Re: Confusing AP Article is Widespread

Bill's News wrote:
> "L Alpert" <alpertl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:oEOQj.3433$I55.2652@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> inkyblacks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>>> All cable companies have poor quality HDTV service.  Sat or
>>> over-the-
>>> air is the way to go.
>>>
>>> IB
>>
>> When I first got cable HD, I still had OTA, and I was able to
>> compare the same channels on the same HD set by switching the
>> inputs.  There were no distinguishable differences that I
>> could detect at that time.
>>
>
> I capture HDTV from both QAM and ATSC almost daily.  While I
> don't intentionally capture the same show on both, I do capture
> from the same OTA networks on both.  The only reason cable
> re-compression is obvious to me is that the file sizes from
> cable are typically smaller than those from OTA.  When I play
> the programs, they're intermixed and no one in the audience,
> including myself, remarks upon which came from which source.
> This is on a 42" 1080p display.  It may become more apparent on
> a much larger display.

Not noticeable on a 55" RPTV or 73" DLP, at least in a qualitative sense
(no 
way for me to determine file size, of course).

>
> I'd guess that fewer bits of the same format makes for a lower
> quality picture but I can not discern what fraction of a
> percentage point lower it may be.  Picture quality does not seem
> to be pro****tionately related to bit count alone.
>
> And then, regardless of which source delivers the picture there
> are those moments of videographer brilliance that inspire
> jaw-dropping awe in the viewer - unknown in the analog era!
> Let's have more of those, eh.

Agreed!