UK Freeview HD - Anticlimax

Peddyr

Freeview HD came 'on-line' today from IOM txs and I must say that the long awaited arrival of it has been a major anticlimax!

I watched short bits of all three channels (BBC HD, ITV HD & CH4 HD) for some of the afternoon and a good bit of the evening. Most of the content was upscaled SD (but labeled “Upscaled HD”) which was no better in quality than my old Humax HDCI-2000T upscales SD to 1080i and a Sony HDD that upscales same. When an actual HD programme came on it was marginally better than the upscaled SD material, but what a disappointment! Compared with RTE's HD test channel, the UK stuff is inferior by a significant margin. The RTE HD test channel and native HD material is stunning through the same STB and TV, but the Freeview HD content is very poor in comparison.

Have swung aerials back to Ireland for both Three Rock & Divis and will stick with Divis for Freeview as much more content available and no noticeable difference in what my MPEG2 STBs upscale and what is being broadcast as 'Upscaled HD'. Feel slightly conned into getting a T2 box for no significant improvement in quality.

However, if you're on the East coast of Ireland (Louth, Down, Antrim) and you're interested in trying for Freeview HD and you can't get overspill from UK, try IOM txs on 43, 46 & 50(HD), vertical, group B. Good luck!

watty

Blu Ray and much satellite HD is 1920 x 1080i and higher bitrate.

Terrestrial HD is 1440 x 1080i anamorphic WS. It could be that UK DTT is using more limited bit rate than Satellite, even allowing for the lower resolution.

The Saorview has only 2 multiplex, and likely most HD (when RTE1, RTE2, TV3 and TG4 with maybe Film Channel) will be similar quality to UK DTT. Test loops are not indicative of program quality. As I remember from BBC test transmissions at start of 625 lines!

The Cush

Peddyr wrote: »

When an actual HD programme came on it was marginally better than the upscaled SD material, but what a disappointment! Compared with RTE's HD test channel, the UK stuff is inferior by a significant margin. The RTE HD test channel and native HD material is stunning through the same STB and TV, but the Freeview HD content is very poor in comparison.

The test channel won't last forever, when RTÉ 2 HD launches most of the material will also be upscaled except for selected live events initially moving to pre-recorded material once the playout facility has been upgraded. In house, studio HD production could be a while away too until the Montrose Project 2025 redevelopment gets underway.

The HD test channel I assume has also been allocated a decent bit rate for the engineering tests.

This from RTÉ

All of the existing RTE 2 SD content (i.e. programmes, commercials, studio inserts etc.) will be up-converted to HD for transmission, and transmitted around the native HD events. In effect the Pres schedule and all programme content will be identical on RTÉ 2 SD and on RTÉ 2 HD, with different quality pictures being presented on each service.

In fairness now,I've had it a while and I can see the individual strands of hair on Gail platt's head and her moustache

Also I discovered last night that Damages on BBChd is in dolby digital on ukfreeview.
I find a noticeable difference between it on BBC1 and on BBChd but find Itv1hd to be better still.

I think Downton Abbey on itv1hd on sunday is amazing in hd on freeview as is X factor.

On my analogue tv through channel 36 though from the stb,it just all looks washed out in comparison

Peddyr

The Cush wrote: »

The test channel won't last forever, when RTÉ 2 HD launches most of the material will also be upscaled except for selected live events initially moving to pre-recorded material once the playout facility has been upgraded. In house, studio HD production could be a while away too until the Montrose Project 2025 redevelopment gets underway.

The HD test channel I assume has also been allocated a decent bit rate for the engineering tests.

This from RTÉ

Oh well, all a big hype about nothing really... It seems somewhat cruel
to show you (RTE HD test) something that you'll never really get again quality wise...

Peddyr

Deleted User wrote: »

In fairness now,I've had it a while and I can see the individual strands of hair on Gail platt's head and her moustache

Also I discovered last night that Damages on BBChd is in dolby digital on ukfreeview.
I find a noticeable difference between it on BBC1 and on BBChd but find Itv1hd to be better still.

I think Downton Abbey on itv1hd on sunday is amazing in hd on freeview as is X factor.

On my analogue tv through channel 36 though from the stb,it just all looks washed out in comparison

Maybe I didn't give it a go for long enough, saw a bit of Corry too. Can honestly say wasn't all that impressed with the quality... If it was the STB it'd be the same for RTE but it's not...

reboot

Peddyr wrote: »

Maybe I didn't give it a go for long enough, saw a bit of Corry too. Can honestly say wasn't all that impressed with the quality... If it was the STB it'd be the same for RTE but it's not...

I remember when this discussion was taking place the BBC spokeswoman curiously put some of the poor quality down to the use of inferior cameras.
For some years now a lot of the HD output,mostly Docs have been shot on the Sony Z1 camera,resolution 720 lines.
Surely if this is all the Corporation will buy ,or rent from freelancers,they can't carp about the final result.
At £3000,you get what you pay for,more Fisher Price than HBO.(Arriflex)

Peddyr

Peddyr wrote: »

Maybe I didn't give it a go for long enough, saw a bit of Corry too. Can honestly say wasn't all that impressed with the quality... If it was the STB it'd be the same for RTE but it's not...

I actually find the quality on RTE1 dtt to be poorer standard definition compared to UK freeview channels and abysmal compared to itv1hd.

Look at Jack Duckworths skin on the face [It's less of a Shock than Gails ] and you can see the pores.
Depending on the size of the hd tv [and obviously it's crucial that you are watching it via hdmi and not scart as the latter is SD from a hd receiver but I don't need to say that!]
You need to be within 6ft of the tv if it's a 32" and within 8 or 9ft if it's a 42"

tlaavtech

reboot wrote: »

I remember when this discussion was taking place the BBC spokeswoman curiously put some of the poor quality down to the use of inferior cameras.
For some years now a lot of the HD output,mostly Docs have been shot on the Sony Z1 camera,resolution 720 lines.
Surely if this is all the Corporation will buy ,or rent from freelancers,they can't carp about the final result.
At £3000,you get what you pay for,more Fisher Price than HBO.(Arriflex)

Not quite accurate. The Z1 has a resolution of 1440x1080 - The same res that BBCHD and ITVHD broadcast in.

Also, the BBCHD has a standard that must be adhered to for BBCHD programming - 85% of the programme must be to the standard. HDV (the format used by the Z1) does not measure up to this standard and so is not used by the BBC for the HD channel. I can't speak for the content of ITV programmes.

The drop in quality fo rBBCHD was down to them reducing the bit rate. The also upgraded the codecs, but the general opinion was that the new codecs did not fully compensate for the loss of bit-rate.

watty

You need to be within 6ft of the tv if it's a 32" and within 8 or 9ft if it's a 42"

Agreed Black Briar

For a typical living room a 48" is reasonable compromise between bareable for upscalled SD content, getting benefit from BluRay and real HD on Broadcast and not too dominating in the room.

Personally I want a projector with motorised Zoom lens for 28" for 4:3, 36" for regular 16:9 WS, 42" for SD 2.40:1 (cinemascope etc), 52" for "ordinary" HD and 72" for HD cinemascope such as 2.40:1

Motorised masks (width and height) on the screen would be nice

reboot

tlaavtech wrote: »

Not quite accurate. The Z1 has a resolution of 1440x1080 - The same res that BBCHD and ITVHD broadcast in.

Also, the BBCHD has a standard that must be adhered to for BBCHD programming - 85% of the programme must be to the standard. HDV (the format used by the Z1) does not measure up to this standard and so is not used by the BBC for the HD channel. I can't speak for the content of ITV programmes.

The drop in quality fo rBBCHD was down to them reducing the bit rate. The also upgraded the codecs, but the general opinion was that the new codecs did not fully compensate for the loss of bit-rate.

I stand corrected(I think),why then are people told to shoot HD on the Z1 if it is not to be transmitted on the HD channel?

reboot

watty wrote: »

Agreed Black Briar

For a typical living room a 48" is reasonable compromise between bareable for upscalled SD content, getting benefit from BluRay and real HD on Broadcast and not too dominating in the room.

Personally I want a projector with motorised Zoom lens for 28" for 4:3, 36" for regular 16:9 WS, 42" for SD 2.40:1 (cinemascope etc), 52" for "ordinary" HD and 72" for HD cinemascope such as 2.40:1

Motorised masks (width and height) on the screen would be nice

I regularly stay with a friend and take great pleasure in watching some HD content on the 40" Sony Bravia,which I set up.
When I return home I take pleasure watching the 32" Sony Trinitron CRT.
On SD I think the CRT is superior to the Bravia on SD.
Blacks are much better,flesh tone much better.I suppose the day will soon arrive when I may buy a 21/9 HD only monitor,OLED.
Yeah dream on.

tlaavtech

reboot wrote: »

I stand corrected(I think),why then are people told to shoot HD on the Z1 if it is not to be transmitted on the HD channel?

These rules only apply to the BBCHD channel. There is nothing stopping them shooting on HDV for use on BBC 1/2/3/4/News channels. With the launch of BBC1HD, it will be interesting to see how much more relaxed the rules become. An amount of programmes will still be transmitted in updcaled SD for the moment.

In the last month or two, the BBC changed their policy so that all programmes must now be in HD - I am not clear if that includes HDV or not. [You might have guessed by now that I am a Z5 owner - the replacement for the Z1 - so I have an interest in how it is viewed by the bods at the beeb ]

I am also interested to see if and when RTE change their policy in regards to news aquisition. All of their news report cameras were changed a few years ago XDCAM, but they continue to shoot SD!

Peddyr

Deleted User wrote: »

I actually find the quality on RTE1 dtt to be poorer standard definition compared to UK freeview channels and abysmal compared to itv1hd.

Look at Jack Duckworths skin on the face [It's less of a Shock than Gails ] and you can see the pores.
Depending on the size of the hd tv [and obviously it's crucial that you are watching it via hdmi and not scart as the latter is SD from a hd receiver but I don't need to say that!]
You need to be within 6ft of the tv if it's a 32" and within 8 or 9ft if it's a 42"

It's interesting that folk are getting different results on the same equipment (as in people who are using their box for both UK & Irish DTT). As my UK HD comes from a Freeview lite relay, is there any chance that the bitrate has been reduce to 'squeeze' the HD mux on to it...?

I don't know to be honest,I'd be doubtfull though.
I had hd from arfon and from the tiny powered haverford west tx last week and didn't notice a degrade compared to presely.

I'd have to completely say that I do notice a huge difference between hd and sd both from the sagemcom and the sony tv.
Without being there,I don't know why you aren't.

Have you itv1 hd or BBC hd on satelite? what are they like for you?

Peddyr

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know to be honest,I'd be doubtfull though.
I had hd from arfon and from the tiny powered haverford west tx last week and didn't notice a degrade compared to presely.

I'd have to completely say that I do notice a huge difference between hd and sd both from the sagemcom and the sony tv.
Without being there,I don't know why you aren't.

Have you itv1 hd or BBC hd on satelite? what are they like for you?

I have BBCHD, ITVHD & CH4HD on Freeview, also RTE on DTT all on same box - Technika £70 job from Tesco. Very little diference between UK HD & SD. RTE SD better than UK SD and RTE HD is stunning on 32" less than 6' away...

Have to say I'm still puzzled for the reasons stated!
Thats not my experience.

To my eye,itv1hd is every bit as good on freeview if not marginally better than it is under added channels on sky hd and certainly streets upon top of streets ahead of ordinary itv with true hd content.

I notice the same level of difference comparing sd with hd on freeview as between sky one hd and ordinary sky one on a sky hd box to be honest.

Theres plenty comment over on digital spy about it where the word outstanding is used in comparison to SD.
Upscaled SD programmes in my opinion are pretty much just the non hd content relayed on a high bit rate network so theres absolutely no chance of even the tiniest hint of pixelation.
I recorded Dr No in hd on saturday and it was superb!

Heres an example [of many when searched] from digital spy of someone who got hd last week for the first time due to athmospherics and they use the word outstanding

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=43865035#post43865035

Gerry Wicklow

watty wrote: »

Personally I want a projector with motorised Zoom lens for 28" for 4:3, 36" for regular 16:9 WS, 42" for SD 2.40:1 (cinemascope etc), 52" for "ordinary" HD and 72" for HD cinemascope such as 2.40:1

Motorised masks (width and height) on the screen would be nice

Dear Santa, I have been a good boy all year......:D

mossym

watty wrote: »

Blu Ray and much satellite HD is 1920 x 1080i and higher bitrate.

Terrestrial HD is 1440 x 1080i anamorphic WS. It could be that UK DTT is using more limited bit rate than Satellite, even allowing for the lower resolution.

there is a lot of speculation that the rather obvious deterioration in the BBC HD channel on satellite(and there has been a noticeable one) was in part due to the large quality differences between Freesat and Freeview for the same channel, and the sat channel was reduced to lessen the differences.

speculation to be sure, but the BBC HD quality on SAT was definitely reduced from what it was a few years ago, they are using a new encoder, but claim the new encoder should make no difference, even though the bitrate has dropped from 14Mb to ~10 to 11Mb.

watty

Gerry Wicklow wrote: »

Dear Santa, I have been a good boy all year......:D

I'll count myself lucky if i get Coal. Be useful in the stove in Cold January.

godskitchen

mossym wrote: »

there is a lot of speculation that the rather obvious deterioration in the BBC HD channel on satellite(and there has been a noticeable one) was in part due to the large quality differences between Freesat and Freeview for the same channel, and the sat channel was reduced to lessen the differences.

speculation to be sure, but the BBC HD quality on SAT was definitely reduced from what it was a few years ago, they are using a new encoder, but claim the new encoder should make no difference, even though the bitrate has dropped from 14Mb to ~10 to 11Mb.

If I recall correctly, was BBD HD not around 20Mb when it was in testing? I think I remember people on AVS talking about how good it was back then.....

mossym

godskitchen wrote: »

If I recall correctly, was BBD HD not around 20Mb when it was in testing? I think I remember people on AVS talking about how good it was back then.....

don't think it was ever that high, sky runs at ~19.5, think highest i ever saw for BBC was roughly 15...

Peddyr

Deleted User wrote: »

Have to say I'm still puzzled for the reasons stated!
Thats not my experience.

To my eye,itv1hd is every bit as good on freeview if not marginally better than it is under added channels on sky hd and certainly streets upon top of streets ahead of ordinary itv with true hd content.

I notice the same level of difference comparing sd with hd on freeview as between sky one hd and ordinary sky one on a sky hd box to be honest.

Theres plenty comment over on digital spy about it where the word outstanding is used in comparison to SD.
Upscaled SD programmes in my opinion are pretty much just the non hd content relayed on a high bit rate network so theres absolutely no chance of even the tiniest hint of pixelation.
I recorded Dr No in hd on saturday and it was superb!

Heres an example [of many when searched] from digital spy of someone who got hd last week for the first time due to athmospherics and they use the word outstanding

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=43865035#post43865035

Hi BB,

Interesting reading over on DS forum and I notice that not all those that posted there were overly impressed with Freeview HD neither. I can't understand why people are having such different experiences. You would be forgiven in thinking that if you have an HD box, Full HD or HD ready TV connected to the STB via HDMI that everyone would more or less have the same experience - strange that's not the case though... Baffled! :O

eyesight,quality of stb,quality of tv,settings on the tv,settings on the stb,quality of hdmi cable etc etc

I know one thing,if [and I don't mean this as any disrespect to you!!]anyone had a look at my itv1hd with hd programming and said they could not see the difference between it and sd,I'd be sending them to specsavers!

Gerry Wicklow

Deleted User wrote: »

eyesight,quality of stb,quality of tv,settings on the tv,settings on the stb,quality of hdmi cable etc etc

From my experience of visiting many peoples houses over the years, I found that picture quality is VERY much personal preference. You see sets with the colour cranked up so everyone is purple, turned down until virtually mono or the contrast set to mountain mist.
I suppose in the end it's whatever you're happiest with yourself rather than someone else's opinion.
And for what it's worth I agree BBC HD on Sat has deteriorated.

Peddyr

Deleted User wrote: »

eyesight,quality of stb,quality of tv,settings on the tv,settings on the stb,quality of hdmi cable etc etc

I know one thing,if [and I don't mean this as any disrespect to you!!]anyone had a look at my itv1hd with hd programming and said they could not see the difference between it and sd,I'd be sending them to specsavers!

I would agree BB. However, if that were the case here, then RTE HD wouldn't appear any better than Freeview HD would it? I'm watching Holby City on BBC HD as I type and have been comparing it to BBC Four - Richard Wilson in the English Lake district and I cannot honestly say that the HD looks any better at all than BBC Four SD at this moment in time. No word of a lie, if Holby city is indeed HD, it is no better than SD on the same box. RTE on the other hand is dramatically different as one would expect pitching HD against SD. Total mystery!

gtg60

Gerry Wicklow wrote: »

From my experience of visiting many peoples houses over the years, I found that picture quality is VERY much personal preference. You see sets with the colour cranked up so everyone is purple, turned down until virtually mono or the contrast set to mountain mist.

Oh God, don't get me started! Do people not know what a natural picture is supposed to look like? :rolleyes:

Gerry Wicklow wrote: »

And for what it's worth I agree BBC HD on Sat has deteriorated.

There was a rumour floating around over a year ago that the BBC had dropped the bandwidth on BBCHD because they couldn't match the bandwidth in DVB-T2 testing. So, it was decided that one platform shouldn't be better than another...

jgc115

Deleted User wrote: »

eyesight,quality of stb,quality of tv,settings on the tv,settings on the stb,quality of hdmi cable etc etc

I also agree with B B - In my case it was the TV settings. I had a sky+ HD and an Edision HD box going in to one TV (Samsung HD TV) for comparison testing. While the HD picture quality was very good on both boxes I got fine tuning settings for my TV off www.hdtvtest.co.uk. Now I can say the HD picture quality is outstanding on both SKY+HD and Edision HD boxes and the SD picture quality is outstanding on the EDision HD box while the SD picture is only OK on the Sky HD box. In fact my SKY+ SD box had better SD quality.

Also I believe BBC HD are transmitting variable bit rate now, to allow for better picture quality on fast moving scenes and to make up for the criticism it got when it reduced it's bit rate down to 9Mb approx.

The Cush

Did anyone follow Paul Eaton's almost 2 year BBC HD Picture Quality Campaign.

BBC worst in Europe for HDTV quality

http://www.zen97962.zen.co.uk/

Peddyr

The Cush wrote: »

Did anyone follow Paul Eaton's almost 2 year BBC HD Picture Quality Campaign.

BBC worst in Europe for HDTV quality

http://www.zen97962.zen.co.uk/

Thanks the Cush.

Well, if that's what the Brits are calling HD I can only say I'm glad I didn't shell out £100s on expensive T2 equipment only to be sorely disappointed by the lack of quality of their Freeview HD transmissions.

At least I can use the cheapo Tesco T2 box for Saorview (hopefully, as it's working fine at the moment pre launch) and the HD test is stunning on my setup.

bbc hd is not as good,noticeably not as good as itv 1 hd.Thats always been my experience and most peoples.It's a lot better than bbc sd channels.


@ peddyr -you need to be comparing simulcasts of the same programmes,not different programmes.

The rtehd test is transmitting a very very well done video loop.
Obviously with a tailor made perfect hd source like that,you will have beautifull hd picture.

But untill RTE start transmitting regular programmes in hd,then you are not comparing like with like.

I'd expect it to be better than bbchd at that given their restrictions, but on a par with itv1hd.

In your case,I'm thinking,if you notice no difference on the transmitted programmes and believe me there is between sd and hd on both freeview and sky,then I think theres a technical issue somewhere,there has to be.

godskitchen

Deleted User wrote: »

eyesight,quality of stb,quality of tv,settings on the tv,settings on the stb,quality of hdmi cable etc etc

I know one thing,if [and I don't mean this as any disrespect to you!!]anyone had a look at my itv1hd with hd programming and said they could not see the difference between it and sd,I'd be sending them to specsavers!

I really have to pull you up on that point......the signal either gets to the TV or it does not, there is no in between. HDMI is digital, meaning you either get the feed or you don't. High prices and gimmicks like gold-plating don't affect 1s and 0s.

Plenty of in for with a quick google search

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=hdmi+cables+myth&aq=f&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

On longer cable runs
(forgive me for not being more specific,that little bit of indiscretion was an awfull crime I agree..)