Sky hd plus is no different

Inactive

generaloneill wrote: »

Just got sky HD and its just the same as normal sky, does anyone else actually notice the difference?

Which type of TV do you have?..if it is a good quality Plasma TV, you will not see much difference, not because HD is that bad, it is because plasma TV's are very good at showing SD at it's best, hence little difference between the two.

aliEnRIK

Inactive wrote: »

Which type of TV do you have?..if it is a good quality Plasma TV, you will not see much difference, not because HD is that bad, it is because plasma TV's are very good at showing SD at it's best, hence little difference between the two.

Ive not really seen sky hd so cant compare myself. But I have quite a few films etc in hidef now and they generally look quite a bit better than playing the same dvds through my pioneer lx50 dvd player (Considered one of the very best upscaling dvd players around)
So that would indicate that some of skys 'HD' content is simply upscaled (a BS HD if you will?)
Or maybe not enough bandwidth is being used?

sturll

I had my Sky HD fitted last week and when the engineer put BBC HD on i commented "Its not as good as i thought it would be - and no where near as good as Blu Ray" He explained that Blu Ray is the best HD there is and that that is why currys etc always show it on their TV's.

However, being an avid sports fan (particularly Rugby League) and having watched 2 games this weekend in HD i have changed my mind. The difference is huge. The detail is far clearer and sharper, the sound crisp, the colour has depth. I am very very happy when watching sport.
Then i have looked at Nat Geographic/Discovery and again the difference is massive, particularly with water and scenerey. It really has to be seen to be believed.

Now, when watching BBC HD and 4HD etc its only a small step up. The prgrammes do look better but not to the point id get excited about it.

I think the point of what im saying is that outdoor things look great and fast motion holds its clarity, whereas dull indoor soaps and such don't really do much for the argument in favour of HD.

I have a 720p 50" Plasma.

macman

AliEnRIK: the majority of SKY HD output is at 1080. I never said this was 'better' than 720. The higher res does give a flicker because of the interlacing, but some may consider this an acceptable trade-off for the higher res. Others may (as you do) think the smoother picture makes up for the lower res. Resolution is not the only measure of picture quality, it's ultimately a subjective decision that the viewer has to make for themselves.

aliEnRIK

Its not just the flicker. When an interlaced picture is used the tv must fuse the two together to create a full progressive picture. Its in the fusing that detail is lost and in most cases 720P DOES have a better picture as theres no detail lost
(well, 'technically' there is but not to the same degree)

aliEnRIK

sturll wrote: »

I had my Sky HD fitted last week and when the engineer put BBC HD on i commented "Its not as good as i thought it would be - and no where near as good as Blu Ray" He explained that Blu Ray is the best HD there is and that that is why currys etc always show it on their TV's.

However, being an avid sports fan (particularly Rugby League) and having watched 2 games this weekend in HD i have changed my mind. The difference is huge. The detail is far clearer and sharper, the sound crisp, the colour has depth. I am very very happy when watching sport.
Then i have looked at Nat Geographic/Discovery and again the difference is massive, particularly with water and scenerey. It really has to be seen to be believed.

Now, when watching BBC HD and 4HD etc its only a small step up. The prgrammes do look better but not to the point id get excited about it.

I think the point of what im saying is that outdoor things look great and fast motion holds its clarity, whereas dull indoor soaps and such don't really do much for the argument in favour of HD.

I have a 720p 50" Plasma.

There is a 'run in' period for all boxes. Freeview for example tends to look awful on new tvs, then as time goes on it gradually looks 'cleaner'.
Youll probably find it looks even better in a month or 2

M4RKM

generaloneill wrote: »

Just got sky HD and its just the same as normal sky, does anyone else actually notice the difference?

yes, you can notice the difference, when the following apply

1 - watching via the HDMI interface (not scart etc, must select the HDMI on tv)
2 - watching a HD Channel - not all channels are HD, select TV Guide - Option 2)
3 - watching a programme that is actually in HD - some of the time, the channels are simulcast of the main parent channel, so not everything is in HD, BBC HD is the exception to this, however, if you're not seeing any particular quality increase over BBC HD and BBC ONE (check when they're showing the same programme) are you sure you're watching via HDMI

M

Inactive

aliEnRIK wrote: »

There is a 'run in' period for all boxes. Freeview for example tends to look awful on new tvs, then as time goes on it gradually looks 'cleaner'.
Youll probably find it looks even better in a month or 2

News to me, never witnessed that.;)

roddydogs

If 720p is better than 1080i, why do they bother to transmit it in 1018i, why not just stick to 720p " an opinion is not a fact.if u prefer 720p thats up to you, the people who say this usually have only a 720p set!

aliEnRIK

Inactive wrote: »

News to me, never witnessed that.;)

I witnessed that on my mates new sony within a week