or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Technical › Status of Boston DTV Tower???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Status of Boston DTV Tower??? - Page 2  

post #31 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by maldini:
I would kill to se the Pats in HD.

If the tower is ready and the Pats play a game that is broadcast in HD from CBS, will it show up as 16:9 or that wierd 14:9?

Maldini
Maldini,

If it is real HDTV, from CBS, it will be 16x9. If it is upconverted analog, it will be 14x9.

And while we're on the subject, anybody really emotional about our 14x9 conversion of 4x3 analog? Let me know.

Bob
post #32 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Hess:
Maldini,

If it is real HDTV, from CBS, it will be 16x9. If it is upconverted analog, it will be 14x9.

And while we're on the subject, anybody really emotional about our 14x9 conversion of 4x3 analog? Let me know.

Bob

I've seen the 14x9 on WFXT, and I'm not too fond of it. It chops off the top and bottom of the picture. I like the "natural wide" mode on my Pioneer Elite PRO510HD. It doesn't chop off a lot from the top and bottom.

I tried tuning in channel 44, the best I get is in the same direction as the other channels. I get a lot of snow... hmm... maybe I need an amplifier? Is WBZ still broadcasting in low power?
post #33 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Hess:
And while we're on the subject, anybody really emotional about our 14x9 conversion of 4x3 analog? Let me know.
I am surprised that CBS would allow any affiliate, let alone an owned and operated station such as WBZ, to butcher their 4:3 material. What are your stations reasons for doing 14:9?
post #34 of 601
Bob,

Please, please, please, if you are part of the decision process please reject 14x9 upconversion. Original aspect ratio is good, even for NTSC upconvert. The blow up part of the 14x9 process losses info for a minimal lessening of the sidebars. Most DTV owners are big boys (or gals) and can adjust to suit themselves. The WHDH 4:3 is a good picture, but given that they have no true HD it is not a good tradeoff.

Avoiding 14x9 would be a positive step.

Tshort,

My "trick" to get WBZ until tower completion full power is to insert a $10 dialable attenuator turn all the way DOWN on the signal path. That and about 30 manual adjustments, including elevation in addition to azimuth, has had WBZ solid for months.

Tim
post #35 of 601
Bob,

I would rather see 14:9 with a loss of picture on the Top and Bottom than 4:3. Projecting black bars over time will cause the tubes to wear unevenly, even if the image is stretched by the projector to 16:9. Plus, what is the point of losing part of the available resolution broadcasting black bars?

I would actually prefer to lose more of the top and bottom, and see a full 16:9, rather than worry about tube burn. My flame suit is on, bring on the OAR purists!

Jim

------------------
Nothing difficult ever turns out to be easy
post #36 of 601
My vote goes to the 14:9. Much more pleasant to watch than 4:3 in any mode!
post #37 of 601
Bob, thanks for asking ....
My preference for 4*3 analog conversion would be:

best: orignal 4*3 aspect
second choice : 14*9 aspect
worst : 4*3 with bars in a 16*9 frame
post #38 of 601
Question:

If WBZ upconverts an analog signal and the presents it in OAR, will a decoder such as the 6000 then be able to use its aspect ratio controls to either keep the picture the same or "stretch" it to fit a 16:9 screen?

If this is possible, then this seems to be the best of both worlds as you let the individual choose how they want to view the picture.

However, if I would not have this ability to control the pictures aspect ratio, I would choose to see it in 4:3 and not and 14:9.

Maldini
post #39 of 601
The SH-D09 tuner allows you to change the screen mode from 4x3 material, but if it's being broadcast in 14x9 or 16x9, then I can't change anything.

I'd rather keep it in 4x3 so I can choose how to see it.

rudolpht:

I'd rather wait for WBZ to have a stronger signal than try to do all those adjustments! I tried an amplifier, but I still get snow on channel 44, so I doubt I'll get any picture of WBZ. When they move to their 800 foot higher tower, then I'll be able to get a picture!

[This message has been edited by tshort (edited 08-29-2000).]
post #40 of 601
I am confused. Isn't digital always 16:9 and the broadcaster determines how much of the frame to fill?

------------------
Nothing difficult ever turns out to be easy
post #41 of 601
Jim,

Leave the suit on, but it is not from the OTAR purists you need to worry, just folks that want to not lose picture information.

In HDTV mode, some STBs or sets cannot deal with anything other than the native bitstream. In SDTV mode, which uses less bandwitdth for 4:3 presentations every STB I have seen can stretch/zoom/multilate to anyones heart's content. For me (on both the D6000 (but not OTA yet) & DTC-100 (now) I have grey bars to address the burn-in issue.

It is better for folks to have the full content & change it as they see fit vs. single solutions (whether it is OTAR purists or fill the creen purists, or the rest of us in between).

Tim
post #42 of 601
I vote for the 14:9 for the only reason of the burn-in possibility. An added plus is the fact true HD material will be in 16:9, anyway.
post #43 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by jeff43:
I vote for the 14:9 for the only reason of the burn-in possibility. An added plus is the fact true HD material will be in 16:9, anyway.
I do not get this burn in argument in favor of 14:9. There are still black bars on the left and right side of the screen but now they are narrower. Any burn in that might happen will just be shifted to a different location on the screen.
post #44 of 601
Rudolph,

Every DTV picture whether its SDTV of HDTV I have seen is identified by my DTC-100 as 16:9. Fox has (I am not sure if they still do) in the past put a 4:3 picture inside this 16:9 box. IMHO this is the worst of all solutions, as it is impossible to resize it.

Bob,

Is this what you are refering to when you say 4:3 picture, or can you send a 4:3 480P signal the non purist among us can resize?

------------------
Nothing difficult ever turns out to be easy
post #45 of 601
Re: aspect ratio adjustment...I'd prefer that 4:3 images be stretched to fill a 16:9 raster in such a way that the extreme left and right edges are stretched more than the middle of the image in a progressive fashion...that is, the closer to the edge you get, the more stretch occurs. Also, I'd crop the top and bottom of the image slightly to reduce the amount of lateral stretch that would be necessary. For 4:3 purists, simulcast an unaltered 4:3 SD channel.

------------------
HiDefDave
post #46 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by Jim_S:


Bob,

Is this what you are refering to when you say 4:3 picture, or can you send a 4:3 480P signal the non purist among us can resize?

We can upconvert our analog product to 1080I with a 4x3 aspect ratio if that is what the majority of our Boston area viewers (and only our Boston area viewers) want. I am concerned about burn in on some projection sets. I do prefer the 14x9 aspect ratio on my DTC-100 at home and our various HDTV sets in the studio building.

- Bob
post #47 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by Bogney Baux:
I do not get this burn in argument in favor of 14:9. There are still black bars on the left and right side of the screen but now they are narrower. Any burn in that might happen will just be shifted to a different location on the screen.

I agree, with the upconverts to 14x9, I get black bars to the sides. This can cause burn in. Sometimes, I do get the widescreen comercials and news, but it's still 14x9 and doesn't look right with the chop off.

With 4:3, my TV puts up gray bars (~50%) on the sides to approximate use on that area of the TV. I can get rid of the bars by zooming or stretching.

For example, WHDH NBC 42.1 and WHUB Ind 23.1 both use 4x3 mode, and I can stretch or zoom to my heart's desire. WFXT Fox 31.2 and WCVB ABC 20.1 both use 14x9 and the content does not fill the screen when the shows are upconverted. The bugs on the stations show up in the black portions of the screen (especially Fox)! Local news and some comercials are widescreen, and they fill up the whole screen. But because the Tuner is integrated into the TV, it won't let me stretch or zoom the material on WFXT and WCVB (I acutally want to unstretch it!).

This is what I would like to see, and what I expected from DTV:
1. Analog 4:3 upconverts to 480P in 4:3; allow the viewer to choose how much of the screen to see (and if I had an external decoder, I could use natural wide mode, sigh... but then again, I couldn't because the PROx10HD's lock in full mode with a progressive signal via the inputs, oh never mind these parenthesised comments http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif )
2. Widescreen programming in 720P or 1080I in 16x9 mode; give us the best we can get

[This message has been edited by tshort (edited 08-30-2000).]
post #48 of 601
Bob -

I'd prefer that you NOT upconvert to 14x9 or even 16x9 - if the source material is 4x3, then please broadcast it as 4x3. Digital-ready sets are not all 16x9 (Sony HS series), and all HDTV watchers won't be using the RCA receiver. If you broadcast the material in its original format, each receiver can make their own local decision on how they prefer to view it (stretch, squeeze, zoom, etc.) with minimal loss of picture quality and information.

I'll note that for those with 16x9 sets, the burn-in issue shouldn't be any worse for HD 4x3 than for normal 4x3.

Thanks for keeping us informed and involved!!!!
post #49 of 601
My vote is for OAR because that puts the onus on the STB to decide what to do and STBs are within the viewer's control (whether current generations allow stretch modes or not). If you commit to a certain scaling process on the broadcast end, we must petition the broadcasters to do it "our" way which, judging from the mixed responses here, would result in chaos.

my .02

Jake
post #50 of 601
My understanding is burn in is least likely when the lit part of the screen changes at least occasionally. Since much digital stuff is 4:3 and much is 14:9 and sometimes 16:9, for HD broadcasts, it does seem less likely to have the burn in problem in Boston.

I always want HD to be in the original aspect ratio which never means 4:3. It could be 1.66:1 or as high as 2.33:1. However, we are mainly talking television shows here and not Lawrence of Arabia. I'd prefer to fill as much of the screen as possible and take advantage of as much of the screen as possible.

If I do indeed get burn in, I'd rather have it as far to the sides of the monitor as possible.

As a matter of fact, I'd even prefer to have 4:3 upconverted material changed to a full 16:9. However, I have a small set, 30" diagonal, with a 16:9 aspect ratio and my thinking may be completely different if I had a 65" screen.
post #51 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by jeff43:
I vote for the 14:9 for the only reason of the burn-in possibility. An added plus is the fact true HD material will be in 16:9, anyway.
So 1/8th burn in is OK?????


Jim,

I'm assuming you are not getting WHDH-DT which is not 16x9 and allows all changes.

tshort,

You nailed only I would swap #2 & #1.

SANdood,

Welcome to the club.


Jake,

All our .02s can add up. We'll hit a dollar eventually.

Tim
post #52 of 601
My preference would be that 4:3 be broadcast 4:3 and 16:9 broadcast 16:9.

I use a CRT projector with a 4:3 and can doodle around with aspect ratios all day if I want to correct some of the bizzare converting I see right now but I would prefer to not to have to. I am also not overly concerned about uneven CRT burn-in, I would just like to be able to maximize the viewing area available to me with any source.
post #53 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by jeff43:
I always want HD to be in the original aspect ratio which never means 4:3. It could be 1.66:1 or as high as 2.33:1.
Why can't HD be 4:3? Most movies made before the early 50's were shot 4:3. I see no reason why a movie such as Casablanca could not be shown in 4:3 black and white HD.
post #54 of 601
HD sets, by definition are 16x9. There is no reason a 4:3 aspect movie couldn't be transfered to HD and maintain the OAR of 4:3. It would be the 1920x1080i pixels (or 1280x720p) but it would have many of the pixels on the sides be null. I'm sure there are actually some really crisp early color 4:3 films (early Hitcock or musicals) that would really benefit with the extra resolution in the frame not that "greyscale" movies in HD would be bad. SD is 480p but always 4:3, but would lose resolution in comparison.

Since we are in a CBS/WBZ/etc. thread, noted Dave was on in HD tomorrow/today/Thur night at 0830PM.

Tim
post #55 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by rudolpht:
tshort,
You nailed only I would swap #2 & #1.
Well.. I want BOTH #1 and #2, order wasn't important... maybe I should've used stars.

Quote:
Originally posted by rudolpht:
Since we are in a CBS/WBZ/etc. thread, noted Dave was on in HD tomorrow/today/Thur night at 0830PM.
But I can't get in WBZ! UGH! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/mad.gif
post #56 of 601
Due to burn-in issues, I'd have to vote for 14x9... Hell, I'd prefer you blow up the 4x3 stuff to full 16x9... I could even stand to lose a little extra picture to protect my TV that costs more than most of my friends cars...

Derek

------------------
Derek J. Nolan -- Derek@ImBetterThanYou.com -- My DVDs
post #57 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by ][ronMan:
Due to burn-in issues, I'd have to vote for 14x9
14x9 WILL NOT PREVENT BURN-IN

4x3 material presented in 14x9 will still have black bars to the side. For example, on WFXT I was watching the Simpsons with black bars to the sides, the Fox logos covered both the active part of the screen and the black part of the screen.
When 4x3 material is delivered in 4x3 format, the tuner and/or TV can put black or gray bars (gray in the case of the PRO510HD), or the TV can be put into one of the stretch modes. Using a stretch mode or 50% gray bars will reduce and/or eliminate burn in.
The black bars delivered along with 14x9 material will not reduce burn in.
post #58 of 601
I know on my tv if I get a 5:4(?) picture the tv will put grey bars along the sides to prevent burn in. the bars actualy change shades to aproximate the same intensity as the picture. If I get a 14:9 picture I get black bars which would actualy be worse. If you have a wide screen tv most should allow you to zoom, stretch. whatever. PLEASE display 5:4 as 5:4 and 16:9 as 16:9. if you want to upconvert it do it to 16:9. other wise let the viewer decied what He/She(politcly correct) wants to do with it.

Thanks
post #59 of 601
Quote:
Originally posted by computergeek:
14*9 Can be used to prevent burnin.
14*9 is achieved by adding black bars to 1/16 of horizontal size and clipping 1/16 from the top and bottom
Adjust the overscan on your set to be (1/16 = 6.25 %) and there will be no black bars. My set came from the factory with 7%overscan so once I centred the picture, there ae no black bars on CBS, Fox or ABC in 14*9 mode.
The black bars are more than 1/16 of the screen when one has a 16x9 TV.
Quote:

In fact, I've changed my mind: 14*9 is a good compromise.We need to cinsider all the HDTV users and not just the the people with sophisticated expensive equipment or HDTV will definitely die. There are more people watching HDTV on 4*3 HD ready sets, computer monitors and front projectors who don't have the control of the aspect ratio that are features of some expensive 16*9 set.
Well... 4x3 is 1.3333, 14x9 is 1.5555, and 16x9 is 1.7777; they are not the same.

Those watching on 4x3 HD ready sets and those with computer monitors and the like will end up watching 14x9 in widescreen mode (since that is how it is broadcast) with black bars on the top and bottom from the software/tuner/STB trying to fit a 14x9 image on a 4x3 monitor. Then there will be black bars on the right and left from the broadcaster.

It'd be like watching a non-anamorphic wide-screen DVD on a 16x9 TV in 4x3 mode without zooming or stretching. In other words, a small picture surounded by black. On a basic 4x3 TV, there are no zoom controls, so Joe 6-Pack with a cheap $250 STB (wouldn't it be nice if they were that cheap http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif )and a 27" TV will have this small image displayed on his small TV and say... WHAT'S SO GREAT ABOUT (H)DTV?

This reminds me of a time when I was in a store and a widescreen movie was being displayed on a 4x3 TV and some lady commented that she didn't the black bars on the top and bottom. Even after I explained the OAR aspects, she still didn't get it.

So now, I've come to the conclusion that 14x9 IS BAD FOR (H)DTV!.

For those of you who have a separate STB (my tuner is built in, but I could use the DTV outputs, which will put the 14x9 widescreen material in letterbox, to demonstrate on a 4x3 19" TV, which unfortunately is soooo cheap that it doesn't have a composite input, I'd have to use the VCR, RF modulator or pull the 27" (i.e. heavier) from upstairs to actually do it), try hooking the STB to an average 4x3 TV (i.e. NOT a Sony XBR) and take a look at how 14x9 looks. My bet is that without tweaking (which may not be possible since the STB will have to output at 480i), you will not be happy with what you see: a small picture surounded by black. Realize that this is how a majority of people will be watching (H)DTV. Those with 4x3 TVs and computer monitors and the like.

BEWARE THE 14x9
post #60 of 601
The tribe has spoken, I think....

WE have re-set our upconverter to retain the 4x3 aspect ratio. This only applies to upconverted analog product (480I upconverted to 1080I). All CBS HDTV will be 16x9 or whatever CBS passes through our system. We can't please everyone. If enough want 14x9 back, we will make the change. For now, let's give 4x3 a shot.

Bob Hess
Director, Broadcast Operations/Engineering
WBZ-TV/WBZ-AM/WODS-FM
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Technical
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Technical › Status of Boston DTV Tower???