I'm not sure Channel 8 WMTW understands high definition AT ALL

Once again ABC's World News at 6:30 pm, which began high definition broadcasting on August 25, 2008, was not in high definition on Portland, Maine's Channel 8 - WMTW.

At lease it wasn't for the first several minutes. I don't know how long they went in standard definition because I switched channels to NBC's Nightly News.

At some point, around 6:45 or so, I checked again and this time it was in high definition.

So I ask myself, what does it take to broadcast in high definition?

Well, I'll tell you. I've written this in several posts over the last few years. Whoever is sitting in the control room needs to "flip the switch", literally. There is a little switch and when the network (in this case ABC) is sending the TV station a direct feed that the TV station is simply relaying back out to you, the viewer, that's all they have to do. But can WMTW handle that. Doesn't seem like it.

They are not the first, or last, in Portland to not meet High Definition expectations. They are just the latest. After a hundred emails or so from me at the Maine HDTV Forum, the NBC and CBS affiliates in Portland (WCSH and WGME) have finally figured it out. I guess they got sick of hearing from me every time an HD program wasn't in HD. I keep doing it because if I don't stay on top of these people, who will?

I wrote to Bill Greep, lead engineer at WMTW, last night about ABC World News not being in HD and never heard a thing back from him. This is common. They don't want to respond to my inquiries about their mistakes, the don't think the public is smart enough to understand the technical complexities of their job. How would someone like little old me understand "flip the switch".

WMTW - ABC Channel 8 Portland Maine still can't get HD done right

ABC's World News Tonight at 6:30 pm began broadcasting in HD on Monday, August 25, 2008.

I have not had a chance to check it out until today. It was NOT in HD on WMTW.

Just to make sure it wasn't the network's fault, I checked WCVB out of Boston and they were carrying the ABC World News Tonight in high definition.

I called the station, to no avail, so I wrote to the lead engineer Bill Greep. I am awaiting an explanation and a reply.

If any of you watched ABC News at 6:30 pm earlier this week, can you let me know if it was in HD then. I am now suspecting it hasn't been in HD all week.

Thanks folks,

Ellen's Talk Show in High Definition?

I recently saw a post on a web site called "PopCritics.Com" in which someone named Mike declared that Ellen would be in HD starting with her new 2008 season to begin 2/8/08. My response, base on all of the information I have (and my regular visitors will recognize this issue) is was as follows:

I'm not sure I'm convinced. Since Ellen is syndicated, it goes out on a
feed from the production company and/or distributor. If a TV station who airs Ellen, simply accepts that signal and turns around to broadcast it out on its
local channel to the views, it may work. But 99% of television stations don't
have the ability to record, and then playback later, a High Definition program.
That's why you don't see reruns for most TV shows (that appear on other networks
or in a different time slot than the original) broadcast in high definition. I
don't believe that the distributor is going to send a feed out to the satellite
system for every TV station that airs Ellen at a specific hour. Here in New
England, you can watch Ellen on WCVB Channel 5 (ABC) at 9:00 am and then on
Channel 8 (WMTW - ABC) at 4:00 pm. That just accounts for my particular cable
provider. Some people see Ellen at 10:00 am, 3:00 pm, 5:00 pm or in late night.
So as nice as it is that Ellen will produce her TV show in HD, very few will
actually see it in HD. I started a web site almost 2 years ago now that track
all these issues and I have gained several contacts within the industry. Believe
me, I wish for more HDTV, and it has been my quest to get more HDTV on the air.
The most difficult TV shows to go HD will be anything syndicated because TV
stations can't record and play it back in HD. The equipment to do so is
unbelievably expensive and most TV stations imply can't afford it.

Survivor Gabon goes High Def

I am not a big fan of "Survivor". In fact, I've never watched it - ever.

But in the interest of full disclosure and in keeping with the mission statement of this blog. "Survivor: Gabon - Earth's Last Eden" premieres September 18, 2008, at 8:00 Eastern.

And for the first time, Survivor will be broadcast in full high definition. In fact, it will become one of the first reality television series produced and broadcast in high definition. CBS uses 1080i as its HD format. No word yet on whether or not CBS will broadcast in Dolby 5.1 surround sound.

WPXT Channel 51 - Portland, Maine - all digital, only digital

Just in case you didn't notice, Portland, Maine's CW Network affiliate, WPXT, Channel 51, was the first station in Maine to turn off its analog signal. They only send out a digital signal.

For those of you using cable or satellite services, you won't notice the difference because they are down-converting the digital signal to analog.

For those of you using an antenna who don't have a digital TV or digital converter box, you have LOST YOUR SIGNAL FOR GOOD.

If you have a digital or HDTV and use an antenna, you can only receive the digital signal which, right now, is broadcast on UHF channel 43 (it still appears as channel 51, the 43 is behind the scenes so to speak.

So this is good and bad. Good for Channel 51 since they are the first to do it in Maine and are the first to remove their analog signal from cluttering up the airwaves. It's bad for anyone who doesn't have cable or satellite, or has not yet bought a digital TV or conveter box.

The FCC allows TV stations to drop their analog signal as early as February 19, 2008 without further approval from the FCC. WPXT applied for an earlier shut-off date and it was approved by the FCC. The FCC wants as many stations as possible to do exactly what WPXT did to avoid having one single day when everyone shuts off analog and goes all digital. That scenario would probably create lots of havoc for those who aren't ready and/or have no idea in the first place that they were supposed to do something. The hope is that as local affiliates turn off their analog signals, viewers who are no set up for digital will notice and make the changes they need to make. If all of this happened on one day, well, let's just say I wouldn't want to be answering the phones at a Maine television station on that day, or at the FCC. Oh, and I wouldn't want to be working at Radio Shack, Best Buy, Circuit City, or anyone else who is selling converter boxes.

So, the games have begun. We can't run back now. The digital age is here so I hope you are all ready. There is lots of information to help on this blog if you need it.

Sometimes, too much Digital TV signal can be the problem

In some recent back and forth email conversations I had with Suzanne Goucher of the Maine Association of Broadcasters, she provided me with some further insight about digital TV signals which is pretty important.

First, one new piece of the puzzle, at least it was new to me, is that if you have very strong digital TV signals it could actually cause a degradation of the signal. It's like the old adage "Too much of a good thing". Ms Goucher, like me, admitted to not being a technical expert on this stuff but provided an analogy that seemed to make sense: "if you think about throwing a rock into the water, you get strong ripples at the center and weaker ripples further out. Now, add in sticks and rocks and boats and other obstacles, and the ripples start bouncing back and forth and overlapping one another or smacking up against the rocks, and it becomes much less of a "straight line" proposition"

She also used WGME as an example and provide me with an FCC Analog map and an FCC Digital map of the digital signal area from the WGME Tower. Note that the two maps are almost identical: (click image to enlarge)

Analog:

Digital:

The last important piece of information that Ms. Goucher shared with me was an article written about 10 years ago regarding digital reception problems. If I didn't know it, I would have thought it was written just yesterday.

Here's the link: http://www.current.org/dtv/dtv815reception.shtml

So there's some good information here. Some of it may help those of you struggling with Digital TV reception and some of it may at least explain why you are having reception issues to begin with.

I'd like to personally thank Suzanne Goucher from the Maine Association of Broadcasters for her commitment to providing information to Maine's population about digital television.

The HD bait and switch

Have you noticed that some high definition television programs look better than others? I have. I always thought that the difference in HD quality was the result of the quality of the camera being used or the types of lenses and filtering used to produce special effects. For example, some TV shows want to look like they were produced in the 70's with that more grainy effect, or maybe they want black and white. Further, one show I can think of, "CSI: Miami", tends to have a yellowish glow through the whole show which produces a certain "look and feel" to the program. Some of these make an HD program look lesser in quality and some don't.

Well, come to find out the differences in HD quality are a result of the camera but not in the way I thought. For whatever reason, I assumed that all 16:9 aspect ratio television was high definition. It is not. Manufacturers like Sony make, and TV producers use, professional grade 16:9 standard definition cameras. I did not know that.

This explains why on Channel 5 out of Boston (WCVB), which is the first station in the region to go High Definition for its local news, has such a grainy looking picture when they show field produced pieces, whether live or on tape. It's quite jarring to see such a clear picture of the studio and then the anchor cuts to a journalist live at some "happening". The aspect ratio is correct, meaning nothing looks squished, or cut off, but the quality of the picture goes to hell. I never could quite figure it out until I read an article today on the "Broadcasting and Cable" web site.

There was an entire article there on all of the different cameras, definitions, and aspect ratios. The article talked about the different networks and what kinds of cameras they use and what they intend to use in the future. In an earlier post I wrote about ABC going to HD for its evening newscast, but the best they will be able to do for field pieces, even if they use 16:9, will be standard definition.

So don't be surprised when you are watching an HD program, or an HD network, and the picture isn't so hot. It's not you, and it's not your HDTV, it's the quality image being sent to you.

ABC News finally rolls out High Definition

ABC already uses high definition for some prime time shows and in its morning lineup of Good Morning America and The View. But World News Tonight (the evening newscast) and Nightline (ABC's late night news magazine) have been left, until now, in the dirt when it comes to HD.

Now according to Glen Dickson on the "Broadcasting & Cable" web site, on Aug. 25 (that's today!), "World News with Charles Gibson and Nightline will start broadcasting in 720-line progressive (720p) HD, first from the Democratic National Convention in Denver, then from the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul the following week."

"Additionally, during the week of September 8, news magazines 20/20 and Primetime, as well as the weekend editions of World News, will also make their HD debuts."

To me, this is exciting news (no pun intended). It is great to see more HD programming come on board and I hope more and more networks, both broadcast and cable, will follow suit.

One more programming note: this is the first time that all of the big 3 networks will be broadcasting the Democratic and Republican Conventions in High Definition.

So it's good for the political junkies as well as the HD junkies out there.

Response from Maine Assoc. of Broadcasters regarding poor digital TV signals

Suzanne Goucher from the Maine Association of Broadcasters responded to an email I recently sent that inquired about the poor digital signal strength in some parts of Maine and if anything could be done about it. I have posted some excerpts from that response below:

We certainly share your concerns, as we want to ensure continued delivery of TV signals to the widest possible audience.

Most stations in Maine are operating their digital transmitters at full power right now (there are a few exceptions, such as WPFO-TV in Portland, which ran up against a Canadian interference problem on its proposed "borrowed" DTV channel and thus cannot turn on its digital transmitter until the transition date of 2/17/09).

Stations cannot arbitrarily increase their transmitter power above the FCC-permitted limits without risking fines that run into the several thousands of dollars for operating above their licensed power output.

It's not that the digital signals are weaker; in fact, the predicted Grade B contours of digital signals match up pretty closely with their corresponding analog signals.

Through our DTVforME.com website, TV station websites, one-to-one contact with viewers and other outlets, we are urging Mainers to get their converter boxes now and begin the conversion process sooner rather than later, so that they have time to experiment with different configurations before the transition date. If people are able to receive analog signals, the physics suggest that they should be able to receive digital signals. It may take an antenna booster, different antenna position, or other alternatives to address the issue. For households close to TV transmitter sites, it may even take a switch from a rooftop antenna to rabbit ears, because "too much" digital signal can pose problems too.

As you say on your blog, people need to "think about their particular situation and make changes where necessary." What works in one household may not work in the household next door or down the street. There's no one-size-fits-all answer; it may take a little try- this, try-that.

So that's the response in summary. I am concerned with the following statement from one section above:

If people are able to receive analog signals, the physics suggest that they should be able to receive digital signals.

As we all know, this simply isn't true

I was a bit disappointed. I'm glad I got a response but unfortunatley got no answers. Maybe I am expecting too much from some of these "associations" who are really nothing more than lobbyist organizations operating solely for their own benefit.

Well, I'm going to keep trying, keep plugging away at it, until maybe someday I can find someone to address the issue of poor signal strenght for Digital TV. I could use some help; there is power in numbers. I anyone is interested in helping, please let me know.

Hang in there folks.

Face the Nation on CBS goes High Def

I'm not sure when it happened. It must have been shortly after the CBS Evening News. This morning as I surfed the Sunday political talk shows I noticed that Face the Nation was in high definition.

The CBS Evening News changed to high definition on July 28, 2008, making only the second (after NBC) national network evening news program to do so. Why ABC has not followed suit, I have no idea. ABC's other news division programs like "Good Morning America" and "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" are in high definition. But others news programs like "Prime Time" and "Nightline" are not.

This disparity between what is in HD and what is not is confusing to me. CBS's morning show isn't in HD but the competition is. ABC's evening news isn't in HD but the competition is. I know that it is more expensive to produce shows in High Definition. But why some shows and not others.

I thought it was about ratings and revenue but are more people watching "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" than "Meet the Press" which isn't in high def. I doubt it. Plus, if a show is in high definition, it is more likely to get a ratings boost because those of us with HD TVs are more likely to watch a show that is in HD rather than one which is not.

My whole point in writing this article is to first, congratulate CBS on moving "Face the Nation" to high def, and second, to urge everyone in the business of producing television shows to do it in high definition.

The public is spending money on HDTVs and HD services to bring High Definition into our homes. We've proven our commitment to High Definition. Now it is the networks turn, both off air and cable/satellite, to step up to the plate.

Remember the old expression "I want my MTV"? Well, I want my HDTV!

The truth about broadcast television's conversion to digital

I feel that I need to make this VERY clear.

February 17, 2009, is not the first day of "digital TV", it is the last day of analog TV.

Over the air TV stations (the one's that broadcast the major networks) must cease all analog transmission over the air by 2/17/09.

Over the air TV stations have been broadcasting both analog signals AND digital signals for quite some time; in many cases for a few years. The FCC has said they must cease the over the air analog signals by the date above.

Over the air TV stations can cut off transmission of their analog TV signal as soon as November 19, 2008 without further approval from the FCC. (SO YOU CAN'T WAIT UNTIL 2/17/09 TO ACT IF YOU ARE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT NEED TO)

Over the air TV stations can cut off transmission of their analog signal PRIOR TO November 19, 2008 with approval from the FCC. Many have applied and the FCC has never said no. In my area, I already have one network (THE CW) that has ceased analog transmission and another network will cease analog transmission in September. (AGAIN, YOU CAN'T WAIT AROUND UNTIL FEBRUARY OF NEXT YEAR, THIS STUFF IS HAPPENING NOW).

• According to the "Leightman Research Group" 14% of primary residences nationwide with at least one TV set do not subscribe to cable ... or any other type of multi-channel video service (satellite, telephone company, etc). In addition, 24% of households that subscribe to a multi-channel video service have at least one TV set that only receives broadcast programming. In total, 34% of all US households are at risk of losing broadcast reception to at least one TV set as a result of the pending digital transition if no action is taken.
• Further, among those who have heard about the transition to digital, 30% OF THOSE WHO DON'T subscribe to cable or multi-channel service BELIEVE THAT THE TRANSITION TO DIGITAL WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON THEIR TVs. Also, 41% of cable or satellite subscribers with at least one broadcast-only TV set think that the transition will have no impact on their TVs.

So let me just summarize these two points above. There are a lot of people, even now, who either only rely on over-the-air broadcasting or have at least one TV that relies on over-the-air broadcasting, that don't realize they will not receive any TV signals on those television sets after 2/19/09 or even earlier depending on the TV stations from which they get the over-the-air signals. I know that was a long sentence. Let me state it again only shorter. Some people don't know, or don't believe, they will stop getting TV on their TV.

I am no advocate for cable TV, satellite TV, or any other form of pay TV. I have a digital TV set with an antenna and receive all of the major broadcast TV networks for free in digital and high definition for free. I want to ensure that everyone continues to receive their television signals.

You can do it cheaply with your existing analog TV if you purchase a digital converter box with a $40 coupon provided to you by the FCC (www.dtvanswers.com).

If you can afford it, subscribe to a cable or satellite service and if you can afford it, but a digital TV, but you don't have to.

There has been so much publicity about the conversion to digital TV that I think people have tuned it out. They think they are all set or don't really understand what they need to do, if anything. I mean, who would ever think that after all these years the very nature of television is changing and nothing works like it used to. But, that is what we are dealing with.

Those of you in more rural or otherwise hard to reach locations may have difficulty getting digital TV signals. They are not as strong as analog signals. So those TV stations that you receive that are a bit fuzzy sometimes or have ghost images, they won't even come in when that TV station goes all digital. That is why I want everyone to figure out, and think about their particular situation and make changes where necessary.

Let's face it. For many of us, especially with the economy the way it is, rely on television for our only form of entertainment. Most of rely on TV as our primary source of local, national, and international news. TV is our primary lifeline to the rest of the world.

So please do some research and find out if you need to do anything to keep receiving television signals. There is plenty of information out there but if you can't find the answer, write to me and I'll do my best to help.

When is HDTV not really HDTV?

To be honest with you there is a lot of "high definition" programming out there that is not high definition. I'll give you a few examples:

On both TNT-HD and TBS-HD pretty much all programs are advertised (by that I mean in the on-screen program guide provided by your cable company if you have a cable box) as high definition. It show up in the description as a logo. The letters "HDTV" inside a little black box. The same is true if you check Internet-based TV guides like "Zap2It" or "TitanTV". They say that programs on these stations are in HD, but they are not.

So programming like reruns of "Friends" and "Sex and the City", or movies like "Deep Impact" are not broadcast in High Definition. These networks simply stretch the picture to fit the screen. The picture looks stretched, I mean, you can tell something is off, and the picture is no clearer or crisper than you would see it on a regular analog, standard definition TV. Obviously you can't broadcast programming in HD that was never produced in HD, but don't list it in programming guides as High Definition when it is not.

The TNT-HD web site addresses the issue by admitting they do broadcast non-HD programs and stretch the picture; and they also say they are "sorry for the inconvenience".

There are also plenty of other culprits out there in the land of HD networks. For example, FoodNetwork-HD, Science Channel-HD, Discovery-HD, and a bunch of others, broadcast programming that has been stretched, poked, prodded or god knows what else to make the picture fit the screen hoping nobody will notice that the HD Networks, for which you pay extra for to you cable company, are not giving you what you paid for. One of the worst offenders is the Science Channel HD. Usually, when you watch analog TV on a High Definition TV, there are black bars, called "pillars" on the left and right side of the screen. What the Science Channel HD does is make those pillars much smaller hoping you won't notice that the picture doesn't fit the screen. Essentially they simply re-record the program and zoom in on it when they do it so the outcome is a larger version of the original that "almost fits the screen". You can tell something is up because when there are graphics on the very bottom or top of the screen, they are cut off. If these programs have subtitles, or even credits, you can't read them in their entirety because they have slid off the screen somehow.

Listen, I know that we are in the midst of the big transition to digital, and High Definition, being a subset of digital, is also in its infancy. However, High Definition has been around for several years now. At least as far back as 2003, 2004 or even farther back, TV shows have been produced in High Definition. So if these so called "HD" networks can't find enough programming to fill the schedule, why launch an HD version of your network? I'll tell you why, for the money.

The sad part is that people are paying for high definition TV that they are not getting, and these cable HD networks are gambling on the fact that the public won't notice. Just because the picture fills up the screen on your new big screen TV doesn't mean it is in high definition.

Here are some interesting statistics I saw on the "Broadcast Engineering" and "Leichtman Research" web sites:

• More than 75 percent of HDTV owners believe they are watching HD programming, but Leichtman estimates that 20 percent actually are not. (So who's fault is it that people think they are watching High Definition when in fact they are not?)
• Forty percent of HDTV owners and more than 20 percent of all adults believe that their household currently has a High Definition DVD player, which is much larger than the total number of HD DVD players sold to date. (You can't watch a high definition DVD on a regular DVD player, well, you can watch it but it won't be in HD. You need a special player called either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. This is the same fight that went on in the 80's when VHS went up against Beta. VHS won. And so did Blu-Ray. So if you don't have a Blu-Ray DVD player, or in rare cases an HD-DVD player, then you are not watching DVDs in high definition. However, if you have a X-Box or PlayStation, you can actually use those as high definition DVD players so don't go out and buy a new Blu-Ray DVD player if you have one of these gaming sets.)

So there you have it. HDTV is not always what it appears to be. Viewer may think they are watching HDTV when indeed they may not be. The honest truth is that if have watched HDTV you can recognize it in about a Milli-second when channel surfing. It is that good and that noticeable. I can only conclude that viewers who think they are watching HDTV think this simply because they are told it is HDTV. Don't be fooled and don't pay anybody money for high definition until you understand how it works and what you are getting for you money.

You can still, and always will be able to, get FREE HIGH DEFINITION programming if you have an HDTV tuner by purchasing an antenna. If you do this, like I did, you can view all of the major broadcast networks' programming (ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, FOX, CW, and MyN) in high definition for free. You won't receive cable-only high definition networks like the ones I mentioned earlier, but those networks are not providing enough HD programming to compensate you for what cable companies will charge you to get it.

Those without cable boxes are not safe from digital forever

This was taken from the FCC's DTV web site. It explains how cable companies are required to carry ANALOG signals of local TV stations and the FCC's rule to move to digital only applies to high powered broadcast TV (over the air).

Having said that, analog won't be around forever. Those without cable boxes are OK for a few years. But at some point, I believe that everything will be in digital because at some point it will be cheaper. Anyway, here is the statement:

"First, it's important to know that the February 17, 2009 deadline for the digital television transition only applies to full-power broadcast stations. The government does not require cable companies to transition their systems to digital. They can continue to deliver channels to their customers using analog signals. Actually, cable companies are required under FCC rules to offer local broadcast stations to their customers in analog, as long as they offer any analog service. This requirement will continue for at least three years after February 17, 2009. The FCC will decide in 2011 whether the requirement should be extended beyond February 17, 2012. This means that customers who receive analog cable service (without a cable set-top box) will be able to continue doing so."

I'll just add "for now" to the end of that sentence.

Visit form Cable Guy was very enlightening

Can you trust cable guys? Well, sometimes you can. I've had pretty good luck when I have needed to work with them.

This week, I was forced to pay for Internet from my cable company. I had been picking up unsecured wireless networks around the neighborhood but people have either moved away or secured their networks. Oh well, it was good while it lasted.

Anyway, I got to talking with the two guys that showed up to install my modem (why they neeed two I have no idea). They saw my big HDTV and noticed the antenna I had hooked up and asked what it was and how it all worked. I explained to them that I received all 7 major broadcast networks out the Portland area in digital, over the air, and of course with that, I get all of the HD programming they offer. The didn't believe me. These are people in the cable industry.

I actually had to turn on my HDTV, put it in antenna mode for input, and scrolled through all the channels (and sub-channels) I had. They were amazed, in disbelief, and had no idea that you could actually do that. One said "I didn't think you could carry a digital or HD signal through a coax cable".

I was amazed that they knew so little about broadcast TV and the digital conversion in general. One of them said that he thought the broadcast networks were getting rid of their over-the-air signals entirely (analog and digital). That's what he thought the digital conversion was all about.

I am NOT kidding. Maybe these guys are new to their job; maybe they are more focused on learning how to install cable, digital cable, Internet and IP Phone and have no time to follow what is going on with the broadcast side of the digital conversion. They were nice guys so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

I've been writing this blog for almost 2 years. It has moved from one location to another so the dates on the early posts don't accurately reflect the original posting date. In the last two year I have spoken with General Managers at TV stations, customer service reps at the cable company, cable TV installers, the Maine Association of Broadcasters, and the FCC just to name a few. I am blown away by how little people know about the whole TV Industry right now. But then again, this lack of knowledge and lack of information available to the general public is one of the reasons I started the blog in the first place.

Take care all.

The basic rules of receiving digital television

I recently wrote to Maine Public Television (MBPN). They are one in a long list of organizations I have contacted in an attempt to gain support and/or guidance concerning the difficulties in receiving digital TV signals in certain areas of Maine. I was surprised that they actually responded and even more surprised that J. Maurice Doyon, Audience Services Representative, gave some very useful information. It's not all good news but I thought I would post the response in full as it does give some very good advice on the best way to try and receive digital signals (they were speaking receiving MPBN specifically but many of the tips apply to all digital reception).

"Thank you for contacting the Maine Public Broadcasting Network. The following text is a comprehensive response for viewers experiencing difficulty in obtaining a digital signal. The portion in bold print addresses the fact that some, regardless of what they do, may not receive a digital signal off air. As a non-profit entity, MPBN simply does not have the financial resources to consider building more towers. The initial conversion from analog to digital will present challenges for sure. In your area of expertise, I'm sure you can foresee many of the ramifications, problems, and challenges that this change in technology will offer.

MPBN is receiving a steadily increasing number of contacts from television viewers who have purchased digital converter boxes and hooked them up to their TV sets only to find they can’t pick up MPBN. These experiences stand in contrast to the generally upbeat articles about the upcoming DTV conversion touting mainly the benefits of digital TV – of which there are indeed many, provided you can pick up the signal. Now that people are actually buying the converter boxes and hooking them up, however, they’re finding that it’s not always as easy as those public service announcements make it seem.

Here at MPBN we’ve tried out converter boxes on sets here at the station and asked some employees to try them out at their homes, with mixed success. In so doing, we’ve come up with a few things to check or consider:

• Unlike analog transmissions where the TV picture gets fuzzier as distance from the broadcast tower increases, with digital television you either get the signal or you don’t. You don’t get a snowy picture as the signal fades, it just cuts out completely.
• If you can’t get any channels at all, check your connections to make sure they are good. Especially with an outside antenna, connections can loosen or corrode and may need to be tightened or fixed.
• If you get other channels but can’t get MPBN, go to your TV’s menu and try entering the channel manually (follow the manufacturer’s instructions; most converter boxes have a signal level indicator) and adjusting the antenna.
  Keep in mind that MPBN’s digital channel number is not the same as its current analog channel number, and that the correct number depends on which of MPBN’s five TV stations in Maine you receive your signal from:
  
  o Bangor: analog channel 12, digital channel 9;
  o Portland/Augusta: analog channel 10, digital channel 17;
  o Biddeford: analog channel 26, digital channel 45;
  o Calais: analog channel 13, digital channel 10;
  o Presque Isle: analog channel 10, digital channel 20.
  
• Also keep in mind that channels 1 – 13 are VHF (regular “rabbit ear” antenna),
  but channels 14 and above are UHF, and will require a UHF “rabbit ear” loop or dish-resembling antenna for best reception.
• Try moving your rabbit ears near a window or try your converter on a TV upstairs, if you have one. If this works, a different set of rabbit ears might do the trick. In the Bangor area, MPBN shares a broadcast tower with WABI-TV Channel 5, so pointing your antenna in the same direction as you would to pick up WABI provides the best chance of receiving MPBN’s signal.
• If you still can’t find MPBN, you probably need an external VHF/UHF antenna. Among those who watch our over-the-air signal (not cable or satellite), an outside antenna with coaxial cable provides the highest probability of reception – but we still can’t guarantee that it will help.
• One last twist: in February, digital channels 17 (Augusta/Portland) and 20 (Presque Isle) will both switch to digital channel 10. All the other digital channels will stay where they are now. If you are in the coverage area of these stations, this change will most likely solve your issue, but there’s no way to be sure of that or even to test it before then.

Our Canadian friends are not facing a similar conversion to digital television in February 2009 in their country. They (and Americans along the border who can receive Canadian analog TV signals) will continue to be able to receive over-the-air analog TV emanating from Canadian TV stations. But if Canadians along the border want to continue to receive MPBN for free over the air, they will have to either purchase digital TV sets or the converter boxes, just like their American counterparts.

In addition to the materials produced by the Federal Communications Commission to explain the DTV conversion generally to a national audience, we are busily preparing similar materials specific to Maine and MPBN and what this transition will mean for you. We will announce the availability of these materials on TV and radio, on our web site and in our programming magazine as soon as they’re ready.

Finally, it does appear that it might be the case that regardless of what steps a person might take to receive MPBN for free over the air in the coming digital TV era – no matter which manufacturer’s converter box one uses, or what model digital TV one purchases, or how high one places the antenna on the roof, or which direction one contorts one’s body to receive the signal (“That’s it! Now stand just like that!”) – there will likely be a very small number of people who can pick up MPBN today who will not after February 19, 2009, converter boxes and new TVs notwithstanding. For those viewers, a cable or satellite subscription might be the only way to continue to receive public television broadcasts from MPBN. We wish it were not so, but that is reality.

Other resources include:

Maine Assoc. of Broadcasters - Conversion to Digital TV
http://www.mab.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3335

DVT for Maine - DTV News for Maine: http://www.dtvforme.com/

"Doppler HD" is a ploy - There is nothing HD about it

Maybe not everywhere, but here in Maine the term "Doppler HD", as used by one local television station, is nothing but a ploy.

Doppler HD refers to a television stations weather system being able to produce and transmit their weather data to the viewer in brilliant High Definition quality.

Well, if this local affiliate doesn’t have the equipment to produce or transmit the local news in high definition, why would it be any different for the weather segment?

The answer is: It isn't.

I have sources in the industry who have told me that the term "Doppler HD" as it is used at Channel 13, WGME, in Portland, Maine, is nothing but a ploy. They reserved the name -- the "brand" so to speak -- so that some day, when they are actually able to broadcast the local news and weather in high definition, they will be ready, with their pet name for their product. (It’s just a brand name. You know, like how all the TV stations have pet names like “Accu-weather” or “Weather-Plus”)

I certainly understand the idea, but I think it is sad. Not one station in my local TV market (Portland/Lewiston/Auburn -- which, by the way, is rated by size as somewhere between 75 and 100 in the country depending on the day) has any ability to produce and/or transmit their own HD programming. In fact not one station in this state or any other Northern New England state can do it either. I don’t know for sure but as far as I can tell, only a few Boston channels produce their own HD programming. WGME apparently finds it important to "copyright" the name "Doppler HD" for our television market as quickly as possible so somebody else can’t use it. Yes, it is such an attention grabber, such a unique take on weather forecasting in High Definition that they felt the need to copyright it. It’s the same idea as when you were a kid and you had to “call it”. “I call shotgun”, I would say as we piled into the station wagon.

In terms of the weather forecasting itself, I've seen the spots on WGME referring to Doppler HD saying things like "the viewers will be amazed" and "it's like nothing you've ever seen before". Well, that is not necessary true. It looks exactly like what I saw before. It looks exactly like the weather forecast and news I saw last week, last month, and last year. Nothing has changed. So maybe the "tease" spot should say "you won't even notice the new and exciting Doppler HD because we haven't changed anything”.

It is understandable that local television stations, who are dropping their analog signal, are trying to find their way in the new digital TV realm. Television is all about revenue which is based on ratings. Advertisers pay more to air commercials during programming that has a higher viewership. In my dealings with the local affiliates, they don't seem to get it. Those of us with High Definition TVs are craving HD programming. I am lucky enough to live in Southern Maine near the New Hampshire border. My cable channel lineup includes all of the Portland, Maine networks affiliates AND all of the Boston network affiliates. Both the ABC and NBC affiliates in Boston can and do broadcast their local news (including the weather) in High Definition. Maine can only sit back and dream that maybe, someday, hopefully, they will be able to do this. As an HD-phile, I tend to watch the Boston stations rather than the Maine stations simply because they are in High Definition. So what the local Maine affiliates don't seem to understand is that whoever gets the HD technology first will win. The winner will have more viewers, which converts to higher ratings, which in turn, converts to more revenue from advertisers.

So that's the lay of the land. All we are left with here in Maine is one television station in Portland who has reserved a name with the word "High Definition" in the title. There is nothing in high definition during the local news but each and every day, the viewers keep looking at the WGME broadcast thinking "Gee, I'm not sure why I spent money on an HD TV, it looks like the same quality as it did before".

Jeers to WGME for coining the term "Doppler HD". I don't have a problem with what they did; they should just be honest about it.

Hmm. TV stations being honest with the public? I've pushed it too far haven't I?

So the bottom line here is: Don't hold your breath. If you have high definition capabilities at your house, don't wait; don't pull your chair up to within inches of the screen trying to determine if something different is going on. Don't worry yourself thinking something is wrong with your eyes or your glass because they said it was in HD but you just don't see it. It's not there.

And finally, speaking of pulling your chair up closer to the TV, inn Maine, if you want high definition, big screen capabilities in your house, do exactly that.

Businessweek writer misses the mark on Digital TV

If you want to read the article to which I am referring, click on the link above.

Here's a guy who wrote an article for Business Week. An actual reporter, or journalist, I don't know. But his "summary" of the whole digital revolution was that converter boxes were quaint, but since smaller digital TVs are ONLY $600 or so, wasting your time on a converter box wasn't worth your time and effort.

Well, let me tell you something. Six hundred dollars is a lot of money to a lot of people. And simply buying a digital TV, without subscribing to cable or satellite (more monthly bills), won't get you any better reception than a converter box.

The author, Stephen H. Wildstrom, is an elitist, a snob, and has totally missed the point of what is really going on with the conversion to digital TV. He talks about his old "rabbit ears" TV set as being one that is only used on his morning jog on his treadmill where he was "putting up with" imperfect TV reception and hadn't given it much thought. The author also knows little to nothing about digital TV itself.

There are people in rural areas who can't afford a digital TV and/or cable TV. And they don't have a treadmill either. They have one TV, with one set of rabbit ears, and that's it.

Hell, I don't live in a rural area in Maine but I can't afford it all of the equipment and services needed. But we're all supposed to lay out $600 for a new TV and pay the cable company what, $50, $60, $100 a month. If Mr. Wildstrom is willing to set up a trust fund of his own money, I'd be happy to see that those who can't afford a new TV and a new cable bill, get some assistance.

This guy must be a republican.

Please visit Mr. Wildstrom and let him know your thoughts.

I wrote to him with my concerns and asked that he spend some time writing about the other side of the digital conversion; the side that people can't afford and can't see because they don't get the signal.

UPDATE - Here is Mr. Wildstroms's reply and my response to that.

"I didn’t deal with the question of whether the digital transition is a
good idea in large part because it’s just too late. Congress mandated the
transition in 1996 and at this point it is irrevocable.. The government has
actually gone ahead and sold the analog spectrum that broadcast stations will be
surrendering next year, so there’s no going back. Rural TV has been
problematic since the birth of television. It was the problem of poor rural
reception and the need to build a really tall “community” antenna that gave
birth to cable TV in the first place."

My response:

That is an interesting way to stand by the value of your story. The
translation seems to be "it's the government's fault and I can't do anything
about it". My challenge to you was to report on the other side of the
issue. It's not too late and if there are enough squeaky wheels, maybe one
of them will get the grease. Rural TV reception is not a life or death
issue; but it is a story worthy of telling. I had composed a lengthy email
that I later decided wasn't worth sending. You obviously have different
opinions that I, and I know that I can't change another person's point of view
with one conversation. Your piece on digital converter boxes was fluff,
created only to use up space and had no real merit. It is disappointing
when people try to act like journalists but don't really want to look at more
than one side of a story. I am assuming you got paid for that
article. Good for you."

I don't know folks, you be the judge. Maybe I'm wrong about this; maybe I pushed it too far. But for those of you out there who are being forced to convert to digital TV with an antenna and can't seem to get any channels, I would think you understand where I am coming from. Nobody is reporting on this issue or doing anything about it.

Online Class - Digital Television - Part 6 - Mastering High Definition

High Definition TV will reach your TV in one of two way. You can receive it over the air from your local TV stations for free (see article on what HD programming is actually available on the big broadcast networks) or through your cable/satellite provider.

When I refer to cable here I am referring to cable or satellite (like Dish TV, for example).

There are many cable networks that now have a separate High Definition version of themselves. Examples of these are TBS, TNT, A&E, Food Network, etc.

Keep in mind that just because these channels are supposedly all high definition, the truth is most are not. Keep in mind that these channels are showing current programming but in many cases reruns as well. TBS for example, shows reruns of Seinfeld, King of Queens, and other sitcoms and dramas that were never produced in High Definition. So how could a station like TBS broadcast them to you now in HD if they weren't produced in HD. The answer is, they can't. So in order to fill up the whole HDTV screen (remember it is a 16:9 ratio), they stretch the 4:3 picture to fit. Because the stretching originates from the source broadcaster, you have no control over it. You can use your TV's controls to "unstretch" it but that never works very will and you are left with black bars on the side and a picture that now looks squashed instead of stetched. There's just no way to win.

On the contrary, there are lots of HD channels including TBS that run either original programming or reruns that were produced in high definition. For example, TBS airs "House of Payne", an original sitcom, produced in HD. TNT airs "Saving Grace" and "The Closer" where this is also true. And they air reruns of shows like "Law and Order" and "The Office" which were originally produced in HD. So if a show was originally produced in HD and is airing on an HD network, you are truly seeing HD programming.

Let's go back to you local TV station for a minute. My local NBC affiliate airs "Law and Order" in the afternoons (because NBC has absolutely no daytime programming other than "Day of our Lives" so there's lots of room for reruns and/or "judge" shows). My local station can't record and play back at a later time, HD programing (see earlier posts). So in this case I am watching a channel that is HD capable and I'm watching a show that was produced in HD, but my local station can't record that show and play it back in HD so I end up with a plain old digital program with black bars on the side. I hope that makes sense.

The next example of HD is what I call "Fake HD". There are HD Channels out there like Discovery HD, Food Network HD, Science Channel HD who commit even bigger sins. There are certain shows on these networks that are broadcast in a strange format. It is as if they re-recorded a 4:3 program in close up and the outcome is that it ALMOST fills up the screen. It was originally a 4:3, non-HD program. They cleaned it up or something to get the picture to be a bit crisper, then zoomed in on it so make the picture bigger. But if you look, there are still black bars on the sides of the screen. The are smaller and a lot less noticeable than the typical black bars, but they are there.

The last and in my opinion the worst kind of HD programming is what I call "Horizon HD". On some HD Television sets, you can stretch a 4:3 picture to 16:9 (stretching) but everything looks a little off, so there is another setting called "Horizon Stretch". It's hard to explain but the picture is stretched out in a strategic way, not quite stretched evenly, to give the illusion that people are objects aren't so stretched. That's the best way I can explain it. But as the camera moves, let's say it pans the room, the picture looks like there are two rolling pins underneath the screen giving a wavy or undulating appearance. It can make you sea sick. And with all those makeover shows on TLC and HGTV where they pan the room before and after, Horizon HD is NOT a good choice. I find I must change the channel when I come upon these shows.

The moral of this story: HDTV is not necessarily HD so be careful what you're willing to pay for.

Stay tuned for more.

Online Class - Digital Television - Part 5 - What are those Black Bars?

OK, here we go. For the purposes of this post, I am going to assume that people either have a High Definition TV or an old style Analog TV. The other types (SDTV and EDTV) are not as popular and those who have them can figure out where they fit into these scenarios.

High Definition Televisions are wider than regular TVs. That's why they call them Wide Screen. Not to get too complicated but Analog TVs use a 4:3 ratio (picture it 4 inches across and 3 inches high). HDTVs us a 16:9 ratio (16 inches across by 9 inches down). That's a big difference. An HDTV is almost twice as wide as it is high. To make things more confusing, movies in the theater are in a 1:2 ratio, twice as wide as they are high. So when a movie plays on TV, even in HD, they still have to cut off part of the picture.

I want to talk about the most common scenario so let's assume you have a High Definition TV, subscribe to cable or satellite, and pay extra for the high definition TV package offered by your provider. You are channel surfing. Some of the channels are High Definition channels (meaning they are HD capable) and some are regular or non-HD channels. In this scenario sometimes you will have control over how the picture fills your screen and sometimes you won't.

If a digital TV broadcast is simply that, digital, and not high definition, then by default it will be in 4:3 format. A digital 4:3 format displayed on a 16:9 screen leaves black bars on both sides of the picture. Those black bars originate from the source (meaning the broadcast TV station you are watching or the cable channel you are watching). You will not be able to stretch the picture yourself using your TV controls. If you have a cable or satellite box, there is typically an option to stretch the 4:3 picture to fill the screen. If this is your case then the box itself is stretching the picture. Things will look out of shape, people will look fat and squatty, but it will fill your screen.

If you are watching an analog 4:3 format (which is what you have been watching for years until digital and HD came along), you will also see black bars but those originate from your TV, not from the source broadcaster. So you could stretch the picture yourself using your TV controls. Again at the cable or satellite box, if you subscribe to one of those, should also have options to override this and stretch the picture.

There is one more scenario; black bars (pillars) on the sides as well as along the top and bottom. Sometimes, those who produce programming or even commercials, use the letterbox black frame for special effect purposes. In these cases there is nothing wrong with your TV, the broadcaster, or anything else. But sometimes you will be watching your 4:3 analog TV or your 16:9 digital TV and you see black bars on all 4 sides of the picture. This happens because a television program is produced in high definition and is only being broadcast in high definition. It is not simulcast in standard definition. In addition to that, the program is being broadcast from a TV station that is not showing it directly from the network feed, it is being recorded and played back at a later time. And because most TV stations can not (yet) record and playback HD programming (as we discussed) they can only broadcast this HD programming in non-HD format. That's why you'll get black bars on the top, bottom, and both sides of your picture. If you have a digital TV and can zoom in, you will be able to get rid of them, but the picture quality will suffer severely. The program, at this point, will most likely be in 480i or 480p which is not conducive to zooming; the picture will look grainy and blurry.

The moral of this story: Sometimes the picture doesn't look right; and just because the picture takes up the whole screen doesn't mean its High Definition.

Stay tuned for more.

Online Class - Digital Television - Part 4 - What am I watching?

OK, now that you know why digital TV exists and how it works, it's time to discuss the realities of everyday television watching. The truth is, there is relatively very little High Definition programming that reaches your home everyday, no matter how that TV signal gets to you and no matter what the cable or satellite company tells you, and no matter what you THINK is happening, there really is very little HD programming getting to you.

I'm going to skip over specialty HD network for now and talk about just broadcast TV. I'll touch on cable and satellite High Definition in another post.

I'll run through the day for you quickly. Starting a 7:00 AM "Good Morning America" and "The Today Show" are broadcast in high definition. The CBS Early Show is not. From there "The View" is in HD and "The Young and the Restless" is in HD and that's about it until the evening news. Both NBC and CBS (just recently) are broadcasting the evening news in high definition, ABC is not. It really makes no sense. Supposedly it's all about cost. Producing a TV program in high definition is more expensive. As to why ABC broadcast GMA in HD but not their evening news, I have no idea. Conversely, why CBS broadcast their evening news in HD but not "The Early Show", I have no idea. I thought is was about ratings, meaning a highly rated show with more viewers means more revenue. But to me, you'll get more viewers if you broadcast in high definition because those of us who have HD capability would rather watch a program in HD than one that is not. But that's just my opinion.

Next comes Prime Time (8:00 pm in the East, 7:00 PM Central). Most non-reality type programming, meaning your TV dramas and sit-coms are in high definition (with very few exceptions). Reality shows like "Extreme Home Makeover" or "Big Brother" are not broadcast in HD. Neither are most news magazine shows and game shows, although when "The Price is Right" did their Prime Time specials, they were in HD. So basically it's hit or miss. Almost all of FOX's prime time programming, and most of the CW's prime time programming is in HD.

As for late night here we go again. Conan (NBC), Jay Leno (NBC), and Letterman (CBS) are in High Definition. Nightline (ABC), Jimmy Kimmel (ABC) and Craig Ferguson (CBS) are not in HD. See I told you, there's no rhyme or reason to it.

Now a footnote about PBS. They run things a bit differently. PBS has its own HD channel where all of the programming is in HD. As for local PBS stations, it depends. Some have the ability to produce and/or broadcast HD programming apart from the network.

I have read, however, that all news programming produced by CBS will be in HD by year end. The same is supposedly true for ABC and I suspect the other network will follow suit but there's no way to tell, or be sure, until I see it for myself.

So as you can see, the picture I am drawing here is that local TV stations can only broadcast HD programming when the network is broadcasting HD programming. These local TV stations are basically operating as a pass-through, passing the programming fed to them from the big satellite in the sky from the network to you. They can not record it and play it back later, they can only broadcast it when the network broadcasts it. Getting the picture?

The moral of this story: There's not a lot of HD programs to watch especially if you're not paying your cable or satellite company lots of extra money.

Stay tuned for more information

Online Class - Conversion to Digital Television - Part 3 - High Definition

In order for a TV station to broadcast high definition (HD) programming they must first be broadcasting in digital. HD is an extension of digital television. Just because a TV station is broadcasting in digital does not mean it is broadcasting HD. And further, just because you have a High Definition TV set doesn't mean that all programming you watch will actually be in high definition.

Two things must be true in order for you to watch high definition television. The TV station (or cable network, which I will get into later) must be sending an HD signal out over the airwaves AND you must have a TV that is displaying high definition receiving that signal.

What is High Definition? A super clear, superior picture with more dots of color to comprise that TV picture than was ever available with analog. There are really 2 types of high definiton. "P" for progressive and "I" for interlaced. You don't need to understand the difference other than "P" puts the image on the screen all at once and "I" put the image on the screen line by line. Television shows are not broadcast in 1080p, really only video games are capable of diplaying this high end of high definition. Television highest dots per inch is 1080i. The other type of high definition picture of TVs is 720p. As an example, the ABC network broadcasts its HD programming in 720p. The CBS network broadcast its HD programming in 1080i. The human eye, under normal circumstances would have an impossible time telling the difference between these two different type of HD. Both are very high quality.

The step-child of 1080i and 720p is "480". 480 is really the lowest number of dots per inch on the screen that you can have and still call it digital. 480i and/or 480p are not high definition, just regular digital TV.

The moral of this story: There are a lot of different kinds of digital TV

Stay tuned for more.

Online Class - Conversion to Digital Television - Part 2 - How?

Part 2 will focus on more of the guts of the digital TV revolution.

If you own a digital TV then you can receive digital broadcasts. If you don't have a digital TV, you'll need a converter box (to convert the signal from digital to analog so your TV will be able to read the signal and make a picture come through on your TV).

There are many types of digital TVs. First there is SDTV which means "Standard Digital Television". The picture is the same size and shape as an analog TV but the innards of the TV are more space age. Then there is EDTV or Enhanced Digital TV. EDTVs have the ability to project High Definition images but need another piece of equipment (like an HD cable box or HD satellite box) in order to get HD images. Without this middle piece of equipment, and EDTV is not much different than an SDTV. Next is a true DTV also referred to as HDTV or High Definition Digital Television. An HDTV is capable of displaying high definition images all by itself as it receives them either through the air, or through a cable or satellite provider.

Broadcast TV stations have been broadcasting in digital for several years now. They have ALSO continued to broadcast analog signals so that anyone with an older TV can still get their signal, and anyone with a newer digital TV would be able to reap the benefits of what digital TV can accomplish.

For a few years now I have owned a Digital TV. DTVs come in two type, Plasma or LCD. It really is about cost, preference, and performance. My TV is LCD. I have an antenna (similar to the old "rabbit ears") and because TV stations in my area are broadcasting in digital and because I have a digital TV, I get a clear, sharp picture, better than anything that could be done with analog.

I could accomplish the same thing if I subscribed to digital cable. I would get all of my local stations in digital format (and a lot of other channels that may or may not be in digital format) but for quite a monthly cost.

If your analog TV is hooked up to cable or satellite, your provider will send out a digital signal for digital TVs AND an analog signal for older TVs.

The moral of this story: Figure out what kind of TV you have and what kind of TV you want.

Stay tuned for the next chapter.

Online Class - Conversion to Digital Television - Part 1 - Why?

There are so many misconceptions about digital TV, HD TV, the conversion from Analog to Digital, even those who think they understand it, might not really get it. So much has been written and those annoying pulbic service announcement about the "conversion to Digital TV" are incessant. What really bugs me is when people think they are watching High Definition TV, when in fact they are not. I'm going to try and clear some things up and simplify them.

Every broadcast television station (meaning they have a local TV station and a broadcast tower near you) is already broadcasting in digital as well as analog. The famous February 17, 2009 date is the LAST day that these stations can broadcast in Analog (as set forth by the Federal Communications Commission). TV stations may cut off all analog broadcasting as early as 11/19/08, and even earlier if the station applies to the FCC to do so. All analog broadcasting must cease as of 2/17/09.

Now, these rules only apply to "high powered" broadcast television. The rules DO NOT apply to cable TV or satellite networks (e.g. USA Network, Comedy Central, A&E, etc.) because this type of network does not broadcast their signals directly to your home through the airways like local TV stations do. The rules also do not apply to "low-powered" TV stations. An example of that might be one of the several thousand local faith-based TV networks. You may not even know about them because they are not broadcast on cable and satellite, and their signals are so weak that if you use an antenna to receive TV signals, then you probably don't pick it up unless you live underneath the low-powered tower from which they broadcast.

The whole point of the conversion from Analog to Digital is to free up noise in the air that is preventing or hindering other more important things from using space in the air like Emergency Services (911), Cell Phones, and other Radio and Microwave signals. There's just too much stuff floating around up there and not enough room for everybody. So the Federal Communications Commission said, 10 years ago, that TV Stations must switch from Analog to Digital because digital takes up less space, thereby leaving more space for others.

The moral of the story: Don't wait until February for the conversion to digital, it already happened and now you know why it happened.

Stay tuned for the next installment

How to get more HD Programming in Maine

First of all, if you live in Southern Maine, your cable company may carry the Boston network channels as well as the Portland network channels. Watch the Boston ones. Most are in High Definition for their local news broadcasts, some are producing their own HD programming locally, and some can record and playback High Definition programming apart from the Network Feed.

Not ONE Portland Network Channel can do any of this. In my dealings with the many network affiliates in Portland (ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CW, MyNetwork, FOX), none of them are even close to the technical capabilities of the Boston channels and to make it worse, I have received communicates from some affiliates General Managers who have said things like "we are only mandated to switch to digital, we are not required to do anything more than that".

Translation: They will do the very least to be in compliance with the laws set forth by the FCC, no more, no less. So if you are waiting to put your new HDTV to the real test, don't look for it in Portland. If you can get the Boston stations, do that. If not, get Satellite and if you can, just try to get the national network feeds, not your local network feeds. You can use you PC or the newspaper to check the news if it's important to you. It's all about ratings which means it's all about revenue. Money talks. If nobody is watching their channels because they are not in HD, then they will have no choice but to change their attitude.

In a recent communication with the NBC affiliate in Portland, I was told that they don't have the capability to broadcast, for example, reruns of HD television shows, in HD. For example, WCSH airs reruns of Law and Order in the afternoon. Law and Order is (and was) originally produced in High Definition. But WCSH doesn't have the equipment to record it and play it back in High Definition. They can only air High Definition programming that is being fed to them from the network during prime time (8 - 11 pm). I was also told that they have no plans to change this through 2009 and beyond. It's not even on their radar screen.

These TV stations don't care about providing the public with an excellent product; they are trying to skate by, doing the least amount of work possible. And there you have it, the new American Dream. Do as little as possible to get by. No wonder we are failing in this global economy.

There are a few exception. My personal opinion is that WPME and WPXT, managed by the same people, are doing as much as possible within their budet constraints to provide an excellent product to the public. They are self-producing a television program aimed at visitors to the state of Maine. The program is broadcast to hotels in the Portland area but anyone with a Digital TV and an antenna (forget cable or satellite) can receive this programming as well. They are thinking outside the box and that's what you need to be successful.

Digital Conversion happening early in Maine and other places

You've seen the advertisements and public service announcements. Digital TV is here. You have until 2/17/09 to get ready.

Well the truth is that 2/17/09 is the LAST DAY POSSIBLE, meaning TV stations have until that day to convert their analog signals to digital. That doesn't mean they can't broadcast in digital now. In fact, most TV stations are broadcasting in digital now as well as analog.

However, the FCC rules say that a broadcast station can cut off their analog signal as early as November 2008. That's 3 months from now. 2/17/09 is simply the day that all analog signals must be cut off.

But the FCC has figured out that they don't want the entire country to convert to digital at one time. (It's about time).

In Portland, Maine, both WPME and WPXT (MyNetwork and the CW) will be converting soon. WPXT may go as early as this week. WPME is slotted for next month.

So viewers using Antenna don't have as much time left as they thought.

I learned this information recently and wanted to make sure and share it with you as soon as I could.

Local Portland Broadcasters finally putting digital technology to good use

A while back, WPME launched the Maine Visitors Channel (on their digital sub channel), a separate, locally produced set of programs targeted at visitors to the Portland area.

Other than that, WCSH6 and WMTW have used their digital sub channels for replays and repackages of news and weather (yawn!).

Now, WCSH, during the Olympics, finally put their sub channel to good use, and in my mind, what sub channels are meant for; at least one of the the things they are meant for.

During the Olympics, if the NBC Network decides to broadcast right through the local 12:00 noon news hour, WCSH 6 will broadcast the news on its sub channel. That's Channel 6.2 to you and me, over the air. Some cable providers carry Channel 6.2 as part of their regular line-up, usually on channel 207.

So for those of us using over the air antennas to receive free digital and high definition broadcasts, it's easy, and WCSH actually announced they were going to do this. I saw something flash on the TV screen there at about 11:45 am today. On my TV I just have to surf one channel up from 6.1 to 6.2 and receive their Noon News Broadcast.

It's nice to see someone is finally thinking about this and leveraging the advantages of digital broadcasting.

Northern Maine may lose in the Digital TV revolution

The Converstion to Digital TV is Worse than Y2K

I have corresponded with several people in Northern Maine where the digital TV and HDTV landscape is quite different than in Southern Maine.

I was feeling like Southern Maine was being left behind in the the digital TV revolution. But after hearing what's going on north of Portland, we're not doing so badly after all.

In a recent conversation with someone in the Skowhegan/Norridgewock area. The have two channels, Fox 22 and the CW, that are being broadcast ONLY on a sub channel of another network TV station(like WABI). So those channels have little to no possibility of ever being in High Definition. Fox and the CW have put their digital channels out there just to satisfy the FCC rules. But as we know, digital is not the same as HDTV. You need to be in digital to move further into the realm of HDTV, but just because a station is broadcasting in digital doesn't mean it can broadcast in HD.

Then you have the issue of reception. The FCC has put out a broad public service campaign. You've all seen the commercials about the change to Digital TV and getting a Converter Box. You probably watch these commercials and wonder what the hell they are talking about. Well if you are fortunate enough to be able to afford cable TV or satellite TV then you probably don't care and don't need to. But some people still rely on their antenna. And if you don't have a brand new digital TV, you need a converter box between your antenna and your TV in order to keep in working after 2/17/09.

I thought there were FCC rules about over-the-air, broadcast TV stations that dealt with the public's right to receive free, clear signals. I mean, there is an entire Emergency Broadcast System that relies on free, over-the-air TV stations to get emergency information to the public. But if this same public can't receive the emergency information after 2/17/09 because the digital revolution left out one little detail --TV reception in remote areas -- then what's the point.

Right now digital TV is broadcast on UHF (ultra high frequency) channels. These are channels above the number 13. After the cut-off date of 2/17/09, broadcasters in the channel 2 to 13 range who are now using UHF channels to send out their digital signals will probably go back to using channels 2-13. Channels who are already above the 2 to 13 range will probably stay right where they are. These channels number are not something that you need to know about if you are a cable/satellite user. And even if you use a converter box or have a digital TV, these devices do the conversion work for you so you only have to know what channel you are looking for, not what channel it is being broadcast on.

But digital TV signals, and especially UHF channels, are weaker than VHF (2-13). Add to that the mountainous and heavily wooded areas of Maine and you have a recipe for disaster, literally.

I personally don't believe that the FCC has thought out this whole digital TV conversion to their best ability. I think that on 2/17/09 there will still be a lot of people who have no idea why their TVs don't work. And keep in mind this "conversion" has been a long term FCC project going on since 1996. Yes, that 13 years from inception to the cut-off date. But we're talking about the U.S. Government here. Different administrations, different FCC chairs, and for the past 8 years, the Bush administration has been more concerned with Janet Jackson's boob than the boobs that are running the FCC (which include Colin Powell's son, personally chosen by Bush himself).

So even under the best of circumstances, this conversion is going to be...,well, a mess. Add to that the pile of problems and issues that the FCC hasn't even considered and you've got yourself a real disaster here. Y2K was not an issue, and I never thought it would be. I am in the computer industry. On Y2K is was sipping my cocktail not worrying about a thing because I knew that all of the scare tactics didn't add up to a hill of beans. But this? This conversion to digital. Now I'm going to stock up on canned goods, cash, and gas up my car.