Posted by gaffo on 10/25/05 04:21

Kimba W. Lion wrote:
> NunYa Bidness <nunyabidness@nunyabidness.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Broadcast HDTV is absolutely crisp,
>>regardless of your location. If the signal tunes, the receiver sees
>>everything crystal clear.
>
>
> I wonder if that's true.
>
> In my location, I can get Jeopardy at 7pm from a station here in town, or at
> 7:30 from a station 40 miles away. So sometimes I watch it at 7, sometimes
> at 7:30. I repeatedly notice artifacts on the distant station's picture that
> I never see on the local station.



> I'm not talking pixelation that represents
> losing the signal,




then its not a lose of signal.





> I'm talking JPEG-like artifacts around sharp edges.


Yes - I see them alot on fast moving material. PBS nature shows of
waterfalls and streams show a shitload of transient blockiness.

I think it is two factors. Mainly the topping out of the OTA bandwidth,
where the fast moving water cannot be compressed in a clean way (i.e.
like slow moving/unchanging items) enough to "fit" in the frequency
alotted, so it just compresses anyway in a non-neat way.

I have seen other (more common so far) cases of pixalation. Basically a
shitty digital source, one which looks adaquate when the station
simulcasts the show on thier analog frequency - but looks like a
compressed POS when they show the same source on their digital frequency.

- pixalization 1 above is limitation of the HDTV spec.

pix 2 above is simply poor programing source choices by the station
management.






> I
> can't tell if it's a signal-related phenomenon, or if the distant station is
> transmitting at a lower bit rate. (The local station also provides
> programming on two subchannels, the distant provides just one subchannel,
> which would tend to argue against a lower bit rate on the distant HD
> channel.)



--

If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognize the undisputed power
of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as
given by a judge, and contrary to the evidence...If the jury feels that
the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent
circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason
which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to
acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision.

4th Circuit Court of Appeals, United States v. Moylan, 1969

[Back to original message]