Better HD Picture Quality: Show & Hbo or Starz & Max
- Thread starter JimK2
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 13
- Views 2K
I agree HBO and Showtime don't look as good. But I don't think Starz and Cinemax are much better either.
Max is MPEG4? It's on the worst transponder (sat 127/tp 27) out there--the same one as A&E and Universal HD.
Max looks a little better than HBO and Showtime. However, that's not saying much.
Max looks a little better than HBO and Showtime. However, that's not saying much.
I didn't vote because I think it changes. At various times they've all looked better and worse.
Seems like a month or so ago (maybe less) some looked better than they had in a while but the last few weeks they haven't looked any better than dvd. In fact, I've got dvds I burned off HD channels (in SP and using just an S-Vid connection of course) last year that look better than what some of these channels claim is HD now.
I've always wondered if Dish shuffles channels and varies quality deliberately, in an attempt to placate everyone.
Last time I compared them closely was about 6-8 weeks ago and at that time, HBO & Showtime were definitely better. I recorded portions of two programs on each and did rapid comparisons for about 45 minutes. HBO and Showtime were sharper with fewer, but different, compression artifacts.
However I was watching an episode of Weeds either last night or the night before, and the quality was poor - running about halfway between SD and HD. Lots of contour artifacts on low contrast surfaces.
However I was watching an episode of Weeds either last night or the night before, and the quality was poor - running about halfway between SD and HD. Lots of contour artifacts on low contrast surfaces.
I would agree. I think E* would be making a poor strategic decision if they didn't make a strong effort to improve picture quality over what it is today.
I guess I'm the only one who noticed that they fixed TP27 a few days ago (I think they moved the "TP27" ID to a transponder that was working better).
And, the signal strength of a transponder has absolutely nothing to do with the picture quality, anyway...
Starz...but it was in original aspect ratio. That's better than blown up to 16:9 no matter what channel.
I just recorded scary movie 4 and the grudge 2 off of starz
Two movies i might not even watch but I went so what i pay for all of these channels it's about time i at least recorded a few
When I went to transfer to external the file size was so much smaller. Each was over 2 gig but not even 3 gig. So two movies at 4.x size and I have mr and mrs smith saved and it's over 8 meg by itself. That was a showtime or hbo movie
and the 3 hr nascar race from last night was over 10 meg i believe
Now I do need to watch and compare the quality but if it's not that different it's a HUGE space saver
so this is the mpeg4 difference and if so I know I will record when I can and delete these mpeg2 space hogs
All I know is to me size DOES matter when it's eating up HD space. It seems it was about 2x standard size and not the 4, 5 or 6 gig per hour on mpeg2
Two movies i might not even watch but I went so what i pay for all of these channels it's about time i at least recorded a few
When I went to transfer to external the file size was so much smaller. Each was over 2 gig but not even 3 gig. So two movies at 4.x size and I have mr and mrs smith saved and it's over 8 meg by itself. That was a showtime or hbo movie
and the 3 hr nascar race from last night was over 10 meg i believe
Now I do need to watch and compare the quality but if it's not that different it's a HUGE space saver
so this is the mpeg4 difference and if so I know I will record when I can and delete these mpeg2 space hogs
All I know is to me size DOES matter when it's eating up HD space. It seems it was about 2x standard size and not the 4, 5 or 6 gig per hour on mpeg2
