Turner Classic Movies (TCM) in HDTV! - Page 47

Great posts friends.


TCM-HD is a failure that may as well not exist.
I'm certain Ted Turner would not suffer these
managers if he were still in charge.

We should stop congratulating TCM for their past (good) work and
criticize them for the mess they're in.


It's been 3 years since TCM-HD showed up, and even back in 2009 they were
considered to be long overdue for setting up an HD channel.


The short-sighted management at Warner/TCM are addicted
to the low dollar cost of Standard Definition.


Delivering HD means losing some money for the sake of the library.

Too bad no one at Warner/TCM has the guts to make it happen.


Steve

I've been called many things around here but until now "stupid" hadn't been one of them. Wouldn't it have been better judgment, not to mention a hell of a lot more courteous, simply to state your disagreement with my decision not to watch movies on TCM rather than characterizing it as "stupid"? Think about it.

I disagree because that has not been the history of the movie execs. First they didn't like the idea of progressive scan DVD players, remember that? They don't allow upscaling over component inputs and at least they may have recognized that folly when it came to Bluray and allowed HD over component (but still not upscaling). They are a technically illiterate bunch of bean counters who make some pretty poor decisions when it comes to technology.

When discussing this one needs to look at resources and industry sites. For instance a lot of people didn't know that the industry had a log of budget cutbacks in production over the past few years. I know from an award winning editor that they cut the show he was editing from three editors to two. They did the same with writers, etc. And look how many movies get greenlit because there is a small cast and it is reality documentary style.

I find WB execs are diametrically opposed in business model to companies like Sony and Lionsgate who seem to believe in getting their content out there and making money on it while they can. I've the two models in game industry (where I work) too. WB seems to believe they have some crown jewels to protect when it comes to classic films. We can thank Disney and the DMCA for that as many of those "classics" would be public domain by now.

There is a tendency for the public to believe that because someone has become at CEO of a company that they are super geniuses and can make all the right decisions (like Jamie Dimon eh). No they make mistakes (like Jamie Dimon).

... no, but I bet PepsiCo corporate would rather use NAVL to move one of their subsidiary restaurants if needed, unless for some reason it would be cheaper to us another company. I've also seen them build joint KFC/Pizza Hut/Taco Bell's in the same building. Big corps like to setup "synergies" and such.

A channel not being able to present movies in HD, but SD is fine and dandy, because a different subsidiary of the same parent company owns the rights and won't let them is downright ludicrous. That doesn't mean I think TCM can somehow force Time Warner to make HD scans of their films available. Time Warner owns TCM, so in essence its Time Warner being cheap asses. This is a company that made BILLIONS of dollars in profit last year.

TCM presents their films in HD format in Europe (even though they are not in HD format, yet???). Two questions:
1. How?
2. Why?

Buddy, are you really that clueless that you didn't know I was using parody of the film classic of the restored Sherlock Holmes series staring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce?

Are you just a TCM apologist? Just another I got here first with my hat and became the chief in thought and police of this thread ?

So therefore, I own every thought here. I don't have to connect dots in context to gather evidence through observation or apply critical thinking skills?

Critical" in this context does not mean "disapproval" or "negative". It does mean finding the truth without having someone thinking for you.

You get all ignorant because I dare to challenge the theory of "No one has any way of knowing" why TCM/Turner and WB are doing what they are doing?

Sorry, some can deduct what they do and think its wrong.

Have you check the tin in your own hat lately?

PS. Save your usual dismissive tripe when challenged.

Of course a number (but not all) of the films that TCM shows are available in HD; check BluRay listings.

"How?" Obviously the facility used is HD. As it was put together more recently than the US facility in Atlanta, this is not surprising.

"Why?" If you have the films in HD and an HD facility, why not?

There's been a lot of speculation in this thread about why TCMHD is not yet true HD. And there's probably a degree of truth in some of it: licensing could be an issue (e.g. TCM can only show films in the WB and TEC libraries if they are not currently licensed to a third party); not all the films have yet been transferred to HD. But it's mainly a technical matter, which costs money to fix.

No, I am not an employee of TCM or WB.

To say that there is no evidence that TCM/Tuner Inc and WB are not in collusion to keep HD content off TCM is not recognizing what is called, a coercive monopoly.

Let the reader deicide if this glove fits TCM/Tuner Inc and WB.

There are comparable examples in history to TCM/Tuner Inc and WB. Where a company is not a government-granted monopoly is claimed to have a coercive monopoly. A coercive monopoly is a business concern like a supplier that prohibits competitors from entering the field, with the natural result being that the Company is able to make pricing and production decisions independent of competitive forces. But coercive monopoly need not be merely a “sole supplier” of a particular kind of goods or service (a monopoly), but it is a monopoly where there is no opportunity to compete through means such as “technological or product innovation.” When a coercive monopoly is securely shielded and anti-trust action can be initiated to resolve the perceived problem. For example, in United States v. Microsoft The Plaintiff's Finding of Fact alleged that Microsoft "coerced" Apple Computer to enter into contracts resulting in the prohibition of competition Also, according to economist Murray Rothbard, "a coercive monopolist will tend to perform its service badly and inefficiently."

Of course there begs the question of just how well some of those older films are going to look in HD given the film grain they were shot on?

They won't look any worse in true HD vs upconverted HD and those films that are HD quality will look much better.
My thought is it's just a rights issue. Broadcasting in true HD may cost TCM more money than they care to pay, for a somewhat basic channel. I'm guessing channels like MGM or Sony may be in a higher tier and therefor have more money to work with??

I really don't buy the excuse that because all movies aren't available in HD that they would purposely downconvert real HD prints only to then upconvert them for broadcast, just makes no sense. After all HDTV channels broadcast upconverted HD all the time(although maybe not on the network level?) I've never seen a HD version of things like Threes Company, Saved By The Bell, All In The Family, etc. and people can cope even though they are broadcast on a HD channel. Why wouldn't the same people be able to cope with upconverted SD programming like Laural and Hardy, Charley Chase, The Little Rascals, etc. on TCM HD?

Boy our friend from France Urga sure brought this thread back to life, before his HD screen shots this thread was almost dead, now it's usually near the top of the list, a little instigator he is......

"But it's mainly a technical matter, which costs money to fix."

What technical matter are you talking about? Are you talking about scanning the films themselves to create an HD data file? Are you saying that there are technical problems with the legal process as far as the actual licensing goes? Or, are you talking about the equipment to actually distribute(broadcast) the HD file?

The way I'm reading your comment is that it is a known fact as to why TCM is not broadcasting HD content. Could you please be more specific as to what "technical matter" it is that is preventing us from seeing HD content on TCM?

I'm 100% sure that Three's Company was videotaped (or maybe the rare outdoor scene was filmed), I also think All In the Family was as well. So there is no going back to the original film and making an HD print. Saved By the Bell was also probably taped, I'm not sure, and I doubt theres the demand out there for it to justify an HD transfer. I can certainly cope with upconverted SD when an HD version is impossible.

The big problem most of us have with TCM is not that they haven't made an HD transfer for their entire library. Its that they sometimes play movies in SD that ALREADY HAVE an HD master. I'm to the point that I will not watching any SD programming that IMO should be in HD.

And yes there is a BIG difference in quality between SD and HD versions of at least some of the movies TCM plays. Watch the Bluray of Ben-hur if your skeptical.

Hopefully liked they looked in the theater.

larry

I agree, which is why I chose those titles and not ones that were originally shot on film(such as Hogans Heroes, Gilligans Island etc.) that could have several reasons for you not seeing them broadcast in HD. Programs that are SD by nature are broadcast all the time on HD channels(although again probably not on the major network level). Other channels don't downconvert all their programming just because not all their programming isn't available in HD.
We seem to be in agreement but I just wanted to clarify why I chose those particular titles(all of which are sitting on a shelf beside me in glorious SD DVDs)

I think I misinterpreted your previous post .

Hello ,
This evening "African Queen" is the program on TCM HD:

http://tcmcinema.fr/films/fiche/the-...en-1951_24323/

Film restored 4K for Blu Ray.
I would make photos of this film on the occasion...

TCM HD Fr .
A few re-mastered HD native 1920x1080i films:

http://tcmcinema.fr/tcm-en-haute-definition/

Why watch it upconverted on TCM when we can just watch the very well done Blu-ray? Even the lack of lossless audio on the disc becomes meaningless when it's still likely going to sound the same or better than on TCM.

Originally Posted by keenan
Or, are you talking about the equipment to actually distribute(broadcast) the HD?


Ken and I are on the same page here.

I did not Blu ray.

Which given the way studios took care of their "crown" jewels may often mean they may only have scratched theatrical prints in storage. Thus the expense is restoring. But then I do recall when DVD started out Philips pushed their Spirit telecine and suggested that studios transfer to HD digital masters for the future HDTV market.

So you don't know for sure then, like the rest of us you're just guessing at the reason for the lack of HD. Your original post read as if it was a fact that it was a technical reason(at the TCM broadcast facility).

It seems odd that Turner has been distributing HD on it's other channels for years now, live sports on several of them, but can't seem to manage it on TCM.

It's not an upconvert for him.

I agree with Ken and others that it's probably a technical reason why TCM is not broadcasting actual HD. Think about this. All the studio content, Robert Osborne's intros and outros, The Essentials, guest programmers, etc, are shown in widescreen. This leads you to believe that it is being shot in HD, but presented in SD. That, most likely, means it's not a rights issue with the films, but a technical issue with the broadcast facility that prevents them from broadcasting actual HD content. Now, while we do not know if this is 100% fact, it's a pretty reasonable assumption. There really can be no other explanation for why the studio content is not, at the very least, presented in HD.

So, to drill down, all indications point to it not being a technical issue at all, but a money issue, as the equipment to create and broadcast HD has been around for many, many years. Why would TCM have an equipment problem when several hundred other channels have no problem at all creating and transmitting HD content? Evidently Turner has decided that the expense to upgrade their production and broadcast facility to distribute HD is not worth the cost, yet. Maybe they need to increase the cost to the MSOs in order to pay for a channel they already sell, and label, as "HD". I wouldn't mind paying an extra .50¢ or so on my cable bill to get a true HD signal from TCM, apparently not enough people out there will though, hence we still get SD on an HD channel.

Hello ,

Yes, it not to complain in France, there is a good HD on TCM.
Most of the restored films HD are superb. : Cool:

Please, don't rub it in.