You have to remember and be aware that much of the broadcasts that are out there are still not broadcast in HD. Probably 80 - 95% of an average viewers watching wouldn't be in HD at this time. The relatively few programs that are in HD are noticable for the improvements that are there.

HD brings a sharper picture, it's brings (typically) a wider picture that shows films and original HD content in it's original aspect ratio.

For sporting events, the picture is almost infinitely better. For NFL games (as an example), even on a relatively small screen there are benefits. You can see much more of the field in the wider screen. You see players you wouldn't have seen when watching SD broadcasts, or wouldn't see until you got to see a replay and some spot shadow that highlights the player that winds up being the "key" to the whole play.

For MLB games you see much more of the field, so you can typically see more of the field when a player is running for the ball. You see more of the field when a player is running from 3rd base to home. There's more real estate there to see and you miss much less of the play that is there going on.

With NASCAR the image is much nicer, you see more detail including objects on the tracks, damage done to vehicles and things like that. You see more of the track and more of what is going on.

With entertainment shows like Letterman's Late Show, or the Tonite Show with Jay Leno you see more detail in the faces of the guests. Signs and placards are easier to read. Pictures that are shown are clearer and sharper.


If you aren't noticing the improvements it may be that you haven't hit some of the lesser quality channels and aren't watching programs on channels where picture quality is an after thought. If that is the case for you, then consider yourself lucky. I've lived with crappy pictures and hated it. I enjoy my HDTV now, and am very glad I have it. I get more frustrated now at programs that aren't broadcast in HD, or lazy TV engineers that forget to turn on the HD switch when they come back from commercials and such. Once you get the HD and get used to it, you hate life when fed funky bars or otherwise warped images.


Finally, something to consider - if you haven't had your TV set calibrated for best picture quality, then you may not notice that much difference any way. Most TV sets are pre-configured with settings that use very bright colors and brightness/contrast settings. You lose a lot of detail in the image that way. It's done to give an average buyer viewing a set in the store an impression of a bright picture. That is fine in a store, but it normally looks like crap in a home. Getting a set professional calibrated and then seeing the level of detail that has been hidden previously can be impressive. It's not cheap (around $400 when I last checked), but I'm told it's worth it. I've not been able to do the professional calibration here, and have been stuck with do-it-yourself that isn't anywhere near as effective it should be. I did learn a bit about where I should be making changes, but I'm leery of giving myself a much worse image and don't want to enter settings in normally off-limits menus that would screw up my TV.

Two things: HD is not THAT much more expensive. And you obviously don't own an XBOX 360.

Reply By: terpfan1980

So what? It's only TV.

The only problem I have with digital tv is the dodgy reception. Where I live the reception isn't great; on normal tv there's a little ghosting even when I use the big antenna. When I plugged in a digital receiver the picture improved out of sight, but because it needs a constant, consistent signal it ended up being a pain in the arse, because every once in a while you get this harsh electrical noise and the screen goes fuzzy because the signal's dropped too low.

I'd much rather have consistently substandard picture and sound than quality that switches between good and godawful.

terpfan1980:

HDTV certainly does have higher quality than SDTV. My argument is that the improvement is only slightly better, and not worth paying much money for. If I need to shell out yet another $400 to get the picture adjusted for best quality, I still don't see any way that the improvement would justify the price.

For entertainment shows... well honestly, I care very little about "more detail in the faces of the guests". I have never had a problem with reading pictures, signs, or placards in regular SDTV.

I watched the superbowl in HD. The higher quality picture did not make the experience more enjoyable. I reiterate that I only noticed the higher quality when I was specifically looking for it.

I have not watched any MLB games in HD (due to lack of HD broadcasts), and this is one thing that I would like to see. Baseball is my favorite sport, but I still just don't see how the HD broadcast would blow me away when compared to SD.


Texas Wahine:

I had access to an XBOX 360 for about one week. I had the chance to spend several hours playing The Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion and Perfect Dark Zero. The graphics certainly look nice, but I attribute this to the power of the XBOX 360 system and not the HD image. I included the quote from the Bungie employee to help make this point.


cactoblasta:

I too have experienced the occasional dropped signal, but only with HDTV. It is extremely annoying, and may have skewed my impression of HDTV. However, the overall signal strength seems to have improved since I first got HDTV, and I have not experienced a choppy signal in quite some time.

Maybe I'm picky, but I can notice a large difference in picture quality. If the program is available in HD, I will almost always switch it over.

But like I said, maybe I'm just picky. I'm also the guy that will sell older copies of CDs to get the new, remastered versions.

I am in agreement with the fact that hdtv is not worth it right or will be not be worth it in the near future. However when ALL broadcast are in high definition and hdtv are resonable priced for the mass market then and only then will standard definition televisions be phased out due to either sets breaking down or being so old that it warrents a purchase to buy a new tv and since all programming will be in hd and no standard definition televisions will exist then only then will hdtv become the norm. As for this next generation of videogame systems they can be played on current televisions but the next generation say in about 5 years will all be played on hdtvs. In conclusion hdtv is the future but television programming must catch up with the technology to make it a viable medium. As for hd dvd or blue ray when they are 99 dollars and the publics dvd players break they will be forced to buy hd dvd player because standart dvd players will not exist. The public will not notice a big difference in hdtv vs sdtv but it will nevertheless become the norm for all media.

It's ridiculous to shell out cash for HDTV when one hardly needs a television in the first place. It's going overboard on something uneeded.

Xbox 360? Only when Halo 3 comes out. I've played no game so far that justifies the cost of the system.

Are you absolutely sure you're watching an actual HD broadcast rather than an upconverted SD broadcast? It may seem stupid to ask but in my three years of HDTV ownership I've read where plenty of people have been confused on what they're actually seeing on the screen. Many times when they're complaining about the lack of improvement they're looking at an upconverted SD broadcast. Any time I've had friends over who have never seen HD before, they've been amazed at the quality improvement and it's easily demonstratable.

It's only television.