Tbs Hd

[richiephx]

Even though I think TBS sucks, I can still be objective based on what I see. I saw stretched-non hd content on a new FrankTV on Tuesday. The premier of the show was in HD as was the Ellen variety show. Both looked good. After that, what happened? If they can provide good HD once, why can't they be consistent, especially with their own programming produced in HD?

[Geronimo]

I guess we cannot agree on much around here.

[Geronimo]

The sketch that Frank had of Pres Bush is a good clue. Look at the metal fastners on the top of the test, in the middle the space between them is fairly small but as you move out towards the sides of the frame the space between them increases.

Why would stretched content stretch inconsistently? Perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying.

[msmith198025]

The sketch that Frank had of Pres Bush is a good clue. Look at the metal fastners on the top of the test, in the middle the space between them is fairly small but as you move out towards the sides of the frame the space between them increases.

thats fine, I wasnt actually saying it wasnt stretched, i just wanted it from someone who seemed a little less biased. Thanks rad

[msmith198025]

Even though I think TBS sucks, I can still be objective based on what I see. I saw stretched-non hd content on a new FrankTV on Tuesday. The premier of the show was in HD as was the Ellen variety show. Both looked good. After that, what happened? If they can provide good HD once, why can't they be consistent, especially with their own programming produced in HD?

Fair enough. I wasnt meaning to offend you, just calling it like i saw it.
Like i was saying in my reply to Rad, you SEEM a little biased based on your sig,, you may not be. I guess the same could be said for me and my Sig.

[rad]

Why would stretched content stretch inconsistently? Perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying.

There are different ways to play with the aspect ratios. I forget what it was called but one of my STB's had a mode where the center 1/3 of the picture was normal, not modified at all, and then as you moved out towards the edges that's when they started to stretch the aspect ratio. Watching things like a stock ticker were really weird, it would move in really quick from one side of the screen, slow down in the middle and them speed back up as it moved off

[msmith198025]

There are different ways to play with the aspect ratios. I forget what it was called but one of my STB's had a mode where the center 1/3 of the picture was normal, not modified at all, and then as you moved out towards the edges that's when they started to stretch the aspect ratio. Watching things like a stock ticker were really weird, it would move in really quick from one side of the screen, slow down in the middle and them speed back up as it moved off

that is the worse possible way to do it IMO. I would rather(if they must stretch) they stretch the whole picture to distribute it evenly across the screen.

[Geronimo]

There are different ways to play with the aspect ratios. I forget what it was called but one of my STB's had a mode where the center 1/3 of the picture was normal, not modified at all, and then as you moved out towards the edges that's when they started to stretch the aspect ratio. Watching things like a stock ticker were really weird, it would move in really quick from one side of the screen, slow down in the middle and them speed back up as it moved off

I probably don't understand what element of the picture you are referring to. i thought that you were referring to the pattern on what appeared to be a curtain liner behind Frank/Bush. that went from the top to the bottom and dis seem to vary in width but somewhat erratically. But you seem to be discussing something else.

Perhaps you are right and we certainly agree on one thing it was not a quality HD picture.

[rad]

I probably don't understand what element of the picture you are referring to. i thought that you were referring to the pattern on what appeared to be a curtain liner behind Frank/Bush. that went from the top to the bottom and dis seem to vary in width but somewhat erratically. But you seem to be discussing something else.

Perhaps you are right and we certainly agree on one thing it was not a quality HD picture.

On the desktop itself there were a series of fastners (really don't know what to call them, guess you could say nails with really large heads on them) that went the lenght of the desk, that's what I'm taking about.

[Geronimo]

Sadly I erased it---the show is not al that great. If it si on again i will look for that. but in the end we alla gree that it was not the best PQ in the worls.