Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Doug Brott, Sep 18, 2007.
I'm not sure Eureka is shot in HD.
Fixing it implies there is something wrong . It may not have a HD source. if that is so then it will never be HD. OTOH it could also be that they can process so many minutes to HD per day and thus things get prioritized.
Generalizing now: Things shot on film are candidates for HD conversion. 4:3 film should always end up as 4:3. Not butchered by chopping top and bottom to get a 16:9 result. 2.35:1 should be shown with black bars top and bottom and not have the sides cut off to fill a 16:9 screen.
Things shot on video for regular TV before there was HD will never be a sharp as HD. They can be enhanced and filtered to look better but GIGO.
Ok i just looked at FRI guide and NOTHING is listed in HD is that the case with SCiFi ? HD but no HD ?
Also I was watching SG-1 and there was a line running from right - left (top-botttom) of picture is this "overscan" ?
What can be done ? Is this my TV, HR-20 or Channel.
That sounds more like underscan. Overscan would cut off a part of the top/bottom/sides of the picture.
Does the box just "know" which one to grab or is there a setting that needs to be changed.
I am still waiting for my install and want to be ready when I start surfing.
Technically nothing has to be shot in HD for it to be mastered in HD. They might be shooting 35mm film still, or even 16mm (but thats doubtful). but seeing that the rates for mastering HD have come down so far, so fast, and that mastering HD will future-proof them, it seems unlikely that they would still be working in an SD workflow.
Both will be in the guide. Your choice on which one you want to watch. You can remove either from the guide if you use a custom favorite list.
If you tune directly not using the guide you'll default on the HD channel if you have an HR20. You'll default to the SD channel if using an H20 without the latest CE update, soon will be national release.
Correct, film is a continous-tone image. If it is still available on film, it can be converted to HD. That's the reason all those old movies can be converted to HD for video.
Is it just me or is the channel bug on the HD shows a little large relative to the SD bug?
It is one of those "good news/bad news" situations. The bug is larger, but it is more transparent so it doesn't bother me as much. I also noticed that even on the SD bug, they now advertize Ghost Hunters instead of Ghost Hunters.
Spiderman 2 NOT in HD??????
As you imply, there are exceptions. Some films shot in Super 35 are released in several aspect ratios. James Cameron is famous for doing that. It's difficult to say which version is "correct" if the director doesn't specify. I've always felt that these should be released in 1.78:1/1:85:1 for DVD, not 2.35:1 as they often are. But would be purists always seem to object.
Cameron once said he preferred the 1.33:1 version of The Abyss. Maybe that's why the "widescreen" DVDs that have been released are letterboxed, but not anamorphic.
The only way if the director doesn't specify then probably use the 2.35:1.
All you can do is guess that is if it was shot 2.35:1 then leave it that way. there are always exceptions and TBH if someone states something flat out with no allowed exceptions then I think to myself what a maroon, Intentional mispelling BTW. Life isn't all black or white there are nuances too.
Super 35 is shot in 1.33:1 and then cropped, sometimes to more than one format. My only point is that if a film was released theatrically in 1.85:1 as well as 2.35:1, why not use the former on our 1.78:1 screens? None of the picture is lost compared to 2.35:1, but enough is retained to eliminate those annoying (to many) black letterbox lines.
I believe in OAR, but I also believe we should be flexible enough to use the format that matches the screen when there is no single true "original." Not that I ever expect to convince the majority here who seem to be convinced that 2.35:1 is always superior, no matter how much latitude the director and cinematographer may have allowed in the actual production.
This channel has been live for several weeks now, and still the guide data is inaccurate. It isn't showing anything as airing in HD. This probably isn't a D* issue, but rather their data source. Any ETA in this?
Write and Call SCI-FI Channel... as they are the source of the data.
DirecTV just loads up the data, they recieve from TMS, which receives it (ultimately) from NBC-Universal/Sci-FI
Just sent them an e-mail and eargerly await their form letter reply :lol:
If anyone else wants the address, it is email@example.com .
What? No posts indicating that BSG is actually in HD. No bitching that the guide doesn't say BSG is in HD?
Or are the servers bogged down by cursing hockey fans?
Watching BSG in HD now. It's great!
There are lots of HD shows on lots of channels not labeled as HD. They shouldn't bother. They should label SD shows on HD channels instead.
I just watched the Razor episode (marked LB in the guide), and while the picture filled the screen, it was soft, the contrast was poor, and the colors were drab. So I'll guess that it was derived from an SD source.