HD v SD
[Deleted User]
Posts: 37
Forum Member
✭
I have a Humax Foxsat HDR (Freesat) and a Humax HDR Fox T2 (Freeview) connected to a Panasonic TV Model TX-26LXD80 using both Scart and good quality gold plated HDMI cables. I cannot see the slightest difference in the definition between SD and HD on the HDMI inputs from either machine. Are there some settings somewhere that need adjusting or is the definittion of this particular TV so good anyway that HD makes no difference? I suspect that HD is only really effective on really large TVs
0
Comments
I don't know that tv, so correct me if I'm wrong. But if its 26" you will struggle to tell the difference between sd and hd.
Also how far away are you sitting from the screen?
IMO 4 HD seems to be the best.
Watching football on ITV should clearly show differences between SD and HD.
http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_GB/Products/TX-26LXD80/Specification/6260814/index.html
It's also 768 pixels vertical resolution not full HD 1080. That may also be a factor given that it won't show HD broadcasts in their native resolution.
Commenting in turn on members posts;
avit-now: I sit approx 8 feet from the TV
Gonzo: You have confirmed my view that HD is only noticeable on really big screen sets
Mickey-T: There seems to be no option in the Menu for setting the video format
I don't watch football except I did on one occasion just to see if there was any difference between SD and HD for the same game--none at all
chris-jr My Panasonic TV was marketed as being HD ready so I don't really understand why they didn't make it the full 1080 pixels vertical resolution. "Bean counting" perhaps?
Anyow enough said. I am more interested in the quality of the programme content rather than the technical quality of the picture
HD Ready minimum vertical resolution 720 lines (usually 768). HD Ready 1080P guarantees 1080 lines.
1080i is what you should have it set on, although sitting 8 feet from a 26" HD ready screen isn't really going to show off HD broadcasts particularly well.
I've been harangued for years on these forums for saying much the same thing as you.
Bottom line - with a good set up and a great TV like Panasonic plus sitting the right distance away SD is the equal of HD in our household. To me it's very much the Emperors New Clothes syndrome. Neither me or the wife can tell the difference and to be quite honest most of the people I work with have now dropped the Sky HD sub having once said HD was great they now say the really can't tell the difference.
Not sure I want to admit this in public but for once I fully agree with Faust. I have made similar comments in the past and received similar responses - the other common one is about sad people who accept any rubbish w/o complaining.
The key point is sitting the right distance away regardless of screen size. Most viewers do this so have no complaints. Provided the TV etc is good quality and working correctly the main cause of poor picture quality (on SD or HD channels) is old archive material where the original is low resolution. Nobody is forced to watch such programmes but I enjoy them - if they have interesting content I soon forget the poor picture quality. Judging by the endless repeats of You've Been Framed which has the ultimate in poor picture quality there must be many viewers who feel the same.
:D
For me, out of all the HD channels on Freesat I find 4HD and NHK World to have to best PQ.
Absolutely correct, the HDR1000s does do a better job with HD. However, such gems have proved to be few and far between and have mostly been foreign imports.
I would say Channel 4 HD is probably the best for PQ too, but BBC don't do a bad job on certain programmes, Spring Watch is looking pretty good at the moment.
I don't understand SD fans with their large TV's, I've got a 50" Panasonic plasma and it is very easy to tell the difference between HD & SD, like it is between Day & Night.
I suppose I'm lucky I get the WOW factor pretty much every time I turn the TV on.
IME the cheaper Panasonic sets give a fairly soft picture on HD and SD, making it harder to see the difference even if you sit 1 foot away. Problem number two.
The motion resolution (i.e. the resolution when things move) on a cheap LCD panel will be sub-SD, so unless you look at a still picture, you don't stand a chance. Problem number three!
Three good reasons why you can't see a difference.
With a screen size + viewing distance that give a normal human eye a chance of seeing the extra resolution, on a TV that doesn't blur the image when stationary, and does its best not to blur the image when it moves, the difference is night and day - especially as most SD channels are sub-SD quality.
Cheers,
David.
They also have the TV adjusted so that there is zero video detail in the darker areas of the picture.
I can't watch it, it's horrendous.
I have a 10" HD tablet viewed from about 12" with a HD screen again the difference between 1080p and 576i is dramatic.
Basically anyone who can't see the difference must be either
Optically Challenged
or
Viewing it from a distance where the perceived size of the on screen pixels is beyond the human eyes capability to resolve the problems.
Take a digital photograph, when viewed closely you need at least 300dpi to get a sharp image.
So a 6 x 4 image needs for the best quality around 6 x 4 x 300 poxels.
At the distance used for TV around 72dpi is needed.
Expecting to see a difference between HD and SD on a 26" TV at the distances speculated defies the laws of physics.
HD is about a larger more dramatic image from your viewing point.
If you can't see the difference assuming your eyesight is normal then you need to sit closer or a larger TV.
Basically work out the size of the pixels on a 1920 x 1080 40" screen and compare to a 26" one. For the same detail the viewing distances are directly related.
Welcome to my world. Why should it drive you crazy? Move the sofa back some more and you really won't see any difference - HD for the price of SD - job done.
As you say Graham, your daughter can't see the difference between HD and SD. I think people just have to accept that we all see the world differently, hence some will be able to see the difference whilst others like my wife and I won't.
I also realise that sitting just shy of twelve feet away from a 42" plasma TV which produces a soft picture anyway leaves me little chance of seeing any difference between the two mediums.
That said I have an iPad 2 and whilst I accept the screen looks brighter on the iPad 3 that's the only difference I can see when comparing the two side by side.
The sofa and tv stays where they are!..........I've been told.:mad:
Fair enough your eyesight isn't that great.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_acuity
"Visual acuity (VA) is acuteness or clearness of vision, which is dependent on the sharpness of the retinal focus within the eye and the sensitivity of the interpretative faculty of the brain."
Then we bought a 55" Samsung HD/3D and now it's "wow those HD pictures are excellent", look at the clarity" blah blah blah lol
The downside was that she's started watching all her rubbish in HD so I bought her a Humax HDR T2 so she'd stop filling the Sky box up with crap lol
Why do you say my eyesight isn't all that great? I said we all see the world differently. Example, I can read the inscription on the inside of a ladies wedding band which is rally tiny. You missed the point about distance, size of TV and softness of picture.