Poor picture on SS1, SS2 & ESPN

I've recently signed up for these channels.  They worked OK to begin with but in last few days, the picture has been very poor - breaking up, lines across screen, pixellated etc.  Also ITV2 is affected, is this a BT vision problem or related to Freeview reception issues?  Could the weather be affecting the Freeview reception?
Thanks

Hi, thanks for the replies.  I live in Shropshire, out in the sticks!  Reception has been variable, was OK yesterday, but this morning the signal is a bit broken up.  I've realised that the same problem is not confined to SS1 & 2, but also affects other channels like ITV, C4 etc.  Only BBC channels appear to be fine. 
It seems to be worse when there is heavy rain, or in the hours after this, so I wonder if water is getting into our cables somewhere.  Anyway, its the same whether I have freeview through the BT vision box or not, so it is either the transmitter signal that is poor where I live (and easily affected by the weather), and/or water is getting into our system somewhere when there is very heavy rain (and there has been a lot of this recently!)

Similar Messages

  • My new Ipad camera takes poor picture quality compare to my iphone 4g. Is it should be so?

    My new Ipad camera takes poor picture quality compare to my iphone 4g. Is it should be so?

    Hi pjl,
    Yes I forgot to mention, the iPad does lose the tether when it sleeps, so I turned sleep off permanently which is probably not great for battery life either!
    I just don't understand why another iPhone4 can connect to the personal hotspot with absolutely no intervention once it knows the password. That's how it should be on the iPad. They are both running the latest iOS5 so why any difference?
    Phil

  • Using Premiere Pro CS3 When exporting as flash file poor picture quality

    I'm using Premiere Pro CS3. I shoot green screen in HDV and work in 1440 x 1080. I have been capturing files in Premiere and sending them to Serious Magic Ulta 2. I use this program for keying and adding virtual backgrounds. I save these files as avi. with a resolution of 1440 X 1080. I then bring them back into Premiere Pro for final edit. When I export these video's encoded as mpeg2 theyplay very clear. I am now trying to export as flv. with alpha channel background and the resolution is poor. I working on the transparent background with walk on spokespersons that overlay the HTML page. When In try to play them on my computer the adobe media player is what comes up. I have downloaded flash player but it doesn't select it to play the video. I'm running windows Vista Business platform. What am I doing wrong.

    Thanks for the reply.
    The capture and editing have already been done in 1440 X 1080. Should I use this resolution rather than trying to bump it up to 1920 X 1080.
    Thanks
    Bill Bennett
    Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 07:33:04 -0600
    From: [email protected]
    To: [email protected]
    Subject: Using Premiere Pro CS3 When exporting as flash file poor picture quality
    Computer playback generally prefers square pixels.  Make sure to set your output resolution to 1920 x 1080 using a Pixel Aspect Ratio (PAR) of 1.0 or Square.
    See if that helps.
    >

  • Poor picture on RF2 output

     Good Evening All After Digital Switch Over (in this region on 17 Aug.) I set up my system to supply a Sky feed via RF2 to two other TVs in different rooms and got a good result. The details were as follows:- 1) Sky+ box SD - Amstrad approx. 2years old. 2) RF2 output reset to Channel 50 and RF power turned ON. 3) Distribution in loft (bungalow) via Globalcom F140 Professional 4 way amplifier. 4) Two accessory TVs tuned to analogue Channel 50 connected by heavy duty co-ax cable each about 15 metres from main lounge TV/Sky box. This system worked very well until about ten days ago when the pictures on the two accessory TVs deteriorated suddenly and became very "snowy" and poor quality compared to previously. Pictures direct from the roof aerial to both these TVs are just fine. I have checked all connections and nothing has changed as well as checking the Sky installer menu settings - still OK. The only thing that might have changed is that we have had a "COM power-up" in this area on 23.11.11 from the Belmont transmitter (Channels 22,25,28,30,53,60) but I suppose the two things happening around the same date could be coincidence. I then changed the RF2 output to Channel 49 and have now got an improvement,but still not as good as it was originally.  The pictures are OK in "still" mode eg.when looking at a newsreader or Sky Guide/Planner lists,but sufferfrom a washed-out appearance with 'ghosting' and 'image drag' when movement is going on as in a rugby match and even a golf event - the ball can have a "tail" when flying through the air (bit like a comet). Has anybody got any ideas as to what I can do to improve things from here?  Or am I trying to achieve the unachievable and will have to put up with it as it is? Sorry this is such a long rambling story and thanks to anyone who has stayed with me to this stage!!  Hope someone can help me. Best regards Roy

    I too was struggling with poor picture on RF2. Then read this thread.
    I recently bought a Samsung UE46ES6710 LED HD TV to replace our old 32" Philips TV in our sun lounge, and the sky picture seemed to deteriorate.
    Freeview Aerial - with masthead amplifier - goes into aerial connection in Sky box in living room. From RF2 outlet on sky box goes to distribution amplifier - SLX digital compatible for magic eye. Our bedroom TV's are fed off this as well.
    Cable to the sun lounge, probably 15 metres of co-ax - not the newest - but this cable carries the HD Freeview signal no problem and I have great quality Freeview HD. The aerial connects to a Samsung hard drive freeview recorder then loops out to the TV.
    RF2 is currently on channel 68.
    My transmitter is Rosehearty which I think uses C41/44/47 and has below average signalling.
    I thought it might be the Sky box, but have just fitted a new HD box and result is the same - poor picture on RF2.
    I saw another thread saying the Sky box does not like amped aerial connections, but at the moment I need the cable to carry the Freeview signal as well as the Sky signal - don't have and don't want to get Multi Room, with all the extra cabling - the way my sun lounge is built on to the gable end of our house may make new cable runs or additional cable runs difficult.
    Anyway - after some faffing about trying different things, I removed the aerial cable in my sun lounge from the Samsung HD recorder and plugged it directly into the TV - hey bingo - much improved sky picture.
    My hard drive recorder has already been back to Samsung for a new tuner as it was picking up HD but TV was not picking up HD on pass through signal. I think tuner may be poor in Samsung box?
    So now I have taken a spare aerial booster, and run the sun lounge cable from RF2 outlet to the through SLX booster to this booster, then separate cables to hard drive recorder and TV and picture is much improved. HD no problem on both TV and Hard drive recorder on Freeview.
    Took out my old magic eye and switched on the 9 volts on RF2 but no red light - think the magic eye may be knackered. Still good picture.

  • Poor picture quality in crystal reports

    Post Author: marina
    CA Forum: .NET
    Hello,
    I need insert high-quality photos of some products to a crystal report dynamically and then export this report to a PDF file to be printed by the customer as some proposal of products.
    Some time ago I developed a web-application using MS Visual Studio .NET 2003 and Crystal Reports for Visual Studio .NET 2003 to generate PDF reports. I added images to reports generating BLOB objects at runtime. But the customer complains on poor quality of images in exported reports. The images in the exported reports have a problem of lost smooth color gradation. Now Iu2019m investigating if Crystal Reports for Visual Studio .NET 2005 would help me.
    So, now Iu2019m using MS Visual Studio .NET 2005 and Crystal Reports for Visual Studio .NET 2005 for a test and nevertheless I have the same problem with poor image quality in a total report and an exported PDF file. If I insert a photo file (e.g., TIF or PNG, RBG/8) to a report template, I see an original good-quality picture (RBG/8) on the template screen. I do not use any scaling in the test. If I just switch to the Preview tab to preview the report, I see a bad-quality picture instead. It has the same width and height but has lost smooth color gradation and looks like a 256-color picture. The option "Retain Original Image Color Depth" does not help. I have the same problem with image quality in an exported PDF or MS Word file.
    Is it possible to manage total image quality in crystal reports and how?
    Your prompt reply will be very much appreciated.

    Post Author: marina
    CA Forum: .NET
    Hello,
    Iu2019ve found how to solve this problem in Crystal Reports for MS VS.NET 2005. The option u201CRetain Original Image Color Depthu201D in the Report Options window helps u2013 the preview screen and the exported PDF file contain images of suitable good quality.
    Iu2019ve found information on the u201CRetain Original Image Color Depthu201D option here: http://support.businessobjects.com/library/kbase/articles/c2016162.asp?ref=devzone_rss_net.
    Unfortunately, I donu2019t have the full version of Crystal Reports 9 or 10 to check if this helps to solve image quality problem in the application on MS VS.NET 2003.
    So, I try to edit source report templates in Crystal Reports for MS VS.NET 2005. I set the u201CRetain Original Image Color Depthu201D option in the Report Options window for them. Then I use these updated templates in my old application on MS VS.NET 2003 u2013 I donu2019t edit the templates there, I just load these updated templates at runtime. Dynamic images are added as BLOB objects to a data set at runtime to bind the reports. But I still have the same problem of lost color gradation in generated reports and exported PDF files. I also insert static images for a test to the report templates in MS VS.NET 2005 and then generate reports again by the application on MS VS.NET 2003. I have the same problem of lost color gradation for the static images too.
    So, is it possible to use u201Coriginal image color depthu201D in an application written on MS VS.NET 2003? Or should I remake the project under MS VS.NET 2005 to retain original image color depth?
    Your prompt reply will be very much appreciated.

  • Poor picture quallity through iPhoto purchased pictures?

    I just recently ordered over 150 prints of a recent vacation from iPhoto with two different cameras. One is a 5 MP and the other a 8 MP camera. Pictures from both cameras when I received them in the mail were very poor quality. I contacted apple support and the refunded me the order amount, but my concern now is should I try ordering them again fearing that some type of compression may be taking place on the apple iphoto upload site.
    As a test, I took 5 of the same pictures to a local photo shop and the pictures look great, same image file, etc....
    Any ideas, suggestions or other users experience anything like this?

    aghead:
    Welcome to the Apple Discussions. If you local supplier does a good job why not just burn the image files to a CD and have them done locally? Not having ordered picture from Apple I can't comment on their service but I'd go with a proven source for that number of photos.

  • Premiere Elements 13 poor picture quality

    Hi Folks
    I recently bought Premier Elements 13 as a Christmas present for myself. I decided I wanted a stable program that would produce good quality video, and I was prepared to pay for it.
    However, my first couple of videos have been disappointing.
    I have Elements installed on my Windows (7)  PC.
    I use MP4 video files from my camera which play well on my PC.
    However once imported into PE13, the video files lose picture quality, and the final edited product looks awful. I have tried publishing as MPEG, AVI and MP4 with the same poor results.
    I guess I must be doing something wrong as I thought PE13 was supposed to be good!
    Any advice (in very basic language) would be gratefully received.
    Thanks very much
    Adrian

    Adrian
    Great news that you were able to produce an excellent .mp4 file with your Premiere Elements 13.
    The keys to success are getting a match between the project preset and the properties of the source video (whether you do that manually or the project does it automatically).
    The project will take over this task unless you intervene. Sometimes the project does it right, sometimes not...for the not, that is when you set the project preset manually.
    You have to evaluate the description in the Publish+Share/ area in making your choices there. Some of the choices require customization of the preset under the Advanced Button/Video Tab/Audio Tab/Multiplexer Tab. That is because the default settings of a preset may be for a lower resolution than your source video. And, you can generate .mp4 under Publish+Share/Computer/Mobile Phones and Players as well as under Publish+Share/Computer/AVCHD.
    The above is an assortment of miscellaneous information. If you decide to want to explore settings other than for .mp4, then we can discuss them in details when your
    schedule permits.
    Best wishes
    ATR.

  • Have dock, Have AV Cabling - Poor picture quality

    Either I have it hooked up wrong, or the picture quality is just plain bad.
    My guess is that it is just gonna be bad when transfering the signals from a tiny little screen to a large 42" TV.
    Anybody got any tips????
    Thanks,
    Froggy

    What format is the file you are playing on the iPod - specifically, what is the resolution.
    When you say it is poor quality on the big set, what do you mean? If you're playing a 320x240 file on a big set, it isn't going to look good.

  • N81 8GB blue flash lens and very poor picture qual...

    Hello.
    I have purchased the N81 8GB yesterday and have two enquirees regarding the camera and the lans. The flash len's is tinted blue which make's taking photos with it, appear as an overall cool tint has been applied to the picture. I have searched the internet to find to why it is blue to no avail. Is this normal?
    [IMG]http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/mm143/technofreak23/blueflash.jpg[/IMG]
    Secondly, the 2MP camera quality is appaling. I have seen many test shot's taken with the phone however nowhere have I seen such poor image quality. I am thinking an firmware update might fix this issue. Currently the phone has FW 11.0.045 installed and I am told via Software updater that the FW is up to date, however an quick internet search reveal's that the newest firmware is in the 20x range. (Region setting perhaps?)
    Please enlighten me reagrding the previous enquirees.

    And what kind of a question is that. I brought it from an nokia representative.
    Ill try to take it to nokia care centre.
    Hmm it is very hard to justiify If I have scratched the len's or what not. Can you verify is the len's of suck phones as this one mentioned can be scratched easily with an fingernail? If not then it might be the protective film which somehow is challanging to remove (providing the phone has any)
    Message Edited by ichan on 25-Aug-2008 11:41 AM

  • DVI HDMI Poor picture quality, grainy / combing

    Hi Guys,
    Have just purchased a 26" Samsung LCD and have it connected to my G5 via a DVI-HDMI cable. However, full-screen playback on the monitor from FCP looks really poor- very grainy, with lots of combing (Note: the LCD autodetected a 50hz/1920x1080 interlace setting).
    I know FCP has this setup as a CINEMA DISPLAY PREVIEW so its not really full-quality, but even still- it looks worse than when i was using a tv attached via S-Video!
    Would anyone be kind enough to share what i might try to address the problem? i have already tried the obvious altering resolutions etc- but to no avail...it has me confused!
    Many thanks,
    Adam

    I know FCP has this setup as a CINEMA DISPLAY PREVIEW so its not really full-quality
    Yup...that's it. It isn't full quality, it is a lower resolution to ensure that no skipping of footage occurs (dropped frames).
    even still- it looks worse than when i was using a tv attached via S-Video!
    That was via firewire to a DV device, correct? Because that IS a proper FULL RES signal, so yes, it will look better. DVI out means that it is sending a COMPUTER signal, not a VIDEO signal...so the quality is worse.
    Would anyone be kind enough to share what i might try to address the problem?
    Yup...get a capture card. With a G5 your options are limited. NO Decklink Intensity with HDMI out...no Matrox MXO with HDMI out. The MXO will do DVI to a computer monitor and clean up the signal, but you can't convert that DVI to HDMI I don't think...messes up the signal. BUT, you could use the MXO and go COMPONENT to that monitor. That would be a good signal. Otherwise you are looking at Decklink HD cards or Kona LH...the Decklink might be comparable in price to the MXO.
    Shane

  • Poor Picture with Showtime Anytime

         I have been a subscriber to Verizon Fios for a week now and there is an obvious difference in picture quality for Showtime Anytime (which is new to me as I didn't subscribe to Showtime with my previous provider) and Netflix and HBO GO (which I have used for about two years). With Showtime Anytime there are two problems: 1) There is a jagged look to objects and people instead of a smooth look.  In gaming this is called "jaggies" I believe and is solved with the anti-aliasing settings of the game. 2) There is a ever slight (but noticible) strobe-like effect that means that that the frame rate is too low.  The sound is fine.
         Netflix and HBO GO playback is outstanding and my internet speed is super fast now (58 MBPS down).  There is an optional driver update for my graphics card, NVIDIA Geforce GTS 240 (I don't game with it any more).  I don't know if a new driver will really change anything with this issue and I tend to leave things alone if they are working.
         I don't think this is the fault of Verizon FIOS but I wonder if anyone else has noticed this.
              Thank you,
                  TryBri

    TryBri wrote:
         I have been a subscriber to Verizon Fios for a week now and there is an obvious difference in picture quality for Showtime Anytime (which is new to me as I didn't subscribe to Showtime with my previous provider) and Netflix and HBO GO (which I have used for about two years). With Showtime Anytime there are two problems: 1) There is a jagged look to objects and people instead of a smooth look.  In gaming this is called "jaggies" I believe and is solved with the anti-aliasing settings of the game. 2) There is a ever slight (but noticible) strobe-like effect that means that that the frame rate is too low.  The sound is fine.
         Netflix and HBO GO playback is outstanding and my internet speed is super fast now (58 MBPS down).  There is an optional driver update for my graphics card, NVIDIA Geforce GTS 240 (I don't game with it any more).  I don't know if a new driver will really change anything with this issue and I tend to leave things alone if they are working.
         I don't think this is the fault of Verizon FIOS but I wonder if anyone else has noticed this.
              Thank you,
                  TryBri
    Showtime Anytime is standard definition only.  That is why its quality is inferior to HBOGo and Netflix, which are HD.  It is not your PC graphics card.

  • Iweb publishes poor picture quality

    Can anybody help me with this one? When I put in a picture in the size of 1000 x 640 pixels in iweb everything looks fine. But when I then publish it to mobileme and check my site online, it looks horrible. I tried different formats and everything, but nothing works....so far;)

    I downloaded the image and it's 1010 x 740. It's getting enlarged in the height and a bit in the width after being added to the page. Select it, go to the Inspector/Metrics pane and click on the Original Size button. That will keep it at the size you created and not let iWeb do any resizing on it. That might help.
    OT

  • IDVD bitrate compression and poor picture quality

    Folks,
    I have been reading some of the postings and agree that blockiness is a problem with bigger movie files >70 min. So, if I do not like IDVD, what other DVD editing programs are out there than can incorporate imovie HD files?
    Regards,
    "picky about the picture"

    jzdcbland,
    So, if I do not like IDVD, what other DVD editing programs are out there than can incorporate imovie HD files?
    "picky about the picture"
    iDVD is a great program for what it is - basically producing 'home movie' DVDs.
    If you are really "picky about the picture" , you can buy Apple's DVD Studio Pro - now part of Apple's Final Cut Studio for US $1299 - and work with the many compression options featured in Apple's Compressor application. Some people prefer the MPG-2 encoding done by BitVice ( BitVice at http://www.innobits.se/ for US $297 (US $149 for the Lite version)) to Apple's Compressor.
    So the chances are good that for an expenditure of about US $1600 you can improve your results. I suppose if you can tolerate much simplier menus, you could buy Roxio's Toast Titanium 7 (about US $80) and use BitVice as the encoding program instead of the encoder in Toast.
    It's easy to be 'picky' ... all it takes is money.
    PS - I'm hoping that Apple will bring out a lite version of DVD SP for people who want more options - who knows what will happen if enough people request such an application.

  • Poor Picture Quality in iMovie Which USB Camcorder Will Work and Which Won'

    Dear Colleagues,
    I continue to read accounts by readers regarding iMovie 98 havinga poor image quality when sharing to iDVD. It has been suggested that users with non-High Definition camcorders, standard DV8 camcorders such as my Sony DCR-TRV315, are stretching the Movie to far when using the Large and Medium setting for sharing ing to iDVD and other media.
    If this is the case, what pixel size should I use when sharing to iDVD. I had understood that 720X480 was the standard format for non-High Definition Digital 8 Camcorders. So what correct pixel ratio should I use for DVD playback on a wide-screen HDTV with non-HD recordings.
    I am planning to purchase a Sony USB camcorder and I continue to hear reports that they and other brands of USB camcorders won't work with iMovie 08. Is this simply a new user not fully understanding how his new camcorder works?
    If this is not the case, how can one determine which USB camcorders are compatible with iMovie 08?
    Please get back to me soon.
    Best regards,
    Robert O. Cobb
    aka The Clemmons Kid

    A great deal has been said about im08 degrading interlaced video, to qualify the matter im08 resorts to progressive video depending on the capabilities of your mac, I for example can achieve full quality 1080i exports.
    Additionally the matter has to be put into perspective. Of course a source video looks clearer on a mac if it is displayed in it's original interlaced format on a frame by frame basis, but this isn't how one would watch video. interlaced video looks dreadful on a computer monitor and needs to be de-interlaced to be watched, additionally you would never watch a video frame by frame and so comparing video in this way is somewhat pointless. There is a quality difference on some macs but if the video is compared in a realistic way the difference is quite small and often unnoticeable.
    720 x 480 as you likely realise uses non square pixels which will be converted to square pixels for your AVC exports in im08, to maintain the aspect ratio of the pixels you should export to DV.
    There are a list of supported cameras here, but of course there are many that are not in this list that do work. If you select a camera, post to see if anyone has had any compatibility issues, but as you seem to be aware a number of apparent issues are as a result of user errors rather than incompatibility.

  • MSI VOX Poor picture quality / stability

    I have just bought a MSI VOX and after downloading the new drivers to get it to work on XP SP2 I an experiencing a few problems.
    The picture quality is not very good and the viewing area keeps flashing pink / purple.
    I have tried altering all the settings I can find.
    I have read that I may need an external power supply; if so what voltage is it etc or where can I get one from. I live in the UK
    PC Spec
    Amd Athlon 1300 mhz
    768 meg PC 133 ram
    Nvidia TNT2 Riva 64 running 66.93 forceware drivers ( the latest that will recognise the card )
    USB 2 is by a ALI chipset add in card
    Soundblaster Sound Card
    30 & 80 gig HDD accessed thru on board raid controller ( not in raid formation )
    Realtek Network Card.
    I have run out of ideas and any help would be good..     
    Regards
    Madyorky

    Quote from: poolcue pete on 18-November-05, 16:35:38
    I used to have this problem a while back, i foudn that looking under Graphics Options > Output to > Monitor (Only).
    This fixed it for me, i have since got a new gaming rig but i am about to install the VOX again, probably sometime over the weekend.
    Can you be a little more explicit? I have this problem too and all the help is welcome.
    Regards

Maybe you are looking for