quote:

---

CEA's antenna mapping program, AntennaWeb.org, will help you determine the proper outdoor* antenna to use in order to receive your local television broadcast channels.

Whether the antenna you want is for use with a home satellite system, high-definition television (HDTV) or a traditional analog set, this site, based on geographical maps and signal strengths, will show you what you need to know to buy the right antenna.

---

quote:

---

Digital TV Questions:

Why doesn't my HD receiver work with my antenna?
What does the * (asterisk) in the DTV column stand for?
When I use Antennaweb.org to determine which affiliates are broadcasting a digital signal in addition to the analog signal, I see dates that are over a year into the future. Why?
What does the "Live Date" column indicate, and what does it mean when it says "TBD"?
What is the difference between Digital Television (DTV) and High Definition Television (HDTV)?
What is multicasting?
Why is it that for some digital channels I need to tune to a UHF channel number such as 36, but for others I have to put in a number such as "4-1"?
Are all digital stations on UHF channels, and do I need a UHF-only antenna to receive them? What are the VHF and UHF bands anyway, and what do VHF and UHF stand for?
Can you provide station listings and antenna recommendations for locations in Canada?

---

quote:

---

Fox Television to Add HDTV to Primetime by Fall 2004

LOS ANGELES, June 24 - The Fox Television Network, which previously shunned high-definition broadcasting, plans to transmit at least 50 percent of its prime-time schedule in HDTV by the season that begins in the fall of 2004, a company official told federal regulators today. The move brings the network into line with its three main broadcast competitors, which already transmit the bulk of their prime-time dramas and comedies in HDTV, the highest available quality of digital television, or will do so shortly.

Fox, owned by the News Corporation, tempered its pledge by stating that it was unhappy about introducing HDTV, however, before the adoption of a "broadcast flag" agreement aimed at protecting those programs from piracy.

Under a proposal being considered by the Federal Communications Commission, digitally transmitted programs, which would include HDTV, would be embedded with a broadcast flag which could be used to prevent retransmission over the Internet. Consumers, however, would still be able to make copies for personal use. The agency has not indicated when it will rule on the issue.

The decision to begin the transition to the high-definition format - which provides an exceptionally sharp image rivaling a motion picture's, a wide-screen format similar to that of a movie screen, and multichannel digital sound - was revealed in a letter from Peter Chernin, president of the News Corporation, to W. Kenneth Ferree, the chief of the F.C.C.'s media bureau.

Currently, the Fox network transmits its digital feed to local affiliates in a lower quality wide-screen format known as 480p enhanced definition.

"Without a very large television, it is hard to tell the difference in picture quality between Fox's enhanced definition and HDTV," said Josh Bernoff, principal analyst for Forrester Research. "But all the marketing is around HDTV, and Fox must have been feeling the pressure. This is a significant development, a sign that the acceptance of HDTV is accelerating."

The transition to high-definition TV will require Fox to change all its digital equipment at the network and its 182 local affiliates. In his letter to the F.C.C., Mr. Chernin pledged to have the job done by the fall of 2004. The company declined to say which programs it would transmit in high-definition. It said that it hoped to broadcast HDTV either later this year or early in 2004.

In 1996, the F.C.C. mandated that over-the-air broadcasters switch from an analog transmission system to a digital one. At the time, it did not formally demand any high-definition content in digital transmissions. But to encourage consumers to buy new televisions and speed the transition, the commission has stated its clear preference for HDTV. For its high-definition broadcasts, the network will use a 720p transmission, the same as that used by ABC. Proponents say this format, which sends a complete picture 60 times a second, does a better job of reproducing the fast movements of sports. Both NBC and CBS transmit their HDTV programs using the interlaced 1080i format, which alternates sending odd and even lines, and thus sends a complete picture 30 times a second.

More than 5.8 million televisions that are capable of receiving a digital signal have been sold to dealers, according to the Consumer Electronics Association; an additional three million are projected to be shipped to dealers by the end of 2003. Most of those sets, however, are used to watch conventional television and DVD's; fewer than one million high-definition set-top converter boxes are in the 106 million homes that have TV.

Currently, only 20 percent of the nation's digital broadcast channels are carried by cable TV operators. So, to see the broadcast networks' high-definition offerings, viewers must often erect an outdoor antenna or use rabbit ears, but only 6 percent of digital set owners have done so, according to Mr. Bernoff of Forrester Research. The problem, according to the cable industry, is that many of the broadcasters' digital channels are not showing high-definition programming, so there is little impetus for cable to offer them.

"With Fox's embrace of HDTV, the company should now be able to strike carriage deals with cable operators for its digital broadcasts," Mr. Bernoff said.

Early this month, Fox announced that it would offer local National Basketball Association, National Hockey League and Major League Baseball games in HDTV to Time Warner Cable subscribers. The company said that it expected to announce similar agreements with other cable companies, which would lead to the production of 200 events, or 500 hours of high-definition programming. "News Corporation is committed to becoming a leader in the production of high-definition programming on broadcast and cable television," Mr. Chernin stated in his letter.

Among its competitors, both ABC and CBS offer all of their prime-time scripted shows to their affiliates in HDTV. NBC, which now transmits "E.R.," "The Tonight Show" and "Law and Order," among others, in HDTV, will add "The West Wing" and its new situation comedies and mini-series to its high-definition lineup next season.

The WB Network, jointly owned by AOL Time Warner and the Tribune Company, shows four programs in high-definition TV. Cable programmers that offer HDTV channels include Discovery, ESPN, HBO, HDNet and Showtime.

Fox's decision to embrace HDTV will help overcome the problems that have prevented high-definition digital television from being more widely used, said Gary Shapiro, the president and chief executive of the Consumer Electronics Association, a trade group representing electronics manufacturers. "This is another `tipping point' to help reach the inevitable widespread adoption of HDTV."

---

quote:

---

...the KD-34XBR960 brings a true cinema aspect ratio picture...

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Great. I got an HDTV last weekend and the only place in town that broadcasts in HD is Channel 2, or the "WB" network. Now I am forced to watch this sappy "Everwood" show just to marvel at the 1080i visuals.

---

Joe, do you have a HD-capable satellite dish? My parents in Colorado Springs have to get all their HD programming via their DirecTV HD dish. They have an outside antenna for receiving broadcast HD signals, but I'm not sure if Colo Sprs stations are showing full HD yet. My dad always likes to call me up on Sunday night to brag about how he is watching football on ESPN-HD. Arrgh. The HD offerings on digital satellite are slowly improving. I guess like HBO-HD, Showtime-HD, Discovery Channel HD and ESPN-HD the most. HD-Net could be better if they showed better movies (they tend to show a lot of crap).

It will be a while before I'll spring for an HD setup. For now, I've got to spend any "big-ticket item" money on things that can make me productive in my work (and therefore make me more money). At this point, I'm leaning toward either a really good notebook computer or a new desktop computer. Given the current controversy about SATA hard discs, I may opt for the notebook and just wait another year to replace my aging desktop machine.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-14-2004, 06:18 PM:
 
I do not have a satellite dish as I do not wish to pay for television broadcasts. The furthest I'd go would be an antenna.

Many HDTV broadcasts do indeed have the onscreen logos, but that is the fault of the station, not HDTV itself. HDTV is meant for stuff other than just watching TV, unless your name is Mark Gulbrandsen!
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-14-2004, 11:08 PM:
 
Joe would be surprised to know that I also use my LCD HD set with my computer and photoshop on occasion. The super fine pitch screen is nicer to look at then my older Phillips LCD monitor..... .

Mark
 

---

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 09-16-2004, 05:12 PM:
 
Our Comcast is doing a decent job adding HDTV channels. I too was surprised by the recent addition of WB to the lineup. INHD repeats a lot of stuff, but they got some nice concerts. Love the Peter Gabriel and the Lynrd Skynrd shows from both a musical and visuals. While Lynrd wasn't artsy looking like the Gabriel show, the colors showed up very nicely. And Freebird still rocks.

I have a 36 inch Sony XBR set. Found it to be a good compromise. You get nearly 33 inch HDTV pic and a 36 inch 4:3 pic for regular channels.

I am thinking of buying one of the pedestal Samsung TVs with the HD2+ DLP chips. It's either that or a DLP projector in the $4000 range which uses the same type of chip. I probably will pony up for a midpriced screen too. Any suggestions on screens and projectors.? It won't be a dedicated theater room. Pretty much the second living room and if possible use the projector on a table instead of hooking it up to the ceiling.
 

---

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 09-16-2004, 05:25 PM:
 
When it comes to teens and their WB shows, they have to have it in the best quality. They love their aspect ratios and detail detail hotties. I'm surprised they haven't done it to MTV yet.
The WB gets their nice Nelsons rating of the 18-25 range... or shall I say 14-25, either way most major networks like NBC and CBS have already been in the band wagon a long time ago.

It's all about getting the next buck. Who goes to the malls, who goes to stores, who drinks that Pepsi ... Teens... are overrated. And that's what these old geezers think can attract them... Making their network as "hip and with it" as any other network.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-16-2004, 06:29 PM:
 
Pravin - how can your 4:3 image be larger than your widescreen image?

One thing I have noticed about all WB prime time shows is that they LOVE the musical montage at the end, usually by some sappy artist. They fucking can't get enough of it. Also everything is usually in slow motion during the musical montage. And then right after that they have an advertising for the music which you can conveniently buy at the fabulous WB online store. Now if only they'd broadcast in something better than Dolby Digital 2.0.

Does it cost extra to get HD over cable?
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-16-2004, 09:50 PM:
 
Sony, as well as a few other companies, make some HD-capable TVs in a 4:3 ratio. You'll still get a sharper image on these sets than a regular TV, but the 16:9 HD images will be letterboxed.

I really don't see much of any point in buying a 4:3 ratio HD monitor. The only motive I can see for any manufacturer in creating such TVs is perhaps a cost saving issue.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-16-2004, 10:53 PM:
 
Wow. Just for a goof I checked out Comcast's web site, and to get my local free HDTV channels through them is MEGA EXPENSIVE and very confusing! I apparently need a variety of boxes and services which really add up. I have an HD tuner built into the TV, so I shouldn't need their cable box. Damn. I guess I won't be paying for cable or satellite any time soon, since the pricing and the required equipment is so damn confusing.

Off the airwaves really is the only way to go. Why pay for TV that is already free? I'm glad I'm not retarded.
 

---

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 09-17-2004, 12:52 AM:
 
I don't know why folks in/near moderate to large-size cities buy cable, but I'd guess most of the males are big sports fans. Or maybe they just can't do without FoxNews. I could happily do without both, but out here in the boonies there isn't much TV without cable. Or a dish.

I can get one .. yes, one .. OTA VHF channel with an antenna. I'm a long way from even a fair-sized 'city' (which would be Fresno or Bakersfield, 100-something miles to the east .. it's 250 miles north to SF and 250 miles south to LA) and there are many mountains in the way in all directions, anyhow. There's no city to the west, because of the Great Blue Pacific. And it's waaay too far to Hawaii.

But, you're right, Joe (and also very fortunate in your available freebies), cable is pretty much a scam. It costs WAY too much, and it's all divided up into 'tiers' of channel-choices (that's the confusion, as you discovered). There's nothing worthwhile on basic cable but, of course, it's the most expensive part and it's, of course, required before one can get the extra 'tiers'.

I don't know what Charter charges for their HD 'tier' .. if there is one .. but it's doubtless outrageous and I don't want it. Not yet. I can do just fine without it.

Anyhow, count your TV-blessings, Joe. You're saving probably around $60-100 a MONTH, at least.

Ron Yost
 

---

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 09-17-2004, 02:10 AM:
 
Joe, I got a 4:3 tv.
To the others: well i bought my TV in 2000 and there will still be plenty of 4:3 programming in the next few years. You get a 36 inch 4:3 Sony, it will give you a much bigger standard image, and a slightly smaller hdtv image compared to a 34 inch sony for almost the same price. That's why I made my choice. 4:3 images on 34 inch 16:9 sonys are too small for me.

As far as why some of us buy cable, well comedy central, espn sunday night football in hidef. If you are a sports fan, you gotta have cable. You get to watch a lot of those IMAX documentaries in hidef. Plus I watch my movies either in the theater or on cable instead of spending money on dvds. 90 dollars is worth it to me. I am sure some of you would prefer to spend it a single night at mons venus instead.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-17-2004, 07:50 AM:
 
$90? A month? That's over $1,000 a year. That's slightly over 50% of my monthly payment for my brand new car that I bought last year (the $90, not the $1000).

Yeah, the 4:3 pic on 16:9 TVs can seem small (it doesn't matter if it is a Sony TV or not), but it makes it that much better when you do watch something in 16:9. My 4:3 image is about the same size as my old TV's screen. So it only gets wider after that. I play a lot of video games that support 16:9 and 480p. Some of them support 720p and 1080i. The rest support 480i and some of the older ones support "280p".
 

---

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 09-17-2004, 12:11 PM:
 
Comcast Cable says you must have their HD converter box to get HDTV over cable, but this is not correct (at least here). My Sony 51" 16:9 has a built-in HDTV tuner that seems to get all the Comcast HD stations just fine. Of course, this will probably change in the future, given that the signals are currently unencrypted. When Comcast does get around to encrypting the signal, you'll either need a set with one of those plug-in decoder cards (QAM?), or the Comcast settop box. But for now, the HDTV signals are there and free -- You just need to find them because Comcast won't tell you they're there. (Free in the sense that there's no extra cost above getting expanded basic cable.)

I was scanning through the really obscure Comcast netherland digital channels last night and found T3 being broadcast in digital, unencrypted, but not HD (and in 4:3). The image quality was pretty good, and the sound was in 5.1. I can also get a whole bunch of audio-only digital music stations over the TV's tuner.

TitanTV.com recently added a HD listing for FOX in this market (in addition to SD), so presumably the local FOX affiliate is about to start broadcasting in HD. No digital WB yet though, SD or otherwise. I can get ABC, NBC, CBS, and PBS either from cable or over-the-air. FOX is difficult to receive via antenna, must still be low-power.

CBS's HDTV rebroadcast of Hallmark's "A Painted House" this past Sunday didn't have the usual CBS bug in the corner. Hooray to Hallmark or whoever was responsible for getting rid of that pesky logo.

More annoying to me than the logos is the delay in locking onto a digital station. It takes the TV several seconds to suck in enough bits to make the picture and sound. This makes channel-hopping much slower than it is with analog. Oh well, such is the price of progress.
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 09-17-2004, 01:49 PM:
 
"When it comes to teens and their WB shows, they have to have it in the best quality."

Best Quality would be to show them WITHOUT the f---ing "The WB" logo on the screen during every damn frame! I saw they also had the words "All New" onscreen next to the bug, also appearing to be through the entire show. It looked like they were just showing a promo, not the actual show! How do people actually WATCH a show with that crap on the screen? And what the hell is the point of HDTV if they're just going to intentionally ruin the picture? That's just like having super-high-quality radio and applying the dynamic range compression that some stations use, and having the DJs talk over the music.
I'm glad I decided not to work in TV, I had wanted to for a long time. I wanted to work for an independent TV station, most of which are now extinct thanks to the Fox, WB and UPN networks. If I were running the master control and was told to put a logo on the screen and keep it there, I would walk off the job!
Oh yeah- Joe, you are my hero for saying that people who pay for cable are retarded! I was getting FREE cable for a while and never saw anything worth watching on it!
 

---

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 09-17-2004, 02:41 PM:
 
I was speaking in terms of ..... COMPLETE SARCASM.
Teens don't gave a care about the quality of the programs. For all I know management on the WB think teens forget what station they are watching so they just have to put the logo on there all the time. Even on promos the actors either walk by a huge lit up logo of the WB or have their face plastered next to the logo.
 

---

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 09-17-2004, 05:16 PM:
 
Jesse O reilly Skeen opines:

quote:

---

Oh yeah- Joe, you are my hero for saying that people who pay for cable are retarded! I was getting FREE cable for a while and never saw anything worth watching on it!

---

Get the f*** out of here. Some might say paying for a tv itself is retarded as there is nothing good to watch on network tv. To each his own. Some might saying paying for a movie ticket is retarded given the many crappy theaters. Some might say paying for popcorn with fake butter is retarded. I get a lot of guests and have 3 TVs which get a lot of use. I feel paying $50 for broadway is retarded. We can go on and on.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-17-2004, 06:51 PM:
 
My Mitsubishi HD set has a 4X3 screen but its also a first genereation HD set that goes back to late 1999. At that time many of the HD capable sets sold were 4X3. I'm glad that I went that way then but wouldn't reccomend it now since there is an onslaught of free off air HD programming available in every big city except Joes. since the CRT's are beginning to get somomewhat soft in my set I am planning on replacing it early next year with a large flat panel of some sort.... will have to wait till after xmas to see whats on sale. I can't wait to gain all the space that getting rid of that large rear screen TV will give me.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-19-2004, 01:02 AM:
 
Well I fiddled around with my rabbit ear antenna and a small piece of aluminum foil and suddenly I am getting 8 digital channels. I imagine I'd get even more with a good rooftop antenna. Channels 2 and 4 seem to drop out quite a bit, unless I put the aluminum foil in a certain place.

Anyway, I am getting "the" WB, FOX, CBS and NBC now, and with the foil in place I also get PBS. FOX is indeed in 720p, but I don't think they have any programming that goes above 480i, do they? If so, what? There was a college football game on CBS that looked pretty good, but college football sucks ass. The local news was in HD, but only the studio cameras seem capable of it. Footage from the field is low-def 16:9. Those assholes.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 09-19-2004, 02:56 AM:
 
The US standard for HD OTA signals assumes the use of an outdoor antenna. Indoor antennas were not considered when the various link budgets and minimum field strengths were established for HD OTA service using 8-VSB modulation. If you live close enough to the transmitter and have no multipath issues an indoor antenna will work, but the system wasn't designed for that. Sorry Joe, no rabbit ears allowed now!

Fox is supposed to be using 720p for its sports broadcasts. NFL and the next Super Bowl* should all be in 720p.

* Yeah, I wrote "Super Bowl" even though I'm not authorized to use the term. The NFL knows were to find me if they wanna sue.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-19-2004, 08:47 AM:
 
Yea, Paul is correct about that. Multipath is a major problem for folks that live in high multipath(mountainous or lots of tall building) areas as the receiver don't know which signal to look at and lock onto.....seems like they will need to take the receivers one step further and make them be able to detect the phase of the received signal so it only locks in on the main or direct signal..... anyway DTV is still in its infancy and has a looooong way to go. I have seen several amplified indoor antennas available and you might want to try one of those. Isn't there a decent house antenna system in your apartment?

If you get the PBS HD channel you will notice that they have a little intro before each show to tell you if its just enhanced widescreen or if its actually presented in HD, its about half and half on PBS right now. At least PBS seems to have their act together regarding this. Most of the filmed shitcoms on CBS, ABC, NBC, and FOX are all in true HD. Many of the films presented on those channels are also in true HD. Jay Leno is also 1180i HD and has since the beginning of HD itself.
How manyn of thosre channels are broadcasting multiple channels in yout area?

Mark
 

---

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 09-19-2004, 02:41 PM:
 
The Zenith Silver Sensor Indoor Antenna is highly recommended by "experts", so I bought one. It doesn't work very well for me, even after I added an amplifier. Then I picked up an RCA amplified antenna at Circuit City, which seems to work much better. Unfortunately that model has apparently been discontinued though. So anyway based on my limited experience, indoor antennas are going to be very hit-and-miss.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-19-2004, 04:17 PM:
 
Wow! Jay Leno has an extra 100 lines of resolution!

I notice TONS of compression artifacts on CBS during their college football game, but I notice very few artifacts on FOX during their 720p football game starring the Seattle Seahawks and none at all on PBS during HD (which has mysteriously disappeared since I can't tune the channel in anymore for the life of me).
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-19-2004, 04:24 PM:
 
Joe, I'm getting alot more than 100 extra lines on Jay Leno. What ever you do if you buy an indoor antenna be sure to buy it at a place that will take it back if it doesn't work.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-19-2004, 04:42 PM:
 
Mark, you said Jay Leno was in 1180i. I can only get 1080i. You get an extra 100 lines!

Also, what is the best place to buy an antenna, indoor or outdoor? If outdoor, who would be best to install it?
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-19-2004, 06:04 PM:
 
Yes Joe.... They increase the number of lines on Leno just to be able to fit in his chin and forehead.

Get the antenna at ay location that would take it back if it fails to provide you with decent reception. On the outdoor one I would reccomend that you inquire around in your area... So that it doesn't turn into Laurel & Hardys Antenna Service.
Mark
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-19-2004, 07:13 PM:
 
PBS HD is back. It's weird, PBS has channels 6 (analog) 6.1 (digital version of the analog) and 6.3 (always completely different programming than analog 6). I can either get 6.1 or 6.3. Never both at the same time. I am guessing when there is nothing to show in HD, they just start sending out the 6.1 channel and leave 6.3 blank.
 

---

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 09-19-2004, 07:15 PM:
 
You should be able to find out the locations of the transmitters in your area so you know what kind of antenna you might need, like unidirectional vs. omnidirectional (did I use the right terms)? Google it, it's all on the web somewhere. In my case, the transmitters are clustered in 2 different locations, and it makes using a directional antenna a nuisance.

Say what you want about Circuit City, but they'll take virtually anything back, no questions asked, except of course DVDs and CDs. My Sony HD set was one of those returned "floor stock" deals -- Someone had returned it, for who knows what reason, and CC marked the price way down. Now normally I wouldn't touch a "used" TV with the proverbial 10-foot pole, but this set caught my eye so I looked at it very carefully. The picture was amazing. Nearly perfect convergence across the entire screen, which is unusual for a CRT-based RPTV out of the box. No sign of much use at all. I've been very pleased with the set and it was a great deal $-wise.

The football game on CBS looked awesome last night in HD. Some compression artifacts, but nowhere near as bad as NBC's HD feed of the Olympics, which I found virtually unwatchable.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-19-2004, 07:51 PM:
 
It seems that standard definition programs have more artifacts than the HD ones, even when the SD is upscaled to fit the HD picture.

I did go to Circuit City and I bought the Terk Low Profile Amplified Antenna. So far no problems at all. My TV picked up 9 digital channels and so far zero break up. Of course I've only had it for about an hour, so I'll be sure to put it to the test this week. I have 30 days to test it out. I'm positive I'll be able to see if it's worth keeping by then.

The football game last night did indeed look good, but there was way too much orange everwhere. Nobody likes THAT MUCH orange! The 720p game on FOX today actually looked a little less sharp when sitting up close, but looked smoother when viewed from a distance than the 1080i game on CBS did. Maybe that was just because of the lack of compression artifacts on the FOX game. PBS HD is now giving me some artifacts... maybe it depends on the individual programs?

I also like how the digital versions of analog channels are at least 2 or 3 seconds behind in time. Somebody says "Oh crap!" on channel 4, and then I switch to channel 4.1 and that same person says "Oh crap!" again!

How many megabits per second am I receiving for an over-the-air HD channel?
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-19-2004, 08:59 PM:
 
Not sure about the exact bit rate and that probably depends somewhat on the compression factors. But somewhere around 19.4 mbps. As a comparison D-Theatre is around 25mbps.

You're also right on 720P having less artifacts and apparent smoother video... thats an important difference that lies between the two systems... 720p has a bit less sharpness but alot less motion artifacts while 1080i has more sharpness along with artifacts. Its just a matter of trade offs in the encoding but using the same bit rates.

Mark
 

---

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 09-19-2004, 09:55 PM:
 
FOX and ABC decided on 720p because it's supposed to be better for sports. Fewer motion-related artifacts. Oh, wait, that's what Mark just said. Anyways, it's hard for me to tell the difference.

What I'd really like to know is why most film-sourced TV shows broadcast in HD look so soft in comparison to live events like sports.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-19-2004, 10:15 PM:
 
The film-based shows look pretty sharp to me. But maybe the sports shows look "sharper" because of the super bright lighting usually used.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-19-2004, 10:20 PM:
 

quote: David Stambaugh

---

Some compression artifacts, but nowhere near as bad as NBC's HD feed of the Olympics, which I found virtually unwatchable.

---

Buy did you hit the nail on the head! The Olympics stuff sucked bug time and the coverage was not even complete... no softball and no horse stuff and Cross Country riding is probably the single most dangerous sport there is. The mixture of HD and SD cameras was so tacky as to be beyond belief and I got sea sick with all the swimming and diving competition thatw as broadcast. Hopefully some one else will be broadcasting the next Olympics because NBC sure can't do it justice. Just watch for them to get some sort of an emmy .....

Joe, Your reception should just get better as the higher power trannys come on line....

Mark
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-19-2004, 10:47 PM:
 
I'm not in to trannys. Sicko.

But yeah. I wish they'd hurry up. Oh wait. They can't. FCC wants it to take until 2134 until it is all up and running (it seems).
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-19-2004, 11:23 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

They can't. FCC wants it to take until 2134 until it is all up and running (it seems).

---