Current HD channels not offered by Dish

[Van]

Ok Im at a loss as to why anyone would want TCM and TMC to be in high def when TCM shows all old non HD recorded movies and TMC does pretty much the same thing. I have watched TNT HD and consider it to be a leach channel as the upconverted shows and movies look like crap on any HD tv or projector that I have ever seen. Also from the list and from what is now in HD I honestly have to wonder if the demand for HD isnt making ugly babies when it comes to channels such monster hd, anima hd, and hd news to name a few. Think about these channels, about TCM and TMC as well as wealth and oln 2 and from what I see your getting in many cases sd upconverted ( read adjusting sharpness ), animated content that will always look just as good as HD when it doesnt have to be in HD, and crap freshened up to look like it just dropped.

If people really want HD then they should be more picky about what they get as HD on a pay service instead of how it is now, tossing $300 at dish or $2000 at bestbuy to get the ability to view a small amount of quality hd ota or off a provider seems to me to be a monumental waste of money. Dont get me wrong, I do like the PQ of HD but I can not justify wasting money the way that so many people seem to be doing when they are getting so little.

 

[Tvlman]

I have both cable and DISH. INHD is just as described except it does show a lot of baseball always including the Red Sox/Yankees series. And they are showing the Stanley Cup series right now. Don't think cable will ever let Sat. pick up this programming. As for WEALTH more than half its shows are SD bumped up to HD and the pictures are awful. Would love to see Turner Classic Movies in HD. Classiic films have worked so well on FILMFEST and offer a high quality view of movies from the past.

 

[Kirby Baker]

Cable cant stop satellites from offering INHD's, but i think there is something hokey in the way INHD sells its channel, i.e. requiring $X per "digital" sub, and since all subs on satellite are digital, but not all HD, satellite companies have to pay for the channel for everyone, but only can be viewed by a portion. I'm sure someone can correct me on this, but I thought thats the way it was sold.

 

[Jeff_R]

InHd is owned by a cable company, but not necessarily exclusive to cable and HDNET is offered on several cable systems, and I'm sure Mr Cuban would like to be on the rest.

I understand all of that. InHD was initially developed by the cable companies (Comcast, Cox, etc.) as a "competitor" to HDNet. It's a cheap substitute if you ask me. HDNet is much better.

Honestly, you aren't missing much with the two InHD channels, unless you want to see endless repeats of some InDemand stuff from months earlier, like Ultimate Fighting, etc.

 

[Jeff_R]

Ok Im at a loss as to why anyone would want TCM and TMC to be in high def when TCM shows all old non HD recorded movies and TMC does pretty much the same thing.

Any film-based content is able to be transferred to HD. So, most movies are capable of an HD presentation. I'm sure there are some exceptions (possibly some of the independent documentaries and such).

The main problem you'd see with some stuff on TCM-HD would be that to maintain OAR, you would have an HD presentation of a 4:3 A/R movie. Film purists would absolutely love to have a channel like this!

 

[sonnyboy11]

Add one more channel-

FSNHD

FSN is Fox's regional sport's network and there is often an HD feed for live sporting events that it airs. For example, during the hockey regular season, a game that was on FSW (I live in LA) would be simulcast in HD. I know for a fact that both Time Warner and DirecTV picked up most of those games (DirecTV would show it on channel 95). I have asked Dish about carrying the FSNHD feed twice and they do not seem to know anything about it.

 

[Van]

Any film-based content is able to be transferred to HD. So, most movies are capable of an HD presentation. I'm sure there are some exceptions (possibly some of the independent documentaries and such).

The main problem you'd see with some stuff on TCM-HD would be that to maintain OAR, you would have an HD presentation of a 4:3 A/R movie. Film purists would absolutely love to have a channel like this!

You can dress a pig in pearls but its still a pig no matter how you look at it. Watch tnt hd or monster hd when they are showing anything pre hd, even being upconverted it looks like all that was done was to udjust the sharp level on a tv, it doesnt improve the overal quality of the movie at all wich is why alot of people complained about voom because out of all the channels on there a small handful showed modern hd content while the rest upconverted non hd movies.

 

[odbrv]

More HD

Just saw this on Star Choice in Canada for HDTV Maybe E* can be the US distributor for some. All are broadcast in true HD.
Channel Number, Broadcaster, IPD ID
280 TSN TSNHD (Sports)
287 FOX East FOXEHD
281* Sportsnet SNETHD
288 PBS East PBSEHD
282** TMN TMNHD (Movies)
289 NBC West NBCWHD
283*** MC MCHD (movies)
290 CBS West CBSWHD
284 NBC East NBCEHD
291 FOX West FOXWHD
285 ABC East ABCEHD
292 CBC CBCHD
286 CBS East CBSEHD
293 CTV East CTVHD
EpressVu had many of the above plus
Citytv east and west
Sportsnet HD
GlobalHD
WGNHD

 

[Jeff_R]

You can dress a pig in pearls but its still a pig no matter how you look at it. Watch tnt hd or monster hd when they are showing anything pre hd, even being upconverted it looks like all that was done was to udjust the sharp level on a tv, it doesnt improve the overal quality of the movie at all wich is why alot of people complained about voom because out of all the channels on there a small handful showed modern hd content while the rest upconverted non hd movies.

What you are probably seeing on older movies is the age of the film. Newer movies are transferred to HD fairly early on, so it looks great. Watch "Scarface" on HDNet Movies or Universal HD sometime. It's a pretty good transfer from film for an older movie. Doesn't compare to a brand new film, but it was restored very well.

The conversion can and is done, however the condition of the master has a lot to do with it.

 

[M Sparks]

Although those Dish subs who are already paying for both HD and Cinemax & TMC (i.e. HD Platinum) probably think they are owed this channels.

Well, yes and no. As people still don't seem to understand, everyone who subscribes to a premium package on DBS isn't getting everything they're entitled to get. (Although Starz will be a complete package soon.)

All the premium multiplex channels (including HD) are "free" to subscribers, but that doesn't mean the cable or DBS provider is obligated to carry them. In fact, although they are free to the provider, their contract lets them split them up however they want. On my old cable system, you could get HBO for $10 or whatever it was, but you could only get HBO 2 & 3 by buying a package with Showtime & TMC included as well.

I also seem to recall in the USSB days, you could only get HBO Family if you subscribed to their "everything" package.

Premium Multiplexes are just a tool offered to providers to increase subscriptions. The only reason we don't all get 8 Cinemaxes and 8 Showtimes is an issue of bandwidth and dimishing returns. So apparently DISH thought adding HBO Comedy would bring in enough more HBO subscribers to make it worth while, but not HBO Zone.

Which is why I still don't understand people complaing that they can't buy JUST the HD premiums. The price is the same...why not get everything you pay for?

 

[M Sparks]

You can dress a pig in pearls but its still a pig no matter how you look at it. Watch tnt hd or monster hd when they are showing anything pre hd,

TNT-HD for sure...they are awful and lazy.

But I don't know what you mean by Monsters HD and "Pre-HD." Virtually everything on Monsters comes from a film master. It doesn't matter when it was made- film was "HD" as soon Edison shot some.

The quality of the prints could be questionable- I have seen a few less than stellar prints on Monsters. But you can't compare it to TNT stretching and upconverting an SD video program from the 80s. Or worse yet, stretching and upconverting regular movies because they are too cheap to spring for an HD print.

And at least Monsters won't stretch a film that was originally shot in 4:3!

 

[M Sparks]

Ok Im at a loss as to why anyone would want TCM and TMC to be in high def when TCM shows all old non HD recorded movies and TMC does pretty much the same thing.

Huh? Turner Classic Movies owns one of the potentially largest HD libraries in the world! Obviously they show "non HD recorded movies"...they are an SD channel. Why would they pay to make HD copies? But if they wanted to start an HD channel, they would have an amazing library to start with!

As for The Movie Channel HD...I haven't seen it, but Showtime HD has a pretty good track record...I see more HD movies than not...even some older, lesser movies I wouldn't expect.

I've heard some people complain that Starz HD has a high percentage of SD upconverts. But they also aren't carried by many systems. Hopefully they will try harder once their audience grows.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Van's take on old movies in HD sure doesn't agree with mine.

I like watching the old movies in HD. Much, much better than watching them in SD. Sharper, better colors, wider aspect ratio (at least than the 4:3 that most old movies are aired in).

Perhaps they aren't quite as sharp and bright as a new movie, although some are excellent.

Watching older movies in HD is near the top of my list of what I want to see on HD channels. I watch Monster HD and Film Fest more than I do Showtime HD. So I would LOVE to see TCM HD. And more movie channels in the VOOM lineup.

 

[cebbigh]

What you are probably seeing on older movies is the age of the film. Newer movies are transferred to HD fairly early on, so it looks great. Watch "Scarface" on HDNet Movies or Universal HD sometime. It's a pretty good transfer from film for an older movie. Doesn't compare to a brand new film, but it was restored very well.

The conversion can and is done, however the condition of the master has a lot to do with it.

I'm with you on this. I'm really hoping for TCM hd. I'd like to see the 4:3 kept as 4:3 with slowly changing borders like they do on Voom when presenting oldies. TCM is the only non HD channel I have on my favorites "movies" list. Some great stuff on that channel and it would only be better in HD. To see some of the old B/W Hitchcock films in HD would be great.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Well, yes and no. As people still don't seem to understand, everyone who subscribes to a premium package on DBS isn't getting everything they're entitled to get. (Although Starz will be a complete package soon.)

All the premium multiplex channels (including HD) are "free" to subscribers, but that doesn't mean the cable or DBS provider is obligated to carry them.

...

Which is why I still don't understand people complaing that they can't buy JUST the HD premiums. The price is the same...why not get everything you pay for?

My point is that those of us who want HD movie channels, would like to get those which we are already paying for. When we pay Dish for Cinemax, TMC, and Starz, and then we pay Dish again to get HD channels, I think it is natural for us to desire and expect Dish to deliver those channels.

I think we have a better case for expecting the HD channels than those who want more of the SD channels offered by those providers (although that is a valid expectation too). We are paying extra to get HD channels. Part of that goes to VOOM and to HDNET, but part of it also goes to cover the extra expense incurred by Dish to broadcast HD channels. Thus if we are paying for Cinemax and paying for HD, why aren't we getting Cinemax HD?

As to your last question, yes, right now it seems to cost Dish the same for one HBO channel or all of them (can't say I know this for a fact). However that doesn't mean it has to be that way. It doesn't mean that E* or D* or some cable provider couldn't negotiate an HD-only deal from HBO or Showtime or whomever. Might never happen, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't ask for it.

Theoretically E* could offer something like a $60 package that included all HD channels, including those whose SD equivalent is AT180, and the premium movie channels. It could include the premium SD channels, Sirius (if E* wants to throw it in), and the educational channels. Maybe throw in CNN and TWC.

Right now they include HD for $20 in the HD Bronze. So take that $20. Add $30 for the premium channels. And another $10 for the AT180 HD channels and the throw-ins and some extra profit for E*.

Or look at it in reverse from the HD Platinum. $100 - $50 for AT180 + $10 for Nat Geo, OLN, maybe a couple more AT180 HDs, and the throw-ins.

Might be interesting to see how many people would pick up that package for $60-$65 a month.

 

[M Sparks]

My point is that those of us who want HD movie channels, would like to get those which we are already paying for. When we pay Dish for Cinemax, TMC, and Starz, and then we pay Dish again to get HD channels, I think it is natural for us to desire and expect Dish to deliver those channels.

Oh, absolutely. But we all know that bandwidth has been extremely limited. I would hope/expect this will change soon.

As to your last question, yes, right now it seems to cost Dish the same for one HBO channel or all of them (can't say I know this for a fact). However that doesn't mean it has to be that way. It doesn't mean that E* or D* or some cable provider couldn't negotiate an HD-only deal from HBO or Showtime or whomever. Might never happen, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't ask for it.

Well first of all, it is an absolute fact...only Encore charges separate fees for each channel. But the whole point is, the programming is for the most part paid for when you pay for the first channel. When you buy a premium, most of your money is going to pay for programming rights. Except for a few very minor cases, everything on the multiplexes also plays on the main channel at one time or another. And the more expensive the programming is (a big Hollywood movie), the less likely it is to be exclusive to one of the multiplexes.

So most of the costs incurred by broadcasting the multiplexes is uplink costs, a few voice overs, and a little bit of equipment in master control. It is not in their interest to sell them separately. They are simply a marketing tool. Their costs remain constant, so why would they want to get paid less? And would that even be fair? They've been offering these channels for free for so many years...now they would essentially be charging extra.

Now, let's say a premium develops a totally different service- say "Cinemax HD Favorites" It features ONLY HD programming, which means more repetition and fewer programming costs. They can pad it out with older, cheaper films, and they don't have to pay for all those late night "thrillers" that aren't available in HD anyway. THAT they could afford to offer at a slightly reduced rate. In the case of Cinemax, it would probably increase subscribers, because HD fans might be willing to shell out an extra $5 for an all HD premium, but might not want to pay $8 or $9 for a part time HD channel and a bunch of SD channels.

Right now they include HD for $20 in the HD Bronze. So take that $20. Add $30 for the premium channels. And another $10 for the AT180 HD channels and the throw-ins and some extra profit for E*.

Or look at it in reverse from the HD Platinum. $100 - $50 for AT180 + $10 for Nat Geo, OLN, maybe a couple more AT180 HDs, and the throw-ins.

Might be interesting to see how many people would pick up that package for $60-$65 a month.

You're still looking at this under the assumption that the HD pack won't include National Geographic HD. Maybe I missed something, but I haven't seen any indication that this is true. There is no such thing as OLN-HD...this is a isolated case. Now, they could just throw the NHL games to be nice- like they did with Universal during the Olympics. But I'm betting that OLN wouldn't allow it.

You have a good point if this situation comes to pass, but at this point, there's no indication that this type of packaging would be necessary.

 

[M Sparks]

Van's take on old movies in HD sure doesn't agree with mine.

I think he just doesn't get it...period. Film > HD (in most cases)

I do understand that film on HD doesn't have the "wow" factor that HD video does. But technically, it's even better as long as the print is good.

An HD version of Turner Classic Movies is absolutely at the top of my wish list. You see stuff on there you just won't see anywhere else. Anybody catch "F For Fake" last week? Facinating!

In the case of TCM, I wouldn't even mind some upconverts on the more obscure stuff, as long as it's 16:9. I hate watching everything in "Zoom" mode.