My Humax Forum

• Home
• LOGIN
• Register
• Search
on Amazon

My Humax Forum » Freesat HD » HDR 1000, 1010, 1100S

111. 

     grahamlthompson
     

     special member
     Joined: Feb '11
     Posts: 14,442

     offline

     souporjuice - 47 minutes ago  » 
     OK, try this:
     http://youtu.be/nD3O5433NJA
     You can hear the clicky remote as I press buttons. All I'm doing is opening the guide, then hitting down until I go over to the next page of results, then i click up again, then down again, so you can see that thing redraw. Slowly.

     Upload the clip to a fileshare site. Without a frame accurate editing programme editing package, a known frame rate capture rate it's impossible to deduce anything with any degree of accuracy.

     Given the original footage it's very easy to find the exact instant within the frame rate compression limits. The resolution is clearly down to the framerate resolution.

     At 50fps the event accuracy is accurate to to 1/50 second. At 25 fps 1/25 second. (measured in minutes:seconds:frames)

     A frame accurate editing package will show the exact instance of an event within the frame rate limitations.

     Posting a video clip with no access to the original content means nothing.

     As others have now observed the clip posted has no value at all.

     I will try and post some actual event stills just before and after the actual events, based on the same sequence despite the fact that it's not a sensible way to use the UI (If only to check if Souperjuices box is not working as it should).

     | Sun 30 Jun 2013 21:32:44 #111 |
112. 

     souporjuice
     

     senior member
     Joined: Oct '12
     Posts: 76

     offline

     What a load of rubbish. Do you work for Humax or something? I feel like I've slipped into an alternate universe here. Everyone is being deliberately obtuse, and I have to wonder why.

     Scrolling between pages in the guide isn't a sensible way to use the Guide? Are you actually serious? This is how it's meant to be used. You open the guide, you scroll through it. If you're meant to only key in numbers, why did they put a guide in at all?

     Instead of posting stills, which prove nothing, how about you follow your own advice and post a video showing how silky smooth the guide is in your universe?

     | Sun 30 Jun 2013 21:40:38 #112 |
113. 

     navi
     

     member
     Joined: Dec '12
     Posts: 21

     offline

     Graham, starting at channel 101 to scroll through the whole guide takes 32 presses of the page down key. Using your method would take 96 so I can't see how you can claim it is a more efficient way of using the guide.

     Using page down there is a slight delay as each page is rendered. I'm not quite sure it is a 3 second delay as souporjuice claims however.

     | Sun 30 Jun 2013 21:56:16 #113 |
114. 

     Faust
     

     special member
     Joined: Jun '13
     Posts: 1,598

     offline

     souporjuice, having watched your video upload a number of times now I really don't understand what the issue is. The page loads are momentary, certainly no where near the 3 seconds you claim. I see very little if anything wrong with what you have shown us - sorry.

     | Sun 30 Jun 2013 22:08:46 #114 |
115. 

     navi
     

     member
     Joined: Dec '12
     Posts: 21

     offline

     Actually I have just unscientifically measured the page rendering delay on a page down command and it seems closer to 3 seconds than I had first thought. I don't have a video camera or the required software to verify it but it seems Graham could put this issue to bed using his previously demonstrated method.

     | Sun 30 Jun 2013 22:18:15 #115 |
116. 

     grahamlthompson
     

     special member
     Joined: Feb '11
     Posts: 14,442

     offline

     navi - 28 minutes ago  » 
     Graham, starting at channel 101 to scroll through the whole guide takes 32 presses of the page down key. Using your method would take 96 so I can't see how you can claim it is a more efficient way of using the guide.
     Using page down there is a slight delay as each page is rendered. I'm not quite sure it is a 3 second delay as souporjuice claims however.

     True but I don't ever scroll through the whole guide. See the following post. Prepared to do some testing. The key here is to set up real test using the same conditions. I cam measure the exact number of frames and hence the elapsed time. Heaven knows why (I don't have any issues with response times). Approaching 70 yrs old perhaps I have gained a tiny bit of patience

     Just joking.

     | Sun 30 Jun 2013 22:32:18 #116 |
117. 

     navi
     

     member
     Joined: Dec '12
     Posts: 21

     offline

     Thanks Graham. I appreciate you giving up your time to test this.

     | Sun 30 Jun 2013 22:43:20 #117 |
118. 

     grahamlthompson
     

     special member
     Joined: Feb '11
     Posts: 14,442

     offline

     souporjuice - 52 minutes ago  » 
     What a load of rubbish. Do you work for Humax or something? I feel like I've slipped into an alternate universe here. Everyone is being deliberately obtuse, and I have to wonder why.
     Scrolling between pages in the guide isn't a sensible way to use the Guide? Are you actually serious? This is how it's meant to be used. You open the guide, you scroll through it. If you're meant to only key in numbers, why did they put a guide in at all?
     Instead of posting stills, which prove nothing, how about you follow your own advice and post a video showing how silky smooth the guide is in your universe?

     You clearly haven't a clue what's proposed here.

     No point at all posting still frames from a video of the screen.

     Procedure is as follows.

     Video the screen (including the remote key press (nice idea
     ).

     Transfer the video to a PC and load it into a frame accurate video editing package (Sony Vegas in my case). Locate the exact frame the button is pressed and screen capture the editor screen showing the exact time code of the event). These are the still images that will be posted. Repeat for other signicant events. Calculating the time difference is easy. No point in recording UK TV at other than 1080i (25 fps). Simply work out the number of frames between each event and divide by 25 to get elapsed time in seconds.

     If the other posters upload clips made under the same conditions as far as possible then it's easy to see if they have a box or other location specific problem. Posting a video clip without being able to download the source isn't really helpful. As others have said they look normal.

     If somebody wants to post such data, I am open minded enough to check the results. By the way I do not work for Humax, never have. Retired in 2000 after 40+ yrs with National Grid. Pretty amazing how some posters go into conspirancy mode if you dare to challenge what they say.

     A hobby including many years of home video production helps a lot. Grew up with Cine and progressed through analogue to digital video.

     | Sun 30 Jun 2013 23:06:03 #118 |
119. 

     REPASSAC
     

     special member
     Joined: Mar '11
     Posts: 4,100

     offline

     chistery - 12 hours ago  » 
     It's almost 3 seconds for me too when I do a page down. My box takes 1m30 to boot too. I've been told I'm lying when I state that.

     I rather think that boot times over 30 secs are associated with a disk problem.

     | Mon 1 Jul 2013 5:06:07 #119 |
120. 

     Pollensa1946
     

     special member
     Joined: Sep '12
     Posts: 1,171

     offline

     grahamlthompson - 13 hours ago  » 

     Pollensa1946 - 9 minutes ago  » 

     souporjuice - 5 hours ago  » 
     And how long to scroll down as I described, i.e. without keying in a channel number?
     I'll try channel numbers later, but seems like this shortcut is only any use if you memorise the numbers, which kind of defeats the purpose of having the guide.

     Exactly. What I'm reading here are work-arounds for an inherent problem. A bit like... the gearbox is rubbish but if you double-declutch then it's just fine.

     Not workarounds at all, just a different and better way of using the epg. Do I detect a degree of embarrassment that there is a better way of navigating the epg that you personally did not find ?
     Following your negative postings so far there has always been a solution to your problem. No idea if my box will exhibit the delays you experience. No intention of testing it either. Why would I ? Never used the epg like that, no reason to.
     What will be interesting is if you try out the suggestions and still have the problems then this will indicate local problems.
     That's down to you, suggesting that we try out techniques we never use, worse still are less efficient is plain lazy, daft, stupid (choose your adjective) on your part.
     Trying to help here, faced with your attitude clearly you aren't interested in a solution merely trying to perpetuate a pointless argument.
     If you lose the attitude, try out the suggestions and if they don't work then you will find members trying to help.
     I'm out of here

     Hi Graham... thanks for that. I see that when this community has a keenly argued point to discuss you are always ready to step into the breach with your cogent, constructive, witty pearls of wisdom. Keep up the good work, you're a star.

     | Mon 1 Jul 2013 8:35:15 #120 |

RSS feed for this topic

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.