Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

HD Discusson: SciFi Channel (Channel 244)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
465 replies to this topic

#451 OFFLINE   Mixer

Mixer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,764 posts
Joined: Sep 28, 2006

Posted 20 October 2007 - 09:52 AM

Spiderman 2 NOT in HD??????
HR20-700:Component, TV:Mitsubishi WS65807, Audio is connected using Digital Toslink cable. OTA:NO, Locals:New York, Native:Off, Network:Yes, eSata:No, AT9 dish, BBC: Yes, Harmony 880. HR20 is wired, Streaming Music and Photos through Twonky Media Server and internet connection is 5MB DSL.

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#452 OFFLINE   Macfan424

Macfan424

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 7 posts
Joined: Aug 19, 2005

Posted 20 October 2007 - 01:45 PM

...Generalizing now:... 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...

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.

#453 OFFLINE   TBoneit

TBoneit

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,291 posts
Joined: Jul 27, 2006

Posted 22 October 2007 - 08:40 AM

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.

#454 OFFLINE   Macfan424

Macfan424

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 7 posts
Joined: Aug 19, 2005

Posted 22 October 2007 - 11:17 AM

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. ;)

#455 OFFLINE   stlmike

stlmike

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 207 posts
Joined: Aug 24, 2007

Posted 25 October 2007 - 01:13 PM

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?

#456 OFFLINE   Earl Bonovich

Earl Bonovich

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Registered
  • 30,092 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 25 October 2007 - 01:14 PM

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
Earl - Gotta Love Karma

DIRECTV employee since April 2008.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#457 OFFLINE   stlmike

stlmike

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 207 posts
Joined: Aug 24, 2007

Posted 25 October 2007 - 01:20 PM

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 feedback@scifi.com .

#458 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,945 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 24 November 2007 - 09:17 PM

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? :)
LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

#459 OFFLINE   MrKlaatu

MrKlaatu

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 407 posts
Joined: Mar 07, 2007

Posted 24 November 2007 - 09:49 PM

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.

#460 OFFLINE   GregLee

GregLee

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,651 posts
Joined: Dec 28, 2005

Posted 24 November 2007 - 09:55 PM

What? No posts indicating that BSG is actually in HD. No bitching that the guide doesn't say BSG is in HD?

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.
Greg

#461 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,945 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 24 November 2007 - 10:57 PM

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.


Nope. You are confusing an artistic style with SD/HD. Looked the same as BSG looks when it was on UHD (well, better because it didn't have breakups).

Did you notice that the "current" scenes were sharper than the flashbacks?
LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

#462 OFFLINE   Drew2k

Drew2k

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,370 posts
Joined: Aug 16, 2006

Posted 25 November 2007 - 05:19 PM

Folks, DBSTalk.com now has a forum dedicated to discussions of programs such as Battlestar Galactica:Razor, so please stop over there and continue the discussion!

Here's the current discussion on BSG:Razor ...

Battlestar Galactica: Razor - 11/21/2007 - Discussion Thread

#463 OFFLINE   JerryElbow

JerryElbow

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 218 posts
Joined: Jun 14, 2007

Posted 25 November 2007 - 07:10 PM

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.


I read an interview with Cameron who didn't understand why people wanted the letterbox version of The Abyss when it was shot in Super 35 and the 1.33:1 version actually showed MORE visual information than the widescreen version did. At the time, it kind of made sense as the best source for video was laserdiscs and the best TVs were still use 480i Standard Definition TVs. Why "waste" your pixels on black bars when a version of the film was available that had everything in the theatrical release PLUS more information on the top and bottom of the screen AND filled the standard TV screen.

However, widescreen HDTVs are now popular (though hardly yet the norm), DVDs look WAY better than laserdiscs PLUS they (mostly) come in anamorphic widescreen, plus there's HD broadcasts and now HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs, so there's just no reason to release a version that doesn't reflect the theatrical aspect ratio and allow the home theater enthusiast to be able to recreate the theatrical experience as closely as possible. I don't think Cameron would claim a preference for 4:3 video any more.

As far as his original preference being the reason why The Abyss was originally available only in letterboxed 4:3, that doesn't make any sense to me. I think it was made that way because it was easy to re-use the masters from the laserdiscs and since the vast majority of potential buyers did not have HDTVs then, most buyers wouldn't even be able to detect a difference (since letterboxed 4:3 and anamorphic widescreen DVDs look basically the same on SDTVs). That was a stupid decision that showed no foresight to how the market was changing, but a LOT of movie companies were guility of it. Of course, when some movie companies re-released 4:3 letterboxed movies as anamorphic widescreen DVDs, they saw the profit in double-dipping and started released "special" editions and "collector's" editions and "unrated" editions and now are poised to probably do the same double- (and triple- and quadruple-) dipping with high definition DVD formats.

Oh well, what's a collector to do? It's like Tommy Lee Jones said in Men In Black when encountering some new futuristic digital storage media: "Look's like I'll have to buy the 'White Album' again!"

#464 OFFLINE   billbillw

billbillw

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 37 posts
Joined: Aug 18, 2006

Posted 26 November 2007 - 06:05 AM

Sunday night's broadcast of the Matrix looked VERY good in HD. Noticably better than my older (original release) DVD copy. Way to go SciFi and D*!

#465 OFFLINE   petergaryr

petergaryr

    Passed away April 24, 2010

  • Registered
  • 608 posts
Joined: Nov 22, 2006

Posted 26 November 2007 - 08:06 AM

Sunday night's broadcast of the Matrix looked VERY good in HD. Noticably better than my older (original release) DVD copy. Way to go SciFi and D*!


Yes, it did. The pace of HD on SciFi has been increasing nicely lately.

#466 OFFLINE   Kenkong586

Kenkong586

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 160 posts
Joined: Apr 03, 2007

Posted 27 November 2007 - 11:46 AM

Sunday night's broadcast of the Matrix looked VERY good in HD. Noticably better than my older (original release) DVD copy. Way to go SciFi and D*!

I agree, it looked as great as that movie is.




Protected By... spam firewall...And...