April Magazine comment on HD quality not helpful

mmvi:

I am surprised to be honest disappointed by the writ large comment in this months magazine that states that most people wont notice the alledged bit rate drop from BBC HD.

Umm, we didn't mention an 'alleged bit rate drop'; we said 'BBC HD has received some flak for an alleged drop in its HD picture quality'.

We went on to comment that while we felt the Freeview HD as received by the Humax HD-Fox T2 was 'maybe a little softer than on Freesat', we thought 'most viewers will be very happy with its HD broadcasts'.

That there has been a bit-rate drop is not alleged, but real, the BBC saying that new encoders have enabled it to maintain quality while using lower bitrates.

What is alleged by some is that this has led to a lowering of picture quality, and frankly having watched a lot of the rugby over the weekend, plus Tropic of Cancer and the latest episode of Prof Brian Cox's superb series, I just don't see that lowering of quality.

TBH and its probably just me.

 I watch all the nature chanels and rugby and I cant see a difference really.

There is a big improvment from SD to HD when I switch back and forth.

Maybe its only on a few chanels, who knows.

Canada16, the complaints only concern BBCHD's picture quality, not any of the other available HD channels.

I'm convinced there's a difference, BBCHD used to leap off the screen at you it was such an impressive picture. Now it's merely good, it looks fine but it's nothing special, which, when I think about how it used to look, makes me sad. It just seems to have lost some of the sparkle, I can't think of a better word for that.

It's not just me either. My local ex-Pioneer retailer used to use BBCHD for demoing screens, now they've changed to Blu-ray as people just aren't impressed enough by BBCHD anymore. 

Thats what I meant, sorry.

I meant other chanels like programs,

I thought the rugby looked great and so did the Nature stuff, I cant complain.

 

 

Yes, but then BBC HD is always going to come out second best to Blu-ray, given the difference in picture format...

Andrew Everard:

Yes, but then BBC HD is always going to come out second best to Blu-ray, given the difference in picture format...

You're missing the point, previously they were quite happy to use BBCHD as the response from customers was very positive. They only switched to Blu-ray because people started commenting that the BBCHD pictures didn't look particularly impressive.

I'm still of the opinion that EurosportHD and ESPNHD give the best pictures currently (simulcast SD content aside). 

And I'm making the point that after you've seen what a really good Blu-ray can do, it's hardly surprising that BBC HD can seem a little poor. Not that I am in any way dissatisfied with how BBC HD looks - in my case delivered via Sky HD.

This play between SD and the obvious improvement to a HD picture is what the BBC are counting on.  Most people will flick between the other and go wow but it once was, and should be, so much more.   The comment about sky compared to BD is moot and not valid in support of falling HD standards for no good reason.   Some films I have seen on Sky movies recently have been superb,  I can never say that about any image on BBC HD. 

I feel that the BBC picture is not only not what it could be, but borderline shoddy compared to others.  I did not watch the rugby and would argue that in fast moving images the differences may be less obvious.  Try the vistas and scenes in Lark Rise and you will immediately see that all is not right, and yes the excellent Brian Cox series is a delight but I am looking at the picture as well as the content and whilst one is marvellous the other is average. 

I want to metaphorically cut my finger on it.  The system is capable of this and yet we are being denied the quality.  Whats even more insulting is that non definitive reasons are being bandied around in statements.  

I am not most people, most people don't read this magazine.  What hi-fi should be all over this like a rash and yet? 

 The BBC should be a reference against which all other services are judged.  This is poor very poor.

Maybe I don't see the drop in quality you encounter because I'm only watching on a 50in screen...

Andrew Everard:

Maybe I don't see the drop in quality you encounter because I'm only watching on a 50in screen...

is your tv 1080p ?? ive definately noticed a drop in quality , itv hd looks better , especially with the footie , when i got my first hdtv , last march , bbchd looked stunning , now it looks very good , but im sure i can see a difference ...

I've viewed BBC HD on a wide variety of large screens, and really don't see this drop-off in quality...

i dont know , i guess its possible that i have just gotten used to hd , having said that , im watching "the forbidden kingdom" now on blu-ray , and the picture is fantastic .. as it should be i guess..

Agreed: we're currently watching Hachi: A Dog's Tale on Blu-ray, and sentimental though it is, it looks and sounds lovely.

But just to reiterate, the criticism in the original post was based on an entirely inaccurate misquote of what we actually said...

I too have noticed the drop in BBC HD quality. The picture looks 'flatter' and less vibrent.

ashcorn:

I too have noticed the drop in BBC HD quality. The picture looks 'flatter' and less vibrent.

I wish I'd said that, that's the perfect description of what I see (or don't see more to the point), I just kept coming up with "less shiny" which isn't really a good enough description!