UPDATE: All I have to say is wow. I just got TWC installed in my home and the HD quality is excellent! I can actually see all the wrinkles in people's faces and grass with all the detail! The soften blurried image that I used to get on uverse is gone now as well as the one second updated background artifacts. Fast moving scenes are not microblocking either. Life is good again! 
texasguy37
pulseman wrote:UPDATE: All I have to say is wow. I just got TWC installed in my home and the HD quality is excellent! I can actually see all the wrinkles in people's faces and grass with all the detail! The soften blurried image that I used to get on uverse is gone now as well as the one second updated background artifacts. Fast moving scenes are not microblocking either. Life is good again!
Something tells me you really don't want to leave U-verse. You keep coming back to the forum.
texasguy37
pulseman wrote:
OK fine that was my last one.
I'm glad that you now have the HD PQ that your were looking for. You can come visit us on the forum anytime.
texasguy37
callmeox wrote:
Who died and made you the official greeter?
Want to fight?
texasguy37 wrote:Want to fight?
Not in front of the kids!
texasguy37
callmeox wrote:
texasguy37 wrote:Want to fight?
Not in front of the kids!
You're no fun!
pulseman wrote:
UPDATE: All I have to say is wow. I just got TWC installed in my home and the HD quality is excellent! I can actually see all the wrinkles in people's faces and grass with all the detail! The soften blurried image that I used to get on uverse is gone now as well as the one second updated background artifacts. Fast moving scenes are not microblocking either. Life is good again!
Yeah pulseman, I can see them just fine here on Uverse too, fast moving scenes are fine, no soften blurred
images on HDMI on my Panasonic plasma.
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more
squareeyes wrote:
how about that... "video stutter" is exactly the issue i experienced with uverse. glad to know they're working on it to be fixed in a future sw release.any att moderators know when that might be? when it's resolved perhaps i'll consider switching back to uverse from cable.btw... especially love part of the presentation with addams family 'thing' performing a soft reboot.
RRK wrote:
callmeox wrote:Looking....not finding. Care to provide a link to this?
http://helpme.att.net/uknow/uknow_wrapper.htm?Item=11690 #10
Have a hunch the problem was your TV on this video stutter as I don't see it on my Panasonic plasma.
ATT may call it 'missing frames', but if so why wasn't I missing them? 
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more
i can't speak to why you don't have them. but my hunch is that it's either the way different television sets handle that compressed video or there is a local problem that affects some users and not others. it's either that or it's that some videophile users have a more discriminating eye than others. in my case all other "hd" video signals into my television, including cable, produced a far better picture than uverse did.
either way, it appears that att acknowledges that it is a widespread (if not universal) issue. i believe it's important for existing and prospective uverse customers to be aware of it.
so, is there a user or mod that has an eta for the sw update to fix the issue?
mibrnsurg wrote:Have a hunch the problem was your TV on this video stutter as I don't see it on my Panasonic plasma.
ATT may call it 'missing frames', but if so why wasn't I missing them?
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more
squareeyes wrote:
i can't speak to why you don't have them. but my hunch is that it's either the way different television sets handle that compressed video or there is a local problem that affects some users and not others. it's either that or it's that some videophile users have a more discriminating eye than others. in my case all other "hd" video signals into my television, including cable, produced a far better picture than uverse did.either way, it appears that att acknowledges that it is a widespread (if not universal) issue. i believe it's important for existing and prospective uverse customers to be aware of it.so, is there a user or mod that has an eta for the sw update to fix the issue?
mibrnsurg wrote:Have a hunch the problem was your TV on this video stutter as I don't see it on my Panasonic plasma.
ATT may call it 'missing frames', but if so why wasn't I missing them?
Chris
Don't give me this bunch of hooey, I just had my DOT physical and w/my glasses on I'm 20/13 vision. So don't
try and say I don't see them, if they were there I'd see em. Seamless HD on the fastest motion w/o any
stuttering is what I see. 
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more
chris, certainly didn't mean to offend. fantastic that you have good vision and can't see any video problems with uverse. i also have good eyesight and i rely on my acute vision and eye for detail at work. i don't believe it's hooey some users may not perceive the artifacts or stutter if its there-- with or without excellent vision. i wrote: "discriminating eye," not "poor eyesight." i also offered two other hunches that may be plausible. some users may not even have the issue. some tvs may simply handle the uverse video signal differently than others, it may be a local problem, or there could be any number of factors... everyone's av kit and environment are different. i'm certainly not an expert in the field, but i would like to know if there is a common thread between those who see the poor video quality coming to them from uverse.
the fact remains that it is an issue acknowledged by att and that it is a deal-breaker for some users who experience it. and i'd still like to know if there's an eta to resolve the issue at the posted att 'help' link:
"Are you experiencing a 'jump' forward when watching certain shows? You may be seeing what is called HD Stutter. HD Stutter is a skip forward due to the loss of a video frame. It is typically observed during slow horizontal pans - such as those that occur during sporting event coverage (particularly basketball)... The defect is usually present at all times... We can't eliminate HD stutter now - but we're working on it."
and i still crack up everytime i watch "thing" perform that soft reboot.
mibrnsurg wrote:
squareeyes wrote:i can't speak to why you don't have them. but my hunch is that it's either the way different television sets handle that compressed video or there is a local problem that affects some users and not others. it's either that or it's that some videophile users have a more discriminating eye than others. in my case all other "hd" video signals into my television, including cable, produced a far better picture than uverse did.either way, it appears that att acknowledges that it is a widespread (if not universal) issue. i believe it's important for existing and prospective uverse customers to be aware of it.so, is there a user or mod that has an eta for the sw update to fix the issue?
mibrnsurg wrote:Have a hunch the problem was your TV on this video stutter as I don't see it on my Panasonic plasma.
ATT may call it 'missing frames', but if so why wasn't I missing them?
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more
Don't give me this bunch of hooey, I just had my DOT physical and w/my glasses on I'm 20/13 vision. So don't
try and say I don't see them, if they were there I'd see em. Seamless HD on the fastest motion w/o any
stuttering is what I see.
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more
mibrnsurg wrote:
Don't give me this bunch of hooey, I just had my DOT physical and w/my glasses on I'm 20/13 vision. So don't try and say I don't see them, if they were there I'd see em. Seamless HD on the fastest motion w/o any stuttering is what I see.
Chris
Chris,
Do you have a Blu-Ray player? I assume you do.
What is your evaluation between the HD from U-Verse vs. the HD from a reference-quality Blu-Ray? Some example reference-quality Blu-Rays:
- I, Robot
- Baraka
- Live Free or Die Hard
- Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Man's Chest
How about U-Verse vs. some trash-quality Blu-Rays? Examples:
- The Fugitive
- The Fifth Element
- Full Metal Jacket (original release)
- Eyes Wide Shut
(For more examples, including Blu-Rays all the way in between these extremes, see the AVS Forum's PQ Tier Thread.)
I own I,Robot, Baraka, Live Free or Die Hard, The Fifth Element, and Eyes Wide Shut. And I have a Netflix account and have rented several others. For me, U-Verse's HD on a good station (Discovery HD, for example), is about even with some of those trash-quality Blu-Rays, maybe a touch higher. On the bad HD stations (NBC HD, USA HD), the quality is less than that. I don't count 720p stations (ABC HD, ESPN HD, FOX HD) as "real" HD.
Now, not all picture quality problems are the fault of U-Verse. On many Fox programs, I see interlacing artifacts that are Fox's fault due to improper editing/conversion. On many NBC programs I see macroblocks that are also present in the OTA feed, showing that NBC has artifact problems within their network before it gets to the broadcasters.
I'm interested in your opinion on this because from the way you describe U-Verse's HD on your setup, you would think it was pristine. Are you making this evaluation in relative terms to other providers or to HD in general?
SomeJoe7777 wrote:
mibrnsurg wrote:Don't give me this bunch of hooey, I just had my DOT physical and w/my glasses on I'm 20/13 vision. So don't try and say I don't see them, if they were there I'd see em. Seamless HD on the fastest motion w/o any stuttering is what I see.Chris
Chris,
Do you have a Blu-Ray player? I assume you do.
What is your evaluation between the HD from U-Verse vs. the HD from a reference-quality Blu-Ray? Some example reference-quality Blu-Rays:
- I, Robot
- Baraka
- Live Free or Die Hard
- Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Man's Chest
How about U-Verse vs. some trash-quality Blu-Rays? Examples:
- The Fugitive
- The Fifth Element
- Full Metal Jacket (original release)
- Eyes Wide Shut
(For more examples, including Blu-Rays all the way in between these extremes, see the AVS Forum's PQ Tier Thread.)
I own I,Robot, Baraka, Live Free or Die Hard, The Fifth Element, and Eyes Wide Shut. And I have a Netflix account and have rented several others. For me, U-Verse's HD on a good station (Discovery HD, for example), is about even with some of those trash-quality Blu-Rays, maybe a touch higher. On the bad HD stations (NBC HD, USA HD), the quality is less than that. I don't count 720p stations (ABC HD, ESPN HD, FOX HD) as "real" HD.
Now, not all picture quality problems are the fault of U-Verse. On many Fox programs, I see interlacing artifacts that are Fox's fault due to improper editing/conversion. On many NBC programs I see macroblocks that are also present in the OTA feed, showing that NBC has artifact problems within their network before it gets to the broadcasters.
I'm interested in your opinion on this because from the way you describe U-Verse's HD on your setup, you would think it was pristine. Are you making this evaluation in relative terms to other providers or to HD in general?
Unluckily no Blu-Ray player to see what it would look like on my TV SomeJoe. Have seen Blu-Ray on LCDs
and not been that impressed. On my Panasonic TH42PZ80U plasma w/anti-reflective filter, HDMI using 4
differentTV picture settings, Custom (using your HDNet calibration), Standard (customized to be a mild
'lightener' for dark scenes and programs), Game (customized to be a heavy 'lightener' for the same) and
Cinema (default).
Also I sit 3 x diagonal distance away (10.5'-CNET's far seating position). In my recliner 9.5' away and at the
computer 13' away. In the recliner I see more of the compression artifacts than I do at the computer. Any
closer and I wouldn't be happy w/Uverse HD. I go through alot to get a good HD picture, since that's just me.
It's not pristine, I see the problems slightly of the background movement due to the frame refresh timing,
but none of the 'stuttering' on sports fast motion. Pretty much no pixelazation or macroblocking (except
that provided by the program) and find FOX HD pretty bad, except the All Star game was very good. Don't
watch much of anything on NBC, so don't know about that. Stats are all 0 except some corrected blocks from
POTS phone ringing to the answering machine and 510' from the VRAD all cat5e and ethernet patch cable.
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more
mibrnsurg wrote:
Unluckily no Blu-Ray player to see what it would look like on my TV SomeJoe. Have seen Blu-Ray on LCDs and not been that impressed. On my Panasonic TH42PZ80U plasma w/anti-reflective filter, HDMI using 4 differentTV picture settings, Custom (using your HDNet calibration), Standard (customized to be a mild 'lightener' for dark scenes and programs), Game (customized to be a heavy 'lightener' for the same) and Cinema (default).
Also I sit 3 x diagonal distance away (10.5'-CNET's far seating position). In my recliner 9.5' away and at the computer 13' away. In the recliner I see more of the compression artifacts than I do at the computer. Any closer and I wouldn't be happy w/Uverse HD. I go through alot to get a good HD picture, since that's just me.
It's not pristine, I see the problems slightly of the background movement due to the frame refresh timing, but none of the 'stuttering' on sports fast motion. Pretty much no pixelazation or macroblocking (except that provided by the program) and find FOX HD pretty bad, except the All Star game was very good. Don't watch much of anything on NBC, so don't know about that. Stats are all 0 except some corrected blocks from POTS phone ringing to the answering machine and 510' from the VRAD all cat5e and ethernet patch cable.
OK. I think what we have to keep in mind here is your seating position and distance, because this probably affects your perception of the picture quality more than other people.
With a 42" screen, seated 9.5 feet away, your screen viewing angle (horizontal) is 18.2 degrees of arc. This is pretty small -- theaters are set up for 26 degrees of arc at the furthest seating position to 36 degrees of arc at the nearest seating positions (THX standards). The most comfortable viewing angle for people to generally watch in the theater is 28-30 degrees of arc.
In addition to this, the human eye can resolve details that are about 1 minute of arc (1/60th of a degree). Multiplying that out means that in your setup, your eye (at 9.5 feet from a 42" screen) can only resolve ~1100 horizontal pixels' worth of detail. Since the screen contains 1920 pixels of detail, your eye is missing almost half the detail on the screen at your viewing distance.
If an MPEG artifact like mosquito noise appears that only affects one pixel, you will not see it at your viewing distance.
Compare this to someone who has a 65" TV at a 9' viewing distance. This is 29.4 degrees of arc, with an eye-resolution of ~1760 pixels. These people will notice the single-pixel artifacts on the exact same picture that you're watching.
For you to see the same picture that they see, you need to be seated at only 6 feet from your screen.
If you were forced to sit at that distance from your TV all the time and have to watch that picture, you can see that the complaints of others become justified.
