|
|
Posted by Wondering_1 on 10/06/20 11:36
Thats my point....gullible uneducated public is snapping up these HD TV's,
thinking it's the best thing since bread, yet the source material is
absolute crap...
Reminds me of a post I read here years ago about a guy who purchased a S-VHS
VCR and taped shows off cable, then complained that these was no improvement
in picture quality...
"Richard Crowley" <richard.7.crowley@intel.com> wrote in message
news:dpjnq4$pkq$1@news01.intel.com...
> "Wondering_1" wrote ...
>> To shoot and edit and create, digital is great, but as an end consumer
>> product, I have to say, I'm disappointed.
>>
>> lately, as I wander through all the best Buy and Circuit City and Sears
>> stores and look at the 42" Plasma or LCD or DLP monitors, each
>> pre-viewing the latest hollywood blockbuster, I begin to cringe as I take
>> a close look at the images on these screens.
>>
>> Compression artifacts, giant square pixels that dance around, strobe-like
>> shimmering static backgrounds, all makes me long for the days of analog.
>
> You seem to be assuming that all "digital" means "heavily compressed".
> If you are talking about the lowest-common-denominator, end-user
> distribution of HD/widescreen, you're likely right. Because the actual
> data requires such a huge bandwidth, it seems unlikely that we poor
> consumers will have to go the the neighborhood digitally-equipped
> theatre to see HD video that isn't horribly compressed.
>
> OTOH, note that DV and its variants (mini-DV, DVCAM,
> DVCpro25, Digital8, etc.) are rated slightly *above* BetacamSP
> which was considered "broadcast quality" for many years.
>
> Ref: http://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-tech.html
> "How good are the DV formats compared to other formats?"
>
> Even SD video on most of the direct-broadcast satellite services
> contains a lot of visible artifacts of JPEG compression as the
> sattelite providers try to cram more channels into their limited
> bandwidth.
>
> This is also happening with the satellite radio services. People are
> complaining about the low quality of the audio as they cram more
> and more channels into the constrained bandwidth.
>
> This is an economic and competitive issue, not really a technical one.
> These quality tradeoffs are made consciously by the providers and
> we are getting what they think we want. They are likely right as most
> of the general public seems to be just fine with it.
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|