More ESPN talk
 

I was reading the other thread on ESPN, and after getting my box and
watching all the HDTV offerings on my local Comcast, the ESPN is by far the
worst of all the network offerrings. It just looks like they are stretching
the pictures. I watched a college hockey game (hey Im from the south I
didn't know what was going on) on one of the inHD channels and the pictures
looked great, then I compared it to Stanley cup hockey (I assume this is the
guy that met up with Dr. Livingston) on ESPN, and ESPN sucked. I hope their
live football games are better quality than this.

"Mike" wrote in message
...
I was reading the other thread on ESPN, and after getting my box and
watching all the HDTV offerings on my local Comcast, the ESPN is by far
the
worst of all the network offerrings. It just looks like they are
stretching
the pictures. I watched a college hockey game (hey Im from the south I
didn't know what was going on) on one of the inHD channels and the
pictures
looked great, then I compared it to Stanley cup hockey (I assume this is
the
guy that met up with Dr. Livingston) on ESPN, and ESPN sucked. I hope
their
live football games are better quality than this.

I'm not sure ESPN has ever advertised that ALL of their games are available
in HD. Most games, there aren't even any HD cameras in the building, so
those are the ones that ESPN stretches the picture for. They do have some
that are in HD, though, that look tremendously better, but probably not
quite as good as that college one you watched.
I haven't yet seen an ESPN HD football game, but I'm sure you'll notice the
difference, as those games are ones that ESPN advertises will be in HD.

"Mike" wrote in message
...
I was reading the other thread on ESPN, and after getting my box and
watching all the HDTV offerings on my local Comcast, the ESPN is by far
the
worst of all the network offerrings. It just looks like they are
stretching
the pictures. I watched a college hockey game (hey Im from the south I
didn't know what was going on) on one of the inHD channels and the
pictures
looked great, then I compared it to Stanley cup hockey (I assume this is
the
guy that met up with Dr. Livingston) on ESPN, and ESPN sucked. I hope
their
live football games are better quality than this.

Only a small percentage of the content on ESPN HD is actually in HD -- the
rest of it, as you've noticed, is stretched, which is pretty annoying.
Sunday night baseball is in HD, as were (I think) their Sunday night
football telecasts. There are also some random basketball and hockey
telecasts in HD, but not much more. For everything else, you're better off
watching regular ESPN.

Mark

I watched quite a few football games on ESPN-HD last season. Not quite the
picture I got on CBS-HD but still exceptional!

"Mike" wrote in message
...
I was reading the other thread on ESPN, and after getting my box and
watching all the HDTV offerings on my local Comcast, the ESPN is by far
the
worst of all the network offerrings. It just looks like they are
stretching
the pictures. I watched a college hockey game (hey Im from the south I
didn't know what was going on) on one of the inHD channels and the
pictures
looked great, then I compared it to Stanley cup hockey (I assume this is
the
guy that met up with Dr. Livingston) on ESPN, and ESPN sucked. I hope
their
live football games are better quality than this.

In article , Mike says...

I was reading the other thread on ESPN, and after getting my box and
watching all the HDTV offerings on my local Comcast, the ESPN is by far the
worst of all the network offerrings. It just looks like they are stretching
the pictures. I watched a college hockey game (hey Im from the south I
didn't know what was going on) on one of the inHD channels and the pictures
looked great, then I compared it to Stanley cup hockey (I assume this is the
guy that met up with Dr. Livingston) on ESPN, and ESPN sucked. I hope their
live football games are better quality than this.




If you're watching in 16:9 aspect, even their true HD content is crap. They
produce it in 4:3 and stretch it, which degrades the picture. The HD picture
okay if I watch in 4:3 but isn't widescreen a big part of the HDTV experience?
ESPN gives a lame excuse about needing to do 4:3 so their score ticker will show
properly. Somehow CBS manages to produce a true 16:9 HDTV picture as well as
their 4:3 SDTV picture complete with score ticker. The truth is that Eisner and
company don't give a damn and won't spend the money to do it right. They figure
viewers are so addicted to sports that they'll just pay more each year
regardless of how crappy the picture is.

"Mark Hanson" wrote in message
...
Sunday night baseball is in HD, as were (I think) their Sunday night
football telecasts. There are also some random basketball and hockey
telecasts in HD, but not much more. For everything else, you're better off
watching regular ESPN.

Well that's encouraging at least. I like to watch Sunday night football,
was hoping it was a good quality HD. I'm watching the Phillies/Dodgers game
now on comcasts's inHD channel and it looks really good.

"RobHolif" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
I watched quite a few football games on ESPN-HD last season. Not quite the
picture I got on CBS-HD but still exceptional!

The CBS affiliate is broadcasting a digital signal but I'm not sure yet if
they do HD. The digital signal the cable is picking up from them is
actually washed out compared to the analog channel. In these smaller
markets I think they are going to drag their feet and do what only the FCC
requires at the last minute. I'm hoping they get HD before football season.
But like the old man I used to work with used to say, hope in one hand and
doody (cleaned up) in the other hand and see which piles up faster.

"BillJ" wrote in message
...
their 4:3 SDTV picture complete with score ticker. The truth is that
Eisner and
company don't give a damn and won't spend the money to do it right. They
figure
viewers are so addicted to sports that they'll just pay more each year
regardless of how crappy the picture is.

I know, discouraging isn't it. ESPN has always been a pioneer in sports
coverage I would have thought they would have really been in the forefront
of this. Disappointing, if that is their thinking.

"Mike" wrote in message . ..
I was reading the other thread on ESPN, and after getting my box and
watching all the HDTV offerings on my local Comcast, the ESPN is by far the
worst of all the network offerrings. It just looks like they are stretching
the pictures. I watched a college hockey game (hey Im from the south I
didn't know what was going on) on one of the inHD channels and the pictures
looked great, then I compared it to Stanley cup hockey (I assume this is the
guy that met up with Dr. Livingston) on ESPN, and ESPN sucked. I hope their
live football games are better quality than this.

God almighty. Don't you people read the freakin' archives? I'm so
sick of this topic.

Mike wrote:
I was reading the other thread on ESPN, and after getting my box and
watching all the HDTV offerings on my local Comcast, the ESPN is by far the
worst of all the network offerrings. It just looks like they are stretching
the pictures. I watched a college hockey game (hey Im from the south I
didn't know what was going on) on one of the inHD channels and the pictures
looked great, then I compared it to Stanley cup hockey (I assume this is the
guy that met up with Dr. Livingston) on ESPN, and ESPN sucked. I hope their
live football games are better quality than this.



Not only is virtally all sports on ESPN HD low-def, the
ones that aren't are in med-def , aka 720 scanlines. When I saw
this format for the first time on Sunday night baseball,
I was taken back by how bad it looked compared to
CBS football games last fall (1080 scanlines.)
At first, I thought the game was being shown in better-than-average
SDTV. Then I found that it was passing as HDTV,
which explained everything.

Jeff B

"Larry Bud" wrote in message
om...
God almighty. Don't you people read the freakin' archives? I'm so
sick of this topic.

Of course not. That's why there are subjects so you can pick and choose.
You dufus.

"jeff b" wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s52...

Not only is virtally all sports on ESPN HD low-def, the
ones that aren't are in med-def , aka 720 scanlines. When I saw
this format for the first time on Sunday night baseball,
I was taken back by how bad it looked compared to
CBS football games last fall (1080 scanlines.)
At first, I thought the game was being shown in better-than-average
SDTV. Then I found that it was passing as HDTV,
which explained everything.

Yes, if you have a 1080i display you can only see half the data in the 720p
signal so it doesn't look so hot. But 720p isn't "medium definition" by any
means.

no, this is not correct...their true hd programming IS in 16:9 and is NOT
stretched...when it's stretched, it's not hd


"BillJ" wrote in message
...
If you're watching in 16:9 aspect, even their true HD content is crap.
They
produce it in 4:3 and stretch it, which degrades the picture. The HD
picture
okay if I watch in 4:3 but isn't widescreen a big part of the HDTV
experience?
ESPN gives a lame excuse about needing to do 4:3 so their score ticker
will show
properly. Somehow CBS manages to produce a true 16:9 HDTV picture as well
as
their 4:3 SDTV picture complete with score ticker. The truth is that
Eisner and
company don't give a damn and won't spend the money to do it right. They
figure
viewers are so addicted to sports that they'll just pay more each year
regardless of how crappy the picture is.

God almighty. Don't you people read the freakin' archives? I'm so
sick of this topic.

Of course not. That's why there are subjects so you can pick and choose.
You dufus.

When the subject is "More ESPN Talk", it could be about a myriad of
issues, not the old, worn out, "stretch" issue.

"Larry Bud" wrote in message
om...
: God almighty. Don't you people read the freakin' archives? I'm
so
: sick of this topic.
:
: Of course not. That's why there are subjects so you can pick and
choose.
: You dufus.
:
: When the subject is "More ESPN Talk", it could be about a myriad of
: issues, not the old, worn out, "stretch" issue.

==================
How can it be "worn out" when they STILL stretch!

On 2004-05-25 09:43:41 -0700, "Richard C." post-age @spamcop.net said:

How can it be "worn out" when they STILL stretch!


Aren't they moving SportsCenter to HD in June?

--
There are no monkeys in my email.

Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 2004-05-25 09:43:41 -0700, "Richard C." post-age @spamcop.net
said:

How can it be "worn out" when they STILL stretch!

Aren't they moving SportsCenter to HD in June?

According to their website the change takes place on June 7th.
Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

"Seth Mattinen" wrote in message
news:2004052515225116807%[email protected] ..
: On 2004-05-25 09:43:41 -0700, "Richard C." post-age @spamcop.net
said:
:
: How can it be "worn out" when they STILL stretch!
:
:
: Aren't they moving SportsCenter to HD in June?
:
======================
And what does that have to do with their STRETCHING of 4:3 material.
Are they going 100% 16:9 HD sources? I doubt it.

"Richard C." post-age @spamcop.net wrote in message
. ..
"Seth Mattinen" wrote in message
news:2004052515225116807%[email protected] ..

And what does that have to do with their STRETCHING of 4:3 material.
Are they going 100% 16:9 HD sources? I doubt it.

I think they will have to at some point. Their crappy stretched picture
will look so bad against the other HD programming, that any self respecting
cable sports TV pioneer will become embarrassed at some point. The baseball
on the inHD channels on Comcast looks great and then you go to ESPN and it
looks like a funhouse mirror. Unwatchable.

"Mike" wrote in message
.. .
:
: "Richard C." post-age @spamcop.net wrote in message
: . ..
: "Seth Mattinen" wrote in message
: news:2004052515225116807%[email protected] ..
:
: And what does that have to do with their STRETCHING of 4:3 material.
: Are they going 100% 16:9 HD sources? I doubt it.
:
: I think they will have to at some point. Their crappy stretched
picture
: will look so bad against the other HD programming, that any self
respecting
: cable sports TV pioneer will become embarrassed at some point. The
baseball
: on the inHD channels on Comcast looks great and then you go to ESPN
and it
: looks like a funhouse mirror. Unwatchable.
:
======================
They have ignored all complaints so far.
Why would they stop?

"Richard C." post-age @spamcop.net wrote in message ...
"Larry Bud" wrote in message
om...
: God almighty. Don't you people read the freakin' archives? I'm
so
: sick of this topic.
:
: Of course not. That's why there are subjects so you can pick and
choose.
: You dufus.
:
: When the subject is "More ESPN Talk", it could be about a myriad of
: issues, not the old, worn out, "stretch" issue.

==================
How can it be "worn out" when they STILL stretch!


It's worn out because it's discussed ad nauseum. Ok, we all get it,
they stretch their SD stuff!

"Larry Bud" wrote in message
om...
: "Richard C." post-age @spamcop.net wrote in message
...
: "Larry Bud" wrote in message
: om...
: : God almighty. Don't you people read the freakin' archives?
I'm
: so
: : sick of this topic.
: :
: : Of course not. That's why there are subjects so you can pick
and
: choose.
: : You dufus.
: :
: : When the subject is "More ESPN Talk", it could be about a myriad
of
: : issues, not the old, worn out, "stretch" issue.
:
: ==================
: How can it be "worn out" when they STILL stretch!
:
:
: It's worn out because it's discussed ad nauseum. Ok, we all get it,
: they stretch their SD stuff!

====================
It will be discussed ad nauseum until THEY get it.
====================