Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Espn-hd


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
16 replies to this topic

#1 of 17 OFFLINE   JeremyFr

JeremyFr

    Supporting Actor



  • 794 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 28 2003

Posted September 24 2003 - 10:21 PM

Ok I've seen alot of people post about ESPN-HD and how badly they want it.

I've got it and I'm going to rant how much I wish I didn't have it.

Why would you launch a channel that shows less than 5% a month of true HD programming and then force your viewers to watch upconverted SD s-t-r-e-c-h-o-v-i-s-i-o-n?

To me this channel seems like a total waste of bandwidth there are so many HD channels I could think of I dont have yet that I'd easily be happy if they replaced ESPN with one.

I can understand that they dont have a production studio built yet and I can understand they have access to 2 production trailors that aren't even theres. But for petes sake there owned by Disney! Disney has more than enough dough to throw out there to make ESPN-HD truely an awesome must have channel but they aren't and if they are it hasn't proven to be obvious yet.

There are other sports networks that by the sound's of it are pushing harder and faster to provide high quality HD sports channels. logically and monetarily sports is going to become the make or break deal for HD. That and TLC to keep the wives happy

But seriously, they could have easily waited untill they had the capability to offer even 50% of there programming and had a much more impressive channel but for now were stuck with a very sad excuse for an HD channel. It should be called ESPN-Strechovision SD.

Jeremy
For those of you who know your job is to teach.
For those of you who dont know your job is to learn.

#2 of 17 OFFLINE   Paul W

Paul W

    Second Unit



  • 468 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 17 1999

Posted September 25 2003 - 02:05 AM

Yes, I get headaches watching this channel. Luckily, I have HDNet and HDMovies to fall back on (as well as CBS and ABC for primetime sports).
"Hairs are your aerials. They pick up signals from the cosmos, and transmit them directly into the brain. This is the reason bald-headed men are uptight." —Danny, Withnail and I

#3 of 17 OFFLINE   Todd Schnell

Todd Schnell

    Second Unit



  • 255 posts
  • Join Date: May 21 2001

Posted September 25 2003 - 03:42 AM

Recently got ESPN HD too, & I agree with you. Though Sunday Night Football sure looked nice! Really I can understand the limited HD at the moment, but the stretch-o-vision is just plain ignorance on their part. Most consumer equipment has the option to stretch if desired anyway. Let us do the stretching if we want. Can't do much with a image that is already being broadcast in stretch mode. The non HD programming would look fine if just up-converted. I only watch ESPN HD when they broadcast HD programming. Wake up ESPN! Broadcast in OAR! The stretched image looks like crap!

Todd

#4 of 17 OFFLINE   Shawn C

Shawn C

    Screenwriter



  • 1,434 posts
  • Join Date: May 15 2001

Posted September 25 2003 - 04:30 AM

Yeah, Sunday Night Football in HD is awesome!

#5 of 17 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,530 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted September 25 2003 - 05:09 AM

Does everyone who gets ESPN-HD not get the regular ESPN? I just switch to the regular ESPN channel if no native HD content is on ESPN-HD. I can then stretch or not stretch to my heart's content. Sure the picture is not HD, but it's not real HD on the HD channel, just 480i/p upgraded (which looks like crap, stretched or not stretched). The baseball, hockey and footbal in true HD on ESPN-HD is fantastic and dealing as soon as their new studio is ready, most of the Sportscenter/"'insert sport here' Tonight" shows will in HD too. IMHO, they've done a great job.

#6 of 17 OFFLINE   Diallo B

Diallo B

    Screenwriter



  • 1,076 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 18 2002

Posted September 25 2003 - 12:59 PM

hey, i will be happy with the sunday and thursday night football hd games for the time being. but espn better step up soon with more hd programming besides football, baseball and playmakers. too much wasted bandwith and i know that feed costs a king's ransom to run.

also, the stretch on that channel is terrible but it has improved tremendously over the past couple of months. i think they heard all of the complaining and made the stretch a little less stretched. but it is still terrible.

djb
listen with your own ears...
watch with your own eyes...
make your own decision.
_______________________________________

#7 of 17 OFFLINE   Todd Schnell

Todd Schnell

    Second Unit



  • 255 posts
  • Join Date: May 21 2001

Posted September 27 2003 - 05:57 AM

Does everyone who gets ESPN-HD not get the regular ESPN? I just switch to the regular ESPN channel if no native HD content is on ESPN-HD. I can then stretch or not stretch to my heart's content.


Yes & me too.

Sure the picture is not HD, but it's not real HD on the HD channel, just 480i/p upgraded (which looks like crap, stretched or not stretched).


Point is there is no need for ESPN to stretch it on their end. I don't think most of the up-converted programming looks like crap on my set up. I generally prefer to watch the up-convert. Except ESPN because of the stretch.

The baseball, hockey and football in true HD on ESPN-HD is fantastic and dealing as soon as their new studio is ready, most of the Sportscenter/"'insert sport here' Tonight" shows will in HD too. IMHO, they've done a great job.

Oh yea it is worth it just for the live sports! Its a keeper! No doubt it will get better in time. It just seems silly & ignorant imo, that they feel the need to use stretch-o-rama. Posted Image

Todd

#8 of 17 OFFLINE   Tim K

Tim K

    Second Unit



  • 402 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 07 1999

Posted September 30 2003 - 08:02 AM

I'll take stretch-o-vision over what the other networks do to their digital 4:3 broadcasts. I'd much rather look at a stretched picture than have black bars burned onto the sides of my TV. It drives me nuts that I can't watch any 4:3 digital broadcasts on ABC, NBC or FOX because of the black bars they broadcast.

#9 of 17 OFFLINE   Todd Schnell

Todd Schnell

    Second Unit



  • 255 posts
  • Join Date: May 21 2001

Posted September 30 2003 - 09:50 AM

I'd much rather look at a stretched picture than have black bars burned onto the sides of my TV.


Tim do you not have the option to stretch on your equipment? I can stretch with either my TV or receiver.

Regarding burn in - from my experience (& I believe the general consensus of those with the experience of owning and/or calibrating rear projection sets) if you calibrate your display, & use common sense you should not have to worry about burn in. Namely turning the contrast & brightness down.

Todd

#10 of 17 OFFLINE   Lew Crippen

Lew Crippen

    Executive Producer



  • 12,060 posts
  • Join Date: May 19 2002

Posted September 30 2003 - 09:58 AM

Quote:
Tim do you not have the option to stretch on your equipment? I can stretch with either my TV or receiver.

A lot of sets lock in full when they are receiving a 720p or 1080i signal. My Sony does. You live with what is being telecast.

What I do Tim (on the 4:3) telecasts, assuming that they are not real HD) is switch to the analog stations telecasts and use a setting on my receiver to display gray side bars, thereby vastly reducing the burn-in issue.

I have noticed that some sporting events being telecast in HD use some kind of colored side bars when they are in a studio that has not yet upgraded to HD (e.g. CBS telecast of the U.S. Open).
¡Time is not my master!

#11 of 17 OFFLINE   Tim K

Tim K

    Second Unit



  • 402 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 07 1999

Posted October 04 2003 - 12:44 PM

I do not watch any 4:3 material being broadcast on the "digital" channels. ie. I do not watch ABC news on ABC's digital channel. It is not a matter of stretching or locking in FULL. The network 4:3 digital broadcasts all include BLACK bars on the left and right of the screen that DO cause burn in (or maybe burn out?). NOTHING can be done about this by any TV or cable box. These bars are included in the broadcast. That is why I would rather have ESPN stretch-o-vision than ABC's BURN-o-vision. I don't understand why the networks won't broadcast their 4:3 material on the digital stations as 4:3 material. Adding the black bars is rediculous and prevents all of us from utilizing our TV's stretch modes.

Believe me, I'm not an idiot here. I have calibrated my equipment properly and burn in here has nothing to do with contrast. It has to do with black bars that I can not work around.

#12 of 17 OFFLINE   JeremyFr

JeremyFr

    Supporting Actor



  • 794 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 28 2003

Posted October 04 2003 - 01:28 PM

Actually you can put the DCT-5100 in 4:3 Pan & Scan which will eliminate the bars. Though to be most effective you should probably switch output to 480P as well.
For those of you who know your job is to teach.
For those of you who dont know your job is to learn.

#13 of 17 OFFLINE   Diallo B

Diallo B

    Screenwriter



  • 1,076 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 18 2002

Posted October 04 2003 - 05:27 PM

Quote:
Actually you can put the DCT-5100 in 4:3 Pan & Scan which will eliminate the bars.


How? I have not messed with my 5100 since I installed it. I am pretty sure that I am in 480p although I would have to check.

Thanks in advance.

djb
listen with your own ears...
watch with your own eyes...
make your own decision.
_______________________________________

#14 of 17 OFFLINE   JeremyFr

JeremyFr

    Supporting Actor



  • 794 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 28 2003

Posted October 04 2003 - 05:58 PM

You have to turn the box off then press the menu button this will bring up the output/closed captioning set-up screen in here you find aspect control, output rez and 4:3 override.
For those of you who know your job is to teach.
For those of you who dont know your job is to learn.

#15 of 17 OFFLINE   Kenneth R

Kenneth R

    Auditioning



  • 6 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 12 2001

Posted October 05 2003 - 01:28 AM

Speaking of PQ of ESPN-HD.

Watched part of the Tennessee-Auburn football game last night and the picture during HD shots is just not up to the quality of the CBS broadcasts of SEC football. The pictures of the Georgia game earlier in the day on CBS were cleaner and had more resolution. The same was true of last weeks college football broadcasts on ESPN. I don't know if its because it's 720P because I have seen ABC broadcasts that are in 720P that look simply wonderful. The supposed lack of motion artifacts with the 720P for sports simply doesn't make up for the decrease in resolutoin if this is any indication.
Larry Raulston

#16 of 17 OFFLINE   Tim K

Tim K

    Second Unit



  • 402 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 07 1999

Posted October 05 2003 - 04:58 AM

Actually, the pan and scan mode of the 5100 only works when set to 480i. In 480i, the digital picture isn't much better than the analog broadcast. Also, the problem with it is that it actually cuts off more material from the left and right sides than it should. I guess its better than the black bars but still not perfect. Obviously, the only "right" answer is for the networks to stop broadcasting the friggin black lines with their digital broadcasts.

#17 of 17 OFFLINE   HankM

HankM

    Second Unit



  • 337 posts
  • Join Date: May 15 1999

Posted October 05 2003 - 10:15 AM

I have heard bad thing about ESPN-HD also. MY cable company is getting soon and I'm not anxious anymore. Maybe they will get it right soon after hearing all of us.
My DVD Collection

My System

"Perhaps you could warn them, if only you spoke Hovitos"





Forum Nav Content I Follow