# Stars HD: Torchwood



## koralis (Aug 10, 2005)

Unlike any other channel and show, when watching Torchwood the shadowy low-end of the brightness spectrums seems very muddled... not a lot of distinction between tones (particularly facial skintone.)

I did a (not very scientific) recalibration of my TV set, and while the picture improved (got rid of some odd banding that showed up after putting in a new bulb) the previous problem remains.


I'm starting to think it's a matter of an overly compressed signal and Torchwood shooting so many dark scenes. Anyone else notice this or is it just my TV?


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

koralis said:


> Unlike any other channel and show, when watching Torchwood the shadowy low-end of the brightness spectrums seems very muddled... not a lot of distinction between tones (particularly facial skintone.)
> 
> I did a (not very scientific) recalibration of my TV set, and while the picture improved (got rid of some odd banding that showed up after putting in a new bulb) the previous problem remains.
> 
> I'm starting to think it's a matter of an overly compressed signal and Torchwood shooting so many dark scenes. Anyone else notice this or is it just my TV?


I'll take a look, but please give me the episode and the minute time of a good example.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

I haven't noticed at all.


----------



## koralis (Aug 10, 2005)

Laxguy said:


> I'll take a look, but please give me the episode and the minute time of a good example.


The last episode had some occurances and I saved that one for futzing around in the calibration menu. I'll dig up a minute mark and scene description. Could just be the TV settings (maybe changing out the lamp undid some of my previous changes) but appreciate the confirmation.


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

Oh Darn. I thought this would about how crappy Torchwood is now compared to the original.

It's junk and Jack has been neutered.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

Jack's been neutered? Far from it...


----------



## kalone (May 6, 2010)

RasputinAXP said:
 

> Jack's been neutered? Far from it...


Seemed busy in last weeks episode.


----------



## Kevin Brown (Sep 4, 2005)

RasputinAXP said:


> I haven't noticed at all.


+1. I just got my 50" Panasonic plasma re-ISF'ed too.

I don't know, I don't think Cap't Jack is getting enough screen time either.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

I love John Barrowman, but I've seen...uh...a little TOO much of Jack lately.


----------



## RVRambler (Dec 5, 2004)

I suspect this is PAL HD (25/50fps vs 30/60fps for US HD), and I've seen bad/poor 'encoding' which is as much responsible as bad decoding and 'not enough bits' limits.

But honestly ALL HD signals do NOT do well with gradations (very gradual changes of color or lightness, fade ins/outs, etc) simply because of too few bits per pixel & BW limits make this even worse, this is the same reason DLSR/studio still cameras are going from 12 to 14 bits and soon 16 bits per pixel per color (16 x 3=48bits/pixel), the dynamic range &/or color map (colors that can be shown-subset of what our eyes sees) etc can be much more subtle and close to analog (the real signal you know-called the world as we see/sense it).
(color maps are still an issue-technically but not really seen by most of us except in direct comparison-think oil painting and a picture of an oil painting-never the same!)

I also think that if you drive ANY type of HD monitor/tv especially with very bright and contrasty settings you will see MUCH more of the gradation/encoding/decoding/bandwidth issues as well as noise, etc.

The ISF calib. also mentioned would serve you well, especially a 'dark room calibration' as it lets the TV be driven more linearly/'kindly', as some of the DSP processors in sets are NOT the greatest (many HD sets are nothing more than commodity sets now, very generic electronics, screen, etc) or older ones are just that, old and maybe not great to start with and now just old!

I did see Torchwood and it did NOT seem the best looking HD I have seen, but best is in the eye of ...........

Also, as leading tech moviemakers are now pushing, higher frame rates, not only action is MUCH improved but generally it looks better, even gradations, colors my appear smoother as well, same bit depth.

Good Luck!



koralis said:


> Unlike any other channel and show, when watching Torchwood the shadowy low-end of the brightness spectrums seems very muddled... not a lot of distinction between tones (particularly facial skintone.)
> 
> I did a (not very scientific) recalibration of my TV set, and while the picture improved (got rid of some odd banding that showed up after putting in a new bulb) the previous problem remains.
> 
> I'm starting to think it's a matter of an overly compressed signal and Torchwood shooting so many dark scenes. Anyone else notice this or is it just my TV?


----------



## Kevin Brown (Sep 4, 2005)

Kevin Brown said:


> I don't know, I don't think Cap't Jack is getting enough screen time either.





RasputinAXP said:


> I love John Barrowman, but I've seen...uh...a little TOO much of Jack lately.


I posted my comment before I watched last week's episode.

I agree with you now.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

LOL!


----------



## russ9 (Jan 28, 2004)

Who would have guessed that jack was so into Italian.


----------



## FarmerBob (Nov 28, 2002)

koralis said:


> Unlike any other channel and show, when watching Torchwood the shadowy low-end of the brightness spectrums seems very muddled... not a lot of distinction between tones (particularly facial skintone.)
> 
> I did a (not very scientific) recalibration of my TV set, and while the picture improved (got rid of some odd banding that showed up after putting in a new bulb) the previous problem remains.
> 
> I'm starting to think it's a matter of an overly compressed signal and Torchwood shooting so many dark scenes. Anyone else notice this or is it just my TV?


I have let most of the episodes stack up after the first three left me bored with it, dumped them to make room and am catching up off DISH VOD. The picture is gorgeous on my DLP with no special adjustments. Usually I see what you are talking about with standard DISH transmissions. But VOD is just plain incredible. Stumbled on that a long time ago with the first Spartacus (which was filmed kinda flat/sepia to accentuate the blood and other accents). Skin tones including each individual pore (in close ups) and pierced ears without gear, are crystal clear and beautiful. Shadow levels are perfect. No banding as I see in a lot their dish HD programming. No usual back glare. There is a definite difference between off dish and VOD. And I am glad that I decided to watch this VOD.

And Jack may not be as I remember him, but he's getting there. I have hope. But I am loving the Hell out of Gwen!!!!!! Tired of all the B star cameos though. We have a drinking game off it now. A shooter for every new "old star" pops up and for every pierced ear with nothing in it. We're getting pretty toasted.


----------



## koralis (Aug 10, 2005)

Sounds like enough people are not seeing it that I can disregard the signal itself. In the meantime I'd seen the effect on a couple more shows too.


It occurs to me that after swapping bulbs some of my other settings may have been reset too... Lost my notebook where I figured out the best settings several years ago, but can tinker around some more.

One setting in particular is suspect... I forget the name of it, but it basically has the TV collect similar adjacent colors into a single color... you know, reduce dithering I think. I'd turned it off years ago... maybe it got turned back on.



(samsung DLP)


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

RVRambler said:


> I suspect this is PAL HD (25/50fps vs 30/60fps for US HD), and I've seen bad/poor 'encoding' which is as much responsible as bad decoding and 'not enough bits' limits.
> 
> But honestly *ALL HD signals do NOT do well with gradations* (very gradual changes of color or lightness, fade ins/outs, etc) simply because of too few bits per pixel & BW limits make this even worse, this is the same reason DLSR/studio still cameras are going from 12 to 14 bits and soon 16 bits per pixel per color (16 x 3=48bits/pixel), the dynamic range &/or color map (colors that can be shown-subset of what our eyes sees) etc can be much more subtle and close to analog (the real signal you know-called the world as we see/sense it).


By the bolded do you mean "No HD signals do well with gradations", or "Not all do well"?

And won't the increase in bits per pixel be a problem when it comes to pushing it through a limited pipeline? Or does it mean that better transcoding can take place, and then skinnied down to fit the existing throughput limits?


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

I have now eight recorded, but am not sure what to do, as I am missing the first two eps of this year's season. Also, I've never watched this, so is coming in at this point a lost cause?


----------



## koralis (Aug 10, 2005)

Don't worry about it... starts off very slowly (in fact, you may be better off for having skipped the first couple 

All you need to know is that Gwen and Capt Jack (immortal) used to belong to an organization that dealt with alien and extradimensional threats on behalf of the UK government. They were wiped out at the end of last season. Gwen is in hiding, Jack was presumed dead. Everyone else is dead.

People stopped dying. Torchwood ends up getting roped into the investigation. Enjoy!


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

Man. I'd just delete the whole series after that finale.


----------



## RVRambler (Dec 5, 2004)

Laxguy said:


> By the bolded do you mean "No HD signals do well with gradations", or "Not all do well"?
> 
> And won't the increase in bits per pixel be a problem when it comes to pushing it through a limited pipeline? Or does it mean that better transcoding can take place, and then skinnied down to fit the existing throughput limits?


All as in ALL HD encoding types/signals that we use (mpeg2/4,divx,Flash,....) whether bluray or dvd or satellite bitrates.

The 12/14/16 bits was for still DSLR cameras, and yes, the 16/18/24 megapixels (current models) in combination with 12/14/16 bits (although losslessly compressed) does increase write times to a CF/SDHC/SDXC card simply due to the size per picture (raw not jpeg), but the camera's DSP processor can write as fast as the cards can be written to, luckily, just saw a 90 Mega Byte/sec sdxc card from sandisk announced!

And yes hopefully even better encoding (at the expense of more h/w via DSPs) will keep the bit rate low enough for all of our thinpipes! 

DSLR's and HD camcorders are going to 1080x1920p @ 60fps (has been 24/25/30fps), this will remove lots of stutter/jitter/tearing when doing video sweeps or fast movement (was blurring in film/video taken @ 24fps), so actually significantly better than any film current or past.

The new 120/240 screen refresh 'interpolated' LCD HDTVs simulate this (artificially of course) but now the 'source' for video movie makers will be that much better, just will not see it via satellite but maybe via bluray.

Most professional video cameras spew out uncompressed video at full HD rates (not already mp2/4 but raw unaltered data), so LOTS of data/bits generated! Uncompressed video is easier to edit finely, then once editing done, it is downsampled.

Read that movies in theatres likely will first go to more fps (48 or even 60 from current 24 or 30fps) before going to higher resolutions.

I think we are stuck with 30fps from satellites for quite some time, so up to TV processing to make it look better!

Let's first have HD for all 'good' channels then other tech (3D,..) later!!!


----------

