anthonysimilion Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 New upcoming native HD to look forward to on ABC HD - first on Sunday 18th March 2007 with 'Constructing Australia: The Bridge', then on Thursday 22nd March 2007 with 'The Big Blue'. 7:30pm Sunday 18th March 2007 Constructing Australia: The Bridge, ABC/Film Australia co-production Constructing Australia is the first three-part doco-drama series to be produced under the Film Australia Making History Initiative.The first episode is the definitive story of how a giant steel arch resembling a coat hanger, became one of world's most recognised structures, and an engineering triumph. Completed during the dark days of the Great Depression and finished in March 1932, it is the legacy of a fateful partnership between two very different men - a brilliant engineer, JJC Bradfield, and a maverick politician, Jack Lang - who shared a relentless ambition to create "the people's bridge". Along the way, they managed to stir up more than one hornets' nest, both at home and in Britain. More information: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/netw/200703...2007T193000.htm8:30pm Thursday 22nd March 2007 The Big Blue, ABC/NHK co-production This award winning natural history documentary narrated by Colin Friels reveals the secrets of the planet's largest living creature, the blue whale.Filmed off the southern coast of Australia researchers and fishermen have uncovered a natural phenomenon called 'Bonney Upwelling' which sparks a feeding frenzy all the way up the food chain to the blue whale. Around 30 metres long, weighing up to 180 tonnes, with a heart the size of a small car and a tongue that weighs as much as an elephant, a feeding blue whale is a sight to behold and rarely captured on film. More information: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/netw/200703...2007T203000.htm--------- Something to look forward to!
LBM Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 I saw the advert for the bridge and wanted to see it, now I know it is HD I will steal the HDTV out front. Thanks for the notice.
Neon Kitten Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 Question: why, why, why does the ABC not even vaguely attempt to promote its HD offerings? Planet Earth was not even listed as HD in the Green Guide, and the ABC's promos for it made no mention. Maybe they're worried people will vomit at the sheer size and obnoxiousness of the worst shitemark on Australian TV...
kootaberra Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 Question: why, why, why does the ABC not even vaguely attempt to promote its HD offerings?Planet Earth was not even listed as HD in the Green Guide, and the ABC's promos for it made no mention. Maybe they're worried people will vomit at the sheer size and obnoxiousness of the worst shitemark on Australian TV... keep whatching.
Darthdury Posted March 7, 2007 Posted March 7, 2007 Question: why, why, why does the ABC not even vaguely attempt to promote its HD offerings?Planet Earth was not even listed as HD in the Green Guide, and the ABC's promos for it made no mention. Maybe they're worried people will vomit at the sheer size and obnoxiousness of the worst shitemark on Australian TV... Why is there so much discussion about the watermarks? If the show is good enough I don't even notice it, and if it's not good enough I don't sit there and stare at the watermark, I change the channel.
pietro1503559499 Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 That's a co-incidence....Planet Earth this Sunday is also about the blue whale.
robertr Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 Question: why, why, why does the ABC not even vaguely attempt to promote its HD offerings?Planet Earth was not even listed as HD in the Green Guide, and the ABC's promos for it made no mention. Maybe they're worried people will vomit at the sheer size and obnoxiousness of the worst shitemark on Australian TV... To make matters worse they (ABC) do not even have WS next to any of their programmes in TV guides,yet $even have the temerity to state that the $even Nighly News is HD
Santa1503559644 Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 I'm going to go out on a limb, and draw some fire, by suggesting that the "Constructing the brigde" will be another nauseating Fake-U-Mentary® riddled with ridiculously cheesy recreations of events/speeches/etc. Pity Generation Howard can't cope with a simple documentary these days! There was a time when facts could be presented in an interesting and intelligent fashion, where the story itself was worth watching ... rather than these sad ham-fests for kiddies with 2 minutes attention spans! That said, when I first saw the promos of these, I thought they looked a lot crisper than usual in terms of PQ.
aztec Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 I'm going to go out on a limb, and draw some fire, by suggesting that the "Constructing the brigde" will be another nauseating Fake-U-Mentary® riddled with ridiculously cheesy recreations of events/speeches/etc.Pity Generation Howard can't cope with a simple documentary these days! There was a time when facts could be presented in an interesting and intelligent fashion, where the story itself was worth watching ... rather than these sad ham-fests for kiddies with 2 minutes attention spans! That said, when I first saw the promos of these, I thought they looked a lot crisper than usual in terms of PQ. Waste of bandwidth. :ph34r: (not you Santa)
tonygib Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 keep whatching. hmm, that has an almost 'fear of dread" about it, does this mean there is something you know that we don't yet? Despite what Santa say's, the bridge one sounds interesting, I'll have to make sure I remember about it, may well be the first time in a long while that I'll watching anything on FTA after 7pm on a Sunday.
Neon Kitten Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 Why is there so much discussion about the watermarks? If the show is good enough I don't even notice it, and if it's not good enough I don't sit there and stare at the watermark, I change the channel. The ABC HD watermark is so huge and so opaque it's in a league of its own. It's also pointless - being a digital-only channel, everyone who is watching would already know what channel they were on as their STB or TV would have told them.
kootaberra Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 The ABC HD watermark is so huge and so opaque it's in a league of its own.It's also pointless - being a digital-only channel, everyone who is watching would already know what channel they were on as their STB or TV would have told them. Maybe the people who want the watermark, need it 'cause' they don't know what channel they are watching?
Neon Kitten Posted March 8, 2007 Posted March 8, 2007 Maybe the people who want the watermark, need it 'cause' they don't know what channel they are watching? Then they can push the "info" button on their digital receiver's remote. It's so easy even a Herald-Sun reader can do it.
BribieG Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 If ABC broadcast their evening news on the HD channel I would only have channel 20 active on my STB so that's right, I wouldn't bother with 2, or the others. Also 7 I would just keep on channel 70, not that the quality is any better but they show the loop during the day. (so why don't I just keep 7 on channel 7 or 71 or whatever? Because I live in hope that one day a miracle may occur and they may at least go 720p)
DrP Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 It's so easy even a Herald-Sun reader can do it. Its not that easy! You still have to be able to think about pressing the button.
kootaberra Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Its not that easy! You still have to be able to think about pressing the button. You also have to know which button?
Neon Kitten Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 You also have to know which button? So to cater for a handful of seriously stupid people, the rest of us have to suffer the world's most obnoxious watermark?
LBM Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Want a bad watermark, watch MTV. I saw a show where they animated the letters M T V through a little TV on a crane (animated) that moved around the screen whilst scrolling and having the name of the show at the top every few minutes. After that, anything looks good to me. Although, since this is OUR ABC, WE should have the option to say no to the screen blob.
MELso Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 So to cater for a handful of seriously stupid people, the rest of us have to suffer the world's most obnoxious watermark? Ah - so you've correctly identified the real culprits for the shitemarks: the marketing executives. This is all about the 'branding' even though the said seriously stupid people marketing executives don't realise that they are seriously downgrading the brand. Oh - but the programs look good...
anthonysimilion Posted March 9, 2007 Author Posted March 9, 2007 Oh - but the programs look good... At least you're trying to bring the thread back on topic by referring to the programs... *hint*
straycat Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 ....It's also pointless - being a digital-only channel, everyone who is watching would already know what channel they were on as their STB or TV would have told them. Don't know if that was supposed to be a serious comment? I thought the most likely and obvious reason for vandalising TV programs in this way would be in order to 'brand' the program so that any subsequent broadcast by another channel, and any replays of recordings of it, would all advertise the original broadcaster. Also it would discourage unauthorised rebroadcast and illegal recording for resale, and perhaps facilitate prosecution for such copyright breaches. It wouldn't bother me so much if they could just do it a bit less intrusively. Doesn't help either, that the vast majority of WS productions are still geared for the 4:3 viewing majority, so their pesky icons aren't placed at the margin of the screen (where they'd be invisible in 4:3) but right in the picture! Oh yes, and I am looking forward to seeing some of these Aus native HD programs.
tonygib Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 Don't know if that was supposed to be a serious comment?I thought the most likely and obvious reason for vandalising TV programs in this way would be in order to 'brand' the program so that any subsequent broadcast by another channel, and any replays of recordings of it, would all advertise the original broadcaster. Also it would discourage unauthorised rebroadcast and illegal recording for resale, and perhaps facilitate prosecution for such copyright breaches. hmm, you don't happen to work for the ABC do you, thats the same BS response they give whenever one complains about watermarks. So your saying that other TV stations can't be trusted and will just 'steal' content for their own broadcast, without giving any credit. That is assuming they leave the watermark visable and don't just blur it out or put a solid one of their own over the top, all seen that happen before. As for 'illegal' recording, for whatever reason, given the amont of data going over P2P networks today, from TV broadcasts all over the world, I think its fair to say that it has no impact on recording. As yet I'm not aware of any court case over TV recording. All that aside, yes it will be interesting to see what the quality is like of some local stuff, compared to say The West Wing (when it is good quality HD) or the likes of Planet Earth.
straycat Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 hmm, you don't happen to work for the ABC do you, thats the same BS response they give whenever one complains about watermarks. No, don't work for Auntie. I presume that the "BS response" you refer to, is my point that it would discourage breach of copyright? If so, then that was only the afterthought. The main reason that I suggested, was to 'brand' the program to advertise the original broadcaster in any subsequent rebroadcast,(meaning legal usage. eg as in the use of newsclip footage by rival channels) and to remind those viewing recordings which network originally broadcast it. So your saying that other TV stations can't be trusted and will just 'steal' content for their own broadcast, without giving any credit. That is assuming they leave the watermark visable and don't just blur it out or put a solid one of their own over the top, all seen that happen before. Can't see what point you're making here. Your first sentence implies that I'm wrong in suggesting that another broadcaster may "steal" content, but then, in the second sentence, you say "..all seen that happen before". (?) I'd guess that networks in some 3rd world countries, eg, wouldn't hesitate to 'steal' whatever they could get away with, and not having to deal with a watermark would make it that much easier for them. As for 'illegal' recording, for whatever reason, given the amont of data going over P2P networks today, from TV broadcasts all over the world, I think its fair to say that it has no impact on recording. As yet I'm not aware of any court case over TV recording. The networks can't do much (anything?) about p2p, but I specifically mentioned "...illegal recording for resale ..." and I don't doubt that they'd be quick to prosecute if unauthorised boxed sets of any of their shows, complete with watermark, started popping up for sale on ebay & at weekend markets. btw tonygib, I certainly wasn't advocating the use of watermarks. (Note my use of the term "vandalising". Does that sound like I work for Auntie? ) Merely stating what I thought would be the obvious reasons for their use, as opposed to Neon Kitten's implied suggestion that they were simply there to tell the FTA viewer what channel they were watching.
-Anthony- Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 Sounds good, hopefully i'll have my new HD TV by then .
kootaberra Posted March 10, 2007 Posted March 10, 2007 I thought the most likely and obvious reason for vandalising TV programs in this way would be in order to 'brand' the program so that any subsequent broadcast by another channel, and any replays of recordings of it, would all advertise the original broadcaster. Also it would discourage unauthorised rebroadcast and illegal recording for resale, and perhaps facilitate prosecution for such copyright breaches. All jokes aside the real reason (that I know) is with all the follow on re-broadcast on pay etc, the 'punter' can work out who he really is watching. Yes you and me can work that out, but in travelling back and forth across Aust by road and Motel, it is hard to work out what you are watching at different stops. I myself don't like the watermaking, but I can see the reasoning behind them. I don't think they really think it will stop copyright breaches.
Recommended Posts