|
Posted by Bill Fright on 10/06/02 11:36
Wondering_1 wrote:
> 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...
>
>
I've been preaching about this for years. Digital quality is as obscure
a term ever used to sell supposedly premium quality. Especially in the
way the cable and satellite folks use it. Their is no bench mark and
even if there was I don't think they'd use it for their comparisons. I
think Richard mentioned it was a dollar to bandwidth issue and I agree.
Large corporations aren't interested in quality - they want just enough
quality to make the sale and they want to sell as much as possible.
I blame a lazy population for this issue. But let's remember most people
are watching television for content and not image quality.
Like your VHS story I actually saw a sales poster that touted a high
definition VHS deck. They had to send a mop to that aisle because I
peeded my pants laughing.
Even in the pro area they touted DVcam to be superior to betacamSP. Just
the aliasing of DVcam is enough for me to stick with betacam. I have a
camera that will dock both formats and still my clients ask for betacam
except on rare occasions. Also I'll take an analog audio channel over a
digital one any day.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|