Directv now issuing out right lies about HDLITE

[vurbano]

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5848676#post5848676

Thank you for writing. HD formats are 1080i and 720p. For the best picture possible, the receiver or TV should be set to an HD format. HD allows for vertical lines of resolution up to 1080. High Definition content has between 720 and 1080 vertical lines of resolution. First, a show must be created in HD format. DIRECTV then delivers the show in the same quality to our HD customers.
For High Definition channels like ESPN or Discovery, DIRECTV provides a turn-around service. This means we receive and transmit the content without decompressing and compressing content. The resolution provided to you is exactly the same as the resolution transmitted to DIRECTV by the program providers. This ensures that you get the best quality image. How you see the HD content is determined by the setting on your HD receiver or TV. 1080i is Interlaced HD and 720p is Progressive HD. These formats are best for most HD programming.

As far as which is better, 1080i or 720p, this is a personal preference, but consider the following. 1080i is very sharp. It has more detail than 720p. 1080i is so sharp because most programs are shot in 1080p, or with a 35-mm camera that converts to 1080p. The 1080p format converts well to 1080i. However, sometimes 1080i looks "soft" (less sharp). This depends on the broadcaster, particular program, or how the image was upconverted. 720p may look better than 1080i, especially for live broadcasts or fast action. In fast action (like sports), the 2 sets of odd/even lines in 1080i may be out of sync, so some detail is lost if using 1080i. In this case, 720p is better. This is why sports channels are often broadcast in 720p.

I hope this information is helpful.

Sincerely,

Ashley
DIRECTV Customer Service

 

[charper1]

This is not directed at you V, but at the whole debate in general.

I don't claim to have the scientific equipment or "1st hand" knowledge of this debate, but I have read most of the hearsay evidence, and at this point I won't discredit their now official statement until someone can post actual documented proof, from legitimate testing gear that they captured that shows otherwise. Not more of someone's word of mouth calculations from some home-brew testing gear. At least this is now an official statement from DirecTV that may well be true after days worth of transponder movement, I don't know, but now some tester has a clear official target provided by DirecTV to can come up with the legal goods to prove them wrong. If you do, please post it here for all to see.

 

[calypsocowboy]

Not to stroke the fire but does it need to show full resolution to be called HD or does HD just dictate the number of vertical lines or resolution, for example there are a number of HD plasmas which are only 1024 x 768, clearly not enough horizontal pixels but enough vertical ones.

 

[damaged]

Strictly speaking, the definition of high-definition is:
Main Entry: high-definition
Function: adjective: being or relating to a television system that has twice as many scan lines per frame as a conventional system, a proportionally sharper image, and a wide-screen format.

 

[charper1]

Some added info:

1080/24P: Refers to an internationally standardized High Definition production format (ITU BT 709) having a digital sampling structure of 1920 (H) x 1080 (V) and operating at 24-frames per second progressively scanned. Often used to loosely describe a system that operates at 23.976P as well.

1080/60i: Refers to a standardized High Definition production format (SMPTE 274M and ITU 709) having a digital sampling structure of 1920 (H) x 1080 (V) and operating in interlaced scan mode at 60 fields per second. Often used to loosely describe a system that operates at 59.94i as well.

1280x720: Refers to a high definition digital sampling structure of 1280 horizontally and 720 vertically. All 1280x720 images are progressively scanned (720P).

16x9: The standardized aspect ratio of HDTV and Widescreen SDTV – having a width of 16 units and a height of 9 units. Also see Aspect Ratio- Picture, 1.78

1.78: The ratio of the horizontal size of a screen to its vertical size as 1.78 units wide to 1.0 units high. This ratio is the most standardized aspect ratio of HDTV and Widescreen SDTV. Also known as 16x9. Also see Aspect Ratio- Picture

1.85: The ratio of the horizontal size of a screen to its vertical size as 1.85 units wide to 1.0 units high. This ratio is the most common screen ratio for motion pictures. Also see Aspect Ratio- Picture

1920x1080: Refers to a digital sampling structure of 1920 horizontally and 1080 vertically. 1920x1080 images can be scanned either interlaced (1080i) or progressively (1080P).

2k: Resolution defined as 2,048 pixels wide by 1,556 high. Also the name of a color enhancement system made by DaVinci Systems ( www.davsys.com ) that processes Standard Definition, High Definition, and high resolution images.

22:11:11 Defines high definition video signals, where the luminance (Y) is sampled at 74.25 MHz and the color difference samples (R-Y,B-Y) channels are each sampled at 37.125 MHz. Note that it has become commonplace to denote HDTV Y,R-Y,B-Y also as 4:2:2. While technically incorrect, it is popularly used in a great deal of published literature.

22:22:22 Denotes a high definition system where all signals (R,G,B) are sampled at 74.25 MHz. Note that it has become commonplace to denote HDTV RGB also as 4:4:4. While technically incorrect, it is popularly used in a great deal of published literature.

 

[vurbano]

"The resolution provided to you is exactly the same as the resolution transmitted to DIRECTV by the program providers." Truth or Lie?

 

[lee espinoza]

This was by a CSR, You know some do not know sh*t about sh*t

 

[vurbano]

This was by a CSR, You know some do not know sh*t about sh*t

Yes but when it is put in writing it becomes a "Directv" statement in writing by a Directv representative. Someone should be terminated. IMO.

 

[vurbano]

This is not directed at you V, but at the whole debate in general.

I don't claim to have the scientific equipment or "1st hand" knowledge of this debate, but I have read most of the hearsay evidence, and at this point I won't discredit their now official statement until someone can post actual documented proof, from legitimate testing gear that they captured that shows otherwise. Not more of someone's word of mouth calculations from some home-brew testing gear. At least this is now an official statement from DirecTV that may well be true after days worth of transponder movement, I don't know, but now some tester has a clear official target provided by DirecTV to can come up with the legal goods to prove them wrong. If you do, please post it here for all to see.

Youve got to be kidding. Their 1280x1080i resolutions were out in the open when the HD DVR backdoor codes were active. When the cat was let out of the bag they deleted them and removed all of the technical jargon on resolution from their website to cover their ass. The PQ and transponder assignments have not changed since. Unless they did this morning. Marc Cuban himself has verified that D* is downrezzing his channel in statements on AVS forum. You still need more proof?

 

[Chado]

That statement is paraphrased from the HD TIVO user guide as well. I think that is where I read it.

Who cares? It looks better than SD and I can be patient until it gets better. Why get so upset about it? Move on....

 

[vurbano]

That statement is paraphrased from the HD TIVO user guide as well. I think that is where I read it.

Who cares? It looks better than SD and I can be patient until it gets better. Why get so upset about it? Move on....

I was sharing the same philosophy but if D* refuses to acknowledge a PQ problem then, IMO there may be no fixing it. And many people have a lot of money invested in their equipment.

 

[Neutron]

I hope that the new satellites plus the MPEG-4 transition will help solve this.

 

[sampatterson]

The bad thing is that they are possibly down-rezzing, AND recompressing which not only gets rid of some of the resolution (obviously) but can put in more (re)encoding artifacts.

 

[tdillon]

I think that too many people are viewing MPEG4 as the solution to the bandwidth issue. It won't be. MPEG4 allows for MORE COMPRESSION of signal, which does NOT equate to better picture quality. Yes, the compression algorithms appear to many as being better than MPEG2, but in the end it is still a huge compromise of signal quality.

 

[Chado]

I was sharing the same philosophy but if D* refuses to acknowledge a PQ problem then, IMO there may be no fixing it. And many people have a lot of money invested in their equipment.

I was referring more to your "Someone Should Be Terminmated Statement". That was a bit drastic, IMHO. Especially when the verbage is in the user manual.

 

[vurbano]

I think that too many people are viewing MPEG4 as the solution to the bandwidth issue. It won't be. MPEG4 allows for MORE COMPRESSION of signal, which does NOT equate to better picture quality. Yes, the compression algorithms appear to many as being better than MPEG2, but in the end it is still a huge compromise of signal quality.

Very wise statement.

 

[pradike]

I was referring more to your "Someone Should Be Terminmated Statement". That was a bit drastic, IMHO. Especially when the verbage is in the user manual.

Just another in the continuing saga of D*TV bashing. Same old same old. This gentleman clearly has a major anger issue, based on the reams of "the sky is falling" posts all over the place. I bet that vurbano is actually a pretty good guy, but this subject clearly sets him off like the 4th of July.

MPEG4 allows for MORE COMPRESSION of signal, which does NOT equate to better picture quality. Yes, the compression algorithms appear to many as being better than MPEG2, but in the end it is still a huge compromise of signal quality.

Since no one has confirmed knowledge of how MPEG4 will be used or how the new sats will distribute their bandwidth (which will be alot more bandwidth), any speculation as to the D*TV HD viewing after Spaceway 2 is up and running is pure guesswork. We'll all have to just wait and see.

 

[Pete In Plano]

I had Comcast HD and it looked much worse than ANY HD Lite that D* is using now. And the SD is much better on D*. So you could be watching much worse!!

 

[sateck01]

one point guys,

you want "perfect digital signals" OTA, by all means buy an antenna and install and aim it yourself.

if you want the convience of having it all on the bird, wait 6 months and i think directv will shock you

but untill 2009 SD pays the bills and generates the profits, they will be catered to , for the time being.

one more thing you are never, in my opine, getting full rez from any satcaster, including voom. oh, sorry to walk on the dead.

ya gotta give and take, there is only so much space up there.

 

[Pete In Plano]

one point guys,

you want "perfect digital signals" OTA, by all means buy an antenna and install and aim it yourself.

if you want the convience of having it all on the bird, wait 6 months and i think directv will shock you

but untill 2009 SD pays the bills and generates the profits, they will be catered to , for the time being.

one more thing you are never, in my opine, getting full rez from any satcaster, including voom. oh, sorry to walk on the dead.

ya gotta give and take, there is only so much space up there.

I agree with you!! I think that D* is spending billions on new satellites to give us a great "WOW" in the near future. They will make HD a househould item, making HD the norm instead of the fringe. Once the programming is available, more people will buy HD sets, and the changeover of broadcast TV can then take place smoothly and we will be fully in the HD age. Now I see HD sets for $450 in Walmart, our time has come!!!!