Posted on 10/26/2006 7:20:25 PM PDT by Snickering Hound
NBC says it's dropping most scripted programs from the network's 8 p.m. time slot next season, replacing them with reality and game shows.
The unscripted fare, which is cheaper to produce, will not be broadcast in High-Definition TV. However, NBC Universal TV CEO Jeff Zucker says that's no big deal.
In an interview with The Washington Post, published today at washingtonpost.com, Zucker was asked if high-def viewers might be less interested in watching non-HD programming.
"It's hard to say if viewers will be less interested in unscripted programming that's not in HD when the rest of the programming is in HD," Zucker tells the newspaper. "I think it's a fair question, but I'm not overly concerned about it at this point."
While the HDTV audience is growing, some network executives have occasionally remarked that it's still too small to have an impact on network schedules and ratings. HDTVs are now in approximately 25 million U.S. homes, but slightly fewer than 10 million actually have the HD tuners necessary to watch high-def signals.
Zucker's NBC decided in 2004 not to air a separate HDTV channel for the Summer Olympics because it said the audience was too small. After being roundly criticized in the press and Internet message boards, NBC reversed that decision for its coverage of the 2006 Winter Olympics.
The network's decision to restrict the 8 p.m. hour to unscripted shows, such as Deal or No Deal, is part of an overall effort to cut $750 million from its annual operating budget. Scripted programs, such as dramas and sitcoms, are more expensive to air due to actor salaries and higher production costs.
Producing a show in high-def also requires more expense, perhaps as much as 20 percent, according to some reports.
To NBC's credit, the network recently completed a $3.5 million renovation of The Today Show's studio and production facilities so it could air in HD.
Final note: After Zucker said last week that unscripted programs would not be scheduled in the 8 p.m. time slot, a NBC spokesman clarified his remarks, saying some comedies could still make the cut.
You are talking about "reality tv" people watch it to see people bicker, not to be able to make out every pore on their faces.
As long as they film and edit the fighting and bickering well people are going to watch, regardless of HD or not... its Jerry Springer for prime time.
It doesn't matter what it is. If I see black bars on the sides of the picture, I'm more likely to change the channel to something else.
True for 4:3 images, but NBC is broadcasting more of its SD content in a 16:9 letterbox, so you would actually get a bigger image on 26", 16:9 HDTV. The same is true for anamorphic widescreen DVDs.
I strongly suspect that the 2007 deadline will pass without happening.
As for the upcoming deadline, it only requires over the air analog broadcasts to end, and all television broacasters to broadcast their over the air signals in digitial. Digital broacasts can be SD or HD. If you are using cable or satellite, you are not using analog over the air broadcasts, so it does not matter. Nothing will change for you.
Current digital TV broadcasts are the best kept secret in television. First of all, it is free. Second, the support for multichannel broadcasts means a single station can broadcast two, three, or even four streams. Back during the NCAA playoffs, the Altanta CBS affiliate simultaneously broadcast two different basketball games, one in HD, and one digital SD.
Most digital TV receivers can downconvert the signal to display on an SDTV.
Most HD sets up to '06, were HD ready that required a seperate ATSC tuner. The FCC mandated that in '06 and after, all HD sets sold, had to have the ATSC tuner built in. True, sets before '06 could have the tuner built in, but those were mostly the high end/high dollar sets.
As for commercials, they film them once, and have to play to the lowest common denominator, which is still SDTV.
Now I just got a Samsung 30" "Slimfit" (16" depth) CRT HD (1080i) set for $750 that looks wonderful. Much better than LCD and even DLP. I ripped out the guts of my old (1979) dying 27" Sony console, and inserted the Samsung into it. I had to use a sawsall to cut out part of the old speaker boxes for the width, but over all it fit perfectly.
That is what is so great about America everyone is entitled to make their own choices. I Personally couldn't go back to watching SD if HD is an option. I switched from cable to DTV because of the superior SD quality and HD offerings. I also get my locals in HD along with ESPN/2, DiscoveryHD, TNTHD and others and love it. If you are satified with what you've got that is great, to each his own;).
Bingo. I am not dissatisfied with the quality of the picture and sound I'm getting now. I am, however, dissatisfied with the qualtiy of the programming. The original article seems to indicate that I am not alone.
All NASCAR is already in HD. It's like being at the race, except you can see, don't get sunstroke and the beer isn't $10/cup.
The difference between standard-def and HD (even 720p) is stunning; no matter the show it's like cleaning the fry oil off your glasses.
(Sidebar: most if not all widescreen HDTVs can display SD content either stretched (ugh, but some prefer the picture to fill the screen) or in the original aspect ratio - there's no reason your old tapes/DVDs have to look bad).
(Sidebar2: widescreen versions of good movies look much better than fullscreen versions. The immersion into the scene is much more present when you're viewing (most of) the original scene as opposed to a porthole-view into just the actor's face. HD widescreen is good enough that I don't see any reason to set foot in a theatre even for good films any more.) The content providers themselves have fought kicking and screaming to avoid a) going all-digital and b) going HD -- these are separate, and only a) is mandated by the FTC. What little they've put in HD they fight doubly hard to wrap with layers of inconvenience in the form of content protection (HDCP).
The reason IMO is that again, everything becomes very very clear in HD. A "perky" anchor or actress' makeup job might become clearly visible to the audience where it wasn't in low-rez. Studio sets have to be higher-quality to look good. The technical equipment is higher-cost of course, but that's a depreciating cost as the tech becomes mainstream.
On our end, the cost of the set has already dropped; you can get a 27" HD set for ... $375. (quick search through a popular brick-and-mortar store's listing).
Upshot is that those content providers that adopt the new tech will set the pace (and get to define the standards to their benefit); fools like Zucker who crawl backwards will find themselves in bad shape when HD is everywhere. It's analogous to the US automakers trudging along selling the same-old while their competitors pursue R&D; eventually the bill comes due.
I hope you dont consider yourself an expert on the subject.
Smaller? You said you had a 17" TV. 32 > 17 last time I checked.
If you are in hte boonies, then this option is not for you. I have no problem if you don't want to take the leap. I was just informing you that I had done so for a grand total of $299. MUCH less than the $2K figure you threw out there.
And if I REALLY wanted some kind of DVR setup with what I presently have, I could get a brand new computer solution for probablly less than $600 which would give me the added bonus of a new computer. Or a solution that would run me < $150 with my present computer.
Plus the government is required to give a free converter to anyone who doesnt have an HDTV
So... Experts... What's the scoop?
Good God, you aren't kidding. Every time I go into a thread about new consumer technology, all I see are posts about "My granpappy never needed any such thing, so neither do I, dagummit!" Come on, people! Of course no one NEEDS this stuff, but we live in a highly advanced, wealthy country, and the toys you can play with (if you have the money) are really, really cool. Check it out sometime rather than claiming it's witchcraft, please!
Those without HD have not seen a movie or sporting event displayed on a 100" screen by a decent video projector in a light controlled room. It's vivid and three dimensional, like looking out of a window.
Given a choice you will subsequently seek out HD over standard fare.
BUMP
I just went to Directv to find the scoop on HDTV and HDDVR.
You have to sign up to wait for an HD DVR. They aren't currently available, but will sell for $199 after rebate.
Directv only offers 7 HD channels, mostly crap plus ESPNHD and ESPNHD2. It costs $10 a month plus you have to get a new dish and get it wired in your house. Network HD programming depends on your local stations.
Circuit City has 57" HDTVs for between $1500 and $2500.
It looks like my $2,000 upgrade figure was pretty accurate and it looks like the vast majority of programming would still be 4:3 programming.
When I want HDTV I put my glasses on.
Your DirectTV numbers seem ok (I thought DTV had absorbed Voom ... no, that's Dish. Dish has a pile of HD channels, but I can't get satellite due to my location)...
...but earlier you wrote: "HDTV of at least 16.5 inches in height" which sounds like a 27" TV (27" is diagonal, that divided by square root of 2 is 19" high). Now you're talking about a 57" HDTV. Huge price difference there.
Who the Hell needs more than 64K of memory, anyway?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.