Freeview, Otautahi, UHF...

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Dave Doe, Sep 1, 2011.

  1. Dave Doe

    Dave Doe Guest

    Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    already pointing at the hill?


    --
    Duncan.
     
    Dave Doe, Sep 1, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dave Doe

    Me Guest

    On 1/09/2011 10:22 p.m., Dave Doe wrote:
    > Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > already pointing at the hill?
    >
    >

    Shouldn't be a problem. We got good reception from Burnside area with a
    cheap dick smith amplified indoor antenna.
    It's a damned shame to be back on satellite freeview now we're back home
    and out of direct line of sight to Sugarloaf. It's not just the lower
    resolution. The video compression / artifacts on satellite freeview is
    terrible.
     
    Me, Sep 1, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dave Doe

    Your Name Guest

    In article <-september.org>, Dave
    Doe <> wrote:

    > Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > already pointing at the hill?


    A TV with built-in Freeview or an external Freeview set-top box. Depending
    on the signal quality you may also need to upgrade to a satellite dish
    instead.

    Plus, if you want to record shows you'll need either a new recorder with
    Freeview built-in or (if you also want to watch another channel while
    recording a second one) a second Freeview set-top box.

    It may be named "Freeview", but in reality it's "Expensiveview". One major
    reason for the switchover is simply to put more money in the Governments
    pockets via extra GST from sales of new equipment and then the sale of the
    old frequencies to mobile phone companies. :(
     
    Your Name, Sep 1, 2011
    #3
  4. Dave Doe

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <yourname-0209110900380001@203-118-184-
    219.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>, , Your Name says...
    >
    > In article <-september.org>, Dave
    > Doe <> wrote:
    >
    > > Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > > already pointing at the hill?

    >
    > A TV with built-in Freeview or an external Freeview set-top box. Depending
    > on the signal quality you may also need to upgrade to a satellite dish
    > instead.
    >
    > Plus, if you want to record shows you'll need either a new recorder with
    > Freeview built-in or (if you also want to watch another channel while
    > recording a second one) a second Freeview set-top box.
    >
    > It may be named "Freeview", but in reality it's "Expensiveview". One major
    > reason for the switchover is simply to put more money in the Governments
    > pockets via extra GST from sales of new equipment and then the sale of the
    > old frequencies to mobile phone companies. :(


    Cheers for the feedback - all good points. I don't need much, I'm
    buying it for my Mum. She's totally deaf (since age 7) and is now in
    her 70's. She has a full Sky subscription, but very rarely watches it.
    She needs Teletext for the future, and Sky doesn't have it (does it?).
    Freeview, I think does. She has an old 4:3 CRT 29" TV w' Teletext - and
    it's getting quite 'dark'. She has a DVD (also w' Telextext) and old
    VCR recorder, but uses neither. The house has a UHF and old aerial and
    satellite dish - and a splitter on the aerial in the ceiling (yeah I
    climbed in and had a look). So I'm hoping the aerial will 'just work'.
    I understand the terrestial reception is better than satellite
    (confirmed by 'Me' too).


    --
    Duncan.
     
    Dave Doe, Sep 1, 2011
    #4
  5. Dave Doe

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <j3nqhv$8hg$>, d, Me
    says...
    >
    > On 1/09/2011 10:22 p.m., Dave Doe wrote:
    > > Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > > already pointing at the hill?
    > >
    > >

    > Shouldn't be a problem. We got good reception from Burnside area with a
    > cheap dick smith amplified indoor antenna.
    > It's a damned shame to be back on satellite freeview now we're back home
    > and out of direct line of sight to Sugarloaf. It's not just the lower
    > resolution. The video compression / artifacts on satellite freeview is
    > terrible.


    The house has a good view to the hill - I checked the dual aerials last
    week (old type aerial and a later UHF one) and it seems to have a proper
    splitter up in the ceiling space. Cheers - hoping the UHF will work
    well. I'm just hoping I don't have to re-orientate the UHF aerial, and
    it sounds like I won't need to?

    --
    Duncan.
     
    Dave Doe, Sep 1, 2011
    #5
  6. Dave Doe

    Enkidu Guest

    On 01/09/11 23:32, Me wrote:
    > On 1/09/2011 10:22 p.m., Dave Doe wrote:
    >> Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    >> already pointing at the hill?
    >>
    >>

    > Shouldn't be a problem. We got good reception from Burnside area with a
    > cheap dick smith amplified indoor antenna.
    > It's a damned shame to be back on satellite freeview now we're back home
    > and out of direct line of sight to Sugarloaf. It's not just the lower
    > resolution. The video compression / artifacts on satellite freeview is
    > terrible.
    >

    Huh? We have Sky via satellite and there are rarely any 'artifacts',
    even in a *very* heavy downpour.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

    The end excuses any evil - Sophocles
     
    Enkidu, Sep 2, 2011
    #6
  7. Dave Doe

    Me Guest

    On 2/09/2011 11:14 a.m., Enkidu wrote:
    > On 01/09/11 23:32, Me wrote:
    >> On 1/09/2011 10:22 p.m., Dave Doe wrote:
    >>> Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    >>> already pointing at the hill?
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Shouldn't be a problem. We got good reception from Burnside area with a
    >> cheap dick smith amplified indoor antenna.
    >> It's a damned shame to be back on satellite freeview now we're back home
    >> and out of direct line of sight to Sugarloaf. It's not just the lower
    >> resolution. The video compression / artifacts on satellite freeview is
    >> terrible.
    > >

    > Huh? We have Sky via satellite and there are rarely any 'artifacts',
    > even in a *very* heavy downpour.
    >
    > Cheers,
    >
    > Cliff
    >


    Freeview seem to be trying to pack as much channel content into limited
    bandwidth they buy from the satellite service. Result is very heavy
    mpeg compression which looks horrible. It's not to do with signal strength.
     
    Me, Sep 2, 2011
    #7
  8. On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 22:22:06 +1200, Dave Doe <> wrote:

    >Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    >already pointing at the hill?




    Yes but does Freeview come from the Hill.
     
    Frank Williams, Sep 2, 2011
    #8
  9. Dave Doe

    Your Name Guest

    In article <4e6011db$>, Enkidu
    <> wrote:

    > On 01/09/11 23:32, Me wrote:
    > > On 1/09/2011 10:22 p.m., Dave Doe wrote:
    > >> Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > >> already pointing at the hill?

    > >
    > > Shouldn't be a problem. We got good reception from Burnside area with a
    > > cheap dick smith amplified indoor antenna.
    > > It's a damned shame to be back on satellite freeview now we're back home
    > > and out of direct line of sight to Sugarloaf. It's not just the lower
    > > resolution. The video compression / artifacts on satellite freeview is
    > > terrible.

    >
    > Huh? We have Sky via satellite and there are rarely any 'artifacts',
    > even in a *very* heavy downpour.


    When it REALLY chucks it down here in Auckland, we do get a messed up
    screen for a few seconds at a time via Sky (rarely watch via Freeview, so
    not sure about that one), and once it completely lost the signal. You can
    also lose the signal due to sunspot activity.
     
    Your Name, Sep 2, 2011
    #9
  10. Dave Doe

    Your Name Guest

    In article <-september.org>, Dave
    Doe <> wrote:

    > In article <yourname-0209110900380001@203-118-184-
    > 219.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>, , Your Name says...
    > >
    > > In article <-september.org>, Dave
    > > Doe <> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > > > already pointing at the hill?

    > >
    > > A TV with built-in Freeview or an external Freeview set-top box. Depending
    > > on the signal quality you may also need to upgrade to a satellite dish
    > > instead.
    > >
    > > Plus, if you want to record shows you'll need either a new recorder with
    > > Freeview built-in or (if you also want to watch another channel while
    > > recording a second one) a second Freeview set-top box.
    > >
    > > It may be named "Freeview", but in reality it's "Expensiveview". One major
    > > reason for the switchover is simply to put more money in the Governments
    > > pockets via extra GST from sales of new equipment and then the sale of the
    > > old frequencies to mobile phone companies. :(

    >
    > Cheers for the feedback - all good points. I don't need much, I'm
    > buying it for my Mum. She's totally deaf (since age 7) and is now in
    > her 70's. She has a full Sky subscription, but very rarely watches it.
    > She needs Teletext for the future, and Sky doesn't have it (does it?).
    > Freeview, I think does. She has an old 4:3 CRT 29" TV w' Teletext - and
    > it's getting quite 'dark'. She has a DVD (also w' Telextext) and old
    > VCR recorder, but uses neither. The house has a UHF and old aerial and
    > satellite dish - and a splitter on the aerial in the ceiling (yeah I
    > climbed in and had a look). So I'm hoping the aerial will 'just work'.
    > I understand the terrestial reception is better than satellite
    > (confirmed by 'Me' too).


    You can get Teletext when watching via Sky, but from memory (I can't check
    right now) you have to be watching TV One or TV2, but not a Sky channel
    like UKTV - sometimes it does work, but doesn't update pages properly. The
    Teletext subtitles are specific to the channel you're watching, so you
    won't get sub-titles for Sky channels.

    DVD players don't have Teletext. Teletext is built into the TV, not the
    external devices ... I don't think you can record Teletext either (at
    least not easily).

    We, in Auckland, have a Sky dish and standard decoder, and a TV with
    Freeview built-in (and a smaller TV that is still using the "normal" TV
    channels). I've never bothered to look, so I'm not sure whether the
    Freeview is using the dish or the antenna, but viewing via the Sky decoder
    is in 4:3 standard definition while via Freeview it's in widescreen (when
    possible) and higher definition.
     
    Your Name, Sep 2, 2011
    #10
  11. Dave Doe

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <yourname-0209111532050001@203-118-184-
    71.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>, , Your Name says...
    >
    > In article <-september.org>, Dave
    > Doe <> wrote:
    >
    > > In article <yourname-0209110900380001@203-118-184-
    > > 219.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz>, , Your Name says...
    > > >
    > > > In article <-september.org>, Dave
    > > > Doe <> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > > > > already pointing at the hill?
    > > >
    > > > A TV with built-in Freeview or an external Freeview set-top box. Depending
    > > > on the signal quality you may also need to upgrade to a satellite dish
    > > > instead.
    > > >
    > > > Plus, if you want to record shows you'll need either a new recorder with
    > > > Freeview built-in or (if you also want to watch another channel while
    > > > recording a second one) a second Freeview set-top box.
    > > >
    > > > It may be named "Freeview", but in reality it's "Expensiveview". One major
    > > > reason for the switchover is simply to put more money in the Governments
    > > > pockets via extra GST from sales of new equipment and then the sale of the
    > > > old frequencies to mobile phone companies. :(

    > >
    > > Cheers for the feedback - all good points. I don't need much, I'm
    > > buying it for my Mum. She's totally deaf (since age 7) and is now in
    > > her 70's. She has a full Sky subscription, but very rarely watches it.
    > > She needs Teletext for the future, and Sky doesn't have it (does it?).
    > > Freeview, I think does. She has an old 4:3 CRT 29" TV w' Teletext - and
    > > it's getting quite 'dark'. She has a DVD (also w' Telextext) and old
    > > VCR recorder, but uses neither. The house has a UHF and old aerial and
    > > satellite dish - and a splitter on the aerial in the ceiling (yeah I
    > > climbed in and had a look). So I'm hoping the aerial will 'just work'.
    > > I understand the terrestial reception is better than satellite
    > > (confirmed by 'Me' too).

    >
    > You can get Teletext when watching via Sky, but from memory (I can't check
    > right now) you have to be watching TV One or TV2, but not a Sky channel
    > like UKTV - sometimes it does work, but doesn't update pages properly. The
    > Teletext subtitles are specific to the channel you're watching, so you
    > won't get sub-titles for Sky channels.
    >
    > DVD players don't have Teletext. Teletext is built into the TV, not the
    > external devices ... I don't think you can record Teletext either (at
    > least not easily).


    Cheers, it might actually be the old VCR that has Teletext built into
    it. Regardless, she currently gets T.Text off the TV. And yep, we know
    it's only available on 1,2, and 3 - that's pretty much all she watches
    anyway.

    --
    Duncan.
     
    Dave Doe, Sep 2, 2011
    #11
  12. Dave Doe

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <>,
    , Frank Williams says...
    >
    > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 22:22:06 +1200, Dave Doe <> wrote:
    >
    > >Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > >already pointing at the hill?

    >
    >
    >
    > Yes but does Freeview come from the Hill.


    Yes, of course it does.

    --
    Duncan.
     
    Dave Doe, Sep 2, 2011
    #12
  13. Dave Doe

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <-september.org>,
    , Dave Doe says...
    >
    > In article <>,
    > , Frank Williams says...
    > >
    > > On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 22:22:06 +1200, Dave Doe <> wrote:
    > >
    > > >Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    > > >already pointing at the hill?

    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > Yes but does Freeview come from the Hill.

    >
    > Yes, of course it does.


    http://www.freeviewnz.tv/images/uploads/pdfs/Sugarloaf_Standalone_Freevi
    ew.pdf

    --
    Duncan.
     
    Dave Doe, Sep 2, 2011
    #13
  14. Dave Doe

    Me Guest

    On 2/09/2011 5:09 p.m., Dave Doe wrote:
    > In article<-september.org>,
    > , Dave Doe says...
    >>
    >> In article<>,
    >> , Frank Williams says...
    >>>
    >>> On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 22:22:06 +1200, Dave Doe<> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Is anything required for a Freeview setup given we have an UHF aerial
    >>>> already pointing at the hill?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Yes but does Freeview come from the Hill.

    >>
    >> Yes, of course it does.

    >
    > http://www.freeviewnz.tv/images/uploads/pdfs/Sugarloaf_Standalone_Freevi
    > ew.pdf
    >

    But the hill's shifted a bit - and so has the house probably.
    I'm reminded to include the TV aerial in the next batch of eqc contents
    claims.
     
    Me, Sep 2, 2011
    #14
  15. Dave Doe

    Richard Guest

    On 9/2/2011 11:54 AM, Me wrote:
    >
    > Freeview seem to be trying to pack as much channel content into limited
    > bandwidth they buy from the satellite service. Result is very heavy mpeg
    > compression which looks horrible. It's not to do with signal strength.


    Its much worse on freeview than sky satellite. Unwatchable IMO.

    C4 has less bandwidth than the 8 hour mode on my old DVD recorder. the
    other minor channels look really bad, 1/2/3 have their moments but often
    have visible blocking particually when zooming in on things. MPEG2 has
    just had its day and it shows when starved of capacity.
     
    Richard, Sep 3, 2011
    #15
  16. Dave Doe

    Richard Guest

    On 9/2/2011 3:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    > DVD players don't have Teletext. Teletext is built into the TV, not the
    > external devices ... I don't think you can record Teletext either (at
    > least not easily).
    >
    > We, in Auckland, have a Sky dish and standard decoder, and a TV with
    > Freeview built-in (and a smaller TV that is still using the "normal" TV
    > channels). I've never bothered to look, so I'm not sure whether the
    > Freeview is using the dish or the antenna, but viewing via the Sky decoder
    > is in 4:3 standard definition while via Freeview it's in widescreen (when
    > possible) and higher definition.


    Then set your skybox up correctly for the television if you are getting
    4:3 out of it. All channels except a couple of useless ones and CNN are
    in widescreen, if you are centrecutting you will be missing massive
    amounts of content.
     
    Richard, Sep 3, 2011
    #16
  17. Dave Doe

    Your Name Guest

    In article <j3si5t$217$>, Richard <> wrote:

    > On 9/2/2011 3:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    > > DVD players don't have Teletext. Teletext is built into the TV, not the
    > > external devices ... I don't think you can record Teletext either (at
    > > least not easily).
    > >
    > > We, in Auckland, have a Sky dish and standard decoder, and a TV with
    > > Freeview built-in (and a smaller TV that is still using the "normal" TV
    > > channels). I've never bothered to look, so I'm not sure whether the
    > > Freeview is using the dish or the antenna, but viewing via the Sky decoder
    > > is in 4:3 standard definition while via Freeview it's in widescreen (when
    > > possible) and higher definition.

    >
    > Then set your skybox up correctly for the television if you are getting
    > 4:3 out of it. All channels except a couple of useless ones and CNN are
    > in widescreen, if you are centrecutting you will be missing massive
    > amounts of content.


    True, but then some of the content on Sky is old repeats which then run in
    a square in the centre of the screen ... it's a personal preference as to
    whether you want borders down each side, or a stretched or chopped image.

    Even on the normal channels you still get the occasional advert or old
    re-run that is in 4:3.

    But you not "missing massive amounts of content". Although it's slowing
    changing, most shows are still made to fit a 4:3 screen with little of
    importance happening in the small amount of extra space on each side of a
    widescreen.

    In fact, in some cases it can be better since the 4:3 size (almost)
    thankfully gets rid of the annoying and stupid channel's "ghost" logo -
    UKTV being one example.
     
    Your Name, Sep 3, 2011
    #17
  18. Dave Doe

    Richard Guest

    On 9/4/2011 10:10 AM, Your Name wrote:
    > In article<j3si5t$217$>, Richard<> wrote:
    >
    >> On 9/2/2011 3:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    >>> DVD players don't have Teletext. Teletext is built into the TV, not the
    >>> external devices ... I don't think you can record Teletext either (at
    >>> least not easily).
    >>>
    >>> We, in Auckland, have a Sky dish and standard decoder, and a TV with
    >>> Freeview built-in (and a smaller TV that is still using the "normal" TV
    >>> channels). I've never bothered to look, so I'm not sure whether the
    >>> Freeview is using the dish or the antenna, but viewing via the Sky decoder
    >>> is in 4:3 standard definition while via Freeview it's in widescreen (when
    >>> possible) and higher definition.

    >>
    >> Then set your skybox up correctly for the television if you are getting
    >> 4:3 out of it. All channels except a couple of useless ones and CNN are
    >> in widescreen, if you are centrecutting you will be missing massive
    >> amounts of content.

    >
    > True, but then some of the content on Sky is old repeats which then run in
    > a square in the centre of the screen ... it's a personal preference as to
    > whether you want borders down each side, or a stretched or chopped image.
    >
    > Even on the normal channels you still get the occasional advert or old
    > re-run that is in 4:3.


    3 button presses to set it to centercut if needed, I seldom bother since
    the 4:3 tv's I have running off the SD output have so much overscan that
    there isnt a great deal of black borders around it when its on letterbox
    and the channel has pillarboxing added.

    > But you not "missing massive amounts of content". Although it's slowing
    > changing, most shows are still made to fit a 4:3 screen with little of
    > importance happening in the small amount of extra space on each side of a
    > widescreen.


    Only US sourced stuff since they still push it out in 4:3 for their non
    HD services - widescreen SD never took off over there, and most people
    there are so ignorant that they equate widescreen with HD

    > In fact, in some cases it can be better since the 4:3 size (almost)
    > thankfully gets rid of the annoying and stupid channel's "ghost" logo -
    > UKTV being one example.


    And half of people when there are 2 onscreen, and parts of sports scores
    etc. The habit of pushing everything to the middle of the screen to
    allow for centercutting is thankfully almost over.

    Now if only the clowns at juice and 63 could play stuff out in the
    correct aspect ratio and they would pillarbox the remnant 4:3 channels
    like CNN, CNBC and whatever else, as mums stupid SD skybox cant do
    pillarboxing of those channels to feed the widescreen tv so you are
    stuck with fattovision when watching CNN.

    The mysky is much better with its aspect handling. I dont get how they
    can sell the service with the old boxes when they have no way to send a
    4:3 channel to a widescreen TV and have it display correctly. Ironically
    they do support letterboxing the normal wide channels onto an old 4:3
    screen.
     
    Richard, Sep 5, 2011
    #18
  19. Dave Doe

    Richard Guest

    On 9/5/2011 9:55 PM, Me wrote:
    > On 3/09/2011 6:38 p.m., Richard wrote:
    >> On 9/2/2011 11:54 AM, Me wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Freeview seem to be trying to pack as much channel content into limited
    >>> bandwidth they buy from the satellite service. Result is very heavy mpeg
    >>> compression which looks horrible. It's not to do with signal strength.

    >>
    >> Its much worse on freeview than sky satellite. Unwatchable IMO.
    >>
    >> C4 has less bandwidth than the 8 hour mode on my old DVD recorder. the
    >> other minor channels look really bad, 1/2/3 have their moments but often
    >> have visible blocking particually when zooming in on things. MPEG2 has
    >> just had its day and it shows when starved of capacity.

    >
    > Since posting this, Freeview satellite picture quality (TV1/2/3) seems
    > to have improved drastically. Still some compression artifacts visible
    > around static text when it first appears on screen, but not too bad.
    > I wonder if they bought a bit more bandwidth prior to the RWC (TM).


    They cant. Some idiot decided to run freeview sat on the same satellite
    that sky have rights to almost all the available space, just to save
    people money on a dish install. 2 halves of a transponder is all they
    will ever have, no more.

    Not sure if they were supposed to get more space before the total cockup
    that D1 was, but IMO once it was clear that they didnt have the space
    they should have moved freeview elsewhere. Perhaps there will at some
    stage be a new freeview sat service based on another satellite with
    capacity, perhaps HD etc too.

    But for now no change of more bandwidth without abandoning the
    exisisting installed base and moving to dvb-s2 and mpeg4. Which also
    would be a good idea but all the whiners with cheap-as boxes would cry
    at them being obsoleted so soon.
     
    Richard, Sep 5, 2011
    #19
  20. Dave Doe

    Your Name Guest

    In article <j41trq$3bh$>, Richard <> wrote:

    > On 9/4/2011 10:10 AM, Your Name wrote:
    > > In article<j3si5t$217$>, Richard<> wrote:
    > >
    > >> On 9/2/2011 3:32 PM, Your Name wrote:
    > >>> DVD players don't have Teletext. Teletext is built into the TV, not the
    > >>> external devices ... I don't think you can record Teletext either (at
    > >>> least not easily).
    > >>>
    > >>> We, in Auckland, have a Sky dish and standard decoder, and a TV with
    > >>> Freeview built-in (and a smaller TV that is still using the "normal" TV
    > >>> channels). I've never bothered to look, so I'm not sure whether the
    > >>> Freeview is using the dish or the antenna, but viewing via the Sky decoder
    > >>> is in 4:3 standard definition while via Freeview it's in widescreen (when
    > >>> possible) and higher definition.
    > >>
    > >> Then set your skybox up correctly for the television if you are getting
    > >> 4:3 out of it. All channels except a couple of useless ones and CNN are
    > >> in widescreen, if you are centrecutting you will be missing massive
    > >> amounts of content.

    > >
    > > True, but then some of the content on Sky is old repeats which then run in
    > > a square in the centre of the screen ... it's a personal preference as to
    > > whether you want borders down each side, or a stretched or chopped image.
    > >
    > > Even on the normal channels you still get the occasional advert or old
    > > re-run that is in 4:3.

    >
    > 3 button presses to set it to centercut if needed, I seldom bother since
    > the 4:3 tv's I have running off the SD output have so much overscan that
    > there isnt a great deal of black borders around it when its on letterbox
    > and the channel has pillarboxing added.


    On our TV there's quite a thick black border down each side. Besides
    which, not everyone is technically minded enough or can be bothered to
    keep switching the settings.




    > > But you not "missing massive amounts of content". Although it's slowing
    > > changing, most shows are still made to fit a 4:3 screen with little of
    > > importance happening in the small amount of extra space on each side of a
    > > widescreen.

    >
    > Only US sourced stuff since they still push it out in 4:3 for their non
    > HD services - widescreen SD never took off over there, and most people
    > there are so ignorant that they equate widescreen with HD
    >
    > > In fact, in some cases it can be better since the 4:3 size (almost)
    > > thankfully gets rid of the annoying and stupid channel's "ghost" logo -
    > > UKTV being one example.

    >
    > And half of people when there are 2 onscreen, and parts of sports scores
    > etc. The habit of pushing everything to the middle of the screen to
    > allow for centercutting is thankfully almost over.


    Nobody here cares about sports anyway, and I've never noticed any real
    problems with "two people being on-screen". As I said, most stuff is still
    filmed with 4:3 in mind (and most movies are still filmed with that
    smaller screen size in mind), and will be for quite some time yet - the
    Government may be pushing their digital "Expensiveview", but at the same
    time they're saying you can keep you old TV, so there will be lots of
    people still using 4:3 TV sets here and lots of countries around the world
    where they have no choice that makers want to sell their shows to.




    > The mysky is much better with its aspect handling. I dont get how they
    > can sell the service with the old boxes when they have no way to send a
    > 4:3 channel to a widescreen TV and have it display correctly. Ironically
    > they do support letterboxing the normal wide channels onto an old 4:3
    > screen.


    You can't make 4:3 fit widescreen "correctly" (whether that's old shows or
    old broadcast format). You're stuck with either black borders or a
    stretched image - you can't magically make up data that isn't there.
     
    Your Name, Sep 5, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. bigredfred

    freeview to pc

    bigredfred, Mar 28, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    4,581
    bigredfred
    Mar 28, 2005
  2. J Poy
    Replies:
    46
    Views:
    8,218
    otacanada
    Jun 19, 2009
  3. Martin
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,283
    Martin
    Feb 8, 2009
  4. Martin
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    614
    Craig Shore
    Feb 8, 2009
  5. ~misfit~

    Sky TV UHF channels?

    ~misfit~, Mar 11, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    963
    ~misfit~
    Mar 12, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page