8K TV

[Joseph Bento]

We have two TV sets in my house.  Both are CRT based, and both are over 
10 years old.  One is HD capable.  However, I find analog broadcasts 
more realistic and natural.  There is something in the detail of most HD 
programming that somehow makes it look artificial, especially when there 
is fast movement in the characters.  That 'something' I really can't 
explain.  Similar to the percussion track on some CD's - the drums don't 
sound natural.  There's something a bit jarring in the sound.  That same 
irritant is not present on an all analog recording.

Joe, N6DGY


On 4/13/2013 6:02 PM, Andre Kesteloot wrote:
> On 4/13/2013 19:53 PM, Phil wrote:
>> "...a whopping 16 times the picture resolution as today's HD..."
>>
>> Really? My tin eyes can rarely distinguish between a true HD 
>> broadcast and the same rendered in 'regular' resolution.
>
>
> Phil,
>
> although 16 times better resolution appears a bit silly indeed, there 
> is a marked difference in today's transmissions.
> In the early 1960s' we lived in Cambridge (UK) and watched British TV. 
> It looked good enough for me (although was I had seen in 819 lines in 
> France was definitely superior).
>
> Now, our channel 26 WETA transmits some old British programs (from 
> tapes I presume)  and I must say that some of the Benny Hill re-runs 
> definitely lack sharpness. (which, because of the content, hum hum, I 
> sincerely deplore ...  :-)
>
> 73
> André
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tacos mailing list
> Tacos at amrad.org
> https://amrad.org/mailman/listinfo/tacos

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://amrad.org/pipermail/tacos/attachments/20130413/7ae1a63b/attachment-0001.html>