HD

For things that don't fit into a category. i.e. non-motor related subjects.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

munky
RT GOD
Posts: 8282
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:30 pm
feedback: 870185
Location: my own little world
Contact:

HD

Post by munky »

Right, I just saw an advert for History channel HD's new series of lost films from world war 1 and 2....

'In glorious HD'

But filmed on what looks like a pinhole camera. :lol: :facepalm:


Also a lot of films that were made before 'HD' existed are shown on the HD movie channels. I havent watched any yet to comment, but how does that work? Do they just upscale them and increase the sharpness a bit? Or can they remaster a copy in HD from the original film? And if they can, would they bother?



And while we're here... If I use my pc to play a '720p' hd x264 film I happen across on my internet travels, output through rgb cable to my HD telly... is it really HD?

And how do I play x264 format files, or whatever they are?
Image
Rich_1988 wrote:I unch in le harbogb
Fordimus Prime
Rovertech Moderator
Rovertech Moderator
Posts: 2783
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 6:58 pm
feedback: 332911
Location: middlesex
Contact:

Re: HD

Post by Fordimus Prime »

munky wrote:Right, I just saw an advert for History channel HD's new series of lost films from world war 1 and 2....

'In glorious HD'

But filmed on what looks like a pinhole camera. :lol: :facepalm:


Also a lot of films that were made before 'HD' existed are shown on the HD movie channels. I havent watched any yet to comment, but how does that work? Do they just upscale them and increase the sharpness a bit? Or can they remaster a copy in HD from the original film? And if they can, would they bother?



And while we're here... If I use my pc to play a '720p' hd x264 film I happen across on my internet travels, output through rgb cable to my HD telly... is it really HD?

And how do I play x264 format files, or whatever they are?
i can help here - ima cameraman / editor of sorts.

Film - be it 35mm or even 16mm, is actualy quite high resolution- in fact, way higher than than high def. Film shown in the cinema has to be projected on a huuuuuuge screen. If you blew up a normal standard def TV programme on a screen that big, it would look awful.

Film doesnt exactly have an exact 'resolution' but most agree you can scan it up to a resolution of 4k (thats four thousand horizontal) - which is way higher than high def.

To remaster old films in HD, they just dig out the old master copy of the film, and have it scanned it- probably at 4k, then downscale it to HD resolution, and clean up any hairs/ dirt etc. Some old films can look pretty ropey in HD - film stock has come a long way, so older films look grainer. In fact, I watches terminator 2 in HD the other day, and i could see the diferences in film grain between two camera angles. One camera was probably running a higher ISO of film, so would be slightly grainer. This wouldnt have been an issue 15 years ago, but now with HD everyone is able to see every detail on their crisp sharp HD massive TVs.

The war footage you mentioned could have been shot on 16mm film. this cant be scanned in as higher res as 35mm, but you're supposed to be able to scan 16mm at full 1080 HD res. But - it'll have been shot on ropey old film stock, in a ropey old camera, with nasty old lenses. Is it HD? well it might have the right number of pixels, but i wouldnt call it HD.

Although these days, anything thats got more pixels than standard def TV, seems to be refered to as HD!

The 720p files you mention are technically sort of high def. 720 is the number of vertical pixels, and is the lower of the high def formats. H264 is simply the format the file has been encoded to. HD video takes up a lot of space, so clever encoding compresses the files down to a more manageble size. But this takes a powerful computer to decompress for viewing- or a PS3 or xbox. I know PS3's read and playback H264 files quite nicely. You might able be able to hook a laptop up to your HD TV for playing the files back.
Also, with such HD video files, your also at the mercy of whoever did the encoding- if they used rubbish settings, then the video might look dire.

hope ive made some sense
- MG ZR td+ -
munky
RT GOD
Posts: 8282
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:30 pm
feedback: 870185
Location: my own little world
Contact:

Re: HD

Post by munky »

thanks for the reply.

I figured cinema's would be running a much higher resolution and as such would mean old stock could be re-mastered. Just wondered if the companies would put the effort in to do it, especially just for tv releases.

I know when HD first came out a lot of the 'hd' channels just turned up the sharpness, and got a lot of flak for it as it was very obvious. Understandable though as I imagine its not cheap to create new copies for the small amounts of money made from tv broadcasting. Although I suppose there's more incentive if you factor in a re-release on blu-ray.


I used to have a ps3 and always downloaded the x264 files, or mkv's. I'd use a converter to turn them into .vob's and the ps3 would play them in HD. Seemed to work well and they were definitely high(er) definition.

I dont have a ps3 anymore though, but downloaded a film the other day in normal avi format, claiming to be HD. It just so happened the same film was on sky the next day so I had a quick gander and the one on the pc was definitely far better quality. But it was just an avi with a higher pixel count and much larger file size. (4gb for one film as opposed to the usual 700mb).

My pc runs the telly as a 2nd monitor, but via a normal monitor cable (dvi/d, not hdmi) and I'm sure I read somewhere that kind of cable isnt capable of carrying a full hd image... though that seems odd as it does run the tv at its native resolution of 1300x700 (ish... 720p, whatever that is in pixels). I appreciate it wont have the same audio quality as, say, a blu-ray because the sound is coming from the pc via vga cables... But its only coming through the tv speakers anyway so stereo is fine with me for now.

I understand the whole 720i<720p<1080i<1080p principle in terms of levels of quality. Seems that most people arent bothering with 1080 for pc files though, I assume because of file size constraints. My tv is 720p, I went for a lower pixel count in favour of a plasma. Side by side in the shops, the 720p plasmas made the 1080p lcd's look really poor.

Will have to have a look into finding a player that can play x264's and mkv's and see if my pc is up to it.
Image
Rich_1988 wrote:I unch in le harbogb
rovex
RT BiKiloPoster
Posts: 2391
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 7:23 am
feedback: 1042809

Re: HD

Post by rovex »

Yeah unfortunately anything shown at the usual HD resolutions can be claimed to be HD, even if its an upscale. There is no rule that says the picture has to be maintained at HD the whole way from camera to screen, it only has to be an HD resolution at the final screening stage. Even a mobile phone vid can be claimed as HD if its upscaled and broadcast at 1080i on Sky. Its a joke really.

History did WWII in colour recently. It wasnt really in colour, it was colourised, and not always very well. TBH a lot of the stuff the Discovery network shows is poor quality, sometimes they are even shot on consumer grade camcorders, not broadcast quality HD cams! Eurosport is honest about it, anything filmed in HD is given a 'Full HD' logo in the corner, everything else isnt.

HD isnt a promise of quality, and i think the name is misleading. HD is only as good as the source material and there is no way to predict how good a film will be in HD, age is the last thing to use as a prediction.


There is no reason a PC cant deliver full HD and HD sound. They can with the latest graphics cards, which can pass full HD audio over HDMI, but you do need a good receiver to make use of it. For me DTS or DD is good enough. Plasma are better than LCDs most of the time, they are certainly better when both are 720P sets and they work better with SD channels. Unless you sit quite close to a large TV 1080P isnt really necessary. even a 50inch TV only needs to be 720P if you sit more than 10 to 12 feet away. Even at 8ft good quality HD looks just as good as on a 1080P set.
Image
munky
RT GOD
Posts: 8282
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:30 pm
feedback: 870185
Location: my own little world
Contact:

Re: HD

Post by munky »

the funniest is channels like sk1hd and e4hd showing old episodes of simpsons, futurama, friends etc in 'HD'... which means they squish the original picture into a square and have massive black voids down each side... yes, that small section has a higher pixel count, but its not bloody hd!
Image
Rich_1988 wrote:I unch in le harbogb
rovex
RT BiKiloPoster
Posts: 2391
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 7:23 am
feedback: 1042809

Re: HD

Post by rovex »

No they aren't natively HD, but 4:3 images can still be HD, its all about the number of pixels vertically, the horizontal number doesnt matter. Its even more annoying with Movies because its the number of pixels vertically that matters any film thats wider than 16:9 isnt actually HD as far as the visible frame is concerned, but each frame is still HD, they just have black bars top and bottom..
Image
Fordimus Prime
Rovertech Moderator
Rovertech Moderator
Posts: 2783
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 6:58 pm
feedback: 332911
Location: middlesex
Contact:

Re: HD

Post by Fordimus Prime »

munky wrote:the funniest is channels like sk1hd and e4hd showing old episodes of simpsons, futurama, friends etc in 'HD'... which means they squish the original picture into a square and have massive black voids down each side... yes, that small section has a higher pixel count, but its not bloody hd!
ive got beef with the bbc - they droped the bitrate of their HD channels a while ago, and reduced resolution from 1920x1080 to 1440x1080 - the tv tuner just unsquishes it.

how can they get away with calling it HD! I really hoped all this hd stuff would standardise all the TV formats around the world, and now its just more complicated than ever! (i shouldnt complain, hopefully if i can understand all this nonsense in detail, then i might have the edge over other cameramen)
- MG ZR td+ -
PJW
RT GOD
Posts: 6631
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 2:44 pm
feedback: 737527
Location: Helensburgh

Re: HD

Post by PJW »

HDMi and x264 movies ftw.

Matroska files are a format used to rip from BR or HDDVD.

IF you have 720p movies than they should play in HD.

Pm your way..
Paul.
Diagonally parked in a parallel universe
radddogg
RT GOD
Posts: 13324
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 11:23 am
Location: Sat scouring Sheaf's posts for epic quotez

Re: HD

Post by radddogg »

DVI is digital anyway so capable of full hd.
Swnt frpm my iphonr
Punx0r wrote:S&M always comes immediately to mind.
Image
Punx0r
Rovertech Moderator
Rovertech Moderator
Posts: 32552
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:42 pm
feedback: 538363
Location: Northants

Re: HD

Post by Punx0r »

Fordimus Prime wrote: I really hoped all this hd stuff would standardise all the TV formats around the world, and now its just more complicated than ever!
Very good point, that.

I'm hoping that the everyone can at least settle on 16:9 for aspect ratio on TV programmes.
Anthony | 1997 800 Vitesse Coupe, 1985 SD1 Vitesse
rovex
RT BiKiloPoster
Posts: 2391
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 7:23 am
feedback: 1042809

Re: HD

Post by rovex »

radddogg wrote:DVI is digital anyway so capable of full hd.
Indeed HDMI is just DVI with Audio and a different shaped plug (basically).

HD is fairly standard. Its 720 or 1080 pixels vertical. The horizontal is another matter, but SD isnt standardised either, Some channels are not full SD. ITV on Sky being one example (which is why its so ugly, its not just the shoddy programmes!).

Pretty much all HD TV programmes will be 16:9, movies though will never be standardised.
Image
Punx0r
Rovertech Moderator
Rovertech Moderator
Posts: 32552
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 8:42 pm
feedback: 538363
Location: Northants

Re: HD

Post by Punx0r »

Everyone in the world* has a 16:9 tele so you'd think everything would be broadcast in that, letterboxed if need be. I'm bored of playing guess the aspect ratio and adjusting the TV to suit.

*Anyone with a 4:3 screen can letterbox, I doubt they'd care.
Anthony | 1997 800 Vitesse Coupe, 1985 SD1 Vitesse
marc9584
Rovertech Kiloposter
Posts: 1387
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:10 pm
feedback: 1078611

Re: HD

Post by marc9584 »

What does my head in is people that compare Blu ray to Zune on the xbox 360, the bitrates are so much lower and the sound is more inferior to Blu ray. Im sure the source might be 1080p but its not when you get it at sodding 8gb.
Image
Post Reply

Return to “The Living Room (Posh man's lounge)”