Where has all the HD content gone?

Forums › Freeview (DVB-T/DVB-S) › Where has all the HD content gone?

1 | 2 | 3

1469 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 307

#268896 31-Oct-2009 22:18

Wiseacre:

SVU: Special Victims Unit
Heroes
Criminal Intent
Pushing Daisies

None of these have ever been in HD on NZ television.

Pretty sure first series of Heroes was in HD.

Then TV3 went cheap.

Didn't see first series of Pushing Daisies on TV, the BD looks great, even the regular DD sound is good.

allstarnz

1720 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 24

Trusted

#269134 1-Nov-2009 23:42

TV3 wouldn't pay NBC the extra money they demanded for the HD programming. Fox don't charge extra. Wonder why none of the ABC stuff is in HD though (I may be wrong) - eg Wipeout, Greys etc

Nety

2584 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#269171 2-Nov-2009 09:25

I thought I read awhile ago something that sounded like NBC were going to back down on the extra charge for HD but maybe that was just hopeful wishing on TV3's part.

Media centre PC - Case Silverstone LC16M with 2 X 80mm AcoustiFan DustPROOF, MOBO Gigabyte MA785GT-UD3H, CPU AMD X2 240 under volted, RAM 4 Gig DDR3 1033, HDD 120Gig System/512Gig data, Tuners 2 X Hauppauge HVR-3000, 1 X HVR-2200, Video Palit GT 220, Sound Realtek 886A HD (onboard), Optical LiteOn DH-401S Blue-ray using TotalMedia Theatre Power Corsair VX Series, 450W ATX PSU OS Windows 7 x64

Wiseacre

44 posts

Geek

#269174 2-Nov-2009 09:33

Yeah, I read a while back about them negotiating a new contract with NBC to bring their programs to us in HD - here's hoping!

HTPC: AMD 4000+, 2GB RAM, XP Pro sp3, NVidia 8600GT silent 512mb, Xonar HDAV1.3 Deluxe Soundcard, Hauppauge HVR2200, Hauppauge HVR1100, Leadtek PVR2000, Zalman HD160 case, MediaPortal

old3eyes

9158 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1364

Subscriber

#269259 2-Nov-2009 13:30

Wonder if networks did this when color came in. Want color?? Pay more or is this a more recent thing??

Regards,

Old3eyes

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10209

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#269288 2-Nov-2009 15:02

They have paid more to make things in HD so its only right that they charge more for it.

But TV3 should be paying the price, as otherwise there is little incentive to watch it on TV over a crappy 350 meg divx download. Since it takes a 1.4 gig rip to be comparable to HD off air that is a substantial incentive to watch the late HD screenings on NZ tv. Surely thats worth something to TV3 since without HD, there are less eyes watching for their customers, so revenue from their customers will be lower.

Richard rich.ms

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

old3eyes

9158 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1364

Subscriber

#269382 2-Nov-2009 19:32

richms: They have paid more to make things in HD so its only right that they charge more for it.

But TV3 should be paying the price, as otherwise there is little incentive to watch it on TV over a crappy 350 meg divx download. Since it takes a 1.4 gig rip to be comparable to HD off air that is a substantial incentive to watch the late HD screenings on NZ tv. Surely thats worth something to TV3 since without HD, there are less eyes watching for their customers, so revenue from their customers will be lower.

Give me a break. Most TV programs made in thew US are in HD so where does the "Cost Extra" over the same program in SD come from??

Regards,

Old3eyes

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10209

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#269419 2-Nov-2009 20:45

The cameras etc dont come for nothing, neither does the additional that has to be spent on the special effects, makeup, set design etc to withstand being in HD

There is a higher value in something that is HD - why should it be sold to other broadcasters at the same price as SD or 4:3 content?

Richard rich.ms

Nety

2584 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#269462 2-Nov-2009 22:38

Not sure if I agree with that argument.. HD is technology. We are not paying any more for the tech that we buy today even though there is a lot more technology in it then there was in the tech we brought 4 years ago.

I would not be at all surprised to find that a good HD camera costs the same today as a good SD camera cost 10 years ago. As for special affect etc. Just look how far digital processing has come from the days when Toy Story was rendered.

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10209

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#269777 3-Nov-2009 21:20

If it doesn't cost any more to produce it, then why is so much content still made in SD, and in the case of the US 4:3? - if it was so easy to make HD then there would be more locally produced HD stuff.

Of cource it costs more to refit everything to be HD capable, perhaps once they stop making SD gear, and everywhere has had to refit anyway then it will not matter, but for now there is a huge cost in making HD.

Also, as there is clearly a demand for HD over SD, its a rather stupid production company that doesnt charge a premium for the HD version of things.

Blurays dont cost the same as a DVD for the exact same reason.

Richard rich.ms

browned

636 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 36

#269885 4-Nov-2009 09:08

We have no way of knowing what the costs are and how they compare to normal daily maintenance or upkeep of the exist equipment that HD equipment is replacing. Normally a tech upgrade should reduce ongoing costs and maintenance.

However, as a comparison Lord of the Rings was shot on Big Red cameras. The cost at the time shooting started (2002?) was $50k. Now you can get a Big Red camera with production pack, and a 5 lense kit for $37750. So HD prices have dropped a lot.

And to quote Peter Jackson....."I liked what they were doing ? making a digital camera of the utmost quality, and making it affordable for indie filmmakers." So there we have it HD cameras are affordable.

I think you may find US content not in HD or 16:9 is low budget shot a number of years ago. There is no value in reproducing it in 16:9 or making it HD even if the raw footage is 16:9 or HD quality.

Oh and also, I think TVNZ and TV3 would find it hard to justify in the current market any extra costs for advertising during an HD program, that and the fact we have so many platforms and the HD audience is minimal at the moment. Therefore I see no way for the broadcaster to recoup their costs just because production companies produce in HD and charge extra for it.

cheers
db

Home Server: AMD Threadripper 1950X, 64GB, 56TB HDD, Define R6 Case, 10GbE, ESXi 6.7, UNRAID, NextPVR, Emby Server, Plex Server.
Lounge Media Center: NVIDIA Shield TV 16GB: Kodi18 with Titan MOD, Emby.
Kids Media Center: NVIDIA Shield TV 16GB: Kodi18 with Titan MOD, Emby.
Main PC: Ryzen 7 2700, 16GB RAM, RX 570, 2 x 24"

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

old3eyes

9158 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1364

Subscriber

#269913 4-Nov-2009 10:05

richms: If it doesn't cost any more to produce it, then why is so much content still made in SD, and in the case of the US 4:3? - if it was so easy to make HD then there would be more locally produced HD stuff..

The 4x3 stuff from the US is most likely old shows originally shot in SD or some reality stuff is still in SD. Most OTA programing these days is in HD.

See this website for program listings and program format.

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/programming/guide.php

Regards,

Old3eyes

allstarnz

1720 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 24

Trusted

#269916 4-Nov-2009 10:09

on the other side though browned, what encouragement is there to move if there is no incentive (i.e stuff all HD content offered by the networks)

browned

636 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 36

#269976 4-Nov-2009 12:15

analogue switch off date is encouragement enough. ie You can watch TV or you can't.

This move is more about Analogue/Digital than SD/HD. 75% of the country can get HD, 98% can get SD digital via Satellite. If you listen to the Freeview ad's they will normally mention digital quality and widescreen rather than HD vs SD.

RustyGonad

495 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#269993 4-Nov-2009 12:58

All technology arguments aside this really boils down to whether or not the Freeview associated networks (TVNZ & TV3) are committed to HD in New Zealand.

I have a strong opinion that they currently are not - I believe that Freeview HD was nothing more than a weakly vieled marketing attempt to one up Sky Televisions release of their own HD network.

If either network was committed to HD - they would showcase their premier content ie the 6pm news slot in HD. This would then translate to local content being filmed and broadcast in HD - specifically in any of the local sporting events these networks broadcast. They would also have the ability to correctly mix this content into DD5.1, rather than say TV3 broadcasting the news in stereo within a 5.1 container.

The fact remains that none of this has occurred. Any local content filmed in HD appears to be from contractors. Neither network brodcasts any of its internal content in HD.

Even US sourced content which was initially broadcast in HD seems to be drifting rapidly out the window.

Compare this to Sky who broadcast low rating magazine style programs such as Reunion and Deaker on Sport in HD (with correctly mixed 5.1 audio) and you quickly see who is committed to HD. I'm not by any means saying Sky are perfect, but it illustrates the point.

Like they say a picture is worth a thousand words - in this case both TV3 and TVNZ are speaking very loudly indeed... That is neither network is currently interested in High Definition.

You'd call it a joke, except no one's laughing.

1 | 2 | 3