TiVo Community
TiVo Community
TiVo Community
Go Back   TiVo Community > TiVo TV Talk > Now Playing - TV Show Talk
TiVo Community
Reply
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-28-2011, 02:03 PM   #31
marksman
ID-10-T
 
marksman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 16,781
Scifi nerds will buy anything!
marksman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 02:29 PM   #32
Fish Man
Phish Food
 
Fish Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 0.7 miles from the Abita brewery!
Posts: 8,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoadStar View Post
The principal photography was done with Panavision Panaflex 35mm cameras. It, however, was edited and mastered on standard definition broadcast videotape, so they would have to re-scan the film masters, re-edit the show to the same edit points, and reproduce all the VFX.

This is video of the "Reading Rainbow" episode where they show the making of TNG. The episode was recorded during the first season of TNG. I've cued it up to the point in the show where they are talking about editing the show down:
http://youtu.be/cCsD5PRoX7I#t=394s

The task is not impossible - just improbably difficult, time-consuming, and expensive.
I've read (for what it's worth) that it's even slightly worse than you describe:

From what I've read, the 35mm camera negatives were scanned directly to videotape, via a scanner that reversed the negative image back to a positive.

The rest is then exactly as you describe, all editing was done in the videotape format and all FX were created directly to video.

So, yeah, they'll have to re-create the show from the raw camera negatives (possibly without good notes as to exactly which takes were ultimately used, etc. having to determine that through trial and error, essentially) and do the FX from scratch.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Fish Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 02:39 PM   #33
Fleegle
Chef-In-Training
 
Fleegle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Man View Post
I've read (for what it's worth) that it's even slightly worse than you describe:

From what I've read, the 35mm camera negatives were scanned directly to videotape, via a scanner that reversed the negative image back to a positive.

The rest is then exactly as you describe, all editing was done in the videotape format and all FX were created directly to video.

So, yeah, they'll have to re-create the show from the raw camera negatives (possibly without good notes as to exactly which takes were ultimately used, etc. having to determine that through trial and error, essentially) and do the FX from scratch.
Like I said, a LOT of work which will make for one heck of an expensive Blu-Ray set...
Fleegle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:04 PM   #34
Bierboy
Seasoned gas passer
 
Bierboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Quad Sillies
Posts: 11,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougF View Post
Yeah, I read it. But, the same percentage is cropped out. In some shots it might be critical, in others it won't.

Regardless of that, why would you want it 16X9? Just to fill your screen?
Yes I would want it in 16X9....again IF the video material that is cropped is not excessive. How many times do I have to repeat myself, class?

And, BTW, I am not a Star Trek nerd. I've watched each series and movie, but am not obsessed as some are....
__________________
"You don't know Bierboy like I know Bierboy. He became a lot more amusing after I figured out his sense of humor..." -- Rob Helmerichs

XL4

Last edited by Bierboy : 09-28-2011 at 05:34 PM.
Bierboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:15 PM   #35
IndyJones1023
Documentarianologist
 
IndyJones1023's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 51,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoadStar View Post
Changing it to 16:9 creates a different visual image than what the director intended.
This isn't exactly accurate. The directors of these episodes didn't exactly have any other option. And it's not like they were visionaries bringing their message to the screen. These were all studio directors running through the system.
__________________
Common sense is a gift, not a given.
IndyJones1023 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:39 PM   #36
LoadStar
LOAD"*",8,1
 
LoadStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 30,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyJones1023 View Post
This isn't exactly accurate. The directors of these episodes didn't exactly have any other option. And it's not like they were visionaries bringing their message to the screen. These were all studio directors running through the system.
Well, I know it's a different director on a totally different show, but here's Joss Whedon's comments when he was asked about releasing Buffy the Vampire Slayer in 16:9:
Quote:
"It's not a widescreen show. We shot it in a TV ratio, and I am very, very specific with the way I frame things. To arbitrarily throw - and I love widescreen, but Buffy was never a widescreen show. It was an intimate, TV-shaped show. To arbitrarily throw wider borders on it, to make it more cinematic when I very specifically framed it... See, that is not the way I framed it. That's not the way it was meant to be seen, and therefore that's not the way I shot it. I'm preserving what I shot. The DVD is there to preserve what we made, for eternity. What we made, very specifically, was a certain shape. So I'm sure there'll be widescreen copies and there'll be arguments about what's better, but I'm not interested in - and I mean, I love widescreen. I'm a widescreen fanatic, when something's wide. When it's not, then I want to see it the way it was meant to be seen."
I'm guessing that there would be at least a few of the directors on TNG that would feel the same as Joss does about his show. Although 4:3 was at the time their only choice, just as Joss did when he made Buffy, they made certain choices within that restriction that would be affected by a change to 16:9.
LoadStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:46 PM   #37
DougF
Registered User
 
DougF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 13,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bierboy View Post
Yes I would want it in 16X9....again IF the video material that is cropped is not excessive. How many times do I have to repeat myself, class?

And, BTW, I am not a Star Trek nerd. I've watched each series and movie, but am not obsessed as some are....
No need to be rude. I was simply trying to ask why you would want it in 16X9. It seems most hardcore HD people were also OAR people when it came to buying VHS tapes, laserdiscs and DVDs. I can't see why someone wouldn't want it the same for 4X3.

You keep seeing you want it in 16X9 (if it's not excessively cropped, I get it), but you have never said why, at least that I've seen. If it's none of my business, just say so. Save the rolleyes for someone else.
DougF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:47 PM   #38
Bierboy
Seasoned gas passer
 
Bierboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Quad Sillies
Posts: 11,391
Sci Fi, in general by the nature of the genre, is MADE for widescreen. Now, whether STNG will adapt well to it is another issue altogether...
__________________
"You don't know Bierboy like I know Bierboy. He became a lot more amusing after I figured out his sense of humor..." -- Rob Helmerichs

XL4
Bierboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:48 PM   #39
Bierboy
Seasoned gas passer
 
Bierboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Quad Sillies
Posts: 11,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougF View Post
No need to be rude. I was simply trying to ask why you would want it in 16X9. It seems most hardcore HD people were also OAR people when it came to buying VHS tapes, laserdiscs and DVDs. You keep seeing you want it in 16X9 (if it's not excessively cropped, I get it), but you have never said why, at least that I've seen. If it's none of my business, just say so. Save the rolleyes for someone else.
See my previous post...

I did not intend to be rude...if it came across that way I apologize.
__________________
"You don't know Bierboy like I know Bierboy. He became a lot more amusing after I figured out his sense of humor..." -- Rob Helmerichs

XL4
Bierboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:49 PM   #40
DougF
Registered User
 
DougF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 13,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bierboy View Post
See my previous post...
Ah, yes. I see now where you said specifically why you wanted it in 16X9 and didn't just say once again that you want it in 16X9 but only if it's not excessively cropped. My apologies.
DougF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 05:52 PM   #41
Rob Helmerichs
I am Groot!
 
Rob Helmerichs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 31,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoadStar View Post
I'm guessing that there would be at least a few of the directors on TNG that would feel the same as Joss does about his show. Although 4:3 was at the time their only choice, just as Joss did when he made Buffy, they made certain choices within that restriction that would be affected by a change to 16:9.
Yes...directors of that period wouldn't arbitrarily leave dead space at the tops and bottoms of the frames just in case it would some day be cropped to 16:9. In close-ups (of which there are many in most TV shows), you will lose the tops and bottoms of the characters' heads, e.g.

It's interesting to watch the Babylon 5 DVDs. JMS was very forward-looking, and decreed that they should be shot open-matte (an aspect ratio between 4:3 and 16:9), and be framed so that it could be cropped a little one way for the regular broadcast, and a little the other way for eventual 16:9. Some directors got it, and some didn't. And you could always tell when they didn't very easily...chins and foreheads got cropped in the close-ups.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougF View Post
Ah, yes. I see now where you said specifically why you wanted it in 16X9 and didn't just say once again that you want it in 16X9 but only if it's not excessively cropped. My apologies.
Wow, sarcasm. THAT'S original!


__________________
“This is the moment of truth. Are you my friend, or are you some bloodsucking network vampire?”
“Why do I have to pick one or the other?”
Rob Helmerichs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 06:01 PM   #42
DougF
Registered User
 
DougF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 13,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Helmerichs View Post
...Wow, sarcasm. THAT'S original!

Yeah, and probably uncalled for. Apologies to Bierboy.
DougF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 06:01 PM   #43
IndyJones1023
Documentarianologist
 
IndyJones1023's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 51,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoadStar View Post
Well, I know it's a different director on a totally different show, but here's Joss Whedon's comments when he was asked about releasing Buffy the Vampire Slayer in 16:9:
Yeah, that was one man, one showrunner's vision. Not a bunch of different directors run thru the mill.
__________________
Common sense is a gift, not a given.
IndyJones1023 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 06:01 PM   #44
LoadStar
LOAD"*",8,1
 
LoadStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 30,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Helmerichs View Post
Yes...directors of that period wouldn't arbitrarily leave dead space at the tops and bottoms of the frames just in case it would some day be cropped to 16:9. In close-ups (of which there are many in most TV shows), you will lose the tops and bottoms of the characters' heads, e.g.
It's more than just whether space was left on the top/bottom of a frame.

Again, going back to the Buffy example (just because it's where I recall another major debate happening about releasing a 4:3 show re-edited for 16:9) this is (as DVDTalk.com transcribed) from the commentary from the Buffy episode "The Body.":
Quote:
"We're actually coming up on one of my favorite shots that I ever composed, and it's very simple, which is this: very simply, it's an over where I squeezed her in the frame as much as possible so that it's like she didn't have room to maneuver... A normal over would have been her with a tiny slice of his shoulder. Instead, I let his shoulder own the frame. I took his eyes out of the frame to show the experience of literally being trapped, being blocked off from reality. It's an obvious thing, not great filmmaking, but when I did it on the day when I saw the over and thought, 'he's a little too much in the frame. Oh, keep pushing it...keep pushing. Give her less room...give her less room.' It excited me."
Again, there were probably more than a few directors on TNG that wouldn't have a particular "artistic vision" like Joss did on Buffy. But there may have been some that did.
LoadStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 06:15 PM   #45
Rob Helmerichs
I am Groot!
 
Rob Helmerichs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 31,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoadStar View Post
Again, there were probably more than a few directors on TNG that wouldn't have a particular "artistic vision" like Joss did on Buffy. But there may have been some that did.
Right, but my point was just that regardless of the level of artistic vision, they would have used all of the 4:3 frame. Ergo, cropped chins and foreheads.

The kind of care Joss talks about in that example is just bonus cropping suckage on top of the normal cropping suckage.

Now, maybe Bierboy is less sensitive to that kind of stuff. But I know there's a movie theater here in Minneapolis (sadly, the one closest to me) that routinely overscans (that's probably not the right technical term) movies. And it doesn't take any necessary visual information out of the picture (unless there are subtitles, the bottom line of which usually are off the screen), but the (mis-) framing of the image drives me crazy, to the point where I can't enjoy the movie. So I don't go there any more (they also like to lower the brightness of the bulb, which makes the movies darker and murkier than they were meant to be).
__________________
“This is the moment of truth. Are you my friend, or are you some bloodsucking network vampire?”
“Why do I have to pick one or the other?”
Rob Helmerichs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 08:50 PM   #46
JYoung
Series 3
 
JYoung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 24,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleegle View Post
Like I said, a LOT of work which will make for one heck of an expensive Blu-Ray set...
Yeah and that gives me pause because it seems obvious to me that CBS Video did not spend enough money to get the TOS HD release correct.


Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyJones1023 View Post
Yeah, that was one man, one showrunner's vision. Not a bunch of different directors run thru the mill.
TNG had showrunners who set down edicts as well though.
Seasons 1 & 2, it was primarily Roddenberry and Maurice Hurley.
Season 3-7, it was Michael Pillar and Rick Berman.

And I think that most (if not all) of the directors would have framed for 4:3 during TNG's run as that was all that was really out on the market.

As Rob points out, in 1994, it was very forward thinking for JMS to be shooting with 16:9 in mind.

(Although I recently noticed that in 2001, the headrest displays in the Pan Am spaceclipper appear to be 16:9.)
__________________
Member of the TiVoShanan Fan Club!

"I aim to misbehave"
JYoung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 09:15 PM   #47
Fish Man
Phish Food
 
Fish Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 0.7 miles from the Abita brewery!
Posts: 8,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyJones1023 View Post
This isn't exactly accurate. The directors of these episodes didn't exactly have any other option. And it's not like they were visionaries bringing their message to the screen. These were all studio directors running through the system.
Regardless how badly any given director might have wanted to shoot in widescreen, the fact is that when ST:TNG was in production, TV was 4:3.

The directors were stuck with 4:3. It was never going to be anything but 4:3 as far as they knew.

Therefore, they composed the frames to look correct in 4:3.

To change the aspect ratio would be to alter their intended composition. Period.

It's not a matter of whether you (meaning anyone reading this, not only Indy) or I or the director preferred widescreen (generally speaking, I indeed do). It's a matter of the source material being composed by the cinematographer to look right in 4:3. It will look "less right" in any other ratio.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Fish Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 11:00 PM   #48
Bryanmc
I'm normal.
 
Bryanmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Richardson, TX 75082
Posts: 38,514
I've been keeping this in mind as I've been rewatching the series. There's no way it would do well with a crop to 16x9. Some of the framing is super tight (almost too tight for 4x3 IMO) and would just be awful cropped.

I sure hope they don't crop anything. The show was shot for a 4x3 frame, it should be preserved that way. I see no benefit to cropping it.
Bryanmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 05:25 AM   #49
SimonGoodwin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 9
Woooow.... Bring back ST:TNG
Let's just hope they get the GFX right!
SimonGoodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 07:00 AM   #50
doom1701
I blue myself!
 
doom1701's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 24,115
I still haven't seen anything that actually explains what "recomposited" means, and if it's a good thing or not for the FX. We know that it won't be a CGI redo, like with TOS. The best explanation that I've read is that the FX shots were shot on 35mm and composited on video, so they can go back to the original 35mm film, get the base FX shots, and rebuild them.

But there doesn't seem to be a concensus on whether or not those FX shots do exist on film.
__________________
Tim
doom1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 09:01 AM   #51
Amnesia
The Question
 
Amnesia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 9,429
The Digital Bits is reporting that the Blu-ray will contain the episodes in the original 4:3 aspect ratio. There is also a trailer for set...
Amnesia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 09:31 AM   #52
DougF
Registered User
 
DougF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 13,695
Interesting...

Quote:
By the way, we're told that the show's original 1.33:1 aspect ratio will be preserved (and that's what you'll get on Blu-ray), but 1.78:1 versions may be created for use in certain distribution venues.

DougF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 09:35 AM   #53
Fish Man
Phish Food
 
Fish Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 0.7 miles from the Abita brewery!
Posts: 8,261
Quote:
By the way, we're told that the show's original 1.33:1 aspect ratio will be preserved (and that's what you'll get on Blu-ray), but 1.78:1 versions may be created for use in certain distribution venues.
IIRC CBS digital used almost identical wording in some copy about the HD remastering of ST:TOS "[widescreen] versions may be created for certain distributions", or words very close to that.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Fish Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 09:38 AM   #54
Fish Man
Phish Food
 
Fish Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 0.7 miles from the Abita brewery!
Posts: 8,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnesia View Post
The Digital Bits is reporting that the Blu-ray will contain the episodes in the original 4:3 aspect ratio. There is also a trailer for set...
The trailer shows camera negatives being loaded into the scanner, and then it morphs a negative image into a positive.

So, yeah, the only high resolution medium that exists of the show is the camera negatives.

Wow! That is really a lot of work!

I'll buy it just to see how well they did with the conversion.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Fish Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 10:16 AM   #55
Jonathan_S
Registered User
 
Jonathan_S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 13,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Helmerichs View Post
It's interesting to watch the Babylon 5 DVDs. JMS was very forward-looking, and decreed that they should be shot open-matte (an aspect ratio between 4:3 and 16:9), and be framed so that it could be cropped a little one way for the regular broadcast, and a little the other way for eventual 16:9. Some directors got it, and some didn't. And you could always tell when they didn't very easily...chins and foreheads got cropped in the close-ups.
For what it's worth I prefer if remasters don't screw with the aspect ratio. I've got those Babylon 5 on DVDs and, IMHO, reframing them fpr 16:9 didn't turn out all that well. (Now some of that is that JMS's plan to redo the CGI fell through, so all the space scene's are cropped down from 4:3, but even the normal stuff doesn't work as well)

And like you said that's a show where they at tried to frame thing for the possibility of later widescreen conversion, so they don't have to crop much, mostly just show more content to the side. I can't image what a mess it would be to take something that wasn't framed to go wider and just make it shorter to fill out a TV. Ug.
__________________
Xbox: MetalThreshkeen -- PSN: Threshkeen
TiVo Elite

Last edited by Jonathan_S : 09-29-2011 at 10:22 AM.
Jonathan_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 10:38 AM   #56
JYoung
Series 3
 
JYoung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 24,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by doom1701 View Post
I still haven't seen anything that actually explains what "recomposited" means, and if it's a good thing or not for the FX. We know that it won't be a CGI redo, like with TOS. The best explanation that I've read is that the FX shots were shot on 35mm and composited on video, so they can go back to the original 35mm film, get the base FX shots, and rebuild them.

But there doesn't seem to be a concensus on whether or not those FX shots do exist on film.
I'm not sure either.

I was hoping that someone like Bryan or Indy would have more insight on what they mean by "recomposited".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnesia View Post
The Digital Bits is reporting that the Blu-ray will contain the episodes in the original 4:3 aspect ratio. There is also a trailer for set...
Good to know.
Thanks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Man View Post
IIRC CBS digital used almost identical wording in some copy about the HD remastering of ST:TOS "[widescreen] versions may be created for certain distributions", or words very close to that.
Interestingly enough, the new CGI for TOS was rendered at 16:9 but was also supposed to be 4:3 friendly.

Of course then you still have to crop the live action for 16:9..
__________________
Member of the TiVoShanan Fan Club!

"I aim to misbehave"
JYoung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 11:09 AM   #57
scooterboy
Wookin' Pa Nub
 
scooterboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: East Kingston, NH USA
Posts: 27,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnesia View Post
There is also a trailer for set...
Can someone tell me what "trailer for set" means? I'm following the technical discussion fairly well but I'm not familiar with that term.
__________________
Proofreading: it's a good thing.

Every time I'm drying off from a shower I think of my childhood buddy's father. - mcthumber
scooterboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 12:19 PM   #58
LoadStar
LOAD"*",8,1
 
LoadStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 30,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooterboy View Post
Can someone tell me what "trailer for set" means? I'm following the technical discussion fairly well but I'm not familiar with that term.
There is a trailer [for the] set [of episodes they are releasing.]

A few words got dropped.
LoadStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 01:00 PM   #59
scooterboy
Wookin' Pa Nub
 
scooterboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: East Kingston, NH USA
Posts: 27,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoadStar View Post
There is a trailer [for the] set [of episodes they are releasing.]

A few words got dropped.
Ok...thanks.
__________________
Proofreading: it's a good thing.

Every time I'm drying off from a shower I think of my childhood buddy's father. - mcthumber
scooterboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2011, 02:14 PM   #60
Amnesia
The Question
 
Amnesia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 9,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooterboy View Post
Can someone tell me what "trailer for set" means?
Yes, should have been "trailer for the set". Little editing mistake...sorry for the confusion...
Amnesia is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Forum Jump




Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Advertisements

TiVo Community
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media

(C) 2013 Magenium Solutions - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVo® is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not owned or operated by TiVo Inc.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 AM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |