Why is the picture quality on HDTVs so bad?(I'm not kidding)

indstr · Post by **indstr** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:55 pm

I don't understand what the hype is all about with HDTV. Every time I've ever seen one, whether it's been at someone's house, or on display at Walmart/Sears/etc, the quality has not lived up to my expectations AT ALL. If it's all so "super duper hyper awesome high resolution quality", why can you see BLOCK NOISE??? I was watching a display at Walmart the other day, advertising BLU RAY movies which have something like 35 gigs of storage, right? And on one of the movie clips I saw, it showed a crowd of people and the camera was panning and I swear I could have sat there and counted the pixellated-ass looking blocks. There was so much block noise it might as well have been one of the DivX 3.11 movie rips I made back in the year 2000. I'm not exaggerating. I used to make a lot of DVD rips of movies in Divx 3.11, and this shit was very comparable to that crap ass quality. (Hint, XviD looks beaautyful these days)

I've noticed this with TV broadcasts at a friend's house too. Block noise. Why should I have to worry about this? (Not that I ever plan on buying a goddamn HDTV, but anyway what the fuck?). I mean how is this supposed to be "the future" when it looks worse than VHS?

I've always been able to notice the compression in DVD's even on an SDTV or a computer monitor (1024x768), but from what I've seen of HDTV, they just exxagerate all the flaws in the video stream.

What I'm guessing is that the TV signals look like shit because they are compressed heavily before they come down the pipe. And I'm also guessing (hoping?) that the demo I saw at Walmart advertising Blu Ray did not actually have the same amount of Data stream as a Blu Ray disc. Because if Blu Ray looks that bad I would be seriously amazed/WTF'ing at how goddamn stupid people are to think this is "high quality".
I'm guessing also that DVD's look like shit on an HDTV because it just exxagerates the flaws in the compression that would normally be less noticable on an SDTV or lower resolution.

I've never claimed myself as a videophile, just making the observations that something proclaimed to be "the ultra highest quality video shiznit ever" seems very, very, very wrong.

Turrican · Post by **Turrican** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:01 pm

Simple answer: nothing will ever beat a CRT, SD-def TV. End of story.

The hype is there just because the industry needs you to keep buying stuff, and unfortunately you already have the best (CRT SD) so now their only option is to sell you something else.

trivial · Post by **trivial** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:24 pm

I guess I never expected broadcast TV to be perfect, so I'm reasonably happy watching OTA digital. If I were paying for cable or dish, I think I'd be very unhappy.

Blu-Ray potentially has the bandwidth to hide compression errors. You have to read the picture quality reviews at AVS before buying. I don't have a player, but my best-rated HDDVD's do not show motion artifacts.

Skykid · Post by **Skykid** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:36 pm

A while ago Samsung made some CRT Flatscreens with special flattened tubes to reduce the unit size. I was considering trying to find one. Anyone had any experience with these?

indstr · Post by **indstr** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:45 pm

Turrican wrote:Simple answer: nothing will ever beat a CRT, SD-def TV. End of story.

The hype is there just because the industry needs you to keep buying stuff, and unfortunately you already have the best (CRT SD) so now their only option is to sell you something else.

I believe you. In fact, right now I'm reading a book about planned obsolescence -- the practice of businesses to design products that you purchase more and more frequently before you really need a new one. Whether it's by using inferior materials to intentionally make the products break prematurely, or the practice of psychological obsolescence -- i.e. things going out of style, and you feel pressured to buy a new one, otherwise you will feel "ashamed" because you are not up to date.

Out of those two methods of obsolescence, I actually find psychological obsolescence more disturbing. I think when I finish this book, I'm gonna read a couple others, and then start crusading to open peoples' eyes about these issues.

We're all just puppets. Makes me sick.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:49 pm

Turrican wrote:Simple answer: nothing will ever beat a CRT, SD-def TV. End of story.

Thanks for dusting off the old crystal ball for us, O Magnificent Carnac. Smellovision's going to be a failure, huh?

Meanwhile, I'm enjoying posting from a laptop with a 1920x1200 TN screen with great color reproduction and amazing detail. Blows the shit outta my old 21" P110 without tripping breakers.

Anyway, why does HDTV look bad?

You're discovering that you didn't really want to see the dirt between the players' teeth, right?

The real problems are Best Buy factory presets that mysteriously (!!!!) aren't well suited for home viewing, people not hooking up their sets properly, and the variety of picture broadcast formats on a variety of screens. When some screens are 1440x900, and others are 1920x1080, and some broadcasts are HD and others not, don't you suppose it's ever so slightly possible there could be some discrepancy, maybe, maybe some stretching and blurring? ;)

I'm not convinced by the "CRT phosphors accomodate different resolutions better" argument either. CRT phosphors are aligned in rows, and it's possible for these to be off. If LCD monitor makers can do something with subpixel rendering for better resolution switching, that'd be great. As it is, I already get a much, much higher effective resolution on my LCDs than I could on a CRT with text due to Clear Type than I would have on a CRT. Here the word "resolution" is about a centimeter wide and doesn't look much worse than type (aside from the emissive vs. reflective aspect).

Skykid wrote:A while ago Samsung made some CRT Flatscreens with special flattened tubes to reduce the unit size. I was considering trying to find one. Anyone had any experience with these?

Enjoy shitty digital ICs replacing proper analogue circuitry, I imagine.

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:52 pm

I suppose LaserTVs look better than regular HDTVs (plasma/lcd) and than CRTs. Mitsubishi's LaserVue is still very expensive, though.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:02 pm

SEDtv should also be pretty good. We'll have to see when Canon starts releasing models - they've been able to only since December; the technology has been delayed about two years due to lawsuits.

indstr · Post by **indstr** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:04 pm

Ed Oscuro wrote:When some screens are 1440x900, and others are 1920x1080, and some broadcasts are HD and others not, don't you suppose it's ever so slightly possible there could be some discrepancy, maybe, maybe some stretching and blurring?

The problem here is that there is no standard. Consumers are getting shafted, plain and simple.

trivial · Post by **trivial** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:09 pm

Ed Oscuro wrote:CRT phosphors are aligned in rows, and it's possible for these to be off.

It's actually extremely likely. Fortunately, it makes no difference. Analog devices with digital inputs aren't yet finished baffling us, it seems.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:09 pm

Oh, there's standards, more than you can shake a trailer bed full of TV palettes at.

HDTV is pretty much universal now, SDTV too.

The problem is how companies are reacting to the standards. You get these crazy TVs with 120 Hz and 240 Hz cycle times (or whatever) to "fix" pulldown from movies, and it's just a marketing thing.

Even without that, though, some people are going to want and even need the higher def TVs. You can plug a computer right into some of them, and on a 1920x1080 screen it theoretically should be decent. And then not everybody else has the money to spend powering that sort of TV, or the hardware it requires (i.e. a good console or graphics card that can output at that resolution and keep up a good frame rate).

indstr · Post by **indstr** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:12 pm

Ed Oscuro wrote:Oh, there's standards, more than you can shake a trailer bed full of TV palettes at.

I hope, oh, I hope so desperately that you understand the irony behind that statement.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:28 pm

Thank goodness all TVs can be calibrated with the same equipment.

Too bad nobody can afford to do it (or for that matter knows they should).

Damn, back to square one...again...

Sir, I'm optimistic about this Monster Cable! It should make your picture 1000% clearer

brokenhalo · Post by **brokenhalo** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:29 pm

to get back to the original post, most of what you refer to as block noise can come from a few source problems.

watching tv at your friends house, i'm assuming you were watching a digital cable tv feed? if so, block noise from that source is a problem even with sdtv's. the cable companies are trying to push huge amounts of digital tv feeds down outdated lines, causing blockiness, frame drops, even blank screens.

in store, the tv's are pulled out of the box and dropped on the floor. no tweaking is done to the picture to get optimal results. the source material could be less than stellar, or the tv's built in upscaler could be causing problems. there's numerous problems that could come into play here.

hdtv's are fantastic though. play some current gen games, or watch a bluray on one and i think you would be impressed. that being said, hang on to your sdtv as well, for all your sd needs.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:42 pm

brokenhalo wrote:in store, the tv's are pulled out of the box and dropped on the floor. no tweaking is done to the picture to get optimal results.

That's because the television only has to look good in the store. Most any TV you'll see in stores is set up for that kind of environment to look better for marketing.

I tend to agree that it's a good idea to hold onto an old-fashioned tube, the best that can be found. Won't last forever but hopefully it'll last long enough. Probably the future holds expensive upscalers for most of us, I'm afraid.

indstr · Post by **indstr** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:42 pm

indstr wrote:
Ed Oscuro wrote:Oh, there's standards, more than you can shake a trailer bed full of TV palettes at.
I hope, oh, I hope so desperately that you understand the irony behind that statement.

Ed dodged this for some reason, but what I mean by this is that for 60 something years, THE television standard was 640x480 CRT. That's all there was. It didn't matter if your TV was 13" or 35", it was still 640x480. So now in just the past 10 years, there has been all this "progress", but really it is just making everything worse because there is no single standard of a resolution that HDTV's should use.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing... I guess... (?). I just think the technology has developed too quickly for its own good. Now it's causing a lot of problems.

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:44 pm

If you can afford to get your HDTV professionally calibrated, it's $$$ well spent because then your HDTV is going to be at it's best. A pro HDTV calibrator tech person will be able to gain acces to the manufacture's "hidden" service mode & do the "real" nuts & bolts of adjusting the pic to a certain standard. Then all your Blu-Ray dics & HD gaming will look at it's best. ^_~

The Pioneer Kuro plasma HDTVs that come out soon in May of 2009 will be the last ones to have all-Pioneer parts throughout. starting with the 2010 Pioneer Kuro HDTVs, they'll be made with a mixture of both Pioneer & Panasonic parts throughout.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

indstr · Post by **indstr** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:45 pm

PC Engine Fan X! wrote:If you can afford to get your HDTV professionally calibrated, it's $$$ well spent because then your HDTV is going to be at it's best. A pro HDTV calibrator will be able to gain acces to the manufacture's "hidden" service mode & do the "real" nuts & bolts of adjusting the pic to a certain standard. then all your Blu-Ray dics & HD gaming will look at it's best. ^_~

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

... and again, consumers are getting ripped off... Because why the hell isn't this calibration done by default at the TV factory?

... fuck this I gotta get off these forums for a while, I have work to do.

moozooh · Post by **moozooh** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:47 pm

indstr wrote:Every time I've ever seen one, whether it's been at someone's house, or on display at Walmart/Sears/etc, the quality has not lived up to my expectations AT ALL.

You might want to check if any of the aforementioned examples of HDTV sets are subject to any of this. In a nutshell, there are problems. There are also advantages. If you're up for these advantages, change things. If not, don't change things.

trivial · Post by **trivial** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:49 pm

indstr: Calibration of pixel-based displays is a bit of a scam. Their performance should be repeatable to the point that a common set of service-menu tweaks works pretty well for a particular model.

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:51 pm

indstr wrote:
PC Engine Fan X! wrote:If you can afford to get your HDTV professionally calibrated, it's $$$ well spent because then your HDTV is going to be at it's best. A pro HDTV calibrator will be able to gain acces to the manufacture's "hidden" service mode & do the "real" nuts & bolts of adjusting the pic to a certain standard. then all your Blu-Ray dics & HD gaming will look at it's best. ^_~

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~
... and again, consumers are getting ripped off... Because why the hell isn't this calibration done by default at the TV factory?

... fuck this I gotta get off these forums for a while, I have work to do.

Work comes before play, right? ^_~

Better keep your low-res 15kHz RGB monitors in tip-top shape, there'll be a time when they won't be supported anymore should the arcade devs switch to HD specs and it becomes more commonplace/accepted.

TodayIsForgotten · Post by **TodayIsForgotten** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:55 pm

I understand what the OP is saying. But, the further you are away from the TV, the less (or even no) artifacts you'll see. As for the Blu-Ray. I suppose it depends on the movie. Stargate looked good in some scenes and in others had some noticeable noise. Ratatouille look really excellent with no visual artifacts.

I'm almost certain you can see artifacts on CRTs if you get close enough. It might not look noisy but I'm sure they are there.

Wait for OLED to come out or if SED ever happens to resurface.

But all in all. HDTVs are much nicer than the tvs of yester. And while the newest and best LCD panel computer monitors may not have amazing contrast ratios or the best viewing angles. For what they are head-on, look as good if not better than CRT.

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 8:59 pm

Sony has spent millions over the years on it's new-fangled OLED technology...the intial bigger screen OLED TVs will be quite expensive when they arrive in greater numbers for the masses. That's a given as with any new high-tech stuff coming out these days. ^_~

I recall that you can buy a Japanese stand-alone Blu-Ray recorder machine right now...will be a bit later for it to appear Stateside.

worstplayer · Post by **worstplayer** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:02 pm

According to my (shitty) math:

1920x1080=2073600 pixels/frame
720 × 576= 414720
2073600/414720=5

Blu-ray=~35 GB
Video DVD=~8.50 GB
35/8.50=4.11

5>4.11

So no, it's not just you.
Assuming MPEG2 on DVD and Blu-ray are the same, Blu-ray is actually even more blocky than normal DVD video.

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:05 pm

worstplayer wrote:According to my (shitty) math:

1920x1080=2073600 pixels/frame
720 × 576= 414720
2073600/414720=5

Blu-ray=~35 GB
Video DVD=~8.50 GB
35/8.50=4.11

5>4.11

So no, it's NOT just you.
Assuming MPEG2 on DVD and Blu-ray are the same, Blu-ray is actually even more blocky than normal DVD video.

Isn't Blu-Ray encoded in MPEG4 format nowdays?

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:10 pm

as with any screen, if you dont know how to adjust the levels to suit the space and type of media being displayed it will look like shit.....

HD screens can look AMAZING if set right...please dont let poorly set screens sour you on the whole range of HD displays......

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:14 pm

jonny5 wrote:as with any screen, if you dont know how to adjust the levels to suit the space and type of media being displayed it will look like shit.....

HD screens can look AMAZING if set right...please dont let poorly set screens sour you on the whole range of HD displays......

A bit proper adjustment from the end-user, an HDTV can be quite razor-sharp. Usually requires some fiddling around/experimenting to get the picture to one's liking. Believe it or not, there are still some folks who can't set their VCR's clocks let alone properly calibrate an HDTV. Strange but true. ^_~

worstplayer · Post by **worstplayer** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:22 pm

PC Engine Fan X! wrote:Isn't Blu-Ray encoded in MPEG4 format nowdays?

Ok, according to Wikipedia new Blu-rays indeed use MPEG4.
I admit I was wrong.

moozooh · Post by **moozooh** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:23 pm

worstplayer wrote:Blu-ray=~35 GB
Video DVD=~8.50 GB
35/8.50=4.11

Worst math ever, seriously.

Bitrate/resolution ratio has never been linear, and the codecs used are different. That's why a DVD ISO and an HD rip floating over at torrent trackers weigh similarly.

Hell, you wouldn't even get the same picture with the same codec at different settings. Go to super-play.co.uk and see how many runs weigh over 300MB, yet look like they've been freshly crapped out. (For comparison, this is a good example of the opposite.)

Please don't use this argument in the future, it's misleading at the very best. :\

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:24 pm

worstplayer wrote:
PC Engine Fan X! wrote:Isn't Blu-Ray encoded in MPEG4 format nowdays?
Ok, according to Wikipedia new Blu-rays indeed use MPEG4.
I admit I was wrong.

We learn something new everyday. ^_~

shmups.system11.org

Why is the picture quality on HDTVs so bad?(I'm not kidding)

Why is the picture quality on HDTVs so bad?(I'm not kidding)

Re: Why is the picture quality on HDTVs so bad?(I'm not kidd

Re: Why is the picture quality on HDTVs so bad?(I'm not kidd

Re: Why is the picture quality on HDTVs so bad?(I'm not kidd