Summer Olympics in Low definition

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Where was this "announcement" made? There is nothing on their web site, nor
have I seen anything in any other media.

"Jeff B" <fake@addy.com> wrote in message
news:3QVHc.63206$Oq2.43452@attbi_s52...
> For those who thought the 2004 olympics are to be in
> HDTV, think again. NBC has announced it will be in low definition except
for
> a few selected events.
> Sorta like when CBS made a big deal of Golf being in HDTV. LOL!....yeah
> sure..... It varied, but some tourneys were about 98% low def, 2% hi
> def. Even so, CBS had no problem
> shouting from the roof tops that the show was HDTV.
>
> Jeff B
>

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Phil Ross wrote:
> Where was this "announcement" made? There is nothing on their web site, nor
> have I seen anything in any other media.

I got the link from a Voom newsletter. Below is a partial quote
documenting that over 2/3 of the total number of televised hours will be
in low def.
Worse, only a total
of *six* different sports will be HDTV, and of those, only a few of
the presentations within those sports will be in HDTV. I don't know
how many different sports compose the summer olympics, but I'm guessing
that 6 is maybe 10% of the total number of different sports.


".....NBC's 124 HDTV affiliates will provide a total of 399 hours of HD
coverage for the following competitions:

Swimming
Diving
Gymnastics
Track and field
Basketball (medal rounds)
Men's soccer (gold medal final)

All in all, NBC is presenting 1,210 hours of Athens 2004 coverage...."


Jeff Buchanan

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Hmmm, lets see, the Olympics are from August 13th through the 29th, which is
16 days. 399 hours divided by 16 is 24.9, which appears to me to mean that
NBC will be showing almost 25 hours of HDTV Olympics coverage per day. That
sure seems to be more that a "few selected events". I don't know how much
television YOU can watch at a stretch, but most of my Olympics viewing will
probably be during prime time anyway. Plus, since I only have HDTV OTA, I
don't believe that NBC or their affiliates will be willing to broadcast
Olympic coverage 24 hours a day for 16 days, so my viewing will be
considerably less than the 399 hours that you mention.

Phil

"Jeff B" <fake@addy.com> wrote in message
news:wGXHc.46582$JR4.44098@attbi_s54...
>
>
> Phil Ross wrote:
> > Where was this "announcement" made? There is nothing on their web site,
nor
> > have I seen anything in any other media.
>
> I got the link from a Voom newsletter. Below is a partial quote
> documenting that over 2/3 of the total number of televised hours will be
> in low def.
> Worse, only a total
> of *six* different sports will be HDTV, and of those, only a few of
> the presentations within those sports will be in HDTV. I don't know
> how many different sports compose the summer olympics, but I'm guessing
> that 6 is maybe 10% of the total number of different sports.
>
>
> ".....NBC's 124 HDTV affiliates will provide a total of 399 hours of HD
> coverage for the following competitions:
>
> Swimming
> Diving
> Gymnastics
> Track and field
> Basketball (medal rounds)
> Men's soccer (gold medal final)
>
> All in all, NBC is presenting 1,210 hours of Athens 2004 coverage...."
>
>
> Jeff Buchanan
>

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <2YZHc.64356$Oq2.1452@attbi_s52>, fake@addy.com says...
>
> Of those 399 hours, only a small fraction will be new (non-repeats).
> Worse, ALL of the sports except the six mentioned will be 100% low
> definition.

I don't recall all that much repeating of previous Olympics. Be that
as it may, every single step of producing an event in HD vs. SD is
more expensive -- HD cameras (they can't be at two events at the same
time), HD links from the venues to the studios in Athens, the HD
backhaul to the US, and in many cases, probably the eventual HD
distribution in the US. Given what NBC had to pay to get the rights
to do the broadcast, it's a open question whether they will make a
profit or eat their shorts. The additional profit they would make by
doing everything in HD, given the limited number of HD-enabled
viewers currently, is probably dwarfed by the additional production
costs. As I recall, attempts to sell Olympic viewing a la NFL Sunday
or any of the other PPV sports, has been a failure in the past. So
why would you expect NBC to broadcast the entire event in HD,
especially given that a few events draw the majority of the viewing
audience?

/Chris, AA6SQ

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <xl1Ic.65267$XM6.12766@attbi_s53>, fake@addy.com says...
> > HD cameras (they can't be at two events at the same
> > time),
>
> True...oh wait.....I just had an idea! NBC could purchase a
> second HDTV camera! Then they would have two!

Do you have any idea how many cameras are required to cover all the
events? Plus the fact that providing HD coverage of all events menas
that NBC couldn't use pool coverage (since that's SD), meaning they'd
have to have NBC cameras and crew at every venue. Not even remotely
feasible...

You'll see universal HD coverage when and only when it doesn't cost
more to provide than SD. Eg, when all of the thousdands of cameras
and production vans owned by networks are upgraded to HD.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

<<Sorta like when CBS made a big deal of Golf being in HDTV. LOL!....yeah
sure..... It varied, but some tourneys were about 98% low def, 2% hi
def. Even so, CBS had no problem
shouting from the roof tops that the show was HDTV.>>

Most of the CBS golf coverage I've seen this season has been in HD, as well
as Thursday-Friday rounds on USA network when CBS is doing the weekend. The
exceptions have mostly come when there have been weather delays and they
resorted to filling the airtime with taped highlights of previous year's
tournaments. Obviously, anything that wasn't originally produced in HD
can't be replayed in HD.

Lee


--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Jeff B" <fake@addy.com> wrote in message
news:2YZHc.64356$Oq2.1452@attbi_s52...
> Ever hear of 'time shifting'?
> I'll be recording all day and watching at night, FF the commercials.

Sure I have heard about time shifting, I even have a D-VHS recorder myself.
The whole Olympics will be "time shifted" since they are being held in
Greece, which is more than a few time zones away, especially for us out here
on the west coast.

> Except that most of that will be repeats. 24
> total hours could mean 1 hour repeated 24 times.

What is your information source regarding the amount of "repeats"? Is this
just a guess, or do you have information regarding the actual number of
hours that will be repeated?

I don't know if you are old enough to remember when color television was
first rolled out, but it was over 15 years before everyone was on board, so
I think that the transition to HDTV is moving along at a comparatively
moderate pace. I too wish that more HD would be available, but these guys
are in it for the money, and not enough people are willing yet to shell out
the thousands of $$ for HD sets that would justify the increased investment
by the networks. I made a huge investment in my equipment, but we are still
in the "early adopter" phase of implementation, and these things do take
time. NBC hasn't been the on the leading edge of the networks at adopting
HD, but give them a break, as the are moving in the right direction. Just be
glad that Fox didn't get the Olympic contract!

Phil

>
>
> Phil Ross wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, lets see, the Olympics are from August 13th through the 29th,
which is
> > 16 days. 399 hours divided by 16 is 24.9,
>
> Except that most of that will be repeats. 24
> total hours could mean 1 hour repeated 24 times.
>
> > That
> > sure seems to be more that a "few selected events".
>
> Check out the quote, they admit that all events except the six they refer
to
> will be in low def.
>
> > I don't know how much
> > television YOU can watch at a stretch, but most of my Olympics viewing
will
> > probably be during prime time anyway.
>
> Ever hear of 'time shifting'?
> I'll be recording all day and watching at night, FF the commercials.
>
> > Plus, since I only have HDTV OTA, I
> > don't believe that NBC or their affiliates will be willing to broadcast
> > Olympic coverage 24 hours a day for 16 days, so my viewing will be
> > considerably less than the 399 hours that you mention.
>
> Of those 399 hours, only a small fraction will be new (non-repeats).
> Worse, ALL of the sports except the six mentioned will be 100% low
> definition.
>
> Jeff B
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

> Sure I have heard about time shifting, I even have a D-VHS recorder myself.

How does that work (D-VHS)? IS that better than using your computer as
a HDTV TiVo?


>>Except that most of that will be repeats. 24
>>total hours could mean 1 hour repeated 24 times.
>
>
> What is your information source regarding the amount of "repeats"? Is this
> just a guess, or do you have information regarding the actual number of
> hours that will be repeated?

But the hours number isn't my complaint. My complaint is that they
aren't going to show ANY of the vast majority of sports in the olympics
in Hi def. 100% low def for cycling, baseball, weightlifting,
volleyball, kayaking, fencing, boxing, wrestling, and about 3 dozen
others. And for what? They have the HDTV cameras and crews present,
all they need do is deploy the crews to these venues and tape.
Nothing stopping them.

Jeff B

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

An HDTV-TiVo, or a PC used as such, is undoubtedly more convenient than
using D-VHS, but at least I am able to record and view later, and archive HD
programs for much later viewing. Besides, I didn't want to drag one of my
PCs into he living room to set up as an HD recorder.

I actually got my D-VHS unit on eBay as a temporary solution until a
standard is finally adopted for HD DVD recorders. Nice picture and pretty
easy to use, and the Firewire connection is really easy to set up. Tapes
are real expensive. I understand that you can use good S-VHS tape instead if
you adapt the tape (drill a hole) or player (cut off a pin), but I'll spend
a few extra bucks to get good D-VHS tape, and I have found a few spots on
the web where it is fairly reasonable. The 2 1/2 hour tapes are much cheaper
then the 3 1/2 hour ones, but sometimes you want to put more than 3 hours on
one tape, so you have to bite the bullet and get the 420.

Anyway, my daughter will be away in "band camp" this year during the
Olympics, so I will be taping some of the highlights for her, but it is
unfortunate that more sports won't be covered in HD. However, many sports
have never been adequately covered in past, and this year isn't any
exception. Usually only the "sexy" or "popular" ones like swimming,
gymnastics, or track and field are given more than cursory coverage anyway,
so I imagine that they are using the same "formula" to determine what they
will broadcast in HD as well.

Phil

"Jeff B" <fake@addy.com> wrote in message
news:aEdIc.56666$MB3.54844@attbi_s04...
>
>
> > Sure I have heard about time shifting, I even have a D-VHS recorder
myself.
>
> How does that work (D-VHS)? IS that better than using your computer as
> a HDTV TiVo?
>
> Jeff B
>

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Jeff B (fake@addy.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> Here's what I don't get: 1394 is just a standard for a bit stream,
> like USB 2.0. It has no knowledge of vsync, hsync, rgb, blanking, etc.
> It just transfers files. How does this linear 400 Mb/s get converted to
> video?

The same way that .ts files recorded by a PCI HD card get converted to
video, since it is the exact same thing sent down the FireWire line.

If you have Windows XP, a MyHD card and a D-VHS recorder, you can connect
the PC to the D-VHS with FireWire and archive from PC to D-VHS, record
directly to D-VHS, play back from D-VHS, or copy from D-VHS to hard drive.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Sherm [...] teMeat.jpg
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
uce@ftc.gov |

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Jeff B <fake@addy.com> wrote in message news:<3QVHc.63206$Oq2.43452@attbi_s52>...
> For those who thought the 2004 olympics are to be in
> HDTV, think again. NBC has announced it will be in low definition except for
> a few selected events.
> Sorta like when CBS made a big deal of Golf being in HDTV. LOL!....yeah
> sure..... It varied, but some tourneys were about 98% low def, 2% hi
> def. Even so, CBS had no problem
> shouting from the roof tops that the show was HDTV.
>
I'm not sure what you're complaining about... Do you really need to
watch curling in HD? "Look at those brush strokes... You can really
see the scratches on the ice." 99% of idiots only watch the six
sports you mention.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

T. Pascal wrote:

>I'm not sure what you're complaining about... Do you really need to
>watch curling in HD? "Look at those brush strokes... You can really
>see the scratches on the ice."

I can almost guarantee that nobody is expecting to watch Curling in HD during
the 2004 Summer Olympics.

JGM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 16:10:46 +0000, Jeff B wrote:

> But the hours number isn't my complaint. My complaint is that they
> aren't going to show ANY of the vast majority of sports in the olympics
> in Hi def. 100% low def for cycling, baseball, weightlifting,
> volleyball, kayaking, fencing, boxing, wrestling, and about 3 dozen
> others.

This is my complaint about sports HDTV in general. Look what's going to
be HDTV on ESPN. Baseball. Football. The classic stupid beer-swilling
team sports. Wow.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

dizzy (dizzy@nospam.invalid) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> This is my complaint about sports HDTV in general.

What you really meant was "this is my complaint about sports TV in
general", because HD selections are just like SD selections...what gets
watched gets shown.

> Look what's going to
> be HDTV on ESPN. Baseball. Football. The classic stupid beer-swilling
> team sports.

What you really meant was "the highest rated sports".

If you want to watch something else, pay more for your subscription and
get boxing, soccer, F1, some NASCAR, billiards, etc. But don't expect to
see sports that even ESPN considers "losers" to be in HD any time soon.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Pickles/Adoration.gif
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
uce@ftc.gov |

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>
> Because they are stupid Americans, and they know they audience is mostly
> stupid Americans, who only like a few mainstream sports, and who are
> usually at a total loss to enjoy watching the sport unless there's an
> American contending for the prize.
>

No, that's not it.
If it was, then NBC wouldn't be showing those sports in low def either.
Also, boxing is american as it gets, and
all matches will be in low def.

Jeff B

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

<<No, not "too". The CBS coverage aired in the United States was low def
because most of the video aired was low def. NOT hi def. So there is
no "HD too".
CBS so-called "HDTV" coverage (e.g. the heritage shown in April) was in
low def with an occasional scene shown in HDTV. The Masters, on the
other hand, was mostly in HDTV with some scenes shown in low def.
Problem is, of the 13 weekends of golf, the Masters was the only one
that could be properly called HDTV, the other 12 were, by definition,
SDTV because the majority of the telecast was SDTV. So 12
weekends were low def, 1 was hi def.
Now, you say that CBS shot two different shows. One to be aired on
USA network which was 100% hi def., and different coverage of the same
tournament in SDTV which they called HD, but was in fact SDTV.
Since I don't get USA network in HDTV, I can't comment. I can only say
that the golf coverage by CBS broadcast in the United States was SDTV
with an occasional frame of video in HD. I find it EXTREMELY unlikely
that CBS shot different coverage of the same golf in HDTV, turned it
over to USA networks to be aired, and then made a point of NOT using that
same footage for their stations in the USA. More likely, you were
watching the same thing I was and couldn't tell that you were looking at
SDTV. After all, CBS "said" it was HD, so it was, right?>>

I watched the Masters in its entirety in HD. The first two rounds (i.e.
Thursday and Friday) were produced by CBS but aired, as usual, on the USA
Network. USA's HD feed was shown on INHD which I receive from Comcast
Cable. In addition, my local CBS affiliate made arrangements to carry the
Thursday and Friday rounds in HD on their digital channel. The weekend
rounds were on in HD on CBS. All the live golf action for the Masters and
every other CBS golf event I have watched this season has been in HD. The
only things in standard definition have been archival footage such as some
interviews, features pieces and action from previous years, which they have
occasionally resorted to during weather delays.
If you are not seeing the bulk of the action in HD, perhaps your local
affiliate has dropped the ball.

Lee



--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Jeff B <fake@addy.com> wrote in message news:<3QVHc.63206$Oq2.43452@attbi_s52>...
> For those who thought the 2004 olympics are to be in
> HDTV, think again. NBC has announced it will be in low definition except for
> a few selected events.

I think you should boycott watching the Olympics. It's the only way
the network will get the message.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

> I watched the Masters in its entirety in HD. The first two rounds (i.e.
> Thursday and Friday) were produced by CBS but aired, as usual, on the USA
> Network. USA's HD feed was shown on INHD which I receive from Comcast
> Cable. In addition, my local CBS affiliate made arrangements to carry the
> Thursday and Friday rounds in HD on their digital channel. The weekend
> rounds were on in HD on CBS. All the live golf action for the Masters and
> every other CBS golf event I have watched this season has been in HD. The
> only things in standard definition have been archival footage such as some
> interviews, features pieces and action from previous years, which they have
> occasionally resorted to during weather delays.
> If you are not seeing the bulk of the action in HD, perhaps your local
> affiliate has dropped the ball.
>
> Lee
>
>
>

What you are suggesting is just plain crazy. If it were a matter of my
local affiliate "dropping the ball", then NONE of the footage would have
been in HD. In fact, all the golf was interleaved SD and hd.
Most golf holes were pure sd. A few holes had a mix of sd and hd
cameras, so those holes were a mixture of both. Just
like the NFL primary game on CBS. Their main 3 cameras were hd so most
of the scenes were hd. But the end zone camera was sd, so some sd was
mixed in with hd. Same with golf, only the mix was more like 5/95
hd/sd. This is how it is always done on every network, the affiliates
simply rebroadcast what they get from the main feed. When the local
affiliate "drops the ball", then ALL
scenes are SD, not a mix. True for CBS, NBC every network showing live
sports over the air. CBS/NBC have never shown any sporting event
like the Kentucy Derby, NFL games, NCAA basketball, Golf in 100% HD.
And NBC has publically admitted that less than 1/3 of their hours aired of
Olympic Coverage will be in SD.

However, according to your theory, CBS shot all golf coverage in 100%
HD. My affiliate took SOME of the hd scenes they got from the CBS
feed, converted those scenes to sd,
then aired them. And they did so in real time because the sd/hd switch
was often made on 10 second slices. Sounds more like a bizarre April
fools trick.

Here is the truth: you saw a mix of hd and sd cause that's exactly
what was shot and presented by CBS. They didn't have a seperate hd crew
"just for Lee Gordon", you aren't that special. It was all in
widescreen, so you were fooled into thinking that all of it was HD
because you equate HD with widescreen.. Fact is widesscreen is just
widescreen,
it can be either hd or sd. The difference is obvious, but not
to you, I guess.

Jeff B

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>you were fooled into thinking that all of it was HD
>because you equate HD with widescreen.. Fact is widesscreen is just
>widescreen,
>it can be either hd or sd. The difference is obvious, but not
>to you, I guess.

Actually, I was also fooled. I noticed some HD images weren't as sharp from
some views but I attributed it to lighting, angles, composition, etc. Thanks
for letting me know that it wasn't my eyes!