Why the 
? We are not all pat-ball fans and are up to speed as to when and how it may be broadcast.
? We are not all pat-ball fans and are up to speed as to when and how it may be broadcast.
Changes to BBC HD channels on satellite on 6th June
7 of 11
Originally Posted by gomezz:
“Why the ? We are not all pat-ball fans and are up to speed as to when and how it may be broadcast.
”
“Why the
? We are not all pat-ball fans and are up to speed as to when and how it may be broadcast.”
Out of all that you want to know why i made a
at the end? wow ok...Its because im not a fan of 3D and i think that messing around like they have to accommodate giant ping-pong in 3D is frankly taking the piss on the BBC's part!
It was not to say something about you or others not knowing.
Originally Posted by popeye13:
“Its because im not a fan of 3D and i think that messing around like they have to accommodate giant ping-pong in 3D is frankly taking the piss on the BBC's part! ”
“Its because im not a fan of 3D and i think that messing around like they have to accommodate giant ping-pong in 3D is frankly taking the piss on the BBC's part! ”
Indeed, are there any figures on what % of the population have HD receivers and 3D TVs
?
Originally Posted by popeye13:
“It was not to say something about you or others not knowing.”
“It was not to say something about you or others not knowing.”
Ah! Ok. I think 3D is a waste of resources at the moment. If the BBC has cash to flash on new tech I personally wish they would splurge on a second HD OB suite to take to the MotoGP rounds.
They need to get HD right first, PQ is poor and the resolution is not max. The bitrate is dropping all the time and they want to now play in 3D!!!
Originally Posted by popeye13:
“No idea. The BBC has far better things to spend money on the 3D for giant ping pong..”
“No idea. The BBC has far better things to spend money on the 3D for giant ping pong..”
It might be worth putting a FOI request about how much they are spending on this, it all gets a bit murky imo when it looks like BBC might be promoting a very new technology that conveniently results in more TVs being sold.
They riggled out of revealing what the royal wedding cost the BBC, they would do the same here i am almost certain of that... Worth a try maybe
My Humax HDR seems to have updated itself.
Only thing is the series recording of Britain's Secret Seas failed tonight. Not sure if it was missing markers or something to do with the update.
Watched it live on BBC HD instead.
BTW thought the picture was poor compared to previous weeks.
Only thing is the series recording of Britain's Secret Seas failed tonight. Not sure if it was missing markers or something to do with the update.
Watched it live on BBC HD instead.
BTW thought the picture was poor compared to previous weeks.
Originally Posted by jzee:
“It might be worth putting a FOI request about how much they are spending on this, it all gets a bit murky imo when it looks like BBC might be promoting a very new technology that conveniently results in more TVs being sold.”
“It might be worth putting a FOI request about how much they are spending on this, it all gets a bit murky imo when it looks like BBC might be promoting a very new technology that conveniently results in more TVs being sold.”
The brutal irony is that dealing with pointless FOI requests like this are far more of a waste of resources and money than them actually doing what they are supposed to and progressing with new technologies. "Promoting new technologies to conveniently sell more TV's"? What a ludicrous statement. Did you feel the same when the BBC first broadcast colour TV, or teletext, or NICAM stereo, or digital TV or HD? Good Lord.
Originally Posted by jamiec21:
“The brutal irony is that dealing with pointless FOI requests like this are far more of a waste of resources and money than them actually doing what they are supposed to and progressing with new technologies. "Promoting new technologies to conveniently sell more TV's"? What a ludicrous statement. Did you feel the same when the BBC first broadcast colour TV, or teletext, or NICAM stereo, or digital TV or HD? Good Lord.”
“The brutal irony is that dealing with pointless FOI requests like this are far more of a waste of resources and money than them actually doing what they are supposed to and progressing with new technologies. "Promoting new technologies to conveniently sell more TV's"? What a ludicrous statement. Did you feel the same when the BBC first broadcast colour TV, or teletext, or NICAM stereo, or digital TV or HD? Good Lord.
”
All the innovations you listed had very obvious benefits, and no known bad effects on vision/hearing. 3D is an unproven fringe technology, that will likely never reach large scale as people will simply not want to put on glasses every time they want to watch TV, as well as the fact that for a large number of people the 3D experience has adverse effects. The BBC should simply not be devoting the millions that I am sure they have already put into this which will be of no use to the majority of the licence fee payers.
Yes indeed - 3D has dubious benefits for most people, unlike the other technological improvements mentioned above. It will likely never become mainstream either, not for the foreseeable future anyway (unlike all the other things...).
BBC should be spending our money, using our bandwidth even, on better pictures (yes including HD, or another HD channel) that will benefit the mainstream in the foreseeable future, not on the kind of commercial gimmick that the better funded Sky (and some other Countries) can afford to play about with. Until that is the technology is tried and tested, stable, and there is a foreseeable significant future demand for it. All IMO.
BBC should be spending our money, using our bandwidth even, on better pictures (yes including HD, or another HD channel) that will benefit the mainstream in the foreseeable future, not on the kind of commercial gimmick that the better funded Sky (and some other Countries) can afford to play about with. Until that is the technology is tried and tested, stable, and there is a foreseeable significant future demand for it. All IMO.
According to the BBC Blog, the BBC Trust have stated that the issue with BBC HD picture quality is over.
I wonder if I will be able to spot a difference between my existing recording of the HD test card and that on the new frequencies?
Originally Posted by jzee:
“All the innovations you listed had very obvious benefits, and no known bad effects on vision/hearing. 3D is an unproven fringe technology, that will likely never reach large scale as people will simply not want to put on glasses every time they want to watch TV, as well as the fact that for a large number of people the 3D experience has adverse effects. The BBC should simply not be devoting the millions that I am sure they have already put into this which will be of no use to the majority of the licence fee payers.”
“All the innovations you listed had very obvious benefits, and no known bad effects on vision/hearing. 3D is an unproven fringe technology, that will likely never reach large scale as people will simply not want to put on glasses every time they want to watch TV, as well as the fact that for a large number of people the 3D experience has adverse effects. The BBC should simply not be devoting the millions that I am sure they have already put into this which will be of no use to the majority of the licence fee payers.”
I assume you have not seen that the next wave of 3D TV's will have no need for glasses?
The BBC should always be striving to try out new things - even if at least initially there may be a small number of people interested.
When iPlay was first launched many people thought that was a waste of time but that has been very popular.
Originally Posted by BKM:
“It is known that the BBC are running 3D tests at Wimbledon and it is suspected that the satellite changes may be to launch a temporary 3D channel only for the Wimbledon fortnight - this will NOT be on Freeview-HD.
The BBC have admitted that it may not be possible to bring all new services to Freeview-HD in the future.”
“It is known that the BBC are running 3D tests at Wimbledon and it is suspected that the satellite changes may be to launch a temporary 3D channel only for the Wimbledon fortnight - this will NOT be on Freeview-HD.
The BBC have admitted that it may not be possible to bring all new services to Freeview-HD in the future.”
Things change - looking at announcement today it WILL be on Freeview too...i'm happy as have Freeview HD and satellite (plus a 3D tv)...
Originally Posted by bayards:
“Things change - looking at announcement today it WILL be on Freeview too...i'm happy as have Freeview HD and satellite (plus a 3D tv)...”
“Things change - looking at announcement today it WILL be on Freeview too...i'm happy as have Freeview HD and satellite (plus a 3D tv)...”
And we all have FREESAT!!
Originally Posted by jzee:
“All the innovations you listed had very obvious benefits, and no known bad effects on vision/hearing. 3D is an unproven fringe technology, that will likely never reach large scale as people will simply not want to put on glasses every time they want to watch TV, as well as the fact that for a large number of people the 3D experience has adverse effects. The BBC should simply not be devoting the millions that I am sure they have already put into this which will be of no use to the majority of the licence fee payers.”
“All the innovations you listed had very obvious benefits, and no known bad effects on vision/hearing. 3D is an unproven fringe technology, that will likely never reach large scale as people will simply not want to put on glasses every time they want to watch TV, as well as the fact that for a large number of people the 3D experience has adverse effects. The BBC should simply not be devoting the millions that I am sure they have already put into this which will be of no use to the majority of the licence fee payers.”
The rest of the television and film industry tend to disagree with your view, I'm afraid. I'm no advocate of 3D and will shed no tears if it crashes and burns but to say the BBC shouldn't get involved at all at a time when other major broadcasters are is just stupid. Demand from other countries for a 3D feed is there as shown by the deal with ESPN in America to carry it. And as for the saying the BBC shouldn't be investing in "unproven fringe technology" let me just point you to http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/ .
Originally Posted by Wayne Moule:
“According to the BBC Blog, the BBC Trust have stated that the issue with BBC HD picture quality is over.”
“According to the BBC Blog, the BBC Trust have stated that the issue with BBC HD picture quality is over.”
Heads in the sand possibly?
Originally Posted by Wayne Moule:
“According to the BBC Blog, the BBC Trust have stated that the issue with BBC HD picture quality is over.”
“According to the BBC Blog, the BBC Trust have stated that the issue with BBC HD picture quality is over.”
They finally admitted it was shit?
Originally Posted by Flyer 10:
“They finally admitted it was shit?”
“They finally admitted it was shit?”
They took this sentence from the BBC HD service licence:
"BBC HD should deliver a very high quality technical service to viewers, by adhering to, or seeking to exceed, industry standards for picture resolution."
and decided that it had to be subject to a) a value for money clause and b) spectrum availability on DTT. So now it doesn't even have to adhere to industry standards for picture resolution. The substance of the complaints about reduction in PQ seem therefore to have been ignored on the grounds that they were irrelevant. See the carefully worded actual decision: "The Committee concluded that it did not agree that BBC HD picture quality was falling short of requirements, and therefore these complaints were not upheld."
Case closed (as you rapidly find out if you try to bring it up on, for instance, the BBC blog on the S2 change).
Having said all that, PQ has got a lot better since then.
So it means DTT is crap and so we have to reduce the quality of satellite as to not make DTT look bad.
The people at the BBC are just so backward, the type that wouldnt allow a birthday cake candles to be lit without a fire safety officer there.
The people at the BBC are just so backward, the type that wouldnt allow a birthday cake candles to be lit without a fire safety officer there.
So the BBC once again comes out with the bull**** sentence of 'platform neutrality' which is something that boggles my mind as surely you want to maximise the potential of each platform, and not stifle others because one is less able the another!
The great BBC ladies and gentlemen!!!!
The great BBC ladies and gentlemen!!!!
Originally Posted by mwardy:
“They took this sentence from the BBC HD service licence:
"BBC HD should deliver a very high quality technical service to viewers, by adhering to, or seeking to exceed, industry standards for picture resolution."
and decided that it had to be subject to a) a value for money clause and b) spectrum availability on DTT. So now it doesn't even have to adhere to industry standards for picture resolution. The substance of the complaints about reduction in PQ seem therefore to have been ignored on the grounds that they were irrelevant. See the carefully worded actual decision: "The Committee concluded that it did not agree that BBC HD picture quality was falling short of requirements, and therefore these complaints were not upheld."
Case closed (as you rapidly find out if you try to bring it up on, for instance, the BBC blog on the S2 change).
Having said all that, PQ has got a lot better since then.”
“They took this sentence from the BBC HD service licence:
"BBC HD should deliver a very high quality technical service to viewers, by adhering to, or seeking to exceed, industry standards for picture resolution."
and decided that it had to be subject to a) a value for money clause and b) spectrum availability on DTT. So now it doesn't even have to adhere to industry standards for picture resolution. The substance of the complaints about reduction in PQ seem therefore to have been ignored on the grounds that they were irrelevant. See the carefully worded actual decision: "The Committee concluded that it did not agree that BBC HD picture quality was falling short of requirements, and therefore these complaints were not upheld."
Case closed (as you rapidly find out if you try to bring it up on, for instance, the BBC blog on the S2 change).
Having said all that, PQ has got a lot better since then.”
Is Blatter in charge of the BBC as well?
Originally Posted by popeye13:
“
Its because im not a fan of 3D and i think that messing around like they have to accommodate giant ping-pong in 3D is frankly taking the piss on the BBC's part!
”
“
Its because im not a fan of 3D and i think that messing around like they have to accommodate giant ping-pong in 3D is frankly taking the piss on the BBC's part!
”
As I've said in another thread, your opinion on 3D depends very much on what system you've watched - lenticular, polarised or shutter.
It may even depend on manufacturer and display technology eg plasma or lcd.
I don't think its fair for people to write 3D off based on a particular viewing experience until you've seen all that it has to offer.
As for it being in the minority, I agree, it is at the moment but 3D is largely where tv will be going in the future whether or not that's via 3D glasses or Star Trek type holographic technology. Ultimately, its the only way the manufacturers and broadcasters can deliver more realism as resolution will shortly hit its limits of improvement, I'm guessing around SuperHiVision time.
7 of 11
