No More HD - Confirmed By VM

[homealone]

Originally Posted by moroboshi

Well I'm not sure about that. They do make a point in their website that the V+ is all ready to make the most of your HDTV or some such. Making the most is vague, but one HD channel and a microscopic amount of on demand HD content is stretching it to say the least. Not even Sky could claim to 'make the most' of an HDTV, but they do a damn sight more than Virgin do.

They also advertise their broadband as being without download limits and for those who 'hate to wait'. Not exactly true given how strict their download limits and caps are these days.

It could be argued that the V+ upscaling TV function is 'making the most' of an HDTV? I certainly find the picture quality improved on many channels compared to the previous Samsung 2100C.

Sky do provide more HD channels than VM, however, as someone who doesn't subscribe to the Sky sports or movies even in SD, that doesn't cause me many problems, personally

[moroboshi]

Originally Posted by homealone

It could be argued that the V+ upscaling TV function is 'making the most' of an HDTV? I certainly find the picture quality improved on many channels compared to the previous Samsung 2100C.

Sky do provide more HD channels than VM, however, as someone who doesn't subscribe to the Sky sports or movies even in SD, that doesn't cause me many problems, personally

Upscaling isn't making the most of anything. It's simply blowing up a low resolution image and blurring/smearing it so you can't see the pixels so clearly. The V+s scaler is average at best and does little to disguise just how low resolution and compressed the channels are.

I'm really surprised people seem to keep talking about upscaling as if it has anything at all to with high definition. Have you watched any good blu-rays lately? Try the No Country For Old Men disc on a 1080p plasma and the difference will blow you away. *That's* making the most of high-def.

[wwe]

why there not going to be no more hd channels for on virgin i really want sky sports hd

[ahardie]

Originally Posted by moroboshi

Upscaling isn't making the most of anything. It's simply blowing up a low resolution image and blurring/smearing it so you can't see the pixels so clearly. The V+s scaler is average at best and does little to disguise just how low resolution and compressed the channels are.

I'm really surprised people seem to keep talking about upscaling as if it has anything at all to with high definition. Have you watched any good blu-rays lately? Try the No Country For Old Men disc on a 1080p plasma and the difference will blow you away. *That's* making the most of high-def.

What you are saying goes against the experience of many V+ users who have said how impressed they are with the upscaled pq. If there were blurring/smearing people would be commenting on it. Upscaling may be second best but in my experience it is closer to HD than you are suggesting. Whilst for many enthusiasts this might not be good enough, obviously they want the best. In my experience most people are nowhere near that discriminating to worry about the picture being a little less sharp than HD.

[gc10360]

To be quite frank, no matter what anyone says, the majority of people are reluctant to spend money on new tech and will be quite happy with what they have, if they get what they think is a improvement for very little outlay (ie upscaling) then they will be happy with that.

Just look at the dvd masses, it wasn't until the price of players crashed that everyone bought them (even multiples) but still, alot of people have never seen real DVD quality. so set on bagging a bargain and reluctant to spend on quality (nothing to do with expensive equipment but rather PQ etc) the number of people who make do with pirate DVD's because they're cheap and they dont have to spend at the Cinema or wait for the DVD release is incomprehensible, so why would the masses embrace HD, when the most common perception is make do!

[sherer]

i have to say I have a V+ box with a 1080p 32" TV and I watch alot of Eurosport which most people will tell you is a low bitrate SD channel. Watching this on my TV with the upscaling has been fine for my eyes in fact it was something I worried about before buying my TV.

I find the upscaling of the V+ box to be superb

[waler74]

Not meaning to add fuel to this fire here, but perhaps there's other reasons for not adding new HD channels, yet.

Anyone tried recording something from BBC-HD, while recording another SD channel and watching a 3rd? The STB gets quite sluggish, and I've observed frame and sound skips.

Also, if you record from BBC-HD, the playback is noticeably grainy on certain programs - I guess an unavoidable compression artefact. Don't know if MP4 would give superior results than MP2. Even watching things in realtime, you can see ghosting (even National Treasure had it this passed weekend)

Would you really want more HD, if it resulted in you not being able to record things successfully? Suppose it would give everyone something else to grumble about...

So perhaps we won't see anything new until after the availability of the rumoured updated V+ STB...

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by supremus

This is all correct. Broadcast HD really isn't all that great. It's considerably better than upscaled SD, of course, but it's not even close to the "looking out the window" effect some people describe. You will mostly notice a difference on text, such as scoreboards, credits and that sort of thing, which looks much more clearly defined than on SD. Where you can really see a difference is with high quality source material, such as (some) video games and BluRay movies, although most low and mid-range sets aren't really good enough to make HD worthwhile anyway, regardless of the source.

I'd beg to differ and with 40 channels of HD to work with and only a measly Panasonic (can you get them at Asda) 720 (well XGA 1024x768 display) Plasma HD TV, though it is a 42 in and who needs 1080 at 42 in... anyhoo, to watch something like LOST on that, the definition of stubble on faces, freckles hair being moved by the breeze, the general quality of the long shots and this is on broadcast HD.
My DVD player will output 720p and you can see the difference between that and 480i and you can see the difference between the 720p upscale and an HD broadcast of the same content.
I am fully aware that HD TV is pretty low res. The 14in laptop screen I am sitting in front of right now has the same resolution as my 42 in HDTV!
Equally I did not jump on the digital camera or cameraphone bandwagon until late. The first cameraphone I thought was a worthwhile addition was my 2MP SEK750 and I think my current K800 is a fantastic tote about phone to always have around. Many photos, including one that won the fun little competition on here were taken on it and can be printed to a good size.
I would have bought the 8MP EOS DSLR but I got a good price on the 10MP and I'm in no rush to get more pixels. I want some better lenses and an upgrade to the PC for better post processing before I need more pixels.

Thing is most can see what HD looks like and it is better than SD. No denying that.

---------- Post added at 09:44 ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 ----------

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

I am grlad l read this thread, as if it is confirmed, then l will l be straight ont trading standard, as VM are falsely advertising, the V+ plus with HD content, and people are buying this box, in the hope that they can get HD channels on the box, and they can only get a few, at the moment, if you have a SKY+box, you will get all the HD services available, which you will, so what is the damn point of getting a V+ from VM if you are only going to get TWO HD channels from BBC, what a rip off. l bought an HD tv for £500.00 on this basis, as l have VM, and a V+BOX.

There is no false advertising you can get HD. You can also get a good amount of HD-OD. You can't get Sky HD and until the 5 terestrial channels start broadcasting HD this is all a bit moot. This is a group of early adopters complaining that the masses are not keeping up.

How many HDTV owners have updated their DVD player to BluRay (now the fighting is over) to get HD quality DVD. I know that for me the picture quality improvement does not justify the investment even with the fact that NetFlix (the US version of LoveFilm or whatever they are called now) sends BluRay discs at no extra charge if you change your settings to indicate that you have a BluRay player.

[oliver1948uk]

Through a good quality HDMI cable (yes, my eyes tell me it is worth buying a good one) I find V+ upscaling fantastic on my 40inch 1080p Toshiba - the upscaled ITV picture on the FLOOD programme this weekend was noticeably better then some programmes on BBC HD. Of course it would be good to have all channels in HD but until everything is shot in high resolution it will not necessarily give a better picture.

The best picture of all on my TV comes from X Box 360 fed in through a component cable. Picture quality on games, and photo slideshows fed from the computer, is truly amazing, and upscaled DVD's are very good too (depending on the quality of the source material).

To get back to the point, IMO the V+ box is well worth having for the upscaling of good quality standard definition programmes. My eyes tell me that, not reading any specifications.

[homealone]

Originally Posted by moroboshi

Upscaling isn't making the most of anything. It's simply blowing up a low resolution image and blurring/smearing it so you can't see the pixels so clearly. The V+s scaler is average at best and does little to disguise just how low resolution and compressed the channels are.

I'm really surprised people seem to keep talking about upscaling as if it has anything at all to with high definition. Have you watched any good blu-rays lately? Try the No Country For Old Men disc on a 1080p plasma and the difference will blow you away. *That's* making the most of high-def.

Seeing as I have a 720p/1080i television, comparing 1080p blu-ray media to standard broadcast television isn't really comparing apples with apples. Yes Blu-ray quality is better on a suitable TV - BUT the point I'm making is that upscaled Tv pictures using a V+ box are better than the equivalent picture using a standard STB on my television - as I'm sure it is for many people with similar equipment.

So whatever the purist might think, I am quite happy that the V+ box is 'making the most' of my telly, in that it is better than the previous picture with the old box - arguing that a Ford Mondeo cannot offer a good driving experience because it isn't a Ferrari doesn't explain why more people buy the Ford

[JethroUK]

Originally Posted by ahardie

What you are saying goes against the experience of many V+ users who have said how impressed they are with the upscaled pq..

He isn't comparing like with like - he is talking about blue ray @ 1080 progressive

A/ this is above and beyond even broadcast H/Def

B/ Most don't even have a TV that supports 1080p even if it was broadcast

So for all intent and purpose his points are totally mute - and discussing V+ (or SKYHD) in the same breath is absurd


.

---------- Post added at 17:02 ---------- Previous post was at 16:58 ----------

Originally Posted by sherer

I find the upscaling of the V+ box to be superb

You find that because it simply is

---------- Post added at 17:08 ---------- Previous post was at 17:02 ----------

Originally Posted by homealone

arguing that a Ford Mondeo cannot offer a good driving experience because it isn't a Ferrari doesn't explain why more people buy the Ford

and for £2,500,000 you think they'd have more room for the kids

[moroboshi]

Originally Posted by ahardie

What you are saying goes against the experience of many V+ users who have said how impressed they are with the upscaled pq. If there were blurring/smearing people would be commenting on it. Upscaling may be second best but in my experience it is closer to HD than you are suggesting. Whilst for many enthusiasts this might not be good enough, obviously they want the best. In my experience most people are nowhere near that discriminating to worry about the picture being a little less sharp than HD.

It baffles me to be honest. I can only assume people who think the V+ upscaling is good must have really, really terrible scalers in their TVs. The internal scaling on my HDTV is much better than the V+'s scaler.

That aside, I wish people would stop talking about upscaling and HD as if they are connected. They simply aren't. One is standard definition, one is high definition. They are a generation apart, and it is simply impossible to make SD into HD. Once something has been scaled down the detail is lost forever. All you can do is blur and hope for the best.

I also don't think it has anything to do with being an enthusiast. It's simply progress, like the move from mono to stereo to 5.1, and from black and white to colour.

[JethroUK]

Originally Posted by moroboshi

It baffles me to be honest...

It will whilst ever you pursue the absurd - must be frustrating too

Originally Posted by moroboshi

I can only assume people who think the V+ upscaling is good ...

good is a relative term - and V+ upscaled is very good when relating it to plain SD

as pointed out - you are not compairing like with like - good analogy with the cars - you ought read it

Originally Posted by moroboshi

must have really, really terrible scalers in their TVs. ...

everybody elses TV apart from yours it appears

Originally Posted by moroboshi

The internal scaling on my HDTV is much better than the V+'s scaler....

good for you - but that won't make anyone elses better

Originally Posted by moroboshi

That aside, I wish people would stop talking about upscaling.......

They won't because it is very good and certainly worth the rental on it's own

Maybe we can just say that your experience with V+ is not the same as everbody elses?

[paul nolan]

HD Tv is a technology that is still in the slow adoption category.

people with PS3 or 360's are the main adopters so far, but I think it's more a fact that people don't understand the capabilities.

Once it's seen by the nay sayers they can't believe the difference.

Virgin are Fools if they're not going to board the train.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by paul nolan

HD Tv is a technology that is still in the slow adoption category.

people with PS3 or 360's are the main adopters so far, but I think it's more a fact that people don't understand the capabilities.

Once it's seen by the nay sayers they can't believe the difference.

Virgin are Fools if they're not going to board the train.

But you have just answered your own argument. Right now HD TV is in the slow adoption phase.

Next year where will it be and where will VM be in adding HD channels. Right now and for the next 7 months does VM need more HD channels especially as they have HD OnDemand? In 2009 do they need them? More likely.