Wow! Hdtv!

[minniecarousel]

We just got HDTV through our cable provider. It's only ABC, NBC, Showtime, HBO & PBS. But PBS is running travelogues on this HD channel - and it is unbelieveable! You feel like you're there - it's like watching TV in 3-D!

 

[ToyStory Fan]

Isn't great!

I got mine a few months ago after seeing it at a friends house. I struggled for a while trying to decide satellite or cable, but the sat was too expensive for all the extra equipment. It's cool that your cable company broadcsts the networks in HD, mine doesn't yet...even thought with an external antenna or HD receiver I could. I get HBO-HD, Fox Sports HD and Madison Square Garden Network HD. I'm hoping they hurry and expand the offerings, or at least broadcast the already HD signals all the way thru.

 

[bicker]

Bumping this ancient thread to mark a milestone: The United States just passed the point where now most homes have an HDTV. The percentage jumped from 48% last year to 61% this year.

 

[foolishmortal]

Bumping this ancient thread to mark a milestone: The United States just passed the point where now most homes have an HDTV. The percentage jumped from 48% last year to 61% this year.

AHAHA Before I seen Bickers post I was about to say who mcfly, welcome to the year 2000. lol

 

[minniecarousel]

ha!

This is a typical response for a thread started by me: ONE response! I'm the "Queen of killing my own threads"!

And, now that I've seen 3D TV, HD isn't quite the same thing, but obviously, I was impressed back in '03.

 

[bicker]

This milestone also helps us put a peg in the ground. Back in 2003, about 4%-5% of homes had HDTVs. I suspect we'd have to go back to 2001 or 2000 to get back to the 1% mark. That's where we are with 3D right now... about 1%. So figure, if 3D follows the same track as HD did, 3D televisions would be in a majority of homes sometime around 2020. I think it will take longer, though, because HD really replaced SD, and was a substantial improvement is every experiential aspect (including, incidentally, multi-channel sound). By comparison, 3D is almost surely just going to be a supplement to HD. It's a bit of sugar on top, that really makes sense only in a limited set of circumstances, such as movies like Avatar. So my prediction is that 3D will reach a majority of homes by sometimes between 2030 and 2035.

 

[tvguy]

This milestone also helps us put a peg in the ground. Back in 2003, about 4%-5% of homes had HDTVs. I suspect we'd have to go back to 2001 or 2000 to get back to the 1% mark. That's where we are with 3D right now... about 1%. So figure, if 3D follows the same track as HD did, 3D televisions would be in a majority of homes sometime around 2020. I think it will take longer, though, because HD really replaced SD, and was a substantial improvement is every experiential aspect (including, incidentally, multi-channel sound). By comparison, 3D is almost surely just going to be a supplement to HD. It's a bit of sugar on top, that really makes sense only in a limited set of circumstances, such as movies like Avatar. So my prediction is that 3D will reach a majority of homes by sometimes between 2030 and 2035.

HDTV's yes. HD reception no. About 30% here in the 20th market. We just did a huge study on reception....we're a station still on VHF, and are working to move to UHF.
The most troubling thing to me....as the owner of a 1983 RCA tube SD Stereo TV, and a 1996 RCA tube SD Stereo TV that I am waiting to die before buying an HDTV.....is that many of my friends are on their second and third HDTV's, because they die after about 3 or 4 years.

 

[bicker]

Figure that reception numbers don't include those folks who have Blu-ray disc players but no HD broadcast source. That'll boost the number of home using their HDTVs for HD. It won't reach the full 61%, but it'll sure get closer.

Practically no consumer electronic devices are made, these days, to last 17+ years. Given how consumers are so insanely price-conscious, there is practically no incentive for consumer electronics to be designed with the higher cost-profile commensurate with longer-lasting electronics.

Still, most folks are getting 6 or 7 good years of use out of their HDTVs (and counting). It is only a small minority of LCDs and plasmas (at least) that are failing before that.

 

[mrodgers]

The most troubling thing to me....as the owner of a 1983 RCA tube SD Stereo TV, and a 1996 RCA tube SD Stereo TV that I am waiting to die before buying an HDTV.....is that many of my friends are on their second and third HDTV's, because they die after about 3 or 4 years.

That's me, 1996 Magnavox 27 inch tube and the bedroom has a 1993 (I think) Magnavox 19 inch.

I had my first viewing of HD on Thanksgiving. I had never seen HD before. The football game was on. I have to say, it was absolutely stunning and so clear and sharp...... when no one was moving. As soon as a play started, everything was choppy because LCD televisions just can't keep up with moving action. It was dizzying to watch.

I pretty much only watch hockey on TV. Hockey is so fast paced, it is useless to watch on an LCD television, HD or not. My 1996 tube TV may not be as clear or sharp, but I can actually look at it the whole game rather than needing to take a break and look away every few minutes.

Not sure what the Plasmas are like (HDwise, anything widescreen is useless if you don't have HD as you only use half the TV screen) but I know I sure won't be spending the money for an LCD, especially if I have to replace it or fix it every few years.

 

[phamton]

This milestone also helps us put a peg in the ground. Back in 2003, about 4%-5% of homes had HDTVs. I suspect we'd have to go back to 2001 or 2000 to get back to the 1% mark. That's where we are with 3D right now... about 1%. So figure, if 3D follows the same track as HD did, 3D televisions would be in a majority of homes sometime around 2020. I think it will take longer, though, because HD really replaced SD, and was a substantial improvement is every experiential aspect (including, incidentally, multi-channel sound). By comparison, 3D is almost surely just going to be a supplement to HD. It's a bit of sugar on top, that really makes sense only in a limited set of circumstances, such as movies like Avatar. So my prediction is that 3D will reach a majority of homes by sometimes between 2030 and 2035.

So will you bump this thread in 2030? That way Minniecarousel can't say her threads die.

 

[Shutterbug]

The first HD I saw was at Epcot...I was like this is sooo cool but its gonna take forever for it to really happen. Well welcome to forever lol

 

[bicker]

Not sure what the Plasmas are like

They're fantastic. But then again, LCDs are pretty incredible too. It sounds to me that when you viewed them, either there was a bad configuration setting, the source was bad, or the television was defective.

I just found a setting last night on my Blu-ray disc player that ratcheted up the video quality it provides my HDTV... a very noticeable improvement. So I'd figure it was just a bad configuration setting.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

And yet when we make videos of elementary school plays only about 10-15% of the parents buy the Blu-ray version. I keep telling my wife we need to quit making DVDs and force the darn parents to get with the times.

I just found a setting last night on my Blu-ray disc player that ratcheted up the video quality it provides my HDTV... a very noticeable improvement. So I'd figure it was just a bad configuration setting.

That wouldn't be the feature that converts 24fps video to 120fps video by interpolating the frames in between, would it? It makes movies look much, much smoother. We did an experiment with about a dozen people and that feature. 1 person loved it. A couple didn't notice a significant difference. The rest of us, myself included, all hated it. It looked much smoother, but it looked less like a movie and more like a soap opera.

 

[bicker]

And yet when we make videos of elementary school plays only about 10-15% of the parents buy the Blu-ray version.

Well, I'm not sure I would, either. HD is really incredible, when production values are high, but when production values are low, I feel you're often better off with SD, or perhaps even better off with a 2" diagonal window on your laptop... the less resolution the better sometimes.

That wouldn't be the feature that converts 24fps video to 120fps video by interpolating the frames in between, would it?

No: Believe it or not, my Blu-ray disc player was set to output 1080i instead of 1080p.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Well, I'm not sure I would, either. HD is really incredible, when production values are high, but when production values are low, I feel you're often better off with SD, or perhaps even better off with a 2" diagonal window on your laptop... the less resolution the better sometimes.

I guess the parents have no way of knowing unless they watch some footage from the earlier plays. I think we put together a pretty high quality production. We shoot with three HD video cameras (Canon XH-A1, Canon 5D Mark II, and Canon 7D) using high quality optics. I use manual exposure carefully calibrated with zebra stripes. I use a custom white balance for each camera and make adjustments to make sure that the video from the three cameras matches well. By using 3 cameras, we almost always have a good looking shot on the screen. It's not Hollywood production quality, but the BR looks a whole lot nicer than the DVD.

I find it frustrating because I know that many parents will regret having the DVD years from now. It would be like buying a black and white version of a color movie back when TV was transitioning from b&w to color. OK, it's not quite that extreme, but the concept is the same. As TV sizes increase and quality improves the difference between a 1/3 megapixel DVD image and a 2 megapixel HD image is pretty noticeable.

On the other hand, the school can only reproduce the DVDs, so I have to manually burn each and every BR. I also donate the disks and the BRs aren't cheap. Still, I'd rather know that the parents are getting the best possible quality.

 

[wvjules]

We bought a 42" 1080p 120hz LED TV a few weeks ago and it had that choppiness. Acutally not choppy but sort of unnatural looking. We just had to adjust the smooth motion settings and now it is amazing. The old LCD is downstairs waiting to be mounted above the firelpace. I must say, I was impressed by LCD but the LED blows me away. It is a beautiful picture, clear, sharp, bright, crisp. Now as soon as I get my soundbar for Christmas I'll be all set.

 

[Aimeedyan]

We bought our first HDTV in 2003 - it was a DLP. Sadly, it lived a short life and died about 3 years later (just months before the 3 year warranty ran out!). But because we purchased the extended warranty from Best Buy (and I know experts say they aren't worth it - but we have used those warranties on almost all our major purchases!) we got a credit at BB in the amt we paid for the TV originally. 3 years later, the prices had come down a lot so that bought us a very nice LCD that wasn't in our price range originally.

We also have a huge plasma, we purchased it last year.

So, our first HDTV only lived 3 years but was a DLP. Service tech who came to the house said they see LOTS of DLPs with issues because there are so many moving parts. Ours was deemed not worth fixing in the end.

Replacement LCD is only 4 years old or so and the Plasma is just a year old. I hope they hold out! We have two old tube TVs in bedrooms that don't seem to ever have plans of dying

I really love the 3D TVs, and stop at the demos anytime I'm near one, but with the addition of the huge TV upstairs, I'm not willing to upgrade our TVs yet. I also would like to wait until the TVs have been out a little longer and there are more movies and programming in 3D.

(on a side note, we bought a 32 inch LCD for my dad for XMas and paid $250 for it! Amazing just how CHEAP they are now!)

 

[Dan Murphy]

.....I just found a setting last night on my Blu-ray disc player that ratcheted up the video quality it provides my HDTV... a very noticeable improvement. So I'd figure it was just a bad configuration setting.

What setting change was that, bicker?

 

[bicker]

What setting change was that, bicker?

Settings \ Display:
- BD Wise : On
- Resolution : BD Wise

 

[Dan Murphy]

Settings \ Display:
- BD Wise : On
- Resolution : BD Wise

I'll have to check to see if I have that. I have a Sony Blu-Ray, a Sony HD LCD XBR, a few years old for both. Blu-Ray looks very good, but not stunning.