or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Philadelphia, PA - Comcast
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Philadelphia, PA - Comcast - Page 6

post #151 of 10685
Quote:


If we run 16:9, the upconverted 4:3 format will look "squatty" and someone won't like it.
If we run 4:3, you'll enjoy black sidebars and a small picture on your huge screen...and someone will complain.
The 14:9 upconversion is based on our opinion that it is the least objectionable option.

As more true HD programming becomes available, this will become a mute issue.

Try being a little patient. There's not much at the top and bottom of the screen on Jerry Springer anyway.

g reiger.
i realize that was somewhat of a joke but dont watch springer. the less i see of him the better. but...

channels 3,6,10 and 29 all show the digital channel with barely any cropping at all. and have been this way for, what 1, 2 years or so.
so anyone who will turn in to your channel are already used to seeing the image in a 4x3 with black bars on the side.

what 17 does is not ordinary and is very strange to see when you turn on the channel and it is blown up large like that and cropped.

it seems more like it is possable that you (17) are doing this to draw some attention to the channel.

again all the other channels show the proper aspect ratio including the other new channel, 57 digital.

people are more likely to think something is wrong with the braodcast if they see the way 17 is compared to every other channel in philly.

i apolagize if a came acroos a bit harsh in the post you quoted but origional or maybe natural aspect ratio is much easier on the eye.

and i would guess almost all of the people who buy a widescreen tv are aware of the 4x3 ratio for regular broadcast tv and know and expect to see the bars on the side.
post #152 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by pabuwal
I am not familiar with that pattern. What viewing area does that emphasize?

Would this explain why I receive Chs. 57, 6, and 3 fine and not Ch. 17 here in Somerset, NJ (near New Brunswick and Piscatway)? Ch. 29 and 10 are on low power so I do not include them.

Thanks.

yes this is why you have trouble with Ch. 17
post #153 of 10685
Gunnar,

Please count me as a vote against the current format.

I'm using a Sony HD200 receiver with a Sony 34XBR800 16:9 TV. When I watch your station, I see essentially the whole screen full, but the top and bottom of the picture is cut off. I feel that this is unwatchable.

I would recommend that you broadcast 4:3 in 4:3, or at least in the same ratio that WPVI 6 is using.

The main issue is this - with the way that you are broadcasting, I CAN'T possibly get back the part of the picture that is missing. On the other hand, if you broadcast in 4:3, a user with a 16:9 TV could use the stretch modes on their TV to produce the same effect as your current broadcast.

You are the only station in Philadelphia (out of 7) that causes this problem for me. Please reconsider the format that you are using.
post #154 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by MSmith
Gunnar,

Please count me as a vote against the current format.

I'm using a Sony HD200 receiver with a Sony 34XBR800 16:9 TV. When I watch your station, I see essentially the whole screen full, but the top and bottom of the picture is cut off. I feel that this is unwatchable.

I would recommend that you broadcast 4:3 in 4:3, or at least in the same ratio that WPVI 6 is using.

The main issue is this - with the way that you are broadcasting, I CAN'T possibly get back the part of the picture that is missing. On the other hand, if you broadcast in 4:3, a user with a 16:9 TV could use the stretch modes on their TV to produce the same effect as your current broadcast.

You are the only station in Philadelphia (out of 7) that causes this problem for me. Please reconsider the format that you are using.

post #155 of 10685
I cannot get 32-1 for the life of me. I have a DTC-100 receiver. Is there a problem with my receiver or is this just a weak signal? I get 54 at 76 and nothing else under 60 (except 55 which does not even register). 32 Does not even show up on a channel search! Is anyone else having the same problems? Yes I am using a preamp.
post #156 of 10685
OK, we give up...

You'll note that we're now passing 4:3 unformatted.

Let us know what you think.

-Gunnar
post #157 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by RTrueman
Now that's funny!

Hey, grieger! Thanks for giving us some of the inside scoop at 17. I kinda like the 14:9 format, but what do I know! I'd like to second (or third) the opinion about making the Bug translucent or, even better, removing it after some delay. Keep us informed!

Later.

Rob

Rob,

Unfortunately, we don't have the switching capability (yet) to drop the logo at will.
The choices at present are On or Off, transparency and position.

As DTV gains momentum (we hope) and starts generating revenue, we'll be adding the equipment necessary for better control of the stream.

-Gunnar
post #158 of 10685
gunnar that looks fabulous.
it is jenny jones though.
but the picture looks better, it looks tighter and a little clearer because of that.
i just got your PM and thanks for at least giving it a shot.

tony
post #159 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by grieger
OK, we give up...

You'll note that we're now passing 4:3 unformatted.

Let us know what you think.

-Gunnar

Darn, I actually liked the 14:9 -- less worry about burn-in. Looked almost widescreen. Don't care about OAR for non-HDTV programming anyway.

I do note that the WB logo on the right appears too low. I know this could be an overscan issue, but wondering if others see the very bottom of the WB logo cut-off slightly.

Shouldn't there be some screen space between the bottom of the logo and the edge of the screen?

Also, the wphl local logo on the left should definitely be translucent. All other stations have that translucent as well. Looks cooler that way too.


Eric
post #160 of 10685
about burn in. yes this is an issue. fortunately some have an hd box that is capable of changing the aspect ratio by zooming in the image to fill the screen. i have this ability but still want to see the entire image available.
someone else mentioned that 6abc slightly crops so it isnt as drastic as the 14x9 crop. maybe you could look at that as a possability.

i think 29 does the same thing as 6.
post #161 of 10685
Quote:


I cannot get 32-1 for the life of me. I have a DTC-100 receiver. Is there a problem with my receiver or is this just a weak signal? I get 54 at 76 and nothing else under 60 (except 55 which does not even register). 32 Does not even show up on a channel search! Is anyone else having the same problems? Yes I am using a preamp.

Yes, I have the same problem. I'm using a pre-amp with a Dish 6000. Please update your profile to show your location. Where are you? I'm located right on the Bethlehem Township/Palmer Township line. I get WB17 (54-1) at over 75%, and pick up every other Philadelphia station reliably (except WCAU on low power) except 32-1.
post #162 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by whotony
about burn in. yes this is an issue. fortunately some have an hd box that is capable of changing the aspect ratio by zooming in the image to fill the screen. i have this ability but still want to see the entire image available.
someone else mentioned that 6abc slightly crops so it isnt as drastic as the 14x9 crop. maybe you could look at that as a possability.

i think 29 does the same thing as 6.

Since the sidebars are part of the image on the digital channels, I can only fill the screen (on 4 x 3 material on the digital channel), if I lie to my set-top box and tell it I have a 4 x 3 TV. I can then use zoom on 4 x 3 and fill the entire screen -- this also chops off a little from the top/bottom. I have a samsung t151 set top box.

So I would rather see 14 x 9, where I don't have to change anything at all and most of the screen is filled. Either way, I lose some stuff top/bottom (whether WPHL does it, or I do it via my Samsung T151).

Eric]
post #163 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by caesar1
Since the sidebars are part of the image on the digital channels, I can only fill the screen (on 4 x 3 material on the digital channel), if I lie to my set-top box and tell it I have a 4 x 3 TV. I can then use zoom on 4 x 3 and fill the entire screen -- this also chops off a little from the top/bottom. I have a samsung t151 set top box.

So I would rather see 14 x 9, where I don't have to change anything at all and most of the screen is filled. Either way, I lose some stuff top/bottom (whether WPHL does it, or I do it via my Samsung T151).

Eric]

I agree with caesar1. Not having to fuss with the aspect ratio is worth losing a small amount of information on the top and bottom. Perhaps we should take a vote and let everyone be heard on this matter. What do you think Gunnar?
post #164 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by grieger
We're using an inverted skull pattern.

-gr

grieger,

I don't understand why Ch. 17 would broadcast a digital signal that is not available to their entire viewing population.

I receive Ch 17 analog very well, receive Ch. 17 on my cable system and receive every other digital channel very well.

Yet, Ch. 17 has made a decision that precludes me from receiving their digital broadcasts.


Why is that??
post #165 of 10685
You'll never get a concensus here, everyone has a different opinion.

If you're worried about burn-in, what difference does it make if the bars are at the 4:3 positions or the 14:6 positions? You still have bars no matter what.

Personally, I think the best course of action is to leave the image unadulterated at 4:3. This is the way those programs were meant to be viewed. Unstretched. Allow each viewer to stretch or not with their own equipment. That's why aspect ratio control is a big feature on 16:9 televisions and digital/HD receivers.

If you want to fill your screen by distorting the image and losing information at the top and bottom, then by all means, you should be able to do that. But it shouldn't be done by the broadcaster, IMHO.
post #166 of 10685
I agree, for what it's worth. OAR is the way video should be broadcast. We can each set the equipment we choose to display as we like.
post #167 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by Randy Boecker
You'll never get a concensus here, everyone has a different opinion.

If you're worried about burn-in, what difference does it make if the bars are at the 4:3 positions or the 14:6 positions? You still have bars no matter what.

Personally, I think the best course of action is to leave the image unadulterated at 4:3. This is the way those programs were meant to be viewed. Unstretched. Allow each viewer to stretch or not with their own equipment. That's why aspect ratio control is a big feature on 16:9 televisions and digital/HD receivers.

If you want to fill your screen by distorting the image and losing information at the top and bottom, then by all means, you should be able to do that. But it shouldn't be done by the broadcaster, IMHO.

But do the black bars have to be broadcast as PART of the picture? If 4x3 content is shown on the digital channel without the black bars being part of the picture, it is then easier to use aspect ratio changes on the set-top box.

So if no black bars as part of the picture I agree it should be OAR. If black bars are made part of the picture transmitted than 14 x 9 is better.

I belive channel 12-1 (WHYY-DT) shows some 4 x 3 content without transmitting black bars (so all zoom/full options on the set top box are available).

Eric
post #168 of 10685
Quote:


So if no black bars as part of the picture I agree it should be OAR. If black bars are made part of the picture transmitted than 14 x 9 is better.

I still don't understand your logic. Are you saying, by extrapolation, that you'd even prefer them to stretch the image to 16:9 if they could to completely eliminate the black bars? Why would you want a stretched image and lose part of it (14:9), rather than get the whole image in the format it was originally intended to be broadcast (4:3)? You get windowbox bars either way, but in one case the image is distorted and cropped, and in the other it isn't.
post #169 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by Randy Boecker
I still don't understand your logic. Are you saying, by extrapolation, that you'd even prefer them to stretch the image to 16:9 if they could to completely eliminate the black bars? Why would you want a stretched image and lose part of it (14:9), rather than get the whole image in the format it was originally intended to be broadcast (4:3)? You get windowbox bars either way, but in one case the image is distorted and cropped, and in the other it isn't.


No, by no black bars I mean none transmitted by the station. The set-top box will put gray bars on the side for 4 x 3 content. Thus, no distortion.

Just transmit a 4 x 3 picture for non-HDTV content on the digital channel(like WHYY - DT does). That way I can see it in 4 x 3 if I choose (with gray side bars put their by my set top box), or I can stretch it to fill the screen and distort it if I choose to. But it is easier to fill the screen this way, then when the black bars are inserted as part of the picture. When the black bars are part of the picture, the set top box and my TV think it is a real HDTV picture (when it is in reality a 4 x 3 content with black bars to make it appear as if it was 16 x 9) and all of the stretching options are not possible.

My point is, when it is a 4 x 3 content picture, lets stop pretending that it is 16 x 9 by INSERTING black bars in the transmission. Just transmit the 4 x 3 picture as it is and let us do the bars and the stretching if we choose to stretch. The bars inserted by the station make a lot of options impossible.

Eric
post #170 of 10685
Ok, now I gotcha. It doesn't necessarily have to do with the aspect ratio as much as that information being transmitted by the station.

Don't all DT channels do this? Don't they always transmit a 16:9 signal no matter what (thus filling the excess with black)? I guess I've always just accepted this as the way it is.

Some engineering type explain this, I hope
post #171 of 10685
No, by no black bars I mean none transmitted by the station. The set-top box will put gray bars on the side for 4 x 3 content. Thus, no distortion.

i know what he means by that.
during the day 12 uses the analog signal on the diigtal channel so we see grey bars instead of black bars.

i think thats what he is referring to.
post #172 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by Randy Boecker
Ok, now I gotcha. It doesn't necessarily have to do with the aspect ratio as much as that information being transmitted by the station.

Don't all DT channels do this? Don't they always transmit a 16:9 signal no matter what (thus filling the excess with black)? I guess I've always just accepted this as the way it is.

Some engineering type explain this, I hope

It is done by most of the DT channels, but not all. I don't know why they do this. All set top boxes and 16 x 9 TVs, as I understand it, will put it any side bars for a 4 x 3 picture whether on digital or analog channels.

WHYY-DT (PBS in Philadelphia) does not always transmit black bars with its picture when showing 4 x 3 content. This opens up all avenues of stretching via your set top box, and will still allow OAR (with side bars) if you so choose. Seems the best of both worlds. Technically it is a SDTV signal, not HDTV when done this way. My set top box info. shows SD when PBS does this, not HD. But if it is 4 x 3 content, then who cares -- the signal should be SDTV. It is not HDTV content, so a full 16 x 9 picture doesn't need to be transmitted.

I don't think it effects picture quality of the 4 x 3 content either. It might require different equipment though or a switch to be thrown. I dunno.

But why transmit black bars in a picture just to artificially fill a 16 x 9 screen, when the 16 x 9 screens and set top boxes will do this without this "help" from the station.

Eric
post #173 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by grieger
OK, we give up...

You'll note that we're now passing 4:3 unformatted.

Let us know what you think.

-Gunnar

I personally thought your 14:9 conversion looked pretty good for the 4:3 material.




Does anyone know what UPN will broadcast Enterprise in HD in Philly?
post #174 of 10685
One vote for the 14:9 conversion.Looked pretty in Northern New Jersey.Don't like the traditional 4:3.
post #175 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by Dan Bither
I personally thought your 14:9 conversion looked pretty good for the 4:3 material.




Does anyone know what UPN will broadcast Voyager in HD in Philly?

When is Voyager aired ?????
post #176 of 10685
Folks,

My participation in this forum has been short but sweet. Friday will be my last day at WB17 as I move back to Boston to go to work for WB56, Boston/WB45, Albany.

I know that others from WB17 monitor this forum (Hi Ed) and I hope they'll respond to your questions.

Be patient with us broadcasters...DTV is here, but hasn't arrived just yet.
-gr
post #177 of 10685
Gunnar (or his replacement),

Thanks for the change. I preferred your new format.

However, on Birds of Prey (which is letterboxed to start with), I received it letterboxed and windowboxed. Is it possible to throw the switch when broadcasting real HDTV or 16:9 material?

If it's not possible to throw the switch, I still preferred last night's format to what we had previously.
post #178 of 10685
Birds of Prey is not supplied to us in HD by WB, which is why you saw the letterbox inside a 4:3 format. I suspect it might be delivered in HD next season, but that's just my opinion.
The only HD WB programs this season are:

Reba
Family Affair
Smallville
Everwood

-gr
post #179 of 10685
grieger/ED -- Thanks for your participation here & for your commitment to HDTV. I've sampled 'Smallville' & 'Everwood' & the HD picture quality is terrific!
post #180 of 10685
Quote:


Originally posted by Brajesh
grieger/ED -- Thanks for your participation here & for your commitment to HDTV. I've sampled 'Smallville' & 'Everwood' & the HD picture quality is terrific!

I second that!! Thanks for your listening and patience! It's a shame that other station engineers/managers don't participate here on the forum!

I know that criticism can hurt sometimes... but it does help the ratings!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Local HDTV Info and Reception
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Philadelphia, PA - Comcast