picture quality

  • Thread starter Thread starter new-oakviller
  • Start date Start date
Try both and see which gives a better picture on your TV. There could be some difference or no difference at all between the two.
 
It looked even worse with Shaw HD. Flashing lights and confetti don't like any type of compression. It totally wrecks the Victoria Secrets "fashion" shows.
 
That makes more sense that the 1080p VOD movies are downloaded over the internet. I've got an Apple TV that I watch HD movie rentals on and I believe they are all 720p. Even then, that's a heck of a lot of data to download. Having the ability to download 1080p VOD sounds pretty interesting though. Perhaps one day we'll see the same thing in Canada.
 
I doubt Bell is playing with the SD quality at all.

As for HD, before making accusations, I'd suggest you ensure it is a Bell issue and not a source issue. I personally am quite happy with both SD and HD from Bell at the present time. I find it much improved from last fall.
 
This post is not directed at anyone in particular, but please remember that a proper optimization for each device and input is required, otherwise you're comparing apples and oranges. If you're plugging the device into the TV without optimizing it for that device or for that connection, or using a different TV, then the comments don't carry much weight.

Also, quite a few people leave their STBs in the default 480P mode, not realizing it. It should be changed to 720P in the user settings, since that's what BTV sends, although some people prefer 1080i.

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=76161 Optimization

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=87543 On Upconversion
 
Picture quality on the 9200s and 9242s is excellent, especially the SD upscaling. Not sure why the 9241 would be any worse. The 6141 was reported to be very good, compared to the 6000, when it was released as well. The 6000 is noticeably softer than the 9200/9241 with HD and the 6000 has an abysmal SD upscaler in comparison. However, most of BTV's signals will look soft on a big screen due to their aggressive compression. Their is no way they will look as good as blu-ray, for example. They are typically closer to standard DVD but a few are better, with good HD material. SD will never look as good as a decent HD signal but a good scaler will keep it from looking worse than it needs to.
 
well i just had bell tv installed today after a year and a half with rogers...

6141 box connected to an ISF calibrated pioneer 6010 via the dvi-hdmi adapter..i have tried with the box set to both 1080i and 720p, both resolutions confirmed by the OSD of the pioneer

WOW. just watching leno and HOLY CRAP it looks horrific. the savings from rogers (less than half what my rogers bill is) isnt worth this drop in pq...i was prepared for a bit of a drop but this is outrageous..letterman is crap too..720p is a notch better than 1080i but both are garbage.

ill be calling bell tomorrow and having this all undone i think...is there any reason why this would look so bad that isnt permanent? like..are there any problems anyone knows of right now?

im in shock at how much worse it looks
 
Sounds convincing, they did mean resolution when saying "format". C'est la vie, I guess.

Another issue I didn't mention before, nobody but Bell sees the original footage and therefore can (and from what I know, does) always claim the deficiencies to be in the source (when they get really outrageous).

It's water under the bridge.
First, the differences between the streams you can get at home from different providers aren't really day-and-night all the time. OTA is, but very few know that.
Second, constant feeding of the brainwashing crap about their (Bell) superiority in the HD space (from Bell publications to their tech site to the insiders on a site like DHC) has its effect, very similar to why Monster Cable is still in business.

Maybe this is the reason that nobody - from Joe Shmoe your neighbor to police force - gives a rat's ass about pirates: you eff us, we eff you.

Bottom line - take it easy and you'll live longer...:)
 
It's not just that though. Some TVs and AV Receivers up-convert and a poor picture can look stunning. This is why some people are puzzled over the picture quality issue.
 
Can someone please briefly explain how the changes that are coming will help HD PQ on Bell? Is this proven technology or is Bell just hoping that there is a noticable enough improvement to keep customers from leaving, without really doing everything they can to provide the best possible PQ?
 
Lindsay, JKR, DT1, I am happy to hear that you guys have finally seen what MarkB and I have been stating for the longest time.....PQ is not the greatest!!!

We can complain in this forum all we want but we are not going to get anywhere unless BEV ( someone in a senior position is made aware of this thread and others like it).
If anyone knows of a contact please post it or start a new thread that we can submit to BEV.

I was thinking of Hugh the Forum "chief", as someone who can speak on our behalf, but I don't know if BEV is a sponsor here.... it may not be in his best interest.

Anyway, if someone has any info please let us know!!

Oh, and yes the PQ has deteriorated significantly on most channels.

Paul
 
I have had my Pioneer Kuro HDTV since January 2008. I haven't moved the chair from which I view TV since then, and seldom if ever mess with the contrast and brightness. But I never experienced this macroblocking prior to the Fall of last year. It is sporadic both in its appearance and when it occurs. It doesn't have to be when a fast motion is occurring or when there is a shady spot on the picture. It can overlay just two people sat talking on a set, and will suddenly appear like sparkling confetti that grows and diminishes suddenly. Added to this is the occasional blacking out of the screen and the absence of sound for no apparent reason.

This is 21st Century technological progress ? Instead of inexorably moving forward to perfect Hi-definition quality, we have to endure these pitfalls because of cost cutting on the part of the provider, the same as what became our lot when the Wall Street executives opted for profit over service and the consumer be damned. So, watch out BEV, I now have some cost cutting of my own to put into effect.
 
Not exactly Rogers but I have Comcast here in Nashville. I have "Survivor" on at the moment and my local Cable is definitely the better of the two. Not a huge difference but noticeable on a side by side comparison if I switch between the two.

My receiver is a 9242
 
That may have been due to the last time the shuffled channels and transponders. Fox or Global, which ever you were watching maybe on a better transponder now with less channels. However, TSNHD's PQ has taken a turn for the worse. The actual image isn't all that bad, but there is a considerable amount of macroblocking on movement and alot more noise in the picture. Watching a CFL game, there is alot of noise on the scorebar around the team logos, especially when a replay comes on.

Actually to me, even FOX HD East shows a bit of noise, but Global HD looks better. Watched the Simpsons last week and the opening on Fox had some bad noise in it (especially around smaller lines in the picture) while Global HD showed none at all.
 
Well it may be just our imaginations but I too have felt that the new HD channel assignments are better. Particularly noticeable on the NFL games this past weekend.

Also I can put up a side by side comparison using the PIP feature on my 9200. Minor but noticeable difference on my set.
 
There's a bit of a difference in favour of 1080i on my set but you go set it either way.
 
Guys, picture quality is not so good... RushHD seems to be one of the bests. But last night i was watching American Idol, and as soon as there is some movement in the background, compression artifacts show up everywhere.

I have been on digital cable (videotron) for 4 years, and watch at least 2 hours of HD every day, and Bell TV HD is far worst than it was on Videotron. This is with the exact same equipment except the HD PVR.

Now, what is better on Bell TV is that there are 2x more HD channels than with Videotron.

So, one is better for PQ, the other for content.

I am patiently awaiting the MPEG4 or new satellite to see if even more HD channels are coming and with better PQ or not !
 
I am thinking of getting Bell TV but am being discouraged because of a lot of people complaining about the poor picture quality. I thought this conversion was supposed to improve quality? Any suggestions?
 
Another night and more terrible PQ from Bell. Watching Hell's Kitchen tonight on FOX HD East (yes I know it's widescreen) but there was major macroblocking during the opening sequence which has not been visible in prior weeks. Also, the NCAA tournament on CBS HD looks really soft. The March Madness package on PPV looks slightly better then the regular CBS HD feeds provided by Bell. I turned on Jeopardy on ABCHD West for a minute and it looked awful. Very soft and poor quality, no detail at all in contestants ties. Only a few more weeks and hopefully things get better.
 
Back
Top