Is HD all its cracked up to be?

[scaseman]

No disrespect, but I just want to watch TV sitting on my comfy sofa. I don't want to be sitting in certain angles, a certain distance from the TV, etc!! I have a top of the range 52 in Sony Bravia, which has been correctly installed and currently watching a film in HD and I still can't really tell the difference!!! Personal point and think HD is over hyped, so don't feel offended if I don't think it's awesome, amazing or outstanding!!

Have you considered you might possibly need an eye test. I have a 26" Sony Bravia which is five years old and I can see the difference.

[davies1977]

Went to opticians the other month and my eye sight was said to be excellent!!! Therefore, one doesn't need an eye test!!!! As I said in an earlier thread, it was just my opinion!! Not loosing any sleep...not shouting out of the window...I just don't see what all the fuss is about!!!! Even when I have gone to friends, who have HD, they even comment that they can't see the difference!!! Maybe, I should recommend an eye test to them!!!!!!!

[Wad_2002]

Hd is of a higher quality than SD. If you don't think it is, then perhaps you need to get a better TV. Football is clearly 3 times better than its SD equilvent, escipally on larger TV's such as 50"+.

The V+HD box does a excellent job of upscalling SD. Better than Sky HD's box.

I agree it is a personal opinion, all I can say is sport is much crisper picture in HD and I am talking about SKY Sports not Eurosport as it's SD channel is heavily compressed.

I have a 32 inch flat screen tv and am currently taking the sky sports HD channels on a months trial basis to judge the difference,whilst i would say yes the picture is crisper i would also add my V+HD box does a marvellous job at upscaling,that to be honest i do not think it is going to be worth my while paying £7 a month for the small difference over skys upscaled SD picture,on larger tvs of course the difference may be more obvious but i can only speak of my personal expierience.

[Waldo Pepper]

My GF has a 42" Panasonic HD TV. Last year watching Wimbledon (on Sky) there was a huge difference between SD & HD to the point of me wanting a HDTV.
However I struggled to see much difference this year at all. The only difference is she is now with Virgin.

The problem I have is the HD charge, to me where possible HD is seen as a normal channel not as a premium one, at the end of the day the HD broadcast is just downconverted to SD simulcast one

It's weired huh! For me HD qulaity can change from channel to channel and even programme to programme on that same channel.

Europsort and EPSN HD so far is better than Sky sports HD

And some Sky Movies HD are better than others but not as good as BBC HD or Channel 4 HD

SOME BBC SD programmes look as sharp as HD.

I guess it can also be down to your TV and how it is set up but when you get a good quality HD programme the effect is stunning.

Originally Posted by Bob Q

I have had a VM VIP package over the past two years or so which came with a V+ box but I have only recently inherited an HD TV.

Having connected it up, using an HDMI Cable and set the V+ up to 1080 wide and Hi Def HDMI format I sat back looking at my Sony Bravia TV expecting to be amazed by the quality of the image.

I have to confess that I am barely able to tell the difference with the free HD channels compared with the SD equivalent (on say ESPN). I see the V+ box claiming that it is outputting HDTV but it looks much the same.

So is my Sony TV not really displaying HD or is the box not really outputting it? Or am I not that observant? Or is HD just a hyped up service that is not much difference? It certainly does not encourage me to pay for Sky HD!

Any suggestions?

I think HD is heavily oversold, as with many things. The viewing set-up in most homes (and by 'most', I mean the majority of TV-viewing households in the UK, not the tiny minority who are interested enough in their set-up to join a forum like this and post about it) is such that the TV screen is too small, and the set is too far away from the sofa, for most people to easily tell the difference between a decent SD stream like BBC1 and the same programme being simulcast on BBC-HD.

We installed Freesat-HD in my in-laws holiday flat this summer and spent a fortnight being thoroughly underwhelmed with it. I mean, it did look nice, but not nice enough to make me want to rush out and buy my own kit when we got home.

I have seen HD on a mahoosive screen in a friend's front room so I'm well aware of the improvement the technology is capable of delivering. However in many cases the practical application of it is such that the experience is just a little disappointing.

[sherer]

It depends on so many factors. When I watch football if there is a slow mo close up of the ball it is hard to really get any more detail in the picture. With the normal side on angle if you look at the pitch it is mostly the same, if you look at the crowd and stuff around there is more detail there.

On Eurosport and the HD channel there is a bigger difference but I don;t have HD and my parents do. I can tell the difference but it doesn't mean I can no longer watch in SD like some people claim

Has anybody got an LED TV and if so does HD picture look better than on a LCD TV?

[Nanor]

Originally Posted by mlayzell

Has anybody got an LED TV and if so does HD picture look better than on a LCD TV?

Wouldn't have thought that would make a difference. LED TVs are still LCD they just use LED backlights rather than CCFL.

---------- Post added at 12:43 ---------- Previous post was at 12:32 ----------

My experience with HD is that it is definitely down to the display. I used to have a 32" Bravia V2000 and was very pleased with the picture quality. I noticed a marginal improvement between SD and HD but nothing outstanding. I've recently bought a new TV, Phillips 37" pfl9604 and the HD picture on this is simply outstanding.

The difference between SD and HD movies is immediately apparent even to the missus who generally isn't that bothered. I did spend about three weeks tweaking the picture settings, getting the balance of contrast/brightness right made a huge difference and then tweaking the other settings improved matters even further.

With the correct display and with that display set up properly you should really be seeing a big improvement with HD broadcasts over SD. It's definitely more than just a gimmick IMO.

[Bob Q]

Interesting debate.

Not sure I can be bothered with the settings especially if they make the few HD channels better at the expense of the majority but I will have a play.

But overall, my view is that I am sitting 8 feet in front of a 28" TV and cannot see much difference, not enough to spend £7 a month of my hard earned dosh on. Clearly it makes a difference to those prepared to invest in bigger, larger screens.

I am probably too cynical but it seems to me that if VM can supply a STB that makes SD look almost as good as HD to someone like me then the fact that Sky do not means they are pulling a fast one.

[Charlie_Bubble]

Originally Posted by Waldo Pepper

My GF has a 42" Panasonic HD TV. Last year watching Wimbledon (on Sky) there was a huge difference between SD & HD to the point of me wanting a HDTV.
However I struggled to see much difference this year at all. The only difference is she is now with Virgin.

The quality of the HD picture is better on Sky in my opinion. My parents have Sky HD, I have Virgin HD. They have a slightly smaller TV (37" as opposed to 40") and it is 'supposedly' not as good a quality TV as theirs is a year older and was several hundred pounds cheaper than mine, but their HD quality is noticably better than mine.

[Itshim]

I am not sure what I tried to do really worked - but this is what I did my TV has a split screen so I put HD (?) one one half & the same channel via freeview ( it was bbc1 & bbc HD putting out the same programme) on the other could not see any worthwhile difference .
Then I switched between BBC 1 & HD again nothing to get excited about,

Emperors new clothes comes to my mind.

No way will I pay out another £7 per month