TV Questions Maybe I Can Help.

GreenNinja67 said:
Videography is a very different genre to photograqphy.

I'm not at all surprised.

With the advent of the drone I'm sure more people are "doing" videos but I doubt calibrating their TV's will make much difference to an HD feed.
Click to expand...

I am talking cinematography/videography produced by Directors, DP's etc .
 
Are you a member on AVForums Barry?
 
Last edited:
Barry L. said:
I am only interested in how those moving images are replicated on my screen.

My statement was purely from a photographic perspective. Simply that we all want the pictures we see to look their very best and i am surprised that no one hear shares that view for moving images.
Click to expand...


I find this strange.
I'm more interested in taking and PPing my images than other people's.
 
DorsetDude said:
Now this bit I agree with. Its digital, it either gets there or it doesnt, if it doesnt the error correction will pick it up and fix it anyway.
Click to expand...

No, it's an analogue representation of a digital signal. The bandwidth of the cable is dependent on the accuracy of manufacture.

It's not much of an issue up to HD, but beyond that it is.
 
st599 said:
No, it's an analogue representation of a digital signal. The bandwidth of the cable is dependent on the accuracy of manufacture.

It's not much of an issue up to HD, but beyond that it is.
Click to expand...

I am afraid it really isn't. It's digital signal pure and simple:

http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/4k-hdmi-cables-are-nonsense/

http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/

I have found the build quality on these to be very good and excellent value for money:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AmazonBasi...t_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=PQ8R6NYFYDP7MFCW7E4N
 
Last edited:
Barry L. said:
I am talking cinematography/videography produced by Directors, DP's etc .
Click to expand...

Yeah but you're very specific, about DVDs and viewing on a calibrated screen only, whereas there's a whole realm of moving media from different sources, including producing your own.

On a photographic forum, where a lot of members have cameras with the ability to make video, you're not interested in that.

And that's fine. As I've said I understand there's AV buffs, much as there's audio buffs, but to consistently harangue people for not calibrating there TVs, comes across as a little arrogant.
I'm sure you don't mean too and it's just the way words can be interpreted, but it might explain some of the responses you've been getting (and getting upset about).
 
Incidently, for video work with vehicles I've started experimenting with a sj7000 GoPro ripoff. £33 and it's brilliant and can be put places I wouldn't risk with a dslr.
Ice road truckers used go pros a lot for the filming (and lost a lot).
Just starting to get back into Adobe premiere (on my calibrated monitor), but as yet I've not done much colour correction yet.
That may change if I combine clips from different days.
 
Byker28i said:
Yeah but you're very specific, about DVDs and viewing on a calibrated screen only, whereas there's a whole realm of moving media from different sources, including producing your own.

On a photographic forum, where a lot of members have cameras with the ability to make video, you're not interested in that.

And that's fine. As I've said I understand there's AV buffs, much as there's audio buffs, but to consistently harangue people for not calibrating there TVs, comes across as a little arrogant.
I'm sure you don't mean too and it's just the way words can be interpreted, but it might explain some of the responses you've been getting (and getting upset about).
Click to expand...


Thats right i am talking about Blu Ray & TV. Sorry no i am not interested in making my own i think there are other threads for that?

I am not haranguing anyone, i offered to help with calibration etc and have posted many videos and links to to just that. I set up a thread to talk AV if people are not interested that's OK, but as i have said this is a AV thread.
 
Last edited:
GreenNinja67 said:
Videography is a very different genre to photograqphy.

.
Click to expand...
Maybe you're right but cinematography was always very similar to still photography perhaps because films were worked up from storyboards which are a series of still images. I don't watch so many movies these days but in older films the (still) photographic quality was very evident, it was one of the things I liked about them.
 
Documentarys often have some beautiful imagery included. I'm often drawn to those 3-10 sec clips.
 
st599 said:
Sorry, you're wrong. There is no such thing as a digital signal over cable. To say otherwise is nonsense.
Click to expand...

Did you read my links.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI

Sorry but you are keep appearing on this forum and sharing your opinion, which is great, but i am giving you the answers to your opinion which you a choosing to ignore or not reply to with any objective evidence as to why you think that the signal carried over HDMI is not digital?

EDIT
Nope he has disappeared again?
 
Last edited:
Barry L. said:
Did you read my links.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI

Sorry but you are keep appearing on this forum and sharing your opinion, which is great, but i am giving you the answers to your opinion which you a choosing to ignore or not reply to with any objective evidence as to why you think that the signal carried over HDMI is not digital?

EDIT
Nope he has disappeared again?
Click to expand...

A digital signal has 2 states, 1 or 0.

An analogue representation of a digital signal tries to convey this but has a non-zero rise time, a non-zero fall time, overshoots, undershoots, transmission noise and loss. This is what an HDMI eye diagram shows.

That's why HDMI physical layer tests exist. It's why the data rate and cable length is limited by how good the manufacturing tolerance is.

To say that any HDMI cable perfectly transmits and hence they're all the same is false. There's a point at which it's no longer possible to use error detection to discern which state is being transmitted.
 
st599 said:
A digital signal has 2 states, 1 or 0.

An analogue representation of a digital signal tries to convey this but has a non-zero rise time, a non-zero fall time, overshoots, undershoots, transmission noise and loss. This is what an HDMI eye diagram shows.

That's why HDMI physical layer tests exist. It's why the data rate and cable length is limited by how good the manufacturing tolerance is.

To say that any HDMI cable perfectly transmits and hence they're all the same is false. There's a point at which it's no longer possible to use error detection to discern which state is being transmitted.
Click to expand...

Sorry mate that's nonsense. If you read the links i provided they explain a little better.

Here are some more:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MMDGkQ-w5s

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/tvs-...les-make-no-difference-and-heres-why/page/0/1

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/are-expensive-hdmi-cables-worth-buying/

Nope he has gone again lol.
 
Last edited:
Barry L. said:
Sorry mate that's nonsense. If you read the links i provided they explain a little better.

Here are some more:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MMDGkQ-w5s

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/tvs-...les-make-no-difference-and-heres-why/page/0/1

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/are-expensive-hdmi-cables-worth-buying/

Nope he has gone again lol.
Click to expand...

I've read them, I think they're incorrect.

As I've said, the tolerance of the HDMI cable manufacture is important. Even the HDMI website states there are at least 2 cable certification standards (and investigating more for UHDTV). So whilst you can say that all legitimate category 2 cables certified for x metres should act alike, you can't say all HDMI cables are the same.

Tektronix, Rhode and Schwarz and Agilent all have excellent white papers on the HDMI physical layer, the required measured tolerances etc.

This goes through the differences in cable tolerances nicely:
http://www.cedia.co.uk/cda_/images/Resources/4K-Industry-Whitepaper_ENG.pdf
 
st599 said:
I've read them, I think they're incorrect.

As I've said, the tolerance of the HDMI cable manufacture is important. Even the HDMI website states there are at least 2 cable certification standards (and investigating more for UHDTV). So whilst you can say that all legitimate category 2 cables certified for x metres should act alike, you can't say all HDMI cables are the same.

Tektronix, Rhode and Schwarz and Agilent all have excellent white papers on the HDMI physical layer, the required measured tolerances etc.

This goes through the differences in cable tolerances nicely:
http://www.cedia.co.uk/cda_/images/Resources/4K-Industry-Whitepaper_ENG.pdf
Click to expand...

They are correct and every scientific test that has ever been done has backed this up. You also did say that HDMI was not digital, again this was quite an untrue statement as i have shown.

There is nothing i can see in white paper that to be honest mentions any difference in PQ. Which again has been scientifically tested to the very highest level.

HDMI simply carries a signal of 1 & 0's if these are not carried you will see no picture. You can not have (as with analogue) a series of 1ish or 0ish data signals.
 
Last edited:
st599 said:
Again, any cable that meets the HDMI version 2 spec is fine. However it's not correct to say any cable is fine.

Try wiring some bell wire between 2 HDMI plugs and see what you get.
Click to expand...

I think you are moving the goalposts a little lol.
 
st599 said:
No need, old chap. A cable that meets the cable specification will work fine.
Click to expand...

st599 said:
Again, any cable that meets the HDMI version 2 spec is fine. However it's not correct to say any cable is fine.

Try wiring some bell wire between 2 HDMI plugs and see what you get.
Click to expand...

The video and articles clearly mention that any cable that meets the spec will work, which is what Barry and I both meant. A £5 certified cable is functionally equivalent to a £500 certified cable.

I wouldn't expect to get a good result using bell wire for HDMI as, amongst other inadequacies, it has too few connectors. Bell wire is only really suitable for simple connections, like speakers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top