AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
After one week with the HD-100, I need to ask the question. Local Seattle KING-DT broadcasts a "demo" loop during the day which is absolutely gorgeous! Local PBS periodically (sometimes off air due to "energy" savings aspects) does a loop as well. Gorgeous too. The only program I would currently include is stunning as well is Jay Leno Show.


hen watching local CBS or other HDTV stuff, it does not "look" nearly as good. What is going on here? IS it because the other stuff is "film" or what?


The HD-100 is being used in Variable mode and when the program switches back and forth from 4:3 to 16:9 (like commercials), I see no apparent difference between the two other than the appearance of the black sidebars. I have not hooked up to DirecTV yet, so I do not have that experience yet.


Is it that the stuff is just converted to HDTV format and not really "sourced" in HDTV?

Bill
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
That is correct. CBS upconverts all of their primetime shows, with exception of "Diagnosis Murder". This show is shot with HD cameras.

In time more and more shows will be shot with HD cam, thus this will give more of a window effect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,592 Posts
No, that is absolutely not the case. Most of CBS's prime time shows ARE in true 1080i HD. They are NOT upconverts. If you want to see upconverts, then you watch FOX. CBS shoots most of their shows on film, which already is beyond the resolution of HD. The transferring process to video yields a full 1080i resolution. I'm not sure what equipment you're watching these shows on, but there is a very significant difference between the CBS commercials and their true HD broadcasts. Virtually all of CBS's prime time shows have beens described by most as "stunning". I agree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,311 Posts
I've never watched "Diagnosis Murder", but if it's the only CBS prime time show shot in native HD with HD cameras, guess I'll have to start! Is it a noticably better picture? Are any other shows shot with HD cameras, Leno for example? Any of the FOX shows? What about the fact that these shows all seem to be widescreen (letterboxed)? Are they all shot that way and most of America sees 30% less of them in their analog 4:3 formats on their primitive 4:3 analog TV's?


Is there any way to know for sure whether a show you're watching is actually HD as opposed to merely digital?

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
730 Posts
The generally accepted definition of HDTV is digital television broadcast in any of the 6 ATSC formats that use 720 or 1080 lines of vertical resolution.


IMHO, it doesn't have to be captured with an HDTV video camera . . . 35mm film to 1080i is still HDTV. (IMHO 35mm film has better resolution than HDTV.)
 

·
AVS Forum Special Member
Joined
·
11,139 Posts
Perhaps there's a misunderstanding of times and the use of the term upconvert. My understanding is that during the day CBS upconverts standard 480i NTSC to 1080i ATSC. Perhaps not all stations carry the conversion, but I see it here in NYC.


But during primetime I agree with Ken Ross's summary: it's film scanned onto tape in 1080i format, although the consensus from numerous posts here seems to be that horizontal resolution is limited to something under 1400 lines because of the HDCAM recorders widely used. I'd like to hear from anyone in the business about what the upper resolution is for live HD broadcasts. (This varies from second to second, of course, due to HDTV encoding, which drops details depending on how much detail and change occurs within images.) Then there's the "D.M." program shot with HD video equipment, not film. I caught the show for the first time last night and didn't think its HD fidelity was anything special at all--it seemed rather muted, and I'm confident my set can display all the detail CBS is sending out. -- John


------------------

STOP DVI/HDCP AND DFAST
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,329 Posts
wanthdtv,

Quote:
Originally posted by :
I beg to differ Ken Ross. Look at an earlier post from Bob.
No, Ken Ross is correct. Most of the CBS prime time is shot on film, transferred to 1080p/24fps then transferred to 1080i for broadcast.


Now, who knows what your local CBS affiliate station may be doing with the CBS HDTV feed.


------------------

Wendell

Technical Services Supervisor

MAETV
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,999 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by wanthdtv:
I beg to differ Ken Ross. Look at an earlier post from Bob.
I have no idea what post or which Bob you're referring to. Please quote or describe the relevant information you're referring to and tell us which poster said it. Thank you.


And Ken is absolutely correct. Most of CBS's prime time series are HDTV transfers from film. They are NOT upconverts.


------------------

(The original Jerry G, not the new member named Jerry_G)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,273 Posts
Babula,


Yes, the CBS primetime shows are "real" HDTV. They "look" exactly the way the directors want them to look. They're orginally shot in 35mm film and often have the typical grainy "film look" the film buffs consider high art. In the case of these shows, the HDTV technology is doing its job in accurately reproducing this "look" in your home.


Film buff types would probably regard comments that stuff shot in 35 mm doesn't look as "good" as video-sourced material in the same way as they would regard comments that photographs look better than paintings. You're not being artistically sensitive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,494 Posts
The latest issue of one Hollywood film trade publication goes into grat detail about the use of special filters used on the new SONY 24P HDcams to make them look like film...because they look too real otherwise!! I've heard that Diagnosis Murder is also shot in the same fashion..with detuned cameras. Call me artistically insensitve but perhaps it is time for Hollywood to grow beyond the limitations of the film look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,273 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by cwood:

Call me artistically insensitve but perhaps it is time for Hollywood to grow beyond the limitations of the film look.
That may be asking alot, especially since most TV directors are probably feature-film wannabes. They'll want to look as much as possible like the "big boys".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Many thanks to all for the interesting response! For all who missed it, I am watching a HD-100/36XBR400 combo. I watched the Final FOur today and must sya, that my answer is that my perception of "real" HDTV is that Video is more "real" than film converted. I know that the "creative" side of the business wants their product to reflect them. As an example the best analogy I can think of here is that there was a time when I was in the Inflight Entertainment business where the film audio had such a wide dynamic range, that many, if not all, low passages could not be heard due ambient cabin noise. We tried to get the film audio compressed and teh "creator" said "No way". So we built compression into the audio system. Oh well.


Very subjective I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,586 Posts
I can see both sides of the argument. HD-Cam stuff looks hyper-real, and for 'live' stuff its really appropriate. But I'm also sympathetic to the film folks too. It might be partly due to the fact that we associate that look with daytime TV or something (not the poor quality of daytime TV, but the overall video look) because of decades of training. I dunno.


I love the super reality, but I just couldn't imagine what many of my favorite films would look like in HD-Cam format. I think that they would have a completely different feel to them. The thing about the film look is that it gives it a certain ambience that I think would be very, very different or even missing with the video look. Could imagine some big epic films like "Out of Africa" or "Gone with the Wind" or "The Wizard of Oz" or "Ghandi" or "Ben Hur" in HD-Cam? I'm not sure that they would have nearly the effect, though they would be super-duper crisp looking. Somehow, that film look creates a certain 'fantasy world' feeling that we've been trained to associate with the trip into the screen.


And also its clear that film transfers can be very crisp, too. If you look at "The Fifth Element" or "The Professional" or "Starship Troopers" and such, though they are not HD-Cam type real, they are very crisp, even at DVD resolution. HD transfers of the most crispy films look very, very good, and represent a pretty good compromise to me. I would assume that the 'filter HD-Cam' stuff would be around that point or slightly more to the super-crispy side?


Anyway, I can see both arguments. The only way we could have a really meaningful discussion on this would be to have the same thing filmed both ways for comparison, but we'll never have that. I guess the good thing about the filter HD-Cams is that they hopefully be filtered more or less as desired, which migth allow us to be slowly weened off of the film look slowly, and allow folks who want to to use the more hyper-real aspects of it for their projects.



------------------

Dean Roddey

The CIDLib C++ Frameworks

[email protected]
www.charmedquark.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Dean,

I could not have expressed it better.

Bill
 

·
AVS Forum Special Member
Joined
·
11,139 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Dean Roddey:
The only way we could have a really meaningful discussion on this would be to have the same thing filmed both ways for comparison....
Caught this summary yesterday of a film shot just this way, and this newspaper
article adds some interesting comparisons to Dean's excellent summary.


My own hope is that directors will evolve with the new HDTV media and give us productions that creatively mix both full-resolution HDTV and filtered recording. To me, the misapplication of filtering would occur for most outdoor scenes when it would diminish all the details possible with 1080p that help simulate reality. In strong sunlight we see a lot of details.


The misapplication of full-bore HDTV crispiness, IMO, occurred with the recent HBO presentation of the Pulitzer-prize-winning play, "Wit." The opening scenes, with intense lighting and close-ups of a patient's and doctor's faces, seemed more suitable for a clinical medical production. Perhaps the director's intention, but this Bergman-like sequence might have been more successful with lighting suitable for a doctor's office and perhaps even limited filtering. -- John



------------------

STOP DVI/HDCP AND DFAST


[This message has been edited by John Mason (edited 04-01-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
IMHO, any 24p source whether from film or HD cam introduces shutter/judder and pulldown artifacts I find objectionable. Combine that with MPEG2 which "throws away pixels" on fast moving objects, there is no HD.

Some viewers have noted that there is something lacking in NYPD's fidelity. I think it is because the camera rarely stops moving. (I can't stand to watch)

Take a look at the opening aerial shots of Family Law. As long as the helicopter is moving very slowly, the picture is outstanding. But speed up the movement and the buildings become a blur.

On second thought, HD cam probably doesn't suffer from shutter problems.


[This message has been edited by Rayman Carlton (edited 04-01-2001).]
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
215 Posts
I'd like to see more films shot in Imax HD with 48fps for movie theaters and reduced to 24fps for smaller-screened-HDTVs. Why does the cinema industry think we all like to view films in myopia? Forget the grains and blurs. The real visual artistry can be accomplished with more concentration on lighting and color. Remember Miami Vice (albeit fuzzy, too)?


[This message has been edited by Bob Utne (edited 04-01-2001).]
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top