ESPN HD Is Brain Dead!

[MJConroy]

ESPN is stretching the picture on their HD channel all the time! So when they are not transmitting in HD, the aspect ratio is screwed up! Think I'm joking? - check their web site:

http://espn.go.com/espnhd/ask_expert.html


"When ESPN Is Not Originally Producing An Event In HDTV, Why Do You Stretch The Picture To The 16:9 Format?

We have found that most consumers with HDTV want to "set it and forget it" when it comes to stretching original 4x3 video to the 16x9 format. We also have a series of on-screen features (bottom line information throughout some programs like Baseball Tonight…interspersed on other programs at 28 and 58 minute past the hour) for which ESPN desires a consistent look and spacing for information and for the sponsors of those on-air graphics and features. It is important to ESPN to transmit a consistent 24:7 signal to all consumers nationwide for continuity of service and viewer satisfaction for the majority of consumers with HDTV sets. We also use equipment for this "upconversion to 720p" and "stretching 4:3 to 16:9" which is of a quality far superior to that contained within consumer HDTV units. "

I called and told them this was stupid! You should too!

[57U]

There are a quite number of people who would disagree with you. Most people stretch their 4:3 SD images to fill a 16:9 set, so having it "pre-done" on HD is "good" since most HDTVs cannot stretch HD images.

People don't want "black bars" due to burn in concerns.

If more HDTVs could stretch HD signals, then I'd agree with you - let each person decide, unfortunately, that's not the case. The ESPN response is also correct in that it provides a "continuity" so that people don't have to be changing the aspect ratio themselves all the time.

You'll probably find a number of people on both sides of this argument.

[alpha21]

unfortunately

conroy is right (about everyone being ticked off about this)

not me though, I have no problem with it, but everyone continually makes topics about this and fight back and forth.

[Ratman]

IMO... if you pay extra for HD programming, it should all be HD or at least priced accordingly. I feel that DirecTV has used ESPN-HD as an enticement/leverage to subscribers for financial gain and offset costs.

I feel that this was/is misleading and you are all getting raked over the coals.

Just my $.02

[alpha21]

Originally posted by Ratman
IMO... if you pay extra for HD programming, it should all be HD or at least priced accordingly. I feel that DirecTV has used ESPN-HD as an enticement/leverage to subscribers for financial gain and offset costs.

I feel that this was/is misleading and you are all getting raked over the coals.

Just my $.02

57U
this is exactly what I was talking about!

nobody even mentioned the QUANTITY of HD programming (we are talking about STRETCHING) but everyone turns this topic into a total ***** session

[MJConroy]

Well, if I were paying extra just to get ESPN HD, I'd be even more upset, luckily I'm not.

I can understand the "continuity" argument, but I still think it's wrong to transmit an incorrect aspect ratio the vast majority of the time. If they were only stretching for 10% of the time, I would not mind.

And since Comcast can't seem to get me a strong enough non-digital channel signal, I have to choose from either a lousy 4:3 picture or a sharp but streched HD channel picture.

[kevinw]

Originally posted by alpha21
this is exactly what I was talking about!

nobody even mentioned the QUANTITY of HD programming (we are talking about STRETCHING) but everyone turns this topic into a total ***** session [/B]

Actually by saying that ESPN is stretching non Hd content that implies they are not showing HD. If the content is not HD and the are stretching programs quite often then the quantity of HD is limited...Don't get your knickers in a twist both the stretching and the lack of content is related.

[Tom]

what's even sadder is I walked in to an HH Gregg store recently and they actually were using ESPN HD to show off their HD sets.............. ha!

[Mike71]

The way I see it is if you don't like them stretching it, just tune to the regular ESPN channel in 4X3. Am I missing something??

[Tom]

Originally posted by Mike71
The way I see it is if you don't like them stretching it, just tune to the regular ESPN channel in 4X3. Am I missing something??

yeah, the fact Direct TV charges extra for this.........

[MJM3000]

Better late than never... I've been meaning to drop by the forum for about 1 month now, but I haven't been online much recently.

How intersting that the main reason I am stopping by tonight has to do with this exact thread. I'm glad I didn't have to create a new thread, and I can just post in this one.

Unless I'm missing something, I'm somewhat surprised that more people aren't annoyed by this. From day one, whenever I would turn on ESPN HD, it was blatantly obvious to me that it was a stretched 4:3 screen. Damn, it looks so horrible to me. I guess this means I'm one of those people *****ing.

Of course, they do occasiaonlly broadcast in genuine widescreen, and when they do so, I've enjoyed the results.

I'm in the same boat as MJConroy. If I were paying extra money specifically for this channel, I would be ultra pissed!

MJM

[Tom]

Originally posted by MJM3000
Better late than never... I've been meaning to drop by the forum for about 1 month now, but I haven't been online much recently.

How intersting that the main reason I am stopping by tonight has to do with this exact thread. I'm glad I didn't have to create a new thread, and I can just post in this one.

Unless I'm missing something, I'm somewhat surprised that more people aren't annoyed by this. From day one, whenever I would turn on ESPN HD, it was blatantly obvious to me that it was a stretched 4:3 screen. Damn, it looks so horrible to me. I guess this means I'm one of those people *****ing.

Of course, they do occasiaonlly broadcast in genuine widescreen, and when they do so, I've enjoyed the results.

I'm in the same boat as MJConroy. If I were paying extra money specifically for this channel, I would be ultra pissed!

MJM

well, thanks for rubbing it in, MJM........... ;)

[Jean-Luc PIGard]

ESPN-HD and they hardly ever broadcast in HD. They just stretch the SD picture and hope we don't notice. I am not paying for it yet...6 mo free on Cox, but if this continues, I will not pay and will just watch regular ESPN.

I have a 4:3 TV , so when they stretch the SD picture, I can just zoom it to full screen...but I might as well just stay on regular ESPN. And when they DO broadcast in HD, so far all I have seen is football, they waste the extra screen on the offensive side when they could zoom in closer. Their time and down icon also is not in the corner but almost in the middle. I guess they crop the HD image down for the SD channel so they just give you some extra turf area in the wide screen picture. My TV is too small to watch it this way. You really need a big screen to watch ESPN HD.

They are the worst of all the HD channels out so far, IMO.

PIGard out.

[raidbuck]

I guess because I get ESPN-HD free as part of Comcast's standard package I'm more tolerant.

To my mind, live sports is the best example of original HD, and while only one or two games a week are now being shown, that is more than I would see otherwise. I bought my TV for now and the future, and within a year I probably won't be watching any SD at all. Besides, on my TV the digital signal on ESPN-HD comes in better than the analog anyway (DLP, cable).

I'm also lucky that my TV allows me to change the ratio to 4:3 with bars, and the picture is pretty good.

Rich N.

[billw]

Watching the Terps upset the Gators last night in HD!!!!

That made it all good....i forgot about the regulary stretched material!

[Zoetermeer]

I like the fact that ESPN HD stretches it out, even if the line about sophisticated equipment used to do this is total bogus. And soon enough, a majority of their programming will be in HD.

I do think ESPN should have waited to launch their HD channel until they finished building that new facility. If you can't broadcast everything in HD, don't advertise as if you can. It should be called "ESPN 4:3 Stretched". They should just keep what they have for now, and simulcast their HD events on another channel, sort of like the NFL network does.

[raidbuck]

I disagree. Since I don't have to pay extra for ESPN-HD my views may be different than others.

I think ESPN was right in launching their system with only 1 or 2 events a week. I've got enjoyment from their products since Comcast got it.

I don't know why people have such a difficult time accepting that there are still a limited number of mobile HD facilities, they are very expensive, and it takes time to build an HD network.

Next year will be much better and hopefully ESPN will have learned during this year to make 2004 exceptional.

Rich N.

[Parker Lewis]

So let me get this straight, ONLY the events posted on their HD Schedule are actually IN HD!?

HD Schedule:
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tvlistings/espnhd/espnHDStory?id=1635015


I want to get this straight before I invite my buddies over to watch a game in HD and they think "Hell this looks about like mine". I would rather they be like :bow:

Thanks

[hferris]

Originally posted by Parker Lewis
So let me get this straight, ONLY the events posted on their HD Schedule are actually IN HD!?

HD Schedule:
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tvlistings/espnhd/espnHDStory?id=1635015


I want to get this straight before I invite my buddies over to watch a game in HD and they think "Hell this looks about like mine". I would rather they be like :bow:

Thanks
That is correct. Everything that is not listed is streched SD. Make sure you check the schedule before inviting anyone over to show off HD or they will think it sucks.

[PDTECRJ]

If more HDTVs could stretch HD signals, then I'd agree with you

Well, I've sold Electronics and HDTVs for the last 2 years now, and every single HD/HD Ready TV we sell/sold except for 3 Sony 4:3 ratio TVs have allowed the aspect to be changed on the TV. And the Sony TVs that didn't allow it were CRT TV's, so screen burn wouldn't be an issue anyways. I agree that ESPN should leave it in a 4:3 ratio and just allow the user to change it themselves.

[sto22]

They can stretch a HD 4:3 broadcast?

If I had a HD 4:3 signal to test on my set, I'd have to call you on this, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

What source material do you use in the store to accomplish this?

BTW - I just got my SAT-HD300 (upgraded from HD200).

It allows you to squeeze HD 16:9 material into a 4:3 format? I guess this is for the HD 4:3 TV sets out there?

sto22

[summerfun]

Originally posted by PDTECRJ
If more HDTVs could stretch HD signals, then I'd agree with you

Well, I've sold Electronics and HDTVs for the last 2 years now, and every single HD/HD Ready TV we sell/sold except for 3 Sony 4:3 ratio TVs have allowed the aspect to be changed on the TV. And the Sony TVs that didn't allow it were CRT TV's, so screen burn wouldn't be an issue anyways. I agree that ESPN should leave it in a 4:3 ratio and just allow the user to change it themselves.

You are speaking about SD channels. You cannot stretch the HD channels on most TVs becasue the black bar is part of the signal. Unlike the black bar generated by the TV on a 4:3 channels.

[sto22]

Who's broadcasting HD material in 4:3 with the black bars part of the signal?

sto22

[Parker Lewis]

Originally posted by sto22
Who's broadcasting HD material in 4:3 with the black bars part of the signal?

sto22

None have done it that I have seen. Sometimes it will switch to 4:3 when something comes on an HD channel that is not HD, But thats because it was not originally made for HD.

In ESPN's case, They stretch ALL material on their HD channel whether its in HD or not.

Does not bother me to much though...My Hitachi has an EXCELLENT stretch mode.:rockon:

[summerfun]

I was talking about SD 4:3 programs being broadcast on HD 16:9 channels.

[mase63425]

Espn-HD will be showing 2 NBA games in HD tonight so you cant beat that. Im from ny and I pay extra for Espn with Direct-tv Hopefully Cablievision will hurry up and get it so i can get rid of direct tv. But its still worth it to me to watch about 4 or 5 games a week in hd on espn. I work during the day so i can catch all the Hd games after work at night. Mostly college hoops and NBA games. But between Cablevision and Direct-tv I have about 16 HD channels to watch.

[dmlove]

Duke v. Wake Forest last night in HD was fantastic (this from a Stanford fan)!

[Parker Lewis]

Originally posted by dmlove
Duke v. Wake Forest last night in HD was fantastic (this from a Stanford fan)!

YES, It was quite an amazing picture and very professionally done as well.:)

I sure hope they start doing more games in HD.

Its funny how with HD it really depends on the signal and quality of programming as to how well it looks.

[LRK84]

Espn-HD will be showing 2 NBA games in HD tonight so you cant beat that

It even says it on HDTVGalaxy.
But I am getting NHL instead of the NBA Games.
Whats up with that?

[hawk]

the 2 nba games are tonight not last night

[biffsbiz]

MJConroy:bow: is correct. Switch to 4:3 SD if you can't broadcast 16:9 HD. There is no such thing as 16:9 SD. It just makes ESPN look stupid. "Set it and forget it"? Have a little more respect for your customers, ESPN. "ESPN Intelligence" That's oxymoronic.

[vurbano]

The problem, (or scam) is that espnHD is mostly upconverted sd bologna. When you put the letters HD after something it should be like 90-100% HD. maybe they should call it "espnHDsometimes" Funny how HDNET is HD and espnHD isnt usually. My theroy is they are upconverting everything to 720p so they can justify the HD after their names ...lmao. how moronic.

[mase63425]

Espn hasnt been to bad with the HD content. They have been showing about 3 or 4 games in HD a week. You still got to understand that HD cameras and HD vans arent cheap so they cant show everything in HD they would go out of business. Now if only Cablevision can work out a deal with them so I can get rid of my DirectTV. As time goes by and things get cheaper in HD you will see more and more stuff from Espn-HD in HD besides Sportscenter should be broadcasting in HD this year.

[vurbano]

wow 3-4 HD games a week, well that certainly is like 16 hours of programming out of 168 a week. I guess they have a right to put HD after their name. lmao. Guess what? UPN does a couple movies a week and star trek in HD maybe they should too?

[mase63425]

Nobody watches UPN for HD come on get real. :sleeping:

[vurbano]

maybe so but their amount of HD programming qualifies them to call themselves UPNHD by espn's standards, well after they upconvert and stretch everything.

[dmlove]

I get two ESPN channels (well, a lot more if you include ESPN2, Classic, News, etc, but just 2 regular ESPN). One of those is not HD. One of those is HD or not depending on the availability of HD programming. Sure I'd prefer that there were MORE HD programming available, but in the meantime, its fair for ESPN to call that channel ESPNHD, because its not the regular channel, and it is the only place you can see ESPNHD programming that IS availalble

[Parker Lewis]

Their tournement coverage has been pretty good over the last couple of days.

Some of the games look great while others look kinda bland.

[biffsbiz]

I have no idea why any of you guys would ever want to watch any image stretched? This is not rocket science. They don't have to stretch SD 4:3 to SD 16:9. They can simply broadcast the SOB in it's native ratio. Why would anyone ever watch a stretched (or squeezed, depending on your viewpoint) video feed? That's totally moronic. What they are doing is stupid and anyone that supports it is really really stupid.

Mark

[Tom]

and ESPN stretching it for us (because they know what looks best for us), STILL sucks!

The sad fact is, there are alot of regular tv viewers out there who don't even realize how bad it looks. Prime example: sitting in a sports bar last Friday getting ready to watch the first round of the SEC tournament.

I look up at the Mits. widescreen in front of us and we're watching ESPN and I'm sitting there shaking my head at the short, squatty players running down the court. Over to our left is another HD set with a true HD game on - like night and day. So I say to my buddies, "hey guys, how do you like those short, chunky players the teams have on that set in front of us?"

:confused:

As they looked dumbfounded at me, I said: "hey, look over to your left - that is what we call high definition, note the stunning crispness, clarity, and everything is in proper size - see that in front of us? that is what we call ESPN stretching the damn picture - looks lovely, doesn't it?"

:rolleyes:

At this point, the boys got a lesson in hdtv - it's obvious that many people think just because it fills the screen it's 'hdtv'....... until they see it side by side, then they see what all the hoopla is about. (sorry, had to use that adjective)

My point is, they can fool the uneducated viewers some of the time, but as more people learn about what hdtv should look like, ESPN is going to look even more ridiculous!

:wave:

[raidbuck]

I guess I'll have to defend ESPN. Many people complain about the amount of HD. I appreciate that they started showing HD when they did (I got it in August) even though they were very limited. But when football started that allowed them to increase their coverage. During the basketball season it seemed that a least 4 days a week had an HD game. Hopefully they'll have more than one baseball game a week in HD, and their studio shows will be in HD in a month or so.

As far as stretching, I usually just leave it stretched because the digital picture is a little better than their SD picture through Comcast. But I can either watch the SD channel or make ithe digital 4:3 via my DLP aspect options. I don't find it a problem at all. I surely can't figure out what the big issue is.

Rich N.

[vurbano]

again another reason to not put HD in their name. they dont have a clue what it is supposed to be if they feel strectching an sd signal to 16:9 then upconverting it is acceptable.

As for basketball, I find that the NCAA player look like WIllie Wonka's chocolate factory elves. oompa oompa

[Tom]

I don't find it a problem at all. I surely can't figure out what the big issue is.

===========

that it looks distorted and it's not HD...........

if you can't see that all the players look like more like midget wrestlers than lanky basketball players, and that the court appears to be more rectangular than usual, then, hey, our debate is not worth having.........:boxer:

perhaps ESPN figures that guys that watch sports are too busy drinking Bud and after a few of those we won't notice how CRAPPY their stretched picture looks........ :cheers:

personally, I'd rather see bars on the sides and people look normal than watch midgets dunking the ball and laughing my ass off........but then again, you know my motto about stretching......

:mad:

[chasfh]

Originally posted by PDTECRJ
If more HDTVs could stretch HD signals, then I'd agree with you

Well, I've sold Electronics and HDTVs for the last 2 years now, and every single HD/HD Ready TV we sell/sold except for 3 Sony 4:3 ratio TVs have allowed the aspect to be changed on the TV. And the Sony TVs that didn't allow it were CRT TV's, so screen burn wouldn't be an issue anyways. I agree that ESPN should leave it in a 4:3 ratio and just allow the user to change it themselves.

CBS, NBC, etc. manage to show true 16:9 when HD is on, while showing 4:3 with gray or black bars when it is not. Why ESPN does not allow this is beyond me. They clearly believe that people who own this equipment, who are on the cutting edge of technology and prefers to make this kind of choice on their own, are part of the LCD (i.e., lowest common denominator).

But this also appears to be a decision being made at the corporate level as well, because another Arm Of the Mouse, ABC, does exactly the same thing, stretching 4:3 programming to 16:9. Or at least the ABC O&O in Chicago does. Very irritating.

Chuck

[vurbano]

no one stretches here

[Parker Lewis]

Really the stretching is not an issue for me, I usually watch all my SD programming in stretch mode anyways.

You kinda get used to it after awhile + my set really makes it a non issue.

Plus it is usually best to leave it in stretch mode anyways to prevent burn in.

[Tom]

that most of us on this particular site would consider ourselves a bit on the perfectionist side when it comes to the quality of the television picture we want?

Why would we go to all the expense and trouble to set up our systems for the best possible picture?

Why then, would we settle for a picture that is, first of all, stretched wider than it should be, and second, compresses all the characters on that picture?

My arguement is, that if we didn't give a damn about whether the picture we're watching is unnaturally distorted, then why bother even use a set as expensive as an HDTV one to watch an inferior broadcast? Why not just go back to a 13" black and white if it doesn't matter?

Yes, stretching would eliminate burn-in (not on my set - I could care less), but why should you be FORCED to watch it that way?

Stretching sucks and so does ESPN when they do it.

:whistle:

[biffsbiz]

Originally posted by Parker Lewis
Really the stretching is not an issue for me, I usually watch all my SD programming in stretch mode anyways.

You kinda get used to it after awhile + my set really makes it a non issue.

Plus it is usually best to leave it in stretch mode anyways to prevent burn in.

:rofl2: Parker :rofl2: Parker :rofl2: Parker :rofl2:

A non-issue? You get used to it?

With my equipment I can unsqueeze and/or unstretch and/or add grey bars. It might be a non-issue for me as well if I thought that the anyone else could do this. Viewers with scan conversion equipment and adjustable ratio viewing appliances are a minor part of the viewing public. Maybe 5%. Most people have equipment that was designed for the SD/HD specifications. The specifications do not call for a set to unstretch 16:9. Consequently no set was built with that capability. Consequently ESPN thinks that since us morons have watched crappy TV for 60 years, we'll surely get "kinda used" to even crappier TV now while they pretend to be offering something meaningful with SD 4:3 stretched to SD 16:9. Actual real SD a6:9 is acceptable. Actual real SD 4:3 is acceptable. What ESPN is doing is not f***ing accepable d***it!
__________________
Runco/Faroujda/Da-lite
---100" & 1000 lumens
Pioneer HD 50" Plasma
---multi use video & 3 CPUs
Computers w/DVD/RW
---1gb P4:2.4ghz ATI9800 AinWdual
Theta/Krell/B&W audio
---3500 watt truly pristine
---five (5) B&W 800 subwoofers
---seven (7) B&W 800 speakers

[biffsbiz]

ESPN wrote to me:
------------------------
"Thank you for your e-mail. We have shared your comments with the appropriate personnel for ESPN HD.

Currently, ESPN HD is a simulcast service of ESPN. Until ESPN HD is a 24-hour, 7-day-a-week network of original 16:9 high efinition programming, we are converting and stretching the 4:3 programming not originally produced in 16:9 to fit the format.

We are doing this for consistency and to protect the integrity of our various feature components, such as our BottomLine and 28/58 news inserts, and various studio updates that will continue to be produced in 4:3 until the ESPN Digital Center opens later this year, even during events produced in 16:9.

Sincerely,
ESPN Viewer Response"
-----------------------------

I asked why they are stretching the image and not leaving it 4:3. Their answer was:

"We are doing this for consistency and to protect the integrity of our various feature components, such as our BottomLine and 28/58 news inserts, and various studio updates that will continue to be produced in 4:3 until the ESPN Digital Center opens later this year, even during events produced in 16:9"

What the f**k are they talking about? All of this is better preserved by leaving it 4:3.

What morons!

[Tom]

AMEN!

maybe you ought to cut and paste them the comments from here...........

[biffsbiz]

As I mentioned, I wrote to ESPN about this. This was their response (highlighting of text added by me):
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Thank you for your e-mail. We have shared your comments with the appropriate personnel for ESPN HD.

Currently, ESPN HD is a simulcast service of ESPN. Until ESPN HD is a 24-hour, 7-day-a-week network of original 16:9 high definition programming, we are converting and stretching the 4:3 programming not originally produced in 16:9 to fit the format.

We are doing this for consistency and to protect the integrity of our various feature components, such as our BottomLine and 28/58 news inserts, and various studio updates that will continue to be produced in 4:3 until the ESPN Digital Center opens later this year, even during events produced in 16:9"
--------------------------------------------------------------------
So I wrote to them again. This is what I wrote (these highlights and the ones above were included in my response):

This is obviously incorrect.

1. Consistency is actually lost since you are distorting some of your program material and not other material. Broadcasting 16:9 material at 16:9 and broadcasting 4:3 material at 4:3 would be consistent. This would consistently maintain correct proportions.

2. Integrity is lost when an HD channel broacasts SD 4:3 at an HD 16:9 ratio since there is no HD being broadcast. "BottomLine and 28/58 news inserts, and various studio updates [are] continu[ing] to be produced in 4:3". Integrity is maintained if you broacast these SD 4:3 programs at SD 4:3. Either way, no material is cropped. I assune this is what you were alluding to.

HDNet, HBO, Showtime and all other HD broadcasters provide all of their programming with consistency and integrety in the correct original program ratio. There is no integrity lost or consistency lost when a program is broadcast in it's true ratio. These channels broadcast in many different ratios because the material is made available to them in many different ratios. ---- Movie film is produced in numerous ratios and seldom is it originally 16:9. ---- They maintain these various ratios. None of them has ever stretched anything or squeezed anything. They don't distort the image.

Why then does ESPN have this need to distort the image? Since your original material is 4:3, leave it 4:3. Preserve the ratio. Don't distort it.

The answer you gave certainly did not address the question.

Thanks for listening. I hope you pass this on, and that a consequential response will be forthcoming.


(please note: some additional editing was done prior to this post... well... some was done after I posted this post too... heee heee)

[vurbano]

its laughable. Do you realize the reason they are giving for screwing up the picture is to preserve the integrity of their little ticker at the bottom? Shows where their priorities are.

[biffsbiz]

The ticker isn't lost if they don't distort.

[Tom]

Hey Biffster.............why don't you give us all the email addy and person you talked to at ESPN so some of us can put in our .02 worth to them?

:cheers:

[biffsbiz]

I had to sign up for ESPN Viewer Zone at http://www.espnviewerzone.com/. This was no big deal. It's free. This would probably be the best way to actually get a response. Alternately, you could try bypassing this and using one of the following e-mail addresses. I have no idea if they will respond if you aren't a member.

askespntv@espn.twdc.com*
comments@espnviewerzone.com
support@espnviewerzone.com

*The first e-mail address is the one that I officially used.

Within ESPN Viewer Zone there is a chat forum just like this one. It is called The Players Bench. Try this link: http://www.espnviewerzone.com/forum/. There is some discussion about this topic in there. My posts are prevelant.