Why Upconverting is bad.
03-10-07 | 04:38 PM
#51
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Mpls, MN
They are probably trying to send full 1920x1080 in 15Mbps or some such. And with a dead weather channel. Priceless.
It's amazing how NBC is consistently the worst network for HD for almost every locale. Both the network and the local stations all suck. It's like they wrote a memo 2 years ago saying "90% effort is the level HD requires to be acceptable, 100% to look good, but don't go above 80% ever".
The bizarre thing is that, even with all the hate-talk about HDLite providers like DirecTV downrezzing the 1080i networks, bit-starving is far worse. NBC has wisely chosen bit-starving.
It's amazing how NBC is consistently the worst network for HD for almost every locale. Both the network and the local stations all suck. It's like they wrote a memo 2 years ago saying "90% effort is the level HD requires to be acceptable, 100% to look good, but don't go above 80% ever".
The bizarre thing is that, even with all the hate-talk about HDLite providers like DirecTV downrezzing the 1080i networks, bit-starving is far worse. NBC has wisely chosen bit-starving.
03-11-07 | 10:42 AM
#52
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally Posted by Spiky
They are probably trying to send full 1920x1080 in 15Mbps or some such. And with a dead weather channel. Priceless.
It's amazing how NBC is consistently the worst network for HD for almost every locale. Both the network and the local stations all suck. It's like they wrote a memo 2 years ago saying "90% effort is the level HD requires to be acceptable, 100% to look good, but don't go above 80% ever".
The bizarre thing is that, even with all the hate-talk about HDLite providers like DirecTV downrezzing the 1080i networks, bit-starving is far worse. NBC has wisely chosen bit-starving.
It's amazing how NBC is consistently the worst network for HD for almost every locale. Both the network and the local stations all suck. It's like they wrote a memo 2 years ago saying "90% effort is the level HD requires to be acceptable, 100% to look good, but don't go above 80% ever".
The bizarre thing is that, even with all the hate-talk about HDLite providers like DirecTV downrezzing the 1080i networks, bit-starving is far worse. NBC has wisely chosen bit-starving.
03-13-09 | 10:44 PM
#53
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Re: Why Upconverting is bad.
Heh. I just made the upgrade to HD/BD and found this thread.
I just watched "Iron Man" on my Blu-Ray player upconverted and connected with an HDMI cable and it doesn't look THAT different from 480i. Some scenes are better than others. I guess normal 480i is just consistently bad.
I'm going to be selling some of my DVDs to upgrade to Blu-Ray.
I just watched "Iron Man" on my Blu-Ray player upconverted and connected with an HDMI cable and it doesn't look THAT different from 480i. Some scenes are better than others. I guess normal 480i is just consistently bad.
I'm going to be selling some of my DVDs to upgrade to Blu-Ray.
03-14-09 | 08:48 AM
#54
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Why Upconverting is bad.
Heh. I just made the upgrade to HD/BD and found this thread.
I just watched "Iron Man" on my Blu-Ray player upconverted and connected with an HDMI cable and it doesn't look THAT different from 480i. Some scenes are better than others. I guess normal 480i is just consistently bad.
I'm going to be selling some of my DVDs to upgrade to Blu-Ray.
I just watched "Iron Man" on my Blu-Ray player upconverted and connected with an HDMI cable and it doesn't look THAT different from 480i. Some scenes are better than others. I guess normal 480i is just consistently bad.
I'm going to be selling some of my DVDs to upgrade to Blu-Ray.
03-14-09 | 12:29 PM
#56
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Why Upconverting is bad.
Heh. I just made the upgrade to HD/BD and found this thread.
I just watched "Iron Man" on my Blu-Ray player upconverted and connected with an HDMI cable and it doesn't look THAT different from 480i. Some scenes are better than others. I guess normal 480i is just consistently bad.
I'm going to be selling some of my DVDs to upgrade to Blu-Ray.
I just watched "Iron Man" on my Blu-Ray player upconverted and connected with an HDMI cable and it doesn't look THAT different from 480i. Some scenes are better than others. I guess normal 480i is just consistently bad.
I'm going to be selling some of my DVDs to upgrade to Blu-Ray.
03-14-09 | 06:51 PM
#57
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Re: Why Upconverting is bad.
The funny thing is, unless the OP has a CRT HDTV, he's getting upscaling. Unless he's watching 480p with a ginormous black box around it at NATIVE resolution.
It's just a matter of if your player does a better job deinterlacing and scaling than your display can do.
All of the flat panel and digital displays HAVE to upscale, to native resolution of the display.
It's just a matter of if your player does a better job deinterlacing and scaling than your display can do.
All of the flat panel and digital displays HAVE to upscale, to native resolution of the display.
03-15-09 | 09:40 PM
#58
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Re: Why Upconverting is bad.
I think I have a setting right now that's good enough across the board...
I mean the upscaling is better than no upscaling, but I'm not going to pretend the Blu-Ray version won't be much, much better.
03-15-09 | 09:50 PM
#59
DVD Talk Hero
Re: Why Upconverting is bad.
I'd bet your TV does to...but maybe not.
