High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

High Definition Media A place to discuss BD and UHD Content from physical and digital media

HD looks pretty bad to me

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-01-2006, 02:24 PM   #31  
HD DVD Supporter
 

Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1080PsF
Teach me Steeb. I'm always up for learning more. That's why I'm where I'm at. I love to learn. Opps did that sound condescending. Sorry didn't mean to.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to teach you. Good luck with your SD analog tv.

I still don't understand what you're doing on this forum, since you have admitted to having no respect for HD, in any form, if it's of lesser quality than a D5 master.

Go troll elsewhere, douche.
Steeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 02:43 PM   #32  
No HD? We have a problem.
 
stchman's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 52
Posts: 2,321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1080PsF
No I donít have HD at home because I wonít buy into the hype. I deal with HD everyday at my job and Iíve been dealing with HD for about 10 years of my 20 years in post-production. I have very fast eyes and I see more than most people including people in my industry so I see a lot more of the problems than most. And on top of that I know what Iím looking for. So for me itís OTA SD. No compression artifacts, field weaving, or temporal averaging. Iím just trying to say that the broadcasters and manufactures need to stop screwing over the general public and give the consumer real HD.

BTW the first time I saw an HD DVD was at NAB in April and I asked the manufacture if the DVD player or monitor was making the picture look so bad (It had huge blocking issues and temporal averaging). They said they didnít know.

Does anyone live in So Cal. and want to see how HD should look?
So with your enhanced temporal vision you have come to the conclusion that SD looks better than HD?

Temporal averaging, sound like you have been watching too much science fiction.
stchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 02:49 PM   #33  
HT Frontiersman
 
borromini's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stchman
...sound like you have been watching too much science fiction.
Are tape monkeys eligible for long-term disability?
borromini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 02:56 PM   #34  
Compression Sucks
Thread Starter
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Monrovia, CA.
Posts: 737
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stchman
For OTA the FCC allows 6MHz of bandwidth. You have to compress and HD signal to fit in that alloted bandwidth. Do some homework before spouting dribble. I guess the FCC should just listed to you.
I know what the allotted bandwidth is and that is why I was saying that they should only use that bandwidth for the HD signal only and not chop it up for other uses.


Quote:
Originally Posted by stchman
Mpeg2 is approx 10:1 compression so therefore the satellite companies would have to cut down the numner of HD channels by 10. That means DISH would have 3 instead of 30 in your grand scheme.
Speaking of doing some homework. The satellite companies are stepping on the signal about 100:1 not 10:1. If they are using a 17Mbps hose but you are trying to fit 1.5Gbps into that hose it would have to be compressed about 89:1 but I really doubt that they are using 17Mbps.


Quote:
Originally Posted by stchman
Blu Ray and HD-DVD players need compression to get the movie to fit. A typical HD movie with audio takes about 15G with compression not counting extras and other language audio tracks. Your "True HD" would require a 150G optical drive. Guess what? They don't exist.
So I guess in this statement you are saying 15GB correct? So once again do some homework 150GB wouldnít be enough for an uncompressed movie. Itís 1.5Gbps or 187.5MBps so 187.5 x 60 = 11.25GB per minute and letís say an average movie is 90mins. So that would be 11.25 x 90 = 1.0125TB. Your correct that HD-DVD or BD canít handle that much data but the holographic disc will and instead of these companies wasting their time on HD-DVD and BD they should be working harder on the holographic disc.
1080PsF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 03:35 PM   #35  
No HD? We have a problem.
 
stchman's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 52
Posts: 2,321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1080PsF
I know what the allotted bandwidth is and that is why I was saying that they should only use that bandwidth for the HD signal only and not chop it up for other uses.


Speaking of doing some homework. The satellite companies are stepping on the signal about 100:1 not 10:1. If they are using a 17Mbps hose but you are trying to fit 1.5Gbps into that hose it would have to be compressed about 89:1 but I really doubt that they are using 17Mbps.


So I guess in this statement you are saying 15GB correct? So once again do some homework 150GB wouldnít be enough for an uncompressed movie. Itís 1.5Gbps or 187.5MBps so 187.5 x 60 = 11.25GB per minute and letís say an average movie is 90mins. So that would be 11.25 x 90 = 1.0125TB. Your correct that HD-DVD or BD canít handle that much data but the holographic disc will and instead of these companies wasting their time on HD-DVD and BD they should be working harder on the holographic disc.
6MHz is still not near enough to fit uncompressed HD video.

For 720p 60Fps you need 486GB for 1 hr of uncompressed video. 1080p requires 1092GB for an hour of uncompressed video. A two hour movie would require 972GB for 720p and 2184GB for 1080p.

Those are crazy big numbers. A 1080p movie to fit on a 30GB HD-DVD disc would need approx a 100:1 compression. VC-1 is capable of these with little loss in PQ.

For BD, they mainly use MPEG2 and at 100:1 compression the loss is greater than VC-1 but still manageable.
stchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 03:46 PM   #36  
No HD? We have a problem.
 
stchman's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 52
Posts: 2,321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1080PsF
I know what the allotted bandwidth is and that is why I was saying that they should only use that bandwidth for the HD signal only and not chop it up for other uses.


Speaking of doing some homework. The satellite companies are stepping on the signal about 100:1 not 10:1. If they are using a 17Mbps hose but you are trying to fit 1.5Gbps into that hose it would have to be compressed about 89:1 but I really doubt that they are using 17Mbps.


So I guess in this statement you are saying 15GB correct? So once again do some homework 150GB wouldnít be enough for an uncompressed movie. Itís 1.5Gbps or 187.5MBps so 187.5 x 60 = 11.25GB per minute and letís say an average movie is 90mins. So that would be 11.25 x 90 = 1.0125TB. Your correct that HD-DVD or BD canít handle that much data but the holographic disc will and instead of these companies wasting their time on HD-DVD and BD they should be working harder on the holographic disc.
I do stand corrected on the numbers.
stchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 03:57 PM   #37  
Compression Sucks
Thread Starter
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Monrovia, CA.
Posts: 737
Default

BTW I never said anything about anything needing to be uncompressed. Even the machines that I use at work have some compression (HD-D5 is 4.1:1, HD-CAM is about 7.1:1, and even the newest machine HD-CAM SR is 2.7:1). I don't have a problem with light compression even if I can still find some problems with those signals. I'm just saying that a compression of 100:1 is out of control.
1080PsF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 04:03 PM   #38  
HD DVD Supporter
 

Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1080PsF
BTW I never said anything about anything needing to be uncompressed. Even the machines that I use at work have some compression (HD-D5 is 4.1:1, HD-CAM is about 7.1:1, and even the newest machine HD-CAM SR is 2.7:1). I don't have a problem with light compression even if I can still find some problems with those signals. I'm just saying that a compression of 100:1 is out of control.
Like I said, you must live a pathetically sad existence. It must suck to be as jaded as you are - it would kill me, being the movie lover I am.
Steeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 04:12 PM   #39  
Compression Sucks
Thread Starter
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Monrovia, CA.
Posts: 737
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stchman
6MHz is still not near enough to fit uncompressed HD video.

For 720p 60Fps you need 486GB for 1 hr of uncompressed video. 1080p requires 1092GB for an hour of uncompressed video. A two hour movie would require 972GB for 720p and 2184GB for 1080p.
BTW for a movie recorded at 1080p/23.98 would be the same as a 1080i/59.94 they are both 1.4835Gbps (I just rounded that to 1.5Gbps in the other post to make easy math) and a 720p/59.94 is also 1.4835Gbps.
Check out this link
http://www.highdefinitionblog.com/?page_id=143
1080PsF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 04:34 PM   #40  
Compression Sucks
Thread Starter
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Monrovia, CA.
Posts: 737
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steeb
Like I said, you must live a pathetically sad existence. It must suck to be as jaded as you are - it would kill me, being the movie lover I am.
On one side you are so correct it truly sucks not to be able to just watch a movie and enjoy it like everyone else and not look at it for problems, but on the other hand thatís why Iím so good at my job.
1080PsF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 05:47 PM   #41  
HT Frontiersman
 
borromini's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1080PsF
...but on the other hand thatís why Iím so good at my job.
Glad to know there's someone else that can do that job. Me...I'll just stick to enjoying movies in HD.
borromini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 06:04 PM   #42  
Compression Sucks
Thread Starter
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Monrovia, CA.
Posts: 737
Default

borromini - are you also a tape monkey like me?
1080PsF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 06:16 PM   #43  
HT Frontiersman
 
borromini's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,309
Default

Nope...sorry if I mislead you. I merely meant it was good to know that someone is doing that job. I'm just an HD enthusiast with a knack for front projectors and overall A/V design. If I spent all day looking at the material you do...I'd probably would ruin my love for watching HD movies and sports.
borromini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2006, 05:42 AM   #44  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,095
Default

Quote:
On one side you are so correct it truly sucks not to be able to just watch a movie and enjoy it like everyone else and not look at it for problems
...so, your wish is that we also stop enjoying HD movies, HD programs?

Or is this a need to express your frustration at not being able to enjoy them and wish not to remain alone with this anomaly ? This Forum does not replace the couch in a psychiatrist's office...
mfabien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2006, 06:43 AM   #45  
Every day is Friday
 
oblioman's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Hooooterville
Posts: 9,279
Default

Permit me to toss in a couple of pennies here - Although 1080PsF has been flamed he does bring some good stuff to this forum. He may have ignited a few of us with his opening OPINION and does crack a few points that the industry must address in the coming years. We do have our 720P,1080i & 1080P and to myself I love all of it. Much better than SD. Although we be small in numbers - remember that we all joined this forum to educate ourselves and others in HD - no matter how it is presented. I agree with 1080PsF in that the industry is not doing enough. I pay $150 bucks a month for cable & broadband (Comcast). I rent their HD-DVR (Motorola PoS), I rent their broadband modem (works but still prefer DSL) but the kicker is the 400+ channels I get and 390 of them are pure crap. Out of the 10 channels I get in HD, 3 of them stand out-the other 7 are mediocre. I also have 2 OTA receivers (Sammy 351 & 451) that blow the Comcast signal away. Hands down. Explain to me why an OTA signal - traveling through hill and dale and everything else between, not to mention my cheap home made antenna still delivers a better picture than Comcast hard wired does? The answer - compression. You all know that.

1080PsF works daily with true HD, and if he wants to deny himself the pleasures of what is available to the masses, thats his choice. Oh shit, Im drtunk agin and lost my strain of thoughty,,,hang in thier guys,,,gotta take a nap before I finsh me rant.
oblioman is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


to HD looks pretty bad to me
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Panny plasma, HORRIBLE SD and red lines in HD sincraft Flat-Panel TVs 46 10-27-2009 11:04 PM
Super Resolution Coming To DVD Players (960P) Lee Stewart High Definition Media 3121 01-01-2009 06:03 PM
Bad Vudu [blog on Forbes.com] Nikopol High Definition Media 53 12-22-2008 10:12 AM
Review:360 HD-DVD owns PS3 blur-ray... Cygnus HD DVD Players and Discs 75 01-03-2007 08:43 PM
Comcast On-Demand HD movie dlh4599 Cable Providers 6 02-01-2006 04:45 PM
HD Lite On Dish Network? lookn4HDTV DISH Network Forum 13 01-25-2006 12:04 AM
Samsung 30" built-in HD tuner TX-P3071WH review kdogg Direct-View (tube) TVs 39 10-26-2005 04:42 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:19 AM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands