PDA

View Full Version : HD question



tucsonzag
11-06-2010, 02:46 PM
Apologies if this has been definitively addressed elsewhere but does anyone have a clear answer as to what the HD status is going to be for the home games?

Was pleasantly surprised to see the Mark Few show in very nice HD for this new season – someone up there’s shooting with HD now.

What I saw for last night’s game was something I’ve personally never seen before on any broadcast (not that I can remember at least) – standard def in true widescreen. Not just standard def stretched out or cropped to fill the screen but a genuine 16:9 image, just not HD. It was almost like they were trying to fool people into thinking it was HD. Either way, it’s a positive step
forward to see the home games in 16:9.

Any other observations on this?

Heister and Ehlo were in rare form as always - brought a smile to my face.

tinfoilzag
11-06-2010, 08:35 PM
My theories on why we don't get the watch the national powerhouse Zags in HD:

• HD is too much like witchcraft
• Current format let's you use your imagination much more
• Salesman tricked KHQ into buying "Heightened Definition" cameras
• Surplus game tapes aren't big enough for HD
• Grainy picture gives our games that hometown feel

HOOTER
11-06-2010, 09:57 PM
My theories on why we don't get the watch the national powerhouse Zags in HD:

• HD is too much like witchcraft
• Current format let's you use your imagination much more
• Salesman tricked KHQ into buying "Heightened Definition" cameras
• Surplus game tapes aren't big enough for HD
• Grainy picture gives our games that hometown feel

:lmao: Quality post.

Those are just as good as any other reason I've heard. I don't really care though because I program my VCR to tape the games while I'm at work. :p

zaguarxj
11-07-2010, 08:57 AM
Yes! All three of my game predictions have come true.

zagzilla
11-07-2010, 10:32 AM
The court looked washed out by glare during the game. It was a distraction and looked bad on both SD and HD. Broadcasters need to put a filter on their camera for the wide-angle full court shot

tucsonzag
11-07-2010, 12:03 PM
"Heightened Definition" - well played.

Actually not quite zaguarxj - I'm not complaining (about the HD or Heister/Ehlo). I'm just genuinely curious if anyone knows what the answer actually is. And I'd never seen standard def in 16:9 - have any of you guys? Guess it's just the geeky A/V part of me but thought that was really interesting.

Dower did look great - so stoked to see his future!

sofa king
11-07-2010, 02:10 PM
Maybe it is a beta test to try a new format designed to help Dan Kleckner in his continuing bid to pretend that he's not really losing his hair.

But seriously, if KHQ had to decide on spending more money on HD vs. upgrading their announcers, I'm not sure which I'd support. Having one's eyes be pleased while having the feeling of being dumber just for listening is a tough one.

FlyZag
11-07-2010, 02:37 PM
But seriously, if KHQ had to decide on spending more money on HD vs. upgrading their announcers, I'm not sure which I'd support. Having one's eyes be pleased while having the feeling of being dumber just for listening is a tough one.

I'd go with the better picture quality. You can always mute.

kitzbuel
11-07-2010, 02:50 PM
I'd go with the better picture quality. You can always mute.
Aye

Birddog
11-07-2010, 03:44 PM
Tucson, were you watching it on Sat? I didn't check on Fri, but sometimes the games are carried on FSNW HD (687 on DirecTV) and other channels in standard (688 for instance). I can't say I've seen this happen on Zag games, but I have noticed it on some football telecasts on the Fox array of channels.

LynetteG
11-07-2010, 04:08 PM
Maybe it is a beta test to try a new format designed to help Dan Kleckner in his continuing bid to pretend that he's not really losing his hair.



this sure wasn't appropriate but I laughed so loud I spit my food out!

adoptedzag
11-08-2010, 08:27 AM
I'm guessing it was 480p:

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/480p :

The ATSC digital television standards define 480p with either 704 × 480 (non-square sampling) or 640 × 480 (square sampling) pixel resolutions, at 24, 30, or 60 progressive frames per second.

U Zig, I Zag
11-08-2010, 08:46 AM
I posted this awhile back but maybe some can get a difinitive answer and make it a sticky:

I am pretty sure that when KHQ/FSN is involved we will be seeing it as SD only. It's not the cameras, per se, but it is the truck outside the Kennel that brings it all together. Q6 bought a used truck some time back that's probably what we are stuck with for awhile. It's possible that when it's a 'larger' game that ESPN or CBS, etc will bring in their own (rent from Seattle prob.) truck/gear and enable a high-def signal feed.

That still doesn't explain the 'blooming' (what I would call it) on the wider shots with the terrible white-balance and hot spots, etc. It seems, that after all these years with the same lighting, same variables year after year that they would have the cameras dialed in to give the best possible picture - but that doesn't seem to be the case.

That said, the actual camera work is good and the operators can follow the action well.



* quick google search brings up about $1.5 million for a standard (ahem) HD enabled on-location production studio. Don't see Q6 ponying that up anytime soon.

229SintoZag
11-08-2010, 10:24 AM
I am with you. I had never really seen that broadcast format before either. I hated it. It was terrible. The picture quality was so poor it was tough to watch the game.

I really hope Gonzaga insists on HD broadcasts the next time the TV contract is up. If I can get Greg Heister's off season fishing shows from Alaska in HD, we ought to get Zags games in HD.

Memo to Q6: you're not fooling anyone.

SintoZag
11-08-2010, 04:14 PM
I think the washed out look might actually be the lighting in the arena. I haven't been in there in a couple of years but I remember it being bright. When I was in MSG for the Duke game last year year the floor was bright, but I felt like I was almost sitting in the dark and I was only 10 rows up. I have noticed this more recently at NBA games. The audience looks like they are in the dark and the floor is lit bright. It might be an HD thing.

I also agree about the wide screen non-HD thing. Maybe they have HD cameras, but not HD truck? I am happy to not have to watch it in a box.

U Zig, I Zag
11-08-2010, 04:25 PM
I think the washed out look might actually be the lighting in the arena. I haven't been in there in a couple of years but I remember it being bright. When I was in MSG for the Duke game last year year the floor was bright, but I felt like I was almost sitting in the dark and I was only 10 rows up. I have noticed this more recently at NBA games. The audience looks like they are in the dark and the floor is lit bright. It might be an HD thing.

I also agree about the wide screen non-HD thing. Maybe they have HD cameras, but not HD truck? I am happy to not have to watch it in a box.

It's the truck (see my post above).

I prefer the (ever so) slight improvement when they broadcast in HD and put the SD content in 4:3, like on ESPN. However, thats not for everyone and you should be able to go to the non-HD channel and use your TV to stretch to fill, etc. So locally it would be on KHQ and KHQHD, ESPN and ESPNHD and FSN and FSNHD - if your screen is big enough and you are far enough away the non-HD version is probably choice.

The women play on SWX, which is a local weather/sports/whatever channel next week, or the week after? The Whitman game - that's going to be a treat. Unless they changed something SWX is on a sub-channel of another already broken up hunk of space. The quality of that tends to be pretty bad...

hockeyzag
11-08-2010, 04:56 PM
You know I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure The Mark Few Show is broadcast in HD. If it isn't I hope we change the game broadcast to whatever it is because it looks 10x better on my HD tv than the regular games.

If they have HD cameras to shoot The Mark Few Show, why wouldn't they use them for games???

HOOTER
11-08-2010, 06:07 PM
If they have HD cameras to shoot The Mark Few Show, why wouldn't they use them for games???

Because they're dumb. They make excuses as to why they can't broadcast games in HD, while practically everything else on TV is available in HD. If it's so damn difficult then why is everyone else able to do it? If anyone is going to respond to my question with some BS about how expensive or complicated it is you can save it. Time to do what almost everyone else has been able to do and jump on the HD bandwagon.