HDTV has arrived

[Canonman]

Of course they do. What do their competitors say?

Have they gone completely HD, or are they shooting SD and upconverting? Which cameras are they shooting with on the street?



Nobody else there is broadcasting HD?



It's obvious to you and me. It is not necessarily obvious to a less savvy viewer. Hell, most people can't tell the difference between film and video.

You have to remember that the people who have been buying HDTV up to now have money. They are going to be more savvy than the general population of viewers who will be forced to switch in the next few years. They bought HD because they wanted HD for the better picture quality and could afford it. They would naturally be looking for the difference, if for no other reason to justify their expenditure. So when you talk to them, and you hear them say they could never watch SD video again, they're not exactly speaking for the unwashed masses.

They are still the minority. The majority are waiting for smaller, more affordable sets. Many of them will probably end up watching your beautiful HD signal downconverted to an older NTSC set that will still last another five, ten years. While the broadcasters have to stop broadcasting NTSC, I seriously doubt the cable companies are going to leave their NTSC customers hanging and give up on that revenue. They'll take your beautiful HD signal, downconvert it, compress the hell out of it and send it through wires to the majority of your viewers who, on their 20" NTSC teevees, won't have the slightest clue whether the story they just watched on your newscast was shot with an HD camera, an HDV camera or an SD camera.

Eventually, little by little, they'll upgrade. The gamble I mentioned concerns the timing of this upgrade and how it will affect ratings. If your competitor can maintain his advertising revenue without making the expenditure you've made to improve your picture, there's less reason from a business standpoint for him to do it.

Disclaimer: I don't work for the station. I had a couple of their guys in my class at NAB and I recently toured their station.

That said, they are still using SX with 16:9 turned on for field acquisition and they are the only local station doing HD news. They also have at least one XDCAM HD (F350) in the production dept. The studio cameras are Grass Valley HD cameras.

I would agree that maybe I have more of an eye for spotting true HD acquisition. I've had a set since 2002 when there was virtually nothing to watch other than some sports, a few prime times(shot on film), and The Tonight Show.

The cable companies are pretty much all digital transmission now, even on the SD channels, so they have the infrastructure already in place...ditto the satellite providers. I FULLY agree that cable and satellite already compress the hell out of the HD content they offer. As low as 12mb data rates in some cases. OTA however, is a different story. It comes in at around 19.2 to 25 depending on how many sub channels the local broadcaster wants to tag along. For that reason, I haven't bothered to upgrade my satellite service. I watch all HD stuff OTA.

I disagree about Joe Average not being able to see a difference, especially when seeing the studio cameras. Keep in mind also that Joe Average may not own an HD set yet, but he or she is going to get a lot of exposure to it if they go out to sports bars and other establishments. You no longer have to flock to a big box chain or home theater store to see HD in person. It's in a lot of public venues. And where it's getting utilized, it tends to get promoted so Joe Average gets clued in as to why the picture looks so much better than what he's used to. The BIGGEST confusion I hear coming from Joe Average viewer is not understanding 4:3 vs. 16:9 and all the ramifications of broadcasters having to use both in the current transition.

I have also read and heard broadcasters admitting that they haven't done enough to promote and educate viewers about the Feb 17, 2009 cut-off for NTSC.

cm

 

[cameradog]

That said, they are still using SX with 16:9 turned on for field acquisition and they are the only local station doing HD news.

Then WFAA has little to do with what was being discussed. The issue was whether it's okay to continue shooting SD and upconvert to HD for broadcast. That's exactly what they're doing. You said they saw an increase in ratings, but if they're still using the old gear, that increase obviously had nothing to do with upgrading cameras.

 

[cameradog]

I don't like watching broadcast HD after editing uncompressed HDCAM at my work!

HDCam is compressed. That's part of the format spec. The compression ratio is something like 7:1. You may not be compressing it any further when you edit it, but if you're working with footage acquired in HDCam format, you are not working with uncompressed HD.

 

[patssle]

It is either expensive or time consuming. You can spend $35,000 on a VelocityHD and get real time unncompressed editing, effects, color correction with 2 streams of video or you can spend a couple thousand on Avid or Final Cut Pro and have to render your heart out. That dosn't even count the HDCAM deck or hardrives. 10-bit uncompressed 1080i 4:4:4 is about 240 megabytes/sec. You need a terabyte for one hour worths of footage. Hardrives are cheap, but you need a ton of them...

 

[patssle]

HDCam is compressed. That's part of the format spec. The compression ratio is something like 7:1. You may not be compressing it any further when you edit it, but if you're working with footage acquired in HDCam format, you are not working with uncompressed HD.

Agreed, my mistake. I meant to put it that I capture HDCAM into an uncompressed workflow to allow for maximum quality (graphics, animations, etc).

 

[David Bird]

HD backhaul is almost here

Your Nextel digital MW conversion will be able to haul an ASI stream back to the station.
A HD IRD will decode to whatever format your put into your MPEG encoder on the MW field unit.
Miranda makes a HDV to ASI converter and there will be converters for other formats to ASI.

It is important to have the Inter City Relay links able to do digital. Nucomm has the Analog Coder 2 that will convert an analog MW radio to digital.

Will it be important to do HD from the field?
Who knows?

Bird

 

[The Daywood]

I guess at some point we need to define what "HD" is.
Is is just above the old 525 and digital? I know Fox is doing 720p and CBS 1080i. Which is better?

There are some stations who are going digital, but busting their bandwidth into 4 and 5 subchannels. There's no way you get "HD quality" out of that.

I will admit that I can see the difference between Digital and HD, but I'm with the camp who says most people assume that if it is 16:9, it must be HD...They're watching it on their HD set aren't they?

Don't get me wrong...I think it will take educating people to what to expect from better picture quality.

I also think there are many people who are snake oil salesmen who are pushing digital TV as HD...

 

[patssle]

I also think there are many people who are snake oil salesmen who are pushing digital TV as HD...

You know, I don't think I've heard anybody I know (average consumer) refer to the transistion in 2009 as a digital transistion, they all call it a HD transistion.

 

[Canonman]

You said they saw an increase in ratings, but if they're still using the old gear, that increase obviously had nothing to do with upgrading cameras.

Only the field cameras. They had to build all new news sets, the talent has to apply makeup with an airbrush, and the studio cameras are HD. It DOES make a visual difference. So it's quasi-HD local news... I get it.

All I'm saying is they (BELO Corp.) spent lots of money, promoted the heck out it, continue to do so and they saw a ratings bump because they're the only local doing HD news of any kind, even if it's only the studio cameras at this point. It had more to do with promoting it as HD and at this point, they're the only ones who can assert that claim with any grain of truth to it.

 

[The Daywood]

WFAA actually opens every newscast with a variation on the line "Welcome to News 8 in High Definition..." Whether it be from their main studios, or the studios in Victory Park (storefront outside the American Airlines Center), they push the heck out of the HD.

 

[NTNewsie]

News8

Yes WFAA is in HD however the studio cams are the only thing HD, both at victory and at the main studio. Field is shooting on Beta SX in 16:9 and being up converted.

The main thing is that they are the first in this market to do HD of any kind and yes, it has helped with the ratings.

 

[MOShooter]

I guess at some point we need to define what "HD" is.
Is is just above the old 525 and digital? I know Fox is doing 720p and CBS 1080i. Which is better?

720p and 1080i are both HD specs. One is higher resolution than the other, but that doesn't matter as much, unless you're looking at a 70-inch screen from 8 feet away, for example. Take a 42-inch screen from 10 feet or more, and you'd be hard pressed to see the difference, because the eye can't resolve that kind of detail. 720p is better for fast moving images, such as sports, and 1080i is better for shots with little movement.

There are some stations who are going digital, but busting their bandwidth into 4 and 5 subchannels. There's no way you get "HD quality" out of that.

Agreed, but who's going to stop them from doing that?

I will admit that I can see the difference between Digital and HD, but I'm with the camp who says most people assume that if it is 16:9, it must be HD...They're watching it on their HD set aren't they?

I've been watching PBS HD a lot lately, and I can tell what's SD widescreen, and what's HD widescreen. The SD blurs when the camera moves.

Don't get me wrong...I think it will take educating people to what to expect from better picture quality.

Basically I see it like those Claritin commercials. SD is before Claritin, and HD is after. If you don't believe me, switch between the local SD and HD feeds.

I also think there are many people who are snake oil salesmen who are pushing digital TV as HD...

Agreed, again. All HDTV is digital, but not all digital is HD.

Personally, if it isn't 16:9 720p or 1080i, it's not HD. Also, nothing irks me more than going to a restaurant that's spent money on HD sets but is showing SD channels stretched to fit. Why?