Sharpening the Image of HDTV

[Filip Norrgard]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.com.com/Clearing+up+the+HDTV+picture/2100-1041_3-5609311.html' target='_blank'>http://news.com.com/Clearing+up+the+HDTV+picture/2100-1041_3-5609311.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"The sharp picture quality that wows you on that expensive HDTV in the electronics store isn't necessarily what you'll see once you get the set into your living room. In some cases, retailers run video into the sets from closed circuit networks. They do that for various reasons, including wanting to demonstrate the sets' capabilities and keep pranksters from turning to racy programming. But the practice may be distorting consumer expectations, leading to disappointing experiences--and product returns."</i><br /><br />This News.com article points out the need for "regular" customers to get more information about HDTV and how to watch true HD broadcasts. There are buyers out there who think digital TV is equal same as HDTV, and don't know the true meanings of the two. Do you think that there is a need for educating the general population of getting HDTV sets?

[Felix Torres]

Yup!
Vast amounts of consumer education are needed.
Somebody ought to write a book.
(Has it been done? I'd but it at the drop of a hat.)

HDTVs are more like computer displays than analog TVs.
After all, with analog there was but one resolution and display mode. Reception and rendering were all that mattered.

With digital, reception is a non-issue; you either get the channel well enough to watch or you don't; drop-outs tell you when you don't.
In exchange for this (minor) boon, however, consumers now need to worry about the quality of the rendering engine, which is something *nobody* talks about and the monitor's inherent display properties. The latter includes not just resolution and aspect ratio, which are readily available, but hard-to-find data like MTBF, brightness and contrast, color purity, and video response times. The latter, for example is a major concern for gaming and video users on PCs but you never see it discussed fot LCD TVs at all. I recently saw a 30 inch LCD from a name brand vendor at a very enticing price. In a fit of honesty, the retailer listed full specs; great contrast and brightness, gorgeous image quality. And 26 millisecond response time.
Ohhh...kaaayyy...

Right now, as I scope out HDTVs, I'm most concerned with the rendering engine. In NorthAM there are currently 4 roughly equal digital TV formats in use (DVDs, the two main HD formats, and cable/satellite digital video) each with a different native resolution. Which means that for any digital display, whether ED or HD, something like 75% of the available content will *not* be in native resolution and will need to be up-scaled or downscaled to match the display.

I understand that we are in a transition phase between all-analog and all HD but, frankly, this is *not* a good time to be buying a TV. At a minimum you need to do research comparable to that of buying a car, without the readily available data sources of the car buying market.

Down the road a bit I forsee hordes of seriously disgusted buyers.
And I expect the class-action lawyers are already licking their chops.

[Macguy59]

The average consumer does need additional info. It wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit if all channels via satellite or cable went HD :) Channels broadcast in digital look ok on my 50" LCD HDTV but analog looks ghastly. DVD quality @ 520P looks nice but HD broadcasts (1080i) are stunning.