Anyone else disenchanted with HDTV?

[kunilou]

It's been a year now since we got a 19" hi-def TV as an after-Thanksgiving "doorbuster" special. We ran right home and hooked it up to a Dolby 5.1 stereo system and settled back to watch.

And it's true we could see individual blades of grass on a football field, and see the pores on the faces of the news anchors. But since then, it's mostly been Meh.

Most of what we've seen doesn't look that much better in hi-def than it does in standard analog. And given the frequent pixellation on the screen and audio hiccups that seem to go hand-in-hand with digital TV, I find myself just watching the analog channel of programming almost all the time now.

Is anyone else less than impressed? I suppose it might be different if I had a giant screen TV, but I don't really have room to put a seven-foot TV anywhere.

[Quasimodem]

You would have to post this during the same week I got my 42" inch Sharp HD, wouldn't you?

Kidding, but since I haven't had time to adjust all my settings, i'll reserve my answer till then.

Maybe a bigger screen?

Q

[What Exit?]

I really love both my 37" LCD panels. I rarely watch std channels anymore except for Comedy Channel. They are especially good with DVDs and we use Netflix pretty regularly. Even the DVD of the old Get Smart show looks better in HD. They did a good job cleaning it up.

[Asimovian]

I have to admit my first reaction to the OP's post is, "You're judging based on a 19-inch screen?" which I realize isn't quite fair. At the same time, I just wouldn't think you'd get the sense of cinematic beauty from HD movies or (if you're into it) sports on such a small screen.

We're about three months into our HD experience (a 42" like Quasimodem), and while I wish we had gotten a 120Hz, we're both quite happy with it. I feel that HDTV is hit-and-miss. From day one, there were certain programs that really did nothing for me, and some that amazed me. And I still feel the same way now.

[Szlater]

Originally Posted by kunilou

It's been a year now since we got a 19" hi-def TV as an after-Thanksgiving "doorbuster" special. We ran right home and hooked it up to a Dolby 5.1 stereo system and settled back to watch.

And it's true we could see individual blades of grass on a football field, and see the pores on the faces of the news anchors. But since then, it's mostly been Meh.

Part of the problem is with the size of the screen.

Screen size vs viewing distance

To make the most of a 19" screen you would have to sit less than 5 feet from it, much more than 5 feet and you won't notice much difference from standard definition.

[kunilou]

Originally Posted by Szlater

Part of the problem is with the size of the screen.

Screen size vs viewing distance

To make the most of a 19" screen you would have to sit less than 5 feet from it, much more than 5 feet and you won't notice much difference from standard definition.

It's a small room, and most of the time I am just about 5 feet from the TV.

But I get your point. Perhaps if I were more...overwhelmed... like in a movie theater, I'd be more impressed.

[Tangent]

You've got to consider screen size, television quality, and signal quality.

Screen size is obvious--the bigger it is, the more difference you'll notice between HD and SD. 19" is tiny for an HDTV. I've got a large (65 inch) HDTV and the difference in the picture between HD channels and SD channels is huge.

Things like pixellation and audio problems could be related to your make/model of television (and your surround system)--they are not necessarily a problem with all HD sets. Not surpisingly, some brands have a better reputation than others when it comes to picture quality and response times.

Finally, not all HD signals are created equal. Some cable or satellite providers compress their HD channels more. And some stations often seem to broadcast SD quality video resized to 16:9 on their HD channel.

There are still some issues to be worked out by cable providers and by television set makers. But I can say without a doubt that a good HD signal on my HD set looks AMAZING! Luckily, my provider added a bunch of additional HD channels recently. I can hardly stand to watch SD channels anymore--they look pretty awful in comparison. I think anyone disenchanted with HDTV just doesn't have a good HDTV setup.

[GuanoLad]

I love digital TV.

But HD has never interested me.

[Vox Imperatoris]

I read the title as "Anyone else disenchanted with HIV?"

But I don't have HDTV, and I've never really felt "enchanted" with it in the first place. The normal resolution is fine for me, although I was impressed by one of those really fancy (read: expensive) sets I saw at the store one time, but I can't recall the name of it.

Valete,
Vox Imperatoris

[EvilHamsterOnCrack]

I have a 42" as well... completely worth it. Especially for sports. I can't watch sports in SD anymore... it just bothers me. I have had my TV since August, and am still amazed at how crisp the quality is.

[Dinsdale]

HD and digital mean nothing to me. My good old Sony trinitron tube was plenty fine for all of my TV viewing wants/needs. I'm just not so interested in anything I watch on TV that I care about the improved picture quality. The only sport I regularly watch on TV is golf.

I value simplicity of use far more than improved picture quality. I derive no benefit/enjoyment from programming my set/remote to optimize viewing of various programs/media.

Our HD flatscreen is 40".

[Kinthalis]

I loathe SD content now a days. I will always opt for the HD version of a channel if given the choice.

It's like going outside without my glasses, then putting them on. :: cue orchestral music::

[Nars Glinley]

Recent thread.

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by kunilou

It's a small room, and most of the time I am just about 5 feet from the TV.

But I get your point. Perhaps if I were more...overwhelmed... like in a movie theater, I'd be more impressed.

I've withheld buying hi-def for the reason you listed. If the scene pixilates for any reason it defeats the purpose of HD. It also doesn't make Saturday Night live any funnier or improve the plot of movies. If I spend money on anything it will be a box to synchronize the picture to the voice. I find it really annoying that digital technology doesn’t automatically do this.

[Swallowed My Cellphone]

We got out HDTV to save space. We wanted something we could hang on the wall. That's it. We don't really care about all the high resolution stuff, and in fact I tried watching some show with Christian Slater and I was particularly distracted by his nose hair during once scene.

Me: "Wow, look at that nose hair."
Fianceephone: "It's mesmerizing."
Me: "I'm serious! Look at it! It's practically flapping off his face!"
Fianceephone:

[Fiddle Peghead]

Absolutely not disenchanted with HDTV. I have a 52" Hitachi Rear Projection TV that I love. And unlike LCDs or plasmas (maybe both, maybe one or the other, I don't really know the difference) there is no pixillation. I find the colors to be lifelike, that I could step right into the picture, unlike LCD/plasma, which a friend of mine described as having "candyland" colors. They seem very cartoon-like and unrealistic, which completely ruins the verisimilitude of whatever I'm watching.

Or, maybe I'm just jealous...

[MaxTheVool]

When people say they don't see any difference, or don't see what the big deal is about HD, that's one of those times where I am baffled by the fact that they are members of the same species as I am.

[Jack Batty]

I'm still enamored.

I've had HD for the last couple of years, and ever since my system expanded to enough channels to make it worth while, I've barely watched any regular stations. I'll still go to Comedy Central and some of the Discoveries and things like that that aren't on my HD list yet, but for the most part, I'm planted firmly in HD-ville.

(Edit: and of course, HBO only has 2 HD channels, so the rest of their stable of channels I don't get the pores)

In fact, ESPN2 I get in HD, but there's a glitch in my cable box that messes up that channel every once in a while. If I'm watching something on that channel, and it goes all kaflooey, I don't even bother going back to the normal version of the channel, I'll go to something else in HD.

I gotta have my pores and blades of grass.

[Swallowed My Cellphone]

Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead

I find the colors to be lifelike, that I could step right into the picture, unlike LCD/plasma, which a friend of mine described as having "candyland" colors. They seem very cartoon-like and unrealistic, which completely ruins the verisimilitude of whatever I'm watching.

If they find the colors of the set to be unrealistic, they should adjust their picture settings. When we first got ours, there were color and brightness issues we found distracting (I swear they upped the contrast so when you first turn it on after you buy it everything is SUPER-crisp so it looks radically different from a CRT and they expect this will make you "ooooh" and "aaaaah" more). It took two minutes to save our "custom" setting to one that we feel is optimal and best looks like the real world.

Originally Posted by MaxTheVool

When people say they don't see any difference, or don't see what the big deal is about HD, that's one of those times where I am baffled by the fact that they are members of the same species as I am.

Oh, we totally can see the difference, we just don't think it's a big deal. Yes, the picture is super sharp and we can see people's pores, but that has zero impact on whether or not we enjoy a DVD (we actually adjusted our setting to be less sharp due to distracting details like the aforementioned nose hair).

The number one reason for our purchase of a flat screen TV was to save space. We wanted a big picture, but not a monolithic TV set.

[corkboard]

Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead

Absolutely not disenchanted with HDTV. I have a 52" Hitachi Rear Projection TV that I love. And unlike LCDs or plasmas (maybe both, maybe one or the other, I don't really know the difference) there is no pixillation. I find the colors to be lifelike, that I could step right into the picture, unlike LCD/plasma, which a friend of mine described as having "candyland" colors. They seem very cartoon-like and unrealistic, which completely ruins the verisimilitude of whatever I'm watching.

Or, maybe I'm just jealous...

That might be because your friend's TV is still adjusted for the showroom. The TV has to have its display tweaked for in-home use, because often they leave the factory with the settings pumped up to catch the eye in the showroom. Without adjustment, the picture in the home will look terrible. Candyland colors is one of the complaints.

[MrFloppy]

I have had HD since the 2000 Olympics and never looked back. I am a huge football fan and most if not all of the games are now in HD. Channels like Discovery and History are now in HD and some of the content is breathtaking.

I too, loathe standard def broadcasts which look awful IMO.

[Asimovian]

I will say that while the normal movie star pores and such never bothered me, my favorite local channel was finally added to DishNetwork's HD lineup recently, and there are certain news anchor people that I never, EVER wanted to see in that kind of detail. It was kind of painfully shocking.

[shallora]

Purchased a 32-inch LCD Samsung HDTV last month and it's great!

We don't have cable. We don't have dish. Nothing but the airwaves. We get NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, CW (old WB), one independent, plus something like SIX different PBS stations. Plus each local news station broadcasts a second "24-hour weather channel" too.

Watching DVDs on it is fantastic.

I'm not impressed with all the stations (CBS and FOX leave a lot to be desired) but everything else is great.

[Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor]

HDTV has always been "meh" to me, no matter the screen size.

[torie]

I honestly can't tell the difference between HDTV and standard TV. Plus, I don't want to have to think this much about my TV. Some of the above posts were exhausting.

[Tangent]

If you can't tell the difference, then either you're doing it wrong or your eyesight isn't very good.

(And I don't have to think too much about it--I just watch tv like I always have. Only now it looks a lot better!)

[MaxTheVool]

Originally Posted by torie

I honestly can't tell the difference between HDTV and standard TV.

Really? Really really? In what context? I just find this statement so alien as to be unbelievable.

[Magiver]

Originally Posted by MaxTheVool

Really? Really really? In what context? I just find this statement so alien as to be unbelievable.

Well, some people aren't as impressed with nose hairs as they are with a picture that doesn't pixalate.

[Eats_Crayons]

Originally Posted by Magiver

Well, some people aren't as impressed with nose hairs as they are with a picture that doesn't pixalate.

Can someone explain this to me? My partner and I got an hi-def TV last month and we haven't seen any kind of pixelating. Is it something that happens in shows broadcast in HD? We don't subscribe to any kind of cable, but we do get HD broadcast shows through the antenna. In fact we get more stations now because the tuner is superior to our old set. When we first turned on the set, we had to adjust the contrast and some other functions because shows and DVDs looked grainy, but we haven't seen anything that looks like pixels since we got the settings to something we like.

My personal opinion is that the hi-def image is abnormally sharp, beyond what I would normally expect to see in real life, but I imagine that if I watched a SD set it would look muddy now that I'm used to the HD image quality. Of the things that are important to me when watching a movie, sharpness ranks around the least important.

[Tangent]

Pixellation can occur with any digital signal--not just HD. Back when I had standard-def digital satellite service (DirecTV) on a standard-def set, it was not uncommon to see some pixellation.

[Acid Lamp]

One thing that is weird for me is that everything looks like it was filmed with the same camera techniques they use for soap operas. What's up with that?

[torie]

Originally Posted by MaxTheVool

Really? Really really? In what context? I just find this statement so alien as to be unbelievable.

My friend's HD on the HD channels looked kind of blurry to me. They gave me a 20 minute dissertation on 1080 vs. the other number and i vs. p. The set needed to be tweaked, argued about, then the proper channels ordered and the correct device obtained from the cable company. Considering I have a real deficiency in the mechanical/electronic area, I can't see myself trying to go through that many hoops for a better screen. I only watch House and the VH1 reality shows anyway. (Shut up. )

The only time I really noticed a substantial difference was when I played Oblivion on a 60' high definition with HDMI. That was kind of cool. But other than that, I have never known or noticed anything unless I have been told it's HD. It just looks either slighty sharper or kind of blurry.

[msmith537]

Originally Posted by kunilou

It's been a year now since we got a 19" hi-def TV as an after-Thanksgiving "doorbuster" special. We ran right home and hooked it up to a Dolby 5.1 stereo system and settled back to watch.

Is anyone else less than impressed? I suppose it might be different if I had a giant screen TV, but I don't really have room to put a seven-foot TV anywhere.

No. But I went with a 50".

[SeaDragonTattoo]

The last person who told me she just switched to an HD tv and wasn't impressed, was diagnosed with cataracts about 2 months later. Get your eyes checked!

[ParentalAdvisory]

Originally Posted by MaxTheVool

Really? Really really? In what context? I just find this statement so alien as to be unbelievable.

This must be what colorblinded people had to deal with before color blindness was discovered. It is quite possible that what is percieved by you, may not be the same for everyone else. I assume most people can tell the difference with HD vs SD/Regular. For those that cannot tell any difference at all? Maybe their internal "CMOS" is different than yours. I would not be suprised if that was the case.

[Dinsdale]

Originally Posted by MaxTheVool

Really? Really really? In what context? I just find this statement so alien as to be unbelievable.

I think just about everyone could tell the difference between 2 sets side-by-side. Most likely even on a single set that is switched back and forth.

But I imagine there are a great many people like me to whom TV just isn't so important, that if you replaced their old TV with HD while they were sleeping they might notice it looked a little different, but after all, it is still just TV. Having HD would not change the enjoyment they derived from TV watching, or change their watching habits in any respect.

I think the same is true of many things. Stereo for example. The audiophile can point out things you can hear on his system that you can't hear on your clock radio - but if all you are using it for is background music...

[Swallowed My Cellphone]

Originally Posted by MaxTheVool

Really? Really really? In what context? I just find this statement so alien as to be unbelievable.

I would say it's possible if the only exposure you've had to HDTVs is in the stores. Wandering through Best Buy, we were amazed at how awful the picture quality was on the screens. Later at a Sony Store we saw the same sets but the picture was great, so we asked the guy. Best Buy had basically one signal source that was being spliced for 12-20 TV sets. The problem wasn't with the HDTV image, but rather the source signal was degraded to the point where it was going to look like shit no matter what set was feeding off of it. At the Sony Store, they had one Blue Ray for 4-8 sets.

If you only see the HDTVs in the stores, you may only be seeing the ones sucking on the same media teat and looking like poo.

[msmith537]

ALso, are you sure you are watching a show recorded in HD on an HD channel? If you are just watching an SD channel it will look like crap.


My GF sometimes complains that she can't tell the difference. That's probably because she's used to watching a TV 1/3 the size of the new one.

[Dolores Reborn]

We just got a new LG 52" LCD HD TV. I didn't notice much difference until my husband found out that our 5-yr-old cables were obsolete. He got HDMI cables and the picture is phenomenal!! I don't know much about this topic, but I am truly amazed at the picture quality.

[Hampshire]

My wife is one of those who doesn't care if it's in HD or not.
For Comcast the major networks have standard definition channels down in the 1-20 range, and their HD channels are in the 230-240 range. My wife is always watching the SD channels just because "I know the channel numbers".
She'll also DVR network shows on the SD channels because "they take up less space on the DVR" even though we have never went past 25% capacity.
Drives me nuts.
But when I observe how she watches TV she doesn't really "watch" it. She more listens to it, files her nails, and glances up once in a while. I tried explaining to her that she misses 75% of what's going on (e.g. The Office has so many visual gags and subtle gestures between characters) but she's stubborn and watches (listens) to TV like she wants to.

[kanicbird]

Isn't this how it always goes. The bigger better item that everyone must have becomes old news and sometimes the level of enjoyment actually is less then the older one.

Yes there is the WOW factor with a new HDTV (or whatever), but once that is gone it becomes the new normal, is the level of enjoyment really better with HDTV once the novelty has worn off? Is the enjoyment of watching the game the relationship between you and the TV or perhaps the socialization that goes with it, either directly (inviting friends over), or indirectly talking about it after. How important is HDTV in that aspect?

I have noticed this trend with the # of channels now available, and the more channels we get the more disatified most of us get with what's on TV.

[Szlater]

Originally Posted by kanicbird

I have noticed this trend with the # of channels now available, and the more channels we get the more disatified most of us get with what's on TV.

That's probably more a function of the dilution of quality that has happened as more channels became available. Certainly that's the case in the UK.

Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie wrote an excellent sketch on this:

Choice (Youtube, mildly NSFW).

[robardin]

Originally Posted by kunilou

Perhaps if I were more...overwhelmed... like in a movie theater, I'd be more impressed.

An overwhelming YES here.

First of all, I find the 16:9 aspect ratio much more natural than the 4:3 of a SDTV image, even over a relatively small 19" viewing area. So to me, even if you're not able to appreciate the increased clarity/resolution of an HD image, you're already winning in terms of being able to see, for example, more of the field in a football game, or when watching movies in their proper aspect ratio.

But yes, you will appreciate the difference more on a larger image. It's the way you can see details like non-blurry words on the sides of boxes in the background of a scene, and the lack of fuzzy or blocky edges due to digital interpolation and anti-aliasing when an SDTV image is "blown up" to a large size.

To get the best bang for the buck in big HD images, get a front-shooting projector. They go for under $1,000 now in 720p, and you can throw up a very bright 100" diagonal HD image on a screen or even a suitably painted wall that will blow away any floor-standing TV of similar cost or size -- plus you can easily put it away.

[Szlater]

Originally Posted by robardin

To get the best bang for the buck in big HD images, get a front-shooting projector. They go for under $1,000 now in 720p, and you can throw up a very bright 100" diagonal HD image on a screen or even a suitably painted wall that will blow away any floor-standing TV of similar cost or size -- plus you can easily put it away.

You do need a reasonably big and dark room to get the most out of a projector. You would also need to invest in audio gear, because AFAIK no projectors come with speakers (or at least speakers that you might actually want to listen to outside of a presentation in the office conference room).

[torie]

See? See? This is what I am talking about not wanting to think about it. I want a decently large screen, plug it in, play games, watch Rock Of Love.

Why can't it be that simple anymore!!??


Get off my lawn.

But I imagine there are a great many people like me to whom TV just isn't so important, that if you replaced their old TV with HD while they were sleeping they might notice it looked a little different, but after all, it is still just TV. Having HD would not change the enjoyment they derived from TV watching, or change their watching habits in any respect.

Yep, this is me. To a T.

[Rigamarole]

I still don't have an HDTV because like some here TV isn't very important to me, but I am a gamer (as well as movie-watcher), and am planning on getting an XBox 360 for Christmas. Does anyone know if the 360 is designed to look better in HD? Also (I should know this being interested in the film industry, but I don't) how many films are being shot in HD nowadays that it will make a difference in watching DVDs?

[Szlater]

Originally Posted by Rigamarole

I still don't have an HDTV because like some here TV isn't very important to me, but I am a gamer (as well as movie-watcher), and am planning on getting an XBox 360 for Christmas. Does anyone know if the 360 is designed to look better in HD? Also (I should know this being interested in the film industry, but I don't) how many films are being shot in HD nowadays that it will make a difference in watching DVDs?

Yes, I believe that the Xbox360 was designed with HDTV in mind. All films are capable of being encoded into HD for playback from a blueray disc, or an HD channel (although the quality will be downgraded for broadcast due to bandwidth limitations). Your standard DVDs, when played on a upconverting DVD player (or blueray player), also look considerably better on an HDTV than they do when played on normal DVD player onto a SDTV.

[Hi, Neighbor!]

Originally Posted by Rigamarole

I still don't have an HDTV because like some here TV isn't very important to me, but I am a gamer (as well as movie-watcher), and am planning on getting an XBox 360 for Christmas. Does anyone know if the 360 is designed to look better in HD? Also (I should know this being interested in the film industry, but I don't) how many films are being shot in HD nowadays that it will make a difference in watching DVDs?

Yes, those next-gen systems look great in HD. I have a PS3 and most of my games play in 720p (Fallout 3's max resolution, ugh), with some of the newer ones playing up to 1080i.

I bought a PS3 during the "format wars" between HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray discs. Luckily, Sony chose the right one and now I rent Blu-Rays off NetFlix for some great looking picture.

[robardin]

Originally Posted by Szlater

You do need a reasonably big and dark room to get the most out of a projector. You would also need to invest in audio gear, because AFAIK no projectors come with speakers (or at least speakers that you might actually want to listen to outside of a presentation in the office conference room).

Very true. Though many projectors are bright enough for viewing sports with a moderately dark room (where the lights are off where the image is projected, but lights may be on elsewhere in the room), for movie watching you should have as dark a room as possible. And you are also right on the audio aspect; I have had external 5.1 sound for so long I forgot about listening to the audio through TV speakers.

As for gaming in HD -- I personally would recommend NOT getting a giganto image for that. I did the projector thing to watch movies at home in as awesome a way as possible (with three small kids, I haven't been to a movie theater in 6 years), and for sports, but the one time I tried playing a video game in HD on the big screen it (a) looked awesome and (b) got me motion-sick in less than five minutes.

[HeyHomie]

Does HDTV significantly enhance (or detract from) the experience of watching p()rn?