I had a look at the air check and talked to the people involved with preparing that program for air. Although it was letterboxed, it was not a standard ratio. If it was upconverted as a 16:9 program the bottom part of the second line of subtitles would have been lost. Since the whole show was subtitled, the decision was made to treat it as a 4:3 show.Ah, understood. That makes sense! Those subtitles can be a pain!

Thanks for looking into it, Nick

For movies filmed at 1.66:1, I agree you don't want to stretch the image by 33% like normal as this would crop off some (3 1/8%) of the top and bottom (never good, but especially a problem if there are sub-titles), but there is another solution. You can stretch the image by 25% and sidebox it with black bars to make a 16:9 aspect ratio. For other ratios less than 1.78:1 (16:9) the same principles can be applied with different scaling ratios.

For more information on this see 1.66:1 Movies (http://gregl.net/videophile/anamorphic.htm#1.66:1). It is talking about making an Anamorphic widescreen DVD which is probably a bit different than making a WS broadcast (am I correct in assuming that WS broadcasts are not stretched vertically (or squeezed horizontally) like anamorphic DVDs are?), but the basic principle is the same.

High definition standards have pixels with a square aspect ratio (1:1) so HD broadcasts are not anamorphic. Standard definition pixels in digital production standards are not square but the number on a horizontal line is consistent at 720. In 4:3 standard definition, the pixel aspect ratio is 0.9 so the 720 becomes 648 when converted to square pixels (648/486 = 1.33) For WS DVD, the aspect ratio of the pixel is interpreted as 1.2 resulting in 864 pixels (864/486=1.78). If you are wondering about the use of 486 lines rather than 480 lines, the answer is the SD digital production standards date from the 1980s and were designed to accommodate the active image area of NTSC analog which is 483 lines.

For DVD production, three choices are available to handle the 1.66 format with sub titles. The text can be included in the video below the image, the text can be superimposed on the image, or the subtitles can be included as data. The first option with subtitles below the image requires the 4:3 format. The second allows placement of the 1:66 image in the middle of the 1:78 frame with black bars on the side but the subtitles must appear over the picture image. Some people don't like having the picture altered by the presence of subtitle text particularly if they understand the original language. The third option allows the viewer to control if the subtitles appear while using the maximum area for the image. Most DVD players will also allow the user to configure the output as 4:3 and place subtitles under the image. This appears to be the best solution but it depends on the viewer having the knowledge to operate the equipment properly. Fortunately, a DVD has menu capability to assist the viewer in configuring the presentation.

Going back to HDTV broadcast, the caption system for the hearing impaired could be used for the subtitles and the 1.66 image could be placed in the middle of the 16:9 area. Unfortunately, HDTV does not have the same type of menu capability as a DVD that allows the viewer to work through the best configuration and then start the movie. If you don't know how to use the caption function on your TV or set top box, you are out of luck.

There is another issue with creating a new version of a movie that needs to be addressed. Even if the broadcaster wanted to spend time and money preparing a new broadcast master with closed captions and an optimal treatment of the 1.66 image, the terms of the license agreement with the copyright owner might not allow creation of a new version. There may also be rights for the cinematographer, director and others in the production to participate in creating or reviewing the new version. And there will be money to pay for the priviledge of creating the new version in addition to the actual cost of production. For most broadcasters, the realistic approach is to play the material as the distributor sent it to you.

Thanks GeorgeMx for the technical discussion of TV, DVD and HDTV standards and production. That is basically what I thought, but I did learn some interesting things. I agree though that for broadcasts you are better off inserting subtitles than trying to use CC text.

There is another issue with creating a new version of a movie that needs to be addressed. Even if the broadcaster wanted to spend time and money preparing a new broadcast master with closed captions and an optimal treatment of the 1.66 image, the terms of the license agreement with the copyright owner might not allow creation of a new version. There may also be rights for the cinematographer, director and others in the production to participate in creating or reviewing the new version. And there will be money to pay for the priviledge of creating the new version in addition to the actual cost of production. For most broadcasters, the realistic approach is to play the material as the distributor sent it to you.

That is basically what I originally thought, but when Marc said the following, I figured that the CBC was considering modifying the movie to fit the screen. My comment was to say that they could have modified it to fit the screen vertically instead of horizontally.

I had a look at the air check and talked to the people involved with preparing that program for air. Although it was letterboxed, it was not a standard ratio. If it was upconverted as a 16:9 program the bottom part of the second line of subtitles would have been lost. Since the whole show was subtitled, the decision was made to treat it as a 4:3 show.

...when can we expect CBOT-DT and CBOFT-DT? June is almost half gone!

-gmd

CBC-HD showed the 'The Last Castle' in low def last weekend. This is disappointing though not surprising.

It actually started off as a low def widescreen with big black frame around all 4 sides, then about mid way through the movie someone got wise and zoomed it, but still not HD.

Why couldn't they have picked up the proper masters? We're talking about a half hour of someone's time to arrange it. I know the standard excuse is that the movies CBC shows aren't available in HD, but this one is readily available in HD and has been shown countless times on the other HD movie channels.

Nature of Things is back and the first programme (Einstein) was HD and DD5.1 on the weekend. Great job CBC.

This was not the Einstein that was on PBS a while back.

BTW, my PVR had not recorded NoT since November, but I left the "scheduled recording" in and it picked up the programme, no issues.

I asked CBC when I could expect the National to be in HD, and he said they're aiming for January. No word on when Canada Now will be in HD.

I asked CBC when I could expect the National to be in HD, and he said they're aiming for January.Did the mention a year? :-)

They could do "HD" with as little as a single stationary camera on the anchor and a change to the format to be widescreen. They could frame all the non-HD reports with the frosty side bars used for parts of HNIC.

I'm not saying this would be the best, but I'm saying it could be in "HD" by tomorrow if the really wanted to be quick & dirty with it.

So a January release isn't miraculous or anything... it will all depend on what is included.

I was quite shocked and disappointed to turn on BBC's Hustle tonight, which CBC has been prominently promoing for a while, to discover that it's been shown in 4:3! I just can't imagine what would possess them to do this, as it's shot and aired in 16:9! It looks horrific in 4:3, the shots are very badly framed!

How come CBC can get 16:9 Coronation Street and Doctor Who, but their latest purchase has reverted to 4:3?

I already tried e-mail the CBC a couple of weeks ago, trying to find out how they were going to squeeze a 60-minute show (without commercials) in a 60-minute slot (the answer was hack it to death!) and never received a response? How do I complain to them properly about this gross incompetence?

Nick

I was quite shocked and disappointed to turn on BBC's Hustle tonight, which CBC has been prominently promoing for a while, to discover that it's been shown in 4:3! I just can't imagine what would possess them to do this, as it's shot and aired in 16:9! It looks horrific in 4:3, the shots are very badly framed!
That is a real shame. I recorded it last night but have not watched it yet. Why would they do that?

Tonight's NHL Awards will be wide screen.

Marc, you're a great guy, doing a heck of a job. But the WS picture quality of tonight's NHL awards show was the worst thing I've seen in WS by far. And it now seems they changed it back to 4x3. I guess someone at CBUT took at look at the monitor and pulled the plug on WS.

It was cropped and stretched, that's all I can say... it was just gross.

My appologies. This is the first time we've done WS live in the east and delayed to the west. The live release went as planned, but there was an issue with how the automation handles the HD delay. In the end, an improperly upconverted 4:3 aired for 2 minutes and 44 seconds followed by a proper 4:3 upconvert. What you saw was supposed to be WS, but in fact was upconverted 4:3.

In case others are wondering, I should note that this problem was isolated to CBUT-DT. Other stations would not have seen this problem.

Procedures are being modified to prevent this from happening again.

The WS-NHL Awards seemed fine on CBC-HD last night.

Marc...any timeline in place for a West feed for CBC-HD?

Thanks again for all the information.

No one will tell me. :)
"Ottawa in 2006" is the only info I have for new HD transmitters.

http://www.cbc.ca/hdtv/

Website needs some updating. Get rid of the hockey stuff and give us a schedule for next week. A slightly more accurate schedule would also be appreciated. (many times WS/HD programmes are "missing" from the schedule).

Thanks

Hi Marc,

When will CBC-HD go on air in Ottawa. When will I be able to pick it up OTA, and at which channel will it be located at?

Thank you,
M

According to Industry Canada CBC has been allocated: ON Ottawa 25 CBOT-DT @ 45°30'11" 75°51'02". It is not on the air. You can only receive the CBC HD Toronto feed via Sat/ Cable as of now. But it does answer the question as to what channel it will be on. Maybe you should look at the OTA forum for more info... just use the Search▼ at the top and search for CBOT-DT. Digital signals will require an Antenna and an ATSC capable tuner.

So what do I need to access this station OTA?

I did not even know that there was a signal at channel 25. I thought they were at 4.

Any help on this?

Thanks

Marc