Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DirecTV TiVo Powered PVRs & Receivers' started by BBQ Chicken, Dec 23, 2005.
Starz HD? I thought D* only offered SHO and HBO in HD.
In the context of this thread I have no quarrel with that.
However, it's much like saying that music of the 1930s is of lower quality than music today.
In both cases there is a difference, and living today and being immersed in today's conventions, we tend to prefer today's conventions. Personally, I don't think there's ever been a better film "look" than the late 1930s/early 1940s b&w film "sheen." Occasional attempts made to recreate that look with modern film stocks or video fail.
And, probably not coincidentally, I like the sound of vinyl and find much digitally-recorded music to be harsh. I don't find either vinyl or digital to be anything like the experiece of live music.
HiDef is new, it's today. Where there is no artistic content in the material (e.g. TV), the look is clearly superior. But I, for one, dread the day when movies are shot with HD cameras, much like other hanger-ons to the past once were uncomfortable with the transition to sound movies, or to 3-D (oops) or color.
From the OP:
Just have to take a second again to say that CBS sucks - only broadcasting three games a week in HD. I keep on hearing that's it all due to bandwidth issues, and I've been saying all year that that is BS, and I think this week proves it. The game today was HD, and they only have two games tomorrow in HD. Seems to me that they are just too cheap to buy enough HD equipment for all games. All year long they have had two early games in HD and one late game in HD - where does the bandwidth limitation come in??
I'm sick of hearing that they are #1 for NFL coverage - people don't choose CBS over Fox - they choose to watch the games CBS broadcasts over than the games that Fox broadcasts. It has nothing to do with the fact that the game is on CBS and has everything to do with the teams that are playing. I could go on and on about why they suck, but I'm sure it's all common knowledge.
D* only has showtime and hbo hd. My original post stated that cable companies carry those plus starz and cinemax. Even TMC sometimes. More choices! Is the D* package a rip?
UHD- a total waste
DHD- Nice, good programming
HDNET- A copy of UHD
HDNET MOVIES- Some good movies
Espn- great for sports
Espn2- Not enough programming in hd
Also, take into account that this is not real hd because it is compressed so bad. I remember a few years ago some of these channel were awesome now they are just not the same. Maybe $5 should be the price.
Yeah, I understood your post, it was ElvisIsDed who replied with
He was (incorrectly) saying he's getting Starz and Cinemax in HD via D*
well, here we go with that... it's all very subjective. but we are talking about picture quality and not the art form, but even than i would not agree with you on that. but that's because you like old movies... i don't
some movies are shot already in high def. and it is something that will be unavoidable. it's a train that can't be stopped. and that's fine. because when hi-def is shoot properly it has an incredible film-close look. especially when transferred back to film for the theaters.
for years i was against it, but i see the quality and film like look and i am fine with that. at this point i prefer to work with film tough because it is easier. hi-def cameras are hugh and heavy and you "need" all these monitors and cables...
but again this is all get subjective and should be argued over in a "film" forum and not here
I remember when I first got my HD tv and was watching the HD commercial on CBS. The picture quality of the commercial was phenominal. I remember asking my wife why the shows that were HD were not as good as the commercial that was promoting their shows that are "HD."
IM assuming the above explanation is why?
yes and no. pretty much all commercials are shot on film, but not even transmitted in HD format 16:9 that is. but i have not seen a difference in the pic quality of a promo and the show itself. maybe you did not really watch a HD show and you thought you were...
promos are shot to promote... so they take more care of shooting it and make it look good. maybe it (the promo) was shot on 35mm and the show itself was shot on 16mm or even HD, but with a D.P. that wasn't that talented... they have 2 days to shot a 60 sec promo and they have 7 days to shot 42mins of show...
what show is it you are referring to ?
the promo was for HD on cbs in general. It showed sports on cbs(tennis and football and basketball) it showed the stars of various cbs shows (csi miami) and it showed Prince (the musician)playing for a few seconds. The stars of the shows were just standing in a studio, not actually out takes from the shows.
The quality of all of the pictures was great, and better than anything ive seen from any of the shows themselves. CSI Miami looks great in HD, but still cant compare to the quality of this particular CBS HD commercial. It would air over and over ahain, but I cant remember the last time ive seen it.
The promo was shot on video. The programming is shot on film. "The Young and the Restless" is shot on video. Probably the creative teams don't want prime time programming looking like a soap opera. Also, film is well established medium for producing visual effect. Film stock choice and processing adjustment can be used to produce grain, contrast enhancement and depth of field tricks cinematographers and directors have relied on for decades. Grainy stock is the choice to convey the mood in a burned out building or a crack house for example. Conversely, video is seen as having a "cheap home video" effect by many. There are as many opinions as there people I guess.
That is a very general statement and not entirely factual.
Depending on many, many factors it can be very easy to get HD OTA or very difficult. The poor tuners in the HR10-250 don't make the difficult situations any easier.
the tuners in the 10-250 are not that bad. i had a OTA receiver for a while and needed a line booster from the antenna to get a signal ad with the 10-250 i could remove the booster at still get a signal
I can't use the 3 LNB dish due to tree issues. Can I buy and use the HD Tivo from DTV without subing to the HD Package and also use the normal round dish?
The tuners keep getting better and better. Since both of my TVs with built-in tuners are about 2 model years newer than the HR10-250, the tuners seem to have benefited as I have much more reliable HD OTA reception with my TVs directly than with my HR10-250. Of course the TVs don't record!
I watch many programs in HD on HBO, Showtime and the 4 major networks. I think the price is worth it, although I'd like to see alot more HD channels like TNT HD, Starz HD, Cinemaz HD and UPN/PBS/WB in HD.
You kicked over the antpile with this question, didn't cha BBQ?
Long time no see
that's pretty easy to do these days
i just cant believe that there arent more HD channels on DTV... I mean, seriously. These guys have like 3490348 channels of crap, why cant they have some HD crap too?
Keep holding out for the new mp4 systems and maybe an announcement on more channels. I dont want to spend money on a receiver until I know Im going to get at least 10-20 channels of HD content.
I mean, didnt Voom have at least that many? (Yeah yeah sure they went out of business, but thats beside the point here)
And if DTV will come thru with more HD channels I will bite maybe.
i'd rather have fewer HD channels with no CRAP than just making up something or upconverting SD to HD with black sidebars.
there is just not that much HD content availble yet. it will take time. this switch is by far more difficult than VHS-DVD for example. at even that took a long time.
look at the major four, barley 10% of the air time is actully 16:9 true HD, so how can you excpect some mini mouse channel to produce HD 24/7 ?? i don't mind paying $11.- for HDnet and HDdiscovery, at least they are broadcasting 24/7 in HD unlike any other channel (As far as i know) and mostly original HD content. not movies (that's easy to convert, since you have the quality and format there already)
i said it before and i will say it again, i think it is said that so many people want everything for free. if i'd have a choice (and that's what i watch mainly) i'd be just subscribing to the HD channels and the locals. great i have an other 180 channels or so, but it's all useless stuff (for me and in my point of view)
i think it would be great if the channel lineup would be more split up, how about five bucks for the locals, five bucks for news, five bucks for shopping, five bucks for home improvemnt channels, 10 bucks for sports, 10 bucks for HD... you get the picture.