Author Topic: GSN and SoapNet (Read 11141 times)

Terry K · « **Reply #15 on:** December 26, 2010, 03:29:51 PM »

If its not in HD, its not for me, period. I don't watch SD programming on ANY channel. After seeing the hatchet job Directv does with local channels, I REFUSE to watch SD anything.

As for the pesky black bars, why not use that real estate on the HD feed of GSN to do a WinTV like thing? Put facts and stuff in those bars...it meets my need of having the HD stuff, and it keeps the shows in their original ratios.

Although if the masters to WML and the B&W stuff existed, they could EASILY be converted to HD...but alas they aren't. =(

inturnaround · « **Reply #16 on:** December 26, 2010, 08:09:16 PM »

[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'253385\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 03:29 PM\']As for the pesky black bars, why not use that real estate on the HD feed of GSN to do a WinTV like thing? Put facts and stuff in those bars...it meets my need of having the HD stuff, and it keeps the shows in their original ratios.[/quote]

Because all the stuff shot in SD video years ago is garbage? I really don't get what you're saying? If something SD is upconverted for the HD channel, it's still essentially SD. And the pillars would just be an awful distraction that would exist for nobody. I suspect the people who are fans of WML and IGAS wouldn't want a hugely busy screen.

Not every piece of the screen must be used every moment.

mmb5 · « **Reply #17 on:** December 26, 2010, 08:59:49 PM »

[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'253385\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 03:29 PM\']Although if the masters to WML and the B&W stuff existed, they could EASILY be converted to HD...but alas they aren't. =([/quote]
Don't think so, they were shot in 4x3.

J.R. · « **Reply #18 on:** December 26, 2010, 09:41:49 PM »

[quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'253385\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 02:29 PM\']If its not in HD, its not for me, period. I don't watch SD programming on ANY channel. After seeing the hatchet job Directv does with local channels, I REFUSE to watch SD anything.[/quote]
OUTRAGE!!!!!

You seriously bumped a six month old thread for this?

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #19 on:** December 26, 2010, 09:45:29 PM »

[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'253411\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 08:59 PM\'][quote name=\'Terry K\' post=\'253385\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 03:29 PM\']Although if the masters to WML and the B&W stuff existed, they could EASILY be converted to HD...but alas they aren't. =([/quote]
Don't think so, they were shot in 4x3.[/quote]
Besides that -- don't the "masters" still exist anyway? They're filmed kinescopes, but that's what masters were for live programming, and I doubt they got thrown away when the stuff was transferred to tape for GSN all those years ago. So yeah, all sorts of fail in that comment.

trainman · « **Reply #20 on:** December 26, 2010, 10:03:18 PM »

[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'253411\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 05:59 PM\']Don't think so, they were shot in 4x3.[/quote]

"HD" is not synonymous with "16x9."

As Matt alluded to, they could go back to the original kinescope films and create an HD version from those -- but I have a feeling the HD version of a 16-millimeter black-and-white kinescope wouldn't be much of an improvement over the already-existing transfers.

mmb5 · « **Reply #21 on:** December 26, 2010, 10:37:38 PM »

[quote name=\'trainman\' post=\'253417\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 10:03 PM\'][quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'253411\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 05:59 PM\']Don't think so, they were shot in 4x3.[/quote]

"HD" is not synonymous with "16x9."

As Matt alluded to, they could go back to the original kinescope films and create an HD version from those -- but I have a feeling the HD version of a 16-millimeter black-and-white kinescope wouldn't be much of an improvement over the already-existing transfers.
[/quote]

I know, but what would be the point of making something that would then be in 16x9 from a 4x3 original and as you state, not going to be from quality stock to begin with.

trainman · « **Reply #22 on:** December 27, 2010, 10:36:45 PM »

[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'253425\' date=\'Dec 26 2010, 07:37 PM\']I know, but what would be the point of making something that would then be in 16x9 from a 4x3 original...[/quote]

I think we're saying the same thing, but I'm not sure if you understood my "'HD' is not synonymous with '16x9'" comment -- it wouldn't be 16x9 unless GSN chose to stretch or crop it during the HD conversion, which they definitely don't have to do. TV programming can be 4x3 and still in high-definition.

Tony Peters · « **Reply #23 on:** December 28, 2010, 01:51:39 PM »

[quote name=\'trainman\' post=\'253485\' date=\'Dec 27 2010, 09:36 PM\']TV programming can be 4x3 and still in high-definition.[/quote]
A good example of this would be the original Star Trek on Blu-ray.

BTW, for those who don't like the new effects added on for its recent syndication run, the original version of each episode (other than no Paramount logos on the Paramount-produced episodes) are included. (I don't have them yet, I just remember looking at the back of the boxes when I've gone shopping.)

inturnaround · « **Reply #24 on:** January 11, 2011, 04:52:27 PM »

[quote name=\'Tony Peters\' post=\'253513\' date=\'Dec 28 2010, 01:51 PM\']BTW, for those who don't like the new effects added on for its recent syndication run, the original version of each episode (other than no Paramount logos on the Paramount-produced episodes) are included. (I don't have them yet, I just remember looking at the back of the boxes when I've gone shopping.)[/quote]

The Trek TOS Blu-ray sets are fantastic. They really did a great job with it and it's a pleasure to watch.