# Has SD Picture Quality Degraded?



## moman19 (Oct 22, 2004)

Is it my eyes? Lately, it appears as if many SD channels are looking more compressed than usual. Some of the least-popular channels have always looked poor IMHO, but lately I find that FNC and many other popular chanels (not all channels) just lack detail, have many artifacts and appear rather flat on my HD big screen.

I have no real way of comparing the old with the new, but PQ just seems to be sliding downhill to the point where I'm beginning to miss good ol' analog.

Just wondering if others have noticed this. I have a Dish 811.


----------



## alebowgm (Jun 12, 2004)

Maybe it is just your market?


----------



## ww2154 (Aug 4, 2004)

my pq seems to have improved in the last few months


----------



## waltinvt (Feb 9, 2004)

ww2154 said:


> my pq seems to have improved in the last few months


Dish only has limited PQ which they cycle around the country. Vermont is having their good signals now, so we'll probably be looking poorly again by NFL playoff time


----------



## Ghostwriter (Oct 11, 2005)

As I have stated in some other threads that also touched on this subject my PQ is outstanding at the moment far better than even my local cable provider.


----------



## moman19 (Oct 22, 2004)

waltinvt said:


> Dish only has limited PQ which they cycle around the country. Vermont is having their good signals now, so we'll probably be looking poorly again by NFL playoff time


Other than local market channels, how can PQ vary by location when we're all viewing the same source? One thing for sure, this small sampling illustrates how opinions can vary.


----------



## lakebum431 (Jun 30, 2005)

Moman,
He was joking with you. That's why he threw the  in there.


----------



## ehren (Aug 3, 2003)

Actually the NHL CI SD channels have looked bad for the games they take off the FSN regionals in the 400's.


----------



## Antknee (Oct 13, 2005)

My locals look horrible. I just moved from the chicago area and had DirecTv there, the PQ was very good there


----------



## waltinvt (Feb 9, 2004)

Antknee said:


> My locals look horrible. I just moved from the chicago area and had DirecTv there, the PQ was very good there


Not to worry, the good news is Rockford,MI is scheduled for their improved PQ from mid December through 2nd Saturday in Janurary. The bad news is everything's a re-run durning Christmas break (and don't anyone give me any sh*t about it being called "Winter" break).


----------



## Antknee (Oct 13, 2005)

Well, that is sort of good....
How do you know all this info?


----------



## cohagen (Oct 27, 2005)

I totally agree that many/most of the SD channels are crap! When you are looking at all black sometimes it is a ridiculously sloppy mess of chunks of pixelation.

Please everyone, try to compare to what you think the ORIGINAL SOURCE would look like! SD programming on a tube TV should look very clean, no artifacts, no pixels!

I'm totally disgusted by what Dish passes of as "TV".

I really think the members of this forum should band together and ask Dish to identify what level of compression they use for various channels. If Dish would provide this info, and DirecTV, we could perhaps get the two into a picture quality war. Maybe then they could advertise better picture qualitly than the other!

How Dish thinks they can take an SD signal, and compress it the point where it looks SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE is beyond me.


----------



## waltinvt (Feb 9, 2004)

Antknee said:


> Well, that is sort of good....
> How do you know all this info?


Just KIDDING..........sorry - you know, Friday and all that.:lol:


----------



## kb7oeb (Jun 16, 2004)

Anytime I watch SD on dish I feel like I am watching something I downloaded over the internet. I have HD but I can see it on the SD tv too.


----------



## cohagen (Oct 27, 2005)

kb7oeb said:


> Anytime I watch SD on dish I feel like I am watching something I downloaded over the internet. I have HD but I can see it on the SD tv too.


 Totally agree with you. Ok, it's obviously better than an internet download. But all the same type of pixel artifacts you get from internet video are present in the Dish SD programming.

This is not how the source material looks like!

I think we all need to rally together on this forum, and let Dish know how unhappy we are about picure quality.


----------



## moman19 (Oct 22, 2004)

Maybe if Dish didn't carry so many useless channels, there would be more bandwidth available for the channels we do watch. But they're playing a numbers game: Dish 500, Dish 1,000, etc.

How many shopping channels (for example) do we really need????? Must-carry only makes matters worse. If they must-carry, giv 'em more bandwidth!

C'mon, how many channels to we really need? I would prefer to have 200, truly clear DIGITAL channels rather than 500 blurry ones.

I agree. It does look more and more like an Internet download than real TV.


----------



## Orange Man (Oct 9, 2003)

Yea the so-called "blacks" just look sorry most of the time. Any large backdrop or scene in black and darks look blotchy and washed. It makes VHS look like HD. With locals it's the worst. Some days are better than others and it can vary alittle bit. Even on clear days it can be bad.


Kenny J.
Nashville TN


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Orange Man said:


> Yea the so-called "blacks" just look sorry most of the time. Any large backdrop or scene in black and darks look blotchy and washed. It makes VHS look like HD. With locals it's the worst. Some days are better than others and it can vary alittle bit. Even on clear days it can be bad.


I also see the same problem with "reds" as well. Seems like any solid color or black is apt to show up the most if there is a large area coverage.

However, keep in mind that even if they turned down to a minimum level of compression, MPEG compression is a lossy compression even at its best. Whoever believes that digital=better is on a false train to begin with.

I would like to see compression decrease, but am resigned to the reality that this is the future of TV. In my area, I used to also have problems with signal on analog cable either oversaturated colors or noise in the signal... and apparently I was the only one to ever complain because they were always hesitant to send anyone out... but whenever they did, they immediately realized and saw what I was complaining about and would fix it for a while... but most people seem to not be bothered by poor quality, so I've learned mostly to deal with it. Sadly.


----------



## dpd146 (Oct 1, 2005)

HDMe said:


> However, keep in mind that even if they turned down to a minimum level of compression, MPEG compression is a lossy compression even at its best. Whoever believes that digital=better is on a false train to begin with.


MPEG compression is what is used for DVD's, so that is not the problem. I would be happy w/ DVD quality channels.

"Present DBS systems have a bandwidth problem: too many channels. These companies have resorted to some filtering to reduce the bandwidth per program. This allows them to carry more channels, but it gives the images a slightly blurry look. They call it "noise filtering", but in effect they have reduced the resolution to below 640x480. Exactly what this resolution is has not been stated (550x400? Nobody knows.) On a 17 inch TV this problem is not very noticeable. But the larger the set is, the more offensive it is." (HDTV Primer)

Hopefully the future of E* will be to use their additional sats to increase bandwidth not channels, but I doubt it.


----------



## nuckingfutz (Nov 6, 2005)

actually mpeg compression is the problem. if it wasnt then why is everyone moving to mpg4?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

dpd146 said:


> MPEG compression is what is used for DVD's, so that is not the problem. I would be happy w/ DVD quality channels.


I'm not trying to be argumentative... and I agree DVDs look better than most of the digital SD on satellite or cable... but MPEG compression is still a loss-based compression algorithm. In theory, and without being too technical, MPEG attempts to "average" changes in the picture out and has a formula by which it "throws away" pixels that are deemed to be less noticable.

Even the best (including Superbit DVDs) still have flaws that you can see if you have a large enough TV and good enough eyesight. You just don't notice it as much as you do on satellite where the compression is turned higher.

Problem is, they need to compress it somewhat or we'd only be able to have a fraction of the channels we have... and like you, for SD I can be happy most of the time with DVD quality if that's what they would leave the compression at... but history is proving that isn't going to happen.

We can only cross our fingers that MPEG4 lets them have their bandwidth and we get an improved picture as well... but I'm not ready to hold my breath just yet.


----------



## kb7oeb (Jun 16, 2004)

HD also uses mpeg2, with out compression I don't think an entire transponder would have enough room for a single channel. Not sure about SD but I know HD wouldn't


----------



## rhiggs (Sep 29, 2005)

I hadn't watched the encor channels for over a year but decided to this weerkend. I was rather surprised with the poor quality, pixalizations during action scenes, etc. I watched Cold Mountain, The Missing and Kill Bill, Vol 1. Anytime there was any fast movement, all I got was digital blocks!


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Ufortunately you have two groups of people clambering to be heard. The people that want more channels to choose from, and the people who want better PQ/SQ from the channels they already have....Hopefully mpeg4 will help accomplish both, and of course, more sats up there will help...it will just take time...


----------



## cdoyle (Feb 3, 2005)

geeze, I thought it was just me. I've really noticed it since I've signed up, the black screens have that washed out, blotchy look to them.

Or if there is a scene with a lot of action, you see squares here and there.

If it's a bandwidth problem, then they need to get rid of many of those worthless channels. I can't believe how many channels I have blocked out, because who would watch them??


----------



## cebbigh (Feb 27, 2005)

Don't know the answer to this because I've been on dish for over 5 years. How does SD compare between dish and comcast? I've assumed dish is superior, is that a fallacy?


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

As with any comparison to cable, it all depends on your local cable provider. Witht eh right setup, everyone gets teh exact same PQ from E*, or D* for that matter, with cable its hit or miss depnding on your provider and where you are. I setup a guys new Plasma tonight and his PQ on TW digital cable in Canton Ohio was absolutely lousy...I was thankful to get home and get back to my D* PQ...other cities have great cable PQ, but not here...


----------

