Paging Mena661
What make and model LCD TV is it that you are using that draws 2 amps? Thanking you in advance.
Forum Discussion
SCVJeff wrote:NinerBikes wrote:Depends on the network...JiminDenver wrote:
Not the OTA channels here. They may not be 1080p all the time but the major networks are especially for sports.
Major league teams in all the big cities get the 1080p camera's and 60 frames per second, me thinks. SCVjeff is the guru on that stuff, he would know for certain, he's the guy that puts the airwaves in the air.
ABC (and all of their sports holdings) & Fox went 720 vs. 1080 because they were very early adopters, and at the time the gear of the day couldn't build a picture fast enough to chase a NASCAR driver or flying football across the field without the picture completely breaking down. It's not the problem it once used to be as processors have gotten faster and faster, and the new encoders are simply magic. But off-air you can often see the difference the reduction in data has by looking at maybe a CBS station (1080) up against Fox or any of the ABC stations (both 720). If you can see them on the same band, in the same location (Apples to Apples), AND get out to where both are equally weak, the 720 transmitter will always outperform the higher data (CBS) simply because the TV is having to deal with 1/2 the data payload to create a picture. It's very easy to demo this in Los Angeles where everyone is grouped together on the same mountain. Back to motion.. On a smaller monitor it's very difficult to see the difference of the two formats with moving video, and impossible on most non-fast motion programs. Watching any reasonably strong station not sitting at threshold is getting more and more difficult to pick between what's 720 or 1080.
Back to the previously scheduled thread...
NB- It's entirely possible that plugging the Samsung into a 12V source vs. the 14v brick on AC could yield either the same or more current over running it on AC because the current draw of the TV could increase as the voltage goes down, depending on what voltage the internal regulator is providing. Only one way to tell...
ABC and Fox went 720P, because that was the format they could get in the then state of the art DLP/Texas Instrument chipped camera's they mounted all over the football field on guy wires. Those cameras cost a fortune back then, only larger sports markets could afford them, but they were absolutely magic in skilled teams hands on the football field. Quantum light years ahead of old analog and 480i format.
I remember a sports director I bumped into up at Mammoth Lakes in a coffee shop from Fox Sports. I complemented him and the organization for the quality of the camera's and the camera work over CBS and NBC. It was very, very noticeable then in 2006. At the time, we had Time Warner and Cable card ready Toshiba. The Scientific Altantic cable cards sucked, the Motorola card system was much, much better. Being early adopters, it was just amazing, seeing sweat fly off of football players on hits, or blades of grass fly up and flutter from divots from the players cleats. The camera's caught it all. They also seemed to have a much better depth of field than older cameras. Another great show was National Geographic, as well as some very high quality hi def stuff shot by KCET, nature stuff. Of course, Time Warner over subscribed for the bandwidth they had for cable as more and more customers came on board, and pixelated work over cable and freezing, due to packets of data that carried encrypted digital codes to protect digital owners rights being missing caused all kinds of audio and visual freezing problems. We had to tell TWC to stick it where the sun don't shine when they foisted a crappy cable box on us that chintzed on the quality of picture and saved bandwidth. Time for a simple OTA antenna then.
720p in OTA is fine and dandy... but if you watch blu ray with DVD's shot in 1080p cameras and have 1080p with good hdmi cables... then it can be a noticeable improvement, not so much 1080i.
