Options

COM7 mux, Al Jazeera HD - LCN 108

1181920212224»

Comments

  • Options
    kasgkasg Posts: 4,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    OwenSmith wrote: »
    Since we've had HD on Freeview, I have found it affecting my viewing choices. I am more likely to watch something (well actually record to watch later) if it is on an HD channel.
    Same here.
  • Options
    eladkseeladkse Posts: 1,948
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    chrisy wrote: »
    That was mooted, and I thought it had been agreed, but it never made it into the LCN policy.

    Just had a check - 8.2(ii) of the latest policy:
    http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/86814/Digital_UK_LCN_Policy_Version_5.2_07082013.pdf
  • Options
    chrisychrisy Posts: 9,421
    Forum Member
    eladkse wrote: »

    Oh, yes, it did get in there - however it only applies to existing channels. New associated channels can still queue jump as much as they like. Makes no sense at all.
  • Options
    DragonQDragonQ Posts: 4,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Seriously, the only SD TV I've watched in about a year was the French Open on ITV4, and that was on satellite.

    How anyone puts up with the Freeview SD channels is beyond me.
  • Options
    kasgkasg Posts: 4,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    DragonQ wrote: »
    How anyone puts up with the Freeview SD channels is beyond me.
    I don't think there's a lot wrong with the mainstream BBC SD channels, compared with analogue (although I know some here will disagree with that), but we've now been spoilt by HD and are getting used to it.
  • Options
    DragonQDragonQ Posts: 4,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The BBC's SD channels are of course OK because they haven't crammed a ludicrous number of channels into their multiplex. All of their channels are available in HD though (BBC Parliament excluded) so it's irrelevant for anyone with HD capability.
  • Options
    BizmanBizman Posts: 749
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    DragonQ wrote: »
    How anyone puts up with the Freeview SD channels is beyond me.
    I get a clean, rock-steady, clear SD picture, can't complain about that. :)
  • Options
    DWA9ISDWA9IS Posts: 10,557
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Bizman wrote: »
    I get a clean, rock-steady, clear SD picture, can't complain about that. :)

    on an SD TV yes SD channels are fine as thats how they were designed to be watched, on a HD TV most SD channels look rubbish, but its a lot to do with how they are upscaled for the HD TV, even a good upscaler though cant fully overcome the issues with low res and 544*576 res channels!
  • Options
    DragonQDragonQ Posts: 4,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Also because detail is reproduced better on modern TVs (budget rubbish excluded). The way CRTs work happens to have the happy advantage of blurring out things like compression artefacts a bit.
  • Options
    BizmanBizman Posts: 749
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    DragonQ wrote: »
    Also because detail is reproduced better on modern TVs (budget rubbish excluded). The way CRTs work happens to have the happy advantage of blurring out things like compression artefacts a bit.
    My TV is a 22" 'HD Ready' LED model, my CRT model weighed 33Kg and went to the tip about 5 years ago.
  • Options
    Mickey_TMickey_T Posts: 4,962
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bizman wrote: »
    I get a clean, rock-steady, clear SD picture, can't complain about that. :)
    Bizman wrote: »
    My TV is a 22" 'HD Ready' LED model.
    Mystery solved. :D
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,775
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bizman wrote: »
    My TV is a 22" 'HD Ready' LED model, my CRT model weighed 33Kg and went to the tip about 5 years ago.

    It's not an LED TV, it's LCD with a LED backlight. Very different from a true LED TV (which don't exist in 22" yet).
  • Options
    DWA9ISDWA9IS Posts: 10,557
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Bizman wrote: »
    My TV is a 22" 'HD Ready' LED model, my CRT model weighed 33Kg and went to the tip about 5 years ago.

    Is you TV very good at upscaling? I expect though you will find it hard, unless you sit close, to see detail or scan lines?
  • Options
    BizmanBizman Posts: 749
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    lotrjw wrote: »
    Is you TV very good at upscaling? I expect though you will find it hard, unless you sit close, to see detail or scan lines?
    I normally sit 6ft from the screen due to the room layout, I have on occasion noticed that the quality is sometimes better via my PVR, but have to get closer to notice this difference.
  • Options
    Colino GreenColino Green Posts: 575
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    DragonQ wrote: »

    How anyone puts up with the Freeview SD channels is beyond me.

    The most noticeable reason for avoiding SD channels is when watching a sport such as football.

    With the small particpants moving about, it really shows up just how gruesomely horrible SD can be.

    I find normal broadcast such as films quite ok in SD, but if there is a choice I will always record from HD channels to PVR where possible.
  • Options
    DragonQDragonQ Posts: 4,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bizman wrote: »
    I normally sit 6ft from the screen due to the room layout, I have on occasion noticed that the quality is sometimes better via my PVR, but have to get closer to notice this difference.

    I sit 2.5 m from my 50" screen so it's incredibly easy for me to see compression and low resolution artefacts.
  • Options
    peter_sharp1ukpeter_sharp1uk Posts: 1,661
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Seems to be in sd at the moment.
  • Options
    kasgkasg Posts: 4,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The live feed from the UN that's on at the moment is SD, but the captions are definitely HD.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 115
    Forum Member
    The most noticeable reason for avoiding SD channels is when watching a sport such as football.

    With the small particpants moving about, it really shows up just how gruesomely horrible SD can be.

    I find normal broadcast such as films quite ok in SD, but if there is a choice I will always record from HD channels to PVR where possible.

    When you say gruesome you must mean 544x576 over-compressed SD, BBC SD is pretty good.
  • Options
    chrisychrisy Posts: 9,421
    Forum Member
    christoFar wrote: »
    I'm astonished at how bad it looks. Bitrate must be south of 1Mbit.

    My TV happened to be on 5* when I switched it on. Content: Jewellery Maker. It looks awful. Out of curiosity I tuned to the COM7 version. The PQ is identical. It looks like somebody has recorded the channel to VHS tape, and is playing it back!
Sign In or Register to comment.