PDA

View Full Version : Do you prefer HD or SD?


Ward Dragon
09-04-11, 23:04
Poll requested by Apathetic :)

TombOfRaiders
09-04-11, 23:04
HD all the way. :cool:

lara c. fan
09-04-11, 23:05
I do love my HD...

Spong
09-04-11, 23:05
LOL, I wonder where this question came from Ap :p:vlol:

trlestew
09-04-11, 23:06
I only have an SDTV which does the job so...I chose SD.

Vinkula
09-04-11, 23:07
SD here, I have no HD screen. Except my living room TV, but I don't use it for gaming.

King.Louie
09-04-11, 23:07
Hd :)

Encore
09-04-11, 23:11
I love HD. :cln:

Apathetic
09-04-11, 23:13
LOL, I wonder where this question came from Ap :p:vlol:

Why, yes. :p Care to take part in the poll?

robm_2007
09-04-11, 23:14
I'm not bothered by SD, but HD is always better.

Spong
09-04-11, 23:15
Why, yes. :p Care to take part in the poll?

Nope, not enough choices and it's not multiple choice. Of course HD's gonna win, it's the latest thing.

Apathetic
09-04-11, 23:17
Nope, not enough choices and it's not multiple choice. Of course HD's gonna win, it's the latest thing.

No, because HD is obviously better. ;)

Ward Dragon
09-04-11, 23:18
Nope, not enough choices and it's not multiple choice. Of course HD's gonna win, it's the latest thing.

Well what do you expect when you don't game on a PC? :pi:

voltz
09-04-11, 23:22
I love HD, but when it comes to SD content, HDTV has a way of bringing out the worst in it. I have to go buy processing equipment just to get around that issue.

Btw... 15Khz FTW!! (http://raster.effect.free.fr/tv/Photos_LCD_720p/LCD_1438.jpg)

SkyPuppy
09-04-11, 23:24
HD. :l

Ikas90
09-04-11, 23:27
I think most people would say HD. :p

SD is what I use, though. :) I don't have HD.

This is what I use:

http://www.risingdayclub.com.au/tv.jpg

lol jk

Nerd For Life
09-04-11, 23:27
HD. I don't mind SD either, though.

Phlip
09-04-11, 23:27
HD for me. :) I can't see why anyone would go for SD unless they're not able to use it. Well what do you expect when you don't game on a PC? :pi:

:vlol:

Pietras
09-04-11, 23:28
honestly, as long as the quality ain't like ridiculously bad, I couldn't give less crap if it's SD or HD.

Vinkula
09-04-11, 23:30
No, because HD is obviously better. ;)

SD is IMO better.

Apathetic
09-04-11, 23:31
SD is IMO better.

You may prefer it, but there's no way you can provide legitimate evidence as to why it's better.

Ward Dragon
09-04-11, 23:33
For the people who say SD is better, I'm genuinely curious as to why. Do you mostly play older games which don't look that good when upscaled to HD?

trlestew
09-04-11, 23:33
You may prefer it, but there's no way you can provide legitimate evidence as to why it's better.
BIASED STATEMENT






Sorry. :|

And at WD: I don't have an HDTV. I don't even find the need for one honestly. Only some PS3 games cause issues with small text (Mass Effect 2 for one...) and everything else is displayed clearly, so I don't see the point.

Phlip
09-04-11, 23:34
honestly, as long as the quality ain't like ridiculously bad, I couldn't give less crap if it's SD or HD.
This is quite true.
For the people who say SD is better, I'm genuinely curious as to why. Do you mostly play older games which don't look that good when upscaled to HD?

Ugh I hate when SD looks like **** on HD...

Vinkula
09-04-11, 23:36
For the people who say SD is better, I'm genuinely curious as to why. Do you mostly play older games which don't look that good when upscaled to HD?

I am okay with SDTV and I don't need HDTV. On the SDTV, games aren't bad looking at all and I don't see ANY difference between SD and HD image. I am maybe blind in your opinion then, but I don't see any difference.

Phlip
09-04-11, 23:37
I am okay with SDTV and I don't need HDTV. On the SDTV, games aren't bad looking at all and I don't see ANY difference between SD and HD image. I am maybe blind in your opinion then, but I don't see any difference.

Did you use an HDMI cable when looking at HD? Because that makes all the difference.

trlestew
09-04-11, 23:37
Things just look more crisp and detailed, nothing worth spending over $300 for in my opinion.

Vinkula
09-04-11, 23:39
Things just look more crisp and detailed, nothing worth spending over $300 for in my opinion.

:tmb:

Apathetic
09-04-11, 23:39
BIASED STATEMENT

Care to elaborate or prove otherwise? Saying SD is better than HD is like saying a PS2 is better than a PS3 in terms of technical comparison when obviously, it's not.
Also, saying you don't see the point of HD is just silly.


I am okay with SDTV and I don't need HDTV. On the SDTV, games aren't bad looking at all and I don't see ANY difference between SD and HD image. I am maybe blind in your opinion then, but I don't see any difference.

Well either you are in fact blind or you're not using HDMI cables!

trlestew
09-04-11, 23:41
Care to elaborate or prove otherwise? Saying SD is better than HD is like saying a PS2 is better than a PS3 in terms of technical comparison when obviously, it's not.
Also, saying you don't see the point of HD is just silly.






I said it was biased as you made this poll already knowing that you loved HD and that there is no one going to change your mind. Your arguments are based on your personal preference only.

Apathetic
09-04-11, 23:43
I said it was biased as you made this poll already knowing that you loved HD and that there is no one going to change your mind. Your arguments are based on your personal preference only.

Biased or not, it's still better.. :p

Ward Dragon
09-04-11, 23:44
Things just look more crisp and detailed, nothing worth spending over $300 for in my opinion.

I just use my PC monitor which cost around $100. The PC is plugged into the DVI slot and the Xbox 360 is plugged into the HDMI slot :D But yeah, I'm definitely not buying an HDTV because they're bloody expensive.

Vinkula
09-04-11, 23:44
I prefer SD more than HD, that's it. And I am not going to blow up my SDTV with HD settings.

KC Mraz
09-04-11, 23:48
HD. I just like the additional space on the sides.

Phlip
09-04-11, 23:50
HD. I just like the additional space on the sides.

Widescreen is unrelated to HD :o

KC Mraz
09-04-11, 23:58
Isn't widescreen compulsory for HD transmissions? That's why I was thinking of.

Also the difference in detail is noticeable (at least to me), specially in text. It's not something I can't live without but is nice to have it.

Spong
09-04-11, 23:59
Isn't widescreen compulsory for HD transmissions? That's why I was thinking of.

Aspect ratio isn't connected HD or SD resolutions. You can have HD movies in 4:3 (1920x1440).

Ward Dragon
10-04-11, 00:01
Widescreen is unrelated to HD :o

I'm pretty sure that as far as TV's go, SD is 640x480 (4:3 ratio) while HD is either 1280x720 or 1920x1080 (both of which are 16:9 widescreen ratios).

Aspect ratio isn't connected HD or SD resolutions. You can have HD movies in 4:3 (1920x1440).

That's the first I've heard of an HD movie having that resolution. How is that even possible? :confused: If the TV only has 1080 pixels vertically then how can it display 1440?

Spong
10-04-11, 00:03
That's just the way the movie houses and TV production companies made it go because it's their preferred AR. You can buy plenty of HD material that's 4:3 though.

voltz
10-04-11, 00:04
Most crt televisions can do 224p/240p natively and some were fine with 480p. It's just before we had YUV component we had to stick with 480 being interlaced and it was ugly on some things that needed a progressive signal.

StefanJ94
10-04-11, 00:07
I'm pretty sure that as far as TV's go, SD is 640x480 (4:3 ratio) while HD is either 1280x720 or 1920x1080 (both of which are 16:9 widescreen ratios).



That's the first I've heard of an HD movie having that resolution. How is that even possible? :confused: If the TV only has 1080 pixels vertically then how can it display 1440?

Actually I believe that SDTV resolutions are:
NTSC - 720480
PAL - 720x576
no matter if the aspect ratio is 4:3 or 16:9
Correct me if I'm wrong :o

Apathetic
10-04-11, 00:08
Aspect ratio isn't connected HD or SD resolutions. You can have HD movies in 4:3 (1920x1440).

Doesn't look quite as good though. As far as I know you can toggle to 4:3 from 16:9, but I don't see why you would want to do that..

Ward Dragon
10-04-11, 00:08
That's just the way the movie houses and TV production companies made it go because it's their preferred AR. You can buy plenty of HD material that's 4:3 though.

But if the movie is 1920x1440 resolution, then can you only watch it on PC? Or are there HDTV's out there which don't have the usual 720p or 1080p resolutions?

Edit:

Actually I believe that SDTV resolutions are:
NTSC - 720480
PAL - 720x576
no matter if the aspect ratio is 4:3 or 16:9
Correct me if I'm wrong :o

I just looked it up and the numbers I put were correct for the US. Our SD is 640x480, which is a 4:3 ratio. However you're right that in the UK shows are broadcast in both of those resolutions that you put, so the UK does have widescreen SD. I didn't know that before, so thanks :)

xcrushterx
10-04-11, 00:09
I don't mind SD, but I HATE HATE HATE it when I can use a HD version of something. When my parents are watching TV, they always use the standard channel rather than the HD one and it drives me nuts. :pi: As for gaming - some SD games look disgusting on HD TVs, but I really couldn't go back to playing PS3 games in SD.

Spong
10-04-11, 00:10
That's the first I've heard of an HD movie having that resolution. How is that even possible? :confused: If the TV only has 1080 pixels vertically then how can it display 1440?

They can't, the image gets scaled. And it's one of the reasons why I only have HD monitors and not an HDTV. I've got a few HD TV shows on PC that play at that resolution.

Apathetic
10-04-11, 00:12
I don't mind SD, but I HATE HATE HATE it when I can use a HD version of something. When my parents are watching TV, they always use the standard channel rather than the HD one and it drives me nuts. :pi:

OH MY GOD, I KNOW RIGHT? :vlol:

I'm like, "Mom, you know there's an HD version of this channel? It's just the next one up." And she's all "I don't care, I don't see a difference anyway." "Then why do we have an HDTV?!!?" - Well, because I made her buy one. :D

savusilakka
10-04-11, 00:13
hd is too much technology for me. It's scary.

StefanJ94
10-04-11, 00:14
I just looked it up and the numbers I put were correct for the US. Our SD is 640x480, which is a 4:3 ratio. However you're right that in the UK shows are broadcast in both of those resolutions that you put, so the UK does have widescreen SD. I didn't know that before, so thanks :)

Wow, that's quite a low resolution for TV. :eek:
I always thought that the US uses NTSC systems.

EDIT: here's a map tho :o
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/PAL-NTSC-SECAM.svg/1000px-PAL-NTSC-SECAM.svg.png

trlestew
10-04-11, 00:14
hd is too much technology for me. It's scary.
I feel that way about some things, but not HD. :p

Ward Dragon
10-04-11, 00:15
They can't, the image gets scaled. And it's one of the reasons why I only have HD monitors and not an HDTV. I've got a few HD TV shows on PC that play at that resolution.

Ah, that makes sense :) I guess media over here is more standardized to the TV resolutions because everything is widescreen now, aimed at 480p, 720p or 1080p. I haven't seen any TV shows or movies which have a different resolution from one of those three.

Vinkula
10-04-11, 00:18
I have widescreen television, but I use 4:3 resulution. Looks nicer.

Ward Dragon
10-04-11, 00:27
Wow, that's quite a low resolution for TV. :eek:
I always thought that the US uses NTSC systems.

We do use NTSC for analog TV's, but apparently there's a new set of standards for digital TV's called ATSC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC_Standards) (which I didn't even know existed until I just saw it on Wikipedia :p).

I think the main difference in resolutions is that standard definition is always 4:3 over here. As far as I know, we don't have widescreen standard definition TV's. Plus our TV's apparently have different specs so I guess the media is designed around the hardware limitations.

Edit: I just found out that "Enhanced-definition televisions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced-definition_television)" exist which are widescreen intermediates between SD and HD, but I don't think I've ever seen one before so I have no idea what that's about :p

StefanJ94
10-04-11, 00:36
We do use NTSC for analog TV's, but apparently there's a new set of standards for digital TV's called ATSC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC_Standards) (which I didn't even know existed until I just saw it on Wikipedia :p).

I think the main difference in resolutions is that standard definition is always 4:3 over here. As far as I know, we don't have widescreen standard definition TV's. Plus our TV's apparently have different specs so I guess the media is designed around the hardware limitations.

Edit: I just found out that "Enhanced-definition televisions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced-definition_television)" exist which are widescreen intermediates between SD and HD, but I don't think I've ever seen one before so I have no idea what that's about :p

Oh, I haven't done some TV broadcasting research in quite some time then.
Those systems look quite interesting IMO. They have loads of variety resolutions when it comes to H.264/MPEG-4 AVC codec encoding which I like. :tmb:

scremanie
10-04-11, 00:45
HD. LOL SD has no chance with HD for me. :p

Alpharaider47
10-04-11, 00:45
Once you go HD you never go back :ohn:

scremanie
10-04-11, 00:46
Once you go HD you never go back :ohn:

Mmmhhhhhhmmmmmm :ohn:

Encore
10-04-11, 00:54
Once you go HD you never go back :ohn:

Pretty much, yeah. I used to think HD was pointless, until I actually saw a movie in HD. :|

Vinkula
10-04-11, 00:55
I had HDTV. Maybe I am weird, but I changed back for SD.

Because, it felt weird.
I was too used for my old tv. I wanted it back.

Ward Dragon
10-04-11, 01:00
Oh, I haven't done some TV broadcasting research in quite some time then.

I feel like this conversion happened practically overnight in 2009 when the government sold off the rights to the analog frequencies and forced all television stations to switch to digital. It's very recent as far as these things go, so that's probably why you hadn't heard of it before.

Those systems look quite interesting IMO. They have loads of variety resolutions when it comes to H.264/MPEG-4 AVC codec encoding which I like. :tmb:

I'm actually surprised to see that too. I'm trying to figure out what exactly it means (I'm convinced the table mixed up "square" vs. "non-square" resolutions because I call 4:3 square and 16:9 non-square, not vice-versa XD).

In general I really hate all this 720p, 480i type of stuff. I wish they'd just use normal PC terms and say what the resolutions are :p For example on that table there are multiple resolutions ending with the same vertical pixel number so just referring to HDTV resolutions by the vertical pixels is confusing.

Legend of Lara
10-04-11, 01:13
I only have an SD TV. ;_;

Spong
10-04-11, 01:18
In general I really hate all this 720p, 480i type of stuff. I wish they'd just use normal PC terms and say what the resolutions are :p For example on that table there are multiple resolutions ending with the same vertical pixel number so just referring to HDTV resolutions by the vertical pixels is confusing.

Again, that's the movie houses' and TV production companies' doing by outputting most of their media in 16:9 nowadays. Because of that, people make the association that 720/1080 refers to a 16:9 aspect ratio. The resolution 'standards' technically has nothing to do with aspect ratio because every one can display either.

scoopy_loopy
10-04-11, 01:21
It depends... if it's gaming or TV, etc. Of course I prefer HD. But with youtube and other internet stuff, I prefer SD. Loads faster. :p

TRfan23
10-04-11, 01:21
HD here :wve:


You know it was only last August I had noticed in Cinemas that the quality is so much better then what it used to be like for animated films. I saw Toy Story 3 then.

StefanJ94
10-04-11, 01:26
I'm actually surprised to see that too. I'm trying to figure out what exactly it means (I'm convinced the table mixed up "square" vs. "non-square" resolutions because I call 4:3 square and 16:9 non-square, not vice-versa XD).

I believe that the square/non-square value is for the pixels.
This pic should explain most of it.
http://documentation.apple.com/en/motion/usermanual/Art/L00/L0004_Pixels.png

Because 640x480 is actually 4:3 the pixels are shown as squares where at a resolution of 720x480 there are more horizontal pixels than vertical the pixels end up being rectangular shaped so they fit the 4:3 screen.
Anyway that is just how I understand it, I may be wrong. :o

Mr.Burns
10-04-11, 01:28
We do use NTSC for analog TV's, but apparently there's a new set of standards for digital TV's called ATSC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC_Standards) (which I didn't even know existed until I just saw it on Wikipedia :p).

I think the main difference in resolutions is that standard definition is always 4:3 over here. As far as I know, we don't have widescreen standard definition TV's. Plus our TV's apparently have different specs so I guess the media is designed around the hardware limitations.

Edit: I just found out that "Enhanced-definition televisions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced-definition_television)" exist which are widescreen intermediates between SD and HD, but I don't think I've ever seen one before so I have no idea what that's about :p

Oh I've seen plenty of them, they're a pain in the ass from my perspective. Either tube tv's that see at 480P or the first gen tube HDTVs that were 4x3 but could see at 1080i. The end result is at the native resolution of HD used in the US, 720 and 1080 end up with bars on the top and bottom of the screen. Since the vast majority of my customers are technological morons, it's hard trying to explain why their tv doesn't work like they thought it should.

TV providers in the US use mainly 720p or 1080i for tv transmissions. Dish Network does offer 1080p for the video on demand service but the bandwidth requirements are so excessive that it can only be done on their dual tuners and that's a problem if people use the tuners for two tv's. So yea, not used much but it's offered.

TV stations broadcast mainly at 720p. All newer tv's these days can upconvert. The 4x3 format is primarily SD, not HD. It "can" be used for HD but nothing these days is shot in HD at 4x3. Just 16x9. It's the format standard so anything shot at an HD resolution but at 4x3 format is not conforming to the new standards.

Just a few things rattling through my brain. I deal with HD equipment on a daily basis.

Oh a final note. Anyone looking to get a new TV, when you're at the store and the guy tells you, you need a $100 HDMI cable that's gold plated, they can go shove one up their bum, they don't know what their talking about. Gold won't do much for signal conductivity when your connections at the TV and the blu ray/xbox, ps3, converter box are aluminum which is generally the standard by most manufacturers. *shakes head*

Ward Dragon
10-04-11, 01:32
Again, that's the movie houses' and TV production companies' doing by outputting most of their media in 16:9 nowadays. Because of that, people make the association that 720/1080 refers to a 16:9 aspect ratio. The resolution 'standards' technically has nothing to do with aspect ratio because every one can display either.

What I meant is that they should scrap the practice of labeling resolutions with labels like "720p" and just say it has a resolution of 1280x720p (or whatever the resolution actually is). If they just say the full resolution then there's no room for confusion :)

It depends... if it's gaming or TV, etc. Of course I prefer HD. But with youtube and other internet stuff, I prefer SD. Loads faster. :p

Very good point! :p Yeah, I usually watch streaming videos in SD because my internet isn't fast enough to stream HD without stuttering.

I believe that the square/non-square value is for the pixels.
This pic should explain most of it.
http://documentation.apple.com/en/motion/usermanual/Art/L00/L0004_Pixels.png

Because 640x480 is actually 4:3 the pixels are shown as squares where at a resolution of 720x480 there are more horizontal pixels than vertical the pixels end up being rectangular shaped so they fit the 4:3 screen.
Anyway that is just how I understand it, I may be wrong. :o

Ah, that makes sense now, thanks :) I thought it was referring to the shape of the image on the screen and that's why I was confused before :p

Oh a final note. Anyone looking to get a new TV, when you're at the store and the guy tells you, you need a $100 HDMI cable that's gold plated, they can go shove one up their bum, they don't know what their talking about. Gold won't do much for signal conductivity when your connections at the TV and the blu ray/xbox, ps3, converter box are aluminum which is generally the standard by most manufacturers. *shakes head*

Thanks for that post. Was very informative :D With this particular part, I remember having this discussion recently in the videogames section and we came to the same conclusion. Basically it was proven that as long as a cheapo HDMI cable worked (no obvious lines or image distortion) then it was as good as a really expensive cable.

Mr.Burns
10-04-11, 01:39
No problem Jen :) It boils down to basic electronics. Alumnimum, silver and gold are used in the electronic industry. Alumninum being the cheapest and most plentiful, is the one most used. But it's also not as conductive as gold so there's an old adage in the telecommunications industry: Your signal will be as good as your worst connection. *shrugs* Why waste the money. It's like with Radio Shack and their gold plated crap. They claim that their gold plated coax connections are better for your signal when the signal travels down on the stinger in the middle of the cable, which is made of...copper. Hmmm... o.O

voltz
10-04-11, 01:52
Wait until you see some of the MONSTER vs off-brand arguments.

Mr.Burns
10-04-11, 01:58
Yea, I've heard it all. It's rubbish. I've personally tested different brands and unless you're an audiophile with extremely high end equipment, the average user will not notice any different worth the money. I actually use cheap, ten dollar HDMI cables that I got from work when I installed my HD receiver. I'm running them into my home theater system which is TrueHD and no problems at all. Seeing people arguing over things like this is a source of amusement for those of us in the tv industry. Quality doesn't mean crap if the devices that decode the signal can only handle so much.

Paddy
10-04-11, 02:06
HD may be better then SD but SD is better then nothing :p
@ Mark good post dude, may have helped me when I decide to buy an HD tv :)

Mr.Burns
10-04-11, 02:12
HD may be better then SD but SD is better then nothing :p
@ Mark good post dude, may have helped me when I decide to buy an HD tv :)

Yer mum...


Oops, sorry, I'm so used to the yer mum jokes :p

No problem dood :)

Stosh
10-04-11, 02:14
HD.

Paddy
10-04-11, 02:15
Yer mum...


Oops, sorry, I'm so used to the yer mum jokes :p

No problem dood :)

Steal away, glad people decide to use them that isnt just me :p

Aphrodite22
10-04-11, 02:19
why would anyone prefer SD??

DgoOdz94
10-04-11, 03:38
HD. :)

Even though the closest I can get is 1080i. :p I need to get my HDMI cable, PRONTO!

Tear
10-04-11, 03:43
...Why would one prefer an SD television?:confused:

voltz
10-04-11, 03:57
Just want to point out for the record that questions like "why would anyone want to watch SD" are irrelevant at this point. Some people would know the details, but I'd rather suggest looking it all up yourself then bombarding this thread with repeated annoyances.

Google stuff like 15khz, 224/240, or your fav past gen system with either RGB or Scart and get educated.

tranniversary119
10-04-11, 03:58
HD, of course.

michaeldt
10-04-11, 04:10
HD

t-raider26
10-04-11, 05:57
Obviously people prefer HD. It's just a matter of what people can afford, or have access to.

RAID
10-04-11, 06:02
HD obviously :)

Summers
10-04-11, 06:12
nothingtoseehere

Drone
10-04-11, 07:11
sd :wve:

Lara's Nemesis
10-04-11, 07:25
Wow, great poll.

I just can't decide. :tea:

Cochrane
10-04-11, 07:44
More resolution is always better.

Autolycus
10-04-11, 08:55
HD it's the way forward ;)

igonge
10-04-11, 08:58
Sexy and Sparkly HD

cezy rockeru
10-04-11, 08:58
I like HD:p

LNSNHGTDS
10-04-11, 09:00
HD!!!

sandygrimm
10-04-11, 09:01
Who doesn't like HD? :p

rowanlim
10-04-11, 09:02
I prefer HD, especially when I'm watching documentaries :D

Survival
10-04-11, 09:05
HD is the obvious choice :ohn:

moodydog
10-04-11, 09:30
people who choose SD obviously only have SD. If people had both HD and SD they obviously would choose HD.

TippingWater
10-04-11, 09:41
HD , but I only have a standard HDMI cable , I wonder if that affect the overall performance ? But I think it doesn't especially since it's only 1.5 m long .

Spong
10-04-11, 10:31
^Absolutely not. A dirt cheap cable gives you just as good a picture as a really expensive cable. People who fork out loads of money for gold plates and all that nonsense have been completely suckered. It may've made a difference back in the days of SCART, but it doesn't with HDMI.

lara c. fan
10-04-11, 10:45
I'm rolling off of a 2.50 HDMI cable my mate gave me, and it looks just as nice as on my parent's Monster cable.

Yeah, they seem to have a lot of money to burn. I don't have the heart to tell them what I know now. >.<

Cristina
10-04-11, 11:12
High definition :D

ajrich17901
10-04-11, 12:01
HD for the win!:D

GeekOfComedy
10-04-11, 12:31
^Absolutely not. A dirt cheap cable gives you just as good a picture as a really expensive cable. People who fork out loads of money for gold plates and all that nonsense have been completely suckered. It may've made a difference back in the days of SCART, but it doesn't with HDMI.

Actually it totally does. Fibre cables travel faster than copper which means extremely high quality video there isn't a latency delay nor any image loss.

lara c. fan
10-04-11, 12:38
Actually it totally does. Fibre cables travel faster than copper which means extremely high quality video there isn't a latency delay nor any image loss.

A.) He was talking about gold plates, not fibre cables. :confused:
B.) There's fibre cables? Every HDMI cable I've seen is copper.

ShadyCroft
10-04-11, 12:49
HD. Once you go HD, you never go...back? lol! no seriously, I used to watch SD cause we dont have HD channels here, only HD screens, and when I download stuff on my PC I get them SD cause HD takes a lot of space, but ever since I watched some stuff in HD, everytime I watch SD I feel bothered...they started feeling pixelated

Squibbly
10-04-11, 14:03
HD for me!

HD , but I only have a standard HDMI cable , I wonder if that affect the overall performance ? But I think it doesn't especially since it's only 1.5 m long .

Nope, any HDMI cable will perform equally, no matter how much you spent on it. HDMI is a digital signal; it will either arrive at your TV perfectly or not at all. Cable quality matters if it's an analogue signal. :) Soo, you're fine!

Edit: Oh, I see someone already told you this. :p

Actually it totally does. Fibre cables travel faster than copper which means extremely high quality video there isn't a latency delay nor any image loss.

HDMI doesn't support fibre optics unless it's an extender. Even then, you'd be limited by the copper speeds at the HDMI connectors, so it's not something that people have to worry about.

Lara Croft!
10-04-11, 14:06
Why even make a poll like that? HD FTW!

FloTheMachine
10-04-11, 14:35
HD =D Ftw.

Aranara
10-04-11, 14:36
Hd. :3

moodydog
10-04-11, 14:39
8 people need to ask for a pay rise next year :pi:

Dazzy
10-04-11, 14:40
I prefer SD.

trlestew
10-04-11, 14:50
8 people need to ask for a pay rise next year :pi:

15 year olds can't exactly get real jobs y'know :pi:

jackali
10-04-11, 15:02
I prefer penguins.

Weemanply109
10-04-11, 15:08
Most pointless poll ever, no offence to anyone, but who would choose SD over HD?

The only few who did either don't have it or can't afford it?


15 year olds can't exactly get real jobs y'know :pi:

Still, regardless of your employment status, everyone should know that HD is better, have you EVER seen a HD TV before? :p

silviu_raider
10-04-11, 15:09
Why even make a poll like that? HD FTW!
+1 :tmb:

Legend of Lara
10-04-11, 15:15
I've seen an HDTV before. Hell, I've played PS3 games on an HDTV before.

Like, two years ago.

Since then, I've never been in direct contact with an HDTV.

TheCoolJazz
10-04-11, 15:21
I don't care.. really
If i need to watch a video i will use whatever option is available.

Mikky
10-04-11, 15:48
I've never even seen HD, but why would anyone prefer SD? :confused:

mikhail
10-04-11, 15:57
I like on HD only the documentaries like: Science Channel, Discovery and etc.... and on SD I love the normal movies. :)

Apathetic
10-04-11, 16:05
Atleast we can now infer something about the sanity of those who chose 'SD'. :pi:

Phlip
10-04-11, 16:14
I like on HD only the documentaries like: Science Channel, Discovery and etc.... and on SD I love the normal movies. :)

Why do you prefer films in SD?

Encore
10-04-11, 16:15
Atleast we can now infer something about the sanity of those who chose 'SD'. :pi:

Yeah, I must admit - with all due respect - that I don't understand the logic behind such a choice.

Mr.Burns
10-04-11, 20:31
Actually it totally does. Fibre cables travel faster than copper which means extremely high quality video there isn't a latency delay nor any image loss.

Fiber isn't currently used in anything other than audio. Besides: gold is an excellent conductor. Aluminum and copper are industry standards. Good conductor but not as good as gold. Your picture/audio quality will be as good as your worst connection. So gold plated connections are effectively useless and just a scam to get people to fork over more money. This is coming from someone with 7 years in the telecommunication industry.

mikhail
10-04-11, 21:18
Why do you prefer films in SD?

Because the graphics in old movies don't translate well to HD.

Tonyrobinson
10-04-11, 21:30
HD definatley, SD burns my retinas now I've seen 1080p. :p

Phlip
10-04-11, 21:31
Because the graphics in old movies don't translate well to HD.And that is fair enough. http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/images/smilies/pat.gif

mikhail
10-04-11, 22:24
And that is fair enough. http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/images/smilies/pat.gif

:tmb: :D

Lara Croft!
10-04-11, 23:00
I think the sole purpose of this poll, is to stigmatize the striking minority and ostracize them from the TRF community.
:D

Shark_Blade
10-04-11, 23:07
Oh come on, is this even a question?:p HD of course.