AFC Playoffs - Motion Artifacts on 58

[ReesR]

I would be very interested in seeing a true test between the Madison and Milwaukee CBS feeds.  This is but one issue of six which I outlined.  I do not look merely at single issues, I look at trends.  In this case, there is a trend.  If the test fails to show my point, I will gracefully bow to that one.

Early on, I was told that Ch4 tried multicasting and the results negatively effected the high definition outcome.  Hence, they dropped multicasting.  Also, the ATSC standards show a bandwidth of 19.28 mbps for true high definition.  14mbps just isn't 19.28.  It was that aspect of my point which referred to 10lbs through a 5 lb pipe.  Just a clarification.  Maybe I should have said you can't push 19.28 lbs of programming through a 14 lb pipe.

Rees

[Joseph S]

Until this happens complaining that multi-casting is dramatically affecting the picture is baseless and without merit.

The motion artifacts of the 2002 Winter Olympics and several NBA games on NBC tended to only occur on things with white backgrounds such as the ski jumping. I didn't see them at all during any of the Triple Crown coverage on NBC.

I believe multicasting clearly had an impact on the programming as it did to those that had to suffer through it during the Olympics. When the multicast was shut down people saw dramatic improvements on their set. Yesterday, one comment read,

"Update:  Koin has turned off 40-02 and 40-03!!  Now the game looks much, much better!!  Thanks Koin!"

That wasn't a quote from 1st half to second half.

Apparently, the viewers aren't the only ones that believe it has an impact as demonstrated by this response to the KOIN complaint.

The button got pushed, but the ATSC encoder control program didn't kill the 6-2 and 6-3 services (gotta love two year old beta version programs running on Windows) and I was not home.  Once the Master Control operator got ahold of me and she restarted the control program a couple of times it switched correctly.

Here's another comment from a multicast:

How did that happen?  
Here in South Bend, Indiana, WSBT-DT is showing the EDTV version on 30-02.  I've asked them repeatedly to drop the 4:3 subchannel, but to no avail.
 
 Now, any camera pans or major motion causes the picture to block up.  When the replay graphics go whizzing by, it's like watching video from the Internet...  Yeesh.  This is why I want the HD waiver from my local station for CBS-HD on Dish.

As for the effect on general programming: Alias includes several switches from dark to light and quick motion, but I don't ever see compression artifacts in it. Flash a white light on CSI, such as in the Halloween Magic episode and suddenly we see a bunch of white blocks. When I watch HDNET on CBS pixelation is a regular occurence. When I watch the same sort of flyby landscape shots on PBS it doesn't happen at all. Motion artifacts aren't ever a problem with HBO and SHO HD either.

I think we're owed the chance to see an A/B comparision rather than accept what little information we get as fact. CBS58 has done a lot for HDTV here, but the low power and multicasting remain unaddressed.

We are told they have to send 41 to TW for cable rebroadcast, yet there's never a mention about fiber obtic transport. I believe dropping the multicast and directly affecting TW would sure do a lot more to get the ball rolling toward fiber optic transport of 41. Whatever the conflict is between TW and CBS58 is it shouldn't be affecting the region the way it does. Somebody needs to take responsibility and solve this immediately.

[MesaV]

ReesR if you would like to see Madison HD I think I might be able to help you.  Let me know if you're interested and we can set something up via email.

[Ron Pollitt]

I was trying to sneak a peak at 1-2 to see parts of the Badger game.   But the picture was terrible.  I agree all of the bandwidth should have been used on 1-1 for an important game like the playoffs.
Ron

[Todd Wiedemann]

I switched over to 1-2 (WMLW 41) during a commercial during the Jets-Raiders game.

Yikes ! The pixellation on a baldness commercial was off the chart !

In comparison, the game on 1-1 looks stunning, just as the second half of the Steelers-Titans game.

They've really ramped up the bandwidth for 1-1.

[David Hendrickson]

One last comment now that the games are over. Granted, there were imperfections. But what an enjoyable experience the broadcasts were. Kudos to cbs/ch 58 for the lack of station logos floating in the corner of my screen.
Can't wait till next week. The games should be great, and look even better.

[AndrewP]

Yes, games will be great, but only one of them will look good.

oh, FFFFFFFFFFFox............

Andrew

[SugarRay]

:bang: Too bad I have Time Warner as my HD outlet as CBS and TWC don't seem to get along.  Maybe someday

[Joseph S]

To CBS58:

Ask TW if this is acceptable quality. Then kindly recommend fiber.



No editing other than resize.

[borghe]

and that really goes to my point as to if the other two channels were taking up 5Mbps. Many DirecTV channels come in around 2.5Mbps'ish or so, and that isn't even anywhere near that.

Again, I am not saying multi-casting doesn't affect quality. I am merely saying that in the case of multi-casting we are really putting a lot of assumptions on WDJT when the truth of the matter is: we can't prove anything. Yes we can point out some posts from other cities on multi-casting, but as we all know there are many different ways and different quipment to do it with.

If someone really wants to prove it they really need to do no more than botain two D-VHS tapes or Hi-Pix recordings. One from a 58 broadcast and one from the same broadcast from either Chicago or Madison. But until that happens, we are all just really talking out of our a**es.

[ReesR]

borghe:

I believe I agreed with you earlier.

I believe what the postings are showing is consensus.  It can be better.  You agreed with that yourself when you said "I am not saying multi-casting doesn't affect quality".  However, we have a management at Ch58 which is not likely to bow to consensus.  My earlier observations that there are many issues which effect the viewers ability to view them properly goes to deaf ears there.

Ch 58's point of view has always been that they do not have enough marketing data which shows enough digital viewers exist to justify and to rectify these troublesome issues.  This goes to the heart of the problem.

***It is their responsibility to attract viewers***
It is "not" our responsibility to first purchase systems to view them which would ultimately create the data they need.

However, the problem we have is two fold.  How do you prevent stations from riding piggy back on the coat tails of other stations which are doing it properly?  And secondly, how does the viewer gain leverage to convince them they should do their part to rectify the issues presented above including the six I talked about.

Do we speak to their advertisers?  Do we engage in dialog with them?  Granted, our options are few and they know that.  This works against us.  But we should decide by consensus we should do one or more of the following:

1. Ignore them
2. organize
3. continue to share our comments here about how we feel.
4. talk with ch58 top management (in Chicago not Milwaukee)
5. let them continue doing what they want because we can't change anything.
6. let the count down clock run it's course and see what happens.
7. talk with their advertisers and ask them to send $$ to other stations.
8. do absolutely nothing because consensus feels ch58 can't afford to do anything anyway.
9. their special temporary authority (STA) for low power has an expiration date.  wait til then and then react.  (but this does nothing about the multicasting problem)
10. do nothing (which is different than ignore them)

constructive comments?

[Kevin Arnold]

This may be a good time to ask what the business plan actually is for 58 (as well as the others, but that is a different thread).  They have stated there is no profitable way to do digital yet and claim that as the reason for their actions.  That does not explain the multicasting of 41 and 63, both of which are available analog. Channel 3 multicasts one other feed in Madison but that is one that is not avail. OTA. So what would the logic be in duplicating the 41 and 63 (especially 63) feeds?  I'm not sure. Usually you can figure out a strategy that a business if pursuing but this one is obscure. Any takers?

[Gregg Lengling]

Kevin at this point WDJT is multicasting in order to provide their 41 and 63 signals to TWC as they do not have a fiber to TWC.  

Simple Question, Simple answer.

[ReesR]

Boy, I must have blown it.  I had asked for constructive comments.  How about any comments then. (but remember the new rules) Am I the only one who is not receiving channel 58 digital reliably?  There has to be more of us in metropolitan areas both north and south of their tower who are having the same problem as I am having.  CBS has some good programming and to see a prime network be treated the way they are in our neighborhood is a crime.

How about it?

Rees

[borghe]

Sorry Rees.. I am West (and slightly north) of their tower and to be honest their signal is by far the easiest of the signals to get. 4 is pretty close also, but 58 is still easier. 12 seems to have big dropouts if the signal ever drops below 79 for me so I have to work at it a little to keep it above 79. 6 is actually a very very very stable signal, I just have to find the "sweet spot" where it comes in the highest. But 58 I can pretty much just throw the antenna anywhere, literally throw, and it will probably come in at least a 72. More likely 83 or higher. A quick flick of the wrist and I'll grab 100.