#31
|
|||
|
|||
I had one of those HDTV tuner cards for my PC back in the early 2000's and early HD, before all of the subchannels came along, was awesome. Even 720p channels back then easily trounce the 1080i OTA channels today.
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Old TV Nut, you are correct. I misspoke. Our ABC affiliate is broadcasting in 720p. I went back this morning and checked all of the major Atlanta TV stations:
ABC: 720p CBS: 1080i PBS: 1080i NBC: 1080i Fox: 720p OTA shows the difference. Cable shows virtually no difference at all. |
#33
|
||||
|
||||
All this time I'm thinking PBS is 720, like my local PBS (which has sacrificed HD bandwidth by squeezing in do-gooder channels, in a certain foreign tongue, that this hoped for target audience apparently totally ignores.)
|
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Back at the beginning of DTV, ABC and Fox chose 720p because it was thought better for
sports. And back then, it was. There were three reasons: interlace artefacts per se, the Kell factor of blurring used to reduce them, and the fact that nobody actually transmitted 1920 resolution, the absolute max was 1440. This was implemented by restricting the coefficients in MPEG. At least around here, they are equally horrible. |
#35
|
||||
|
||||
Anyone else notice their local OTA PBS has been kicked down to 720?
|
Audiokarma |
#36
|
||||
|
||||
...besides, any 'advantage' of 720 is now moot because right at this moment, sports broadcasts are being originated with 1080i PsF cameras, resulting in zero interlace motional artifacts!
|
#37
|
||||
|
||||
Big issues. The network affiliates and their equipment (not trivial, as in Millions). Problem B: Cable and Satellite down-rezzing it even more. Sorry, reality applies.
|
#38
|
||||
|
||||
Does the FCC even enforce standards anymore?
|
|
|