# HD picture quality



## dorfd1 (Jul 16, 2008)

IS the HD picture really bad?


----------



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

With Dish? No, actually it's damn good.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Curious... what prompts you to ask that question?

I'm happy with my Dish HD.


----------



## Calvin386 (May 23, 2007)

Mine is excellent. Actually people tell me I have the best HD they have seen.


----------



## bamanick (Feb 23, 2007)

I'm a new Dish customer (left Directv for a couple of reasons) and I have to say my HD is very sharp. I think sometimes people watch programs on an HD channel that aren't (or maybe I should say weren't) hd programs and judge on that basis and you really can't do that.


----------



## Rduce (May 16, 2008)

I have a friend that has the same exact television as I do, he has D* and I have E* and he says I have the better picture, but honestly I cannot tell any difference between the two.


----------



## pmsmith66 (Feb 13, 2003)

Very few complaints on picture quality. Every once in a while on some channels but I'm 99.9% pleased.


----------



## david_jr (Dec 10, 2006)

I find the HD PQ to be excellent. I have to laugh when I read posts like, "D* is generally believed to have the superior PQ."  Has anyone ever done any double blind side by side comparisons under controlled conditions?


----------



## olds403 (Nov 20, 2007)

It will also depend on what size screen you are viewing it on. The bigger the screen, the worse it will look. I am watching mine on a 60" and am generally happy although I think dish is a little softer than over-the-air HD.


----------



## ka8zay (Feb 12, 2009)

Picture quality here is excellent, I have Plasma and HD projection TV's and I have had D* and Cable and I am very happy with DISH. I found Cable to be the worst.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

david_jr said:


> I find the HD PQ to be excellent. I have to laugh when I read posts like, "D* is generally believed to have the superior PQ."  Has anyone ever done any double blind side by side comparisons under controlled conditions?


I didn't do a 'double blind.. yada,yada,yada' test, but I squinted! 

When I made the switch from E to D, I watched both side by side. The HD was different on each, but I didn't think one was better than the other. If I had to describe the difference, I would call E's slightly softer.

But honestly, after a couple of days with either, I doubt you would notice it.


----------



## et121212 (Feb 9, 2009)

Have had cable HD, OTA HD and Dish Network HD. I'd say Dish (component)<Dish(HDMI) ~ OTA. Cable HD (Charter) is obviously worse than any of the above. 

Never had any experience with DirectTV HD (although I watch Direct TV at the office daily; we have zoomed SD picture on plasma TV's-- a terrible waste of plasma TV).


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

bamanick said:


> I'm a new Dish customer (left Directv for a couple of reasons) and I have to say my HD is very sharp. I think sometimes people watch programs on an HD channel that aren't (or maybe I should say weren't) hd programs and judge on that basis and you really can't do that.


If you'd ever had the chance to see the HD feeds of the same channels as downlinked directly from the provider, you'd be surprised at how much better it *can* look than what DISH is sending out.

That having been said, I'd say E*'s HD is pretty good, D*'s is OK and cable quite often is horrible.

FIOS on the other hand can look quite good.

I also remember when OTA ATSC HD looked incredible; with the increasing addition of subchannels, that era is long gone.

So to get back to the original question, no, it isn't horrible, but it's also not as good as it *could* be&#8230;


----------



## olguy (Jan 9, 2006)

olds403 said:


> It will also depend on what size screen you are viewing it on. The bigger the screen, the worse it will look. I am watching mine on a 60" and am generally happy although I think dish is a little softer than over-the-air HD.


I agree that is the case with my 65". I do prefer OTA. And currently record what I can OTA due to the CC problems with my local CBS and NBC affiliates.


----------



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

Just because it's OTA doesn't mean it looks great. I've noticed many OTA sports events that have quite a bit of macroblocking and compress artifacts, especially basketball and other things with lots of movement.

To be honest, it's extremely hard to tell the difference usually between my OTA HD and Dish HD on the same channel, and I've done lots of A/B flipping back and forth comparison. Some looks good, some looks mediocre, just depends.

OTOH, I've seen some satellite-based HD that looks extremely well with very little artifacts; many of the movie channels look great I think because they are pre-compressed with multi-pass compression, which is much better than on-the-fly live compression.


----------



## olds403 (Nov 20, 2007)

When I speak of OTA being sharper on my TV vs Dish I am comparing primetime HD programming. I don't watch sports at all so that does not concern me. I watch programs like Fringe on Fox and other primetime dramas, these look quite a bit sharper than the same programming via Dish.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

And that is why it has been said many times that picture quality is a personal opinion. It depends on the programming, equipment, channel, personal perception, etc.


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

olds403 said:


> When I speak of OTA being sharper on my TV vs Dish I am comparing primetime HD programming. I don't watch sports at all so that does not concern me. I watch programs like Fringe on Fox and other primetime dramas, these look quite a bit sharper than the same programming via Dish.


There is much less compression viewing OTA channels vs. Dish delivered channels. I think that produces a much sharper picture.


----------



## rocket69 (Oct 27, 2008)

Dish PQ is top of the line as far as consumer sat goes. PBS HD via FTA box is just as good as OTA PQ. 

We have customers come in all the time asking what service is better we alwas say dish as far as hardware and picture quality and show them the same chanel at the same time running on dish and direct.. 70% of them can see the crisp and sharp picture of dish vs direct.The other 30% need to get new glasses. If customer is willing to spend $199 extra every year to sub to a sports pack MLB/NFL then direct is for you...

Cant wate and see what the quality on direct will look like once they max out the 2 new birds.. 

Dish has 3 birds at 110, and 3 at 119 (Some transponders rented to direct) and 2 at 129 chances of dish running out of space probly not till 2011 when the next birds fly.


----------



## Jack White (Sep 17, 2002)

OTA,FiosTV, 4DTV, and even some cable companies have WAY WAY better picture quality than Dish.


----------



## brant (Jul 6, 2008)

Jack White said:


> OTA,FiosTV, 4DTV, and even some cable companies have WAY WAY better picture quality than Dish.


I've compared every OTA HD channel I get, and none of them look any better than dish network's HD.

if you put your nose an inch from the screen, you can notice a very minute difference, but from 3' away you can't tell.

I just got my locals in HD on dish, and they look identical to the OTA HD.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Ive got a calibrated 50" plasma, and its ludicrous to say you have to stick you're nose to the screen to notice OTA being better. Dish's hd locals are good, but are softer than OTA, and thats at 8ft.


----------



## Bobby H (Mar 23, 2008)

HD picture quality with Dish Network varies by channel. I think the HBO HD channels tend to look best.

With local channels in HD, I find the OTA broadcasts look better than what's available on satellite. One very important difference: the NBC and CBS HD locals on D* and E* are delivered in "HD Lite" 1440 X 1080 resolution rather than 1920 X 1080.

Another issue is bit rate. The NBC and FOX affiliates in my viewing market are not multiplexing their channels at all. Their 1080i and 720p broadcasts are being delivered with constant bit rates of approximately 19Mbit/sec. I strongly doubt the MPEG-4 signals in HD Lite coming from the satellite are running anywhere near that high a data rate.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

rocket69 said:


> Dish has 3 birds at 110, and 3 at 119 (Some transponders rented to direct) and 2 at 129 chances of dish running out of space probly not till 2011 when the next birds fly.


Incorrect, Dish is not renting any transponders to DirecTV. DirecTV has the license for the three frequencies at 110 and the ten at 119 and has their own satellites there.


----------



## brant (Jul 6, 2008)

elwaylite said:


> Ive got a calibrated 50" plasma, and its ludicrous to say you have to stick you're nose to the screen to notice OTA being better. Dish's hd locals are good, but are softer than OTA, and thats at 8ft.


its ludicrous for you to assert you know more about my own television and picture quality having never seen it.

maybe i'm the only one that didn't swallow the "OTA-is-always-better-than-dish" placebo pill.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

I would suggest the OP do a search on Picture Quality on Dish forums and DirecTV forums. Bottom line.. Too many variables go into the equation so people are going to experience different things. 

I have both OTA and Dish HD and my A/B testing shows little difference at this time (Was some before). The only words I have is "Your Mileage may vary" and end of story. So to answer the ops question No.. Not even close.


----------



## chainblu (May 15, 2006)

dorfd1 said:


> IS the HD picture really bad?


Well being that this tread is in it's 3rd week and the OP hasn't bothered to check back in... the question begs to be asked: Who said it WAS?


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

brant said:


> its ludicrous for you to assert you know more about my own television and picture quality having never seen it.
> 
> maybe i'm the only one that didn't swallow the "OTA-is-always-better-than-dish" placebo pill.


Whatever guy. 

Dish cant even do HD better than D* on National HD, and you think they can do a hd lil better than the ota signal youd get directly.


----------



## garys (Nov 4, 2005)

elwaylite said:


> Ive got a calibrated 50" plasma, and its ludicrous to say you have to stick you're nose to the screen to notice OTA being better. Dish's hd locals are good, but are softer than OTA, and thats at 8ft.


Different sources require different settings, OTA should be better due to less compression. But keep in mind, those with smaller screens will have a harder time viewing the difference. A softer image on a 42" screen is a lot less visible.


----------



## Mindhaz (Sep 25, 2006)

I was a long time customer of D* and recently switched to DISH. Comparable services, but overall PQ of D* is better... unless of course I have some alignment issues, but I don't think so. DISH isn't bad, but I can tell the difference at 12-15'... and some channels work better than others.

Watching Blu-Ray now makes a big difference. I never paid much attention before.


----------



## brant (Jul 6, 2008)

elwaylite said:


> Whatever guy.
> 
> Dish cant even do HD better than D* on National HD, and you think they can do a hd lil better than the ota signal youd get directly.
> 
> I guess you think upconversion looks as good as Blu-ray on your tv too?


Oh the "whatever guy" comeback. You can't argue with that!


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Mindhaz said:


> I was a long time customer of D* and recently switched to DISH. Comparable services, but overall PQ of D* is better... *unless of course I have some alignment issues, but I don't think so*. DISH isn't bad, but I can tell the difference at 12-15'... and some channels work better than others.


_*Alignment issues will cause NO PICTURE or "drop outs" not actual PQ differences*_.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Ok folks. Seemed to be getting a bit personal here. lets try and avoid the personal attacks.. I have removed the ones that I felt stepped over the line. Future attacks will be subject to further moderation actions.


----------



## Mindhaz (Sep 25, 2006)

smackman said:


> _*Alignment issues will cause NO PICTURE or "drop outs" not actual PQ differences*_.


Define "drop-out"... weak signals lead to pixelation and other weirdness on every system I've ever used. Rain fade on satellite, distance issues with OTA, etc. There is a state between all or nothing.


----------



## smackman (Sep 19, 2006)

Mindhaz said:


> Define "drop-out"... weak signals lead to pixelation and other weirdness on every system I've ever used. Rain fade on satellite, distance issues with OTA, etc. *There is a state between all or nothing.*


Yes there is but this does not define "normal" Picture Quality.
A bad installation is what it is.
When the PQ is actually compared, Surely someone will not gauge actual PQ based on a poor installation which will cause pixaltion.
Both Direct and Dish have rain fade issues which will cause drop out and or pixalation. 
Distance issues is normal with OTA Antennas but the PQ should be compared under a normal not abnormal circumstances.

I thought we were talking PQ with the same conditions and that is a "LOCKED" signal not a weak signal issue or a distant OTA signal issue.
This is the world of Digital Transmission; There is no "snow" or actual fuzzy picture.

I believe Dish Network HD PQ is excellent. I realize Blu ray looks better but thats a given; HD OTA PQ is also excellent but not that much better than Dish at least on my 55 inch Mitsubishi.:icon_peac


----------



## ehb224 (Apr 4, 2008)

Does anyone besides myself find it strange that the OP has not made one response to this thread since starting it?

Dance puppets, dance!:nono2::nono2::nono2:


----------



## krames (Mar 10, 2009)

I just switched from cable and I am unimpressed with the HD picture quality. In particular I have noticed the following:


My local channels do not seem as crisp
The picture seems a bit grainy on some channels (Discovery in particular)
The channel water marks have a rough appearance
The text on ESPN seems like it has been photo copied several times.

Am I missing a configuration on my VIP 722? Or is Dish in the process of tweaking their satellites?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Hi, and welcome..

If you just switched to Dish, here's a couple of things to check quickly...

The Dish receivers default to 480i output to ensure initial compatibility with all TVs (some TVs don't support some modes)... so verify you are set to either 720p or 1080i output on the Dish receiver.

Next... you might need to recalibrate some settings on your TV. Things like contrast and tint sometimes need to be set differently for different sources (cable, satellite, dvd/blu, etc.) I found I needed different settings for satellite than I'd had for cable to get optimal picture quality.


----------



## skyviewmark1 (Sep 28, 2006)

Both have excellent quality.. Some channels vary between services, but overall I have to give the edge to DirecTV in PQ. I have both and can switch between them on my projector.. And for the most part the DirecTV delivers a slightly better picture. More defined it appears. But it's ever so slight. Both are hooked up identically by HDMI to my Onkyo Receiver, then fed to my projecor via HDMI, so any difference has to be in the processing chip of the Satellite box.. And I will give DirecTV the advantage on this one.. But it doesn't make my HR20 any less of a piece of crap just because it has a better picture. I still watch my 622 most of all because of it's stability.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

From another post here:



> Ron is exactly right in that PQ is subjective; some will prefer one over another, regardless of actual technical figures. The TV you use can also highlight things that some might prefer and while others would be annoyed.
> 
> On the other hand, strictly looking that the numbers, providers would be ranked thusly, from best to worst:
> 
> ...


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

And here's another thread discussing Uverse:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=148127


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

IIRC it's been reported that for Dish's Eastern Arc MPEG4 SD channels they're also 480x480 resolution.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

That's possible. The info I posted was for the 119/110 SD feeds; the feeds going to Eastern Arc are separately encoded, and could easily be down-rezzed differently too.


----------



## Orange Man (Oct 9, 2003)

Allot has to do with the TV set itself and if it's been calibrated and tuned. Both of our sets a newer Sony LCD and our older Mits RPTV have been and frankly both shine with Dishs HD especially the Mits. 


Kenny J


----------



## bubba29 (Mar 14, 2009)

I recently signed up for dish network classic gold with hd gold. i had time warner hd service for about 7 years before that. every channel except the HD channels blow away my cable picture. honestly, i am dissappointed in the HD picture, it just isn't as clear and crisp as twc was.


----------



## ka8zay (Feb 12, 2009)

See I switched and I think all the HD on DISH is either better or just as good as cable was. I only watch HD programming when possible since everything else just doesn't cut it on big screens and plasma. Perhaps like the post above you need to check your output and make sure you have it set to HD output. As noted before the receivers do not default to HD output.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

bubba29 said:


> I recently signed up for dish network classic gold with hd gold. i had time warner hd service for about 7 years before that. every channel except the HD channels blow away my cable picture. honestly, i am dissappointed in the HD picture, it just isn't as clear and crisp as twc was.


That is strange as I would rate Dish's SD channels as "Good" at best. Both Comcast and UVerse SD is better. Dish's HD is better then either Comcast or UVerse in our area. As was stated above, make sure your Dish receiver is set to output either 720p or 1080i... the default is 480.


----------



## krames (Mar 10, 2009)

My box is outputing 1080i and I am still think tw has a better picture. It doesn't help that the vip 722 doesn't pass-though HD signals. Upscaling a 720p signal to a 1080i one just looks bad in my option.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

What STB did TW use?


----------



## CoolGui (Feb 9, 2006)

krames said:


> My box is outputing 1080i and I am still think tw has a better picture. It doesn't help that the vip 722 doesn't pass-though HD signals. Upscaling a 720p signal to a 1080i one just looks bad in my option.


Actually, from all that I have read, a different resolution is transmitted by Dish and resized anyway at your receiver no matter if you use 1080i or 720p...


----------



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

krames said:


> My box is outputing 1080i and I am still think tw has a better picture. It doesn't help that the vip 722 doesn't pass-though HD signals. Upscaling a 720p signal to a 1080i one just looks bad in my option.


Well a 720p source like Fox looks great on my TV when the 722 is at 1080i. I guess I need a better TV to discern the difference?


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

Most likely his TW STB didn't do passthrough either. The D* receivers have passthrough, from what I heard the delay when switching channels is close to unbearable and most don't use it.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

HobbyTalk said:


> Most likely his TW STB didn't do passthrough either. The D* receivers have passthrough, from what I heard the delay when switching channels is close to unbearable and most don't use it.


The delay depends on how quickly your TV will sync up with the change in output resolution, not the fault of the STB.


----------



## krames (Mar 10, 2009)

Just the standard Scientific Atlanta 8300 explorer. Nothing special.


----------



## krames (Mar 10, 2009)

I think its more noticeable on 52" and bigger. I think cartoons always look decent in HD. Have you checked out ESPN? The text looks like it has been photo copied several times. It looks really jagged.


----------



## krames (Mar 10, 2009)

HobbyTalk said:


> Most likely his TW STB didn't do passthrough either. The D* receivers have passthrough, from what I heard the delay when switching channels is close to unbearable and most don't use it.


I dont think its bad at all.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

krames said:


> I think its more noticeable on 52" and bigger. I think cartoons always look decent in HD. Have you checked out ESPN? The text looks like it has been photo copied several times. It looks really jagged.


I have a 60" tv. I am not seeing this. How close are you to the TV and what text are you talking about? Are you talking about the scrolling text? When you see this do a PIP swap and let me know if you see a difference in the scrolling text.


----------



## ZBoomer (Feb 21, 2008)

krames said:


> I think its more noticeable on 52" and bigger. I think cartoons always look decent in HD. Have you checked out ESPN? The text looks like it has been photo copied several times. It looks really jagged.


ESPN (including text) looks awesome on my 60" Kuro Plasma w/ 722 @ 1080i, maybe I need a 110 inch?


----------



## ka8zay (Feb 12, 2009)

krames said:


> I think its more noticeable on 52" and bigger. I think cartoons always look decent in HD. Have you checked out ESPN? The text looks like it has been photo copied several times. It looks really jagged.


I think you have a bad setup somewhere in there. Especially if you are talking a National HD Channel like ESPN, its got a GREAT picture here and there is no jagged edges on my TEXT. Everything is very clean on the HD. If I have anything to complain on the E HD it would be with the local HD feeds, but they are getting better all the time as they are still tuning those. I have written to Dish Quality and they have been in constant contact with me as they work on tuning the local feeds gathering my input to the quality and they are looking very good at this point, I can hardly tell a difference when I switch from antenna to Sat now.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

RAD said:


> The delay depends on how quickly your TV will sync up with the change in output resolution, not the fault of the STB.


I never said it was the fault of the STB.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

HobbyTalk said:


> I never said it was the fault of the STB.


Never said you did, did I? Just cleaifying in case something thought it might be the D* STB's fault.


----------



## ka8zay (Feb 12, 2009)

krames said:


> I dont think its bad at all.


You would know this how? You said you switched from cable to E didn't you?


----------



## krames (Mar 10, 2009)

ka8zay said:


> You would know this how? You said you switched from cable to E didn't you?


My cable box has pass though. I usually just select the channel I want from the guide and then there is about a second or so delay while it changes modes/resolutions.


----------



## krames (Mar 10, 2009)

Ron Barry said:


> I have a 60" tv. I am not seeing this. How close are you to the TV and what text are you talking about? Are you talking about the scrolling text? When you see this do a PIP swap and let me know if you see a difference in the scrolling text.


I am talking about static text on the screen and I was probably about 3 feet away at that point. And yeah, it's better the farther back you are, but I still think it was better with my other provider.

I am not sure if I am just extra picky here or I haven't set things up properly. Any suggestions on how to improve it?


----------



## ka8zay (Feb 12, 2009)

krames said:


> I dont think its bad at all.





krames said:


> My cable box has pass though. I usually just select the channel I want from the guide and then there is about a second or so delay while it changes modes/resolutions.


Okay sorry you confused me as I think the original poster was referring to the delay to the D STB not the cable one. Then again as stated before a lot of that has to do with the speed of the TV anyway.


----------

