*** FOX goes PAN&SCAN? 10 Fox discs re-released in MARCH (1 Viewer)

[Mark_Mac]

I dont think we have to worry about OAR movies disappearing. At my local BB and CC Im seeing more 16x9 TVs on the floor then this time last year. The number of widescreen movie buyers continue to grow. Come on, look at the super bit DVD's. There's obviously enough people out there that are picky enough about the image quality for this type of product to be released. Look at DTS only DVD's, Most people dont know what DTS is but theres enough of a market for this product. Also how many of these so called J6P'ers are into DolbyDigital or DTS? Not many Im guessing. Most of these people dont have their TV hooked up to any type of stereo, let alone have a 5 to 7 speaker system with a sub. I think the chances of widescreen movies going away have the same chance as DD or DTS movies going away. Yes the majority of the public want full screen movies to watch on their full screen TV's but there are enough of us Wide screeners out there to warrent a product for both.

 

[Brett Cameron]

3 times Predator is released and still only a special edition in region 2 and no release of it's sequel in region 1. That makes no sense. Fox, a special edition of Predator and a dvd release of Predator 2 would both sell a lot more then a full frame edition of Predator.

 

[Dan Hitchman]

Things are rotten in the state of Denmark...

Dan

 

[Eric Huffstutler]

Things are rotten in the state of Denmark...

Dan...
You live in the state of Denmark?
I live in the state of Chaos... nice to meet you!

 

[Jeff Whitford]

Where do you get this information from???

"There is no HDTV mandate, there never has been an HDTV mandate, and by 2006 what little mandate exists will probably be replaced by something even more wimpy. Wait until you hear Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton complaining that poor minorities (and other poor people that they won't mention) are having their TV taken away from them (a point with some validity). Look for analog broadcast to actually disappear at some point after subsidized set-top boxes for the poor are made available. Maybe 2012 is when regular TV will really go away, and there is a good chance that most stations will just be broadcasting 4:3 SDTV at that point anyway.

And 16:9 solves nothing. It will make things worse. Once Joe Six Pack buys a widescreen set, he gets even more pissed when he finds out that he still gets bars on all of his academy-ratio material and 'scope films."

The analog signal is to be turned off in may of 2006. This was set forth 4 years ago. As far as poor people or minorites as you say or regular folks for that matter,these people have cable and converter box's will probably be part of their cable service.

As far as 16x9 goes again I sell these tv's and alot of people are buying them so they dont have to see black bars on the top and bottom on a 4x3 set(Sony) with an HD broadcast. In fact with HD sets we sell 16x9 sets 5 to 1 over 4x3 sets and the town I live in seems to be the last place in the USA to embrace anything new. In fact HD sets are out selling analog sets (PJ's) 10 to 1 and we have no local HD broadcasts yet. Not till May. Joe six pack as you call them can use the picture format or aspect button to get rid of those bars.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Where do you get this information from???

From a little something called section 3003 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Read it sometime.
Where do you get your information from?

 

[Gui A]

1 Disc titles, eh?
Well, I hope they're DD 2.0 (although Big Fat mono would be more deserved), Single Layered, AND GRAINY AS HELL!!!
Even better. Tape a VHS transfer, dub it a few times, and master it to a DVD.
I'm glad Fox doesn't give those suckers good extras. And I hope they don't even get ONE extra. Not even a trailer. Not Scene Selections and Interactive Menus.
NOTHING
Well, maybe a P/S v. WS demo would be good. and an ad telling them what they're missing. but NO MORE!

 

[Peter Kim]

IF Peter Staddon has relented in his OAR-dogma in order to assuage the demands of the mainstream, I understand. What little I know of Mr. Staddon is that he holds a high level position (VP?) in the marketing arena. Ultimately, his longevity in that position depends on the profitability of Fox.

Bottom line - No brainer. And apparently, according to his or industry studies, the consumption of the masses vastly outweighs the consumption of the enthusiasts (to hell with the enormous per capita imbalance, 1(HTFer) x 100 < 100,000 (?) x 2 dvd's - keep in mind the proportion of the ignorant mainstream to the enthusiast...is it 1 to 100,000, I dunno, but it must be a high ratio indeed).

My guess is that the rate in which people are joining the ranks of the uninformed mainstream is far, FAR greater than the number of dvd's purchased by a pretty static enthusiast base.

How can you argue with a man who wants to keep his job? If Peter accepted the role as an OAR-vanguard, he would do so much to the delight of most members in this forum. However, given that other studios are providing a P&S option, coupled with the current climate of ignorance, Peter might also risk relegating Fox as a purveyor of a niche dvd product.

I'm sure Fox does not want to be knocked down a peg, from a major studio to a boutique producer. And the man who determined this fate would suffer the consequence. Peter would be fired.

Peter Staddon is in a tough position. So I can empathize with him on this quagmire. BUT,...

He is in a position that none of us command. He can almost directly influence the actions of one company, which will inevitably dictate the actions of the rest of the community.

10 years from now, we might be discussing this event as such - either, Fox's action was the result of a miniscule and thwarted charge on the behalf of the ignorant, or this was a pivotal loss for those advocating the rights of the filmmaker.

I believe the latter. What better analogy to apply than that of David vs. Goliath. David did not sit Goliath down and discuss the perils of being immoral, nor did he wear him down with glancing blows. He shot him dead (sorry for the canonic detour...I couldn't find any other secular relation).

Those that prefer P&S do so not rationally, but psychologically - it is basic human instinct to fill in the blanks, connect the dots. I write this sincerely and with full belief - for the vast majority of the masses, it will be impossible to sway their beliefs for P&S. In our society, where instant gratification is king, they want their screens filled now. Education is futile.

This is where leaders come into play. Visionaries, vanguards, whatever...these people in power positions must stand firm and control the fate of what they believe in, despite popular opinion. It's interesting to note that popular opinion once held that since bacteria was not visible to the human eye, it did not exist. But with the persistence of one, Louis Pasteur, society as a whole improved with the introduction of pasteurization (black bars -> picture must be missing, get it...no, I don't think this is too far-fetched).

Good luck to you, Peter. Hopefully, we're not witness to your signal of defeat. Of OAR,...of your principles.

 

[Mark-W]

I think all pan-and-scan titles
should have a "forced trailer" that
explains what the viewer will be missing
by not seeing the film widescreen.
I do know many people who, in spite
of being fully aware of the differences
between pan-and-scan and OAR, still
choose pan-and-scan.
The upside is, I was at a lecture tonight
regarding David Lynch's Lost Highway,
and as soon as the pan-and-scan film was being
presented, bunches of people got up and left because
it was pan-and-scan.
Granted, Lynch fans are genreally NOT
mainstream people.
Mark

 

[David Lambert]

Quote:




Quote:



Where do you get this information from???




From a little something called section 3003 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Read it sometime.




Actually, EVERYONE here should take some time and pop over to the FCC website FAQ about Digitial TV (DTV). It mentions the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, it takes about the 2006 "deadline", the shape of new TV's, whether or not there's alternatives to buying new TV's, what about buying new antennae, and which stations must convert to DTV by when. I see a LOT of misinformation posted here at HTF and other places about DTV, and y'all should just get your facts straight. Anyone who reads it over will see that we CANNOT depend on goverment-enforced conversion to DTV to force the average consumer into getting a widescreen TV. A) they'll be able to buy converters for under $100, according to the FAQ, and keep on using their existing sets "forever" if they so choose, and B) the FAQ, written in 1996 (although updated from time-to-time...last time was Sept. 2001 per the note at the bottom) incorrectly assumed that all DTV's would be 16x9. Nope...you can go into any Best Buy or Circuit City and see DTV's in a 4x3 shape.

Here's the site: http://www.fcc.gov/mmb/prd/dtv/#1


And here are the main highlights:

• l. What is digital television (DTV)?
  
  Digital television (DTV) is a new type of broadcasting technology that will transform television as we now know it. Pursuant to Congressional authorization, the Commission has established rules for the transition to this new technology. By transmitting the information used to make a TV picture and sound as "data bits" (as does a computer), a digital broadcaster can carry more information than is currently possible with analog broadcast technology. This will allow for the transmission of pictures with higher resolution for dramatically better picture and sound quality than is currently available, or of several "standard definition" TV programs at once. ("Standard definition" digital TV pictures would be similar in clarity and detail to the best TV pictures being received and displayed today using the current (analog NTSC) broadcast system and TV receivers.) The DTV technology can also be used to transmit large amounts of other data that you may be able to access using your computer or your television set.
  
  
  2. How will digital television be different than current broadcast television?
  
  With digital television, broadcasters will be able to offer free television of higher resolution and better picture quality than now exists under the current mode of TV transmission. If broadcasters so choose, they can offer what has been called "high definition television" or HDTV, television with theater-quality pictures and CD-quality sound. Alternatively, a broadcaster can offer several different TV programs at the same time, with pictures and sound quality better than is generally available today. In addition, a broadcaster will be able to simultaneously transmit a variety of other information through a data bitstream to both enhance its TV programs and to provide entirely new services. For example, TV programs can be broadcast with a variety of languages and captions, and sports programs can be broadcast so that the individual viewer might select his or her favorite camera angle or call up player statistics, game scores or other information. Broadcasters also will be able to transmit to your television an entire edition of a newspaper, sports information, computer software, telephone directories, stock market updates, interactive educational material and any other information which can be translated into digital bits.
  
  
  4. How will digital television benefit the public?
  
  The advent of DTV will benefit the public because of the improved quality, and possibly quantity, of free television service and the potential availability of much more information on your television set. In addition, one of the most important benefits of DTV is the fact that it will free up parts of the broadcast spectrum and allow its return to the government for other important uses. A part of this additional spectrum has already been designated for public safety, police and fire usage, and other options will be available for other business purposes.
  
  
  6. Will I need a new television to receive DTV?
  
  Not necessarily. During the transition period established for the changeover -- until at least 2006 -- consumers who wish to rely on analog program service can continue to use their existing sets to receive that service, but they will not be able to see the DTV broadcasts without a special converter. Broadcasters will continue to operate their current stations until that time, and consumers will be able to get many more years of service during the useful lives of their existing television sets.
  
  Consumers who wish to keep their existing sets and also want to receive the DTV programming will be able to purchase converters which will allow them to view digital programs on their current sets. The pictures should be clear of the "ghosts" and interference characteristic of analog transmission, although they will not be of the higher DTV picture quality. To receive the full benefits of digital television service, you will need a new digital television set.
  
  
  7. Are the new digital television sets very expensive?
  
  Just as color television sets were very expensive when they were first introduced, the new digital TVs will be quite expensive at first, with manufacturers concentrating initially on "high-end" models. The price is expected to drop over time, so that by the time DTV broadcasts are available everywhere across the country, digital television sets should be more affordable. In the meantime (and as a permanent alternative) you will have the option of purchasing a converter box which can be used to adapt your current television set for digital use, so that your current television will not be made obsolete. The price of converter boxes is expected to drop below $100 during the transition period to full-DTV service.
  
  
  8. What will the new digital television sets look like?
  
  New DTV sets will have wider screens than current TV sets, allowing the pictures to be viewed more like those experienced in a movie theater. The wider picture, especially in larger set sizes, is expected to enhance sports and drama viewing, making you feel more involved in the action, as well as rendering more realistic pictures. As with current TV sets, a range of sizes eventually will be available, although initially larger screensize DTV sets probably will be most common. Larger screen size takes greatest advantage of the higher "resolution" of DTV pictures and may better justify the initially high price of the first DTV receivers. The expectation is also that there will be a range of prices that will coincide with a range of picture quality, as with current TV sets.
  
  
  9. Will I be able to continue receiving regular television?
  
  Regular analog television service, what is broadcast today, will continue until the end of the transition period which currently is set to continue through the year 2006. In addition, a law passed by Congress last fall includes provisions which would extend the time period for continuation of analog service beyond the year 2006 if DTV service and DTV equipment are not as widespread by then as currently expected.
  
  
  10. Will I need a special new antenna in order to receive DTV over the air?
  
  In general, dependable reception of DTV will require the same type of signal reception equipment that currently works to provide good quality reception of analog TV signals. If you now need a roof-top antenna in order to receive television, the same antenna generally will be needed to receive DTV reception.
  
  
  12. How long will it take for the conversion to DTV? What is the schedule for conversion to DTV?
  
  The FCC established an accelerated schedule for the introduction of DTV. Pursuant to this schedule, most Americans will have some access to DTV by 1999 and everyone in this country will have DTV access by the year 2002. At the same time, analog service will also continue until 2006. After the end of this transition period, broadcasters will broadcast only DTV.
  
  More specifically, affiliates of the top four networks (ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC) in the top ten markets must be on the air with a digital signal by May 1, 1999. In markets 11 through 30, the same network affiliates must be on the air by Nov. 1, 1999. All other commercial stations must be constructed by May 1, 2002. Several TV stations in the top ten markets voluntarily have committed to begin digital television service by Nov. 1, 1998.
  
  
  13. What happens if digital television is not widely available by the end of the transition period?
  
  The transition period to DTV is currently scheduled to end on December 31, 2006. This transition period is subject to periodic progress reviews by the FCC to make sure DTV service is widely available. In addition, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, passed last fall by the Congress, includes provisions that would extend the continuation of analog service beyond the year 2006 deadline if DTV is implemented more slowly than expected. Specific conditions which would extend the transition period include the failure of one or more of the largest TV stations in a market to begin broadcasting digital TV signals through no fault of their own, or fewer than 85% of the TV households in a market are able to receive digital TV signals off the air either with a digital TV set or with an analog set equipped with a converter box or by subscription to a cable-type service that carries the DTV stations in the market.
  
  
  14. What must a TV station do to convert to DTV?
  
  The answers depends upon the individual circumstances of the TV station. All TV stations will need a new transmitter, antenna and production facilities. Some TV broadcasters will have to modify their antenna towers or construct new towers for their DTV antennas. Before modifying or building towers, broadcasters may need to get approval from state, city or county governments regarding local zoning, structural engineering, construction, safety, and other issues.
  
  17. Where will the new towers be located? Will my local government have a say in where the towers will be built? How soon will they be built?
  
  The location of any new towers will be determined by the local broadcasters, depending on the service area they need to cover and the land that is available, subject to the FCC's approval of the construction permit application and local approval, zoning building and safety regulations. This will require broadcasters to work with their communities and local governmental authorities in order to quickly determine where the towers will be situated and to obtain the necessary approvals. In many cases, the construction of new towers will not be necessary; broadcasters may be able to put digital television antennas on the same towers as other existing communications facilities. In some cases, broadcasters may be able to mount small antenna structures on existing buildings.
  
  In the top ten markets in the country, affiliates of the four networks must have their transmission facilities in place by May 1, 1999, and some stations have committed to building their facilities even earlier than this. In markets 11 through 30, they must have their facilities by Nov. 1, 1999. New DTV transmitting antennas must be installed and any new towers must be constructed before the stations can be on the air with their digital television signals.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

David,
Thanks for the excellent FCC FAQ; I've read information from a lot of different places (including Congressional record), but have not seen so much good info in one place. Yes, many people in the forums here (and even at AVS!) continue to live in the dark, thinking that after 2006 that everything will be shot and broadcast in 16:9, and that there is a mandate.
Yes, there are 4:3 HDTVs. I don't view that as a drawback, however. Many sports fans (and some other people) don't like how current 4:3 material looks on 16:9 sets, but both 16:9 HD and 4:3 material look great on the latest generation of 4:3 HD sets. The availability of these sets are definitely increasing overall sales of DTVs, which is necessary for the format to succeed! Also, 8 of the 18 ATSC modes are 4:3, so it is logical that sets be available in both ratios...DTV is not only HDTV.
Here are some snips with emphasis added for those who still question this:

the continuation of analog service beyond the year 2006 deadline if DTV is implemented more slowly than expected.

And, of course, there is nothing to prevent new legislation from superceding this with new conditions and new 'soft' deadlines...trust me, the light isn't going to be turned off when 15 percent of the people are still in the room. Just wait...
Oh, and if you want to know who to thank for the ability for HDTV to never take off in america, and for stations to broadcast their DTV in 480i 4:3 SDTV (format 4 of ATSC) forever, thank the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters)...they lobbied for all of this.

 

[Terry H]

This will allow for the transmission of pictures with higher resolution for dramatically better picture and sound quality than is currently available, or of several "standard definition" TV programs at once.
If broadcasters so choose, they can offer what has been called "high definition television" or HDTV, television with theater-quality pictures and CD-quality sound.

This is worth repeating and is the main reason I have not purchased a 16x9 HD set. Many people talk as if digital and high definition are the same thing. Clearly, they are not. HDTV need never be broadcast by anyone. That worries me. I wonder if my local stations out here in the sticks will ever broadcast a HD signal.
If a local affiliate has the choice to broadcast several standard programs and thus several commercials at once vs. one HDTV program and one commercial via their digital signal what do you think they will do? Exactly what is the incentive for them to go HDTV?

 

[Kenneth Cummings]

Well this sucks, but we did saw signs of it before with the press release of Anatasia and Balto in pan and scam a few months ago. I remember we were wondering what happen to cause that, and now here the truth. I wonder if we should put topic on the mainpage to get Peter attention so we can hear his side of the story. I just mad at Fox for this, but I will continue to watch their news channel and the Simpson.

 

[Dick]

I think George K. makes a good point, and I will paraphrase it: if a widescreen version only is available, P&S fans may bitch and complain but they WILL BUY/RENT IT. On the other hand, if pan and scan only is available, OAR fans will bitch and complain and THEY WON'T BUY/RENT IT. Big difference, and I wonder if the studios take that into consideration.

 

[Steve Felix]

I generally agree George and Dick, but there'd be a few who would fight it and not buy or rent anything with black bars. The difference in this scenario is: they'd quickly give up after realizing OAR is the way it is going to be from now on, but we (and our converts) would never put up with p&s.
The studios are letting J6P inch into the pool rather than jump in, and I wish they'd just get it over with. If all the studios would do it together, there couldn't be financial damage unless people just stop watching movies. (Like Ron said.) Maybe it would encourage theater going since 98% of new films are tailored for J6P anyway!

 

[Jeff Whitford]

None of my information was wrong as you showed by copying parts of information. It was set up to be shut off in 2006. I should have used the word was instead of is but that would have made me telephatic as I dint realize the information changed a couple months ago. Granted changes happen and should if the networks dont start producing more programing. Hats off to ABC and especially CBS for leading the way.

4x3 sets can not produce 1080i. HD and digital are two different things. My information on screen formats comes from the people who make the sets and are making less and less 4x3 hi rez/digital ready sets every year. Since im being nitpicked notice I didnt say HD sets.

 

[Frank]

If all DVD players could zoom the image to fill a 4:3 TV, would we even be having this discussion?

Frank

 

[Jeff Whitford]

Good point Frank. Talk to Sony and Panasonic and their derivatives.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Quote:

Nothing changed a couple of months ago. Everything we posted about the fictitous '2002' deadline has been old news for a couple of years.

 

[Jeff Whitford]

2 Dozen huh. Explain to me how this is done on 2 dozen sets. RCA calls their 4x3 sets hi rez, Sony Calls them High Scan and so on. Know why? Because a 16X9 program is only 960i on a 4x3 set. Call the manufactors and ask them. There was a consortium of TV manfactors that was put togather years ago that set standards for what can be labled High Definition. They said to be a true HD set it must be 16x9 and be able to produce a 1080i picture. Its like all DVD players have to have certain features to be called a DVD player. Again if you dont believe me call them up and ask them.

You said;

"Regular analog television service, what is broadcast today, will continue until the end of the transition period which currently is set to continue through the year 2006."

And this

" In addition, a law passed by Congress last fall includes provisions which would extend the time period for continuation of analog service beyond the year 2006 if DTV service and DTV equipment are not as widespread by then as currently expected."

Im am not arguing with either one of these 2 statements and I never said anything about anything in 2002 as you say.