HD TV | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 339 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614114
Today 0
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
HD TV
 

offline aphextriplet from your mothers bedroom (United Kingdom) on 2006-09-11 09:48 [#01968973]
Points: 4731 Status: Lurker



Just bought one alongside sky package.

Anyone else have this?


 

offline staz on 2006-09-11 10:03 [#01968981]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular



i'm getting one when it's financially viable...

some time in 2020?


 

offline Ezkerraldean from the lowest common denominator (United Kingdom) on 2006-09-11 10:08 [#01968983]
Points: 5733 Status: Addict



nope. we just got standard sky.


 

offline aphextriplet from your mothers bedroom (United Kingdom) on 2006-09-11 10:18 [#01968986]
Points: 4731 Status: Lurker | Followup to staz: #01968981



just remember the damn hidden costs.

You pay god knows how much for the tv, then 300 quid for a
hd set top box, then around 40+ a month for the channels.

YEESH.

but it rules.


 

offline ToXikFB on 2006-09-11 10:21 [#01968988]
Points: 4414 Status: Lurker | Followup to aphextriplet: #01968986



40+ a month for like..6 hd channels? lol


 

offline aphextriplet from your mothers bedroom (United Kingdom) on 2006-09-11 10:22 [#01968990]
Points: 4731 Status: Lurker



10 hd channels + all the sky channels on digital + free
broadband


 

offline staz on 2006-09-11 10:37 [#01968994]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular



i really want a 52" one because quite frankly the picture is
gorgeous and i love console gaming so. i'm just having
problems with deciding on one since i want a 1080p native
one when they're affordable, but i know
upconverting/interpolation etc. takes too much juice to
avoid latency issues when using consoles. which renders the
xbox 360 situation a bit problematic.


 

offline redrum from the allman brothers band (Ireland) on 2006-09-11 11:16 [#01969011]
Points: 12878 Status: Addict



what's the point?


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2006-09-11 11:45 [#01969042]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator



I'm waiting for UberDefinition, where the image is more
realistic than reality.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2006-09-11 11:46 [#01969043]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



HD is fucking beautiful.

i don't even own a tv (and i love it!!!) but a few of my
buddy's have HDTV and I go over there to watch lost, or some
other hd programs.

it's is soooo nice.

especially for sports games.

wow


 

offline staz on 2006-09-11 11:46 [#01969044]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular | Followup to redrum: #01969011



better quality


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2006-09-11 11:47 [#01969046]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to staz: #01969044



it's television.


 

offline staz on 2006-09-11 11:47 [#01969047]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular | Followup to qrter: #01969046



um


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2006-09-11 11:48 [#01969048]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Show recordbag



I've had an HDTV for years and I've never actually had any
actual HD programming heh... I don't watch much TV. It does
look awesome though from what I've seen, hockey in HD is
very nice. I'd like to have it but it's too expensive
considering my viewing habits, or lack thereof.

I bought my TV pretty much exclusively for gaming. Xbox 360
looks superb in HD. But still I wish I'd held out on buying
the TV... I really should have waited, because it wasn't
until the 360 came out that the investment was worth it. I
could have had a nicer DLP right now if I'd waited rather
than made an impulse purchase during a generation where HD
gaming wasn't standard.

(I'm pretty pissed that the Nintendo Wii isn't supporting
HD)


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2006-09-11 11:49 [#01969049]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to staz: #01969047



have you ever watched the 1000th reality show or the 10000th
sitcom or the 1000000th commercial thinking "man, if only
the quality of the picture was better!!".


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2006-09-11 11:52 [#01969050]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



have you ever viewed the 1000th or 10,000 post of someone on
xltronic, thinking "man, if only this page would have loaded
faster!"


 

offline staz on 2006-09-11 11:54 [#01969052]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular | Followup to qrter: #01969049



i'm just concerned about dvds/games in the hdtv area,
really, so i dunno. i don't care about that stuff.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2006-09-11 12:45 [#01969095]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



watching LOST (lush scenes) on HDTV is beautiful.

going back and watching it on normal is just, meh.

sure the content is still there, but you can't argue with
resolution


 

offline aphextriplet from your mothers bedroom (United Kingdom) on 2006-09-11 12:48 [#01969098]
Points: 4731 Status: Lurker



sky movies hd and sky one hd and sky sports hd justify
everything. Nature programmes in HD will be awesome too.
Plus PS3 whenever the hell they release that over here.
Watching hd tv is kinda expensive at the moment, but channel
4 and BBC are starting a regular hd tv service in 2007 (bbc
have a partial channel already - shows like 3 things a day).
I don't think the price will drop, but more will be on
offer.


 

offline redrum from the allman brothers band (Ireland) on 2006-09-11 12:51 [#01969100]
Points: 12878 Status: Addict



why be bothered about the picture quality, when it's already
far better than satisfactory, but the quality of the
programmes is just shite?


 

offline staz on 2006-09-11 12:54 [#01969105]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular | Followup to redrum: #01969100



i think it's pretty obnoxious of you to decide what's
"satisfactory" for everyone else.


 

offline giginger from Milky Beans (United Kingdom) on 2006-09-11 13:07 [#01969122]
Points: 26326 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



I have looked at many HD setups in the shops and I've seen
no better quality over a normal setup.


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2006-09-11 13:28 [#01969149]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to giginger: #01969122 | Show recordbag



Keep in mind that shops have HDTVs set to torch, they're
uncalibrated, usually have DVDs running on them which is
pretty much an obsolete tech, and rarely actually have HD
material displayed. Actually when I was shopping for my TV,
the shops usually had DVD players hooked up to these things
via freakin' RCA cables... ugh. What's the point?

Actually my uncle has a beautiful 60 inch behemoth and he
STILL uses RCA cables for his home theater... it's a
tragedy.

I'd say the difference between standard def and hi-def is
night and say, but not everyone is a videophile... my mom
says she doesn't notice a difference.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2006-09-11 13:34 [#01969156]
Points: 18368 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



same goes for stuff with audio quality, bit rates for
digital music, etc.

some people notice the difference, some just dont

others just don't care (???)

but me personally; hd fuckin rawkkkkks


 

offline avart from nomo' on 2006-09-11 15:11 [#01969244]
Points: 1764 Status: Lurker | Followup to qrter: #01969049



:D "shit is shit even in megabits" (highdef = still
braindeath - it's only tv, just made to keep people away
from subversive activities and increase consumption)


 

offline avart from nomo' on 2006-09-11 15:12 [#01969245]
Points: 1764 Status: Lurker | Followup to qrter: #01969049



:D "shit is shit even in megabits" (highdef = still
braindeath - it's only tv, just made to keep people away
from subversive activities and increase consumption)


 

offline staz on 2006-09-11 15:26 [#01969257]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular



good job figuring that out


 

offline NewSkoolScience from Outer Bongolia on 2006-09-11 15:29 [#01969260]
Points: 457 Status: Lurker



avart, you are a tit.


 

offline Laserbeak from Netherlands, The on 2006-09-11 16:19 [#01969308]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker



I just did a little test comparing HDTV
to
HDTV resized to PAL resolution and then back to HDTV using
high quality resizers and a little sharpening

the difference is not dramatic, I had to look pretty careful
to spot the difference in a picture that is standing still.
The most apparent difference are hairs. If things were
moving it would probably be even harder to tell the
difference

the comparison avisynthscript I used was this:

a=imagesource("snapshot_HD.jpg").converttoyv12()
b=a.spline36resize(720,576).limitedsharpenfaster(dest_x=192
0,dest_y=1088,strength=50)
stackhorizontal(a.crop(512,0,-960,0),b.crop(512,0,-960,0))
return(last)

too bad tvs don't use these resizers, the difference that
people really notice is caused by resizers in tvs that are
not suitable for sharp upsizing.

the HDpicture I used was with the koreans here:
http://www.hdtvpub.com/examples/HDTV-Screenshot-DB.cfm



 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2006-09-11 16:28 [#01969314]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to elusive: #01969156



it's not about not being able to notice a difference, it's
more about not caring about the difference.

it's about caring more about content, not about how pristene
the image is.


 

offline staz on 2006-09-11 16:37 [#01969319]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular | Followup to qrter: #01969314



am i disqualified if i care about both?


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2006-09-12 02:12 [#01969476]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



get me a cathode ray tube any day

lcd, pah!


 

offline Laserbeak from Netherlands, The on 2006-09-12 05:49 [#01969532]
Points: 2670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #01969476



I agree, what we need is a CRT hdtv with an upsizer that
looks like this:

lanczos4resize(1920,1088)
aWarpSharp(Depth=4,Blurlevel=1,cm=0)

then even normal resolution DVDs and broadcasts would look
almost as good as an actual HDTV signal. Especially if they
don't compress the video too much.

I've reached a SSIM level of +/- 0.971(1 would be perfect)
for my fake HD(upsized SD) compared to the showcase HD image
that I mentioned above.

things that kill the HD effect:
- compression(always throws away detail if lossy)
- average LCD tvs(cheap ones often much lower than
1920x1088)
- grainy movies (a very high percentage)
- viewing distance and videomovement(because of the way our
eyes work)

I like HDTV but if you add all this, the new copy
protection, the amount of money the new devices cost and
that you need to get your movies all over again, I think
I'll pass on real HDTV and go for fake HD on the PC+CRT
monitor if I want higher quality video



 

offline giginger from Milky Beans (United Kingdom) on 2006-09-12 06:37 [#01969559]
Points: 26326 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ophecks: #01969149 | Show recordbag



Well, they were displaying a supposedly HD Sky Channel. It's
probably the cables they're using.


 

offline Anus_Presley on 2006-09-12 12:23 [#01969715]
Points: 23472 Status: Lurker



if someone was all like "herre's a HDTV forr you, forr
free", i'd be all like "cool", but i won't buy one everr i
don't think, unless i need a new TV and it's all they make
anymorre.


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2006-09-12 13:44 [#01969755]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to Anus_Presley: #01969715 | Show recordbag



that's becoming a real danger.. a mate needs a new tv and we
were out looking for a new tv, but all they had was all that
plasma and lcd crap...


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2006-09-12 14:47 [#01969800]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #01969755 | Show recordbag



What about DLP? I wouldn't spend money on a plasma/LCD
either, but I'd trade my CRT for a DLP in a heartbeat.


 

offline giginger from Milky Beans (United Kingdom) on 2006-09-12 14:52 [#01969804]
Points: 26326 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



I'm drawing up plans for a projector system in my room. It's
only an idea but bascially it turns the end of my bed into a
projector screen so I can lie in bed and watch extreme porn.


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2006-09-12 15:10 [#01969808]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ophecks: #01969800 | Show recordbag



isn't that for projectors only? you wouldn't want a
projector for stuff like just watching the tv or anything
involving having it on for lots and lots of time in one go..
they burn out and those lightbulbthingies are damned
expensive...


 

offline swears from junk sleep on 2006-09-12 15:10 [#01969809]
Points: 6474 Status: Lurker



It looks ok I guess.


Attached picture

 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2006-09-12 15:29 [#01969819]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #01969808 | Show recordbag



They're rear projection, not projectors, and while they're
definitely not as resilient as a CRT (which seem to be
almost immortal), they're way better than plasmas in that
regard.

I saw one in action for a few minutes in one of those
demonstration rooms in a store (someone playing Kameo on the
360) and it put everything else to shame, didn't seem to
have any of the quirks of the other TVs. Never any ghosting,
never any geometry errors, never any convergence problems,
never any screen-door (I think), no possibility of burn-in,
they're not too bulky... I'm definitely ditching CRT for one
of those as soon as I have the cash.


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2006-09-12 15:34 [#01969823]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ophecks: #01969819 | Show recordbag



but isn't one of the weaknesses of rear-projection that it,
like lcd, has no black?


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2006-09-12 15:39 [#01969824]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #01969823 | Show recordbag



Probably not as good as a direct view CRT, for sure, but I'd
gladly sacrifice it for the impossibly sharp and vibrant
picture I saw.

Then again Kameo is a really really bright game and I didn't
really get to gauge the black levels at all... I read it's
not as big a problem as it is with LCD.

I gotta go back there and see if I can a dark game like
Splinter Cell running on there...


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2006-09-12 15:42 [#01969825]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ophecks: #01969824 | Show recordbag



you should try looking at some real expensive crts.. they're
awesome! you know how the gladiator looks really crisp? they
do that to all movies (of somewhat decent quality)!


 

offline staz on 2006-09-12 15:48 [#01969828]
Points: 9844 Status: Regular



CRT is still the best by far, but FUCK are they ever heavy.


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2006-09-12 15:51 [#01969831]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #01969825 | Show recordbag



I dunno man, I love the crispness (and they're awesome for
gaming) but they screens are so small and there's so much
junk in their trunk... screen-size would be of paramount
importance to me, it just doesn't feel, like ''epic'' or
something on anything less than 45 inches... I chose a
rear-projection CRT over a direct-view for this very reason,
knowing full well the picture isn't as sharp. This fuggin'
DLP was a huge monster yet it still looked better than the
direct-view.

It made me tele-penis feel small. :_-( Fuck high end
electronics.


 


Messageboard index