|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 1:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
The point is I watch everything that really interests me, I don't care about what I haven't seen, and I'm sure not going to spend more money to watch more content when I already am generally quite disinterested in the vast majority of TV programming available today, no matter what name you choose to call it.
To me, either it's a full length feature movie that has been made for the cinema, or it's TV. A made for TV movie? Still TV to me. A long running serial done with cinematic production values? It may be really well done TV, but to me that's still TV.
I don't waste my time bisecting lepines. My home theater, such as it is, is where I watch MOVIES, and nothing else. Movies in the CLASSIC definition. Not today's blurred definition.
Last edited by cmjohnson on Mon Apr 11, 2016 1:53 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
I still watch as much TV as I care to watch. I am utterly disinterested in finding more content to watch when I'm content to watch less content than you do. (A nice little play on multiple meanings of the same word.)
I may miss out on some great shows and even great movies. So what? My choice. I am adequately entertained.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: | | cmjohnson wrote: | | The point is that I completely totally understand what you're saying and still don't care to spend more of my time watching WHATEVER you want to call it, be it TV, a movie, or some hybrid thereof. |
This is confusing.
You said previously movies = good, TV = bad. This doesn't make any sense at all in 2016 and is all that we've been trying to point out. You admit you don't actually subscribe to or get anything that we consider good TV which makes it more confusing why you'd say this given that you've never actually seen anything good on TV. But still for some reason you classify anything that is "TV" as not as good as movies.
I couldn't care less what you watch. Just trying to stop you from making nonsensical statements.
Maybe we have different definitions of TV. Let's just leave it at that. Watch whatever you want.
Kal |
I agree Kal. I would take it one step further in that Chris seemed to imply that watching TV is stupid. To take that a step further, those that watch TV must be stupid as well (see vidiot term).
I don't even have cable/sat. Whatever I want to see, I can get online. I end up watching PBS more than any other channel week in and week out. I should be watching a Nova right now. 
| kal wrote: | That's strange logic, that content made originally for cinema is better. I also believed that 10-15 years ago (because it was true). Not so much today as content delivery has completely changed.
Look up some of your favourite content creators. You'll be surprised to see how many have moved to what you call TV.
Kal |
To add to this, I was listening to a tech podcast recently. It looks as if some of these companies are willing to fund content without a lot of oversight to see what sticks. They have the money, but need content and are willing to spend. Better for us, as it leads to more creative freedom.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 2:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Don't even think that I would even imply that TV watching is stupid. That's ridiculous.
I'm just not interested in it very much. Like I said, left to my own devices, I can go for WEEKS without ever turning the TV on and never care about it.
I'm just interested in using my projector only to watch full length feature movies. That is it, that is all, that is that. I do not go to the local cinema to watch TV, neither do I turn on my projector to watch TV. No matter what your definition of TV is. Which is no concern of mine.
It's for movies, period. I could watch more, I choose not to out of a stunning lack of interest in it.
I think this is a mindset that you find confusing, but just accept it for what it is. I DON'T WANT TO WATCH MORE.
Look at it this way: I don't care what it is, even if it's a marathon of my favorite serial show. I don't want to watch more
than a single hour of "TV" on any single day. And I don't want to watch it on my projector.
PROJECTOR = MOVIE TIME. Chill a beer and warm up the popcorn. It's a special occasion. Like it will be on the day when
I finally have a Porsche 911 in my garage and I back it out on that first Sunday afternoon pleasure drive after I get it. Nowhere to go but open roads with little if any traffic and law enforcement.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cmjohnson wrote: | | Don't even think that I would even imply that TV watching is stupid. That's ridiculous. |
Sure you did. When you started this by saying:
"I do not burn those expensive, limited lifespan CRTs on wastes of time like regular daytime television. Movies only."
We're talking past each other here so it seems pointless. You've never watched good TV content so you assume that all TV content is garbage. I get that. It's myopic and narrow minded, but if you have no exposure to good non-cinematic content then that's what you'd think. I know I would
| Quote: | | I'm just interested in using my projector only to watch full length feature movies. |
What you're not understanding because you've never been exposed to it is that a lot of the best directors who's movies you are enjoying are now going towards putting out 10-part mini series movies on what you call "TV" because 10-12 hours lets them tell a better story, lets them flesh out their characters more.
I love cinema and I love movies but the ~2 hour limit that is imposed by movie theaters because people can't sit in a location longer than that (understandable) means that directors/producers are forced to cut movies short, often leaving on the cutting room floor the best parts of their works of art. The three Lord of the Rings movies are a great example: The theatrical versions didn't do much more me. It wasn't until I saw the much longer "directors cuts" that I "got it" and understood the peril around this ring thing. It's the movies that Peter Jackson wanted to release but wasn't allowed. That's just wrong. That's why I like the idea of TV like HBO and Netflix. It lets me see the content that directors I like are allowed to produce.
Directors and content producers are in love with Netflix, HBO, and other similar venues today because for once they have the budgets to tell their stories and not be limited by what commercial movie theaters want, which is to get new asses in seats every ~2 hours to maximize profits.
When peopel in the world talk about "TV" these days it includes Netflix, HBO and so forth. My issue is that you're definition of TV is from the 1980's because that's probably what you're used to. That's what we're trying to make you understand. That you would actually like what we're talking about when we say when people mean by "TV" today.
We're not trying to tell you to stop watching movies (I love movies). We're trying to say stop being so myopic/narrow minded as there's tons of content out there that we know you'd love. Great example: I love the movie Fargo. There's a mini series out now based on the movie that fans are loving (first season in 2014, second season came out in 2015). It's great stuff and it expands on the general premise and storytelling, phenomenally written and directed. It's on what you like to call "TV", by the FX network.
Name your top 5 or 10 movies. I'm sure we can name some other content (possibly by the same writers/directors) that you'd absolutely love too, but have missed because you think "TV" is not worth it. We're not trying to convert you - we're trying to show content that you'd like that you've probably missed that you would really REALLY like.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
The summary of my story is that I watch all the visual content I want to and don't have any interest in adding more to my list of distractions.
That's it, end of story, no reason to continue.
I'm perfectly happy with my choices. I'm not interested in making any changes. I'm not OPEN to those changes at this point in time, regardless of any recommendations.
Maybe in the future. But not now.
If network TV over cable is any indicators, it's STILL mostly a vast wasteland out there anyway in TV land. Not much that appeals to me.
Don't you think that there have been times when I was bored and would have liked to find something to watch? And, as often as not, when I then
go switching through the almost 2000 total channels in our digital cable system, after running through the blocks that MIGHT have some content that
interests me TWICE, I've just gotten up and headed into the garage or workshop to fix something, straighten up the place, or maybe even start working
on some long-standing, low priority project of mine as there's nothing on that I want to watch. Some people would watch something random anyway, just
because it's something. I won't. That doesn't interest me.
People complain about how some people, kids in particular, are couch potatos, spending too much time glued to the idiot box, not getting enough fresh
air and exercise. I decided years ago that there honestly wasn't enough good TV on to keep me in the easy chair so I broke that chain to the TV and I don't
care how good the new shows might be on Netflix, I'm not going back to that no matter what the name of the content provider is.
The only people I know who watch less TV than I do are homeless. Literally.
And I like it that way.
Sure, I'm missing a lot of content, some of which I probably would like. But I don't care. It's my choice and I'm making it and I don't expect you to follow in my
footsteps nor will I worry about it whether you do or you don't. You can make your own viewing choices. I'm certainly making mine.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garyfritz
Joined: 08 Apr 2006
Posts: 12088
Location: Fort Collins, CO
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cmjohnson wrote: | | The summary of my story is that I watch all the visual content I want to and don't have any interest in adding more to my list of distractions. |
I totally get this. I spend very little time watching ""TV"" or even movies these days. I haven't had any cable, satellite, or other TV source except Netflix for over 5 years, and I don't watch much Netflix. (Often none at all for weeks at a time.) I spend way too damn many hours in front of a computer screen; I don't need or want any excuse to spend even more time in front of a TV screen. I want a life away from screens too.
That said, I agree with Kal &etc that your definition of "TV" is outdated.
| Quote: | If network TV over cable is any indicators, it's STILL mostly a vast wasteland out there anyway in TV land. Not much that appeals to me.
...when I then go switching through the almost 2000 total channels in our digital cable system, [you find garbage] |
Yes, I think everybody here would agree most network & similar TV is garbage. The typical sitcom model has cranked out a lot of worthless dreck.
But it's also true that there is some truly outstanding original content being created for Netflix and other outlets. Don't judge all non-"movie" content by what you see on your cable system.
Whether you want to watch it or not is up to you. But there *IS* excellent content out there on the "TV" channels.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't really doubt that. But I choose not to watch MORE "tv" no matter how you define it. I am sure that by making this choice, I won't see some shows that I would probably enjoy. You don't miss what you aren't aware of.
That's OK, I have plenty of things to enjoy in my life already. Pretty much "full up" on them, actually.
It's my choice to regard using the home theater as a special occasion. And I do that. It's also a special occasion when I decide to sit down and listen to music. Because when I'm doing that, it's not background music that just keeps silence away, it's something
I am really LISTENING to. Audiophile style. But I am a little bit less concerned about my system's ability to fully resolve that farting mosquito flying around the second chair violinist's left ear, with nitpicking precision and accuracy, than SOME audiophools are.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barcodude
Joined: 14 Jun 2014
Posts: 169
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
do they broadcast 1080p tv overthere? only 720p of stupidness overhere with every 15min dumb ass commercials 
and i watch tv on my little old school big and ugly (not even crt) tube tv. Movie's on my bg 801s every 2 weeks with 20.000+
hours on them and still showing a perfect picture 
_________________
Epson EMP TW700 - Projecta HomeScreen Deluxe- Denon a/v receiver - Mission highrisers -klipsch subwoofer - Samsung Bluray player
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2016 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My local provider allegedly broadcasts in 1080p but the picture quality tells me that they're compressing the crap out of it. Glories of HD, looks like standard definition only wider.
Truth is, the cable box can generate 1080p but the signal coming down the pipe is whatever it is, and the cable box just fits it to your screen. The cable box is basically a scaler connected to a cable modem and picture quality is at the mercies of the head end techs, who, I am quite sure, are throttling bandwidth on a per-channel basis.
Of course, not all 2000 channels are being carried into the cable box at any moment. More likely it's just one. But with interactive TV and pay per view and other interactive services, plus such a large customer load, all those extra services probably eat so much available bandwidth that a compromised quality video signal is probably the only kind that they have the bandwidth to deliver to the home.
When I was a kid we had three VHF and one UHF channel to watch, over the air. There seemed to be enough TV to watch.
Then we got 13 channel cable. Now this digital absurdity.
I don't really think that there's a proportionately larger number of good shows to watch.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AnalogRocks
Forum Moderator
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 26706
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
TV/Projector: Sony 1252Q, AMPRO 4000G
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nightly. Burn the crap outta the tube watching old TVshows on METV ( Incredible Hulk and Columbo anyone? ) DVD box sets ( on season 5 of Rescue me and Season 2 of Ripper Street in the 6 disk DVD changer ) OTA ATSC CW for Supernatural, The Flash, and iZombie. ROKU for HULU Greys Anatomy, Lucifer, and Hawaii 5-0.
We also have a 32" CRT TV for daytime stuff too.
This past weekend I had 4screens running. a 1985 14"CRT TV on OTA ATSC METV, a 2002 Dell Triniton CRT monitor streaming TV shows from the PC, a 7" LCD with an Android streaming box running into it watching HDTV Canada via Compsite and a 19" LCD/DVD combo TV I picked up surfing Thrift watching DVD's.
Then at night the Sony D50 get's fired back up again and it repeats.
I love TV. 
_________________
Tech support for nothing
CRT.
HD done right!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
LOVE the reel to reel tape deck!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garyfritz wrote: | I agree with Kal &etc that your definition of "TV" is outdated.
Whether you want to watch it or not is up to you. But there *IS* excellent content out there on the "TV" channels. |
| cmjohnson wrote: | | I don't really doubt that. |
Perfect. That was the only point I was trying to make: That your previous comment that all TV is crap isn't true. Has nothing to do with how much content you already enjoy and so forth. Watch what you want.
| barcodude wrote: | | do they broadcast 1080p tv overthere? only 720p of stupidness overhere with every 15min dumb ass commercials |
My satellite provider's been pushing 1080i since about 2000. I believe it may be 1080p now (actually not even sure as I don't watch much regular network TV that that we get on satellite). Netflix does up to 4K however.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: | | garyfritz wrote: | I agree with Kal &etc that your definition of "TV" is outdated.
Whether you want to watch it or not is up to you. But there *IS* excellent content out there on the "TV" channels. |
| cmjohnson wrote: | | I don't really doubt that. |
Perfect. That was the only point I was trying to make: That your previous comment that all TV is crap isn't true. Has nothing to do with how much content you already enjoy and so forth. Watch what you want.
|
Agreed!
| Quote: |
| barcodude wrote: | | do they broadcast 1080p tv overthere? only 720p of stupidness overhere with every 15min dumb ass commercials |
My satellite provider's been pushing 1080i since about 2000. I believe it may be 1080p now (actually not even sure as I don't watch much regular network TV that that we get on satellite). Netflix does up to 4K however.
Kal |
Since you said broadcast, I will guess you meant OTA. Technically, cable/sat/OTA are just distributing the content (see what I did there  ). Right now, the ATSC spec gives us 1080i or 720p for OTA. If the local channel doesn't doesn't mess with the signal (ie bit starve it) and the network gives a good feed, then it can look really good. The Super Bowl for instance really looked nice, because CBS wanted to make sure it looked its best.
I forgot to add that a new ATSC spec is in the works. My guess is it won't be available till the end of the decade. They will be moving to UHD and H265 codec.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC_standards#ATSC_3.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
