U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-03-2017, 07:35 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,896 posts, read 4,422,729 times
Reputation: 3934

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrandK-Man View Post
Both the content of present television, plus lack of consumer knowledge of TV picture calibration, or at least correct setting of user adjustment, do not warrant resolutions that are more than adequate for most viewers and viewing conditions.


I do display calibration part time, and am satisfied with the results of my work, regardless of whether 480, 1080, or 4320 lines of horizontal resolution are invloved. Correct settings are more important than resolution in my estimation.
I would agree with that. I know people who went out and bought the latest and greatest TV, never calibrated it, and when you sit down to watch television, you get the worst eye strain because their colors are too bright or washed out, the picture is set to zoom instead of native, etc... but yet, they'll brag how they got the best TV Wal-Mart had to offer, lol!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-03-2017, 08:09 AM
 
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
2,366 posts, read 964,047 times
Reputation: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy37 View Post
I would agree with that. I know people who went out and bought the latest and greatest TV, never calibrated it, and when you sit down to watch television, you get the worst eye strain because their colors are too bright or washed out, the picture is set to zoom instead of native, etc... but yet, they'll brag how they got the best TV Wal-Mart had to offer, lol!

Yes, those would be 'retail' settings.

As part of the initial setup that most modern TVs self-guide you through, you will be prompted to select something like 'Store Mode' vs. 'Home viewing'. I also find, just for getting folks out of the former, 'Torch' setting, I recommend a one-button solution: Movie or Cinema mode in the Picture menu, for use until I arrive with my test patterns. This mode lowers the backlight on LEDs & LCDs, and turns off a lot of gimmicky non-standard settings in the Advanced section of the user menu.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2017, 08:26 AM
 
Location: Norfolk, VA
6,502 posts, read 6,263,025 times
Reputation: 3693
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobrainman View Post
Only thing about it is that you'll need a new mobile device with the appropriate tuner to get the signal. It won't work with existing phones.

This is just a workaround to get over the air TV to mobile devices for people that are too cheap to subscribe to streaming services. It is not like you can get TV exactly how you want it through this method. It is just a modern implementation of live TV. On Demand options will be interesting, as is the idea of broadcasters actually knowing what people watch for a change, which they can only check now if you're watching cable or satellite, but I don't see it as anything revolutionary. Maybe for the 4K crowd. It could pay off over time as people won't have to pay for internet bandwidth anymore; they can get streaming services for a fee that SHOULD be cheaper than current over the top services cost but probably will not because you're paying extra for a convenience.

TV everywhere. Whether you want it or not. And new technology that not only knows exactly what you're watching, but your exact location as you're watching. You'll have broadcasters figuring out people's habits and giving them a different TV schedule/guide than the next person. TV that is a lot smarter than you are.

It may be of some value to individuals willing to pay the extra money for devices that can make good use of it. A better use would be large tablets. I would not mind it on a 7 inch screen. But I doubt it is a pay once type of situation; there will be free stuff to entice you but this is, in effect, the new cable TV.

I would be more interested if they did this with radio. I might actually start listening to it again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2017, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Norfolk, VA
6,502 posts, read 6,263,025 times
Reputation: 3693
Quote:
Originally Posted by PacoMartin View Post
That is interesting, but frankly I don't believe it. Advertisers use as one metric CPM (cost per thousand viewers).

Average broadcast TV CPM ranges between about $10 - $23/ per thousand viewers. CPM view count is typically how many people are watching the program (tv show) not always a measurement of how many people are watching the commercial.



While the DTV transition was mandatory, the broadcasters were still sweet on the deal, not because the signal was better, but because they could now air subchannels (standard definition channels that mostly show reruns). The revenue from the subchannels made it still profitable to swtich to DTV.

Better signals will not automatically translate into more profit from higher advertising rates, especially since the older TV's will not be able to receive the signal (even at a lower resolution).

Broadcasters will find it very difficult to switch to a newer format without a gauranteed profit.

Now some new stations might develop around the new ATSC 3.0 standard, but not for pure commercial rates of $10 - $23/ per thousand viewers. Basically they will have to sell you the signal.

The profit margin for selling TV shows is much higher than financing them through commercials.
They will have better information for them to make those decisions with though.

Why is it that people naturally assume that they do not have any over the air options. Honestly. It is because the industry can convince people to voluntarily give over that information when they're watching it through a device (cable box, cable card, tivo, satellite tuner, streaming service, etc) than they can over the air. They don't want you watching over the air because they have to guess at it. This is targeted, Google Adsense, level technology. No margin for error.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2017, 08:49 AM
 
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
2,366 posts, read 964,047 times
Reputation: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofy328 View Post
Only thing about it is that you'll need a new mobile device with the appropriate tuner to get the signal. It won't work with existing phones.

This is just a workaround to get over the air TV to mobile devices for people that are too cheap to subscribe to streaming services. It is not like you can get TV exactly how you want it through this method. It is just a modern implementation of live TV. On Demand options will be interesting, as is the idea of broadcasters actually knowing what people watch for a change, which they can only check now if you're watching cable or satellite, but I don't see it as anything revolutionary. Maybe for the 4K crowd. It could pay off over time as people won't have to pay for internet bandwidth anymore; they can get streaming services for a fee that SHOULD be cheaper than current over the top services cost but probably will not because you're paying extra for a convenience.

TV everywhere. Whether you want it or not. And new technology that not only knows exactly what you're watching, but your exact location as you're watching. You'll have broadcasters figuring out people's habits and giving them a different TV schedule/guide than the next person. TV that is a lot smarter than you are.

It may be of some value to individuals willing to pay the extra money for devices that can make good use of it. A better use would be large tablets. I would not mind it on a 7 inch screen. But I doubt it is a pay once type of situation; there will be free stuff to entice you but this is, in effect, the new cable TV.

I would be more interested if they did this with radio. I might actually start listening to it again.
But the traditional broadcast rooftop antenna reception model should be kept as well. TV everywhere sounds like a disaster! Are people that impatient they can't wait until they get home to watch something, or a Tivo of it or recording?

Last edited by TheGrandK-Man; 07-03-2017 at 09:58 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2017, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Norfolk, VA
6,502 posts, read 6,263,025 times
Reputation: 3693
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrandK-Man View Post
But the traditiona broadcast rooftop antenna reception model should be kept as well. TV everywhere sounds like a disaster! Are people that impatient they can't wait until they get home to watch something, or a Tivo of it or recording?
I agree with you but the thing about it is that you have millenials, and Gen X like myself that never use the tuner in their TV. I don't do anything but Netflix and Hulu all day.

So with these new devices you can use your phone to watch live TV without a data connection. No need for YouTube TV, Hulu TV, or anything else. They'll charge you extra to get rid of ads. They'll charge you another fee to get content that isn't available for free.

Traditional broadcast rooftop antenna is not going anywhere. The article stated that ATSC 1.0 was going to be around for some time to come. And knowing TV stations, they'll continue to offer it as long as the FCC requires them to do so. They won't change unless ATSC 3.0 is profitable over and above what the old standard is, and I don't see that happening any time soon because people are so entrenched in streaming, it will be hard for them to give it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2017, 09:39 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,896 posts, read 4,422,729 times
Reputation: 3934
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrandK-Man View Post
Yes, those would be 'retail' settings.

As part of the initial setup that most modern TVs self-guide you through, you will be prompted to select something like 'Store Mode' vs. 'Home viewing'. I also find, just for getting folks out of the former, 'Torch' setting, I recommend a one-button solution: Movie or Cinema mode in the Picture menu, for use until I arrive with my test patterns. This mode lowers the backlight on LEDs & LCDs, and turns off a lot of gimmicky non-standard settings in the Advanced section of the user menu.
I went online and searched for calibration settings of my TV. I found a site that had posted a calibration setting that matched my model of TV, so I plugged those numbers in. Seemed to help quite a bit. One thing I did do was to turn off all of those weird settings that, honestly, I don't know what a lot of those things did anyway. The only settings I do use is that motion setting which does seem to help with live sports.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2017, 05:02 PM
 
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
2,366 posts, read 964,047 times
Reputation: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofy328 View Post
They will have better information for them to make those decisions with though.

Why is it that people naturally assume that they do not have any over the air options. Honestly. It is because the industry can convince people to voluntarily give over that information when they're watching it through a device (cable box, cable card, tivo, satellite tuner, streaming service, etc) than they can over the air. They don't want you watching over the air because they have to guess at it. This is targeted, Google Adsense, level technology. No margin for error.

Why did people assume they had no OTA options? An aggressive marketing plan, by cable & satellite providers, starting a couple years before the big analog broadcast cutoff, convincing consumers that broadcast was going away! If you owned stock in a cable or satellite co. in 2009, you were guaranteed a very. good. year.


In 2010-2011, when I mentioned to friends and associates how I received my TV, their JAWS DROPPED. I just gave them a smug smile and a thumbs-up! Were these the same people who were convinced that Saddam Hussein orchestrated the 9/11 attacks? Who knows...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:52 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top