Started By
Message

re: Is it just me or is HD overrated?

Posted on 10/7/12 at 10:31 pm to
Posted by TigerBandTuba
Member since Sep 2006
2552 posts
Posted on 10/7/12 at 10:31 pm to
You can turn this off on every tv that has it. It's probably called motion plus or something similar. Sometimes it means you have to switch the "mode" you are using. For a panasonic LED tv I just got I have to put it on game mode and it turns off the SOE.

Explanation of what is happening:
LINK
Posted by Brian Wilson
Member since Mar 2012
2080 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 5:25 am to
Just you
Posted by CocomoLSU
Inside your dome.
Member since Feb 2004
151707 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 7:38 am to
quote:

Is it just me or is HD overrated?


Yes, sports its totally worth it, but I really feel like putting it to TV and film makes it look like I'm still in the editing room, to where I often just want to watch it in lesser quality. The more realistic it looks, the more staged it looks to me. Anyone else feel the same way?

Holy shite, not even in the least. HD is phenomenal, and not just for sports. It's funny how spoiled I am when it comes to watching shite now...I really can't stand watching things in non-HD anymore.

However, that being said, there has been discussion on here (I remember at least me and SFP were in that thread) before about how sometimes things can be TOO clear. Like the new TVs with outrageous refresh rates and all that, those things seem to make it to where everything on the screen is in focus. That's one thing that gives it that really odd look when the screen is scrolling left or right...IMO it's too much. Because sometimes things are supposed to be out of focus, and things are supposed to stay in the background. So I do think that there are certain times when the picture can be too clear and it weakens the watching experience.

ETA: Soap opera effect. That's it.
This post was edited on 10/8/12 at 7:42 am
Posted by Titus Pullo
MTDGA
Member since Feb 2011
28567 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 7:43 am to
It is until you go back and watch something on an older tv or not in HD. When I'm watching it everyday I started to lose perspective, but the minute I see an old tv or something that's not HD or digital, it blows my mind all over again.
Posted by CocomoLSU
Inside your dome.
Member since Feb 2004
151707 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 8:01 am to
quote:

It is until you go back and watch something on an older tv or not in HD. When I'm watching it everyday I started to lose perspective, but the minute I see an old tv or something that's not HD or digital, it blows my mind all over again.

Agreed. That's why I liked my old TV, cuz it had a split screen option on it and I could put my HD cable box picture on one side and regular plug-in-from-the-wall cable on the other side. And the difference was ridiculous.
Posted by jeff5891
Member since Aug 2011
15766 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 10:48 am to
quote:

Yes, sports its totally worth it, but I really feel like putting it to TV and film makes it look like I'm still in the editing room, to where I often just want to watch it in lesser quality. The more realistic it looks, the more staged it looks to me. Anyone else feel the same way?


what?
Posted by jeff5891
Member since Aug 2011
15766 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 10:50 am to
i will say if it feels like you a watching a british tv show, you need to turn of off smooth setting and put on clear(if samsung tv) or nm i only know about samsung tvs. but it has to do with the high refresh rate and a setting that tries to remove motion blur. every HD tv has this setting you just have to find it and set it to normal.
This post was edited on 10/8/12 at 10:53 am
Posted by smokeswithwolves
New Orleans
Member since Aug 2006
2127 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 11:08 am to
It's unfortunate this creates so much confusion. I pity the average consumer who isn't going online to figure this out or who was misled by an ignorant salesman. It may damage the development of 8K and lead us further into 3D hell.

Remember, motion smoothing has nothing to do with resolution. Turn that shite off for movies. It draws dummy frames between real ones in order to increase the frame rate (say frame 1 is a raindrop at the top of the frame and in frame 2 it's at the middle, it draws ghostly intermediate raindrops to create frames 1a, 1b, 1c to sandwich in) It's called soap opera effect because soap operas were shot on cheaper video which had higher frame rates than film; film being the format we associate with high production values ('cinematic'). But smoothing is a lovely option if you want Citizen Kane to look like a PBS special from the 70s!

Remember cinephiles. Motion smoothing is the devil and 3D is the Antichrist, but higher resolutions are good, good, good. Think about this. 35mm is about 4K (unless it was scanned at 2K because they were cheap but that's another discussion). Your television is 1K. We haven't even seen the golden format in its native glory in our homes. About half the theaters in the country are only 2K, so bitch about that too. Say no to smoothing and other bullshite gimmicks and yes to higher resolutions.
This post was edited on 10/8/12 at 11:36 am
Posted by lsu13lsu
Member since Jan 2008
11545 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 11:09 am to
quote:

Anyone else feel the same way?


I feel the exact same way. Sports it is a must. TV shows it all now feels like Soap Operas.
Posted by Spock's Eyebrow
Member since May 2012
12300 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 11:37 am to
quote:

The reason it's called soap opera effect is because soap operas were often shot on cheaper video which had higher frame rates than film.


It has always struck me as rather unfortunate that "high frame rates" have been conflated with something that can cause artifacts and be undesirable, the creation of fake frames in motion interpolation. People often say stupid things like, "It's too smooth and it looks cheap and fake!" When I hear shite like this, I often wonder how they perceive reality. For example, when someone turns their head IRL, do they see it as a ratcheting motion? I know I don't. I can't stand jerkiness due to low frame rates (and I do distinguish it from telecine judder); it doesn't look "natural" to me in any way.

OTOH, I've never spent much time watching a set known for SOE. My 4 y/o 120Hz Sony was reviewed as having a minimal degree of it, and its Motionflow has been at worst benign, at best, making a noticeable improvement in things like panning shots in my "Planet Earth" Bluray. The thing that causes problems is Cinemotion, which can introduce edge artifacts when enabled along with Motionflow. Cinemotion is mainly concerned with inverse telecine, which I don't need the TV to perform anyway since my video card does it for my HTPC, and my BD player either outputs 1080p24 or does it as necessary when upscaling to 1080p60.
Posted by BaddestAndvari
That Overweight Racist State
Member since Mar 2011
18375 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 11:42 am to
quote:

it's just you.

I refuse to watch something in standard def


2 post up

quote:

At the same time the people that refuse to watch anything not in HD and act like regular TV hurts their eyes is ridiculous and annoying though.


Posted by davesdawgs
Georgia - Class of '75
Member since Oct 2008
20307 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 12:09 pm to
quote:

its just you
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
57742 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 12:53 pm to
quote:

Agreed. That's why I liked my old TV, cuz it had a split screen option on it and I could put my HD cable box picture on one side and regular plug-in-from-the-wall cable on the other side. And the difference was ridiculous.
why would you do that?
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
57742 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 1:12 pm to
quote:

smokeswithwolves
thanks. i couldn't find the old thread when the subject came up as i was watching Wrath of the Titans, not that a better picture would have improved it much.

But do you think this is an unexpected problem for movies, or do you think movie makers are anticipating future technology that will smooth all of this out?
Posted by CocomoLSU
Inside your dome.
Member since Feb 2004
151707 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 1:33 pm to
quote:

why would you do that?

I used to use split screen to watch multiple games, or if I was watching something as it aired, I could split screen the show and flip channels until I saw the commercials were over, then go back to the show.

But it also allowed me to put the same game on side by side.
Posted by swamie
Where opportunity meets hard work
Member since Jan 2007
27253 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 1:49 pm to
I got your back Landshark. There used to be times when I had a roommate, he would bitch because I never would watch the HD channels. Just never really cared that much to keep surfing to get to them.

Now, I do DVR everything on the HD channel, but sometimes when I'm flipping, if I land on something that isn't on the HD channel, I'll still watch it in standard. Doesn't bother me at all.
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
57742 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 2:02 pm to
quote:

CocomoLSU
Ah. I didn't know you needed multiple boxes for that. I just kept picturing you sitting at home, yelling to your wife "See, honey? See how awesome it is? I told you it was s solid purchase."
Posted by Hulkklogan
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Oct 2010
43452 posts
Posted on 10/8/12 at 2:24 pm to
HD is absolutely not overrated. I can't stand watching standard def programming anymore; I'm spoiled. As many have said in this very thread, the "soap opera effect" is a tv setting that can be (and should be) disabled.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 3Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram