do indeed have the potential to be something outstanding , other than that , the vast majority of so called LED TV's on the market are nothing more than LCD screens with LED backlights and are pretty much a con job , there is no difference between them and LCD's other than the backlight.

Samsung are the main culprits here , they have been pulled up numerous times for false advertising by the ASA , see here

http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2009/8/Samsung-Electronics-UK-Ltd/TF_ADJ_46783.aspx

Search for Samsung ASA Adjudications for a huge list of other infractions , Samsung just know no other way but lying it would seem !!!


To the OP , Most LCD screens have an interpolation routine , sometimes called incorrectly 100hz , or 100hz motion plus , or Tru Cinema etc.
This is what gives material that dreadful overcooked 80's video look.
Every single review of every single HDTV agrees that the best thing about this feature is that you can turn it off. And it should always be turned off.

Biggins

andy1249 wrote: »

...True LED TV's are due at CES this year , and this year only , other than that , the vast majority of so called LED TV's on the market are nothing more than LCD screens with LED backlights and are pretty much a con job , there is no difference between them and LCD's other than the backlight.

I'd suggest you watch the following video - especially for 2.29 onwards.
They explain that LED's now have moved on from just being a 'back-light' and are an integral part of the screen right across, left to right, up and down.

Samsung have (as even noted by a previous person I've/we've been debating with) learned from experience and probably criticism.
There is no dreadful overcooked 80's video look, no ghosting and nothing less than amazing pin sharpness, top of the range quality from them now.
Along with other high calibre makers, they have learned from previous lessons.

Biggins

Captain_Generic wrote: »

You'll know you're systems good when the flashbacks start

Suffered through 'Titanic' the film on it.
I though I was drowning on the damn ship at one stage! :pac:
Ruddy water was sloshing all around me constantly! LOL
Had I been on a water-bed - I would have been twice as sick!

Jimoslimos

andy1249 wrote: »

True LED TV's (OLED) are due at CES this year , and this year only , they do indeed have the potential to be something outstanding , other than that , the vast majority of so called LED TV's on the market are nothing more than LCD screens with LED backlights and are pretty much a con job , there is no difference between them and LCD's other than the backlight.

It's a bit disingenious to say there's no difference between LED and fluourescent backlighting. It improves contrast greatly for one.

OLED are amazing, but a few years away yet - short life (especially for some colours) is still an issue

omniscient_toad

Biggins wrote: »

I'd suggest you watch the following video - especially for 2.29 onwards.
They explain that LED's now have moved on from just being a 'back-light' and are an integral part of the screen right across, left to right, up and down.

Samsung have (as even noted by a previous person I've/we've been debating with) learned from experience and probably criticism.
There is no dreadful overcooked 80's video look, no ghosting and nothing less than amazing pin sharpness, top of the range quality from them now.
Along with other high calibre makers, they have learned from previous lessons.

But that's exactly what he's saying in this video , led's are used as a new form of backlighting the lcd rather than fluorescent tubes. He's just pointing out the difference between "full array" and "edge lit" , which is the manner in which the led's are positioned to provide the backlighting.

edit: these are full led http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/12/sony-keeps-oled-hope-alive-with-budget-monitor-line-video/ , 25 inches for 7,400 dollars.

don ramo

5.1what are ye on about true HD sound is 7.1tight arses

Minstrel27

Biggins wrote: »

Someone mentioned earlier about the top range in HD quality of broadcasts.
I was told by a number of places that the best that is available is by Sky who broadcast up to 720 in quality.
NO broadcasting station as of yet is broadcasting yet in FULL HD.

Sky is 1080i

Blu-Ray discs for me every time when I buy a movie

Biggins

Minstrel27 wrote: »

Sky is 1080i

Blu-Ray discs for me every time when I buy a movie

Its 1080i which is classed as High Definition. Not every broadcast on an HD channel is in High Definition though. Your friend may be referring to 1080p. p referring to progressive i.e. the way the picture is built up. i is interlaced. 1080p is deemed the ultimate (at the moment) but who can tell the difference between 1080i and 1080p!!

See the following thread: http://www.avforums.com/forums/sky-hd-sky-3d/952172-sky-hd-actually-true-hd.html

Or here: http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/tv-channels/sky-hd/1111719/

SKY broadcasts on 1080i, a somewhat poorer version of the true HD of 1080p. It actually upscales the 720p HD ready to mimic the true HD. So as technology moves forward, you have to buy basic equipment making the advanced feature on your TV redundant.
Moreover, if you try watching normal channels with SKY HD on a HD TV, the downscaling is very notable when comparing with either the CRT's or even the freesat pictures.

For me, if I want TRUE FULL HD, I too go for the discs.
I never buy a film now in poor resolution. Its painful to watch.

AlmightyCushion

don ramo wrote: »

5.1what are ye on about true HD sound is 7.1tight arses

It was tempting but too expensive for me. I'll have to do with my pokey 5.1 system for now.

Biggins

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

It was tempting but too expensive for me. I'll have to do with my pokey 5.1 system for now.

7.1 is great but hard to get.
A friend had to import his.
He hunted the whole of Ireland for a decent one and were not to be found.
Cost him a fortune - never mind the import additional costs.

Turbine

krudler wrote: »

IMAX though, thats something we need in this country, I'm going to London for The Dark Knight Rises in IMAX, and it'll be worth it.

There used to be an IMAX on Parnell St until it shut down a few years ago. Tbh even if they reopened it, I couldn't see enough people paying the extra few euro for it to be viable.

Minstrel27

Biggins wrote: »

See the following thread: http://www.avforums.com/forums/sky-hd-sky-3d/952172-sky-hd-actually-true-hd.html

Or here: http://www.dooyoo.co.uk/tv-channels/sky-hd/1111719/



For me, if I want TRUE FULL HD, I too go for the discs.
I never buy a film now in poor resolution. Its painful to watch.

I am not suggesting that 1080i is full hd. Merely pointing out that Sky doesn't use 720p

See here for the difference

krudler

Turbine wrote: »

There used to be an IMAX on Parnell St until it shut down a few years ago. Tbh even if they reopened it, I couldn't see enough people paying the extra few euro for it to be viable.

wasnt as many movies being made for it then though, theres a rake of blockbusters these days shown in the format, The Dark Knight Rises being the big one this summer

Biggins

Minstrel27 wrote: »

I am not suggesting that 1080i is full hd. Merely pointing out that Sky doesn't use 720p

See here for the difference

True, you have a point too.
I'm sure you will agree though that for the moment, if people want real true HD, they will have to look to their HD dvd's for the full quality.
So far no station is able to given them that same high spec, close but no prize.

andy1249

OLED are amazing, but a few years away yet - short life (especially for some colours) is still an issue

The blue color issue is old news , LG , Samsung and other manufacturers are showing large screen ( 55 inch ) OLED's available for purchase this year. They wont be cheap , but they are here , not five years away.

http://asia.cnet.com/crave/lgs-oled-whopper-boasts-all-the-latest-bells-and-whistles-62212866.htm

http://www.pcworld.com/article/247652/samsung_announces_smarter_slimmer_hdtvs_including_55inch_super_oled_display.html

dave3004

HD TV - I am not even close.....

Let me give you one word to sum my life up ......






















Grundig !