Is blu ray significantly better than hdtv broadcasts (directv)?

[swbsam]

I'm wondering if it's worth getting a blu ray player for my 42" tvs (1080p and another one is 720p)... Is the quality significantly better than say HBO-HD movies? The thing is that, while HDTV channels are vastly superior than SD channels, I'm not seeing the same leap from hdtv broadcasts to upscaled DVD (using a fairly good dvd player)....

I've also purchased some hd movies from xbox marketplace and these look a lot like well mastered, upscaled dvd footage - is the leap from bluray really worth it in my case? i'm thinking 42" is just too small to matter

AV'd

ATOT Moderator ElFenix

 

[geno]

I would assume yes, since broadcast video is usually much more compressed than anything in disc format.

 

[amdhunter]

Imagine HDTV without the artifacting, and a bit sharper and you have blu-ray.
Some blu-rays are definitely top notch though, like Ratatoulie or Wall-e

 

[KeithTalent]

It really depends from my experience, but in general Blu-ray does look better, though on a 42" screen, depending on how close/far you sit, may not show the true difference. I've found HDNet to have the closest picture to Blu-ray as far as broadcast HD goes, they put on some amazing stuff.

Oh and http://forums.anandtech.com/ca...tid=67&flcache=8767705

KT

 

[Throckmorton]

Try Apple TV... The unit is like $200 and movies cost $4 to rent (SD ones are $3). I can't distinguish between Apple TV and Blu Ray quality.

 

[bobdole369]

Over the Air HDTV (with rabbit ears) is significantly "better" than DirecTV.

DirecTV uses about 30% lower data rate in the MPEG-2 stream at 720p than the full spec calls for.

Comcast uses even less bitrate than that but also have some stations in 1080i (which is worse than 720p). Comcast also compresses the "local" stations so you are better off switching to rabbit ears to watch football on local stations/news.

Blu-Ray is typically 1080p - the ultimate in resolution right now.

Yes - Blu-ray wins the resolution war. I've been schooled about DVD up-converts - apparently thats a myth and the studios resample the film to put movies on Blu-Ray so it really is better than a DVD of the same movie.



"I can't distinguish between Apple TV and Blu Ray quality."

Perhaps you need glasses, or a better IQ TV? It's easy to see how blocky AppleTV is.
AppleTV is the worst resolution of them all - it puts out a 720p or 1080i signal, but the movies/podcasts etc, are upconverted from dvd - 1/4 1080p, unless purchased, then 720p is avail.

http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html

MPEG-4 at 720 by 432 (DVD resolution)
h.264 at 960 by 540 (1/4 1080p)

Purchased iTunes content at 720p.



"I'm not seeing the same leap from hdtv broadcasts to upscaled DVD"

And your not going to see much.

normal TV is 480i - or 240 real lines of resolution with noise.

DVDs are 480p (or at least are recorded as such) and have 480 real lines of resolution. Its a HUGE jump - 4x the resolution.

with 480 lines - its not too hard to interpolate and get the DVD up to 720p or higher and have it look spectacular.

direcTV is lower than broadcast quality 720p - (that is 720p with a reduced bitrate) - so its going to look a bit better than upconverted DVD quality.

BLu-Ray is 1080p - which is only 19mb-ish - compared to 720p's 13-16mb-ish isn't all that different. You pretty much need a high-end 60" set and to sit 10-15 feet from the set to really get 1080p's effect fully.


As Torpid intimated below - DirecTV is mostly MPEG-4 stuff now which is better at a lower bitrate than MPEG-2, I'm behind the times

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: bobdole369
Over the Air HDTV (with rabbit ears) is significantly "better" than DirecTV.

DirecTV uses about 30% lower data rate in the MPEG-2 stream at 720p than the full spec calls for.

Aren't most people on MPEG-4 by now?

I just got dish with MPEG-4 service and I find the quality to be better than my local cable company by a noticeable margin. Less pixelation somehow. OTA is slightly better still but depending on the station and your antenna it might not be worth it.

Blu-Ray is only marginally better than an upconverted DVD for some movies, and significantly better for others. It really depends on the film. The big difference will be vibrant colors, IMO. vs cable the big difference is no pixelation during certain scenes of high movement and action.

 

[scott916]

My dad has DirecTV on his tv, and I'd say Blu-Ray is MUCH better looking in most cases. Although his set is huge at 73". YMMV.

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: geno
I would assume yes, since broadcast video is usually much more compressed than anything in disc format.

You must remember that this is mostly Cable and Satellite... if you're going Over the Air (commonly referred to as OTA) HD content, it actually looks really good. Most people that have HD channels via cable or satellite are usually surprised at how good the picture quality is and it only required a $30 one time charge (for the antenna).

 

[FlashG]

How does uverse compair?

 

[CRXican]

I want BR but still can't make myself do it.

I have a 42" 720p set.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Aikouka

Originally posted by: geno
I would assume yes, since broadcast video is usually much more compressed than anything in disc format.

You must remember that this is mostly Cable and Satellite... if you're going Over the Air (commonly referred to as OTA) HD content, it actually looks really good. Most people that have HD channels via cable or satellite are usually surprised at how good the picture quality is and it only required a $30 one time charge (for the antenna).

My local stations must suck then because it only looks marginally better here, and still there are tons of times when it pixelates even OTA.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Might be a dumb question, but if HDNET can look so good then why dont all HD channels look as well as it does.

 

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: FlashG
How does uverse compair?

My parents have Uverse, and it is one of the worst examples of 'HD' there is.

 

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: WaTaGuMp
Might be a dumb question, but if HDNET can look so good then why dont all HD channels look as well as it does.

Others channels compress their video more.

 

[s44]

Originally posted by: amdhunter
Imagine HDTV without the artifacting, and a bit sharper and you have blu-ray.

Yep, and much better sound.

 

[rdp6]

I have been considering getting an HD package with Dish Network but am concerned about being disappointed with PQ. I have a 52" 1080p LCD at 8' viewing distance, and OTA 1080i looks awesome except when it artifacts (like every dive during the Olympics; for reference my NBC station has 1x1080i + 1x4080i for its broadcast).

When HD shows are on, OTA Fox and ABC look a bit less defined whereas CBS & NBC are razor sharp.

Can anyone vouch for Dish's HD PQ? I'd like to stay with Dish if they will give me an HD-only package. (I know I'd have to convince them as a current subscriber.)

Thanks,

Bob

/threadjack

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: WaTaGuMp
Might be a dumb question, but if HDNET can look so good then why dont all HD channels look as well as it does.

Others channels compress their video more.

I know that part but WHY, is this about money, trying to keep profits up etc etc? To me it doesnt make sense, you pay for extra channels like HBO etc when HDNET is included in the package.

 

[Shawn]

limited bandwidth

 

[manimal]

Uverse has less compression than cable or sat to my eyes. I am waiting for them to add uverse in my area but at my friends place on his pioneer 50 inch there was a noticeable difference going from direct tv to uverse.

 

[FlashG]

Originally posted by: manimal
Uverse has less compression than cable or sat to my eyes. I am waiting for them to add uverse in my area but at my friends place on his pioneer 50 inch there was a noticeable difference going from direct tv to uverse.

I have a 55 inch Sony but it's only 1080i. Do you think that I will see any improvement with either blue ray or uverse?

 

[GoSharks]

Significantly better? Probably only in situations where the is a lot of movement - ie the overhead bird flock scene in Planet Earth, water flowing (waves), or fire movement. The extra bitrate tremendously helps in then, but those aren't exactly common.

 

[Dman877]

Originally posted by: rdp6
I have been considering getting an HD package with Dish Network but am concerned about being disappointed with PQ. I have a 52" 1080p LCD at 8' viewing distance, and OTA 1080i looks awesome except when it artifacts (like every dive during the Olympics; for reference my NBC station has 1x1080i + 1x4080i for its broadcast).

When HD shows are on, OTA Fox and ABC look a bit less defined whereas CBS & NBC are razor sharp.

Can anyone vouch for Dish's HD PQ? I'd like to stay with Dish if they will give me an HD-only package. (I know I'd have to convince them as a current subscriber.)

Thanks,

Bob

/threadjack

That's becuase ABC and Fox broadcast in 720p (less definition but no motion-blur) and CBS and NBC broadcast in 1080i (sharper image, more prone to motion artifacts and interlacing).

If the Olympics had been on Fox or ABC seen any pixelation during diving.

AFAIK, the feed over cable (and presumably satellite providers as well) is the same as it is OTA, but compressed. We have comcast digital cable and ABC/FOX are still in 720p while CBS/NBC are in 1080i.

 

[Lurknomore]

OTA, cable and satellite may have lower bitrate and more artifacting, but one thing that I do like is that on some high quality broadcasts, at least they use the ENTIRE screen, all 16x9. I'm sick of these 2.35 : 1 anamorphic movies- where does all the "missing" info from the top and bottom go? Are they lost, or "compressed" into the viewable area so that no info is missing. A 1080p picture is now effectively 700 or so lines because we get to see the original version- fine, but what was the point of 16x9 in the first place if pretty much anything that comes out now is wide widescreen? I'd rather use all the vertical resolution, and lose the bits on the right and the left.

 

[murphy55d]

Is Blu-Ray worth it on a 32" 720p/1080i TV?

Currently have 2 upconverting DVD players, a Philips and my Xbox 360. (using hdmi, so it does upconvert)