I think it's mostly 4:3, but I think some weather and static news channels are using widescreen SD (16:9). For example, I seem to recall that WCAX-DT2's weather channel is widescreen, but I could be mistaken.^^^^
Do those U.S. stations have 16:9 or 4:3 SD on their sub channels?
A growing number of low-power stations are quickly recognizing the potential of digital transmission for expanding service offerings, raising video quality and creating new revenue streams. Now, these stations can follow the lead of KAXT-CA, a Class A community station based in San Jose, CA. This year, KAXT launched an unprecedented digital ATSC television service capable of broadcasting up to 20 MPEG-2 video and audio services within the 19.39Mb/s ATSC spectrum. Using advanced video processing solutions from Harmonic, transmission equipment from Linear Industries, and PSIP generation from Triveni Digital, KAXT is currently broadcasting 12 video channels and four audio channels and is already planning to add four more audio services.
KAXT-CA info: http://www.stationindex.com/tv/callsign/KAXT-CA"Now, these stations can follow the lead of KAXT-CA, a Class A community station based in San Jose, CA."
Although I would love to see Canadian broadcasters use digital subchannels to increase ota content, I doubt that they would be willing to lose the cable subscription fees. They would have to have assurance that increased ad revenue from the subchannels is equal to or greater than the lost cable fees.The problem with getting SD network content on OTA in Canada is most of the owners makes their money off Cable fee-driven programming.
I have to agree with that. Except for a few independent stations, most broadcasters in Canada are owned by the BDU's, so the fight would be between themselves. The BDU's are greedy folks, so I'd doubt they would fight against putting those added advertisment profits into their own pockets.^^^^
Yeah, they have to move the money from one pocket to the other. ;-)
The cash flow from local advertisers is added directly to the bottom line,.. near pure profit.
The last I heard, in June or earlier, is that the CRTC deferred their decision for later until they found out, in the courts, if they had jurisdiction to implement their plan.Forgive me for being so out of the loop, but whatever happened in that fight between the broadcasters and the cable companies? Do Bell & Rogers now have to give some $$ to the broadcast networks?
I don't see them as "available". It could be possible, but it would be up to the channel set themselves up and market themselves as sub-channels for other stations. The most I would see is them getting CRTC permission to be sub channels, and a variance of sub-channel rules to allow them to be such.As stampeder has mentioned earlier, there are already a few Canadian streams such as BC's Knowledge Network and Alberta's Access Network available for subchannels.