PBS HD

Charles Tomaras wrote:

Do you live in the Seattle area to have viewed this station or are you just
speaking in generalities?

Never been to Fungus Corners. Just saying that you have NO IDEA what is
causing the video defects, either. If I drive down a street that is wet,
I don't automatically assume it has rained. I realize that there are other
possible reasons that the street is wet. I've given you other possible causes
for your poor video, as well as reported that *my* PBS station, which also has
two sub channels, does NOT suffer any of these maladies. But you insist on
blaming the sub-channels for your perceived "over-compression", even though
you have no idea how much the main channel is being compressed. Curious.

I can only use my eyes and my higher end 58" Plasma television which looks
"spectacular" on most other HD stations to make my observations.

Wonderful! That has NOTHING to do with what is causing this station's
problems, however.

In this
instance data rates have little bearing over the reality of the product.

Huh? You claim that they are over compressed, but then say it has nothing
to do with data rates? OK...

The KCTS HD picture particularly
suffers compression issues during large changes in detailed scenery, big
pans of varied landscapes, splashing waves, fog/mist etc. The usual sorts of
difficult material that are impacted most by compression.

These types of problems can also be caused by other things. PAL transfers
are notorious for these types of problems. Can DVB-ATSC transfers cause
similar symptoms? Dunno. Is this station broadcasting at 1080i or at 720p?
1080i is worse at lower data rates depending on material.

Just one of the
disappointments of digital broadcasting and the compromises made to provide
more channels at the expense of higher quality.

Once again, my local PBS-HD station also has two sub-channels but suffers
from none of the maladies you describe above. Must not be the sub-channels.

.....it's just kinda disappointing to watch their fine programming
now and get distracted from it due to technical deficiencies.

Technical deficiencies? OK. Over-compression? Without data rate data,
you're just guessing.

On Jan 10, 11:42*pm, Remysun wrote:
I guess it's official. There is a constant scroll on 56.2, which had
been a SD simulcast ever since just after the analog transmitter had
gotten struck by lightning a few years ago. They will start alternate
programming on 1/13/09.

DID THEY FLIP 56.1 and .2?

56.1 is the analog in 4:3 (except the actual analog is still matted),
and 56.2 has a 16:9 cartoon that I've never seen before.

The DVR schedules are completely screwed now, but here's hoping --
wtf? 4:3 again. Curious George.

As of now:

56.1 1080i 16:9
56.2 480i 16:9
56.3 480i 4:3 (Create)

In article ,
UCLAN wrote:
Charles Tomaras wrote:

Then you better change the law, too. The reason a national PBS feed is
not offered is because the local station is available. DirecTV or DISH
could only offer a national PBS feed into areas that do not have a local
affiliate. IP distributorship won't change the law.

Well let me rephrase that. I'd gladly pay my local PBS affiliate for an IP
feed of a single channel that has not been reduced in quality to accommodate
the broadcast of three channels.

Again, you're assuming that the video artifacting you're seeing is due to
the existence of the sub-channels. I don't think it is necessarily true.

My bet would be on trying to fit 10 pounds into a 5 pound satellite link.
(They've done that before, when somebody's bird failed). Have they
added any more special interest channels in their distribution recently?

Mark Zenier
Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)

On Jan 9, 4:58*pm, Remysun wrote:
The channel used to be the standard of 24/7 HD programming, but more
and more often, WTVS is just simulcasting their SD feed. Is it just a
matter of covering the digital transition, or am I just going to have
to go without?

WGBH dropped the PBS HD Channel feed a year ago and switched to
simulcasting on its HD/SD primary channels which are 2.1 and 2.2.
Increasingly its local programming is moving to HD; not all that
useful for talking head interviews. Ironcally the HD channel was
carried in HD on 2.2 and 2.1 SD carried the same programming as the
analog channel.

On Jan 14, 3:41*pm, Rick wrote:
On Jan 9, 4:58*pm, Remysun wrote:

The channel used to be the standard of 24/7 HD programming, but more
and more often, WTVS is just simulcasting their SD feed. Is it just a
matter of covering the digital transition, or am I just going to have
to go without?

WGBH dropped the PBS HD Channel feed a year ago and switched to
simulcasting on its HD/SD primary channels which are 2.1 and 2.2.
Increasingly its local programming is moving to HD; not all that
useful for talking head interviews. Ironcally the HD channel was
carried in HD on 2.2 and 2.1 SD carried the same programming as the
analog channel.

Correction: The local programming is actually up converted to
widescreen
according to comments made tonight on local program Greater Boston
with
Emily Rooney. GBH doesn't have HD cameras yet.