Uplink Activity Report - 10/15/2008 1:02pm - 84 changes

  • WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!

    If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!

    While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!

    Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!

    CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
Back in the day (and I remember this as if it was yesterday) all these stations had were rerun programs and maybe an original programs (More Brady Bunch than you could shake a stick at) old (not classic, just old :)) movies and the very occasional original production. WWOR had Joe Franklin. WGN had Bozo. WTBS has a pretty funny "news" show.

But for the most part, they offered nothing that any other independent TV station offered except the baseball. At the time they showed nearly every "away" game and since that meant that you could watch "your" home team play at home through one of these channels, they were very popular for the sports. Remember that when these stations were in their heyday (widest distribution) the sports black-out rules hadn't caught up to them yet! I remember watching more than my share of Cubs and Mets games at Riverfront on these channels at home. It wasn't until 1984 and 1987 legislation came to pass that super stations were forced to black out many games. It took another 25 years and now super stations have been strangled from all sides and with the formation of RSNs, the fact that all of them went to network programming (WB/UPN and now CW) most of the appeal of these stations is gone.

Sports may not have been the reason you got the super stations, but I know it was the reason why cable systems and Dish had them. Again I am talking about the original reason why the stations became available. The reason they remain on Dish (which is really the only outlet for all of these guys except regionally) is inertia.

See ya
Tony
 
How low can they go? Thats just sad.:eek:

When they went from 6 to 7, digiblur arranged a poll - without telling people what had happened - and no one reported worse PQ - some people reported better PQ.

So, they don't make the change unless new encoding software improvements allows it to be done without hurting the PQ.
 
I see the mapdowns to channels 2 and 5 so that would be HD for only LA and Denver DMA's I presume and not for superstation subscribers.

Perhaps so for Superstations, as KTLA is NOT currently offered in HD. You could be correct, but I am hoping Superstations subs be included. Then again, they could have just been testing with no plans to add the channels.
 
When they went from 6 to 7, digiblur arranged a poll - without telling people what had happened - and no one reported worse PQ - some people reported better PQ.

So, they don't make the change unless new encoding software improvements allows it to be done without hurting the PQ.

The fact is their PQ isn't all that great now nor was it when they had 6 per tp or at least not as good when we first got the Vooms and Hdnet was looking excellent. Remember?
 
I noticed that HBO gets up to nine channels per transponder in their MPEG4 configuration. Do the C-Band transponders have significantly wider bandwidth?
 
The fact is their PQ isn't all that great now nor was it when they had 6 per tp or at least not as good when we first got the Vooms and Hdnet was looking excellent. Remember?

Memory is notoriously inaccurate.

When people first saw HD, it was so much better than SD, that all their first viewings seem better in memory.

Nowadays, lots of stuff is in HD, it is not as remarkable.

It's similar to when a director makes a film, and then the studio forces him to change it - for the worse. When the director finally gets to release the improved "director's cut", there is always a group of people who are desperate for the "theatrical version" to be released - because that is one that they remember fondly - perhaps going out on a date that went well, etc.

Unless someone has HD-DVR recordings to compare from years ago, there is no way to know what was simply the impact of seeing HD.
 
Last edited:
Memory is notoriously inaccurate.

When people first saw HD, it was so much better than SD, that all their first viewings seem better in memory.

Nowadays, lots of stuff is in HD, it is not as remarkable.

It's similar to when a director makes a film, and then the studio forces him to change it - for the worse. When the director finally gets to release the improved "director's cut", there is always a group of people who are desperate for the "theatrical version" to be released - because that is one that they remember fondly - perhaps going out on a date that went well, etc.

Unless someone has HD-DVR recordings to compare from years ago, there is no way to know what was simply the impact of seeing HD.

Hmmm, so dropping the bit-rate of video does not affect picture quality. What are you smoking?
 
Well, I will say this:

My archived version of Open Range prior to when HDNet Movies was down-rezzed still looks noticeably better than most HD programming these days.

So, I feel qualified to meet your challenge. :) I'd say it looks, about 25% better than most HD on E* these days. Does that mean that today's HD PQ is terrible? Nope, not at all. It's still quite watchable. But it used to look better...
 
Hmmm, so dropping the bit-rate of video does not affect picture quality. What are you smoking?

Dropping the bit-rate of video affects picture quality if everything else stays the same.

Dish is constantly updating the encoding software with new improvements that increase the PQ at the same bitrate or allows equal PQ at lesser bitrate.

We see the same thing with MPEG-4 versus MPEG-2, and similar things with newer MPEG-4 encoders versus older MPEG-4 encoders.

PS My own feeling is that I would rather have all the channels I watch in good HD, rather than have most of them in SD, and only 3 or 4 in top quality HD. If I want to see top quality HD, I can always rent a Blu-Ray disk.
 
Memory is notoriously inaccurate.

When people first saw HD, it was so much better than SD, that all their first viewings seem better in memory.

Nowadays, lots of stuff is in HD, it is not as remarkable.

It's similar to when a director makes a film, and then the studio forces him to change it - for the worse. When the director finally gets to release the improved "director's cut", there is always a group of people who are desperate for the "theatrical version" to be released - because that is one that they remember fondly - perhaps going out on a date that went well, etc.

Unless someone has HD-DVR recordings to compare from years ago, there is no way to know what was simply the impact of seeing HD.

Not sure if you been here long enough, but you could find a comparison old and new HD stream for same movies - just search for "HD-Lite". There is real difference, at least visible loss of details.
 
Dropping the bit-rate of video affects picture quality if everything else stays the same.

Dish is constantly updating the encoding software with new improvements that increase the PQ at the same bitrate or allows equal PQ at lesser bitrate.

We see the same thing with MPEG-4 versus MPEG-2, and similar things with newer MPEG-4 encoders versus older MPEG-4 encoders.

PS My own feeling is that I would rather have all the channels I watch in good HD, rather than have most of them in SD, and only 3 or 4 in top quality HD. If I want to see top quality HD, I can always rent a Blu-Ray disk.

I think Dish needs to quit trying to "milk a turd" and just wait until they have additional bandwidth to add more channels.:cool:
 

Similar threads

D
Replies
0
Views
2K
DigiDish Uplink Report
D
D
Replies
0
Views
2K
DigiDish Uplink Report
D

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts