# Artifacts on SciFi Channel, why?



## Bill Mullin (Jul 24, 2002)

Generally I use my 721 to record movies off many of the premium channels and the SciFi channel. Movies recorded from all the premium channels look fine, but those from the SciFi channel are badly pixellated (full of artifacts), which is especially apparent on night scenes.  What is causing this and is there anything I can do to improve the picture?

Thanks, Bill


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

IT has been rumoured for many moons that the premium channels and PPV get more bandwidth. If you are getting the sat signal, there is nothing you can do besides complain to E* about using too much compression on their signal on some of their channels. YOu can sometimes reduce the effects by properly calibrating your tv to lessen the effects, like reducing the sharpness, making sure the brightness adn contrast are set correctly, etc....most use a calibration disk like AVIA or DVE(Digital Video Essentials)


----------



## navychop (Jul 13, 2005)

Yes, I've seen it on my 61" also. I think Spike is worse- look at the "smooth" walls in the background in DS9.


----------



## Bill Mullin (Jul 24, 2002)

Since this problem has been around awhile and Dish has done nothing to allievate the situation, it sounds hopeless.

Here's a couple of interesting things I've discovered since my first post:

- The sound is fine, only the picture is fubar'd.
- I recorded a 4 hour, 16 minute event on the SciFi channel, but erasing it only freed up 3 hours and 33 minutes. Had the remainder been used for compressed bytes, I may have had a crisp picture!


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Bill Mullin said:


> Since this problem has been around awhile and Dish has done nothing to allievate the situation, it sounds hopeless.
> 
> Here's a couple of interesting things I've discovered since my first post:
> 
> ...


It doesnt work like that Bill...the most likely answer is the DVR's just dont estimate free space that well....and E* has done many things, but most all of them would just make the problem worse, like adding more channels, and not having more satelittes to increase the bandwidth available to each channel on each transponder. D* is in the exact same boat, having added literally hundreds of local channels for all the DMA's, but they havent launched that many more satelittes to provide the bandwidth needed to accomodate all the added channels...I've been on sat since 97, and the PQ seems to get worse every year. The PQ was outstanding back in '99 b4 they started adding locals...

I don't know specifics, but the video is variable bit rate, more bits for more motion, etc....so judging free space is not going to be perfect ever, but I believe the audio is constant bit rate, and its much easier to deal with...the sound may seem fine, but it still stinks compared to uncompressed PCM, or MLP....Since Sci-Fi is not high def yet, its sound is broadcast as mp3 audio I believe which means chances are it couldnt even compete with Dolby Digital, which in itself if flawed due to its lossy compression...


----------



## Kevin Brown (Sep 4, 2005)

The funny part is: I had the same problem with the Sci Fi channel over cable. I don't know if the cause is the Sci Fi channel feed itself? Or they don't get any respect (or bandwidth!) from the providers.


----------



## rocky01 (Mar 20, 2005)

the PAX channel is otrocious and it's particularly intolerable since they are the only game in town for international athletics broadcasts


----------



## booger (Nov 1, 2005)

I'd bet the poor picture quality is the provider's fault. Unless SciFi has reduced their quality over time, and I don't see why they would.

I actually remember when the SciFi channel started. My friend had a big ugly dish. The channel started up with a count-down. It went on for months I believe. So I made sure to be in front of the tube the day the counter got to zero. I was and it was pretty cool. I don't remember the first show.

My point is the picture quality was superb (as is the case with a lot of c-band programming).


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

hey give PAX break. they are a small time , christian focused channel. It's not like they are rich or anything  
but being local to them, it is cool since they are broadcasting on all 8 HD UHF channels, though only 1 I think is in HD. The others are alternate programing, music videos, and maybe one is the main channel in spanish. but you really can't expect a lot from PAX, they don't make that much money


----------



## navychop (Jul 13, 2005)

I believe it's 6 subchannels they're using, and I've never seen any HD on them. Channel 66, right? They're not PAX anymore, they're going to "i" for independent.


----------



## rocky01 (Mar 20, 2005)

faith based or not, i would like to strangle whoever is delivering such sub par performance. pass the plate somebody!


----------



## Kevin Brown (Sep 4, 2005)

And ... this is my fear about HDTV. That instead of better quality video with the higher bandwidth that will be available, that we'll get "compressed" high def video quality, that while maybe it will be better than std def or EDTV, that won't be as good as the specs for HDTV allow.

How long truly, do you think, if ever, it will be before Comcast, Dish, or DirecTV give us true full bandwidth 1080p? I'm not holding my breath. And that's one reason why I'm holding off on HD.


----------



## Bill Mullin (Jul 24, 2002)

The last 2 movies I recorded from the SciFi channel looked very good . . . has anyone else noticed an improvement?


----------



## kmcnamara (Jan 30, 2004)

Kevin Brown said:


> And ... this is my fear about HDTV. That instead of better quality video with the higher bandwidth that will be available, that we'll get "compressed" high def video quality, that while maybe it will be better than std def or EDTV, that won't be as good as the specs for HDTV allow.
> 
> How long truly, do you think, if ever, it will be before Comcast, Dish, or DirecTV give us true full bandwidth 1080p? I'm not holding my breath. And that's one reason why I'm holding off on HD.


This is an excellent point. Compression is a wonderful thing most of the time, but it also has allowed the providers to claim "crystal clear digital video" while compressing the video to crap to cram more channels onto the transponders/channels. With the HDlite concept, we're already seeing this effect. I'm perfectly happy watching beautiful (mostly uncompressed) OTA digital video.


----------



## seattlemike (Feb 21, 2006)

I wonder how many dish subscribers like me out there are unable to receive OAR HD channels, does dish care about us? Will we be forever cursed with over compression on our big new HD displays. 

Mike


----------

