Something's wrong witg your settings, or you have a perception problem....
DomA Send a noteboard - 26/12/2010 08:36:07 PM
I've watched some TV shows in HD a few times, but I can't see any major differences that make me say, "Holy shit! That's so much better than standard definition!" The only differences that I've seen are the picture is brighter and the volume is lower. What's the big deal?
Yes, I do have the HD channels, and, yes, I'm sure I was on the HD channel. I'm sure that my TV is an HDTV also. It's an LG 37LD450- 37 inch High Definition 1080p LCD TV.
Yes, I do have the HD channels, and, yes, I'm sure I was on the HD channel. I'm sure that my TV is an HDTV also. It's an LG 37LD450- 37 inch High Definition 1080p LCD TV.
While "testing", make sure you're watching shows shot in HD, not SD shows upscaled for broadcast on a HD channel. SD shows on a HD TV are noticeably worse than broadcasts on a SD TV (for the good reason that they've been blown to twice their vertical size).Don't pick news shows or sitcoms either. They're shot in HD, but they're still technically rushed.
Also make sure your set-ups are right for HD. If you watch HD shows in Zoom/Grand Zoom modes ON, no wonder you don't find them as good as they could be.
Another cause is that you're used to watching SD on cable or satellite, on a fairly small TV (24" and less), and now you've switched to HD on a fairly big one. The rules haven't changed: the smaller the TV set, the smaller the pixels, the more the image is perceived as sharp (and in HD, the bigger the TV, the more high quality you need to buy to keep a great picture. LG is average, but on a 37", it should still be very good.
Otherwise, the problem has to be with a poorer than usual perception of the image quality (you're not alone, I work in VFX/postproduction and we see it with clients from time to time. They just can't judge properly image quality, might confuse the SD stuff compressed for editing with the final HD output and so on, even when it's plain as day shich is which to nearly anyone else. And it's not a matter of experience, just poor perception). There's really no mistaking SD and HD resolutions, normally. HD TV has over twice the vertical information (1080 lines instead of 486) and well over twice the horizontal information (1920 instead of 720 pixels) and isn't afflicted by the many problems of the SD NTSC signal, that could make it blurry or distorted or bad at rendering contrasts below and above certain ranges.
So yeah, there's a huge and very noticeable difference, increased even more by the switch to completely lossless digital production/postproduction and film transfer (before consumer HD got widespread, the few last years of SD had been done with digital systems and tapes, but the image was most often than not still compressed, sometimes heavily. With HD, it can still be compressed for broadcast or by cable, but only extremely rarely is it compressed during postproduction anymore.).
HD TV isn't technically "brighter", that's mostly your TV set. There's more definition in the bright areas, however, and in production since HD, we use a lot more the darker and brighter tones and bright saturated colors as they're no longer problematic, the way they used to be in the crappy NTSC signal days.
HD. What's the deal?
20/12/2010 06:27:40 PM
- 1370 Views
I used to work at a cable company. A few things:
20/12/2010 06:53:15 PM
- 869 Views
Re: I used to work at a cable company. A few things:
20/12/2010 07:42:11 PM
- 963 Views
Re: Filling the entire screen
20/12/2010 09:59:35 PM
- 855 Views
If the picture isn't filling the screen, then it's not HD
21/12/2010 04:06:27 AM
- 928 Views
Time for a new eye glasses exam *NM*
20/12/2010 08:01:29 PM
- 429 Views
Re: Time for a new eye glasses exam
20/12/2010 08:22:21 PM
- 864 Views
Well damn...
20/12/2010 09:33:58 PM
- 755 Views
I'm glad you like it better, but everything I've read says that's incorrect.
21/12/2010 07:06:26 PM
- 713 Views
If you have to ask....
20/12/2010 09:36:01 PM
- 857 Views
I can see the wrinkles and nose hairs much more clearly. I am not necessarily keen on HD. TMI. *NM*
21/12/2010 12:43:59 AM
- 395 Views
Re: I can see the wrinkles and nose hairs much more clearly. I am not necessarily keen on HD. TMI.
21/12/2010 11:10:29 AM
- 694 Views
The deal is... you've gone crazy!
21/12/2010 04:45:33 AM
- 1140 Views
The only Blu-Ray I've seen is those in the stores comparing that to DVD.
21/12/2010 04:48:04 AM
- 849 Views
No one seems to have asked you this yet.
21/12/2010 05:56:55 PM
- 946 Views
Since everyone else seems to think you're weird or offbase...
21/12/2010 11:35:42 PM
- 818 Views
There's nothing wrong with not caring, only with not being able to tell.
22/12/2010 02:31:24 PM
- 709 Views
I'm with you, dude.
22/12/2010 07:12:24 AM
- 691 Views
Blu-ray looks fantastic on the right set, but I wouldn't go crazy over subscription media. *NM*
22/12/2010 02:20:16 PM
- 413 Views
Have you let your horse at the special mushroom patch again?
22/12/2010 02:40:21 PM
- 823 Views
Damn!
22/12/2010 03:16:39 PM
- 713 Views
If you really want to see the difference, watch HD only for 1 month then switch back! Like wine...
23/12/2010 11:34:13 PM
- 687 Views
Something's wrong witg your settings, or you have a perception problem....
26/12/2010 08:36:07 PM
- 897 Views
So... My conclusions from this discussion.
28/12/2010 03:03:13 PM
- 783 Views
I've seen people with the exact same problem as you before
30/12/2010 12:25:00 AM
- 707 Views
So I'm an idiot for not believing in the all mighty power of the HDTV?
30/12/2010 12:31:44 AM
- 794 Views
No...
30/12/2010 02:05:18 PM
- 736 Views
I fail to see how calling him names contributes to this discussion. *NM*
03/01/2011 11:11:35 AM
- 404 Views
Re: I fail to see how calling him names contributes to this discussion.
04/01/2011 10:27:43 AM
- 745 Views
Re: I fail to see how calling him names contributes to this discussion.
06/01/2011 08:28:25 AM
- 772 Views