globular wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> Running at 704x576 instead of the usual 720x576.
>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >> bandwith, I suppose.
>> Sylvia.
> Same as Go, less bandwidth too or whatever you call it. > LCD screens weren't meant for low quality pictures.
Not that it's so obvious with SD, because the pixels in the image aren't square anyway, requiring the display to do a horizontal upscale, which is never good for the result.
Sylvia Else wrote: > globular wrote: >> Sylvia Else wrote: >>> Running at 704x576 instead of the usual 720x576.
>>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >>> bandwith, I suppose.
>>> Sylvia.
>> Same as Go, less bandwidth too or whatever you call it. >> LCD screens weren't meant for low quality pictures.
> Not that it's so obvious with SD, because the pixels in the image aren't > square anyway, requiring the display to do a horizontal upscale, which > is never good for the result.
> Sylvia.
The picture looks softer. I wonder if they have fixed that slightly since this kind of thing started.
globular wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> globular wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> Running at 704x576 instead of the usual 720x576.
>>>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >>>> bandwith, I suppose.
>>>> Sylvia.
>>> Same as Go, less bandwidth too or whatever you call it. >>> LCD screens weren't meant for low quality pictures.
>> Not that it's so obvious with SD, because the pixels in the image >> aren't square anyway, requiring the display to do a horizontal >> upscale, which is never good for the result.
>> Sylvia.
> The picture looks softer. I wonder if they have fixed that slightly > since this kind of thing started.
I've noticed on GO! that there's a lot of large pixellated squares any time there's any rapid motion on screen. Happens every time with one of their logo ads.
"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!" - Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.
"This is the recession we had to have!" - Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.
"Silly old bugger!" - Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.
"By 1990, no child will live in poverty" - Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.
"A billion trees ..." - Borke, pissed as a newt again.
"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor general!" - Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!" - FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.
"I don't care what you fuckers think!" - KRudd the KRude at his finest again.
"We'll just change it all when we get in." - Garrett the carrott
>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >> bandwith, I suppose.
> Watched the Jay Leno show on it last night; did not notice any problems > with the picture.
Well, you might not. Reduced resolution is not as intrusive as compression artefacts. The resolution could be halved, and still make a watchable picture. But it's hardly in the spirit of digital television.
> globular wrote: >> Sylvia Else wrote: >>> globular wrote: >>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>> Running at 704x576 instead of the usual 720x576.
>>>>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >>>>> bandwith, I suppose.
>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>> Same as Go, less bandwidth too or whatever you call it. >>>> LCD screens weren't meant for low quality pictures.
>>> Not that it's so obvious with SD, because the pixels in the image >>> aren't square anyway, requiring the display to do a horizontal >>> upscale, which is never good for the result.
>>> Sylvia.
>> The picture looks softer. I wonder if they have fixed that slightly >> since this kind of thing started.
> I've noticed on GO! that there's a lot of large pixellated squares any > time there's any rapid motion on screen. Happens every time with one of > their logo ads.
>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >> bandwith, I suppose.
> Watched the Jay Leno show on it last night; did not notice any problems > with the picture.
What do you watch it on and at what distance from the screen? They might be improving their tweaking at the other end. But I notice washed out colours and a soft picture. I couldn't even watch Go when it started. Nothing to do with the quality of my television, full HD Sony.
>>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >>> bandwith, I suppose.
>> Watched the Jay Leno show on it last night; did not notice any problems >> with the picture.
> What do you watch it on and at what distance from the screen? > They might be improving their tweaking at the other end. > But I notice washed out colours and a soft picture. I couldn't even watch > Go when it started. > Nothing to do with the quality of my television, full HD Sony.
I watched it on our Panasonic Plasma TV, about 10 feet (3 metres) from the screen.
OTOH I sometimes watch a GO program in my study room on an Aldi Tevion old-fashioned TV with a cheap Dgtec STB & no picture problems either. -- David Barnett
<""noujwas\"@yahoo.com ."> wrote: >globular wrote: >> Sylvia Else wrote: >>> globular wrote: >>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>> Running at 704x576 instead of the usual 720x576.
>>>>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >>>>> bandwith, I suppose.
>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>> Same as Go, less bandwidth too or whatever you call it. >>>> LCD screens weren't meant for low quality pictures.
>>> Not that it's so obvious with SD, because the pixels in the image >>> aren't square anyway, requiring the display to do a horizontal >>> upscale, which is never good for the result.
>>> Sylvia.
>> The picture looks softer. I wonder if they have fixed that slightly >> since this kind of thing started.
>I've noticed on GO! that there's a lot of large pixellated squares any time >there's any rapid motion on screen. Happens every time with one of their logo ads.
They are playing silly buggers with the bitrate.
On my Bravia I don't really notice it but on my mates yumcha special panel it looks like shit.
r...@nospam.net wrote: > On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:12:02 +1100, "Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF" > <""noujwas\"@yahoo.com ."> wrote:
>> globular wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> globular wrote: >>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>> Running at 704x576 instead of the usual 720x576.
>>>>>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >>>>>> bandwith, I suppose.
>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>> Same as Go, less bandwidth too or whatever you call it. >>>>> LCD screens weren't meant for low quality pictures. >>>> Not that it's so obvious with SD, because the pixels in the image >>>> aren't square anyway, requiring the display to do a horizontal >>>> upscale, which is never good for the result.
>>>> Sylvia. >>> The picture looks softer. I wonder if they have fixed that slightly >>> since this kind of thing started. >> I've noticed on GO! that there's a lot of large pixellated squares any time >> there's any rapid motion on screen. Happens every time with one of their logo ads.
> They are playing silly buggers with the bitrate.
> On my Bravia I don't really notice it but on my mates yumcha special > panel it looks like shit.
I notice it from time to time. Looks like poor resolution to me. Annoying when it happens.
"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!" - Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.
"This is the recession we had to have!" - Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.
"Silly old bugger!" - Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.
"By 1990, no child will live in poverty" - Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.
"A billion trees ..." - Borke, pissed as a newt again.
"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor general!" - Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!" - FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.
"I don't care what you fuckers think!" - KRudd the KRude Rat at his finest again.
"We'll just change it all when we get in." - Garrett the carrott
uncle wally wrote: > On Nov 3, 1:47 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote: >> Running at 704x576 instead of the usual 720x576.
>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >> bandwith, I suppose.
>> Sylvia.
> ▬
> Well, perhaps the commercial channels shouldn't even bother > introducing their > 3rd digital channels if there's not enough bandwidth.
I've been watching Stargate Atlantis on 7Two (well, recording it, actually). I've noticed that there aren't so many adertisements to FF through. Since it seems unlikely that Seven have suddenly seen the error of their ways in the amount of advertising, I can only assume that they're simply unable to sell the slots. How long can the second channels survive?
Sylvia Else wrote: > uncle wally wrote: >> On Nov 3, 1:47 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote: >>> Running at 704x576 instead of the usual 720x576.
>>> What you get when you shoehorn too many channels into the available >>> bandwith, I suppose.
>> Well, perhaps the commercial channels shouldn't even bother >> introducing their 3rd digital channels if there's not enough bandwidth.
> I've been watching Stargate Atlantis on 7Two (well, recording it, > actually).
Me too!
> I've noticed that there aren't so many adertisements to FF through.
That's because, it being sci-fi, which only geeks watch, the advertisers aren't too interested in wasting their ad dollars. You'll notice that 72 are actually screening 3 eps. of SG:A in the 8:30 to 11pm slot. Given that they'd normally run 1 ep. per hour, they're losing half an hour of ads. Or slightly more because they actually seem to finish before 11pm. So, 150 mins. / 3 = 50 mins. per ep.
> Since it seems unlikely that Seven have suddenly seen the error > of their ways in the amount of advertising, I can only assume that > they're simply unable to sell the slots. How long can the second > channels survive?
It should be cheap to run. Lots of repeats (just like on GO!). So the shows would be cheap.
"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!" - Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.
"This is the recession we had to have!" - Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.
"Silly old bugger!" - Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.
"By 1990, no child will live in poverty" - Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.
"A billion trees ..." - Borke, pissed as a newt again.
"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor general!" - Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!" - FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.
"I don't care what you fuckers think!" - KRudd the KRude Rat at his finest again.
"We'll just change it all when we get in." - Garrett the carrott
|
