or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › New Orleans, LA - HDTV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Orleans, LA - HDTV - Page 266

post #7951 of 8206
Got it. Thanks. Since posting that, I've been noticing some of the other stations have begun using the DOTD cameras, too.
post #7952 of 8206
Hello, I am new to New Orleans. I am wondering if any body can suggest a good indoor antenna. I live in an apartment on a college campus so any outdoor antenna is not an option. I have tried several but none of them have been able to get wyes at all and all the uhf channels are always messing up. I have provided the station list from tvfool.com.


WUPL-DT 24 (54.1) MyN 6.2 LOS 73.5
WWL-DT 36 (4.1) CBS 7.0 LOS 71.8
WVUE-DT 29 Fox 6.8 LOS 71.8
KGLA-DT 42 6.6 LOS 71.6
WNOL-TV 15 (38.1) CW 6.6 LOS 71.3
WGNO 26 ABC 6.6 LOS 71.0
WPXL-DT 50 (49.1) ION 6.2 LOS 70.9
WDSU-DT 43 (6.1) NBC 6.6 LOS 69.1
WHNO-DT 21 (20.1) Ind 6.2 LOS 68.7
WLAE-DT 31 (32.1) PBS 5.8 LOS 66.1
WYES-TV 11 (12.1) PBS 6.8 LOS 63.2
KNLD-LD 28 6.2 LOS 55.4
K47JO-D 47 6.2 LOS 53.8
KNOV-CD 41 4.1 LOS 46.0
post #7953 of 8206
Given your likely distance from most local transmitter sites, your issue is probably less due to the antenna and more related to what's between your antenna and the towers.

The azimuth (direction) and distance from your location to each tower can also be found there at tvfool.com. The less stuff in the LOS (line of sight), the better your chances for good reception, and the higher above average terrain your antenna, the better.

If there's a window facing the ideal direction, that's the best place to start checking out any antenna connected to your set. Building materials, trees (especially those with fluttering leaves), and other factors degrade reception--some more than others.

With the exception of WYES (Ch 12.x virtual, Ch 11 RF), locals are all on UHF RF channel assignments. WYES is close enough to the high end of the VHF range that most so-called "digital" antennas (optimized for UHF) are still capable of pulling it in under decent circumstances. Here in the 'burbs, I've given up on the hit-or-miss WYES reception of my 1st floor indoor antenna near a wrong-facing window, but have no problem with another on the 2nd floor near the ideal side of the house.
post #7954 of 8206
Had this two days in a row http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsBu4dyvY7U for a bit of a shock as the 1MW near Houston is usually there if anything. Forecast looks like more intense ducting for tonight.
post #7955 of 8206
anyone else have a problem getting WVUE fox 8 to come in? I lost it a few days ago (i was getting a no signal message) So now i have rescanned a few times and i have lost 8.1 all together. I'm in Houma using a channel master for OTA.
post #7956 of 8206
No problems here in Covington. Try tuning it as 29.1 or 29.3
My TV's and DVR's seem to like it as 29.3 for some reason......
post #7957 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvengineer View Post

I sent you a PM BargainHunter. with a little more explation..

But yes..they are the Department of Transportation's cameras... yes we can access any of them in the state...
and I have no idea what the terms of the deal is with them that allows us to use them.

Louis

Louis, are some of the remote live cameras now full HD? I have just noticed in the past few days that they look really good.
post #7958 of 8206
Anybody else notice that practically every night/newscast there is something wrong with the fox8 weather graphics machine? Tonight at ten it locked up totally that they had to go back to the news for a few stories then back to the weather. Even after the weather Nicondra and Lee sort of joked about it. Unfortunately, all of the glitches make their weather segments look amateurish compared to the rest of the newscasts. They always have problems. Was wondering if Louis knows how old that computer is?
I think it is time for Mr. Benson to purchase a new computer.
post #7959 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by John4924 View Post

Louis, are some of the remote live cameras now full HD? I have just noticed in the past few days that they look really good.

IMO, it looks to me like the frame rates have been improved, smoothing out the motion. Fairly certain there's no improvement in resolution.
post #7960 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by dennispap View Post

Anybody else notice that practically every night/newscast there is something wrong with the fox8 weather graphics machine? Tonight at ten it locked up totally that they had to go back to the news for a few stories then back to the weather. Even after the weather Nicondra and Lee sort of joked about it. Unfortunately, all of the glitches make their weather segments look amateurish compared to the rest of the newscasts. They always have problems. Was wondering if Louis knows how old that computer is?
I think it is time for Mr. Benson to purchase a new computer.

Last I noticed, they juggle a couple of different remotes. I'm guessing one may be to advance the graphics and the other for a KVM switch to change which computer's graphics are displayed. Either (or both) could be problematic, and operator error (ex.: failing to put one of the graphics devices into playback mode) may be a factor as well.
post #7961 of 8206
I see that "BOUNCE TV " is broadcasting on WAFB 9.2
post #7962 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by BargainHunter View Post


IMO, it looks to me like the frame rates have been improved, smoothing out the motion. Fairly certain there's no improvement in resolution.

Sure does look like much better resolution on my TV. Louis, can you comment?
post #7963 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by John4924 View Post

Sure does look like much better resolution on my TV. Louis, can you comment?

I thought I had put that on here a while back...

All of the microwave trucks are full HD now.. so all local remotes should look like HD..

Only sat shots are sill SD.

Louis

P.S.. this as of a few months ago.
post #7964 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by dennispap View Post

Anybody else notice that practically every night/newscast there is something wrong with the fox8 weather graphics machine? Tonight at ten it locked up totally that they had to go back to the news for a few stories then back to the weather. Even after the weather Nicondra and Lee sort of joked about it. Unfortunately, all of the glitches make their weather segments look amateurish compared to the rest of the newscasts. They always have problems. Was wondering if Louis knows how old that computer is?
I think it is time for Mr. Benson to purchase a new computer.

Oh.. they are fairly new... the problem might be that they are constantly getting NEW boxes.. and not ONE but TWO of most of them.. .sure confuses the heck out of things :-)

Louis
post #7965 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by BargainHunter View Post

Last I noticed, they juggle a couple of different remotes. I'm guessing one may be to advance the graphics and the other for a KVM switch to change which computer's graphics are displayed. Either (or both) could be problematic, and operator error (ex.: failing to put one of the graphics devices into playback mode) may be a factor as well.


You almost got that right.. They have two complete weather graphics "systems" (from competing companies)..
Each of these systems is an array of several different computers (some of them mirror images of other computers on the same system)..

Each of those weather systems has one computer that is the "SHOW" or "ON AIR" controller.. that computer has the video output card as well as a capture card.. it integrates that systems graphics with video from other sources.. radar, tower cams, etc..
It is those two computers that are controlled by the "CLICKERS" to advace through their show (playlist that they set up beforhand)

Not to add a level of complexity.. each of those SHOW computers is also a source to the OTHER show computer...
So they can use graphics from either system on the other ones show.. clear as mud right? :-)
SO you can see why they sometimes get themselves tied up with the clickers
post #7966 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by John4924 View Post

Sure does look like much better resolution on my TV. Louis, can you comment?

After reviewing my earlier response, I see I misread (multiple times) your original question. I was thinking "traffic cameras" and you were talking about a completely different group. My mistake.
post #7967 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvengineer View Post

. . .clear as mud right? :-)

A little more complex than I had envisioned, but a little clearer the 2nd or 3rd time through. . . Interesting.
post #7968 of 8206
I am trying to setup windows media center with my desktop and xbox 360. My I currently have charter digital and HD and live in Lacombe, LA I did the channel scan and it found most of the channels but not all ie WGNO 26.2. However there are alot of channels found that are locked which i know most are not viewable and some that are not locked but are blank. Does anyone know of a list to identify which channel is which ie 34.12 71.18. Thanks i appreciate the help
post #7969 of 8206
WWL-TV and DirecTV at it again . . .

http://www.wwltv.com/directv
post #7970 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS65711 View Post

WWL-TV and DirecTV at it again . . .

http://www.wwltv.com/directv

Meh.

That's why I like my older DirecTV DVR's with built-in OTA tuners!
post #7971 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoFishMan View Post

Meh.

That's why I like my older DirecTV DVR's with built-in OTA tuners!

My HR20s can handle it!

Aren't we past the days when all of this retrans BS is relevant? Why would Belo or any other major operator ever actually pull the plug rather than deal? Its not like 5 years ago when nobody had HD retrans deals and the two sides were establishing the rates. Now 98% of all retrans deals are done and it seems silly to me that these agreements aren't virtually boilerplate at this point.
post #7972 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by sore_bluto View Post

My HR20s can handle it!

Aren't we past the days when all of this retrans BS is relevant? Why would Belo or any other major operator ever actually pull the plug rather than deal? ..............

Only having seen the WWL side of the story (and not that I really care anyway since I don't subscribe to DirecTV), it appears that DTV is paying $XXX to broadcast "The Knitting Channel" or some such, while only offering to pay WWL $xxx. Maybe I'm missing something, but it would seem that DTV should pay something reasonably based on the number of viewers, or at the very least....... pay each content provider they broadcast the same amount. But they don't do that. Channels like ESPN of course demand MORE than The Knitting Channel, even though many people only watch ESPN on Saturday afternoon and Monday night. Why shouldn't WWL demand more, or at least the same?

No, I don't work for WWL or Belo, and I don't know anyone who does. But I can see their point.
post #7973 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS65711 View Post

Only having seen the WWL side of the story (and not that I really care anyway since I don't subscribe to DirecTV), it appears that DTV is paying $XXX to broadcast "The Knitting Channel" or some such, while only offering to pay WWL $xxx. Maybe I'm missing something, but it would seem that DTV should pay something reasonably based on the number of viewers, or at the very least....... pay each content provider they broadcast the same amount. But they don't do that. Channels like ESPN of course demand MORE than The Knitting Channel, even though many people only watch ESPN on Saturday afternoon and Monday night. Why shouldn't WWL demand more, or at least the same?

No, I don't work for WWL or Belo, and I don't know anyone who does. But I can see their point.

My point is that it is like the NFL draft. Once you know how much all the other players are getting paid, it shouldn't be difficult to figure out the number, and this drama has already been played out everywhere around the country. Unless Belo turns out to be the rare exception, there is no chance that this negotiation will end with WWL removed from DIRECTV.
post #7974 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS65711 View Post

Only having seen the WWL side of the story (and not that I really care anyway since I don't subscribe to DirecTV), it appears that DTV is paying $XXX to broadcast "The Knitting Channel" or some such, while only offering to pay WWL $xxx. Maybe I'm missing something, but it would seem that DTV should pay something reasonably based on the number of viewers, or at the very least....... pay each content provider they broadcast the same amount. But they don't do that. Channels like ESPN of course demand MORE than The Knitting Channel, even though many people only watch ESPN on Saturday afternoon and Monday night. Why shouldn't WWL demand more, or at least the same?

No, I don't work for WWL or Belo, and I don't know anyone who does. But I can see their point.

Reading between the lines of WWL/Belo's argument, I think they may be comparing apples to oranges.

They're complaining that DirecTV is paying more for, for instance "TruTV" (I just picked a national "basic cable" channel at random) than they are for WWL, arguing that TruTV has "a small fraction" of the viewers than "CBS".

That's apples to oranges. There's little doubt that TruTV, because it is nationwide has far more (total) viewers than WWL which can only be seen in the Greater New Orleans area.

Suppose TruTV has 10% of the total viewers of all the CBS affiliates that DirecTV carries combined. That would mean, in this overly-simplistic example, that DirecTV should pay 10% of what they pay in grand total to all the over 100 CBS affiliates they carry on their service for TrueTV, and I guarantee that comes to more than they pay WWL (which is as it should be, because it's a channel they can sell to all their subscribers vs. a channel they can sell to only a very small percentage of them).

Be that as it may, broadcast TV makes their money off of selling commercial time anyway, so money they get from cable and satellite providers is essentially lagnappe. (I realize it's become a signficant part of their revenue stream in recent years.)

I agree with sore_bluto. Why aren't these agreements boiler plate at this point? They've had many, many years to figure it out!
post #7975 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiVoFishMan View Post

. . . Be that as it may, broadcast TV makes their money off of selling commercial time anyway, so money they get from cable and satellite providers is essentially lagnappe...........!

I can see (and agree with) some of your points. However the statement above is equally true for the "ESPN's" and "Knitting Channel's" of the world also. Except of course that without being "broadcast" by the CableCo or SatelliteCo the sales value of their commercials is diminished to zero. One could almost make the argument that ESPN etc. should pay the carrier for broadcasting their programming . . .
post #7976 of 8206
You also have to take into consideration the high costs to provide local channels. Spotbeam satellites, regional uplinks, POPs in the cities to capture locals, backhaul costs, etc. It's no surprise that the satellite companies lose money on providing locals to a city. But if they didn't have them and their competitor did have them, they would lose even more money.
post #7977 of 8206
On the other hand, by far I would say that most of a satellites subscribers are locked into a contract, and therefore can't jump ship on a whim, and therefore the sat companies can play hardball because they know the won't be losing many customers. They don't care if you don't have a particular channel or not. They are still gonna make their money.
post #7978 of 8206
Anyone care to speculate on who's next in the local HD news sweepstakes? 'DSU's Scott Walker tweeted last week that his station is constructing a new news set; in other markets that has sometimes meant preparation for live HD.
post #7979 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by digiblur View Post

You also have to take into consideration the high costs to provide local channels. Spotbeam satellites, regional uplinks, POPs in the cities to capture locals, backhaul costs, etc. It's no surprise that the satellite companies lose money on providing locals to a city. But if they didn't have them and their competitor did have them, they would lose even more money.

It looks like it's more than just locals, and more than just WWL. Obviously the boilerplate is being re-cast . . .

http://www.keepmynets.com/
post #7980 of 8206
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS65711 View Post

It looks like it's more than just locals, and more than just WWL. Obviously the boilerplate is being re-cast . . .

http://www.keepmynets.com/

That's an entirely different animal and those machinations will continue for the foreseeable future.
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 › New Orleans, LA - HDTV