Reply

4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

Reply
Executive Producer
Posts: 7,000
Post 91 of 222
996 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@Nevlolwrote:


Interesting. I have BT Sport HD on my Sky Q and I personally do not discern a difference. Both can be equally as acceptable and both can look horrid. It just depends on what is being shown. I suspect bitrate is there or thereabouts the same and it boils down to source material. That's not to say you aren't seeing a difference of course!

I'm still on Sky+HD (so 1080i output) rather than Q, but I notice the difference most with football - particularly on the wide shots showing large chunks of the pitch where the players are not in close up. Each player appears far clearer on BT HD than Sky HD.  Won't even begin to pretend I know why, but it is consistent.

Production Supervisor
Posts: 1,302
Post 92 of 222
979 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

For all the technical geekery being bandied around, isn't this all just down to Sky broadcasting at the minimum HD/UHD quality that's acceptable to the masses? To the vast majority of people with Sky Q, I'll wager it would not even occur to them that the quality isn't incredible. And so if it's acceptable to the millions, and if it is cheaper to broadcast UHD at a lower bitrate, then Sky will surely be happy to keep it at that level, and to tolerate a few naysayers on their forums. 

Sound Designer
Posts: 105
Post 93 of 222
963 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

@Rhonny you're definitely not wrong there!

 

One more thing to consider is that not everybody is on a 4K TV, nevermind a large screen 4K TV. The issues we see with the HD channels and their compressed feeds are far less pronounced on smaller sized or lower resolution displays. Many may be using large 1080p TVs but the compression simply won't be as apparent. In my bedroom I have a 32" 1080p Samsung from 2014 and the Sky Q mini set to 1080i looks good, I can't really perceive any compression artifacts especially when viewed from the comforts of the bed!

 

The fact is that on our big 4K screens these issues are far more apparent - and are seldom solely the result of poor upscaling or calibration - not with new(ish) 4K TVs. 

First Assistant Director
Posts: 2,155
Post 94 of 222
831 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@Rhonnywrote:

For all the technical geekery being bandied around, isn't this all just down to Sky broadcasting at the minimum HD/UHD quality that's acceptable to the masses? To the vast majority of people with Sky Q, I'll wager it would not even occur to them that the quality isn't incredible. And so if it's acceptable to the millions, and if it is cheaper to broadcast UHD at a lower bitrate, then Sky will surely be happy to keep it at that level, and to tolerate a few naysayers on their forums. 


That's all well and good until people see You Tube UHD and perhaps Netflix and Amazon on their shiny 4K Tv apps and realise they are significantly sharper than Sky, then they may feel they are getting short changed.

Researcher
Posts: 8
Post 95 of 222
786 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

Completely with you all i ever mentioned originally was how nice F1 UHD looked and how UHD wasn’t proper 4K cinema quality but a slightly lower resolution and was patronised and my ear chewed off lol think I won’t bother returning on here again too many forum chasers who all of a sudden become experts but totally agree with you .

Sky Q 2TB
Samsung 65” curved 9 series SUHD
Av Yamaha 7.1 DTX, Atmos running through Acoustics 3050 speakers
Sky fibre Pro 72MB
Executive Producer
Posts: 3,894
Post 96 of 222
777 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@Jamcam11wrote:

Completely with you all i ever mentioned originally was how nice F1 UHD looked and how UHD wasn’t proper 4K cinema quality but a slightly lower resolution and was patronised and my ear chewed off lol think I won’t bother returning on here again too many forum chasers who all of a sudden become experts but totally agree with you .


Well, thankfully Sky aren't using "proper 4K cinema quality", because our TVs would then have to scale that down slightly by 6% to UHD, or even crop the image, which would probably result in even worse picture quality,

Boom Operator
Posts: 81
Post 97 of 222
771 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

This is an amazing thread Smiley LOL. Was watching something on Netflix the other day (HD). Last Chance U series/season 2. Looks as good quality as the UHD shows like Save Me etc. Keen to get fibre (still not available in my area) to see what the 4K/HDR (Dolby Vision) content is like in Netflix and iTunes etc.

Sound Designer
Posts: 105
Post 98 of 222
751 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@andybarneswrote:

This is an amazing thread Smiley LOL. Was watching something on Netflix the other day (HD). Last Chance U series/season 2. Looks as good quality as the UHD shows like Save Me etc. Keen to get fibre (still not available in my area) to see what the 4K/HDR (Dolby Vision) content is like in Netflix and iTunes etc.


No fibre? My man... Smiley Sad

FWIW Plenty of the 1080p stuff on Netflix and Amazon Prime looks glorious and you could be forgiven for not discerning between 1080p and 2160p on Netflix. They both use a variable bitrate and so whenever you begin watching something it'll ramp up through the resolutions and bit rates. Initially it'll look like total ass but by the time you get to 1080p it's quite often difficult to spot exactly when it becomes 2160p/Ultra HD. This doesn't apply to everything of course but The Grand Tour on Amazon Prime is a good example.

Oracle
Posts: 5,259
Post 99 of 222
740 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

@andybarnes

 

Worth noting that despite what Netflix, Amazon and the BBC say, it isn't an absolute requirement to have fibre speed internet to use UHD streaming services: we are on 17Mbs ADSL and have successfully watched Altered Carbon, American Gods and the Blue Planet 2 trial in UHD with HDR.  Can be a bit hit-and-miss in terms of WHEN these are viable, as I suspect local contention becomes a factor, and other devices on the same household connection at the same time don't tend to work so well...

 

And yes, though it pains me to say it, they did look better than content arriving via Sky Q ; (

* * * * * * *

Sky Q from April 2016 (Silver & 1 Mini, both over ethernet), BT ADSL (14Mbs), BT Home Hub 6 (ethernet), Lenovo Tab 2 A7 (Android 4.4 KitKat), Wileyfox Swift (Android 7.1.2 Nougat), LG 49UJ701V with Yamaha RX-V375, Toshiba 32L6353, Samsung UE22F5400
Sound Designer
Posts: 105
Post 100 of 222
734 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

Netflix maxes out at 15.26mb/s. I assume Amazon to be there or thereabouts. So good point above! I imagine plenty of non-fibre connections are capable of hitting that! Bear in mind that is only 1.9MB/s...

Boom Operator
Posts: 81
Post 101 of 222
730 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@TimmyBGoodwrote:

@andybarnes

Worth noting that despite what Netflix, Amazon and the BBC say, it isn't an absolute requirement to have fibre speed internet to use UHD streaming services: we are on 17Mbs ADSL and have successfully watched Altered Carbon, American Gods and the Blue Planet 2 trial in UHD with HDR.  Can be a bit hit-and-miss in terms of WHEN these are viable, as I suspect local contention becomes a factor, and other devices on the same household connection don't tend to work so well...


Yeah. I get to about 11-12 currently, so I could probably get a bit more out of it. But not really worth it at the moment. Openreach are ruining my life. We were in build for months and then suddenly we dropped out of scope! When I asked about it, they said they were reviewing their plans. It's only my road and about 3 others on the estate - everywhere else has the full works. So annoying.

Anyway, back on topic. Where do I get myself a 4K cinema TV?

Oracle
Posts: 5,259
Post 102 of 222
715 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

 


@andybarnes wrote:



Anyway, back on topic. Where do I get myself a 4K cinema TV?

How about this one ?  Of course, some people might think that £24,600 is a bit steep for a 24" screen with no speakers and one HDMI, but at least it's genuine  4K ; )

* * * * * * *

Sky Q from April 2016 (Silver & 1 Mini, both over ethernet), BT ADSL (14Mbs), BT Home Hub 6 (ethernet), Lenovo Tab 2 A7 (Android 4.4 KitKat), Wileyfox Swift (Android 7.1.2 Nougat), LG 49UJ701V with Yamaha RX-V375, Toshiba 32L6353, Samsung UE22F5400
Sound Designer
Posts: 105
Post 103 of 222
680 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@TimmyBGoodwrote:

 


@andybarneswrote:



Anyway, back on topic. Where do I get myself a 4K cinema TV?

How about this one ?  Of course, some people might think that £24,600 is a bit steep for a 24" screen with no speakers and one HDMI, but at least it's genuine  4K ; )


Don't forget a camera so you have some genuine 4K to watch.

Camera Assistant
Posts: 170
Post 104 of 222
648 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@TimmyBGoodwrote:

@andybarnes

 

Worth noting that despite what Netflix, Amazon and the BBC say, it isn't an absolute requirement to have fibre speed internet to use UHD streaming services: we are on 17Mbs ADSL and have successfully watched Altered Carbon, American Gods and the Blue Planet 2 trial in UHD with HDR.  Can be a bit hit-and-miss in terms of WHEN these are viable, as I suspect local contention becomes a factor, and other devices on the same household connection at the same time don't tend to work so well...

 

And yes, though it pains me to say it, they did look better than content arriving via Sky Q ; (

 

I really hope Sky look at comments like the above and similar on this thread.  Netflix and Amazon are definitely paying more attention to delivering a premium quality service in terms of picture quality.  Come on Sky, you need to "up your game".


 

First Assistant Director
Posts: 2,225
Post 105 of 222
505 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

@TimmyBGood

This one is more my price point Smiley Wink

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B015N6UZIW/

31" too!



SkyQ 2TB 2160P 10Bit - Samsung UE40JU6400
Q Mini 1080p - Samsung LE40A656
All wireless connection, Box Sets Bundle with Sky Cinema and Sky Sports. BT Home Hub 6 with 52Mb fibre.
Reply