Poor Freeview on Full HD tv's?

gwynne · 08-12-2008, 14:31

Have just read an article in Which magazine which says their tests showed that viewing Freeview on some full HD tv's produced some very noticeable picture degradations!
Having read as many of the HD tv threads as possible the whole business of introducing HD to the public has been very poorly handled!
Having got their spanking new Full HD home-they plug into aerial and,if Which is to be believed,get a less than perfect Freeview picture!?
Given the only source of HD at the moment is satellite why are people beng conned into buying these HD sets-most wont have satelite and,even if they do,the majority of programmes are still in SD?
Are we to assume that satelite SD programs will suffer the same problems as terrestial freeview?
To lend some credance to this problem-Which said a favourite trick in showrooms was to use a HD feed from a satellite to demonstrate picture quality on Full HD tv's-naturally picture looks perfect!
Give away is a HDMI connector into tv!
We are only at the very beginning of HD tv and already the confusion is mounting!

Willie Wontie · 08-12-2008, 14:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwynne

Given the only source of HD at the moment is satellite why are people beng conned into buying these HD sets

Somebody had better tell Virgin then hadn't they? Cos they're advertising the fact that BBC HD is available via cable. And are Blu Ray DVDs and PS3s a figment of my imagination also?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwynne

-most wont have satelite

Source? How do you know that most won't have satellite? Not that it matters, seeing as there are plenty of alternatives to satellite for high definition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwynne

and,even if they do,the majority of programmes are still in SD?

Back in the 1960s the majority of programmes were still in black and white. Didn't stop people buying colour televisions, and enjoying the few programmes that were made in colour. And as colour TVs increased, so did colour TV programme making. Why would somebody who wanted to buy a new TV today buy one which didn't support high definition, just because there isn't as much high definition television available today as there will be in twelve months time? Should a prospective purchaser only buy hardware for the immediate future, rather than looking forward?

Jaycee Dove · 08-12-2008, 15:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willie Wontie

Back in the 1960s the majority of programmes were still in black and white. Didn't stop people buying colour televisions, and enjoying the few programmes that were made in colour. And as colour TVs increased, so did colour TV programme making. Why would somebody who wanted to buy a new TV today buy one which didn't support high definition, just because there isn't as much high definition television available today as there will be in twelve months time? Should a prospective purchaser only buy hardware for the immediate future, rather than looking forward?

True, but the real issue is scaling.

Full HD TVs have to do scaling to make SD pictures (as in the non HD Freeview channels) appear. They handle HD superbly because they do not need this.

HD ready TVs (ie the ones that are not 1080 p but can still show 1080i HD images) often show SD pictures better because there is less scaling involved. And unless you have a large screen their HD picture quality is virtually as good.

So if you are watching SD via a flat screen you are currently better off with a HD ready TV rather than a 1080p so called full HD one. This comes into its own with blu ray which uses 1080 p but no satellite TV HD channels yet use more than 1080 i so a HD ready set is perfectly fine for these.

I am no expert so I am sure there are other factors. But I think a lot of people might be going full HD without realising both the downside and that they really do not need it.

We know all this as we are currently wrestling with the should we/shouldn't we argument over getting a 1080 p set because the SD on our HD ready Panasonic 37 PX 60 is so good that we fear losing this by 'upgrading' to, say a Panasonic PZ 'full HD' set without substantial benefit to the Sky HD pictures.

roddydogs · 08-12-2008, 15:57

Here we go again, "opinions" toted as being "Fact" My 1080p set shows great SD on Freeview or V-Box.

thorvertonian · 08-12-2008, 16:06

Buy a decent TV, set it up properly, get a decent picture, simple!

bobcar · 08-12-2008, 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by roddydogs

Here we go again, "opinions" toted as being "Fact" My 1080p set shows great SD on Freeview or V-Box.

It depends on the quality of the upscalar. Of course if the 1080 line set costs the same as the 768 line set it's quite likely that the 768 line set will be better.

Fatwaz · 08-12-2008, 16:29

80% of the public who buy these new lcd's have not one idea of hd tv,it is simply the new sexy "in thing" to have a large flat screen in your living room.

my brother in law,bless him

,forked out over 1k on a 40 inch sony and the idiot only has a crappy aerial and sits 6 feet away!!! but he tells everyone who goes round what a great looking tv it is cost over a grand you know(yeah till you turn it on pmsl)

Willie Wontie · 08-12-2008, 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fatwaz

80% of the public who buy these new lcd's have not one idea of hd tv

Do you know that? Or is it just a random high percentage that you plucked out of the air cos it sounded impressive?

Fatwaz · 08-12-2008, 16:48

no 99% would sound impressive

fact is most people just want a new sexy tv and have no idea about hd ready,full hd,720p,1080i,1080p,upscale etc etc

gwynne · 08-12-2008, 17:26

Thanks to all of you who replied to my 'starter' re Freeview quality on full HD.
The fact you contribute to these technical threads means you are probably more knowledgeable than the 'average Joe' who wanders into Currys or Comet and yet there is not absolute agreement from you all on the various technical discussions involving HD,SD,HD ready etc!
The impression I get is that HD has now become a very tangled and involved subject-there is no overall consensus
and one is left to read and digest the various threads and try and come to an informed decision!
I started out being completely uninformed wrt HD TV-having read many submissions by DS'ers I can at last see some light at the end of the proverbial tunnel!
I repeat though, that 'Joe Public' is walking in a mine field, when he tries to fathom out the pros and conns of HD tv!

bobcar · 08-12-2008, 18:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwynne

Thanks to all of you who replied to my 'starter' re Freeview quality on full HD.
The fact you contribute to these technical threads means you are probably more knowledgeable than the 'average Joe' who wanders into Currys or Comet and yet there is not absolute agreement from you all on the various technical discussions involving HD,SD,HD ready etc!
The impression I get is that HD has now become a very tangled and involved subject-there is no overall consensus
and one is left to read and digest the various threads and try and come to an informed decision!
I started out being completely uninformed wrt HD TV-having read many submissions by DS'ers I can at last see some light at the end of the proverbial tunnel!
I repeat though, that 'Joe Public' is walking in a mine field, when he tries to fathom out the pros and conns of HD tv!

There is no one factor that you can pick out to say this TV is better than that TV, full HD 1080p is something very simple for people to understand but it is not the most important thing.

If possible look at a lot of TVs and pick the one that you like the best.

davidseven · 09-12-2008, 07:05

I have just invested in a Panny 26LXD80 as it's the first small LCD I have seen that produces a good SD picture from it's own DVB tuner. The HD picture from Freesat is also good at 1080i.
Now, If anyone can tell me the engineering code to turn down the backlight....

emptybox · 10-12-2008, 00:31

The only thing that baffles me is why 1366 x 768 ever became a TV resolution?

1280 x 720 I could see but 1366 x 768?

Chris Frost · 10-12-2008, 01:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by thorvertonian

Buy a decent TV, set it up properly, get a decent picture, simple!

Sensible answer.

Chris Frost · 10-12-2008, 01:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwynne

We are only at the very beginning of HD tv and already the confusion is mounting!

The average consumer is confused by a lot of things, not just HD TV. The plain fact is that most customers don't want to know about the details or what corners have been cut; they're just interested in the headlines and the price. When it comes to electricals "big & cheap" gets wallets opening faster than "expensive but excellent". It's just the way it is in Britain now.

frasera · 11-12-2008, 05:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaycee Dove

True, but the real issue is scaling.

Full HD TVs have to do scaling to make SD pictures (as in the non HD Freeview channels) appear. They handle HD superbly because they do not need this.

HD ready TVs (ie the ones that are not 1080 p but can still show 1080i HD images) often show SD pictures better because there is less scaling involved. And unless you have a large screen their HD picture quality is virtually as good.

So if you are watching SD via a flat screen you are currently better off with a HD ready TV rather than a 1080p so called full HD one. This comes into its own with blu ray which uses 1080 p but no satellite TV HD channels yet use more than 1080 i so a HD ready set is perfectly fine for these.

I am no expert so I am sure there are other factors. But I think a lot of people might be going full HD without realising both the downside and that they really do not need it.

We know all this as we are currently wrestling with the should we/shouldn't we argument over getting a 1080 p set because the SD on our HD ready Panasonic 37 PX 60 is so good that we fear losing this by 'upgrading' to, say a Panasonic PZ 'full HD' set without substantial benefit to the Sky HD pictures.

1080i is 1080p when deinterlaced correctly.

there is no reason to buy 1080i. its why they really don't bother making it anymore, 1080p video processing is cheap and good enough to be the only game in town. only 720p panels are made to cut costs.

scaling 480p depends on the tv. there is no inherent disadvantage to scaling 480p to 1080p. just depends on the scalers quality.

08-12-2008, 14:31	#1
gwynne Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 570	Poor Freeview on Full HD tv's? Have just read an article in Which magazine which says their tests showed that viewing Freeview on some full HD tv's produced some very noticeable picture degradations! Having read as many of the HD tv threads as possible the whole business of introducing HD to the public has been very poorly handled! Having got their spanking new Full HD home-they plug into aerial and,if Which is to be believed,get a less than perfect Freeview picture!? Given the only source of HD at the moment is satellite why are people beng conned into buying these HD sets-most wont have satelite and,even if they do,the majority of programmes are still in SD? Are we to assume that satelite SD programs will suffer the same problems as terrestial freeview? To lend some credance to this problem-Which said a favourite trick in showrooms was to use a HD feed from a satellite to demonstrate picture quality on Full HD tv's-naturally picture looks perfect! Give away is a HDMI connector into tv! We are only at the very beginning of HD tv and already the confusion is mounting!

08-12-2008, 16:29	#7
Fatwaz Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Essex Posts: 1,992	80% of the public who buy these new lcd's have not one idea of hd tv,it is simply the new sexy "in thing" to have a large flat screen in your living room. my brother in law,bless him,forked out over 1k on a 40 inch sony and the idiot only has a crappy aerial and sits 6 feet away!!! but he tells everyone who goes round what a great looking tv it is cost over a grand you know(yeah till you turn it on pmsl)

08-12-2008, 17:26	#10
gwynne Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 570	Still no consensus! Thanks to all of you who replied to my 'starter' re Freeview quality on full HD. The fact you contribute to these technical threads means you are probably more knowledgeable than the 'average Joe' who wanders into Currys or Comet and yet there is not absolute agreement from you all on the various technical discussions involving HD,SD,HD ready etc! The impression I get is that HD has now become a very tangled and involved subject-there is no overall consensus and one is left to read and digest the various threads and try and come to an informed decision! I started out being completely uninformed wrt HD TV-having read many submissions by DS'ers I can at last see some light at the end of the proverbial tunnel! I repeat though, that 'Joe Public' is walking in a mine field, when he tries to fathom out the pros and conns of HD tv!

08-12-2008, 14:43	#2
Willie Wontie Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 2,847	Quote: Originally Posted by gwynne Given the only source of HD at the moment is satellite why are people beng conned into buying these HD sets Somebody had better tell Virgin then hadn't they? Cos they're advertising the fact that BBC HD is available via cable. And are Blu Ray DVDs and PS3s a figment of my imagination also? Quote: Originally Posted by gwynne -most wont have satelite Source? How do you know that most won't have satellite? Not that it matters, seeing as there are plenty of alternatives to satellite for high definition. Quote: Originally Posted by gwynne and,even if they do,the majority of programmes are still in SD? Back in the 1960s the majority of programmes were still in black and white. Didn't stop people buying colour televisions, and enjoying the few programmes that were made in colour. And as colour TVs increased, so did colour TV programme making. Why would somebody who wanted to buy a new TV today buy one which didn't support high definition, just because there isn't as much high definition television available today as there will be in twelve months time? Should a prospective purchaser only buy hardware for the immediate future, rather than looking forward?

08-12-2008, 15:16	#3
Jaycee Dove Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 16,680	Quote: Originally Posted by Willie Wontie Back in the 1960s the majority of programmes were still in black and white. Didn't stop people buying colour televisions, and enjoying the few programmes that were made in colour. And as colour TVs increased, so did colour TV programme making. Why would somebody who wanted to buy a new TV today buy one which didn't support high definition, just because there isn't as much high definition television available today as there will be in twelve months time? Should a prospective purchaser only buy hardware for the immediate future, rather than looking forward? True, but the real issue is scaling. Full HD TVs have to do scaling to make SD pictures (as in the non HD Freeview channels) appear. They handle HD superbly because they do not need this. HD ready TVs (ie the ones that are not 1080 p but can still show 1080i HD images) often show SD pictures better because there is less scaling involved. And unless you have a large screen their HD picture quality is virtually as good. So if you are watching SD via a flat screen you are currently better off with a HD ready TV rather than a 1080p so called full HD one. This comes into its own with blu ray which uses 1080 p but no satellite TV HD channels yet use more than 1080 i so a HD ready set is perfectly fine for these. I am no expert so I am sure there are other factors. But I think a lot of people might be going full HD without realising both the downside and that they really do not need it. We know all this as we are currently wrestling with the should we/shouldn't we argument over getting a 1080 p set because the SD on our HD ready Panasonic 37 PX 60 is so good that we fear losing this by 'upgrading' to, say a Panasonic PZ 'full HD' set without substantial benefit to the Sky HD pictures.

08-12-2008, 15:57	#4
roddydogs Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 6,352	Here we go again, "opinions" toted as being "Fact" My 1080p set shows great SD on Freeview or V-Box.

08-12-2008, 16:06	#5
thorvertonian Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Devon Posts: 1,289	Buy a decent TV, set it up properly, get a decent picture, simple!

08-12-2008, 16:13	#6
bobcar Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 14,718	Quote: Originally Posted by roddydogs Here we go again, "opinions" toted as being "Fact" My 1080p set shows great SD on Freeview or V-Box. It depends on the quality of the upscalar. Of course if the 1080 line set costs the same as the 768 line set it's quite likely that the 768 line set will be better.

08-12-2008, 16:33	#8
Willie Wontie Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 2,847	Quote: Originally Posted by Fatwaz 80% of the public who buy these new lcd's have not one idea of hd tv Do you know that? Or is it just a random high percentage that you plucked out of the air cos it sounded impressive?

08-12-2008, 16:48	#9
Fatwaz Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Essex Posts: 1,992	no 99% would sound impressive fact is most people just want a new sexy tv and have no idea about hd ready,full hd,720p,1080i,1080p,upscale etc etc

08-12-2008, 18:32	#11
bobcar Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 14,718	Quote: Originally Posted by gwynne Thanks to all of you who replied to my 'starter' re Freeview quality on full HD. The fact you contribute to these technical threads means you are probably more knowledgeable than the 'average Joe' who wanders into Currys or Comet and yet there is not absolute agreement from you all on the various technical discussions involving HD,SD,HD ready etc! The impression I get is that HD has now become a very tangled and involved subject-there is no overall consensus and one is left to read and digest the various threads and try and come to an informed decision! I started out being completely uninformed wrt HD TV-having read many submissions by DS'ers I can at last see some light at the end of the proverbial tunnel! I repeat though, that 'Joe Public' is walking in a mine field, when he tries to fathom out the pros and conns of HD tv! There is no one factor that you can pick out to say this TV is better than that TV, full HD 1080p is something very simple for people to understand but it is not the most important thing. If possible look at a lot of TVs and pick the one that you like the best.

09-12-2008, 07:05	#12
davidseven Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Wiltshire Posts: 3,174	I have just invested in a Panny 26LXD80 as it's the first small LCD I have seen that produces a good SD picture from it's own DVB tuner. The HD picture from Freesat is also good at 1080i. Now, If anyone can tell me the engineering code to turn down the backlight....

10-12-2008, 00:31	#13
emptybox Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Scottish Borders Posts: 11,995	The only thing that baffles me is why 1366 x 768 ever became a TV resolution? 1280 x 720 I could see but 1366 x 768?

10-12-2008, 01:08	#14
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	Quote: Originally Posted by thorvertonian Buy a decent TV, set it up properly, get a decent picture, simple! Sensible answer.

10-12-2008, 01:31	#15
Chris Frost Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cheshire Posts: 6,462	Quote: Originally Posted by gwynne We are only at the very beginning of HD tv and already the confusion is mounting! The average consumer is confused by a lot of things, not just HD TV. The plain fact is that most customers don't want to know about the details or what corners have been cut; they're just interested in the headlines and the price. When it comes to electricals "big & cheap" gets wallets opening faster than "expensive but excellent". It's just the way it is in Britain now.

11-12-2008, 05:40	#16
frasera Inactive Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 8,063	Quote: Originally Posted by Jaycee Dove True, but the real issue is scaling. Full HD TVs have to do scaling to make SD pictures (as in the non HD Freeview channels) appear. They handle HD superbly because they do not need this. HD ready TVs (ie the ones that are not 1080 p but can still show 1080i HD images) often show SD pictures better because there is less scaling involved. And unless you have a large screen their HD picture quality is virtually as good. So if you are watching SD via a flat screen you are currently better off with a HD ready TV rather than a 1080p so called full HD one. This comes into its own with blu ray which uses 1080 p but no satellite TV HD channels yet use more than 1080 i so a HD ready set is perfectly fine for these. I am no expert so I am sure there are other factors. But I think a lot of people might be going full HD without realising both the downside and that they really do not need it. We know all this as we are currently wrestling with the should we/shouldn't we argument over getting a 1080 p set because the SD on our HD ready Panasonic 37 PX 60 is so good that we fear losing this by 'upgrading' to, say a Panasonic PZ 'full HD' set without substantial benefit to the Sky HD pictures. 1080i is 1080p when deinterlaced correctly. there is no reason to buy 1080i. its why they really don't bother making it anymore, 1080p video processing is cheap and good enough to be the only game in town. only 720p panels are made to cut costs. scaling 480p depends on the tv. there is no inherent disadvantage to scaling 480p to 1080p. just depends on the scalers quality.

DS Forums

Poor Freeview on Full HD tv's?