Nor have you backed up your statement regarding the relative leaps between SD, HD and 4K.
My overall opinion is that HD with HDR/WCG is probably satisfactory for most.
Comcast offers 4K
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 40
- Views 7K
My overall opinion is that HD with HDR/WCG is probably satisfactory for most.
Versus making unsubstantiated claims?
The magic of opinion is that it is substantially made up.
Are your claims any more fact based? Do you deny that high definition is a bigger leap from standard definition than 4k is from high def? Really? Because that was my claim. You came in and made a claim that had nothing to do with what I said.
It is opinion based on the technical capabilities of each "leap".
I do.
Yes.
No, I claimed that your claim was questionable.
I supported my position with the reasoning that when accompanied with HDR and WCG, 4K makes a much larger jump in fidelity than the shorter leap that HD was over SD. I reason that triple the resolution (or double in the case of 720p) and minor gains in color gamut don't go as far as a doubling of the resolution in combination with doubling (or more) in brightness range and color gamut.
I'll bet you never heard anyone complain about SD pixellation back in the day.
In the case of Comcast's cablecast product where the "HD" typically means everything is presented in 720p, 4K is a quantitatively larger leap than if it weren't being ham-fisted into a QAM channel.
4K HDR, Dolby Vision in particular, IMHO, is a dramatic difference over HD, on par with if not exceeding the transition from SD to HD.
Well do to rain yesterday I lost my HD twice and both times had to go to SD feeds.....All 7 people in the house couldnt believe the difference it was.
Now if you want to see players scars, count blades of grass or the reflection on a helmet thats were the 4k shines.....But blurry SD on a 75 inch tv is night and day!
Now if you want to see players scars, count blades of grass or the reflection on a helmet thats were the 4k shines.....But blurry SD on a 75 inch tv is night and day!
Maybe it's my old eyes. No version of 4k looks better compared to HD more than SD to HD. It's all relative though. I remember when I first got my c band dish. The picture quality from A1 watching a Blue Jays game was astonishing, and it was SD on a Toshiba rear projection display.
There are many dependencies other than your eyesight that may be driving your opinion. TV capability and quality can have a huge impact.
Dolby Vision is rarely in play (dare I say "never") in the context of linear TV. Hybrid Log Gamma is the order of the day for live TV.
They're both noticeably better than HDR10 and an order of magnitude above non-HDR/WCG.
The shows have to be shot in HLG for you to see it. It's not just a broadcast standard. Plus we are still not seeing 4K on network TV.
It must be shot in HDR/WCG, but not specifically in HLG. Most modern 4K cameras shoot in either RAW or log gamma format (not the same as HLG). Some of the advanced models produce HLG or PQ (effectively HDR10) directly. I'm not aware of any cameras that can stream Dolby Vision (though that certainly doesn't mean they don't exist).
That's what I'm saying. Most live HDR/WCG content (whether broadcast or streamed) is delivered as HLG.
While HLG content can be used with SDR TVs, Dolby Vision requires at least HDR10 (PQ) capability. I should note that HLG might not work with non-HLG capable HDR/WCG TVs (HDR models prior to 2016 or so).
I have a sony T.v and HD looks (almost) as good as 4 K from dtv.. When i put on the 4 k channels it's jaw dropping from DTV or a bluray disc. not only the quality of the t.v. matters but also the source driving it. I also invested in a high end BD player as well.. I watched a few shows on FETV that was filmed in the 70's i'll be honest they looked like crap. But it was how they were filmed and mastered back then. The tv did it's best upscaling it as it did a good job!!! As it smoothed out the show the best that it could..
Maybe the the t.v. is to big for the room it's in
. Ive seen people run out and buy 100 inch screens and put them in small rooms..Then they complain the PQ sucks...
I would love to see any provider sending an uncompressed signal. Though if that happened the content owners would have a public hanging
Uncompressed signals don't even exist at the camera level as I pointed out above.
Nobody (satellite, cable or fiber) has the bandwidth to send an uncompressed signal.
That kind of fiber can be stupid expensive to implement at this level. With HDR and WCG, we may be talking upwards of 20Gbps.
There's really no point given that lossless compression brings that number way down.
Seen a 4k demo in a comcast store back east about 7 months ago. Ide be embarrassed to offer it as it was macro blocking all over the place.. dtv wins there to!!! Can you imagine how many channels a cable Co would have to drop just for one 4k channel??
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
