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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I read the title as “Anyone else disenchanted with HIV?” :eek:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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: :rolleyes:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
