Home News Forum Articles
  Welcome back Join CF
You are here You are here: Home | Forum | Question about SKY HD quality


You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most of the discussions, articles and other free features. By joining our Virgin Media community you will have full access to all discussions, be able to view and post threads, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own images/photos, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join our community today.


Welcome to Cable Forum
Go Back   Cable Forum > Alternatives to Virgin Media > Other Digital TV Services Discussion > Sky HDTV and Sky+

Question about SKY HD quality
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 24-10-2006, 16:25   #16
Sick of Liberals
 
Womble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In A Politically Correct Hell!! Viva La Revolution
Age: 41
Services: 20meg BB SACM : All the Channels and phone
Posts: 813
Womble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Question about SKY HD quality

The Transport streams/Mux's aren't really my field...But, If they put one digital stream down an 8mhz channel, you wouldn't need HD, would you?
If that is true, we the punter have been conned....
__________________
Womble till I die - AFC Wimbledon - Say No to franchised football
Womble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-10-2006, 16:55   #17
Creative
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Question about SKY HD quality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Womble View Post
The Transport streams/Mux's aren't really my field...But, If they put one digital stream down an 8mhz channel, you wouldn't need HD, would you?
If that is true, we the punter have been conned....
HD is a much much much better image than even uncompressed SD. The screen has far more detail as there are far more dots making up the image.
Conned? How? There isn't enough room for all the channels people are demanding are made available to them, without using compression.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24-10-2006, 17:09   #18
Sick of Liberals
 
Womble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In A Politically Correct Hell!! Viva La Revolution
Age: 41
Services: 20meg BB SACM : All the Channels and phone
Posts: 813
Womble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond reputeWomble has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Question about SKY HD quality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Creative View Post
Conned? How? There isn't enough room for all the channels people are demanding are made available to them, without using compression.
Because they dumbed bown the digital image until it had less detail than analogue, thus creating a market for HD
If they didn't compress the digital streams to death, there wouldn't be such a great differance between Digital and HD!!

Hence my view we have been conned
__________________
Womble till I die - AFC Wimbledon - Say No to franchised football
Womble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-10-2006, 17:25   #19
Cable Forum Team
 
Chris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location Location .... mmm, Kirstie Alsopp.
Services: Moto 15 miles Roadchef 33 miles
Posts: 14,441
Chris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny stars
Chris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny starsChris has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Question about SKY HD quality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Creative View Post
HD is a much much much better image than even uncompressed SD. The screen has far more detail as there are far more dots making up the image.
Conned? How? There isn't enough room for all the channels people are demanding are made available to them, without using compression.
Demanding? Funny, I must have missed the petition that went round demanding more shopping channels, more gaming channels and more text-us-and-we'll-gyrate-for-you channels. The digital 'revolution' consists of trillions upon trillions of bits of wasted data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wicked_and_Crazy View Post
You cant compare analogue and digital in terms of bandwidth
No, but to coin an Aussie phrase, even Blind Freddie knows that picture quality on most channels is worse now than it was on analogue, precisely because digital presented the broadcasters with the temptation to compress their content and deliver quantity over quality, something they didn't have the option to do previously. DAB is even worse in this regard, most digital radio stations are noticably lower quality than FM. I don't plan to buy a DAB radio until after analogue switch off for that reason.

I can barely tolerate watching football on any channel other than BBC1. The compression used my most channels - including Sky Sports, which is a disgrace as it's an additional subscription - ensures that when the camera pans even slightly, the pitch looks as uniform and fuzzy as a snooker table.
__________________

Chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-10-2006, 17:48   #20
CableForum - Talk to me!
 
TheBlueRaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Baw deep in a munter
Age: 32
Services: Initiations, rep rigging and orgies!
Posts: 5,772
TheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny star
TheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny starTheBlueRaja has a nice shiny star
Re: Question about SKY HD quality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris T View Post
I can barely tolerate watching football on any channel other than BBC1. The compression used my most channels - including Sky Sports, which is a disgrace as it's an additional subscription - ensures that when the camera pans even slightly, the pitch looks as uniform and fuzzy as a snooker table.
You want to try watching Setanta... Lordy...

SkySports 1&2&3 IMO look pretty good though.
__________________
XBox Live Member TE3BLUERAJA /// Go Retro Gaming here
TheBlueRaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-10-2006, 20:01   #21
Creative
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Question about SKY HD quality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris T View Post
Demanding? Funny, I must have missed the petition that went round demanding more shopping channels, more gaming channels and more text-us-and-we'll-gyrate-for-you channels. The digital 'revolution' consists of trillions upon trillions of bits of wasted data.
Funny? No its not.
There may have been petitions, I didn't see them. What I do see is people on this forum, and others asking when does this channel or that channel get launched? Thats a demand for channels which the providers have to weigh up.
Theres also the channels which don't have a demand but which are willing to pay over the odds for carriage. The providers are in the business to make money, so they have to provide the waste of bits channels.
I agree its not the way I want it to be either

---------- Post added at 20:01 ---------- Previous post was at 19:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Womble View Post
Because they dumbed bown the digital image until it had less detail than analogue, thus creating a market for HD
If they didn't compress the digital streams to death, there wouldn't be such a great differance between Digital and HD!!

Hence my view we have been conned
Nobody thought 5 years ago that the bitrates for HD would get low enough to show in the home. They didn't make the HD market by over compressing. The HD market is a result of continuing improvements in compression. Well it is on Sky.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:22.


Links
Google
 
Web www.cableforum.co.uk


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0
Copyright © 2003 - 2008, Cable Forum.
(s204569790.onlinehome.info)