BBC HD plans

There have been some strong opinions posted on the site about the
BBC's proposals for HDTV. Might I suggest that it might be worth
telling the BBC exactly what you think about the proposals? It does
take a few minutes but if we don't tell them then we can't complain
afterwards. Here is the link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/consul...ions/hdtv.html

"ChrisW" wrote in message
...
There have been some strong opinions posted on the site about the
BBC's proposals for HDTV. Might I suggest that it might be worth
telling the BBC exactly what you think about the proposals? It does
take a few minutes but if we don't tell them then we can't complain
afterwards. Here is the link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/consul...ions/hdtv.html

Here is my letter



I object to the BBC's proposals for HD TV as they stand for the following
reasons and would like to make a few suggestions in order to make them
acceptable.

1) People who currently receive BBC services on Freeview would be treated as
second class viewers if the BBC's plans go ahead as proposed.

It would be totally unacceptable for Freeview users to be denied the right
to watch BBC4, BBC Parliament and the BBCi interactive video streams during
the hours of 2am to 6am so that a tiny minority of licence fee payers with
HD receivers can have the privilege of watching HD television on Freeview
while the majority of licence fee payers, such as old age pensioners,
students and people on benefits or low incomes who might not be able to
afford HD TV's and receivers would end up subsidising the minority while
being denied an overnight TV service themselves compared to those who can
afford satellite and cable.

It is highly unlikely that the majority of viewers using HD TV will have a
HD TV a receiver in more than one room in the home whereas currently they
may have several Freeview receivers in rooms such as in the bedroom. By
taking off BBC4, BBC Parliament and the BBCi interactive video streams
during the night the BBC would be effectively punishing people who have
already opted to buy an SD Freeview receiver to use in their bedroom for
watching TV during the night by removing their night time services from
them.

The only way a HD service would be acceptable on Freeview is if it does not
impact in any way on existing SD Freeview service and Freeview viewers
should have the same service as those on Satellite and Cable, therefore HD
TV should be allocated its own separate part of the terrestrial spectrum
before any Freeview service is put in place.

2) People will not want to buy expensive equipment to watch a cut down HD TV
service on Freeview compared to Satellite or Cable, where they will be
deprived of material such as live spotting events, since everything will
have to be played back from broadcasts recorded the night before. Since
people are essentially being made to buy new equipment to watch the service
they will opt for the full service on Satellite or Cable. Why should SD
Freeview viewers have to suffer for the sake of a Freeview HD service no one
will want to watch since it is inferior to Satellite and Cable, in it being
unable to carry live events, and on top of that only has one channel.

3) Who is going to pay thousands of pounds for equipment to watch just one
extra channel, and a channel where not even the BBC's flagship drama Doctor
Who will be shown since it is not even made in HD.

If the BBC is to go ahead with an HD service and expect people to fork out
the money for the equipment to watch it, it should include the provision of
more than one channel. In fact it should either include all of the BBC's
channels BBC1, BBC2, BBC3, BBC4 and News 24 with the SD programs benefiting
from the higher bitrates used by HD, compared to the substadard SD service
that the BBC currently provides whose picture quality is worse than
analogue, as can clearly be seen by the broadcast of this years Eurovision
Song Contest which looked a complete unsightly mess with blocking everywhere
during the music and flashing lights and panning shots of the audience, or
ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 channels should be included along with the BBC
material as part of the initial service from the start. The idea of the BBC
going it alone with just one channel is idiotic and will be a complete
fiasco like OnDigital since no one will want to watch it when there is so
little on.

4) The HD service should NOT contain any form of branding such as DOG's
(Digital On-screen Graphics) or scrolling banners during programmes. These
only serves to annoy viewers, distract them from watching the programmes and
insults their intelligence. I know what channel I am watching and what
programme is coming up next from my EPG and Now/Next information on my Set
Tom Box, and if the BBC places any kind of DOG on its high definitions
service, like it does with the current trial service, it will DEVALUE the
service and I WILL NOT watch it, since it will no longer be acceptable as a
high definition service and will give the feeling of being cheep and nasty.

I hope the BBC Trust takes my views into consideration and rejects the BBC's
current plans for an HD channel, and invites them to submit a new proposal
for a broader service in conjunction with other broadcasters that will not
affect existing Freeview services.

I am happy to have my response and name published.



Yours faithfully,

On 24/05/2007 02:57, Agamemnon wrote:

Here is my letter

Strange, I didn't think usenet had green ink.

The important question,

will Series 4 of Dr Who now be shot in HD?

(kim)

"kim" wrote in message
...
The important question,

will Series 4 of Dr Who now be shot in HD?

(kim)



on points of view they said they dont do it in HD due to the high number of
effects shots.



--
Gareth.

That fly... is your magic wand.
http://www.last.fm/user/dsbmusic/

"the dog from that film you saw" wrote
in message ...

"kim" wrote in message
...
The important question,

will Series 4 of Dr Who now be shot in HD?

(kim)



on points of view they said they dont do it in HD due to the high number
of effects shots.

Perhaps if they relied less on effects shots and more on decent scripts we
could have the best of both worlds?

(kim)

On Thu, 24 May 2007 15:42:35 +0100, "kim" wrote:

The important question,

will Series 4 of Dr Who now be shot in HD?

It'll be shott in Splott.

Rod.

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 May 2007 15:42:35 +0100, "kim" wrote:

The important question,

will Series 4 of Dr Who now be shot in HD?

It'll be shott in Splott.



my great grandmother lived there - best place name ever.



--
Gareth.

That fly... is your magic wand.
http://www.last.fm/user/dsbmusic/

On Thu, 24 May 2007 22:24:22 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw"
mused:


"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 24 May 2007 15:42:35 +0100, "kim" wrote:

The important question,

will Series 4 of Dr Who now be shot in HD?

It'll be shott in Splott.



my great grandmother lived there - best place name ever.

Nope. Best place name ever IMO is Antrobus. Always make me smile.
--
Regards,
Stuart.

"kim" wrote in message

"the dog from that film you saw"
wrote in message
...

"kim" wrote in message
...
The important question,

will Series 4 of Dr Who now be shot in HD?

on points of view they said they dont do it in HD due to the high
number of effects shots.

Perhaps if they relied less on effects shots and more on decent
scripts we could have the best of both worlds?

If they want a monster, just wrap an actor in bubble wrap and spray it
green.

--
Max Demian