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

#441 OFFLINE   bonscott87

bonscott87

    Cutting Edge: ECHELON '07

  • Registered
  • 9,809 posts
Joined: Jan 21, 2003

Posted 17 October 2007 - 07:31 AM

I'm not sure Eureka is shot in HD.

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#442 OFFLINE   TBoneit

TBoneit

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,267 posts
Joined: Jul 27, 2006

Posted 17 October 2007 - 08:10 AM

Eureka tonight wasn't in HD. I wonder when they will fix this.


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.

#443 OFFLINE   sb40

sb40

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 131 posts
Joined: Nov 28, 2005

Posted 17 October 2007 - 08:23 AM

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.
HR20
100/700

Miele The BEST Vacuum you can buy.

#444 OFFLINE   petergaryr

petergaryr

    Passed away April 24, 2010

  • Registered
  • 608 posts
Joined: Nov 22, 2006

Posted 17 October 2007 - 09:51 AM

Ok i just looked at FRI guide and NOTHING is listed in HD is that the case with SCiFi ? HD but know 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.

#445 OFFLINE   beejpowers

beejpowers

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 21 posts
Joined: Oct 05, 2004

Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:14 AM

Yes, there is an SD 244 and an HD 244 for SciFi.


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.:grin:
Thanks

#446 OFFLINE   beejpowers

beejpowers

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 21 posts
Joined: Oct 05, 2004

Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:18 AM

I'm not sure Eureka is shot in HD.


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.

#447 OFFLINE   bonscott87

bonscott87

    Cutting Edge: ECHELON '07

  • Registered
  • 9,809 posts
Joined: Jan 21, 2003

Posted 17 October 2007 - 11:14 AM

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.:grin:
Thanks


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.

#448 Guest_rcoleman111_*

Guest_rcoleman111_*
  • Guests
Joined: --

Posted 17 October 2007 - 12:31 PM

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.


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.

#449 OFFLINE   dervari

dervari

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 777 posts
Joined: Dec 01, 2005

Posted 20 October 2007 - 07:43 AM

Is it just me or is the channel bug on the HD shows a little large relative to the SD bug?

#450 OFFLINE   petergaryr

petergaryr

    Passed away April 24, 2010

  • Registered
  • 608 posts
Joined: Nov 22, 2006

Posted 20 October 2007 - 09:51 AM

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.

#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.

#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
  • 2,267 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
  • 12,277 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
  • 1,594 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




spam firewall