Another reason not to go nuts over HDTV

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

<tinker@nospamtoday.com> wrote in message
news:ivbg51hpaej7bio9t4n8lhrni6lhbjuf81@4ax.com...
>
> Was channel surfing last night and watched some of the repeat of the
> StarGate Atlantis pilot episode on the SciFi channel. Having seen it
> before, I was amazed at the scenes cut out for extra commercials.
>
> If you didn't see it the first time, you may as well wait for the DVD.
>
> Television is it's own worse enemy.
>
> I was especially annoyed as I was recording a BattleStar episode later
> that I missed the first time around
>

What does this have to do with HDTV?

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

OK newbie here. DVD is not shot in HDTV?
"Alan Figgatt" <afiggatt@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fdudnUCwLp_ZLcXfRVn-jw@comcast.com...
> Panic wrote:
>
>> <tinker@nospamtoday.com> wrote in message
>> news:ivbg51hpaej7bio9t4n8lhrni6lhbjuf81@4ax.com...
>>
>>>Was channel surfing last night and watched some of the repeat of the
>>>StarGate Atlantis pilot episode on the SciFi channel. Having seen it
>>>before, I was amazed at the scenes cut out for extra commercials.
>>>
>>>If you didn't see it the first time, you may as well wait for the DVD.
>>>
>>>Television is it's own worse enemy.
>>>
>>>I was especially annoyed as I was recording a BattleStar episode later
>>>that I missed the first time around
>>>
>>
>>
>> What does this have to do with HDTV?
>
> Agreed. Stargate Atlantis is shot in HD, but Sciffy doesn't broadcast
> HD, so we don't see it in HD in the USA. With the HD broadcasts of
> Battlestar Galactica 2.0 showing up on the UniversalHD network, maybe the
> two Stargate shows will eventually be shown on the UniversalHD network.
> But that raises the next problem - not that many people can get the
> UniversalHD network at this point.
>
> So did Sciffy add in more commercials for the rerun season? Or is this
> about cuts that Sciffy did the 1st time around?
>
> Alan F

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

You didn't mention too that "anamorphic" DVDs are very excellent viewing
on an HDTV set. Just set your DVD player to 16:9, your HDTV to "stretch"
and voila... near HDTV picture quality... and full screen. Of course the
DVD program must be issued in widescreen anamorphic for this to work.
But many of them are, so someone has done their job. Movies like
"Chicago", "Ladykillers" and even "Mary Poppins" look great in
anamorphic widescreen. Most who have seen these on my set think they are
HDTV and I don't spoil the illusion <g>.

George

Alan Figgatt wrote:
>
> DVD is SD NTSC (US) or SD PAL (Europe and elsewhere), not HD. For the
> US, DVDs are encoded to a 720x480 resolution which will usually look
> better than broadcast SD but is still a 480i SD standard. DVD movies or
> filmed widescreen TV shows do look damn good on a widescreen HD with 3:2
> pulldown (aka progressive scan) however. For true HD, be it 1280x720p
> or 1920x1080i/p, you can get a D-VHS player (with a limited choice of
> titles) or wait until HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players and disks hit the
> market by the end of this year.
>
> Alan F
>
> GREG BUGGY wrote:
>
> > OK newbie here. DVD is not shot in HDTV?
> > "Alan Figgatt" <afiggatt@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:fdudnUCwLp_ZLcXfRVn-jw@comcast.com...
> >

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

I think Titanic is widescreen but not anamorphic. Can't understand why they
did that - but I believe that's true.

Jim

"Alan Figgatt" <afiggatt@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:7L2dnXNoTZ-xYcTfRVn-2g@comcast.com...
> Are there any recent new releases which are in widescreen but which are
> not anamorphic? I don't recall coming across any major releases which were
> not anamorphic in some time.
>
> Alan F
>
>
> George wrote:
>
>> You didn't mention too that "anamorphic" DVDs are very excellent viewing
>> on an HDTV set. Just set your DVD player to 16:9, your HDTV to "stretch"
>> and voila... near HDTV picture quality... and full screen. Of course the
>> DVD program must be issued in widescreen anamorphic for this to work. But
>> many of them are, so someone has done their job. Movies like
>> "Chicago", "Ladykillers" and even "Mary Poppins" look great in
>> anamorphic widescreen. Most who have seen these on my set think they are
>> HDTV and I don't spoil the illusion <g>.
>>
>> George
>>
>> Alan Figgatt wrote:
>>
>>> DVD is SD NTSC (US) or SD PAL (Europe and elsewhere), not HD. For the
>>>US, DVDs are encoded to a 720x480 resolution which will usually look
>>>better than broadcast SD but is still a 480i SD standard. DVD movies or
>>>filmed widescreen TV shows do look damn good on a widescreen HD with 3:2
>>>pulldown (aka progressive scan) however. For true HD, be it 1280x720p
>>>or 1920x1080i/p, you can get a D-VHS player (with a limited choice of
>>>titles) or wait until HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players and disks hit the
>>>market by the end of this year.
>>>
>>> Alan F
>>>
>>>GREG BUGGY wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>OK newbie here. DVD is not shot in HDTV?

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

I was told DirectTV will have scifi channel in HD this year

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

Jim Johnson wrote:
> I think Titanic is widescreen but not anamorphic. Can't understand
> why they did that - but I believe that's true.

Keep in mind however that when that edition came out Paramount
was on the fence about DVD. A number of their early DVD releases
were not anamorphic enhanced - Titanic being one of them. Truman
Show, the first couple of Star Trek film releases (ie: Generations
and Undiscovred Country), Top Gun, and Deep Impact come to mind.
But now Paramount has gone back on most of them and have done
newer SE releases with anamorphic transfers.

In fact I give Paramount two big thumbs up by not only doing this but
also by having the SE editions priced at the exact same level that the
previous editions have been selling for (ie: the barebones non-anamorphic
Top Gun before the SE came out was $14.99, the new 2 disc SE
is also $14.99 - and yes its worth buying just for the outstanding
DTS track).

Oh, and Titanic anamorphic is coming out this October in both a
2 disc movie only and a 4 disc special with everything including
the kitchen sink edition. The film itself just got a new HD remastering
so obviously just that alone is really going to improve the quality.
That and the fact that the film is going to be spread across 2 DVDs
(higher bitrate), and it being anamorphic really will make a HUGE
difference.

Brian The Demolition Man Little

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

Thanks for the info. I'll pick up a copy when it's released.

Jim

"Brian The Demolition Man Little" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:s9adnVO9HuSPWcbfRVn-rg@giganews.com...
> Jim Johnson wrote:
>> I think Titanic is widescreen but not anamorphic. Can't understand
>> why they did that - but I believe that's true.
>
> Keep in mind however that when that edition came out Paramount
> was on the fence about DVD. A number of their early DVD releases
> were not anamorphic enhanced - Titanic being one of them. Truman
> Show, the first couple of Star Trek film releases (ie: Generations
> and Undiscovred Country), Top Gun, and Deep Impact come to mind.
> But now Paramount has gone back on most of them and have done
> newer SE releases with anamorphic transfers.
>
> In fact I give Paramount two big thumbs up by not only doing this but
> also by having the SE editions priced at the exact same level that the
> previous editions have been selling for (ie: the barebones non-anamorphic
> Top Gun before the SE came out was $14.99, the new 2 disc SE
> is also $14.99 - and yes its worth buying just for the outstanding
> DTS track).
>
> Oh, and Titanic anamorphic is coming out this October in both a
> 2 disc movie only and a 4 disc special with everything including
> the kitchen sink edition. The film itself just got a new HD remastering
> so obviously just that alone is really going to improve the quality.
> That and the fact that the film is going to be spread across 2 DVDs
> (higher bitrate), and it being anamorphic really will make a HUGE
> difference.
>
> Brian The Demolition Man Little
>

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

George <steber@execpc.com> wrote (in part):

>Just curious. Does upscaling in the player work better than letting the
>HDTV set do the scaling? Why?
>
>George

In general, upscaling DVD players offer a digital output and
non-upscaling ones don't. The material on the DVD is digital already,
and most displays, other than CRTs, must convert analog to digital to
show it. Using a digital connection avoids an extra D/A and A/D
conversion, which should improve PQ.

But practice doesn't always follow theory, so it may come down to
which upscaler does the better job. Which is why somebody invented
the acronym YMMV.

Del Mibbler

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

"Del Mibbler" <mibbler@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:j7bq51d9hclfmgkhdkvhg41h1pd1o1ibp0@4ax.com...
> George <steber@execpc.com> wrote (in part):
>
>>Just curious. Does upscaling in the player work better than letting the
>>HDTV set do the scaling? Why?
>>
>>George
>
> In general, upscaling DVD players offer a digital output and
> non-upscaling ones don't. The material on the DVD is digital already,
> and most displays, other than CRTs, must convert analog to digital to
> show it. Using a digital connection avoids an extra D/A and A/D
> conversion, which should improve PQ.

This applies to our TV set and upscaling DVD player. We used to use a
Panasonic E80 DVD/DVR, which was connected to our (new last fall) Sony
KDF-60XS955 HDTV via component video cables. A couple months ago, we got a
new Panasonic S97 upscaling DVD player, which connects via HDMI digital
cable. Set at 720p upconversion, it does deliver a better picture -- more
like HD -- to the TV set than the E80 did. But I have not tried setting it
to send digitally at 480i and letting the TV set -- which has a substantial
upscaler in its own right -- do the upscaling. I should try that.

mack
austin