HD TV Picture Quality

Just bought a new TV and a Blue Ray player (PS3) and the picture quality on DVD is excellent.

I tried a couple of Blue Ray discs and it upscales standard DVDs ( I think) but to be completely honest, I don't think I can see a massive difference in picture quality between the two types.

So we come to HD. I am probably going to upgrade to Sky HD for the start of footie season but I am now wondering if you really can tell the difference as they claim.

So, gentle AOers, I ask for your experiences of HD.

Connected via a HDMI lead right! Sorry, silly question. I was reading about Component being better than RGB-Scart (I think?) when connecting a normal DVD player to HD-TV for picture quality? Anyone confirm?

Sorry, bit OT there, but can I ask, why a PS3? Someone said to me the other day not to bother with Blue-Ray players but to go with the PS3 because of it's performance ability for gaming, so it's equivalent to a top end £600 Blue-Ray player? I'm thinking of upgrading to Blue-Ray, hence I ask.

I am waiting to get a 1080P TV when they get a bit cheaper.

There really is a difference there...
720P is better than normal TV but not massively IMO.

HD transmissions sorted over here in the UK? Japan has, USofA has, Germany has, anymore for anymore?

Waiting for a Freesat HD DTR.



freesat - Products and Pricing

HD is the US is a major improvement when compared
to NTSC. I'm not sure the improvement will be
that good compared to standard def with a good
bandwidth. (Which most don't have.)

Right on Nev.: Bandwidths, frequencies,channelising kHz's,MHz's,GHz's, not my forte, I know you know though.: It's just when you see the pictures on display over here, I have yet to see a fantastically, greatly improved picture, with all the demos, yet!!:

the sky hd box is worthwhile if you have a 42" or bigger tv as the box upscales all the channels, where uktv gold usualy is very blocky on a hd box it looks much clearer and no blocky bits

there is no difference between for example sky one and sky one hd channels when using the box, im running it on standard scart cables on a 50" lg plasma

Kurzon - I was all set to buy a £650 HDD/Home theatre set as well as the TV and our local shop Sound And Vision salesman talked me out of it "wasting money"(!!! )

I said we already had an X360 and PS2.

His argument was what you said. You get a high-end BR player from the people who invented the thing and a gaming tool for less than half the price. The standard type dvd/hdd was effectively outmoded technology as it wouldn't handle Blue-Ray which will only get more popular now the other lot has jacked it in. He reckoned I'd be better getting that with a decent HDMI cable, and upgarding to Sky HD for £150 + £60 installation and a tenner extra on my subs. Then I get the full HD experience my TV was designed for, plus one of the best HDD recorder (PVR or whatever they are called) and a games console with all that extra functionality like media centre for less dough.

The sound on the TV is ace anyway but if I still wanted more speakers I could always buy them at a later date.

Not pushy.

Originally Posted by 73GTVJim

Just bought a new TV and a Blue Ray player (PS3) and the picture quality on DVD is excellent.

I tried a couple of Blue Ray discs and it upscales standard DVDs ( I think) but to be completely honest, I don't think I can see a massive difference in picture quality between the two types.

So we come to HD. I am probably going to upgrade to Sky HD for the start of footie season but I am now wondering if you really can tell the difference as they claim.

So, gentle AOers, I ask for your experiences of HD.

What TV you got Jim ? Generally speaking, the bigger screen you have, the more benefit you will get from Sky HD, but yes it is definitely definitely worth getting
The footy will blow you away mate, trust me ! If you have a 5.1 surround system as well (and you really should), you also benefit from 5.1 Dolby Digital sound.

Re component connections v RGB Scart, component is slightly better, but there's not much in it. Obviously for HD sources you need to be using HDMI.

Don't get too hung up on 1080P v 720P screens; you really won't notice any difference between the 2 unless you have a 50 inch screen or bigger. For most people with 42 inch screens or smaller, it's just a bit of marketing hype to be frank; at that size the extra resolution just isn't visable.
Much more important to spend your dosh on a quality screen (Pioneer, Panasonic, Samsung ) and take time to calibrate it properly ie dont use the out the box settings.

I will eventually, get an HD sat receiver, but in all honesty some of the pictures are good enough for me, on the old Technomate 7755 2VA 2CI, receiver, and the old Sony LCD Wega Engined box. Can't really afford it at the Mo' though.:

I've been using the XBox 360 alot and the HD quality is superb, I love it, and in my opinion you really can tell the difference.

I've got a Samsung 50" jobby from Curry's, 1080p or something or other, only cost £1000 and looks exceptional, really great TV.

Son-in-Law has just stuffed a 50" on his dining end wall, using a Sky setup, and in all honesty I'm not overly impressed.: In fact I reckon our Sony is a better picture for viewing overall, than his new plasma, with Sky HD and that. I think that's his gubbins??:

OK computer games consoles, DVD Blue Rays, great: HD transmissions???:

That's the problem ZF, the slightest flaw in a set up can seriously reduce picture quality. My old rear projection Sony TV 51" was brilliant picture, not 'for a rear projection', but brilliant anyway, it's not that far off what I have now with the Plasma, I suppose because it's hooked up with scart leads etc etc, I haven't got Sky HD, just Sky+ standard.

Originally Posted by zulu ferret

OK computer games consoles, DVD Blue Rays, great: HD transmissions???:

Wouldn't know!