Can someone tell me some good reasons why the networks are not running towards HD. I mean, the richest black lady in the world, Oprah Winfrey, is still in standard definition. What is up with that?

So many programs could be in high definition because they are being produced as we speak, but is it the broadcasters refusing to broadcast more HD content or are they just not being produced in HD? Anybody have any good answers?

I forgot to add. Almost all the soap opera's are in HD. Why can't everything produced from today forward, be in HD?

Money.

Yep - producing and distributing shows in HD still costs more than producing and distributing them in SD. If your contract with the broadcaster doesn't stipulate HD then it is likely you won't produce and distribute in HD.

Shows that come from dedicated SD studio facilities will need to upgrade their facilities - or pay their resources providers to. Obviously as legacy SD gear is retired it is increasingly likely to be replaced with HD gear. However even then the increased post and distribution costs may mitigate against producing or delivering in HD.

The cost differences between SD and HD may be much smaller than they once were - but even small percentages mount up to quite a lot of cash on a long-running series - as many daytime series are.

In the UK the ratings for daytime series are significantly lower than in prime time - so the budget levels for shows in daytime are consequently also lower. I assume something similar holds true in the US?

The cost differences between SD and HD may be much smaller than they once were - but even small percentages mount up to quite a lot of cash on a long-running series - as many daytime series are.This is a key nuance: Even if, someday, HD production costs are lower than SD production costs ever were, as long as current-day SD production costs are less than that, then that will be sound foundation for some content providers to choose SD production, as long as any significant number of viewers are willing to view it. I suspect the transition from SD to HD could take longer than the transition from monochrome to color.

There is also the issue of syndicated shows. Many local stations do not have the infrastructue in place to receive a "non-network" HD broadcast, record it, and play it back in HD.

Almost all the soap opera's are in HD.

Huh? Where'd 'ya get that? There's only 1 soap opera in HD.

I suspect the transition from SD to HD could take longer than the transition from monochrome to color.

I would think not. The issue in the transition from b/w to color in the US had nothing to do with cost per se. The public were clamoring for color in a way they aren't for HD even though the transition to digital is running well ahead of the color transition. 10 years after the color transition started (it began in 1954) most of the prime time programming schedule was still in b/w. NBC being mostly color and ABC and CBS still mostly b/w with color specials and no national newscasts in color yet. Some local stations had converted to color but just about all still did b/w newscasts. In the same time period of the digital transition, the prime time schedule of all 5 networks is mostly HD now with one network newscast in HD, and 2 of the 3 national morning shows in HD as well as one soap opera and local stations starting HD newscasts on a monthly basis now.

The issue for the transition to color was RCA held the patent for NTSC color. RCA also owned NBC. CBS and ABC resisted transitioning to color to keep from putting money directly in their competitors pockets. You saw very little RCA color equipment in CBS and ABC facilities for that very reason. When CBS and ABC was finally forced to go color by the public in the mid to late 60's, they used Norelco cameras and other non RCA equipment to cut down RCA's profit from the patent.

There is a famous story in broadcast circles how in the mid 60's CBS had the rights to a 1959 Fred Astaire dance special that was shot in color. The contract called for CBS to air it in color. CBS had no color playback equipment. They contracted with NBC to play the show from one of their color playback machines at 30 Rock over a telephone video loop line to CBS master control at Black Rock and then on to air.

For stations and production facilities to transition from b/w to color was pretty cheap since unlike the digital transition, most of the equipment in place would pass the color signal with no problem. In the big picture, all they really needed was color cameras and color recording equipment and a few other adds and ends to transition to color. Video switchers and such would pass the color signal unlike todays analog equipment that doesn't pass digital signals and requires a complete change out of the facility at considerable cost to send a digital signal.

Manufacturers do not want to maintain two product lines, SD and HD and broadcasters do not want to maintain two signal paths, SD and HD, so you will see as SD ages out, it will be replaced with HD and within 5 years it is likely HD will become predominant in the marketplace for that very reason.

There is also the issue of syndicated shows. Many local stations do not have the infrastructue in place to receive a "non-network" HD broadcast, record it, and play it back in HD.
Yes, we need to split daytime TV into 2 camps: the network broadcast shows and the syndicated shows. For the network soaps, money, long term trends of declining ratings and the production studio upgrade cycle are presumably the driving factors. Some of the other remaining soaps will probably only go HD when it is time to replace aging SD production equipment as part of the normal replacement cycle.

There has been progress in syndicated HD shows in the past year. Jeopardy and Wheel are HD in most major markets now, but from I understand, still use a special satellite distribution system for the HD version. Several months ago, a number of stations started showing the syndicated Two and a Half Men in HD. The question is where is Pathfire, the most widely used distribution system for syndication programs, on their HD upgrade? There were reports here some months ago that they were working towards providing HD distribution, but I don't recall seeing anything about that since then.

There have been rumors that Oprah and Dr. Phil were planning to upgrade to HD. Oprah can certainly afford it. But they may be waiting for Pathfire and more stations to upgrade to HD syndication capability before they go HD.

I don't watch daytime TV at all. My interest is in seeing syndicated nighttime and weekend series in HD. It would be neat to see the weekend showings in HD of the syndicated Stargate: Atlantis, Star Trek: TOS, or episodes of CSI that I missed when they were originally aired. Or how about the countless showings of Seinfeld, but now in HD? This will happen, but it is not happening very quickly.

I forgot to add. Almost all the soap opera's are in HD. Why can't everything produced from today forward, be in HD?

You mean almost all soap operas are NOT in HD.

Wolfie

I think the only soap in HD is "The Young and The Restless" I had also heard rumors awhile back here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=880892&highlight=PRICE+IS+RIGHT)that "The Price Is Right" was looking at this too but Barker was against it.

There is a famous story in broadcast circles how in the mid 60's CBS had the rights to a 1959 Fred Astaire dance special that was shot in color. The contract called for CBS to air it in color. CBS had no color playback equipment. They contracted with NBC to play the show from one of their color playback machines at 30 Rock over a telephone video loop line to CBS master control at Black Rock and then on to air.



Interesting story. Thanks for sharing.

The question is where is Pathfire, the most widely used distribution system for syndication programs, on their HD upgrade?

I think I read a few months ago that Pathfire has upgraded its distribution system for HD. So now it's a matter of whether individual stations have upgraded their equipment to take advantage of it. In Charlotte, WJZY-DT (the CW affiliate) is now showing syndicated reruns of "Two and a Half Men" in HD.

I still wish that SD shows that have no immediate plans to go HD would at Least go to full 16:9 SD, such as Kitchen Nitmares & MotorWeek do now .....

I think I read a few months ago that Pathfire has upgraded its distribution system for HD. So now it's a matter of whether individual stations have upgraded their equipment to take advantage of it.

Yes, Pathfire has upgraded to HD distribution and will provide a HD server if asked. The problem is the infrastructure at most stations are not HD yet. Many of the stations showing HD programming is doing with it kluges until they can upgrade their facilities in the routine equipment purchasing cycles. Case in point, the local Gannett owned CBS affiliate runs both Wheel and Jepardy. They play the SD version off of a Pathfire server and the HD version off of digital tape because they do not have the HD infrastructure in place yet. It is a operational nightmare to keep those shows in sync since the commercials are played out of the same playback server on both channels. I am sure within a year or so, they will have the infrastructure in place, but right now it is a nightmare.

The good news is that more and more stations are putting the HD infrastructure in now. In my own stations case, we have recently put the digital intrastructure in place, but other than network (and that is the FOX splicer) we do not have any HD programming (our news production equipment is still too new [2001] to change out yet). When we do get it, it will be a simple matter to be sure we have the HD playback equipment (we don't yet) and purchase and plug in a couple of HD cards in the routing and master control equipment and we are ready to go. Many stations are not that far along yet still using analog signal paths. Having just gone through this, it does take almost a year to install all of this and stay on the air at the same time. If a station is lucky enough to be installing a new facility, they can do it about six months or less depending on what they are installing. Either way, it does take time and lots of money.

"The Price Is Right" was looking at this too but Barker was against it.I don't blame him. Who the h*** would want to see Barker in HD??!!:eek:

I had also heard rumors awhile back here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=880892&highlight=PRICE+IS+RIGHT)that "The Price Is Right" was looking at this too but Barker was against it.No wonder. I hope Drew Carey's more into it.

No wonder. I hope Drew Carey's more into it.
Considering Drew often mocks his own looks, I doubt he would mind at all.

I can see him quipping something like, "hey, I'm in HD now - just don't say I didn't warn you..." ;)

Who's at home to watch daytime HD?

I thought the CBS soap, The Young and the Restless, was the only daytime soap in HD.

I thought the CBS soap, The Young and the Restless, was the only daytime soap in HD.

That is correct.

Who's at home to watch daytime HD?
- People who work nights or second shift
- People who work weekends and are off a couple of weekdays a week
- People who work from home
- People who are on leave from work due to injury, maternity or a WGA-induced layoff
- People who choose to stay home with their kids while their spouse works
- Retired people

This doesn't count people who watch:
- at really boring jobs at work
- at repair shops, hospitals and other places where there is a waiting room
- the many people who work at the networks and affiliates that broadcast the stuff.

Can someone tell me some good reasons why the networks are not running towards HD. I mean, the richest black lady in the world, Oprah Winfrey, is still in standard definition. What is up with that?

So many programs could be in high definition because they are being produced as we speak, but is it the broadcasters refusing to broadcast more HD content or are they just not being produced in HD? Anybody have any good answers?

Demographics. Most people "into" HDTV are men, and since daytime television caters to housewives, there is no push for HD.

Yes syndication plays a role, but the biggest reason is demographics. The core viewership for soaps and Oprah are women, and they are not saying "We will not watch these shows unless they are broadcast in HD." If they did it would be different.

Same thing with Survivor. Several times a year people ask why Survivor isn't in HD. It's because their hardcore fans don't care about PQ, they care about the Survivor content. If they refused to watch unless it was in HD, and CBS had market research showing as much, Survivor would have already been in HD now.

Who's at home to watch daytime HD?

My HD DVR always stays at home and unless there is a power outage it's always on available to record a HD program. :)

Something to consider is the long term viewing of programming. Will your show be sold at some point in the future on a distributable medium (i.e. BR, HD-DVD, internet)? It's not likely that the Oprah show will be packaged and sold in the future. So, if you aren't concerned about future value, why spend extra money to post in HD? Make sense?

Demographics. Most people "into" HDTV are men, and since daytime television caters to housewives, there is no push for HD.

Yes syndication plays a role, but the biggest reason is demographics. The core viewership for soaps and Oprah are women, and they are not saying "We will not watch these shows unless they are broadcast in HD." If they did it would be different.

Was about to post the same thing, although you probably put it nicer than I was going to. ;)

Something to consider is the long term viewing of programming. Will your show be sold at some point in the future on a distributable medium (i.e. BR, HD-DVD, internet)? It's not likely that the Oprah show will be packaged and sold in the future. So, if you aren't concerned about future value, why spend extra money to post in HD? Make sense?
Actually, there have been several DVD releases of some of the bigger Oprah shows. However, I don't think people would rush out and buy them based on whether they were HD or not. Buy stuff from Oprah in SD is like buying a Suburu - it's not the best transportation out there, but those suckers pretty much sell themselves... ;)

You saw very little RCA color equipment in CBS and ABC facilities for that very reason. When CBS and ABC was finally forced to go color by the public in the mid to late 60's, they used Norelco cameras and other non RCA equipment to cut down RCA's profit from the patent.

Wasn't there also an issue that RCA cameras didn't perform as well as the newer Philips/Norelco models? (This may have been because RCA models, being first, used IOs (Vidicons?) rather than Plumbicons?)

Certainly later models of RCAs had a pretty poor reputation in the UK (Some commercial stations used them at one point over here)

- People who work nights or second shift
- People who work weekends and are off a couple of weekdays a week
- People who work from home
- People who are on leave from work due to injury, maternity or a WGA-induced layoff
- People who choose to stay home with their kids while their spouse works
- Retired people

This doesn't count people who watch:
- at really boring jobs at work
- at repair shops, hospitals and other places where there is a waiting room
- the many people who work at the networks and affiliates that broadcast the stuff.

I'll be politically incorrect and just say 'women'.:)

Wasn't there also an issue that RCA cameras didn't perform as well as the newer Philips/Norelco models? (This may have been because RCA models, being first, used IOs (Vidicons?) rather than Plumbicons?)

Certainly later models of RCAs had a pretty poor reputation in the UK (Some commercial stations used them at one point over here)

Some of the early color models were pretty temperamental I hear. The TK-42 was a pretty good camera I hear, it was before my time, but the TK-47 was the REAL workhorse. That was the camera that was used on the Tonight Show and the Today show and Saturday Night Live in the 70's and 80's. We had 3 TK-47's. We bought 2 in 1981 and bought a used 1980 demo model in 1983 and ran all three of those cameras until 1994 when we bought our current Phillips LDK-9s. Many stations had the 47's. They made a great picture and weren't too difficult to operate or repair. As they aged out and there was no more RCA service or parts, they got pretty tough to live with, but they always made a great picture and the chroma was always true. I was trying to remember which tube the 47's used and orthicons stick in my mind but I really can't remember back that far (we always got Marconi tubes, they seem to look the best). I was just getting in to TV and cameras was not on my manifest to learn!

We had three yarn balls we kept on the back of the chip chart, red, green blue and we used those as the "color standard" and as long as the colors of those yarn balls were true, we knew we were on target. It was also those yarn balls is why we bought the LDK-9s over the Sony models. The reds never looked as good with the Sony's as with the Phillips. Not sure what we will go with when we retire the LDK's.

- People who work nights or second shift
- People who work weekends and are off a couple of weekdays a week
- People who work from home
- People who are on leave from work due to injury, maternity or a WGA-induced layoff
- People who choose to stay home with their kids while their spouse works
- Retired people

This doesn't count people who watch:
- at really boring jobs at work
- at repair shops, hospitals and other places where there is a waiting room
- the many people who work at the networks and affiliates that broadcast the stuff.

Also people who DVR the shows.

Since most higher income, male, and other viewers are away from the TV during the day there isn't much of a demand for HDTV. Look at local advertising (I work in a job where most of my off days are during the week) on daytime TV: Personal Injury lawyers, trade schools, "Blue Hippo" ripoff-scams and their ilk, and Infomercials during times when the holdovers from the Great Talk Show Flood of the early-mid 1990's and the recently popular "court" shows aren't airing.

As for Soaps The Young And The Restless (CBS) is the only one in HD. Others including the three on ABC and NBC's last offering, Days Of Our Lives are SD. A syndicated newspaper article noted that the days of Soaps are numbered.

If syndicated talk shows finally go HD, expect Oprah to break though although it will be much like The View and soft filtering.

Current Stable of *Network* HDTV before primtime: (does not count local news or syndicated HD like Wheel, etc)

ABC: GMA (News--2 hours), The View (talk--1 hr)
CBS: The Young And The Restless (soap--1 hr)
NBC: Today (News--4 hours), NBC Nightly News (30min)

What irks me most than anything is that "Price Is Right" is shot in an HD-ready facility with HD cameras, yet the show is still shot/aired in SD using the HD equipment. Just a flip of a switch somewhere and we could be seeing Drew give away cars and the 'beauties' showing off spas in glorious HD! :mad:

What irks me most than anything is that "Price Is Right" is shot in an HD-ready facility with HD cameras, yet the show is still shot/aired in SD using the HD equipment. Just a flip of a switch somewhere and we could be seeing Drew give away cars and the 'beauties' showing off spas in glorious HD! :mad:
No it's not. The cameras are HD, but the rest of the plant is not. It's several hundred thousand dollars away from "a flip of a switch" with no expectation of additional return on the investment. People aren't going to tune in long term just because the show is HD.

Just a flip of a switch somewhere and we could be seeing Drew give away cars and the 'beauties' showing off spas in glorious HD! :mad:

Can I come live in your world dad? It is SOOOOOOOOOO much easier than mine! ;)

Can I come live in your world dad? It is SOOOOOOOOOO much easier than mine! ;)
I wish I could, then just my having an HDTV set would make all the shows I watch HD... ;)

...oh wait, there are people out there that think that's true. :eek:

Who's at home to watch daytime HD?

Hausfraus.

[Nostalgic Rant]

The Tonight Show used TK44s for most of the Carson years which utilized 3 30mm plumbicons. The TK 40/41 were the first production compatible color cameras and used 3 image orthicon tubes. The TK42/43 used one image orthicon in the luminance channel and three vidicons in the color channels.

The Norelco PC60, PC70 and PC72 cameras had nearly identical looking cameras heads and used 3 30mm plumbicons. The PC70s were the most popular, but they had an interesting defect in that the viewfinder horizontal deflection would crosstalk into the video because the driver transformer and flyback were right behind the video amplifiers. It was often referred to as "viewfinder feedback" and was visible as ringing stripes on the left side of the screen. The effect looked different on each camera. One can see this on shows like "All In The Family" (the earlier CBS ones but not the later Metromedia tapings which used RCAs).

As far as the quality, the RCA cameras had the potential to look really good. The Tonight Show was a good example. The peak frequency of the image enhancer in the Colorplexer was at NTSC subcarrier frequency (3.58 Mhz) and Carson's suit jacket would sometimes have alot of rainbow color patterns when viewed on notch filter color TVs.

While Ampex developed the quaduplex VTR, it was RCA that adapted it to color. This was still in the low band days and the color was quite noisy and subject to moire. Ampex's move to high band in 1964 on the VR2000 was a major improvement to color recoding that created playbacks which were hard to tell from live. The VR2000 was a staple of the broadcast industry and even NBC Burbank had some tucked behind all the RCA machines for their most important show: The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson.

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/6866/vr20002kx4.jpg

The later AVR-1 machine made this one look small.[/Nostalgic Rant]

We now return you to your daytime HD broadcast.

The reason many of these private studios have not gone HD yet is simple business economics. When a comapny buys say a Xerox machine, it has a targeted life on paper of say, 5 years. If you replace it before that, you have to write down a loss. Same with production equipment. The owners of these private studio facilities can't just throw out SD equipment that is still being written down. Now they may be forced to if say the contracted show demands HD but barring that there is no incentive.

When you buy a new projector at home, that's it. It's a luxery and cannot be written off or payed down with tax incentatives (at least legally). In a business it's different. You have all kinds of accounting tricks to get the total purchase cost down over the years of ownership.

Note: I am not an accountant so perhaps someone else can explain this better. I just know the principals of this from managing engineering budgets and being told "no, you aren't going to do that" by the finnancial management.

Did Wheel and Jeopardy go HD because of equipment replacement schedules, or was that an extra expenditure on Sony's part?

I'm not surprised TPIR is not in HD. Neither is The Early Show. I would imagine the investment in CBS News is worth much more over the long term than any investment in TPIR HD, and CBS hasn't found a reason to commit its news division to HD yet. (Although I think I read something about plans to put Evening News in HD before the election, but that's likely spurred by Katie's tanking ratings and CBS making every desperate attempt possible to keep competitive.)

Even at NBC, I'd wager most of the push towards HD in daytime/news is designed primarily to make NBC an attractive buy if/when GE decides to dump it.

People aren't going to tune in long term just because the show is HD.

Believe me, I for one DON"T tune in to a lot of shows because the AREN'T HD.

Who's at home to watch daytime HD?

Seriously you should be at work during the day...reading AVS Threads of course.:D

You mean almost all soap operas are NOT in HD.

Wolfie

Whoops. My mistake. I just checked and only one soap opera is in HD.

Who's at home to watch daytime HD?

With my HD TIVO doing recording and with enough hard drive space for 175 hours of HD recorded content, I am more likely to record more day time shows and watch them whenever.

Did Wheel and Jeopardy go HD because of equipment replacement schedules, or was that an extra expenditure on Sony's part?
That was purely a promotional effort on the part of Sony to sell their HD gear.

[Nostalgic Rant]

The Tonight Show used TK44s for most of the Carson years which utilized 3 30mm plumbicons. The TK 40/41 were the first production compatible color cameras and used 3 image orthicon tubes. The TK42/43 used one image orthicon in the luminance channel and three vidicons in the color channels.


IOs and colour were never a great mix were they? The halation (?) issues (peak highlights burned out to BLACK not white!) were a flaw in otherwise very good performance in B&W but very odd in colour - hence the use of stickier, softer Vidicons for chroma in some models, but still a sharper IO in the luma channel in 4 tube models.

AIUI the 4 tube EMI 2001 was originally equipped with Vidicons, but the BBC rejected it, and only accepted it when it was redesigned with Plumbicons. The resulting camera was brought into service in the 60s and was still in use well into the mid-80s (last units were retired from EastEnders drama duty in 1991 apparently). The 4 tube design (1 for luminance, 3 for R,G,B) combined with a very BBC-bespoke chroma matrix mean BBC EMI-2001 pictures have a very distinctive look - instantly recognisable. Sharp, but with relatively pale, desaturated flesh-tones. Classic London studio drama in the 70s was almost universally shot on them - from Doctor Who to I, Claudius. Watching 2" QUAD recordings of drama shot on these formats, Transform decoded (best PAL decoder around) to component, it is amazing how sharp and clean the pictures can be in decent light levels.


The Norelco PC60, PC70 and PC72 cameras had nearly identical looking cameras heads and used 3 30mm plumbicons. The PC70s were the most popular, but they had an interesting defect in that the viewfinder horizontal deflection would crosstalk into the video because the driver transformer and flyback were right behind the video amplifiers. It was often referred to as "viewfinder feedback" and was visible as ringing stripes on the left side of the screen. The effect looked different on each camera. One can see this on shows like "All In The Family" (the earlier CBS ones but not the later Metromedia tapings which used RCAs).


PC60s and 70s were used by the BBC on their first generation colour OB units ISTR - and some were used in TV Centre when it went colour. My father was an original colour Vision Supervisor in OBs and remembers them giving good pictures at Wimbledon in the 60s...


As far as the quality, the RCA cameras had the potential to look really good. The Tonight Show was a good example. The peak frequency of the image enhancer in the Colorplexer was at NTSC subcarrier frequency (3.58 Mhz) and Carson's suit jacket would sometimes have alot of rainbow color patterns when viewed on notch filter color TVs.


Think it was the later TK47s which were used in the UK - and were not well liked...


While Ampex developed the quaduplex VTR, it was RCA that adapted it to color. This was still in the low band days and the color was quite noisy and subject to moire. Ampex's move to high band in 1964 on the VR2000 was a major improvement to color recoding that created playbacks which were hard to tell from live. The VR2000 was a staple of the broadcast industry and even NBC Burbank had some tucked behind all the RCA machines for their most important show: The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson.


Think we were High-band only for PAL 2" Quad in the UK - we switched to colour later, when High-band was standard I guess.

For more info on UK cameras and studios I can recommend the excellent site. It is excellent both in anecdotes and pretty comprehensive about production in London (and outside)

http://www.tvstudiohistory.co.uk

An interesting issue with 4 tube designs is that the luminance spectral weighting is purely the response of the tube and any filters that precede it. In 3 imager designs this is accomplished by the luminance matrix. I saw enhancements by one broadcaster that optimized the filters to better match visual spectral sensitivity. The EMI 2001's desaturated flesh tones may have been caused by too high of a luminance level, and a slight cyan filter may have helped. Water under the bridge now.

An interesting issue with 4 tube designs is that the luminance spectral weighting is purely the response of the tube and any filters that precede it. In 3 imager designs this is accomplished by the luminance matrix. I saw enhancements by one broadcaster that optimized the filters to better match visual spectral sensitivity. The EMI 2001's desaturated flesh tones may have been caused by too high of a luminance level, and a slight cyan filter may have helped. Water under the bridge now.

The EMI2001 had TWO luminance signals whizzing around inside - one derived from the RGB tubes and one derived from the luminance tube. ISTR that both signals were used to create the luminance information - not just the luminance tube. ISTR that LF information came from the RGB and HF came from the luminance tubes - and that there were interesting issues resulting. I can't recall which was used for aperture correction.

AIUI one advantage of 4 tube cameras was that the luminance channel was correctly gamma corrected - whereas with 3 tube designs the luminance was a sum of gamma corrected RGB signals, which wasn't quite the same thing?

As for the EMI colourimetry, the slightly desaturated fleshtone was, I believe, intentional - as that was the "BBC look" that they were trying to achieve.

Whatever the case - the 2001 delivered incredibly sharp pictures for its era - and although a bit noisy in low-light, and very bulky, it delivered sterling service - staying in service in studios for more than 20 years. (They were not massively popular in OBs because they were huge, heavy, and used multicore cables - as soon as triax became viable, OBs shifted to triax based cameras very quickly)
Apologies for being totally off topic.

The bulk of my experience was on the Philips variety, PC60 and PC70, with FAR too much experience on the LDK5, but I've worked a lot on GE and RCA cameras. The PC72 was called something else in Europe (LDK2, I think.) The US-developed PC100 made far better pictures than the LDK5, even after the optics were converted to LDK optics. Never could figure out why... The PC100 had some problems early on that tainted the line for life, but once the issues were resolved they worked fine for many years.

Then the Japanese came out with cameras that were far more reliable and capable (Ikegami preferred, but Sony was OK, plus others.) They quickly replaced the Norelco, Philips, RCA, Thomson, and even Fernseh cameras that were used over here.

Philips/BTS/Thomson/Grass Valley (pick whichever name you like) have made a comeback in the HD Broadcast market (and digital cinema) but the Japanese still rule the roost in cameras, at least in North America.

The bulk of my experience was on the Philips variety, PC60 and PC70, with FAR too much experience on the LDK5, but I've worked a lot on GE and RCA cameras. The PC72 was called something else in Europe (LDK2, I think.) The US-developed PC100 made far better pictures than the LDK5, even after the optics were converted to LDK optics. Never could figure out why... The PC100 had some problems early on that tainted the line for life, but once the issues were resolved they worked fine for many years.



British camera manufacturers continued to produce models that were bought by UK broadcasters throughout the 70s and 80s - EMI, Marconi and Link were all significant players. For some reason the BBC didn't buy latter-day Marconis and instead concentrated on Links, until Link went belly up trying to make the Link 130 reliable (the BBC had already bought lenses for the 130s so bought Thomsons as they were compatible.) Marconi sold mainly to the commercial broadcasters in the UK - and abroad.

BBC Studios were still Link eqipped until the late 80s - when Thomsons were introduced.

News used some Ikes - as did OBs, along with LDK5s, LDK(5)14s, Fernsehs, and Sony 330s.

Once CCDs arrived it was Philips BTS, Sony, Thomson or Ikegami in the UK - with a few Hitachis. Suspect Thomson and Philips BTS did better in Europe because the EU introduced an anti-dumping levy on 3CCD Japanese cameras (which Ikegami got round with their 4CCD models I believe, and I think Sony started fabricating in the EU?)

BBC OBs went entirely Sony CCD (BVP70s/370s mainly, with a few early 7s) by the 90s - and I think they produced better pictures than many of the TV Centre Thomson studios 1647s and similar.


Then the Japanese came out with cameras that were far more reliable and capable (Ikegami preferred, but Sony was OK, plus others.) They quickly replaced the Norelco, Philips, RCA, Thomson, and even Fernseh cameras that were used over here.

Philips/BTS/Thomson/Grass Valley (pick whichever name you like) have made a comeback in the HD Broadcast market (and digital cinema) but the Japanese still rule the roost in cameras, at least in North America.

Ironically - the BBC is moving to be entirely Sony at TV Centre (E30s in SD studios and HDC1500s in HD studios) and in OBs - yet Philips are now making a decent camera. (At least one News studio equipped with LDK100s has had them replaced with E30s) There are a few Thomson 1657 studios still running - notably the BBC Sport studio.

There are a few Philip shops still - Visions (now NEP Visions) is pretty heavily equipped with LDKs in SD and HD for example. Many of the commercial studios (formerly ITV studios) are still running 16:9 SD Ikegamis.

I work mostly 6am-2pm, with different days off every week. I watch a lot of tv in late afternoons. At that time, my only HD choice is PBS. I hardly ever watched PBS until I got my first HDTV earlier this year. Now over half of my viewing is PBS! I am watching a Nature episode about ravens as I write this.

Wasn't there also an issue that RCA cameras didn't perform as well as the newer Philips/Norelco models? (This may have been because RCA models, being first, used IOs (Vidicons?) rather than Plumbicons?)

When watching variety shows (remember them?) you could often see the cameras. I can recall some shows looked significantly better than others and eventually realized the good looking video was coming from Philips/Norelco cameras. As I recall, ABC used these and their programs always looked better to me. I assumed it was because they came to the game later and were benefiting from having newer gear.

People aren't going to tune in long term just because the show is HD.

Perhaps, but some people will tune out if something isn't HD. In my case a show needs to be quite compelling for me to watch an SD broadcast, while I'll casually view something in HD.

Perhaps, but some people will tune out if something isn't HD. In my case a show needs to be quite compelling for me to watch an SD broadcast, while I'll casually view something in HD.
The question is, how often do you actually ever watch the show. If not often, would HD make you start?

The thing is, the main core audience probably neither cares nor even watches HD.

I have never quit watching a show because it was not in HD. On the other hand I no longer check out a new show if it is not in HD.

Rick R

One thing I think we all need to remember here. The person who is on AVSForum is one who is looking for more than just to be mesmerized by TV for hours on end which is what most of the general viewing public wants. To them, TV is just TV and as long as they can make out the actors without too much effort, they are happy. People on AVSForum want more out of their TV experience. Unfortunately, we are in a small minority so we are well above the lowest common denominator so we have to put up with it, much to our discontent.

Also people who DVR the shows.

Yeah, I have one of these at home to tape my daytime shows for me:

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/6866/vr20002kx4.jpg

I'm thinking about getting a newer model. ;)

Yeah, get the newer model !!! :D

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/6348/avr1jy6.jpg

Click here (http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/1751/avr12bx7.jpg) for the works in a drawer view.

Oh you guys...!:D

BTW each of those "newer" machines cost over $100K in 1971 dollars! HD is cheap by comparison.

A lot fewer people watch a given television station today than did in 1971. If viewing was at 1971 levels, the transition to HD would've been over several years ago.

Not only is the audience declining overall, but there are 300+ networks all fighting for eyeballs, instead of a handful.

Yeah, get the newer model !!! :D
You mean the AVR-1? Nah, I'll stick with my VR2000 until Ampex gets the bugs out of their new models. I hate it when I come home and my stories aren't on tape.

[Of course I looked the models up in a book.]

If viewing was at 1971 levels, the transition to HD would've been over several years ago.The transition to color took alot longer.