On the contrary, performance across the human world is often a Gaussian distribution, so Normal is a perfect word (maths joke there).

Recommended HD viewing distance of 3 * picture height ties in with human visual acuity of 1 arcminute. You can make biological+technical arguments to double or halve the value, which makes it all a bit pointless.

Some in the industry are loathed to quote accurate figures, because it means you need a big TV to really appreciate HD in a reasonably large room - and then broadcast SD becomes unwatchable. As long as you're happy.

Cheers,
David.

Wow! This thread is rapidly becoming something out of a typical Hi-Fi forum. You know the kind of thing... those pair of 1m analogue connectors that I bought for only 1000 Pounds are so much better than the previous ones that cost 200 Pounds. Immersive soundstage, bass tighter, trebles more acute, real value for money. I'll never go back to the previous junk.
Carry on folks, don't care is good, I think I'm a don't care. Content, well...rubbish...but picture, well...immersive.

Brilliant post! It just had to be said.

An argument doesn't improve for keep repeating it and the tree is......well, still a tree.

I will stick to my immersive SD content viewed from 12 feet away whilst you stick to your immersive HD superior picture from half that distance. Oh heck, we are watching the same programme. Hope the ending is the same.

Faust as your a content person can I ask why you felt the need to pay Sky for HD, surely the programmes were the same, no doubt the endings were the same too, your plasma TV already produced "stunning" pictures what motivated you to pay Sky extra for HD ?


I can only presume you were expecting to get a "superior" HD picture rather than just stunning, but in my opinion you were never going to get 'value for money' with a 42" 720p TV viewed from 12 foot away !

I would suggest that in the future you do a little more research before signing up to the next Pay TV scheme and then regretting it. But I suppose it wasn't a total loss, moaning about HD ever since must have given you a fair amount of pleasure.

You know the difference though Pollensa? The extreme tweeko world of hi-fi goes beyond the point where there's any detectable difference outside the mind of the listener - all "improvements" disappear when the person doesn't know which cable they're listening to. They are imagining the improvement. It is not detectable by any human ears (if it's even there at all).

Whereas most people who have reasonable eyesight can see the difference between SD and HD when the TV size and viewing distance is about what a basic knowledge of human eyes suggests it needs to be. Even if you don't tell people whether they're watching SD or HD, the difference is obvious to them.




The ending would be the same on the radio - why bother with a TV? The ending would be the same in black and white - why bother with colour. etc etc.

Actually, scratch that argument - I know full well that the pictures are better on the radio.


Still, we are each free to not care about whatever we choose. Just don't imagine that there is no difference, or that the difference brings no pleasure to other people.

Cheers,
David.

I think you miss the point of Pollensa's post.

Sorry to disappoint you/spoil your argument. My old Sky box happened to be on it's last legs. I was offered a new Sky+ HD box including 6 months subscription to Sky HD for free. Once I was out of contract I did not renew. Simply a cost effective replacement box.

2Bdecided, you are comparing apples with pears comparing monochrome to colour. With HD v SD the comparison is PQ. You yourself admit the viewer isn't going to see the benefit from a 42 inch 720p TV viewed from 12 feet.

I like many others can see the improvement with HD when one moves nearer the source but that isn't my argument. My argument is that from 12 feet I don't see the benefit but conversely SD looks good at the same distance.

That's not an 'argument' it's simply a statement of fact, which is exactly what everyone else has been saying all along.

But even at that distance HD will still look 'better', not because it's HD (because you're much too far away to see HD), but simply because HD is broadcast using much higher bandwidth.

If they used decent bandwidth on the SD transmissions it would look like HD does from 12 feet. However, as you have an HD Ready Plasma it's not likely to benefit much at all from HD anyway (no 'wow factor' whatever the distance).

So you're coming round to my viewpoint Nigel, whether it be called argument or statement matters little. You then go on to say even at twelve feet HD will still look better but that my 720p TV won't. Well my TV is all I have so therefore what I have always maintained is in fact correct.

Nice try......(you make sky out to be so nice )

Below is a quote of what you said back in 2010, so you never paid a penny for HD and yet you were quids in after you dropped the sub.


"Personally I'm reaping the benefit of not being able to see much difference between HD and SD in any event - I dropped the sub and now I'm quids in.

We are now considering dropping Sky completley ......................................................I am sick to death of the cynical way Sky manipulates its subscribers."



So you were either lying back then or now, I'm presuming it is now, it seems you are just as manipulative as sky.

Of course there is nothing wrong with zero wrong with my installation, heck I can even show you error free logs from my recordings. That leaves only piss poor bit rates, and pre encode high frequency detail filtering to achieve those low bit rates without being huge blocky mess.

What is it you are having a struggle with? The post you quote is entirely consistent with what I stated. I got a new box and 6 months HD for free, 6 months I had to pay for, I dropped the HD sub at the end of the period. We then decided to ditch Sky altogether. The sad part is you trawling through past posts in order to try to score a point.

No, you've stated that HD is no better - it's YOUR failings that cause it to be no better - not the failings of HD.

Your TV also almost certainly isn't 720P, so why do you keep incorrectly calling it that?.

Some people see the difference - others don't
Some people see the benefit - others don't

What, that content matters more? I think that goes without saying. Apart from archive content, you're hardly left with the choice of watching something rubbish in HD vs something good in SD - all current decent content is made in HD. Plenty of current rubbish content is too!

Cheers,
David.

What an amazing thread; discussion on sitting the right distance from the screen, examining daisies from 3' away for artefacts, no difference between HD & SD at 12'...

I wonder how many people [esp those who can't see the difference] have set the tv up properly? My in-laws had a new Sony and the HD on it was hardly any different to SD, till I delved into the settings and made blacks black & greys grey and skintones more natural, and the HD/SD difference suddenly was night & day. My own parents keep fiddling about with their HD set to the point that I've given up correcting it - if they want the contrast too low and the brightness too high and a bit too much colour that's their choice, but like the in-laws, when the settings are correct HD v SD is no contest but once they've had their paws round the menus that difference shrinks. It's nothing to do with distance - of those two TVs and my own 42" Panasonic HD always look sharper, brighter, more realistic [subject to the above points]. Claiming otherwise makes me wonder how some people are watching. It's not enough to have a good set; it needs to be set up to show blacks, whites, greys & skintones.

.....and you have stated there would be no benefit even with HD because they have a HD ready plasma, because it's your opinion they are all crap/useless at HD, yet they should see a difference between HD & SD at twelve feet - now it's their failings.

So you either agree with the OP that at their seating distance they can't/won't be able to see a difference, therefore giving some credit to your view HD ready plasma are poor, or you disagree with the OP because they should see a difference at twelve feet because the technology is far superior - you can't have it both ways.

I don't see their view any different to yours regarding how poor you think HD ready plasma's are at HD, it's all to do with perception, you can't see the quality/detail where many others can, is this your failing?

No, read his post again. He is saying none of the above.

So in summary the perceptible difference between HD and SD is down to your telly, viewing distance and eyesight.

Excellent, moving on.....

I was suggesting that this thread has morphed into an examination of existentialism. Which holds that there are certain questions that everyone must deal with (if they are to take human life seriously), and that these are special -- existential -- questions. Questions such as death, the meaning of human existence, the place of God in human existence, the meaning of value, interpersonal relationship, the place of self-reflective conscious knowledge of one's self in existing, and finally, and most importantly of all, SD vs HD.

Actually I think your 2010 post is consistent with you once paying the Sky HD sub and you trying to get others to drop the HD sub so Sky would be forced to look at it again. Of course you really shouldn't be at all bothered as neither you or your wife can tell the difference.

So I think I will change my original hypothesis slightly, you secretly love HD but didn't want to pay the Sky HD sub, so after years of fruitless moaning about HD and the Sky sub you finally moved to Freesat. You now sit at home and watch your "WOW" 1000s Free HD every evening while wearing only your "Emperors New Clothes".

By the way I actually found your old post using Google's search engine you might of heard of it, it was on the first page, try it someday.

I think the sad part is that me and others have been willing to entertain you, your delusions and imaginary arguments.

p.s Get a better telly, like a new 50" Panasonic 1080p plasma and then you will love HD even more.

PX60 was supposed to be 720p - no doubt you have the specs so please enlighten me. Why is it my failings - again enlighten me.

I remember saying there's little to no benefit viewed from 12 feet. Can't remember saying it was no better. However, I stand to be corrected if I'm wrong on that as so much has been said on this issue.

I paid for HD in order to get a new Sky+HD box as my old box was on its way out. If it pleases you to delude yourself with hokum then so be it. As usual people are resorting to personal insults in order to point score. A sure sign that they have no ammunition to further the debate. Oh well, sticks and stones and all that.