7th HD channel

bayards · 28-11-2005, 13:29

Well the offering from Sky has just become better: National geographic HD to join the platform. See headlines on this site....

So now we have Sky One HD, 2 x Movie channels, 1 Box Office channel, Sky Sports HD, Artsworld HD and later BBC One simulcast (well that's eight then)....

H

Dan27 · 28-11-2005, 14:03

There should be a few more added before the service launches. Discovery is one that should join up.

bayards · 28-11-2005, 18:30

MHD? - which will/has launched in US - MTV on HD steroids...

H

Vashta Nerada · 28-11-2005, 19:22

Not a big suprise considering NGC is 50% owned by sky.

Dan27 · 28-11-2005, 21:00

Yep MTV is one of the HD channels supposed to be jumping on.

Jarrak · 28-11-2005, 22:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanVitale

There should be a few more added before the service launches. Discovery is one that should join up.

Yep they are on the Premiere package and I suspect uplinked from the UK which would explain their UK broadcasting license early this year.

It certainly looks like SKY HD could be very much like the early days of SKY with only a handful of channels with none along for the ride as is the case in the SD multichannel era.

bayards · 29-11-2005, 17:40

Premiere in Germany will be launching with 3 or 4 channels in HD, TPS and Canal Plus in France with about the same - so Sky's already announced lineup of 7 channels is not bad! Add the BBC and I'm happy....

H

camaj · 30-11-2005, 04:18

I've seen trailers for TPS and Canal plus, do you know when they're launching? TPS had some HD premiership footage (well 2 second of diouf!) so perhaps they'll be showing HD premiership games before Sky

To answer my own questions, TPS in feb/march and Canal+ in April it seems. Worringly they seem to be further ahead than Sky so if Sky is to arrive around that time they would have a shorter build up

howesey · 30-11-2005, 15:27

NG have been saying they will have a HD channel for months. Discovery will be there too, and A1 (not at launch).

bayards · 30-11-2005, 15:53

Camaj

Originally TPS were due for a December 05 launch - but guess shortage of MPEG4 chips has put paid to that. The German Premiere launch is now only 3 days away...at least you can read about it on their site unlike TPS/Canal+.

On the telext service for Sat1 on Astra you can see which flms coming up will be in HD now...a move in the right direction. Strange that their stablemate Pro7 have not got anything on teletext yet....even though they are in HD simulcast mode too.

Can't wait for my Premiere box to arrive - latest arrival date in German shops is 9 December.....

Howard

camaj · 30-11-2005, 18:13

It's a shame you need a motorised dish for that, I'd be up for it!

Powershot · 30-11-2005, 22:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by bayards

MHD? - which will/has launched in US - MTV on HD steroids...

H

MHD has not yet launched here in America.

Powershot · 30-11-2005, 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by robcole2004

Not a big suprise considering NGC is 50% owned by sky.

I doubt SKY part ownership of the British version is the reason. It is likely because the mother network here in America was already going HD.

Bigus_Dikus · 01-12-2005, 17:44

SKY ONE HD? - Do we need The Simpsons in HD?

...and is the 4400 filmed in HD?

Jarrak · 01-12-2005, 22:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigus_Dikus

SKY ONE HD? - Do we need The Simpsons in HD?

...and is the 4400 filmed in HD?

Simpsons would have to be an upconvert and yep The 4400 is native HD.
For SKY1 this means Nip/Tuck, Rescue Me, 24, SG1, Atlantis, BSG, Threshold, Weeds, Las Vegas, Bones, Cold Case etc and any movie they screen.
Not a bad lineup and we can hope SKY1 productions will be in HD and the rest of the "filler" would have to be SD upconverts which in terms of quality we will have to wait and see.

Bigus_Dikus · 02-12-2005, 02:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarrak

Simpsons would have to be an upconvert and yep The 4400 is native HD.
For SKY1 this means Nip/Tuck, Rescue Me, 24, SG1, Atlantis, BSG, Threshold, Weeds, Las Vegas, Bones, Cold Case etc and any movie they screen.
Not a bad lineup and we can hope SKY1 productions will be in HD and the rest of the "filler" would have to be SD upconverts which in terms of quality we will have to wait and see.

Thanks for your reply!

Being an older person, who comes from the old school of things being shot on film (35mm and above: all formats) is there now a HD video system that can out-do film?

If so, how good is it? Is it up to 70mm projection stock - or even IMAX (70mm sideways/ 60 frames a second +- for 3D)

All interesting stuff!

Get as technical as you like (I'm a sad person who actually understands it!

)

But I need updating

"The 4400 is native HD." ??? - What is it shot on?

Jarrak · 02-12-2005, 02:46

A number of US productions (Enterprise was and Dead Zone is) are now shot on HD video which brings significant cost savings. I expect there are quiote a few more now but not really looked in to it

I don't know enough to go into the specific technical attributes of the new HD format compared to 35mm film but there was an interesting doc on the Dead Zone boxset which covered the subject. The final conclusion being that HD video could produce a final product equal to that of 35mm film and produce cost savings in day to day use and post production, the intial setup costs being higher of course.

Found a little article on The 4400 and it's HD filming.... Studio Daily.

Powershot · 02-12-2005, 04:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarrak

A number of US productions (Enterprise was and Dead Zone is) are now shot on HD video which brings significant cost savings. I expect there are quiote a few more now but not really looked in to it

I don't know enough to go into the specific technical attributes of the new HD format compared to 35mm film but there was an interesting doc on the Dead Zone boxset which covered the subject. The final conclusion being that HD video could produce a final product equal to that of 35mm film and produce cost savings in day to day use and post production, the intial setup costs being higher of course.

Found a little article on The 4400 and it's HD filming.... Studio Daily.

Maybe you meant this but it may be able to produce an equal product to film once film is transfered to HD but unless a video camera has quite a bit of more resolution than 1920x1080 film will have much more resolution.

Regular still 35mm film is estimated to have approximately 25 megapixels of information. That could be further reduced as digital still cameras can have quite a bit less noise than film has grain. Even if you removed half the resolution, which is beyond conservative you would still have 10 megapixels compared to 2 with 1080 and around 1 with 720P.

If shows wish to be truely future-proof, with current technology, they would be better off staying with film.

Powershot · 02-12-2005, 04:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigus_Dikus

Thanks for your reply!

Being an older person, who comes from the old school of things being shot on film (35mm and above: all formats) is there now a HD video system that can out-do film?

If so, how good is it? Is it up to 70mm projection stock - or even IMAX (70mm sideways/ 60 frames a second +- for 3D)

All interesting stuff!

Get as technical as you like (I'm a sad person who actually understands it!

)

But I need updating

"The 4400 is native HD." ??? - What is it shot on?

One pro digital still camera has approximately matched 35mm still film. Canon's top of the line camera at 16 megapixels in some ways surpasses it because of its ability to capture images with much less noise than film has grain.

Imax, if I am not mistaken, is essentially medium format sized film and that has not been matched as of yet. That would be roughly up to four times the information available in 35mm.

I think it will still be quite a few more years before 35mm and bigger formats are matched in still or video cameras.

camaj · 02-12-2005, 05:22

35mm is still much higher resolution, I believe the latest archival format is 4k tape which has 4000 lines, 4 times the amount on HD

Saying that, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference on TV, although I thought that about DVD!

Powershot · 02-12-2005, 09:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by camaj

35mm is still much higher resolution, I believe the latest archival format is 4k tape which has 4000 lines, 4 times the amount on HD

Saying that, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference on TV, although I thought that about DVD!

So long as a new display can actually show that much information I think it would still be possible to see a difference as you can see a difference between medium format (IMAX size) still film images compared to 35mm even down to 4x5 and 4x6 prints. It becomes very apparent at 8x10/12 size prints.

Jarrak · 02-12-2005, 12:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powershot

Maybe you meant this but it may be able to produce an equal product to film once film is transfered to HD but unless a video camera has quite a bit of more resolution than 1920x1080 film will have much more resolution.

If shows wish to be truely future-proof, with current technology, they would be better off staying with film.

Worth making it clear I am just a viewer, I have no experience of the industry unlike some who are posting

I wasn't claiming that HD video filming could surpass 35mm filming on terms of pure quality, as you would know there are far more factors involved in TV production than the baseline quality of the raw footage.
HD video filming has proved itself capable of matching 35mm film production for television and has opened up new and cheaper methods of post production.

maccy · 12-12-2005, 17:14

Why no Sky News HD? Surely this would be fairly cheap to produce.....

NedFlanders · 12-12-2005, 17:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccy

Why no Sky News HD? Surely this would be fairly cheap to produce.....

Does anyone know if the Sky/NTL HD boxes we will be getting support Dolby Digital 5.1? Surely it does. I would be very disappointed otherwise

I've been reading an interesting post on another forum about Imax. Apparently the resolution of an Imax 70mm film is 4000 x 4000 odds. I will try and find the exact resolution. I'm sure we all agree that, no ,matter who is right, Imax films are simply breathtaking.

Jarrak · 12-12-2005, 17:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccy

Why no Sky News HD? Surely this would be fairly cheap to produce.....

It took them a couple of years to go 16:9.

I expect the lack of HD on so much external material makes a live channel far too complex to broadcast in HD 24/7.

28-11-2005, 13:29	#1
bayards Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: South Lincs Posts: 1,862	7th HD channel Well the offering from Sky has just become better: National geographic HD to join the platform. See headlines on this site.... So now we have Sky One HD, 2 x Movie channels, 1 Box Office channel, Sky Sports HD, Artsworld HD and later BBC One simulcast (well that's eight then).... H

28-11-2005, 18:30	#3
bayards Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: South Lincs Posts: 1,862	and maybe... MHD? - which will/has launched in US - MTV on HD steroids... H

30-11-2005, 04:18	#8
camaj Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 813	I've seen trailers for TPS and Canal plus, do you know when they're launching? TPS had some HD premiership footage (well 2 second of diouf!) so perhaps they'll be showing HD premiership games before Sky To answer my own questions, TPS in feb/march and Canal+ in April it seems. Worringly they seem to be further ahead than Sky so if Sky is to arrive around that time they would have a shorter build up Last edited by camaj : 30-11-2005 at 04:45.

28-11-2005, 14:03	#2
Dan27 Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: By The Sea Posts: 9,574	There should be a few more added before the service launches. Discovery is one that should join up.

28-11-2005, 19:22	#4
Vashta Nerada Forum Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Barry, South Wales Posts: 4,382	Not a big suprise considering NGC is 50% owned by sky.

28-11-2005, 21:00	#5
Dan27 Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: By The Sea Posts: 9,574	Yep MTV is one of the HD channels supposed to be jumping on.

28-11-2005, 22:34	#6
Jarrak Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Ilkeston Posts: 18,075	Quote: Originally Posted by DanVitale There should be a few more added before the service launches. Discovery is one that should join up. Yep they are on the Premiere package and I suspect uplinked from the UK which would explain their UK broadcasting license early this year. It certainly looks like SKY HD could be very much like the early days of SKY with only a handful of channels with none along for the ride as is the case in the SD multichannel era.

29-11-2005, 17:40	#7
bayards Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: South Lincs Posts: 1,862	Premiere in Germany will be launching with 3 or 4 channels in HD, TPS and Canal Plus in France with about the same - so Sky's already announced lineup of 7 channels is not bad! Add the BBC and I'm happy.... H

30-11-2005, 15:27	#9
howesey Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 11	NG have been saying they will have a HD channel for months. Discovery will be there too, and A1 (not at launch).

30-11-2005, 15:53	#10
bayards Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: South Lincs Posts: 1,862	Camaj Originally TPS were due for a December 05 launch - but guess shortage of MPEG4 chips has put paid to that. The German Premiere launch is now only 3 days away...at least you can read about it on their site unlike TPS/Canal+. On the telext service for Sat1 on Astra you can see which flms coming up will be in HD now...a move in the right direction. Strange that their stablemate Pro7 have not got anything on teletext yet....even though they are in HD simulcast mode too. Can't wait for my Premiere box to arrive - latest arrival date in German shops is 9 December..... Howard

30-11-2005, 18:13	#11
camaj Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 813	It's a shame you need a motorised dish for that, I'd be up for it!

30-11-2005, 22:19	#12
Powershot Banned User Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 77	Quote: Originally Posted by bayards MHD? - which will/has launched in US - MTV on HD steroids... H MHD has not yet launched here in America.

30-11-2005, 22:20	#13
Powershot Banned User Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 77	Quote: Originally Posted by robcole2004 Not a big suprise considering NGC is 50% owned by sky. I doubt SKY part ownership of the British version is the reason. It is likely because the mother network here in America was already going HD.

01-12-2005, 17:44	#14
Bigus_Dikus Banned User Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Inside A Pub, Smoking! Posts: 9,744	SKY ONE HD? - Do we need The Simpsons in HD? ...and is the 4400 filmed in HD?

01-12-2005, 22:55	#15
Jarrak Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Ilkeston Posts: 18,075	Quote: Originally Posted by Bigus_Dikus SKY ONE HD? - Do we need The Simpsons in HD? ...and is the 4400 filmed in HD? Simpsons would have to be an upconvert and yep The 4400 is native HD. For SKY1 this means Nip/Tuck, Rescue Me, 24, SG1, Atlantis, BSG, Threshold, Weeds, Las Vegas, Bones, Cold Case etc and any movie they screen. Not a bad lineup and we can hope SKY1 productions will be in HD and the rest of the "filler" would have to be SD upconverts which in terms of quality we will have to wait and see.

02-12-2005, 02:03	#16
Bigus_Dikus Banned User Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Inside A Pub, Smoking! Posts: 9,744	Quote: Originally Posted by Jarrak Simpsons would have to be an upconvert and yep The 4400 is native HD. For SKY1 this means Nip/Tuck, Rescue Me, 24, SG1, Atlantis, BSG, Threshold, Weeds, Las Vegas, Bones, Cold Case etc and any movie they screen. Not a bad lineup and we can hope SKY1 productions will be in HD and the rest of the "filler" would have to be SD upconverts which in terms of quality we will have to wait and see. Thanks for your reply! Being an older person, who comes from the old school of things being shot on film (35mm and above: all formats) is there now a HD video system that can out-do film? If so, how good is it? Is it up to 70mm projection stock - or even IMAX (70mm sideways/ 60 frames a second +- for 3D) All interesting stuff! Get as technical as you like (I'm a sad person who actually understands it! ) But I need updating "The 4400 is native HD." ??? - What is it shot on?

02-12-2005, 02:46	#17
Jarrak Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Ilkeston Posts: 18,075	A number of US productions (Enterprise was and Dead Zone is) are now shot on HD video which brings significant cost savings. I expect there are quiote a few more now but not really looked in to it I don't know enough to go into the specific technical attributes of the new HD format compared to 35mm film but there was an interesting doc on the Dead Zone boxset which covered the subject. The final conclusion being that HD video could produce a final product equal to that of 35mm film and produce cost savings in day to day use and post production, the intial setup costs being higher of course. Found a little article on The 4400 and it's HD filming.... Studio Daily.

02-12-2005, 04:32	#18
Powershot Banned User Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 77	Quote: Originally Posted by Jarrak A number of US productions (Enterprise was and Dead Zone is) are now shot on HD video which brings significant cost savings. I expect there are quiote a few more now but not really looked in to it I don't know enough to go into the specific technical attributes of the new HD format compared to 35mm film but there was an interesting doc on the Dead Zone boxset which covered the subject. The final conclusion being that HD video could produce a final product equal to that of 35mm film and produce cost savings in day to day use and post production, the intial setup costs being higher of course. Found a little article on The 4400 and it's HD filming.... Studio Daily. Maybe you meant this but it may be able to produce an equal product to film once film is transfered to HD but unless a video camera has quite a bit of more resolution than 1920x1080 film will have much more resolution. Regular still 35mm film is estimated to have approximately 25 megapixels of information. That could be further reduced as digital still cameras can have quite a bit less noise than film has grain. Even if you removed half the resolution, which is beyond conservative you would still have 10 megapixels compared to 2 with 1080 and around 1 with 720P. If shows wish to be truely future-proof, with current technology, they would be better off staying with film.

02-12-2005, 04:38	#19
Powershot Banned User Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 77	Quote: Originally Posted by Bigus_Dikus Thanks for your reply! Being an older person, who comes from the old school of things being shot on film (35mm and above: all formats) is there now a HD video system that can out-do film? If so, how good is it? Is it up to 70mm projection stock - or even IMAX (70mm sideways/ 60 frames a second +- for 3D) All interesting stuff! Get as technical as you like (I'm a sad person who actually understands it! ) But I need updating "The 4400 is native HD." ??? - What is it shot on? One pro digital still camera has approximately matched 35mm still film. Canon's top of the line camera at 16 megapixels in some ways surpasses it because of its ability to capture images with much less noise than film has grain. Imax, if I am not mistaken, is essentially medium format sized film and that has not been matched as of yet. That would be roughly up to four times the information available in 35mm. I think it will still be quite a few more years before 35mm and bigger formats are matched in still or video cameras.

02-12-2005, 05:22	#20
camaj Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 813	35mm is still much higher resolution, I believe the latest archival format is 4k tape which has 4000 lines, 4 times the amount on HD Saying that, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference on TV, although I thought that about DVD!

02-12-2005, 09:43	#21
Powershot Banned User Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 77	Quote: Originally Posted by camaj 35mm is still much higher resolution, I believe the latest archival format is 4k tape which has 4000 lines, 4 times the amount on HD Saying that, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference on TV, although I thought that about DVD! So long as a new display can actually show that much information I think it would still be possible to see a difference as you can see a difference between medium format (IMAX size) still film images compared to 35mm even down to 4x5 and 4x6 prints. It becomes very apparent at 8x10/12 size prints.

02-12-2005, 12:22	#22
Jarrak Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Ilkeston Posts: 18,075	Quote: Originally Posted by Powershot Maybe you meant this but it may be able to produce an equal product to film once film is transfered to HD but unless a video camera has quite a bit of more resolution than 1920x1080 film will have much more resolution. If shows wish to be truely future-proof, with current technology, they would be better off staying with film. Worth making it clear I am just a viewer, I have no experience of the industry unlike some who are posting I wasn't claiming that HD video filming could surpass 35mm filming on terms of pure quality, as you would know there are far more factors involved in TV production than the baseline quality of the raw footage. HD video filming has proved itself capable of matching 35mm film production for television and has opened up new and cheaper methods of post production.

12-12-2005, 17:14	#23
maccy Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: East Midlands Posts: 6,691	Why no Sky News HD? Surely this would be fairly cheap to produce.....

DS Forums

7th HD channel

12-12-2005, 17:45	#24
NedFlanders Forum Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Belfast Posts: 637	Quote: Originally Posted by maccy Why no Sky News HD? Surely this would be fairly cheap to produce..... Does anyone know if the Sky/NTL HD boxes we will be getting support Dolby Digital 5.1? Surely it does. I would be very disappointed otherwise I've been reading an interesting post on another forum about Imax. Apparently the resolution of an Imax 70mm film is 4000 x 4000 odds. I will try and find the exact resolution. I'm sure we all agree that, no ,matter who is right, Imax films are simply breathtaking.

12-12-2005, 17:46	#25
Jarrak Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Ilkeston Posts: 18,075	Quote: Originally Posted by maccy Why no Sky News HD? Surely this would be fairly cheap to produce..... It took them a couple of years to go 16:9. I expect the lack of HD on so much external material makes a live channel far too complex to broadcast in HD 24/7.