Hosko Posted February 9, 2009 Posted February 9, 2009 NBC / CBS and Fox were 1080i I thought while ABC and ESPN 720p. An expert will surely confirm / correct this. Fox is 720p
fredofrog Posted February 9, 2009 Posted February 9, 2009 Fox is 720p I thought ESPN looked the best on my 1920x1080p plasma and the rest about the same as each other with NBC slightly better but only a tiny bit. If ONEHD goes 720p then it could still look good if you base it on that theory.
rovespants Posted February 16, 2009 Posted February 16, 2009 Ten's new PIDs went live in Brisbane on 8 Feb 2009. Here is what I found in the TS: LCN Name Resolution Bitrate Audio 01 ONE HD 1920x1080 12.5Mbps AC3 448Kbps 10 TEN Digital 720x576 4.2Mbps MP2 256Kbps 12 ONE SD 720x576 3.6Mbps MP2 256Kbps I was watching So You Think You Can Dance last night which only last year looked magnificent in 1080i HD. Now both SD channels were unwatchably blocky and the HD upscale was okay except during fast dance sequences, but come April we won't even have that option This is madness. How can we complain to Ten in a way that they will listen?
davmel Posted February 16, 2009 Posted February 16, 2009 This is madness. How can we complain to Ten in a way that they will listen? Simple. Become an advertiser and a paying client and they will actually listen to you ;-)
kretin Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 Simple. Become an advertiser and a paying client and they will actually listen to you ;-) Or complain to the advertisers instead...? I think perhaps the networks and sponsors realise the perceived reality that they've lost the audience to other distribution mediums, and so have focused on programming that is less likely or easy to be distributed in other ways, such as live sport.
pgdownload Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 Simple. Become an advertiser and a paying client and they will actually listen to youCatch 22 there I'm afraid. Once you have their ear you'll be requesting any and all techniques be employed to maximise sales... Seriously though, perhaps were being too hard slating this all through to the networks. In recent times its become obvious that companies in general have placed short term performance before long term growth and wealth creation. Your standard advertiser isn't concerned with how the television industry is going to be doing 10 years from now, they have a million to spend and they want results this month. Is it any wonder that the industry is cannibalising itself? Regards Peter Gillespie
sydney2218 Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 Ten's new PIDs went live in Brisbane on 8 Feb 2009. Here is what I found in the TS: LCN Name Resolution Bitrate Audio 01 ONE HD 1920x1080 12.5Mbps AC3 448Kbps 10 TEN Digital 720x576 4.2Mbps MP2 256Kbps 12 ONE SD 720x576 3.6Mbps MP2 256Kbps I was watching So You Think You Can Dance last night which only last year looked magnificent in 1080i HD. Now both SD channels were unwatchably blocky and the HD upscale was okay except during fast dance sequences, but come April we won't even have that option This is madness. How can we complain to Ten in a way that they will listen? The HD mess is just a part of TENs woes. Their share price has collapsed, the dividend is reduced & they are almost out of business. That is the result of 5 years of wrong decisions.ONLY that they have a valuable trasmission licence is keeping them going. Do not expect any improvements they will be taken over soon.
fredofrog Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 The HD mess is just a part of TENs woes. Their share price has collapsed, the dividend is reduced & they are almost out of business. That is the result of 5 years of wrong decisions.ONLY that they have a valuable transmission licence is keeping them going. Do not expect any improvements they will be taken over soon. How do know they are "almost" out of business. Because HD PQ has dropped? This might qualify as an overreaction. Heaps of businesses go through consolidation, even ABC Learning is being restructured and will trade again will mountains of direct debt. To fit the three channels in, PQ was always going to drop for Ten HD or ONE HD. Ten are the only non govt network moving toward multichannelling and the lack of bandwidth they have to work in that business enviroment does dictate what is going on now, or would everyone rather one channel in 20MBPS and that's it? Freeview are promising more content through 15 channels not 15 channels of near Full HD pic/sound and content. Compared to the majority of paytv channels I've seen for the last year the PQ is no better or worse. If HD is now do bad please find a better source via downloads and enjoy the price that comes with.
dan2007 Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 Freeview are promising more content through 15 channels not 15 channels of near Full HD pic/sound and content. Freeview is a cheap marketing tool to make you think you have 15 channels. Really it's not even that if you count the double simulcast channels from 7 and SBS and ABC. How do know they are "almost" out of business. Because HD PQ has dropped? This might qualify as an overreaction. I don't think he's saying that, he's just generally observing the Ten Corporation troubles that they are having lately. Doubt they are really at that far end. In a way I want One Sports to be a flop but in a way, I don't. Coz I am now obsessed with the NBA thanks to Ten.
sylarG Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 we wont be able to see the FIRST EVER HD WS simpsons episode in high def. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!
sydney2218 Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 Freeview is a cheap marketing tool to make you think you have 15 channels. Really it's not even that if you count the double simulcast channels from 7 and SBS and ABC.I don't think he's saying that, he's just generally observing the Ten Corporation troubles that they are having lately. Doubt they are really at that far end. In a way I want One Sports to be a flop but in a way, I don't. Coz I am now obsessed with the NBA thanks to Ten. See http://business.smh.com.au/business/strugg...90217-8a8d.html
pgdownload Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 Keep in mind Freeview is largely targeted at analogue households. These are still on 5 channels only. It might be just 12 now (as the networks exaggerate their offerings) but its still approaching a pretty good drawcard to switch to digital. Regards Peter Gillespie
tonymy01 Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 Freeview is a cheap marketing tool to make you think you have 15 channels. Really it's not even that if you count the double simulcast channels from 7 [snip].God I wish it was double simulcast right now, losing Lost & 24 to whatever garbage they put on HD during those shows. But no, it isn't quite double simulcast, on all the shows I want to watch on HD (Ten is the same right now, e.g. Dexter.... and come March, everything unless they get the F1 in HD rather than bloody upscaling everything to the HD channel).
fredofrog Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 See http://business.smh.com.au/business/strugg...90217-8a8d.html I wonder if SMH should be consulted every time as the source of financial information about Ten or whether the fact that Canwest have the debt and are selling off non FTA assets at the moment to consolidate that debt is more reliable. Somehow, there is a perception on this forum that only TV derived from the US in the the form of HD drama/scifi is worthy of broadcast and that it should be on Ten and in the highest quality and have precedence over any other content. If that was the case the last 18 months was the time to show how popular and relevant that content was for Ten to have no choice but stick with it. But no, viewers didn't watch Burn Notice etc as expected so it's stuck on SD because the HD attraction was not enough. Sport has it's critics and I'm no fan of IPL for example but extra content was promised and it it's being delivered and if HD sports are shown to attract more viewers than HD non sport then so be it. Everyone knows the bandwidth limitations and the HD market (bugger all extra channels and HD content). Compared to any other FTA 2nd channel it's been well promoted and the content has been explained in advanced. 9HD will lob 1 or 2 shows of HD on 9HD a week if that and who other than dedicated followers of TV schedules knows about them? Ten HD was also well established but didn't make 90210 for example a must watch. Sports such as NBA, NFL, NHL, AFL etc are not irrelevant or niche and there's some scheduled for ONE. Argue that times when non HD content is on ONE there should be shown Dexter etc because that's a more relevant issue
pgdownload Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 But no, viewers didn't watch Burn Notice etc as expected so it's stuck on SD because the HD attraction was not enough.I think this interpretation is possibly incorrect. If a show remains on SD its because it rates well, not badly. Putting anything on the HD channels this past 12 months effectively consigned it to being only viewable by 10% of viewers.Regards Peter Gillespie
pgdownload Posted February 18, 2009 Posted February 18, 2009 I wonder if SMH should be consulted every time as the source of financial information about Ten or whether the fact that Canwest have the debt and are selling off non FTA assets at the moment to consolidate that debt is more reliable.Well that was short lived. Ten do seem to be in trouble...Shares in Ten Network lost as much as 25% in early trade after the broadcaster decided not to proceed with a plan to sell 120 million new shares.Apparently they only received expressions of interest for about 10 million of the 120 million they wanted to sell. CanWest declined to participate in buying any more shares.Full Article Regards Peter Gillespie
fredofrog Posted February 19, 2009 Posted February 19, 2009 Not many companies will issue stock at the moment because the market worldwide has not bottomed out. You would have to rely on dividend income rather than capital gain for 12-18 months (my estimate when markets reach the low ebb). Canwest have stated that they are selling non core assets in Canada to reduce debt so hardly a time to invest in more shares. Just because there's a lack of confidence from investors in any business at the moment does not necessarily reflect a companies true position but does over all sentiment (how many times does that phrase get used in finance reports but I think it's true at the moment). In the days of 2007 and earlier all IPO's would be sold out and that lead to junk investments. ABC Learning to use an example funded from the market and banks yet all of them were happy to lend because they could not see the good times ending. It's ended rather later than would be expected but banking is based on seeling loans to receive a commission and interest and asset rights. If any FTA was in trouble I would say Nine is based on the amount of debt the US owners are carrying. If their banks called in thier loans then a sell off would be possible but hey have one blockbuster program that hold advertising well e.g. Underbelly. Ten Holdings to the best of my knowledge is not as highly geared (pls correct this if clearly wrong) but Canwest is. Now is the time of govt channels which can consolidate and point to the lack of variety from commericial FTA and request upgraded investment. Except for AFL, the rights to other sports on ONE HD are thought to be reasonable so it's not like NRL, AFL, Cricket and EPL were acquired in one going for multi year deals. As said before, some sports will appear to some as niche or pointless (or sport in general pointless) but Ten appear to have taken an opportunity to enter the US pro and college sports market through the associations that run them and got a deal they feel will be funded form advertising/sponsorship. 7/9/10 with the NRL and AFL coverage deals done prior to the downturn are relying on ratings staying and increasing to sustain their revenue. I think all will trim their local staff to the bone and go for budget production local content e.g. studio talkshows, gameshows rather than weekly drama. Even the footy shows are being trimmed back so every network is looking for costs cuts.
fredofrog Posted February 19, 2009 Posted February 19, 2009 (edited) I think this interpretation is possibly incorrect. If a show remains on SD its because it rates well, not badly. Putting anything on the HD channels this past 12 months effectively consigned it to being only viewable by 10% of viewers.Regards Peter Gillespie Well this show has been moved and stopped during 2008 so does it mean it rated well. I'm not querying if it's any good, it probably is but what FTA want more than anything is a sustained ratings winner that can deliver an audience to advertisers. Sport does that. Add to that comments from some that all they do now is record and skip every advert means big advertisers will not invest as much over time in these shows but for sport which relies on live events that go for hours at a time and have shorter (but more frequent) breaks, you can see why its more attractive for FTA. I believe NBA, AFL and IPL will be popular events to watch along with motorsport. V8 SUpercars are boring as hell to me but a huge market loves everything about it. Ten try alot of new shows and that's good in a way but they seem to find well established programs e.g. Simpsons L&O keep rating and new shows e.g. 90210 bomb out. 7 do the same e.g. change Sat night schedule based on one week while H&A keeps going and going. Most Ten HD shows were also shown on Ten SD simultaneously so the overall ratings were not seen as enough based on the cost or what the competition could deliver. Edited February 19, 2009 by fredofrog
Neon Kitten Posted February 19, 2009 Author Posted February 19, 2009 Most Ten HD shows were also shown on Ten SD simultaneously so the overall ratings were not seen as enough based on the cost or what the competition could deliver. Just to reiterate: ratings were never measured for the HD channels. Ratings have nothing to do with Ten's decision.
digitalj Posted February 19, 2009 Posted February 19, 2009 Just to reiterate: ratings were never measured for the HD channels. Ratings have nothing to do with Ten's decision. ratings for the HD channels started to be reported separately from late november.
pgdownload Posted February 19, 2009 Posted February 19, 2009 Just to reiterate: ratings were never measured for the HD channels. Ratings have nothing to do with Ten's decision.Have to agree with digitalj that that seems unlikely. While they might not be published I'm pretty sure some level of tracking was started last year. And of course its not hard to do the maths to extrapolate ratings to HD shows - ie if a show rates X on SD then when you put it on HD this will decrease by the proportion of HD ditital to analogue households. Of course its not a 1 to 1 but probably workable as a rule of thumb. As far as I can determine if 1 million viewers is the current benchmark of success, you'd almost have to pay advertisers to place ads on HD channels.Regards Peter Gillespie
donaldp Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 As far as I can determine if 1 million viewers is the current benchmark of success Ah, but when you say a million, do you mean average, peak, or total? ;-)
the_pharmacist Posted February 22, 2009 Posted February 22, 2009 can tv stations see how many viewers they have
pgdownload Posted February 22, 2009 Posted February 22, 2009 can tv stations see how many viewers they haveNo. Ratings are measured by selecting a few representative thousand households in the country and installing technology to note exactly who watches what. This sample is then applied to the whole population to get an indication of audience numbers (broken into 15 minute segments). It can handle watching live as well as watching a recording up to one week later. Its contentious how accurate this system really is, but its definitely good enough for broad brush strokes of popularity.Regards Peter Gillespie
pietro1503559499 Posted February 22, 2009 Posted February 22, 2009 Noticed last night that SYTYCD was obviously recorded in HD, but of course only shown in SD. Whereas Rove that followed was clearly recorded in SD and shown accordingly. It makes no sense whatsoever.
Recommended Posts