What Prime Time Shows are in True HD?

[summerfun]

I understand that most prime time shows are still shot with film and then converted to HD for broadcast.  I also know that some of them are starting to be shot in native HD giving us a much better picture. Like the Super Bowl, Leno and some other shows.

My question is how do we know what is shot in true HD? Is there a web site or publication that has this kind of info? I would love to know more info on particular shows or episodes.

Someone on this forum once talked about four episodes of CSI this season and all CSI for next season. How do you find out that kind of info?

[hgoodman]

I've gotten most of that type of info. from magazines, honestly. For example, Home Theater magazine late last year published the entire prime-time schedule in grid format, listing exactly which shows are in Hi-Def. I found it very useful.

Almost all "non-reality" prime-time programming is originated hi-def. It's getting tough to track the origination film vs. video, as hi-def. video when done right, is looking pretty darned close to film, in my opinion. Honestly, I don't know if "West Wing" or "NYPD Blue" is originated on film or video, for example. I'll try and find out though.

As a side note, programs originated on film and telecined at a Hi-Def. type of resolution still look spectacular. 35MM film has comfortably exceeded the possible resolutions of previous technology delivered to the home to this point. For example, if you watch the Monday Night ABC movies such as "Gladiator" and "Cast Away," those movies originated on 35MM film shot in various aspect ratios, but have been telecined at Hi-Def resolution. They look absolutely wonderful. The look is very different from Hi-Def. video, and picking one as superior is like Mercedes vs. BMW. It's all a matter of personal taste.

Gone are the days when most people can say "video sucks and film will always be superior" and vice-versa.

[borghe]

show that originate on HD are pretty much one or two ABC sitcoms, Leno, and The Young and the Restless.... well, and sports and special interest programming also...

as for the days of "film being superior to video" being over... as long as there are still bad film transfers out there, as long as there is still cropping out there, as long as some movies arestill being over compressed to fit one movie and supplements on a single disc, and as long as there are technical errors (framing errors, progressive cadence errors, etc), film will almost ALWAYS be better than video... the fact of the matter is that is was never video's fault that video looked bad to begin with... it was thepeople who transferred it... and those people are still around making decisions today... One only has to look at Annie, The Meaning of Life, Back to the Future, Highlander, and hundreds of other releases to see it even today. and the problem will almost certainly follow us to HD... Hopefully you like 1.78:1... because I foresee almost all 2.35:1 movies being cropped in the near future as people once again complain about black bars...

[summerfun]

I just purchased my first wide screen (16:9, 1.78:1) HDTV. I went back to my DVD collection and to my surprise; about 90% of my library is widescreen format. Lucky for me, I guess I was smarter than I thought when buying those DVDs in the past.

I have noticed that some are 2.35:1 format which gives me some black bars on top and bottom. Not a big deal, at 60", I still get a pretty large viewing area, but I bet they look pretty bad on a 4:3 TV.

It seems like you can't get over the hump. Just as they start making wide screen TVs, the movies start getting even wider. Are the TV's going to follow suit and get wider as well?

[GS kid]

I think all the dramas are film transfers. I find a pretty good way to tell if it's film is that there is usually more digital background noise. This is seen most often in dark scenes. I prefer HD video overall. I like film. I like it even better when HD video is shot and made to look like film. Sometimes HD video is made to look not as sharp on purpose. Young and the Restless is shot in HD and then the images are softened in post-production to give it that fantasy look that soaps have always had.

I don't think they will do alot of cropping of 2.35:1 material. I think general consumers are more savy and demanding since the introduction of 16:9 HDTVs. Everyone I know would rather have the black bars then to give up the full views of the original films. I can understand why people didn't like widescreen on a small 4:3 tv when they had to squint. We are also creatures of habit and didn't like having a screen that wasn't filled. With the sheer size of today's 16:9 tvs, there's little reason for people to complain anymore. I think we have turned the corner and in the next few years, pan & scan cropping will be gone forever!

[The Law]

....plus many widescreens have things like "expand"  which will expand content virtically to get rid of the bars top and bottom.  After a couple of minutes, your eyes adjust to the minor stretching and it looks just fine.

[borghe]

actually most widescreen sets' 2.35:1 expand option is usually a geometrically linear option. This means it crops the ends to 1.78:1 and then scales the image. At least that's what it is on the Mitsubishis, Sonys, and Toshibas that I have access to.

Unfortunately doing that requires putting it in the consumers hands.... while this is a great idea for people like this board's members, the average consumer isn't even going to know about changing screen formats on their TV... they are just going to see black bars and complain.

I hope I am wrong, but in Best Buy to this day I still see way too many people complain about black bars to believe it will.. And even worse is when you see the Best Buy employee actually agree with them. :bang: