Cost of HD - Split from Discovery Thread.

2788 Views 17 Replies 8 Participants Last post by j0dest3r, Jan 1, 2011

Fry1989

Discussion Starter · Dec 13, 2010

bigoranget said:
It doesn't matter what Discovery Science airs to me. If it's not available in HD, it wont be on in my house. Same goes for Investigation Discovery.

And that's exactly the problem. Practically every single specialty channel in the US from Investigation Discovery to Lifetime:Real Women to SoapNet to Cartoon Network are in HD. Up here, we have to whine and wait to get them. It's sad, this day and age there's no excuse for anything not to be in HD.

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

reidw

· #2 · Dec 14, 2010

Fry1989 said:
And that's exactly the problem. Practically every single specialty channel in the US from Investigation Discovery to Lifetime:Real Women to SoapNet to Cartoon Network are in HD. Up here, we have to whine and wait to get them. It's sad, this day and age there's no excuse for anything not to be in HD.

fry1989, we are a much smaller country than the US. You can't expect everything American to reach us right away particularly where money is involved.

Also: If you been reading another thread at DHC, one of Bell's installers has provided some interesting numbers on how many HD installs he does compared to SD installs. SD still leads by a country mile. HD has simply not yet penetrated as far in Canada as in the United States so it is at least understandable why our specialty stations have been slow to switch to HD.

And also: Interest in HD in Canada is also not as high as in the US. This fact is obscured by sites such as DHC where everyone is totally enthused with HD. That's to be expected but in the general public there are still many who don't see either the need nor amazingly any real improvement in PQ with HD. Even when they buy a HDTV they don't bother hooking it up to any HD source. All they really want is the wider/bigger screen. Otherwise SD is perfectly fine with them.

See less See more

nec207

· #3 · Dec 14, 2010

fry1989, we are a much smaller country than the US. You can't expect everything American to reach us right away particularly where money is involved.

What the problem with money ? It is NOT like the government is spending money to get HD.

reidw

· #4 · Dec 14, 2010

nec207, the money issue is not with the government, it is with the stations or are you not aware most broadcasters including our specialty channels have been in dire straits for the last couple of years? Converting to HD involves more than a flipping a switch. A ton of equipment has to be upgraded. Since until recently most of our specialty channels were part of Canwest Global, one of the hardest hit, it made sense that they did not introduce HD services. (Over to you Shaw Media).

nec207

· #5 · Dec 26, 2010

nec207, the money issue is not with the government, it is with the stations or are you not aware most broadcasters including our specialty channels have been in dire straits for the last couple of years? Converting to HD involves more than a flipping a switch. A ton of equipment has to be upgraded. Since until recently most of our specialty channels were part of Canwest Global, one of the hardest hit, it made sense that they did not introduce HD services. (Over to you Shaw Media).

Have hollywood and the government pay most of the cost to covert to HD.

reidw

· #6 · Dec 26, 2010

nec207 said:
Have hollywood and the government pay most of the cost to covert to HD.

nec207, you've got to be joking. It doesn't work that way.

JamesK

· #7 · Dec 26, 2010

Have hollywood and the government pay most of the cost to covert to HD.

That's about as likely as the Leafs winning the Stanley Cup!

nec207

· #8 · Dec 26, 2010

nec207, you've got to be joking. It doesn't work that way.

Explain .

Also there is very little programming on Discovery Science and alot of repeats.

Why is that is it do to the fact it is new?

reidw

· #9 · Dec 26, 2010

The OTA and specialty cable/satellite stations are in business to make money. They aren't public services. Up to now they haven't seen any profit in HD, only a lot of extra expense. The market and interest is just not present yet in Canada to justify the investment. Frankly it may never be. Remember to meet CRTC requirements for Aug. 2011 a service has to broadcast a digital signal only. That does not mean HD. Here in Canada I suspect that some small market digital services/channels will still be only digital SD ten years from now.

GeorgeMx

· #10 · Dec 27, 2010

reidw said:
...
Here in Canada I suspect that some small market digital services/channels will still be only digital SD ten years from now.

Manufacturers seem to have stopped building SD only equipment. It doesn't make much sense to have the same equipment in two versions - it's easier and cheaper to offer a single SD/HD device. The equipment cost of HD is really not much higher than SD at present as far as I can tell. The big cost is the rebuild to make a production studio or master control into an HD operation. I think that over the years all the English and French networks will convert to HD because the cost will not be more than SD. The timing for HD in some operations will coincide with the need for a general technical plant rebuild. They will accumulate SD/HD equipment and operate it SD in the beginning as part of the old plant then switch to HD when they rebuild.

Low cost HD cameras (sub $10,000) are available now and offer good performance for many purposes. A small market TV station could easily use this equipment for local news and programming. These cameras record on SD cards which make them easy to use and eliminate the requirement for a real time transfer into an editing system. Just put the card into the computer and away you go. In small operations, Adobe Premiere Pro or Final Cut Pro can be used for editing. The Premiere software bundle with other useful programs is less than $2,000 and it will run on a PC with less capability than a high-end gaming machine. A lot of programming on specialty channels is shot using this kind of gear.

In 2000, HD was a really expensive proposition but over the last decade the costs have come down dramatically. The only reason for SD in 10 years will be to save bandwidth on a BDU.

See less See more

reidw

· #11 · Dec 27, 2010

georgemx, you may be right but I remain sceptical. Time will tell.

nec207

· #12 · Dec 30, 2010

Manufacturers seem to have stopped building SD only equipment. It doesn't make much sense to have the same equipment in two versions - it's easier and cheaper to offer a single SD/HD device

sorry what do you mean?If not a documentary or reality TV there is little incentive to transfer it to HD.Most all TV shows on space channele are low VHS not even DVD.

I think CSI ,NCIS ,bones ,numb3rs , law and order ,x-files, the outerlimits so on is little incentive to transfer it to HD and cost will be too high to transfer .

jmcKDLEX700

· #13 · Dec 30, 2010

The part I find total BS is the lack of competition in Canada. Postings mentioned about our smaller market and how expense it would be to convert for such a small market.

Fine. Open the market up to free competition. That will cure the problem in a big hurry.

OK, I go back on my meds now.

GeorgeMx

· #14 · Jan 1, 2011

nec207 said:
sorry what do you mean?If not a documentary or reality TV there is little incentive to transfer it to HD.Most all TV shows on space channele are low VHS not even DVD.

I think CSI ,NCIS ,bones ,numb3rs , law and order ,x-files, the outerlimits so on is little incentive to transfer it to HD and cost will be too high to transfer .

Your post is confusing. Several of the shows you mention (CSI, NCIS, bones, numb3rs, law and order) were originally produced and aired in HD. If x-files and outerlimits were shot on film then they can be remastered in HD. Considering the popularity of these series the HD versions may already exist.

My comment was about economy in manufacturing a single model of equipment capable of SD or HD operation. Technical people usually try to plan ahead and will purchase a device with future capability over something that just does the job provided the cost is the same or only slightly higher.

NeilN

· #15 · Jan 1, 2011

jmcKDLEX700 said:
Fine. Open the market up to free competition. That will cure the problem in a big hurry.

How is competition not "free" now?

GeorgeMx

· #16 · Jan 1, 2011

jmcKDLEX700 said:
The part I find total BS is the lack of competition in Canada. Postings mentioned about our smaller market and how expense it would be to convert for such a small market.

Fine. Open the market up to free competition. That will cure the problem in a big hurry.

OK, I go back on my meds now.

If free competition was the whole answer then all the Buffalo TV stations would have full HD capability including local origination. At present the CBS and ABC affiliates are still standard definition for news and syndicated programming. The CBS affiliate (WIVB) has good quality SD while the ABC affiliate (WKBW) still looks like it is using NTSC analog equipment. Last night CBC dumped Jeopardy! again so we switched to WKBW and my spouse commented how bad the pictured looked.

Competition is good and forces change but if the money isn't there no amount of competitive incentive will make it happen.

jmcKDLEX700

· #17 · Jan 1, 2011

NeilN said:
How is competition not "free" now?

One word, CRTC

j0dest3r

· #18 · Jan 1, 2011

All the folks that buy fancy new HD TVs and don't subscribe to HD Signals don't help the cause. Then there are those of us that have cable fatigue tired of paying the huge cable bill for little perceived value. Its only a matter of time before I drop completely and am never looking back.

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.