General Forum

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

vikinger — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:28:06 GMT

Emerging from Lime Street Station, Liverpool, you are now faced by a curvy screen that must be 10m high and 50 to 100m long. It is showing ads and movie clips etc. The screen is so bright, even in full sunlight, that drivers find it distracting and dazzling.

Great HD images when viewed from 100m, but just a tad pixelated close-up. I just marvel at how technology keeps striding on: this screen appeared quite quickly and seems almost to be some sort of flexible material stretched over a frame following the street front curve with a top to bottom curve as well. Maybe B&O will bring out a rolled up stretchable screen for full wall images at some point (but you might need to stand up the garden to take in the full view!)

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

Flappo The Grate — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:21:43 GMT

yep , 50 inch would show the diff.

i was alluding to the supposed hd ts that are c. 32-37 ie; pointless

i have a 40 incher and it's just not big enough imo

the pioneer is a superb tv , wish i had one :)

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

Beology — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:15:30 GMT

Absolutely agree.

BD on my 50" Pioneer final generation TV (KRP-500M) is phenomenal. DVD is OK but there is a clear light years difference between the two.

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

DoubleU — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:17:16 GMT

The LOTR serie on DVD has the highest bitrate possible. 3 hours are spread over 2 dvds. Very acceptable on SD, bad example to compare.

In general, normal DVD vs BR, the pq is so obvious, even on a 32 inch. It is like comparing VHS vs DVD. Period!

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

elephant — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:32:01 GMT

moxxey:

elephant:

I could discern worthwhile differences in scenes 2, 3, 6, 8 and 9 but the rest were "so what?"

Sure, but that's on a computer monitor. Ramp that up to a 55 or 60" TV and you'd see a much bigger difference. SD would become more pixelated.

sorry :) that was the point I was trying to make, I should be less cryptic

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

The_Beonic_Man — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:35:55 GMT

Well I spent some time looking at one of the latest Samsung LED Tvs today, 40" and 50" screens and I have to say the picture quality was amazing, especially when playing HD content. They are also 200hz sets which shows. I think the BV10-40 will be a cracking picture based on what I saw today. It really is so difficult to keep up with technologies, they just change so quickly.

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

cooldude — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:26:16 GMT

There is a huge difference between Sd and HD. No question about it. I have a 42" pioneer Kuro plasma which is truly superb both in HD and SD.
Though the SD is definitely lacking in resolution, it's still very watchable. The HD from my BD player really makes this tv shine.

When we are starting to move from 40" screens to 50+" screens, the difference will be more and more noticeable. Those bigger screen will no longer be able to display SD images to a very satisfying level I am sure (haven't seen one yet that would do it for me....)

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

Erik-nl — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:09:44 GMT

No real visible difference - only sound

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

moxxey — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:56:07 GMT

elephant:

I could discern worthwhile differences in scenes 2, 3, 6, 8 and 9 but the rest were "so what?"

Sure, but that's on a computer monitor. Ramp that up to a 55 or 60" TV and you'd see a much bigger difference. SD would become more pixelated.

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

elephant — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 06:24:09 GMT

I could discern worthwhile differences in scenes 2, 3, 6, 8 and 9 but the rest were "so what?"

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

Flappo The Grate — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:41:53 GMT

you could get a similar effect by turning up the sharpness on your telly

imo hd is vastly overrated unless you have a BIG screen

Re: Standard Definition versus High Definition

vikinger — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:17:10 GMT

Interesting! But at full screen the SD images look a bit fuzzy, and the computer viewing distance is not comparable with a normal TV viewing distance. Is this more applicable to just viewing on a PC????? (Not sure what conclusions to draw!)

Standard Definition versus High Definition

seethroughyou — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:00:05 GMT

an impressive site.

roll your mouse over the images to go into High Defintion.

http://www.cornbread.org/FOTRCompare/index.html