Posted by AnthonyR on 01/17/07 14:11

"Joshua Zyber" <joshzyber@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:QuqdnU-25KGl8DDYnZ2dnUVZ_qemnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:45acfe89$0$5167$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>I don't accept ... from seeing the level of detail in the picture ... that
>>this is just an upconverted NTSC signal. Yet it's 4:3, which rules out
>>most of the HDTV standards (most of them are "widescreen"). The "HDTV"
>>light on the cable box is on (yes, that might only mean that it's
>>digital), and it's on a channel (all 500-599 channels in this cable
>>system) that is supposed to be exclusively HDTV. I note that 1024x768 is
>>a 4:3 format that is one of the approved HD formats, so 4:3 aspect ratio
>>does not always, automatically, mean it's SD and not HD [However, I don't
>>think that's what they are broadcasting]. Most likely this signal [Brian
>>Williams NBC nightly news] is 640x480 progressive scan with a 60Hz refresh
>>rate. That is a lot higher quality than standard NTSC analog TV (more
>>than twice the data rate), although no 480 line format is considered to be
>>HDTV.
>
> There's really no debate to be had about this issue. If the nightly news
> were shot on High Def video, it would fill your 16:9 TV. All HD video
> cameras are natively 16:9 in aspect ratio. For example, The Today Show
> recently switched to HD production. Compare the same program on the SD
> channel and the HD channel. Then take another look at upconverted nightly
> news and see if you're really so impressed by the level of detail present.
>

I don't know about NBC News but I did hear their commercial touting it being
the first nightly news now in HD.
But what is to stop someone from recording in HD, then downconverting to SD
format (4:3) for broadcast and yet
simulcast the same full HD signal only over digital broadcast just to HD
capable tuners?

That would work well, no? Maybe that's what they do?

AnthonyR.

[Back to original message]