Question:
What are the limiting factors for increasing the quality of the images broadcast by sky on my widescreen TV?
I may be a whinging perfectionist but despite buying a brand new Panasonic widescreen TV am not convinced the picture quality is that fantastic - but it's diff to know if this is a sky issue or TV one.
Following advice in other threads I've fiddled with all the settings on my 100hz screen to maximise the picture quality but am still not overjoyed at what I've got...
This weekend was watching the cricket on channel 4 via sky on an old Sony widescreen at a mate's houseand and thought the picture quality was significantly better than on mine. It's really noticeable when watching outside sports broadcasts eg golf, cricket and footy especially when viewing distance shots...
I know all the sky settings are correct in terms of 16:9 and RGB and I notice that the sky signal is c.10% better in terms of both strength and quality at my mate's house than mine. Could this relatively small diff account for the significant quality diff?
How can you improve signal quality / strength or for my specific geographical location are my values fixed?
Will expensive / quality scart cables make any real difference?
Cheers
Unless you're using a really crap SCART I doubt that will improve things.
A lot of channels broadcast on Sky are fairly poor quality due to bandwidth limitations (and some of the sports feeds can be atrocious. Although C4’s test coverage on my new Sony FQ70 was flawless some golf later that day on another channel was abysmal with pixellation everywhere). What Panasonic is it btw? I know that the PH40, for instance, was renowned for having poor off-air performance, but that DVD performance was top-notch.
It could simply be that your new set is less forgiving of poor sources than your mate's set.
I believe that some 100Hz TV's have big problems with Sky pictures, try turning off the 100Hz processing on the TV.
Oh, and the signal strength from Sky shouldn't affect the picture quality, you'll just get picture break-up and sound drop outs or no picture if the strength drops too low, but as long as you're getting a good enough signal to avoid that then it shouldn't make any difference.
Your mate's old Sony widescreen is probably a 50Hz set. I cannot stress enough how *bad* 100Hz is for watching Sky Digital - from my experience 50Hz is much better. Getting a better SCART lead won't make a hell of a lot of difference.
The issue with 100Hz is basically that it is eliminating flicker by updating the screen twice as often. Our TV signals be they analogue or digital are transmitted at 50Hz.
The 100Hz TV is therefore generating - by itself - frames that are not actually transmitted. Sky Digital already has a pretty poor picture quality (certainly compared to DVD). The 100Hz TV is essentially taking the flaws inherent in that picture and magnifying them because it's generating twice as many frames as the source signal.
What we really is for a company to produce a 100Hz set with a chipset optimised for making the best from lossy low bitrate MPEG2 images.
I agree that the problem is probably that the 100Hz Panny is less tolerant of heavily compressed Mpeg than the 50Hz Sony. My Dad's 32 in 100 Hz Philips looks awful IMHO when watching Sky but looks better than my 28 in 50Hz Sony for DVD.
Quite frankly, I prefer mine, even though it was half the price.
if you can turn 100Hz off completely, then try it and only use it for DVD.
I'm not sure it's as cut and dried as "Sky Digital + 100Hz set = cra picture"
Only last night Mrs Radiohead said how amazed she was at the quality of the picture when she was watching Corrie - that's a 100Hz Sony KV32FQ70 with Sky Digital. The picture really was fabulous.
I think it's more that a 100Hz set is less forgiving of a poor source than 50Hz sets generally.
Absolutely, Radiohead. It's not cut and dry because Sky sometimes broadcasts at a decent bit rate. It's just that the picture is more likely to be poorly encoded if it's on digital TV than on a DVD.
Live TV seems to be worse than pre-recorded, I guess it's because it's compressed on the fly
I run a toshiba 100 hz telly with sky and panny e 50 excellent pics so I dont believe the bit about the 100 hz just buy good quality .
As I have said on other threads about this,comparing 100hz with 50hz is subject only to one's own taste.I agree that most pictures(not just Sky) look crap on 100hz,with plastic faces and blurred vision.Some people cannot see,or are not bothered by this,in the same way that most people cannot see the 50hz flicker.
I sold some dvd's to someone the other day(recorded in LP) and he commented on the excellent quality on his Sony 100hz.To me ,the picture was awful,and not a patch on my 50hz Panasonic.The best way is to compare the 2 in a demo.If you cannot see any 50hz flicker,buy 50hz,and do not buy 100hz just because the salesman sells it as the latest thing
Originally posted by neilalford
I believe that some 100Hz TV's have big problems with Sky pictures, try turning off the 100Hz processing on the TV.
Can you actually do this?
I've bought the Pany TX28PS12 though am beginning to wish I'd bought the 50hz set now.
Anyhow there seems to be a consistent view about 100hz sets and sky so have contacted Panasonic for a definitive answer - will let you know what they say
Thanks for the advice
Although Panasonic 50hz sets are rated as one of the best,their 100hz sets are rated amongst the worst by the reviewers of What Video/Home Cinema Choice etc
Originally posted by phelings
Although Panasonic 50hz sets are rated as one of the best,their 100hz sets are rated amongst the worst by the reviewers of What Video/Home Cinema Choice etc
Have you got a brain tumor by any chance? Have you not twigged that this is the same guy who posted previously and you (and I) discussed the relative merits of 100hz / 50hz TVs? He's not asking for your opinion on his TV for ____ sake, he wants to know what measures (other than swapping his TV) might improve the picture.
Petergee - I found my SKY pictures improved (again) when I swapped the standard SCART with the one I'd previously been using on my DVD player. It was about £30-£40 when I bought it, but I can't remember the name ... might have been profigold, or maybe not.
Originally posted by phelings
I sold some dvd's to someone the other day(recorded in LP) and he commented on the excellent quality on his Sony 100hz.
Are you some sort of market-trading-knocked-off-dvd-merchant then? Roll-up roll-up, 3 block-busters for a tenner sort of thing? You'll have to let me know which car-boot sales you operate at ... :D
Thanks guys for the advice - I finally spoke to panasonic and they admitted that one of the 'characteristics' of their 100hz sets is the blurring effect that the 100hz refresh rate can cause especially during sports broadcasts which he admitted wouldn't be in evidence on the 50hz sets.
Having done some more digging around and thanks to phelings' prompt found some more websites describing exactly the problems I have been facing (it was almost as if they were describing my TV's 'characteristics' which reassures me it's not just me being a whingeing perfectionist) ie that the pany 100hz sets aren't that great, especially compared to their 50hz sets.
So the conclusions I have come to based on all the collective advice so kindly given (big thanks) is that:
1) my sky signal strength / quality are not the limiting factor
2) Scart cables will probably only make marginal differences
3) the new Panasonic 100hz TVs (as opposed to 100hz tvs in general) are not that great
4) For a 28" TV 50hz was probably fine in the first place
Consequently I have now arranged to swap the 100hz for the 50hz which I'm pleased to say Digital Point were happy to do (great customer service by the way for potential future buyers) if I covered P&P. So I've lost out a bit, cash wise but hopefully will now have a better TV which is set to last.
If however the 50hz TV is no better and has the same problems as the 100hz then I promise not to bother you all with it but will instead top myself. So if you hear on the news of a young(ish) man found buried inside a Panasonic TX28PS1 - you'll know why!
Ps - no one actually answered the bit re improving sky signal quality - was set up is it fixed or can the quality be improved at all?
Thanks again
:thumbs:
Glad you got sorted. Shame you had to swap the TV out, but if the reviews of the Panasonic 50hz TVs are a true reflection of their performance, you should be fine.
You may be able to improve signal strength by getting your dish aligned more accurately, or moved to a position which has a better line of sight to the satellite. However, my signal strength on both the feeds that power my Sky+ is only at about 60-70% and I have no issues with the picture I get at all. Only that it drops out if I have *really* heavy rainfall.
And now that he's sorted-and discovered information that supports my view-and I know he will be happy with his Panny 50hz, REMOVED
Please check the T&C's regarding swearing and personal attacks
Digital TV tends to be either working or not. That is, a poor signal doesn't normally lead to picture degredation per se, it just leads to drop outs in picture or sound if the signal gets so bad that the STB can no longer decode it.
There aren't any tweaks you can do to the box software or any fine tuning or anything like that. New Scart cables will make very little diference as the box is pretty much the weakest link in the chain anyway.
The only thing to check is that you've got the box set up for widescreen and RGB.
So its ok for Sideshowbob to accuse me of being a dealer in pirate dvd's(personal attack I think) but I can't call him an REMOVED
Please check the T&C's regarding personal attacks
The confirmation of my views made Sideshowbob's sarcastic comments look a bit stupid don't you think
Not at all. Your behaviour makes you look like a prize plonker, Rodney.
phelings I don't know why you're getting so wound up as you've stated in the post above that you're selling DVDs from recordings made from Sky.
I sold some dvd's to someone the other day(recorded in LP) and he commented on the excellent quality on his Sony 100hz.
I may be a whinging perfectionist but despite buying a brand new Panasonic widescreen TV am not convinced the picture quality is that fantastic - but it's diff to know if this is a sky issue or TV one.
Following advice in other threads I've fiddled with all the settings on my 100hz screen to maximise the picture quality but am still not overjoyed at what I've got...
This weekend was watching the cricket on channel 4 via sky on an old Sony widescreen at a mate's houseand and thought the picture quality was significantly better than on mine. It's really noticeable when watching outside sports broadcasts eg golf, cricket and footy especially when viewing distance shots...
I know all the sky settings are correct in terms of 16:9 and RGB and I notice that the sky signal is c.10% better in terms of both strength and quality at my mate's house than mine. Could this relatively small diff account for the significant quality diff?
How can you improve signal quality / strength or for my specific geographical location are my values fixed?
Will expensive / quality scart cables make any real difference?
Cheers
Answers:
Unless you're using a really crap SCART I doubt that will improve things.
A lot of channels broadcast on Sky are fairly poor quality due to bandwidth limitations (and some of the sports feeds can be atrocious. Although C4’s test coverage on my new Sony FQ70 was flawless some golf later that day on another channel was abysmal with pixellation everywhere). What Panasonic is it btw? I know that the PH40, for instance, was renowned for having poor off-air performance, but that DVD performance was top-notch.
It could simply be that your new set is less forgiving of poor sources than your mate's set.
Answers:
I believe that some 100Hz TV's have big problems with Sky pictures, try turning off the 100Hz processing on the TV.
Oh, and the signal strength from Sky shouldn't affect the picture quality, you'll just get picture break-up and sound drop outs or no picture if the strength drops too low, but as long as you're getting a good enough signal to avoid that then it shouldn't make any difference.
Answers:
Your mate's old Sony widescreen is probably a 50Hz set. I cannot stress enough how *bad* 100Hz is for watching Sky Digital - from my experience 50Hz is much better. Getting a better SCART lead won't make a hell of a lot of difference.
The issue with 100Hz is basically that it is eliminating flicker by updating the screen twice as often. Our TV signals be they analogue or digital are transmitted at 50Hz.
The 100Hz TV is therefore generating - by itself - frames that are not actually transmitted. Sky Digital already has a pretty poor picture quality (certainly compared to DVD). The 100Hz TV is essentially taking the flaws inherent in that picture and magnifying them because it's generating twice as many frames as the source signal.
What we really is for a company to produce a 100Hz set with a chipset optimised for making the best from lossy low bitrate MPEG2 images.
Answers:
I agree that the problem is probably that the 100Hz Panny is less tolerant of heavily compressed Mpeg than the 50Hz Sony. My Dad's 32 in 100 Hz Philips looks awful IMHO when watching Sky but looks better than my 28 in 50Hz Sony for DVD.
Quite frankly, I prefer mine, even though it was half the price.
if you can turn 100Hz off completely, then try it and only use it for DVD.
Answers:
I'm not sure it's as cut and dried as "Sky Digital + 100Hz set = cra picture"
Only last night Mrs Radiohead said how amazed she was at the quality of the picture when she was watching Corrie - that's a 100Hz Sony KV32FQ70 with Sky Digital. The picture really was fabulous.
I think it's more that a 100Hz set is less forgiving of a poor source than 50Hz sets generally.
Answers:
Absolutely, Radiohead. It's not cut and dry because Sky sometimes broadcasts at a decent bit rate. It's just that the picture is more likely to be poorly encoded if it's on digital TV than on a DVD.
Live TV seems to be worse than pre-recorded, I guess it's because it's compressed on the fly
Answers:
I run a toshiba 100 hz telly with sky and panny e 50 excellent pics so I dont believe the bit about the 100 hz just buy good quality .
Answers:
As I have said on other threads about this,comparing 100hz with 50hz is subject only to one's own taste.I agree that most pictures(not just Sky) look crap on 100hz,with plastic faces and blurred vision.Some people cannot see,or are not bothered by this,in the same way that most people cannot see the 50hz flicker.
I sold some dvd's to someone the other day(recorded in LP) and he commented on the excellent quality on his Sony 100hz.To me ,the picture was awful,and not a patch on my 50hz Panasonic.The best way is to compare the 2 in a demo.If you cannot see any 50hz flicker,buy 50hz,and do not buy 100hz just because the salesman sells it as the latest thing
Answers:
Originally posted by neilalford
I believe that some 100Hz TV's have big problems with Sky pictures, try turning off the 100Hz processing on the TV.
Can you actually do this?
I've bought the Pany TX28PS12 though am beginning to wish I'd bought the 50hz set now.
Anyhow there seems to be a consistent view about 100hz sets and sky so have contacted Panasonic for a definitive answer - will let you know what they say
Thanks for the advice
Answers:
Although Panasonic 50hz sets are rated as one of the best,their 100hz sets are rated amongst the worst by the reviewers of What Video/Home Cinema Choice etc
Answers:
Originally posted by phelings
Although Panasonic 50hz sets are rated as one of the best,their 100hz sets are rated amongst the worst by the reviewers of What Video/Home Cinema Choice etc
Have you got a brain tumor by any chance? Have you not twigged that this is the same guy who posted previously and you (and I) discussed the relative merits of 100hz / 50hz TVs? He's not asking for your opinion on his TV for ____ sake, he wants to know what measures (other than swapping his TV) might improve the picture.
Petergee - I found my SKY pictures improved (again) when I swapped the standard SCART with the one I'd previously been using on my DVD player. It was about £30-£40 when I bought it, but I can't remember the name ... might have been profigold, or maybe not.
Answers:
Originally posted by phelings
I sold some dvd's to someone the other day(recorded in LP) and he commented on the excellent quality on his Sony 100hz.
Are you some sort of market-trading-knocked-off-dvd-merchant then? Roll-up roll-up, 3 block-busters for a tenner sort of thing? You'll have to let me know which car-boot sales you operate at ... :D
Answers:
Thanks guys for the advice - I finally spoke to panasonic and they admitted that one of the 'characteristics' of their 100hz sets is the blurring effect that the 100hz refresh rate can cause especially during sports broadcasts which he admitted wouldn't be in evidence on the 50hz sets.
Having done some more digging around and thanks to phelings' prompt found some more websites describing exactly the problems I have been facing (it was almost as if they were describing my TV's 'characteristics' which reassures me it's not just me being a whingeing perfectionist) ie that the pany 100hz sets aren't that great, especially compared to their 50hz sets.
So the conclusions I have come to based on all the collective advice so kindly given (big thanks) is that:
1) my sky signal strength / quality are not the limiting factor
2) Scart cables will probably only make marginal differences
3) the new Panasonic 100hz TVs (as opposed to 100hz tvs in general) are not that great
4) For a 28" TV 50hz was probably fine in the first place
Consequently I have now arranged to swap the 100hz for the 50hz which I'm pleased to say Digital Point were happy to do (great customer service by the way for potential future buyers) if I covered P&P. So I've lost out a bit, cash wise but hopefully will now have a better TV which is set to last.
If however the 50hz TV is no better and has the same problems as the 100hz then I promise not to bother you all with it but will instead top myself. So if you hear on the news of a young(ish) man found buried inside a Panasonic TX28PS1 - you'll know why!
Ps - no one actually answered the bit re improving sky signal quality - was set up is it fixed or can the quality be improved at all?
Thanks again
:thumbs:
Answers:
Glad you got sorted. Shame you had to swap the TV out, but if the reviews of the Panasonic 50hz TVs are a true reflection of their performance, you should be fine.
Answers:
You may be able to improve signal strength by getting your dish aligned more accurately, or moved to a position which has a better line of sight to the satellite. However, my signal strength on both the feeds that power my Sky+ is only at about 60-70% and I have no issues with the picture I get at all. Only that it drops out if I have *really* heavy rainfall.
Answers:
And now that he's sorted-and discovered information that supports my view-and I know he will be happy with his Panny 50hz, REMOVED
Please check the T&C's regarding swearing and personal attacks
Answers:
Digital TV tends to be either working or not. That is, a poor signal doesn't normally lead to picture degredation per se, it just leads to drop outs in picture or sound if the signal gets so bad that the STB can no longer decode it.
There aren't any tweaks you can do to the box software or any fine tuning or anything like that. New Scart cables will make very little diference as the box is pretty much the weakest link in the chain anyway.
The only thing to check is that you've got the box set up for widescreen and RGB.
Answers:
So its ok for Sideshowbob to accuse me of being a dealer in pirate dvd's(personal attack I think) but I can't call him an REMOVED
Please check the T&C's regarding personal attacks
Answers:
The confirmation of my views made Sideshowbob's sarcastic comments look a bit stupid don't you think
Answers:
Not at all. Your behaviour makes you look like a prize plonker, Rodney.
Answers:
phelings I don't know why you're getting so wound up as you've stated in the post above that you're selling DVDs from recordings made from Sky.
I sold some dvd's to someone the other day(recorded in LP) and he commented on the excellent quality on his Sony 100hz.
1 2