TATA Sky in 40'' LCD TV

[anurag.choudhary]

Hmm..MPEG 4 is actually inferior quality compared to MPEG 2.

Strongly Disagree

What actually is happening behind the scene is this ->
MPEG-2 enabled DTH broadcasters are transmitting data on arround 1.5 Mbps to 6.0 Mbps, and at the same time MPEG-4 is broadcasting data on 0.9 Mbps to 2.3 Mbps.

MPEG-2 broadcasters are spending almost twice more than that of MPEG-4, and still giving a comparable picture quality.
Think a bit what will happen with picture quality if MPEG-4 is broadcasted on 5 Mbps.

viz. 128 Kbps mp3 is said to be CD quality but actually CD quality is far better than MP3's encoded at 128 Kbps

Every compression technique is lossy (lossy = where you will loose some part), that is why it is known as compression. Compress a CD to 320 kbps and listen to it...

----------

i know my cable is gonna suck on a 40'' tv....So i need a DTH for better quality....i belive Sony television upscale video to an extend. if that fixes the pixellation problem i would be happy... who knows all manufacturer give a hype about their products and the consumers suffer....

Sony Bravia is the best!!! no doubt about it, The temporal Noise Reduction which Sony is using in their LCDs is the best so far.

 

[croper]

Tata Sky.... since i belive they give better quality of all the DTH service providers.

Gone are those days mate.
Right now Bigtv has better quality and they also have component out.
Airtel and Sundth are not far behind.
Dishtv and Tatasky are nothing in front of the new DTH entrants with mpeg4 technology.

 

[ayan]

so am not satisfied with all ur answers something is really missing on ur concepts:inodding:

 

[cyberwiz]

Strongly Disagree

What actually is happening ...

MPEG-2 broadcasters are spending almost twice more than that of MPEG-4, and still giving a comparable picture quality.
Think a bit what will happen with picture quality if MPEG-4 is broadcasted on 5 Mbps.


dont u think that at 5 Mbps MPEG 4 will be carrying the same amount of data that a MPEG 2 will be carrying at 2.5 Mbps?..I have encoded video using both MPEG 2 and MPEG 4 and frankly other than difference in file size i didnt notice any substantial difference in video quality, the MPEG 4 at twice the bit rate was at par with MPEG 2..on paper ofcourse it would seem incorrect but practically that's what i have observed. IMO MPEG 4 helps the broadcasters squeeze more channels per transponder rather than stream at a higher bit-rate so the subscribers get the same/lesser quality, though the no of channels do increase.

compression technique is lossy (lossy = where you will loose some part), that is why it is known as compression. Compress a CD to 320 kbps and listen to it...

U didnt get the point..theoretically and also by popular belief 128 Kbps should match CD quality..but it doesn't..similarly theoretically and again going by popular belief MPEG 4 is supposed to be better quality than MPEG2 but practically as far as perceptions of my naked eyes and ears are concerned both propositions appear incorrect..of course this is only my opinion.

 

[anurag.choudhary]

dont u think that at 5 Mbps MPEG 4 will be carrying the same amount of data that a MPEG 2 will be carrying at 2.5 Mbps?
:rofl:
If that would have happened, you wont be downloading any DVDRIP in DIVX/XVID.

..I have encoded video using both MPEG 2 and MPEG 4 and frankly other than difference in file size i didnt notice any substantial difference in video quality, the MPEG 4 at twice the bit rate was at par with MPEG 2..on paper ofcourse it would seem incorrect but practically that's what i have observed. IMO MPEG 4 helps the broadcasters squeeze more channels per transponder rather than stream at a higher bit-rate so the subscribers get the same/lesser quality, though the no of channels do increase.

Secondly, may be you were so dumbo while converting your video to MPEG-2 or MPEG-4.

May be you would have done a only "1-pass" encoding, give it some time and do a "2-pass" encoding.

Do one thing : Pic one video, encode it in MPEG-2 and MPEG-4.
Keep the frame size same,
Keep the video bitrate same,
- and check the results.

----------

so am not satisfied with all ur answers something is really missing on ur concepts:inodding:

YES, I was very weak at concepts, I was trying to please a buffalo.

 

[wiseman]

Do one thing : Pic one video, encode it in MPEG-2 and MPEG-4.
Keep the frame size same,
Keep the video bitrate same,
- and check the results.


You do one thing: Keep all same inculding the Video size and you can claim MPEG2 and MPEG4 occupies same size on the hard dish :clap:

Without any gain who is going to switch to MPEG4? It should be a better compression than MPEG2. If both are same there won't be any MPEG4 at all!

 

[anurag.choudhary]

You do one thing: Keep all same inculding the Video size and you can claim MPEG2 and MPEG4 occupies same size on the hard dish :clap:

Without any gain who is going to switch to MPEG4? It should be a better compression than MPEG2. If both are same there won't be any MPEG4 at all!


You are right wiseman.

TO cyberwiz
Sorry Shaktiman Galti ho gayi!!! leasehelp:
Dobara nahin karoonga. :notallowed:
Tum jeet gaye :clap:

:hysterical:

 

[cyberwiz]

:rofl:
If that would have happened, you wont be downloading any DVDRIP in DIVX/XVID.


Before laughing ur ar$e off.. u should try to understand what the other person is saying..what i meant was that the visual quality of MPEG at 2.5 Mbps will be comparable to video quality of MPEG 4 at 5 Mbps. In terms of Kilobytes ofcourse MPEG 4 reduces the size which is what i have been saying since the first post. AGAIN THIS BASED ON MY OPINION BASED ON WHAT I HAVE OBSERVED ON MPEG2 and MPEG 4 videos..officially MPEG is supposed to better..get what i am trying to put across dodo?

Secondly, may be you were so ...
- and check the results.

keep ur advise to urself and be a little restrained in what u say..i stated clearly that whatever i said was my opinion.

 

[anurag.choudhary]

keep ur advise to urself and be a little restrained in what u say..i stated clearly that whatever i said was my opinion.

Dear cyberwiz dont be so angry....
and I dont talk opinions, I speak technology. I am a programmer in DVB sector.
that is why I was saying what actually is happening, and every time you were writting your OPINION here. Is this a opinion poll out here.

keep your false opinions with you and be happy. It may save the rest of the world being in a misconception .

 

[cyberwiz]

dude learn to read and comprehend properly..i know exactly what spreading mis-information means..i have clearly mentioned everywhere that its only my opinion based on my perceptions ...I have stated that "officially" MPEG 4 is "considered" to be better than MPEG 2..



Hmm..MPEG 4 is actually inferior quality compared to MPEG 2..atleast thats how it appears to my eyes..though the codec promises greater quality at lesser bandwidth.. and it does deliver a part of that promise

i didnt notice any substantial difference in video quality, the MPEG 4 at twice the bit rate was at par with MPEG 2..on paper ofcourse it would seem incorrect but practically that's what i have observed.

similarly theoretically and again going by popular belief MPEG 4 is supposed to be better quality than MPEG2 but practically as far as perceptions of my naked eyes and ears are concerned both propositions appear incorrect..of course this is only my opinion.

U are talking technology and i am also talking technology but technology with a human perspective..on a 40/42 inch plasma/LCD TV iam sure a lot of people here would not find much difference between an MPEG 2 and MPEG 4 video at higher bitrate in terms of video quality though file size of MPEG 4 will be less..this is contrary to the officially stated position..which is why it was stated here ..that also with a disclaimer