HD-DVD coming next year..

Nick Hiltgen · August 4th, 2004, 06:33 PM

I believe full screen hd is 16x9 (1.77)1.85 would be something like 16.65 x9 but the difference is nominal I suppose, However with 2.35 you're right something is happening there if it's playing full screen, which also annoys the heck out of me to. Robert when you say you "know" they were 2.35 is that because you did some work as a projectionist to?

Robert Jackson · August 4th, 2004, 07:37 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Nick Hiltgen : I believe full screen hd is 16x9 (1.77)1.85 would be something like 16.65 x9 but the difference is nominal I suppose, However with 2.35 you're right something is happening there if it's playing full screen, which also annoys the heck out of me to. Robert when you say you "know" they were 2.35 is that because you did some work as a projectionist to? -->>>

Just film club stuff, never a paid job. No, the reason I know the films are 2.35 is because I know those films were shot in 'Scope. I have a fascination with anamorphic optics and I'm always making note of compositional details in films shot on anamorphic optics. Several films I own on DVD in 2.35 have popped up on cable full screen. What's equally odd is that The Shining has popped up full screen. Now I know it was shown that was theatrically, but Kubrick shot in 1.33 and the DVD's have been transferred 1.33, so for them to show it 16:9 they had to make their own decisions about cropping, which is almost as bad as cutting off the sides to make the 'scope films fit full-screen.

Joe Carney · August 5th, 2004, 10:30 AM

>>On the Porn Channels you can see everything, which isn't usually all that glamourous, (think cameron diaz's skin only well... everywhere.)
<<
HiDef porn. Now we know for sure HD will succeed. Think VCRs.

The only bad thing is the lower channels on my set are SD, and don't look so good. Comcast sports is just SD strectched to HD and looks even worse.

Steve McDonald · August 10th, 2004, 07:32 AM

Dream on, HDTV elitists. There will be a substantial portion of the U.S. population that will be unable or unwilling to invest in another TV set, for many more years, if they have an SD TV that still works. Most of you probably don't know any of them, but millions of people struggle to survive financially and won't be joining the HDTV crowd, anytime soon. Even a $200. converter box would be a luxury beyond the reach of many.

If the advertisers, that drive all the decisions about television, know that 40%, 25% or even 10% of their potential customers would be cut off by an end to SD broadcasting, they will, as before, be accomodated by the FCC and SD programing will continue well past 2005. With the narrow profit margins that separate successful and failing competitors, no business will be willing to ignore any of its potential customers.

Steve McDonald

Christopher C. Murphy · August 10th, 2004, 09:00 AM

I don't think there is any argument regarding SD's future. My take is that HDTV users and producers are focused on that market....SD is a given and will have a place for many years. But, that revenue stream is in place already....HDTV is beginning and there ARE many users already and many more coming. I know plenty of single people and couples that are non-industry folks that bought an HDTV in the last year....probably 40% of the people I know have an HDTV right now.

It's not a requirement to own one today, so that should say something right there. Let's also remember that poor people that can't afford HDTV aren't the target market for the users anyway. It's economics 101 - HDTV buyers have $ and advertisers will be spending HDTV dollars on them. Commericals in HD will be cars, applianaces, housing related, big dollar items for many years to come. No one is going to produce a nationwide HD commericial for "As seen on TV" type products until the penetration is out there. (my guess is 3-4 years from now)

Murph

Harrison Murchison · August 10th, 2004, 11:12 AM

Steve if $200 is a luxury to some people then conventional wisdom would have it that they aren't the ideal demographic for targetted adds.

Don't be supprised to see advertisers flock to HDTV channels because that's where the middle class and affluent will be.

David Kennett · August 10th, 2004, 02:23 PM

In 1965 I bought a 21" round tube Zenith color TV (all tubes) for $400. That was the year the networks went to 100% color. It wasn't long after that when everyone had color! I was making about $11,000 a year at channel 6 in Indianapolis. I think HD might just be for everyone by 2006!

Greg Boston · September 1st, 2004, 09:33 AM

--->Commericals in HD will be cars, applianaces, housing related, big dollar items for many years to come. No one is going to produce a nationwide HD commericial for "As seen on TV" type products until the penetration is out there. (my guess is 3-4 years from now)
---

Hey Murph,

I hope you're right about that one. I for one am sick and tired of seeing nothing on daytime tv but ads for ambulance chasers, bankruptcy lawyers, back pain clinics, and the latest (insert job title here) trade school. Maybe those guys will stay on the SD channels for awhile.

Anyway, this Sep 11th will make my 65" rear projection tv two years old. I wouldn't call myself an HD elitist. I needed a new tv, this one was on sale, they had 18 mo. no interest financing, and...it was SEP 11TH. I bought it as my own personal FU to the terrorists who wanted to kill our economy and our people. I originally got very few OTA hidef programs, but more and more are switching over. The main thing is the networks and local affiliates switching to hi def cameras. Heck, even 'Wheel of Fortune' went hi def last year.

I was also recently made aware of the timeline for switchover. IIRC, starting 2005, all tv sets must be manufactured with an HD compatible tuner. An HD converter box will be made for use with older SD sets.

True HD to me looks like a photograph from a 35 mm slr camera, exept it moves. It is truly breathtaking.

regards,

August 10th, 2004, 09:00 AM	#35
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	I don't think there is any argument regarding SD's future. My take is that HDTV users and producers are focused on that market....SD is a given and will have a place for many years. But, that revenue stream is in place already....HDTV is beginning and there ARE many users already and many more coming. I know plenty of single people and couples that are non-industry folks that bought an HDTV in the last year....probably 40% of the people I know have an HDTV right now. It's not a requirement to own one today, so that should say something right there. Let's also remember that poor people that can't afford HDTV aren't the target market for the users anyway. It's economics 101 - HDTV buyers have $ and advertisers will be spending HDTV dollars on them. Commericals in HD will be cars, applianaces, housing related, big dollar items for many years to come. No one is going to produce a nationwide HD commericial for "As seen on TV" type products until the penetration is out there. (my guess is 3-4 years from now) Murph __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

August 10th, 2004, 02:23 PM	#37
David Kennett Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Ridgeville, Ohio Posts: 407	In 1965 I bought a 21" round tube Zenith color TV (all tubes) for $400. That was the year the networks went to 100% color. It wasn't long after that when everyone had color! I was making about $11,000 a year at channel 6 in Indianapolis. I think HD might just be for everyone by 2006! __________________ Dave

August 4th, 2004, 06:33 PM	#31
Nick Hiltgen Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Atlanta GA Posts: 1,427	I believe full screen hd is 16x9 (1.77)1.85 would be something like 16.65 x9 but the difference is nominal I suppose, However with 2.35 you're right something is happening there if it's playing full screen, which also annoys the heck out of me to. Robert when you say you "know" they were 2.35 is that because you did some work as a projectionist to?

August 4th, 2004, 07:37 PM	#32
Robert Jackson Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, CA Posts: 390	<<<-- Originally posted by Nick Hiltgen : I believe full screen hd is 16x9 (1.77)1.85 would be something like 16.65 x9 but the difference is nominal I suppose, However with 2.35 you're right something is happening there if it's playing full screen, which also annoys the heck out of me to. Robert when you say you "know" they were 2.35 is that because you did some work as a projectionist to? -->>> Just film club stuff, never a paid job. No, the reason I know the films are 2.35 is because I know those films were shot in 'Scope. I have a fascination with anamorphic optics and I'm always making note of compositional details in films shot on anamorphic optics. Several films I own on DVD in 2.35 have popped up on cable full screen. What's equally odd is that The Shining has popped up full screen. Now I know it was shown that was theatrically, but Kubrick shot in 1.33 and the DVD's have been transferred 1.33, so for them to show it 16:9 they had to make their own decisions about cropping, which is almost as bad as cutting off the sides to make the 'scope films fit full-screen.

August 5th, 2004, 10:30 AM	#33
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	>>On the Porn Channels you can see everything, which isn't usually all that glamourous, (think cameron diaz's skin only well... everywhere.) << HiDef porn. Now we know for sure HD will succeed. Think VCRs. The only bad thing is the lower channels on my set are SD, and don't look so good. Comcast sports is just SD strectched to HD and looks even worse.

August 10th, 2004, 07:32 AM	#34
Steve McDonald Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Eugene, Oregon Posts: 366	Dream on, HDTV elitists. There will be a substantial portion of the U.S. population that will be unable or unwilling to invest in another TV set, for many more years, if they have an SD TV that still works. Most of you probably don't know any of them, but millions of people struggle to survive financially and won't be joining the HDTV crowd, anytime soon. Even a $200. converter box would be a luxury beyond the reach of many. If the advertisers, that drive all the decisions about television, know that 40%, 25% or even 10% of their potential customers would be cut off by an end to SD broadcasting, they will, as before, be accomodated by the FCC and SD programing will continue well past 2005. With the narrow profit margins that separate successful and failing competitors, no business will be willing to ignore any of its potential customers. Steve McDonald

August 10th, 2004, 11:12 AM	#36
Harrison Murchison Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 243	Steve if $200 is a luxury to some people then conventional wisdom would have it that they aren't the ideal demographic for targetted adds. Don't be supprised to see advertisers flock to HDTV channels because that's where the middle class and affluent will be.

September 1st, 2004, 09:33 AM	#38
Greg Boston Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: DFW area, TX Posts: 6,117 Images: 1	--->Commericals in HD will be cars, applianaces, housing related, big dollar items for many years to come. No one is going to produce a nationwide HD commericial for "As seen on TV" type products until the penetration is out there. (my guess is 3-4 years from now) --- Hey Murph, I hope you're right about that one. I for one am sick and tired of seeing nothing on daytime tv but ads for ambulance chasers, bankruptcy lawyers, back pain clinics, and the latest (insert job title here) trade school. Maybe those guys will stay on the SD channels for awhile. Anyway, this Sep 11th will make my 65" rear projection tv two years old. I wouldn't call myself an HD elitist. I needed a new tv, this one was on sale, they had 18 mo. no interest financing, and...it was SEP 11TH. I bought it as my own personal FU to the terrorists who wanted to kill our economy and our people. I originally got very few OTA hidef programs, but more and more are switching over. The main thing is the networks and local affiliates switching to hi def cameras. Heck, even 'Wheel of Fortune' went hi def last year. I was also recently made aware of the timeline for switchover. IIRC, starting 2005, all tv sets must be manufactured with an HD compatible tuner. An HD converter box will be made for use with older SD sets. True HD to me looks like a photograph from a 35 mm slr camera, exept it moves. It is truly breathtaking. regards,