A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

New technologies?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 11th 18, 02:29 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
charles[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 699
Default New technologies?

In article , R. Mark
Clayton wrote:
I am fortunate to have above average acuity, but if you can't easily tell
SD from HD at 3.5m from a 42" screen, then I would seriously suggest an
eye test.


in 1990, I was demonstrating live HDtv at Wimbledon on a large screen
Trinitron. You could see the mesh in the net on the picture that was taken
from behind the server showing the whole court. People wouldn't believe it
was television.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
Ads
  #22  
Old February 11th 18, 02:59 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,448
Default New technologies?

On 11/02/2018 15:25, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
I am fortunate to have above average acuity,


Did you have a litmus test?

Bill
  #23  
Old February 11th 18, 03:01 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,448
Default New technologies?

On 11/02/2018 15:29, charles wrote:
In article , R. Mark
Clayton wrote:
I am fortunate to have above average acuity, but if you can't easily tell
SD from HD at 3.5m from a 42" screen, then I would seriously suggest an
eye test.


in 1990, I was demonstrating live HDtv at Wimbledon on a large screen
Trinitron. You could see the mesh in the net on the picture that was taken
from behind the server showing the whole court. People wouldn't believe it
was television.

Yes, HD took your breath away in the early days. Live HD from a top
class CCTV camera still seems staggeringly good to me.

Remember the C-mac demos by the IBI? That was impressive at the time as
well.

Bill
  #24  
Old February 11th 18, 06:53 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 649
Default New technologies?

On Sunday, 11 February 2018 15:59:25 UTC, wrote:
On 11/02/2018 15:25, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
I am fortunate to have above average acuity,


Did you have a litmus test?

Bill


No an NHS Biobank eye test
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_acuity
  #25  
Old February 11th 18, 07:04 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 649
Default New technologies?

On Sunday, 11 February 2018 15:29:11 UTC, charles wrote:
In article , R. Mark
Clayton wrote:
I am fortunate to have above average acuity, but if you can't easily tell
SD from HD at 3.5m from a 42" screen, then I would seriously suggest an
eye test.


in 1990, I was demonstrating live HDtv at Wimbledon on a large screen
Trinitron. You could see the mesh in the net on the picture that was taken
from behind the server showing the whole court. People wouldn't believe it
was television.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England


Yes before I got a 4k monitor (in 2014 - now 2) I used Iiyama [Trinton] CRT ones. The first bought ~1996 would do 1,600 X 1,200 at 60Hz, and the second bought 2004 theoretically 2048 X 1,536, but at that resolution the pixels were smaller than the phosphor dots / bar, so the best result was 1,600 X 1,200 at 85Hz. It had one of the flat screens, but this was achieved with very thick glass and the actual inside surface was still somewhat curved. This gave a 3,200 X 1,200 desk top with a two port video card.

Resolution was good (but well shy of 4k) and colour rendition possibly slightly better than flat screen [non HDR].

Also ~1996 I had D[2]-MAC decoder and when a wide screen image was fed from it into a 4:3 Philips TV in RGB, it produced a small, but stunningly high quality letter box image that was almost photographic quality compared to [OK] PAL.
  #26  
Old February 11th 18, 09:09 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Alan White[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 95
Default New technologies?

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:29:13 +0000 (GMT), charles
wrote:

in 1990, I was demonstrating live HDtv at Wimbledon on a large screen
Trinitron. You could see the mesh in the net on the picture that was taken
from behind the server showing the whole court. People wouldn't believe it
was television.


If they'd not reduced the bit rate, it would be like that now.

--
Alan White
Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent.
In Helensburgh, Scotland.
Weather:- http://windycroft.co.uk/weather
  #27  
Old February 12th 18, 03:21 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,448
Default New technologies?

On 11/02/2018 22:09, Alan White wrote:
On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:29:13 +0000 (GMT), charles
wrote:

in 1990, I was demonstrating live HDtv at Wimbledon on a large screen
Trinitron. You could see the mesh in the net on the picture that was taken
from behind the server showing the whole court. People wouldn't believe it
was television.


If they'd not reduced the bit rate, it would be like that now.


Hence CCTV is better.

Bill
  #28  
Old February 12th 18, 08:33 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
tim...[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 619
Default New technologies?



"R. Mark Clayton" wrote in message
...
I am fortunate to have above average acuity, but if you can't easily tell
SD from HD at 3.5m from a 42" screen, then I would seriously suggest an
eye test.


Wearing my current prescription lenses

There was a minor difference in that it was easier to read the title of a
book on the shelf behind the person being interviewed.

But in the moving part of the picture there was no discernable difference

IMHO

there was in the sound level though

tim



  #29  
Old February 12th 18, 09:56 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 649
Default New technologies?

On Monday, 12 February 2018 09:34:41 UTC, tim... wrote:
"R. Mark Clayton" wrote in message
...
I am fortunate to have above average acuity, but if you can't easily tell
SD from HD at 3.5m from a 42" screen, then I would seriously suggest an
eye test.


Wearing my current prescription lenses

There was a minor difference in that it was easier to read the title of a
book on the shelf behind the person being interviewed.

But in the moving part of the picture there was no discernable difference

IMHO

there was in the sound level though

tim


HD is better on satellite due to the higher bit rate. Full HD (1080i) is obvious at that sort of range - is your TV perhaps only HD ready (720p)?
  #30  
Old February 12th 18, 11:37 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,246
Default New technologies?

On Mon, 12 Feb 2018 09:33:31 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:

I am fortunate to have above average acuity, but if you can't easily tell
SD from HD at 3.5m from a 42" screen, then I would seriously suggest an
eye test.


Wearing my current prescription lenses

There was a minor difference in that it was easier to read the title of a
book on the shelf behind the person being interviewed.

But in the moving part of the picture there was no discernable difference


Possibly not quite what you were referring to, but I often see shots
where the books on the shelf in the background are easy to read
because they're the only bit of the scene actually in focus, the
foreground person being slightly soft.

If I had to guess a reason for this, I'd suggest too much reliance on
automatics and a lack of understanding of a) basic optics, and b) how
the equipment works.

Rod.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2018 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.