WMTW Portland Maine - Still broadcasting in SD like it's 1999?

If you watch any local programming on WMTW, Channel 8, in Portland, ME, you would think you think that time travel exists and you would think you are in 1999.

The local news programs produced by WMTW look as if they were produced in the 1990's and quite possibly are still using video tape instead of anything remotely "digital".

Ever since the digital TV (i.e. High Definition) revolution began, WMTW has been behind the times.  They were the last TV station in their market to convert to "HD" in terms of broadcasting from the ABC network, and the last to convert to what THEY consider to be high definition for local news broadcasting.

I gave WMTW some heat on this blog concerning their late arrival but was pleased when they at least figured out how to broadcast the ABC prime time programming in HD (albeit 720p instead of 1080i, but that's an ABC network issue that I'll address later).  But even at that time, the local WMTW news was still in SD.

If you look at Channel 8's local news, you would still think they aren't broadcasting in High Definition, and I'm not convinced that they actually are.

As you probably know, you can see what they consider to be High Definition and compare it to Standard Definition easily by switching between the two channels (whether it's over the air on channel 8.1 and 8.2, or on your cable system comparing the lower channel to the "HD" upper channel).

While WMTW's "HD" channel appears to be better slightly better quality, is it?

Here's what I think is their trick.  Old fashioned SD television was in a 4:3 picture ratio (4 down by 3 across).  HD signals use a 16:9 ratio (16 across by 9 down), hence wider flat screen HD TVs.

If you watch a 4:3 (SD) picture on a 16:9 (HD) TV, there are two options:

• leave the 4:3 ratio and fill in the rest of the screen (sides of the picture) with black bars
• STRETCH the picture to fill the screen but everyone looks short and fat, and generally the image is just horrible

After broadcast TV was forced to go digital in 2009, things changed slightly.  Typically you can watch an HD signal in non-HD mode on your TV but now there will be black bars on the top, bottom, and sides.  The picture doesn't fill the screen but the ratio (16:9) is correct.  So while the picture might be clearer and look right, it doesn't fill the screen and you can't force it to unless you plan to not see the entire picture.

The ONLY other option is for a TV station to broadcast its Standard Definition signal in 16:9.  We usually associate the 16:9 ration with HD, but TV cameras have the capability of recording in the 16:9 ratio even if you are using Standard Definition.

16:9 ratio programming in SD almost looks like HD except the picture quality when compared to real HD is severely lacking, and when compared to old-fashioned 4:3 Standard definition is about the same.

I don't believe that WMTW is broadcasting its locally produced news (or other) programming in real High Definition.

Do a quick comparison.  Watch a newscast on WMTW in HD.  Compare it to any other local channel's news cast.  The difference will ASTOUND you.

Continue watching WMTW and wait for a "remote location" shot.  You will see that the picture quality is even worse because WMTW can't seem to spring for better offsite cameras.

Even if WMTW were broadcasting in full HD, it would be 720p.  This is a choice made by America's broadcasting networks.  NBC, CBS, PBS, and the CW chose 1080i (a better quality picture all around regardless of what some "experts" say - just take a look for yourself).  Fox, and ABC chose 720p.  So each network's affiliates invested in the technology that matched their Parent Company broadcaster.

Some people say that 720p ("p" meaning progressive) is just as good as 1080i ("i" meaning interlaced).  Without going into the difference between progressive and interlaced technologies, in my personal experience in watching TV (which I admit is extensive), 1080i is far superior to 720p especially on larger TV screens (over 32").

But I digress.

The picture quality of WMTW's local news programming SUCKS.  And, their remote shot picture quality is even worse, if that's possible.

I had been laying low because I knew WMTW moving into new studios is Westbrook in September 2014.  I thought that finally, things would improve.  I was disappointed when nothing changed.

As much as I dislike both WCSH channel 6 news, and WGME channel 13 news, I prefer to actually watch either of them over WMTW because the picture quality on WMTW is so bad.  I don't know what WMTW is doing wrong or not doing right.  I just know that what I said many years ago is still true:

"When it comes to TV ratings, whoever has the best HD picture wins"

It's not that complicated.  This is true of cable TV as well.  My cable system does not offer every cable channel in HD.  The non-HD channels are down in the lower numbers.  The High Def channels are on the upper channel numbers.  When I'm channel surfing, I start at the first HD channel - 702 for me - and work upwards.  I don't even look at channels not in HD.

So, for anyone at WMTW, we know that you broadcast in 720p so we understand why your prime time programs are of a lesser quality.  BUT, can you explain why your local news looks no different than it did prior to your "switch" to high definition?

WGME CBS Portland, Maine High Definition downgraded to 720p

I noticed recently that CBS is now broadcasting television shows in 720p instead of 1080i.  I'd like to know, and I am trying to find out, when this began, but more importantly WHY?.

Great debaters take on the topic of 1080i versus 720p ad nauseam; there is no consensus.  But as a long time HD television advocate and industry watcher, in my personal opionion (well, me and my TV's) 1080i is far superior to 720p.  Just take a look at the ABC news cast (720p) and compare it to whatever is on CNN (1080i) at the same time and tell me you don't see a difference.

I was watching the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley recently and noticed how bad the picture was.  I noticed it on Face the Nation the prior day. I started adjusting the fine tuning of my Samsung High Def (which I hate compared to my Sony, Samsung is SO overrated, but that's a story for another post) because the picture just didn't look right.

I tried everything from contrast to brightness to warm/cool and everything in between.  I tried playing with the various (and useless) built-in "modes" on the Samsung (e.g. Movies, Sports, Gaming, etc.) but nothing worked.

When I finally hit the "info" button while tuned in the CBS, I was shocked to see that CBS was broadcasting in 720p. The info button on my TV tells the viewer what "definition" they are watching. I don't believe it had anything to do with WGME because they (like other broadcast stations) simply rebroadcast the signal as it comes in. But to be honest, I'm not sure. I checked back on several days and several other CBS shows and they were still in 720p. For all I know WGME may have downgraded the signal.  I used the google machine thingy and tried various searches regarding CBS and 720p but literally found nothing on the subject that had now capture my attention greatly.

I'm trying to get some answers and I'm starting with WGME to see if they know (or will even tell me) what's going on.

One of the reasons I even watched CBS is for the picture quality.  It's important to me.  If there is breaking news or a Presidential address, I will watch it on NBC, CBS, PBS, or CNN (all 1080i) instead of ABC or FOX (720p for both) because of the better quality of the picture.  When you spend a lot of money on a High Def TV, you want your content in High Def, yes, but you want it in the BEST high def quality you can get.  When you have a choice, you will go with higher quality every time.

So I've started asking questions and we'll see what I find out.

Thanks for reading.

WMTW in Portand, ME, tries to fool viewers looking for HD

 

I'm not quite sure what is going on over at WMTW in Portland, Maine.  Even though Hearst Television (Heart Communications) has spent millions upon millions upgrading the TV stations it owns so that the local news for each can be broadcast in High Definition (HD), somehow Hearst managed to skip over WMTW - "News 8" in Portland, Maine.

Let's face it - whoever has the most HD wins.  Along time ago I predicted that whichever local TV station in our market (Portland/Lewiston/Auburn) did the local news in HD would win the ratings game (and therefore the advertising revenue).  And I happened to be right.  WCSH-6 broadcast its local news in first, WGME-13 was second, and WMTW has yet to do it.  The ratings match up exactly to this dynamic.

Although WMTW has won many award for its news coverage in the last few years, including a regional Emmy award and the Edward R. Murrow award, it continues to be dead last in the ratings in its official demographic area (Portland/Lewiston/Auburn as cited by the National Association of Broadcasters).

And here is why.

First, keep in mind the the majority of US households now have at least one High Definition television. And if you own one, and have truly experienced REAL HD, there is simply no going back to crappy quality pictures.  Why should we.  The technology has been around for two decades.  It would be comparable to the 1950's and 1960's when Color TV took over Black and White.  Can you imagine if out of 3 local TV stations, two were in color and one was in B&W?  Which would you watch on your new color TV?

After the conversion from Analog TV to Digital TV, local TV stations were still broadcasting their locally produced news in standard definition (SD).  It takes lots of money (for equipment in the studio and for field reporting) and time to prepare for broadcasting local news in HD.  But parent company Hearst put up the funds for what seems like every one of its TV station, except WMTW.

As recently as about 3 weeks ago, WMTW's HD capabilities for the local news was limited to a banner/scroll at the bottom of the screen which mostly had weather info during the broadcast, but the actual on-camera folks, and field reporting, was done in SD - and it looked like hell.

About 3 weeks ago, WMTW "converted" to what uninformed viewers might think is HD, but in fact is not.  WMTW simply changed the aspect ratio from 4:3 (SD) to 16:9 (typically HD but more accurately is simply considered wide screen. You don't have to be in HD to broadcast in wide screen) so that the picture would fill the screen and not look stretched or squished.

However, the quality of the broadcast didn't change.  The local news is in wide screen but IS NOT IN HD.  Nor is the field reporting.  Just compare the onscreen graphics to the info bar at the bottom.  Or compare the picture to one of the other TV station's local news.

I can only imagine that WMTW received many complaints from viewers regarding its lack of local news in HD.  So their solution was to try to fool the viewing audience into assuming the broadcast was now in HD simply because the picture was now in wide screen format.  Well, guess what - IT'S NOT!!!!  There is NOTHING HD about WMTW's news broadcast.  It's just a wider originating picture.  Shame on you WMTW.

I am perplexed as to why WMTW is one of the few, if not the only, Hearst-owned TV stations around the country which has not been converted to full HD for the local news.  I've tried to find out, but simply can not.  And worse now is that because of ratings, WMTW cancelled it's weekday noon newscast due to lack of ratings and was replaced by "The Steve Harvey Show".  Really!?  Are you kidding me??  That show will get cancelled within a few months if not weeks.  Then, WMTW will be showing infomercials instead of a noon newscast.  It's just sad.  And all because the ratings were lost to two other stations who invested in HD technology for the local news cast.  WMTW is also the only local TV station to skip a 5 PM newscast - because nobody is watching in non-HD.  Instead they have the Dr. Phil show at 5 pm which is rebroadcast from an HD uplink.  They can do that, but they can't broadcast the local news in HD.  It's different technology.

The bottom line is that WMTW is dragging in the ratings even though the station wins prestigious awards.  But who would want to watch WMTW news (that looks awful on an HDTV) when the viewer can relax his/her eyes and watch WCSH-6 or WGME-13 local news in GLORIOUS, full HD.  No matter how insipid the news readers are (I simply can not call the people who anchor or report for WCSH or WGME "journalists"), the weather maps on the two HD stations are cool (especially WCSH) and much of the field reporting, which is sometimes local and sometimes rebroadcast from other stations around the country, is crystal clear in HD.

WMTW is losing the ratings game.  By all measurable criteria, they should be winning. But the lack of HD from the live studio news broadcast AND from the field reporting is dragging them down even further.

I tried to reach WMTW for comment about why they switched to 16:9 wide screen but not to HD, and to find out why Hearst's multi-million dollar investments in most stations it owns had not reached WMTW.  I could not get a response.

In defense of WMTW, the station does not refer to its local news as HD and does not use "HD" in any tag lines.  However, switching to a wide screen format as a way to placate the public is one more nail in the coffin, and a bit (or a lot) disingenuous.

WMTW once had one of the biggest viewerships in the country (by share) because its tower was located on top of Mount Washington, the highest place in New England.  They used to reach six or seven states plus the Montreal market.  The fall from grace began when digital TV was mandated and WMTW had to sell it's spot "on the mountain" due to FCC regulations.  They simply could not or would not keep up with current technology.

I'm sure that the local management at WMTW wishes like crazy that their local news was in HD.  I can't imagine it would be otherwise.  So the blame has to be put on the Hearst Corporation.  I wouldn't be surprised if Hearst plans to sell the station and that is why WMTW's newsroom has not been converted to HD.

If anyone out there knows what's going on, I'd truly love a reply to this post so that my readers will understand it as well.

CBS, Sinclair, and WGME pass the buck regarding High Def issues

WGME-13 in Portland, Maine is NOT broadcasting in 1080i High Definition on their HD Channel (13.1).

I didn't notice for a while because I had cable TV, with a cable box.  I remember thinking that WGME's broadcast didn't have the quality I remembered but I don't watch TV that often anymore and figured that since I was using my cable box instead of an antenna, there was a signal degradation.  When I decided it was too expensive and went back to using my old Bessie (TERK Antenna) my Sony Bravia TV told me that Channel 13.1 was in 720p.  Then it hit me.

This confused the heck out of me.  As the second largest broadcaster in the world behind the BBC (UK), CBS Corporation was one of the biggest proponents of 1080i High Definition, investing a lot of money to make 1080i the standard over 720p.  In the end, CBS got what it wanted for CBS affiliates while other Networks, like ABC and Fox went with 720p.  And I know that WGME had been broadcasting in 1080i from back a ways when I only relied on over the air High Definition.  So when I noticed all of this happening last week, I called CBS Corporation in New York and left a message - that was my only option.

CBS itself doesn't own WGME, it is owned by SInclair Broadcasting (better known as the Tea Party broadcasting group).  On the day I left a message with CBS, I went home that night and noticed that WGME was back to broadcasting in 1080i.  I thought that maybe, someone from CBS contacted them.  CBS Affiliates are under contract to rebroadcast network programming in 1080i.  It work the same for whatever network we're talking about whether the contract is for 720p or 1080i.
Now, there is an ongoing debate over which is better, 720p or 1080i.  I can guarantee you, in all my years of researching HD TV, 1080i is superior to 720p.  I can tell the difference from a mile off.  But that's not the point.  The point is that CBS and NBC transmit their HD signals in 1080i, while ABC and Fox broadcast in 720p.  Do me a favor - watch and compare and see if you don't agree.

I worked on getting my antenna in just the right spot for several days (it's what you do when you rely on Over The Air, or OTA, television signals).  So I know that it wasn't a fluke.  WGME didn't slip up one day for a few hours.  They were broadcasting in 720p for I don't know how long and they hoped nobody would notice.

I noticed.

I knew (from previous experience) that if I called the General Manager of WGME that I wouldn't get any answers.  So I called CBS Corporate Offices in New York.  I didn't get to speak to a live person but I left a message with a Rich Shoenholtz in Affiliate Relations.  I never heard back from the guy (I wasn't surprised).  When I didn't hear back I wrote to Craig Clark, the Chief Engineer at WGME to ask about the 720p signal.  I did not hear back from him either.

Today, I called CBS again and talked to a lovely (I'm kidding) woman named Kathleen Powers.  She had absolutely no idea what I was talking about and didn't know High Definition from a hole in the wall.  After I got frustrated trying to explain, she put me on hold and said she talked to "someone" who said that Sinclair Broadcasting owned WGME and I would have to take it up with them.

OK - I don't get it.  WGME is owned by Sinclair but under contract with CBS to rebroadcast the CBS signal in 1080i.  CBS spent a lot of money to make sure they would be in 1080i when the conversion to digital/HDTV took place.  But nobody cares that their affiliate isn't doing what is supposed to be done under a signed contract?  That make absolutely no sense to me.

So I called Sinclair, knowing ahead of time that I would be hard pressed to find someone there who would talk to a lowly consumer.  When I explained why I was calling the receptionist, again, had absolutely NO IDEA what I was talking about and said that an affiliate could use whatever "brand of equipment" they wanted and that I should take it up with WGME.  What!?  Really?!

When I finally explained what High Definition was and the different qualities of High Definition, and that one of their stations was following protocol, she transferred me to the IT department.  The gentleman that answered the phone said that he wasn't the right person to talk to (after I explained again why I was calling) and "transferred" me to dead air by hanging up on me.

As a last resort, I called Tom Humpage, General Manager of WGME.  I left a voice mail and sent him and email since we had emailed each other a few years back about other issues.

As of the date and time of this posting, I have yet to hear back from anyone regarding this issue.

Sharon Rose on WCSH 6 a second-rate hack

I can't even bring myself to call her a reporter.  There is nothing "journalistic" about Sharon Rose.  A journalist reports the facts and while every journalist is supposed to be unbiased, it is common that a journalist has his/her own slant to the story.

That's one thing.  But Sharon Rose on WCSH 6 doesn't stop there.  She makes it quite clear what her opinions are about every story she reads.  That's right, she's not a journalist, she's a "personality" that reads from a teleprompter.  As a result, what we get, as viewers, is her biased, eye-rolling, scrunched-up face as it pertains to any story that falls outside her narrow-minded, white-bread, middle class purview. 

On Tuesday morning, November 29th, 2011, the WCSH 6 Morning Report reported a story regarding some business men in Connecticut who won the lottery.  The point of the story was that not only did they win a lot of money, their intentions are to donate a large portion of the money to charities and other humanitarian organizations.

Video of the winners ran during the story. The video depicted the winners at the lottery headquarter in Rocky Hill, CT, where they stood next to and behind the "big cardboard check".  As the video portion ended there was a woman seen clapping off to the side.

When the camera returned to Sharon Rose and Lee Nelson in a wide shot, Sharon Rose just couldn't contain herself.  She made a motion as if she were clapping but her hands never touched, thereby never making a noise.  While she was making this motion she said "That's how they clap in Connecticut".

First of all, Rose's depiction was NOT what was happening in the video.  Second, I was born in raised in Connecticut.  I grew up in the Hartford area.  In fact, I lived in Rocky Hill at one point in my life.  I was born into a lower middle class family that didn't have a lot of money.  Actually, we were poor.  Connecticut is no different than any other place in the world.  Some people have money - most don't. AND WHEN WE CLAPPED, WE WERE POOR ENOUGH THAT OUR CLAPS MADE NOISE.  I moved to Maine in 2001 after living in CT for all of my life prior to that.  It's no different here than it was there; except there are a lot better choices of restaurants and stores outside of major cities.

I was extremely irked by Sharon Rose's depiction of "all people from Connecticut are rich snobs".  On one hand I wondered if she was jealous.  On the other hand, I assumed she's just an idiot.

This isn't the first time I've caught her showing her true colors.  If you take a moment to watch her when either she or Lee Nelson is reading a story, you can tell exactly what she thinks about ANY topic by the way she scrunches up her nose at it, sneers, rolls her eyes, or does any number of things to show her disdain.  Watch closely as a story is read about gay people, the homeless, casinos, abortion rights, Occupy Wall Street, and on and on and on.  She got a stick so far up her ass, her only option is to try and wiggle it out, and every painful attempt can be read all over her face.

I personally am sick and tired of that single-minded, opinionated, prejudiced, bigoted, news-regurgitating blow hard that I can't stand another minute of it. 

To those of you who disagree - YES - I CHANGED THE CHANNEL.  The only reason I was watching WCSH in the first place was because they managed to the first to start broadcasting the local news in High Definition.  I mostly put up with WCSH for a few weeks because the weather graphics are so cool.  But let's face it, WMTW should have been the one to do it first.  They are the local TV station with the best newscast and the most down the middle reporting.  That's why they win the local Emmy for best newscast in this demographic market (Portland/Lewiston/Auburn).

When I wrote to the WCSH news director, Maureen O'Brien, this was her response to me questioning why Sharon Rose is allowed to behave the way she does:

"I am sorry you were offended by Sharon’scomment. We encourage our anchors to be real people – to laugh and joke and react like other people do, particularly in the morning. I understand that this approach is not everyone’s cup of tea.."

 NOT EVERYONE'S CUP OF TEA???.  Making fun of an entire State and making judgments about the people who live there, without knowing what the hell you are talking about, is not a "joke".  It's offensive.  Sharon Rose doesn't "react like other people".  She reacts like herself; a narrow-minded, glorified copy girl, who has nothing but disdain for anyone who doesn't think like she does.  She's a conservative, middle-class, bigot.  And since the management as WCSH stands by her and allows her behavior each and every day, they must be bigots and racists too.  What other conclusion is there to make.

I was stupid to expect an apology from either WCSH or Ms. Rose.  I don't know why I was disappointed I didn't get one even when I specifically asked for one.  I guess that's why they invented blogs.

WCSH 6 Morning Report in High Def

It's been several years now since I have watched WCSH Channel 6 in Portland, for my morning news. Watching it was a habit; it's what "people" watched when I first moved to Maine in 2001 and so I got in the habit of watching it. But never really cared much for the hosts.

When Shannon Moss defected to Channel 8 - WMTW, I began watching Channel 8 for my morning news. Channel 8's newscast was professional and easy to watch. The other competition, Channel 13, WGME, was always a distant third in my book, and in the ratings.

Channel 8 took a big bite out of WCSH's domination of the morning news market. WCSH had become stale, and full of big-egoed anchors that often rolled their eyes at news stories and often voiced their right-wing opinions openly; something that is supposed to be an absolute no-no in the world of journalism. But the viewership never questioned Sharon Rose's opinion about certain stories.

OK - jump to today. I've always said that whoever can do the news in HD in our local Portland/Lewiston television market will win the ratings game. Viewers who have HD televisions will, in general, watch an HD broadcast over a standard definition broadcast, even if the HD broadcast wouldn't normally be their first choice in programming.

I will try to be fair. My opinions on WCSH are not a secret. But they did a good job. I caught the broadcast today, Friday, November 4, 2011, when the morning News Center team celebrating their 15th anniversary. Seeing a live news HD broadcast in Maine was a pleasure and something I have been waiting for since I started this blog in 2007 and long before the official transition to Digital TV in this country in 2008. The anchors, Lee Nelson and Sharon Rose, were still as insipid as they've always been. But Lee Nelson actually looked good in his HD makeup. Whoever did it did a great job. Kevin Mannix, the weather forecaster, also looked great. Unfortunately, the unforgiving bright lights and camera lenses of high definition were not so kind to Sharon Rose. She looks like a corpse in HD; the "false eye lashes" were way over the top and appeared like two frightened spiders caught in a flashlight beam.

Like most HD local news broadcasts, field camera work is still in standard definition. That will come in time. But the most impressive addition to WCSH's broadcast was the weather. The new weather maps were large, crisp, and easy to read. New graphics, like three dimensional surface-map icons (take a look at the high and low pressure icons on the map with circular three-dimensional wind circulation) were cool. There seemed to be many new graphic features and they didn't overpower the map; they added functionality to it. Often, when new technology is available, it is used because it is available regardless of the value it adds. Not true with WCSH's weather graphics - job well done.

The other local affiliates in our demographic market, WMTW and WGME, have to make the switch to broadcasting in HD or they will lose a lot of viewers. It is expensive to convert a studio to an HD studio, and the hardware (cameras, editing equipment, etc.) and software needed is extremely expensive and requires a hefty financial commitment from each station's ownership.

I'm happy that Southern Maine finally has an HD news broadcast. I'm disappointed that it was WCSH to do it first, but I have to admit, overall they did a very good job that will only get better as HD broadcasting in local markets matures.

Now come on WMTW!! Let's get with the program (no pun intended). WGME, to me, is out of the running. Even with an HD broadcast they will still be in third place, out of three.

I will continue to watch WMTW for my news. I simply can not stomach the on-air personalities. I will continue to hope that WMTW goes HD for their news and I may check in on WCSH form time to time, just because HD is so much easier on the eyes.

My Final Posting

** Update 12/1/2011 - Obviously, I'm back.  I decided not to shut down this blog as there may be things I feel that need to write about from time to time.

**


Here is the state of affairs, as I see it, for High Definition TV.

The big 7 broadcast networks are broadcasting most of their programming in High Definition. that's a good thing. Even most of the daily soap operas (for as long as they may last) are in High Definition. I can't believe that it finally happened.

In the big cities, local news is in High Definition. In smaller cities, it could be years before that happens but they are all working in that direction.

It is still free to receive High Definition broadcasts, over the air, from your local affiliates. THAT'S A VERY GOOD THING. And keep in mind that your local broadcasters can offer two, or in some cases three or four, channels from one broadcast tower. So give them a shot. Get a good quality Antenna (you all know I recommend the Terk) and check out what's happening on your local affiliates' sub-channels.

As for cable and satellite - I'm still very disappointed. Most "high def" channels do not actually broadcast 100% in high definition. Some of the programming is in the HD aspect ratio of 16:9, but not in HD quality. A whole lot of it is still just stretched out (from 4:3) to fit your screen and is as bad in quality as it was before. But they all like to call it HD. Keep them honest.

A few HD cable/satellite channels do a better job of providing real, quality HD programs. One of them is CNN. Also the Discovery networks do a fairly good job. As does PBS. But so many of them just call themselves HD because their picture fills up your HDTV's screen. It really is a shame how much they try to fool the TV-watching public.


If you are really watching a 720p or 1080i High Definition broadcast, you will know it, because you will marvel at it. Any time you wonder if the program you are watching is in HD, it isn't. Because if it was, you wouldn't be wondering.

I am moving on to other things. Over the last few years I've become very involved in the world of Blackberry. I am writing for other web sites and moderating user forums. It's become my new hobby and since there are no big changes going on in High Definition, It's time to put this blog to rest. I'll stop back and write a bit if anything newsworthy happens.

The one big thing left to take hold is TV over the Internet. Not to your PC, but to your TV. It will take a while before it all gets straightened out. There will be winners and losers; some people will spend money on new devices that they will love, and some will be disappointed. To me, it's all about the picture quality. That's why I got started down this path to begin with.

Don't accept less than perfect when it comes to high definition. If you are not getting what you pay for, then fight for it.

For my regular readers, we've been down a long road. I hope I was able to help, and teach, and offer information that was important or helpful. When I looked back at all of the articles I wrote, I forgot that it's been more than 4 years since I started. I moved this blog from another blogging location, so the first posting data on this site was December 2007. But I started this blog originally in 2006.

I want to the Doug Finck, from WPXT/WPME. He has been a fervent supporter of mine, and this blog, and has provided me with so much useful information that I can never truly thank him properly. He knew that my goal was to get information to to public, so that they could make informed decisions, and know the truth about high definition broadcasting. I wish him the best.

Until we meet again.........

Public often fooled by HD that isn't HD

Not only do we have HD channels that don't provide 24 hours a day of High Def programming, even new shows produced that you assume are in High Def, aren't

Take for example, TBS. They started airing a new one-hour series called "Glory Daze" about kids going to college in the mid 80's. It was supposed to be nostalgic. That's my generation. I found it stupid, unfunny, and uninteresting. But what I found most offensive was that the show was launched in 2010 on a High Def network, and the show isn't in High Def. TBS says it is, but it is not.

It is very easy to tell when a TV show is in High Def. You should NEVER have to look at the TV show and squint your eyes a bit and say to yourself, "is that in HD". If it is, there is no question.

Consumers started to really dislike television shows that were "stretched" to fit the new wide screen format. The shows were out of focus, characters looked short and fat, and heads were often cut off. But the shot filled the screen so TV execs thought they could fool the public. It only takes watching ONE show in real high definition to realize what you are missing. So TV execs siad "let's at least produce these shows in the 16:9 aspect ratio". Yeah, that will fool them.

Back to "Glory Daze". What they did to this show is the same thing I am seeing all over the place. Shows are produced in a 16:9 aspect ratio (the same length to width ratio of your wide flat screen TV" but it is still in standard definition. A brand new TV show, produced in the 21st century, and it's not in HD even though it is being broadcast on an HD network.

As it turns out there are four categories of TV:

1. Standard definition TV (that's a 4:3 aspect ratio) that has the black pillars on either side of the picture (I refuse to watch that entirely)
2. Standard definition TV that has been stretched to fit the 16:9 ratio. Disconcerting and distracting to watch
3. Standard definition TV filmed in 16:9 format (watchable - but disappointing)
4. And then real HD. Mostly the big 7 networks in Prime Time broadcast in real HD. But some, like "Extreme Makeover Home Edition" on ABC don't even try. That's because they film in the field (not in a studio). HD field cameras are very expensive.

It's easy to discern which shows are in HD. If the picture is so clear that you say "gee that picture is nice", that's your first clue. Then, on a facial close up, if you can see white light reflected back to you in the actors pupil, that's your second clue that it's HD. Standard def rarely, if ever, has this reflection. Third, HD is simply easier to watch. Your eyes don't strain, every detail is easily visible and the color is beautiful.

Some Faux-HD exists that is fairly good. HDNet had Hogan's Heroes (yes that late 60's, early 70's TV show) in high definition. You see, when the original film is of a certain film stock and quality, it can be digitally enhanced and reprocessed to be as close to real HD as possible, the results are quite good. But it's expensive to go back and reprocess these old shows. Some more current shows like "Friends" will never be in "faux HD" because it was filmed on video tape, not film.

A huge number of Americans have now spent the money on a High Def TV. Half of them don't know how to actually get HD on their HD TV. Of the ones that do, half of those don't really know if they are watching an HD show or not.

I can receive all 7 broadcast networks over the air, in HD, with an antenna, for free. It's the best quality HD because there is nothing between the signal and my TV. As for quality, as much as I despise The Today Show on NBC, that's where you will see some of the best quality HD. The CBS evening news is also excellent, as is PBS's news hour. Because all of these are in 1080i, the highest quality HD for broadcast television, they look spectacular. Fox, ABC, Fox, MyNetwork, and the CW all broadcast in 720p. Good, but not excellent quality HD.

For cable, if you have CNN in HD, you won't see a better quality HD feed.

As for the rest of cable TV high definition, so much of it is junk. That's why most cable companies no longer charge extra for HD itself. They charge you for digital TV and for the DVR, but the extra charges for the cable company to simply supply you with an HD feed have vanished. And there's a good reason for it. Even after all of this time, we still can't get many non-reality TV shows in HD. (I don't count DIY shows, and all reality shows to be real TV - when I talk about TV shows I mean the real one hour dramas and sitcoms.)

You are not getting what you think you are. It's time you started making some calls.

WPME's Weeknight Schedule in HD

Portland, Maine's "MyNetwork" affiliate, WPME - Channel 35.1, has an impressive weeknight lineup during prime time.

While the 2010-2011 "Big 3" television season offers some good options like "The Whole Truth" (ABC) and "Hawaii Five-0"(CBS), I can't say, personally, that the new season is all that impressive. Even with Emmy winners like "Modern Family" on the Wednesday Night comedy block on ABC, I find that most of the time, there is still very little to watch on ABC, NBC, opr CBS.

In this economy many people (like me) have had to tighten the belt. HBO and Showtime are gone from my cable lineup (not that I"m missing much from them either).

I enjoy sitting down to a nice cop or law drama, in High Definition. I believe that MyNetwork has found the answer. Right now, WPME is running back-to-back episodes of shows like "Law and Order: Criminal Intent, Without a Trace, Burn Notice, and Monk, during the week in prime time. Each night is a different show - two episodes. Did I mention they are in High Definition. And like "Law & Order" on TNT-HD, these are good shows, well made and well acted. They are an enjoyable alternative to the Big 3 lineup and a much better option than reality and do-it-yourself TV shows in the HD tier of channels.

Give WPME a chance and take a look at their weeknight lineup. Support them if you can.

Thanks for stopping by.

Law & Order: UK, or is it Law AND Order: UK - who cares

In the 20 years that "Law & Order" has been on television in the US, I cannot say that I ever watched an entire first-run episode. TNT-HD started running "Law & Order" (the original) in High Definition a few years back. Suffice it to say that I only started watching "Law & Order" because the episodes were in HD. After that, I grew to like the show. It's a good show - well written and acted. and with almost 500 episodes of the original alone (approx 24 per season times 20 seasons) there's a good chance I have yet to see many episodes.

Law & Order: UK came out in the UK in 2009. It was a huge hit there. And so, as was true of all other Law & Order spin-offs, they made a big deal about it. That meant bringing it to America on "BBC America". Last night was the first episode of "Law & Order: UK". It is not written by, produced by, or in any way related to Dick Wolf (the creator/writer of every L&O episode, ever) other than he gets royalties because he created the original.

The episode in NO WAY resembled the style of the US versions (including "Law & Order: Criminal Intent, "Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, the new "Law & Order: Los Angeles", and "Law & Order: Saved by the Bell - the College Years").

It didn't help that at first, they speak fast. Very fast; and American ears can't understand most of what a Brit is saying at those speeds. It doesn't help that we have no clue what their Acronyms mean (like a CSP is equivalent to our DA - or something like that). And it really doesn't help that the Judge (or equivalent) and Attorney's (or equivalent) are actually wearing white wigs in court. Yes, they are wearing the same white wigs that the Whigs wore. Not only the Whigs wore wigs, but every major party represented in the court room, who is in public view, must wear the white wig.

So I found myself continually thinking "what the hell did he say", followed by "what is an APS" (insert your acronym here)", followed by "WHAT?! - they still wear white wigs in court?". I have no idea who was guilty or innocent, nor do I know how these lawyers and police people got the evidence, or how they put the pieces together, because I was so distracted by all of the things I mentioned above.

The only thing more boring than a Brit is a British Detective who mumbles at high speed.
And to top it all off, it wasn't in HD because my cable provider (METROCAST CABLE) doesn't provide that HD channel in my HD channel lineup. It was painful to see BBC America HD in the corner of the screen. Yet I am not receiving BBC America in HD.

Back to my original thought. If “Law & Order: UK” were in HD at my house, I probably would watch it – and love it. But when a show is not in HD, I notice all of the other crap that turns TV into bad TV.

WGME still can't get High Definition right

Anyone who has read this blog for any length of time knows that one of my pet peeves is when a local TV station is not broadcasting in High Definition when they should be. Another thing you might glean from reading this blog is that I often contact our Portland TV stations and let them know when there is a problem with HD broadcasting.

With few exceptions, broadcasting in HD is a pretty simply process for a TV station. Even without all of the very expensive equipment needed to be a 100% high definition TV station, a simple pass-through of an HD feed from the network is child's play compared to what some of the big boys (like Boston and NYC TV stations) deal with.

Stated another way, Portland, Maine TV stations broadcast High Definition when they get a high definition feed from their affiliated network via satellite and simply pass that programming through (either via antenna transmission over-the-air or through cable TV) to your TV set. They can't record HD programming from their network and can't store it for playback later; they can only do this pass through that I describe. Bigger stations in bigger cities with bigger budgets have the sophisticated equipment that allows them to broadcast everything from their local news, to local produced programming (like a news magazine show or a public debate) in High Definition. They can also download/save programming and play it back at a later date/time. Portland stations cannot yet do this.

So that's the set up. Now, on Friday night, I tuned in to "The Late, Late Show with Craig Ferguson" (a pass through HD program from CBS) and I immediately noticed that the show was not in HD. I checked to make sure the show as not a re-run from before that show was being produced in HD, and it was not. I also checked WBZ out of Boston (which happens to be another CBS channel on my channel lineup) and they were broadcasting it in HD. So I knew the problem was with WGME - Channel 13, right here in good old Portland, ME.

I was given a tour of Channel 13 about 2 years ago when they had a different general manager. I saw the control room, where there is literally an on/off switch built into the control board which allows the person running the board to switch to HD when a network program is coming across the satellite in HD. So basically, if CBS is transmitting a high definition program to its affiliates over the satellite, this switch must be in the "ON" position so that when WGME re-transmits that live signal over their antenna to Maine, it is transmitted in HD so that your TV or your cable provider can receive it in HD.

As I mentioned, and as you can read on this blog, WGME, WMTW, and WCSH have all made this same mistake from time to time. When this happened on Friday night, I called WGME. I tried calling WGME several times for about 20 minutes. All I ever got was a phone nobody would answer or the "General" voicemail box. If WGME is on the air, somebody has to be in the building so I have no idea why nobody answered the phone. There have been times in the past when I called WGME, WMTW, and WCSH to let them know they were not transmitting in high definition. I got mixed reception from all of them, (I mean, who is this guy calling us) but the problem got fixed. Usually within seconds, and sometimes before I could finish getting all the words out, the station magically started transmitting in High Definition. Some of them got used to me calling.

But on this past Friday night (6/18/10), I had no such luck with WGME. I wrote an email to Tom Humpage, General Manager, and I am waiting to hear back from him, hopefully on Monday, to explain to me what happened at their station on Friday night.

If WGME had this problem two or three years ago, I could understand. HD in Maine was in its infancy and a lot of mistakes and oversights were made. But after several years, and several situations just like this one occurring, one would think that WGME would have this figured out by now.

It truly amazes me that a TV station can't do something as simple as "turning on the HD switch". It shows a lack of dedication, lack of technical knowledge, lack of qualified staff, and an overall lack of respect for the viewing public. More than half of all US households have the ability to view high definition TV. Those who have seen what high definition is all about don't want to go back to regular TV. Once you have enjoyed HD and once you have paid a lot of money for an HD TV set, you want your programming to be in HD; it's that simple.

I gave up and started watching Craig Ferguson on WBZ out of Boston. I'm sure WGME's advertisers would love to know that.

Two big hold outs make the move to High Definition

TV is finally becoming what it should be, in this post-analog age of High Definition. What I mean by that is High Definition should be the norm, not the exception. It's been a frustrating 5 years for me, but we're finally getting somewhere. The last network morning show and the first-ever, network, Sunday political show are both broadcasting in high definition - finally.

For the life of me I couldn't figure out why "Meet the Press", the longest running TV show (and one of the most successful) in history was not broadcasting in High Definition. NBC had been one of the pioneers of HD, contributing HD programming over their network very early on in the process. And CBS, another pioneer with the first daytime soap (Young and Restless) broadcast in high definition, was another hold out with its "Early Show". The Early Show has always been in last place of the 3 big network morning shows, and not being in HD certainly didn't help CBS's ratings.


I stopped watching "Meet the Press" at some point in 2009 mostly because I thought David Gregory was a bad choice as a replacement for Tim Russert, but also because the show wasn't in High Definition. So I watched "This Week" on ABC instead. Between that and Fareed Zakaria on CNN, I got my fill of high definition, Sunday politics. If only someone would tell George Will (the ever-present, arrogant, one-man-think-tank on This Week's "panel") how bad his toupee looks in high definition then we'd really be getting somewhere. But I digress.


Finally, finally, finally, Meet the Press starting broadcasting in High Definition last week. And to me, the show is at least palatable again. While David Gregory is making an ass of himself trying to be as good as Tim Russert was, at least the show is in High Definition. So I'll start watching again.


As for CBS's "The Early Show", I've never watched it. Well, that's not true. One time a few years ago I was flipping through the channels and saw Alicia Keys playing the piano and singing that great song of hers called "No One". It was in SD. I haven't watched since other than to check to see if it was in HD yet. I just read on a few different web sites that The Early Show began its HD transmission on April 26, 2010. I will now, finally, have more choices in them morning. CBS should have done this a long time ago. Broadcasting in SD when you are third in the ratings quite simply a bad choice. The thing that broadcasters need to keep in mind is that more than 50% of households in the U.S. have at least one HD TV. And since you can pick up the free networks in HD over the air, people are more likely to watch a show that is in HD over a show that isn't. I've been saying this for a long time and it's been proven in the ratings. So congratulations to CBS and The Early Show for finally making it. I checked in on The Early Show this morning and since CBS broadcasts their HD in 1080i (as opposed to 720p like ABC and Fox), the show looks fantastic.


Right now, more television programming is in high definition than not. And most syndicated television is available in HD but "lower tier" stations (like the TV stations where I live) don't have all the HD equipment they need to record/playback HD received over satellite. So it will still be a whle before syndicated shows and local programming is in HD. But it is nice to see that finally High Definition is growing up, and becoming everything it can be.


Now if I could just get my cable company to carry MSNBC, USA, Bravo, FX and AMC in high definition, I'd be all set.

More HD coming to Portland, Maine

I apologize to all for not writing in a while. To be honest I haven't had any good, bad, or indifferent news about high definition here in Maine, or anywhere else for that matter.

Latest news? 240HZ and sliver-thin LED screens. It's already been proven that the human eye can't distinguish between 120HZ and 240HZ so I wouldn't waste my money, but you can if you want, or if you just don't have the room for a 4 inch thick TV screen and really need to scale back on that.

And then there is the Sharp "Yellow" phenomenon. Did you see the TV commercial with Mr. Sulu from Star Trek? He was explaining that YOUR television can't see yellow, even though the yellow we can't see was yellow on our TV's when he was explaining it. Is there a different yellow and yellow? What a joke. I believe the intention is to confuse the consumer so much that they will think they need to buy anything the HDTV market has to sell.

OK that's enough of that. On to bigger and better things:

I received an email from Doug Finck, General Manager at WPME (MyNetwork) and WPXT (CW) in Portland. They got some brand spanking new HD equipment that will allow them to broadcast HD content - it's all part of the new syndicated TV distribution architecture. Both WPME and WPXT will be able to receive (over the Internet or physical media) HD content and store it on these devices. They can then play it back and broadcast it in HD. There are some third parties involved in the whole process but the bottom line is that for the consumer, this means more HD programming.

Doug went on to say: "Specifically, from here on, we will be creating all local elements in HD. That includes local commercials, local promotional announcements, local [Public Service Announcements], local public affairs programs and all local long-form programs that we produce. (from "The Maine Rundown" to "Local Discovery", [and] from "Buy Local" to "OurMaine Magazine. Over the next 90 days you'll find more and more local HD content being added".

By working with their vendors and partners, WPME and WPXT will be able to broadcast shows like Extra, TMZ, Everybody Loves Raymond and others in High Definition. This is a first for our part of the world. Even the big 3 network affiliates in Portland are not yet doing this.

While WPME and WPXT still can not YET take an HD satellite feed and record it onto a machine and play it back like they did with analog broadcasts, being able to store and record local HD content, and being able to store and rebroadcast HD content delivered to them in ways other than satellite is a HUGE STEP FORWARD for a television station in today's environment.

As Doug finished his email to me he said "Everyday you'll see more and more HD content". That is music to my ears. Doug is committed to being at the forefront of HD TV in the Portland/Lewiston/Auburn Market. I'm excited about this. He's excited about this. And I can't wait to see all of the upgrades really soon.

Many thanks to Doug Finck for supporting this blog site. He's been a supporter for a long time and picked the Maine HDTV Forum to spread the word when he was ready to release this news.

Let us know what you think.

People who own HD want to watch HD - it's that simple

I've been begging for more HD channels and more HD programming for as long as I've owned an HDTV, which is about 3 years now.

My argument has always been that the broadcaster, whether cable or over-the-air, that airs the most HD programming will win the ratings wars. And I was right.


A recent article on MediaPost goes into more details. Here's the link:

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=116495

I firmly believe that the local TV station in Portland, ME, that gets its news on the air first in HD will take over the local market in viewership. The number of households with high definition TV sets is increasing by leaps and bounds every day, even in this economy. Once you get used to it, regular (or SD) television looks, well, crappy. Once you've experienced high definition you will never want to go back to watching regular TV again.

In the article I referenced above, the data shows that even commercials are in the mix. A certain percentage of men and a bit lower percentage of women, but still some women, notice when a commercial is NOT in high definition and have a negative reaction to it.

I knew I couldn't be alone in my viewing habits and now I have proof. I routinely watch programming in high definition because it's in high definition. And I pick the HD programming over non-HD programming every time unless I absolutely have no choice.

What really gets me is when a TV show is supposed to be in HD but isn't. That makes me angry. And that's why I continually call or write to broadcasters to ask them what their problem is.

WGME - 60 Minutes not in HD

The October 25, 2009, broadcast of "60 Minutes" was not in high definition on WGME Channel 13 out of Portland, Maine. I wrote to the General Manager, Tom Humpage, who told me "it must be that switch thing again".

Tom is referring to a switch on the console in the TV Control room at the station. It is literally a switch on the control board that can toggle the broadcast between High Definition and Standard Definition.

The person at the console must "flip the switch" in order for HD to go out over the broadcast antenna. In my experience, when I call a local TV station to let them know that somebody forgot to "flip the switch", I usually get (and I've used this analogy before) a guy named Chad munching on a Kit-Kat bar and a drinking a Red Bull who says, "Huh?".

It's not rocket science. When a TV show you are broadcasting should be in HD, and you don't have sophisticated equipment that will flip the HD switch automatically, then FLIP THE SWITCH!

WGME is Portland, ME, seems to be the one TV station in the area that consistently has this problem. I admit that the incidences of the switch not being flipped are much less often than they used to be, but it bothers me that it still happens.

The new LED High Definition TV's

It seems that whenever you buy new technology, it's not long before even newer technology comes about and you are one step behind. This is true of HDTV as well.

When 60 Hz high definition TVs morphed into the new 120 Hz high definition TVs, I had to have one. So I bought a Sony Bravia 120 Hz HDTV and I love it.

About a month later I started seeing advertisements for the Samsung 240 Hz "LED" TVs. Instead of Liquid Crystal Display (LDC), these new TV are now Light Emitting Diode (LED) TVs. The technology is different, specifically the light source behind it. And since I don't know much about it yet, I thought it best if I send you on to someone who does. If you want information on LED Televisions then you should definitely click on any of the highlighted words in this post.

Take care and thanks for stopping by.

WGME - Oprah not in HD anymore

It took me a while to figure this one out. But with the help of a friend in the business, and Tom Humpage, the GM at WGME, and CBS Television Distribution, I finally put the pieces of the puzzle together.

Last season, Oprah began producing her show in High Definition. Here in Maine, WGME started broadcasting the show in HD around January of 09. When Oprah began her 2009/2010 season earlier this month, WGME no longer broadcast the show in HD. But WCVB out of Boston still broadcasts the show in HD.

Apparently CBS Television Distribution (CTD) changed the way they send the show through the satellite feed to the stations that broadcast Oprah. CTD used to have a 4:00 HD feed which was picked up by WGME and broadcast in HD. This is called a pass-through. Station like WGME all around the country don't have the ability to record shows in High Definition from a satellite feed and play them back at a later time. But they can do a pass-through. Other larger station around the country, like WCVB out of Boston, have the expensive equipment required to record High Definition programs from a satellite feed and play them back at a later date/time.

Beginning September 10, 2009 CTD eliminated its 4:00 Eastern feed in High Definition. So television stations around the country who can only do a pass-through had to revert back to Standard Definition (SD). Stations like WCVB who can record HD from a feed can continue to broadcast Oprah, and other shows, in HD.

I know it all sounds a bit technical but the bottom line is that WGME, and many, many TV stations around the country, have lost their ability to present syndicated shows like Oprah in High Definition because the syndicator has changed the time of the HD feed to an earlier time, therefore disqualifying stations who can only do a pass-through from being able to broadcast Oprah in High Definition. It is not WGME's fault that this has happened. They did not have a choice in the matter. Network Shows in Primetime are sent via satellite feed to affiliate TV stations at the exact time they should be airing. That's how TV Station without the fancy equipment can broadcast High Definition.

The number of households with High Definition TVs is growing rapidly. Therefore, television shows in High Definition are beginning to get higher ratings than shows not in High Definition. So I'm sure WGME would prefer that things went back to the way they used to be. But again, they have no say in the matter. And viewers have nowhere to complain. I guess you could call your congressperson. Good luck.

Craig Ferguson finally goes HD; plus an HD update for Maine

The man who is simply the best in the late night arena, Craig Ferguson, will no longer be able to be the butt of his own jokes about being the only late night show not in High Definition.

Conan O'Brien (Late Night with....) was in HD back when he was still in the 12:30 time slot. His replacement, Jimmy Fallon, continues in High Definition. Jay Leno, David Letterman, and even Nightline on ABC (although it hasn't been that long for Nightline) have all been broadcasting in High Definition for a while. And when Jimmy Kimmel on ABC went high def earlier this year, that left Craig Ferguson on CBS as the only late night show NOT in high definition.

Ferguson made it known, sometimes subtly, sometimes not so subtly, that he didn't appreciate it very much. His self-deprecating humor took pot shots and the bad lighting, second-rate stage, and lack of support from CBS.

Starting this past Monday, August 31, 2009, The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson is now in high definition. And it's about time. With 53% of American Households having at least one HD television, my predication are coming true.

I predicted that when the viewing public got used to high definition, they would demand it. And it would show in the ratings. The bottom line is - if a TV show is not in HD, it has a lesser chance of being watched. HD buffs, and regular TV viewers with an HD TV, will easily channel surf right past a show that is not in HD and will land on one (and stay there) that is in HD. Viewership equals ratings. Ratings equals advertising dollars.

The same is happening with local news broadcasts. In Southern Maine, where we can receive both local Maine news AND Boston news, the ratings tell the story. Viewers would much rather watch High Definition. So with a choice, viewers are tuning in to WCVB, WBZ, and WHDH (the big three out of Boston), for news. Some data suggests that viewers may check their local (non-HD) channels for weather. But Southern Maine and Southeastern New Hampshire are close enough to being far out suburbs of Boston, so why not watch the Boston news. Most of what Boston has on the news is centered around New England, not just Boston. And since New England is really one big state, it makes sense that viewers who spent a lot of money on an HD TV want to get all of the benefits having one.

Again, not one Maine TV station produces its newscast in HD. The ABC affiliate out of Portland, WMTW, even tries to fake it. They bought some equipment that allows them to cram the entire bottom on an HD picture with weather information, but above that is the standard black bars and second-rate picture quality. They want you to think "HD" because they are partially using the expanse of an HD picture, but it's not really HD.

WCSH, channel 6, our NBC affiliate bought some equipment that would make the on-air transition from non-HD to HD programming less jolting. All they have really been able to accomplish in HD is a 3 to 4 second promo for their on-air talent. Example: "Watch Lee Nelson and the Newscenter Morning Report". A picture of Lee Nelson flashes on the screen, there are background graphics and such, and it's all in HD. But it only lasts 3 seconds. That's all they can do.

Then there is our CBS affiliate, WGME. They call their weather computer "Doppler HD". There is nothing HD about it. This is nothing more than a marketing ploy. Do they think people won't notice that their weather broadcast, and the rest of their news broadcast isn't in HD? Do they think we are that stupid.

This is what we are dealing with in Maine. These TV stations need to man up, or woman up, and invest in an HD infrastructure. Otherwise they will continually lose viewership. I've been saying this for as long as I can remember. Whichever Maine TV station beats the rest to doing the local news in HD will win the ratings war. It's that simple.

Disney HD - wow, what a concept

OK, so Disney HD was added to the HD lineup of Metrocast Cable in the Rochester, NH, and Sanford, ME viewing areas. Big deal. The only reason I am mentioning this is because I promised to keep people in Maine up to date on what I know about High Definition in Maine.

Is this fact important? No. But it gives me an opportunity to point out all of the channels that Metrocast does NOT offer in HD.

The quick list is MSNBC, FX, USA, Bravo, SoapNet, and ABC Family. These are just the more popular ones. Instead we have 23 ESPN HD channels, 28 HD Golf Channels, and I believe 8 different fishing channels in HD. This an exaggeration, of course, but it may as well be true. Instead of giving viewers a variety of choices, Metrocast has decided that they'll just keep adding more and more reality channels. By that I mean no channels that offer drama, or comedy shows. It all just reality TV like basketball, fishing, golf, How-To shows and all that kind of stuff. No "produced" shows.

Now to the real truth. Why a cable operator would go through all the trouble of adding a new HD channel when 90% of the programming on that channel is NOT IN HIGH DEFINITION, I'll never understand. What is the point? When you have the opportunity of adding any one of a number of HD channels that actually broadcast HD programming and instead you add one who's HD library is about the size of the "Gay Studies" section of any library in Chattanooga, Tennessee, WHAT'S THE POINT?

Thanks, Metrocast, for adding Disney HD because the cartoons look so much better.

The many faces of High Definition

It is becoming increasingly more difficult to figure out what television shows are actually in high definition and which are not. So many scenarios and combinations exist that it is difficult to explain how this whole HD thing really works.

Here are some of the different categories and examples:

Filmed with an HD camera, recorded and then played back in HD on a network feed to the local affiliate in Prime Time (shows like Two and a Half Men)
Filmed new on film stock, converted to HD, and then played back in HD (like Desperate Housewives, or CSI - this will become more important later)
Filmed live with an HD camera (show like Good Morning America)

--------These first three are what I call "real HD" ----------------

Filmed years ago on film stock, and then converted as best they can to HD (Seinfeld, and even Hogan's Hero's from many years ago)

Filmed Standard Definition but in 16:9 aspect ratio (wide-screen non HD) this includes shows like The Bonnie Hunt Show (which is also shown on many channels in non-HD, and non-wide screen). Another good example of this is the local News. Most local news is still filmed the same old way it has been done for year. Some stations, however, now have digital video cameras for working in the field. Most are not HD cameras but can film wide screen. The result is a correctly proportioned wide-screen picture, but with the same quality as a 480i or 480p camera. Portable HD Cameras for field work are very expensive. Usually large cities that have TV stations with big budgets can afford some HD field cameras. But most TV stations can not; not yet anyway, and therefore it will be quite some time before your local news is in High Definition.

Of course any of these can ALSO be played back in Standard Definition (a bit grainy and in 4:3 aspect ratio). You'll get the black pillars on the sides of the TV picture when viewing this type of broadcast on an HD set.

Then there is Fake HD - This is where a TV network will take an SD show and stretch it to fit the screen but it is horizontally challenged. When the camera pans left or right, you get a ripple effect that creates sea sickness if it goes too fast. Another trick, which you can see on The Science Channel, is where they re-record a show but zoom in on it. You can tell it's fake-wide screen and fake HD because the producers don't zoom in perfectly when they re-record, so there is a very slight black bar on the side. You almost can't notice it, but it's there. Watch the credits or screen notations; they will be cut off.

It gets very complicated. But your eyes KNOW when a show you are watching is in pure HD. The question arises when you are watching a show and you're not sure it is. If you are not sure, it probably is not in pure HD. So make sure you are getting what you pay for if you indeed are paying. Remember; broadcast TV even in HD is still free. And when you are watching real HD, you just know it, no question.

On top of all of this, you must factor in the television station you are watching and its technology capabilities. Most TV stations (unless in a very large demographic market like Boston or NYC) can not afford the equipment needed to play back HD programming unless the HD programming is provided to them at the exact time they will re-broadcast it. This is called a pass-through. In other words, if Law and Order comes on at 10:00, that it the time that NBC send the HD feed to its affiliates so that the affiliates can pick up that signal and broadcast it back out through their TV tower. These same TV stations can not do that with programming they buy from a distributor. For example, WGME purchased distribution rights from CBS Television Distribution to air Oprah Winfrey. But since CBS Television Distribution does not provide an HD feed at 4:00 pm, WGME can not broadcast the show in HD. The HD feed may have been uploaded at 1:30 pm - earlier that day. However, since WGME doesn't have the equipment to download the HD version of the show and play it back at 4:00 PM, their only option is to record the Standard Definition feed and play that back at 4:00 PM.

Some TV stations are now broadcasting multiple channels. For example, WENH (New Hampshire PBS) broadcast three simultaneous channels - 11.1, 11.2, and 11.3. While 11.1 and 11.3 are High Definition 11.2 is not. The problem here is that there is only so much bandwidth available to the TV station. It's like the Internet. If you have one Internet connection it works fine. If you invite 5 friends over to use that same connection with their computers, it's going to be slower. The same is true for an HD signal. The more programming a broadcaster tries to fit through a pipe, the lower the quality of each picture is going to be. There are differing viewpoints about how much TV a pipe can handle. Two HD broadcasts plus one Standard Definition broadcast from one TV Station is right on the line between no degradation of signal, and mild to moderate degradation of the signal. This is just one more variable in the HD picture (so to speak).

On the flip side, you have stations like HDNet (which is on the premium tier of most cable outlets) who can record, playback, or broadcast live events in full HD anytime they choose. Networks like this were born for HD and were built on HD technology from the ground up. This is not true of most cable networks. Some are beginning to convert now but it will be 5 or 10 years before many of them are up to speed.

I have not wanted to admit this but it will be many years before HD is the norm as opposed to the exception like it is now.

One more thing - you might see someone like Direct TV advertise that their HD is "Full 1080p". Well, there are NOT ANY TV networks, or local TV stations, or cable networks, that are producing shows in 1080p; 1080p is reserved for video games of the very highest quality. So don't let anybody fool you burying an HD TV set that is "full 1080p" unless you plan using an XBox, or PS2 or any other gaming system. In the USA, you MAY get a few video on demand resources in 1080p but they are very, very rare. Europe has a little bit more 1080p available, but it is also limited to Video on Demand and gaming. Regular TV, even in it's finest HD quality, is NOT and WILL NOT be in any format higher in quality than 1080i for many years to come.

I know some of this is very confusing. Is it HD? Is it not HD? Maybe some of you will say "who cares?" For those of us who love our HD, we do care, and want to make sure the public is not being fooled.

The channel to whom I would give my annual prize for the highest quality, high definition video is: CNN-HD. They are not always broadcasting in HD but when they do, it is the finest picture I have ever seen. And I've watched it on many different HD TV sets.

Let us know what you think.