Re: [CGUYS] Battery operated converter box (was CGUYS video compression)
I saw an article which mentioned an option for you. ... Some Wilmington residents, who are used to being in the path of hurricanes, worried that their battery-powered TV sets, which provide alerts when the power goes out, would not work because converter boxes need electricity. So consumer groups worked with manufacturers to create a battery-powered converter, Martin said. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/05/AR2008090503486.html?nav=rss_technology Maybe you can contact the station to find your battery operated converter. Richard P. Fred Holmes wrote: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:29:52 -0700 Does this mean that my emergency, battery-operated analog TV set will in fact continue to work on the VHF channels? When we're having a hurricane and the power is off, its good to see the weather maps, etc. that can be seen on the commercial, on-the-air VHF channels using the battery-operated TV. It runs on 12 volts and will operate for quite a while on a car battery. I suspect not. I suspect I will need either a battery-operated digital-to-analog converter box, or a battery-operated digital TV. Fred Holmes * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Battery operated converter box (was CGUYS video compression)
What about a radio for that? Go to the swap meet or dollar stores ...it's ONE DOLLAR!! -Original Message- From: Richard P. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2008 10:04 AM Subject: Re: Battery operated converter box (was CGUYS video compression) I saw an article which mentioned an option for you. ... Some Wilmington residents, who are used to being in the path of hurricanes, worried that their battery-powered TV sets, which provide alerts when the power goes out, would not work because converter boxes need electricity. So consumer groups worked with manufacturers to create a battery-powered converter, Martin said. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/05/AR2008090503 486.html?nav=rss_technology Maybe you can contact the station to find your battery operated converter. Richard P. Fred Holmes wrote: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:29:52 -0700 Does this mean that my emergency, battery-operated analog TV set will in fact continue to work on the VHF channels? When we're having a hurricane and the power is off, its good to see the weather maps, etc. that can be seen on the commercial, on-the-air VHF channels using the battery-operated TV. It runs on 12 volts and will operate for quite a while on a car battery. I suspect not. I suspect I will need either a battery-operated digital-to-analog converter box, or a battery-operated digital TV. Fred Holmes * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Battery operated converter box (was CGUYS video compression)
The newer weather radios that go off when an alert is issued, all have battery backups. I know we have one. Last week when we cam back from vacation Fay was just moving out of our area. The radio went off about 6 times in 24 hours. They work, and they work well. Much better than a TV for weather alerts. Stewart At 01:33 PM 9/6/2008, you wrote: What about a radio for that? Go to the swap meet or dollar stores ...it's ONE DOLLAR!! Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
Antenna Web reports that in DC channels 4, 5, 7, and 9 will continue on VHF That makes sense. The stations are broadcasting analog and digital signals now, why should they turn the analog signals off in February? (Thereby ticking off (and potentially losing) the 10-15% of viewers who will not be ready?) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
On Jul 4, 2008, at 9:19 AM, Ralph wrote: Antenna Web reports that in DC channels 4, 5, 7, and 9 will continue on VHF That makes sense. The stations are broadcasting analog and digital signals now, why should they turn the analog signals off in February? (Thereby ticking off (and potentially losing) the 10-15% of viewers who will not be ready?) I do not think that you interpreted the Antenna Web report correctly. The listed stations will continue to use their current VHF frequencies, but only in digital mode, not analog, after February of 2009. Those stations are using available UHF frequencies to broadcast their current digital signals, but will dump those frequencies in February of 2009. The law requires most TV broadcasters to cease analog transmissions this coming February. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
Actually, as of the Feb. 2009 transition, only 2 Washington, DC stations, 7.1 and 9.1, will broadcast on VHF as digital signals. Channels 4, 5, 7, and 9 will go still away along with the rest of analog channels. The rest of the DC digital lineup will still be UHF. Richard P. Looks like we were not reading the fine print. While they will all go digital in February, it appears that at least some of them will remain on VHF. Antenna Web reports that in DC channels 4, 5, 7, and 9 will continue on VHF. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
On Jul 2, 2008, at 8:32 PM, Richard P. wrote: I just spoke to one of the local TV station's engineers about our intermittent OTA reception, who said that any UHF (read most HD channels), transmission will be more problematic than a VHF signal. So problematic that two stations that I know of in my area are going back to their original VHF channel assignment, come Feb. '09, which should improve reception tremendously. Many, if not most of the stations that currently use VHF for their analog signals, but are using UHF for digital, will revert to VHF for digital in February of 2009. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
I think that this will be quite a surprise for all the people that went out and spent $ on UHF installations, only to find that they will have to spend more $ on VHF/UHF installations. It won't make the broadcasters look good. Richard P. I just spoke to one of the local TV station's engineers about our intermittent OTA reception, who said that any UHF (read most HD channels), transmission will be more problematic than a VHF signal. So problematic that two stations that I know of in my area are going back to their original VHF channel assignment, come Feb. '09, which should improve reception tremendously. Many, if not most of the stations that currently use VHF for their analog signals, but are using UHF for digital, will revert to VHF for digital in February of 2009. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
On Jul 3, 2008, at 7:35 AM, Richard P. wrote: I think that this will be quite a surprise for all the people that went out and spent $ on UHF installations, only to find that they will have to spend more $ on VHF/UHF installations. It won't make the broadcasters look good. Actually, it won't make the people who spent $ on new UHF installations look good. Broadcasters did nothing dubious. Retailers did. There was lots of info out there about how foolish it would be for folks wanting to get digital OTA signals to spend money on new antenna installations when their current external, or even internal UHF/VHF antennas would suffice splendidly, assuming they were in decent operating condition. It was the retailers who sell antennas, Radio Shack, Best Buy, Circuit City, etc., who sold television viewers a lot of crock about the need to buy digital antennas. There ain't a hair of difference between an antenna that gathers analog signals versus an antenna that gathers digital signals. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
How does a broadcaster get to go back and use his old VHF assignment? I thought that all VHF TV was being killed so that those frequencies could be used for mobile/emergency services, with TV gone from that part of the spectrum altogether. By legislation (or perhaps by simple FCC rulemaking). And, oh by the way, the mobile / emergency services have to (already have?) bid big bucks to obtain access to the VHF TV spectrum. Are we going to have a whole lot of angry folks next February who will find that they have to get their signal from a satellite -- install a dish? ?? Fred Holmes At 07:35 AM 7/3/2008, Richard P. wrote: I think that this will be quite a surprise for all the people that went out and spent $ on UHF installations, only to find that they will have to spend more $ on VHF/UHF installations. It won't make the broadcasters look good. Richard P. I just spoke to one of the local TV station's engineers about our intermittent OTA reception, who said that any UHF (read most HD channels), transmission will be more problematic than a VHF signal. So problematic that two stations that I know of in my area are going back to their original VHF channel assignment, come Feb. '09, which should improve reception tremendously. Many, if not most of the stations that currently use VHF for their analog signals, but are using UHF for digital, will revert to VHF for digital in February of 2009. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
This is precisely why my antenna installer said he is not installing UHF-only antennas. He said If I did you would be mad at me when the stations refuse to move. How does a broadcaster get to go back and use his old VHF assignment? I thought that all VHF TV was being killed so that those frequencies could be used for mobile/emergency services, with TV gone from that part of the spectrum altogether. By legislation (or perhaps by simple FCC rulemaking). And, oh by the way, the mobile / emergency services have to (already have?) bid big bucks to obtain access to the VHF TV spectrum. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
On Jul 3, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Tony B wrote: Of course, like you say, what people end up doing is getting all their education from retailers. I think you meant to say bulls__t, as opposed to education. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
On Jul 3, 2008, at 11:29 AM, Fred Holmes wrote: How does a broadcaster get to go back and use his old VHF assignment? I thought that all VHF TV was being killed so that those frequencies could be used for mobile/emergency services, with TV gone from that part of the spectrum altogether. That is what we all thought, wasn't it? It is not the case. Digital TV allows for more efficient use of available spectrum. The amount of bandwidth that can be freed up by the switch to digital will be sold off or provided to public safety or utility agencies. Most, if not all VHF stations will revert back to VHF from UHF for digital in February 2009. Some VHF stations never did migrate to UHV during this transitional phase. TV broadcasters are not required to provide high definition TV to viewers. Full high definition, as opposed to a lower level of quality, requires a lot of bandwidth. TV stations can lease out any unused bandwidth to commercial enterprises that are seeking frequencies for their own use. Thus there exists a financial incentive for broadcasters to not provide the highest definition images that are possible, and that many consumers will have bought new receivers expecting to see. However, any digital is going to be better than analog except for certain problems that will most likely plague viewers on a routine basis. I am speaking of dropouts, synchronization problems between audio and video, and pixellation of the image that will be all too common. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
Does this mean that my emergency, battery-operated analog TV set will in fact continue to work on the VHF channels? When we're having a hurricane and the power is off, its good to see the weather maps, etc. that can be seen on the commercial, on-the-air VHF channels using the battery-operated TV. It runs on 12 volts and will operate for quite a while on a car battery. I suspect not. I suspect I will need either a battery-operated digital-to-analog converter box, or a battery-operated digital TV. Fred Holmes At 02:44 PM 7/3/2008, Steve Rigby wrote: That is what we all thought, wasn't it? It is not the case. Digital TV allows for more efficient use of available spectrum. The amount of bandwidth that can be freed up by the switch to digital will be sold off or provided to public safety or utility agencies. Most, if not all VHF stations will revert back to VHF from UHF for digital in February 2009. Some VHF stations never did migrate to UHV during this transitional phase. TV broadcasters are not required to provide high definition TV to viewers. Full high definition, as opposed to a lower level of quality, requires a lot of bandwidth. TV stations can lease out any unused bandwidth to commercial enterprises that are seeking frequencies for their own use. Thus there exists a financial incentive for broadcasters to not provide the highest definition images that are possible, and that many consumers will have bought new receivers expecting to see. However, any digital is going to be better than analog except for certain problems that will most likely plague viewers on a routine basis. I am speaking of dropouts, synchronization problems between audio and video, and pixellation of the image that will be all too common. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
It will still be a digital signal on VHF/UHF channels, which you won't be able to see on your analog set without a converter box. Richard P. Does this mean that my emergency, battery-operated analog TV set will in fact continue to work on the VHF channels? When we're having a hurricane and the power is off, its good to see the weather maps, etc. that can be seen on the commercial, on-the-air VHF channels using the battery-operated TV. It runs on 12 volts and will operate for quite a while on a car battery. I suspect not. I suspect I will need either a battery-operated digital-to-analog converter box, or a battery-operated digital TV. That is what we all thought, wasn't it? It is not the case. Digital TV allows for more efficient use of available spectrum. The amount of bandwidth that can be freed up by the switch to digital will be sold off or provided to public safety or utility agencies. Most, if not all VHF stations will revert back to VHF from UHF for digital in February 2009. Some VHF stations never did migrate to UHV during this transitional phase. TV broadcasters are not required to provide high definition TV to viewers. Full high definition, as opposed to a lower level of quality, requires a lot of bandwidth. TV stations can lease out any unused bandwidth to commercial enterprises that are seeking frequencies for their own use. Thus there exists a financial incentive for broadcasters to not provide the highest definition images that are possible, and that many consumers will have bought new receivers expecting to see. However, any digital is going to be better than analog except for certain problems that will most likely plague viewers on a routine basis. I am speaking of dropouts, synchronization problems between audio and video, and pixellation of the image that will be all too common. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
On Jul 3, 2008, at 4:11 PM, Fred Holmes wrote: Does this mean that my emergency, battery-operated analog TV set will in fact continue to work on the VHF channels? Not after sometime in February 2009, unless you are speaking of certain low power television stations. The big commercial broadcasters will be going all digital When we're having a hurricane and the power is off, its good to see the weather maps, etc. that can be seen on the commercial, on- the-air VHF channels using the battery-operated TV. It runs on 12 volts and will operate for quite a while on a car battery. I suspect not. I suspect I will need either a battery-operated digital-to-analog converter box, or a battery-operated digital TV. Correct, except as stated above. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
That is what we all thought, wasn't it? It is not the case. Looks like we were not reading the fine print. While they will all go digital in February, it appears that at least some of them will remain on VHF. Antenna Web reports that in DC channels 4, 5, 7, and 9 will continue on VHF. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
On Jul 3, 2008, at 9:19 PM, Tom Piwowar wrote: Looks like we were not reading the fine print. While they will all go digital in February, it appears that at least some of them will remain on VHF. Antenna Web reports that in DC channels 4, 5, 7, and 9 will continue on VHF. VHF provides for better range and greater signal saturation within a given service area at a lower output power than UHF channels can offer. Less interference as well, which means a more stable signal. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
I'm no authority, but I can't help wondering if the first tech put a filter on the line, either on the pole or somewhere on or in your house. If I were you I'd look at all the connectors you can see for tubular connector a couple inches long, and remove it. It's just a possibility. Scott McClure wrote: I currently have Cox internet and analog cable TV service (basic and expanded lineup) and when I purchased a digital TV at the beginning of the year and installed it, I was able to watch the HD version of the local broadcast stations as well as the regular signal fed through with the analog lineup. For example, DC's channel 4 is 34 on the Cox analog channel lineup, but I was also able to view channels 4-1 and 4-2 after I set up my digital television. It was great to watch the Super Bowl in higher definition. A few months ago, I experienced some internet service drops and a tech came out for service call. He changed out a splitter in the house and got everything working again. But after that visit, the digital versions of local broadcasts appeared very infrequently, most of the time they didn't have a signal. I called Cox back again a couple weeks ago and asked them about the local digital channels that were missing and they sent out a tech. The tech looked everything over and told me that since I had analog cable, I wasn't supposed to receive the digital versions of the broadcast stations. He didn't explain anything very clearly, but what I took away from the exchange was that I wouldn't get the local digital broadcasts unless I upgraded to digital cable. Somewhere in the conversation he said that someone at Cox, or the earlier tech had probably done something to squelch the digital versions of the local broadcasts in my channel lineup. I told him that I could also just put in an antenna and a switch and get the channels OTA. I'll add my two cents to the discussion by saying that the analog lineup has been slowly shrinking. I sometimes get the feeling that Cox is going to pull the plug on it someday. Scott * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
I'm no authority, but I can't help wondering if the first tech put a filter on the line, either on the pole or somewhere on or in your house. If I were you I'd look at all the connectors you can see for tubular connector a couple inches long, and remove it. It's just a possibility. Yes it could be a filter. People who remove such filters can be arrested or sued. I would not mess with it. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
Check out antennaweb.org for a chart of what you can expect to receive from your location with an outdoor antenna. On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I told him that I could also just put in an antenna and a switch and get the channels OTA. Getting a digital TV tripled the OTA programming I was getting. Any thoughts about paying for cable quickly vanished. However I did notice a seasonal variation in reception. My reception is considerably better when there are no leaves on the trees. We'll see if getting an outside antenna helps. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * -- John Duncan Yoyo ---o) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
I just spoke to one of the local TV station's engineers about our intermittent OTA reception, who said that any UHF (read most HD channels), transmission will be more problematic than a VHF signal. So problematic that two stations that I know of in my area are going back to their original VHF channel assignment, come Feb. '09, which should improve reception tremendously. Richard P. John Duncan Yoyo wrote: Check out antennaweb.org for a chart of what you can expect to receive from your location with an outdoor antenna. On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I told him that I could also just put in an antenna and a switch and get the channels OTA. Getting a digital TV tripled the OTA programming I was getting. Any thoughts about paying for cable quickly vanished. However I did notice a seasonal variation in reception. My reception is considerably better when there are no leaves on the trees. We'll see if getting an outside antenna helps. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.134 / Virus Database: 270.4.4/1530 - Release Date: 7/2/2008 8:05 AM * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
Check out antennaweb.org for a chart of what you can expect to receive from your location with an outdoor antenna. They list 29 stations, but some of the listed stations have 3 or 4 feeds. Some of the additional feeds are just weather, but some, like for PBS, offer a full compliment of programs. So I get about 50 channels OTA. More than I can possibly watch. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
I currently have Cox internet and analog cable TV service (basic and expanded lineup) and when I purchased a digital TV at the beginning of the year and installed it, I was able to watch the HD version of the local broadcast stations as well as the regular signal fed through with the analog lineup. For example, DC's channel 4 is 34 on the Cox analog channel lineup, but I was also able to view channels 4-1 and 4-2 after I set up my digital television. It was great to watch the Super Bowl in higher definition. A few months ago, I experienced some internet service drops and a tech came out for service call. He changed out a splitter in the house and got everything working again. But after that visit, the digital versions of local broadcasts appeared very infrequently, most of the time they didn't have a signal. I called Cox back again a couple weeks ago and asked them about the local digital channels that were missing and they sent out a tech. The tech looked everything over and told me that since I had analog cable, I wasn't supposed to receive the digital versions of the broadcast stations. He didn't explain anything very clearly, but what I took away from the exchange was that I wouldn't get the local digital broadcasts unless I upgraded to digital cable. Somewhere in the conversation he said that someone at Cox, or the earlier tech had probably done something to squelch the digital versions of the local broadcasts in my channel lineup. I told him that I could also just put in an antenna and a switch and get the channels OTA. I'll add my two cents to the discussion by saying that the analog lineup has been slowly shrinking. I sometimes get the feeling that Cox is going to pull the plug on it someday. Scott - Original Message From: Richard P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 3:45:24 PM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] video compression From what I've seen, Cox is constantly dropping analog channel programming and moving that programming over to digital. At some point I figure the only thing they'll have left on analog will be 3 or 4 network channels. Richard P. Drop channels? When have they ever really dropped a significant portion of channels. The cable is already crowded. They need to shoe horn more material into that limited bandwidth. Media General used to use two lines to get all the channels out to Fairfax county prior to the last rebuild and takeover by COX. Look at the satellite groups lots of people complain about the quality of HDTV compared with the OTA signal. FIOS is the only one with bandwidth to spare right now. And cable/fios companies don't re-compress source material - why would they when they have no trouble sending hundreds of channels? They just drop a channel to make room. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
I told him that I could also just put in an antenna and a switch and get the channels OTA. Getting a digital TV tripled the OTA programming I was getting. Any thoughts about paying for cable quickly vanished. However I did notice a seasonal variation in reception. My reception is considerably better when there are no leaves on the trees. We'll see if getting an outside antenna helps. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
Applying a second round of lossy compression to a file that is already compressed using lossy compression produces a horrid result. If your cable provider is doing this I would argue that they are not selling you what they claim to be selling you. It is an adulterated product. Like the Chineese filler used in pet food. You shoud demand a rebate. Yes Broadcast are compressing their digital signals but the cable/satellite people are recompressing that compressed digital signal a few times more to get the bandwidth down. Try comparing a cable/satellite signal on a digital tv to the same station on an outdoor antenna or simple rabbit ears. You get more artifacts on the second hand digital source. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
Drop channels? When have they ever really dropped a significant portion of channels. The cable is already crowded. They need to shoe horn more material into that limited bandwidth. Media General used to use two lines to get all the channels out to Fairfax county prior to the last rebuild and takeover by COX. Look at the satellite groups lots of people complain about the quality of HDTV compared with the OTA signal. FIOS is the only one with bandwidth to spare right now. On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Tony B [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's not lose focus. The point of this thread was to point out that digital TV broadcasters are having a lot of trouble trying to fit everything they want to fit into a single limited DTV (digital tv) channel. Some are reportedly already recompressing, but they use little boxes that cost as much as a small house to do it so it has been claimed few will notice anything. Oddly, it's more obvious in the audio channels. This does not apply to analog broadcasts received with rabbit ears, even if they are viewed on a 'digital tv'. And cable/fios companies don't re-compress source material - why would they when they have no trouble sending hundreds of channels? They just drop a channel to make room. Soon on the scene: TV delivered via the internet. All super compressed, all the time. I _still_ haven't figured out how they intend to deliver HD movies over this poor excuse for broadband we have in the US. At least one company is slated to take this live 8/1/08. On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Applying a second round of lossy compression to a file that is already compressed using lossy compression produces a horrid result. If your cable provider is doing this I would argue that they are not selling you what they claim to be selling you. It is an adulterated product. Like the Chineese filler used in pet food. You shoud demand a rebate. Yes Broadcast are compressing their digital signals but the cable/satellite people are recompressing that compressed digital signal a few times more to get the bandwidth down. Try comparing a cable/satellite signal on a digital tv to the same station on an outdoor antenna or simple rabbit ears. You get more artifacts on the second hand digital source. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * -- John Duncan Yoyo ---o) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] video compression
Actually, you're thinking about the old analog days. Broadcast TV will be compressing quite a bit in the digital era. On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 3:13 PM, John Duncan Yoyo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you get a clear signal from a roof top antenna it certainly is the way to go. No compression artifacts from the cable and Satellite providers trying to scrunch more signal into the limitations of their bandwidth. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] video compression
Yes Broadcast are compressing their digital signals but the cable/satellite people are recompressing that compressed digital signal a few times more to get the bandwidth down. Try comparing a cable/satellite signal on a digital tv to the same station on an outdoor antenna or simple rabbit ears. You get more artifacts on the second hand digital source. Actually, you're thinking about the old analog days. Broadcast TV will be compressing quite a bit in the digital era. On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 3:13 PM, John Duncan Yoyo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you get a clear signal from a roof top antenna it certainly is the way to go. No compression artifacts from the cable and Satellite providers trying to scrunch more signal into the limitations of their bandwidth. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * -- John Duncan Yoyo ---o) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
