Re: OT? : Netherlands to switch 100% to VOIP before 2010


"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:er7hs8$jb1$1@xxxxxxxxxxx
On a sunny day (Sat, 17 Feb 2007 01:05:30 -0000) it happened "john
jardine"
<john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<45d64843$0$16389$88260bb3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

Your box must be defective, digital transmission changes nothing in the
colors.

Maybe.
Fortunately, I've no idea of the mechanics, so I can just note what I
see.
(My eyes only?), the colour rendition and picture clarity varies
depending
on the particular channel and programme and also the time of day.

Well, I cannot speak for the UK digital terrestial, but only for UK
digital
satellite.
As to BBC and ITV quality, BBC is very good, and ITV too, it depends
if the have old films, US NTSC to PAL converted shows, etc.
The best quality test is always a live shot from the announcer..


Don't know how they measure these things but to a casual eye, all the
programmes look normal. Indeed some can even look 'better'.
Look closer though and the attraction is superficial, skin deep. It's
sort
of smoke and mirrors resulting in flashy bright images with sharp edges
and
lots of contrast and little else. Look for any nuanced detail you know to
be
there and you will not find it.

This really sounds like you have a problem with either your settop box or
with the
TV.

I reckon the best and simplest test of all is just to watch out for a
Black
car turning up in shot and then look for detail. (also applies to any
large
coloured object, especially if moving.

In mpeg2 video compression, a steady object is displayed in more detail
then a moving
object, also there are interpolation frames, so motion is not as
'absolute' displayed
as in PAL or NTSC analog.
At very high compression rates you will see a person in sharp detail when
the head is
100% still, not moving, and as soon as the person turns the head only a
little bit,
all those little spots are gone...
The other thing that is sometimes annoying at high compression rates, is
artefacts around
objects.
Some UK satellite channels in the Sky package in fact only send at 352x288
size,
and the set resizes that to normal (is not that the 'open-access'
channels?).

Technically they've done a good job squeezing the new channels in but
'quality' was not at the top of their list.

Channels are sold to paying customers.
Some work with really low bitrates, some need only really low bitrates.

'Quality' is a lost cause anyhow, as evidenced by the normal analogue
channels now having an unacceptable 10dB-16dB average sound level
variation
when switching channel to channel. What happened to those VU meters!.
john

Yes, I did complain quite a bit to a broadcaster, and the reply I got was:
'We get it from the US, we only edit it a bit ....', I was complaining
about severe distortion, you get this when you get the material as
AC3, decode it to wave, then clip it because you do not know what a VU
meter is,
or an oscilloscope, and then encode again for Europe to mp2.
The mp2 encoding will see the clipping as signal, and favour that above
the
real audio, result: harsh sound, distortion, too loud...
When I went into broadcasting, we got 9 month in the school bench again,
payed by the network, to teach us the technical stuff.
There were some _good_ people there, and BBC had good people too.
But that was long ago before digital, I do not know the situation in BBC
ATM, but
I did read they massively cut in the number of technical people.
Smaller and smaller equipment....... less in house quality control and
knowledge,
maybe less budget, does not help.
These days all you need is be a rapper I think to do audio ;-)

We now see HD camcorders recording on flash cards, that have better
quality then the
original studio equipment of the seventies.
Too bad all the lighting technicians, sound technicians, video and audio
engineers,
directors, the whole club is now done by the local disk jockey :-)


Nice one Jan!. A pleasure to read. (And learn).

john



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: HDTV FAQ UK
    ... >>>The US and Japan now have excellent quality High Definition TV channels. ... HDTV is unpopular with broadcasters, ... The BBC wants more license money but only ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: BBC tax debate on $ky News (Freeview / Astra1)
    ... talking about the technical audio and video quality of the analogue ... I'm so proud of the BBC and you should be too. ... either on their TV channels or the Radio Stations. ...
    (uk.media.tv.misc)
  • Re: OT? : Netherlands to switch 100% to VOIP before 2010
    ... on the particular channel and programme and also the time of day. ... As to BBC and ITV quality, BBC is very good, and ITV too, it depends ... The best quality test is always a live shot from the announcer.. ... Too bad all the lighting technicians, sound technicians, video and audio engineers, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: BBC HD on Freeview proposal
    ... Keep the BBC muxes almost as they are. ... reduced hours, timeshifted, reasonable quality. ... I also suspect that DSat hits more TVs where HD will be noticed ... channels are using. ...
    (uk.tech.digital-tv)
  • Re: HDTV FAQ UK
    ... >>The US and Japan now have excellent quality High Definition TV channels. ... >>watch it at a standard launched in the UK 37 years ago. ... The BBC wants more license money but only ...
    (uk.politics.misc)