About the Voom Channels, Seriously

[Sapient]

Noun: medium (media,mediums) meedeeum

Good lord. I'm going to use an example that I think you can understand.

Consider a show, created to be shown in HD, about the art of painting Because this show was created for HD, it shows very detailed images of the brush strokes. The HD film work is a part of the content. It becomes a different show if it is in SD.

The visuals of a TV show are a part of the content of that show. When you change the visuals, you change the content. If you can't understand the importance of the visuals to the content, and that HD is not the same as SD, you are in the wrong forum.

 

[Ronnie-]

I'm going to post the question to you, yet again, in the futile hope you will actually read it.

"Would you folks that really like Voom, still watch the channels if they were only in SD?"

Note that the word "content" is not in the question. If I answer "no", does that mean the I don't like the content? If that was your conclusion, you would be wrong. I might refuse to watch and SD, regardless of quality of content.

If I answer "yes", does that mean I find the content is good? You'd be wrong to assume so. I might watch Voom because my wife likes shows on fashion.

If the OP wanted to know if we thought the content on Voom was good, he should have asked about content. He did, however, say he was trying to find out what we thought of content with his question. This is why not one person answered with just a "yes or no". Because there was disconnect between the question and the topic, a larger explanation is required.

Everyone here, aside from you, finds this obvious.

Ok, throw the content part that i asked out.
You posted the question, you obviously read it. How is it not a yes or no question. You assume someone would infer something from a yes or no answer. Who cares? Let them.
You could say no, and then if you felt the need to explain, thats good. Or yes, then if you felt the need to explain, get after it. I saw very few people do that. I did see alot of people get defensive over a very simple question, and run this thread in a endless circle of asking and saying the same thing over and over.
You are correct, i threw in content later as a follow up to the original question. No one seemed to be able to get that one either.

 

[Sapient]

Ok, throw the content part that i asked out.
You posted the question, you obviously read it. How is it not a yes or no question. You assume someone would infer something from a yes or no answer.

Who said it was not a yes or no question? If you would just read what people say, you would not have this confusion.

Why do I "infer" the OP is trying to draw a conclusion about content? Because he says so. Here is the question, with the the next sentence included.

"Would you folks that really like Voom, still watch the channels if they were only in SD? I think that when I hear the arguments about content I wonder if the answers are really about content at all"

Even you, throughout this thread, have known the OP was trying to find out what we thought about the content of Voom. You understood this to the extent that you could not see the question did not directly ask about content.

You didn't "throw in content later". It was a part of the original post.

As to why I care? Well, if I didn't care what conclusion a person might draw from my answer, I wouldn't answer. Most of us don't post just to hear ourselves type. We are interested in communicating. We try to get ideas across to other people.

 

[Ronnie-]

Good lord. I'm going to use an example that I think you can understand.

Consider a show, created to be shown in HD, about the art of painting Because this show was created for HD, it shows very detailed images of the brush strokes. The HD film work is a part of the content. It becomes a different show if it is in SD.

The visuals of a TV show are a part of the content of that show. When you change the visuals, you change the content. If you can't understand the importance of the visuals to the content, and that HD is not the same as SD, you are in the wrong forum.

What does the part you qoted have to do with your statement here??

I have explained to you many times I know the difference between HD and SD. Yet you explain it away over and over. Whats your point? HD looks better than SD sure. No one says it didnt.
Some of the channels though were put together with more than just visuals in mind. Many of the Kung fu movies were shot before anyone had heard of HD.
The sports on Rush, i doubt that the were created because someone was broadcasting in HD.
Film Fest shows alot of classics that were shot when "gasp" there was no HD.
Same with Monsters. The content on them is EXACTLY the same as it was when it was shot. Its just now shown in HD.
Does that make them more appealing? Now is the question clear?

 

[Sapient]

What does the part you qoted have to do with your statement here??

I have explained to you many times I know the difference between HD and SD. Yet you explain it away over and over. Whats your point? HD looks better than SD sure. No one says it didnt.
Some of the channels though were put together with just visuals in mind. Many of the Kung fu movies were shot before anyone had heard of HD.
The sports on Rush, i doubt that the were created because someone was broadcasting in HD.
Film Fest shows alot of classics that were shot when "gasp" there was no HD.
Same with Monsters. The content on them is EXACTLY the same as it was when it was shot. Its just now shown in HD.
Does that make them more appealing? Now is the question clear?

The content is NOT exactly the same. The visuals are a part of the content. Change the visuals, you change the content. Movies in HD are far closer to the original than the same movie in SD. I won't watch movies in SD on TV (though I will watch upscaled DVD's). The content is changed too much. Which content? The visuals.

Here is another way to think about it. Consider a movie like The Wizard of Oz. Would it be the same movie if it were all in black and white? No. The color is an important part of the content. The movie is changed if the land of Oz is not in color. What if you showed it without sound. Again, this changes the content of the movie. Likewise, the content changes when you move it to HD from film, and to SD from HD. I will watch the Wizard of Oz in HD. I won't watch it in SD. I do watch it for the content.

 

[Ronnie-]

The content is NOT exactly the same. The visuals are a part of the content. Change the visuals, you change the content. Movies in HD are far closer to the original than the same movie in SD. I won't watch movies in SD on TV (though I will watch upscaled DVD's). The content is changed too much. Which content? The visuals.

Here is another way to think about it. Consider a movie like The Wizard of Oz. Would it be the same movie if it were all in black and white? No. The color is an important part of the content. The movie is changed if the land of Oz is not in color. What if you showed it without sound. Again, this changes the content of the movie. Likewise, the content changes when you move it to HD from film, and to SD from HD. I will watch the Wizard of Oz in HD. I won't watch it in SD. I do watch it for the content.

I guess our confusion is coming from how you define content. I mean plot, story, acting, the meat of the show. The visuals IMO add to the experience but they cant change the story. And the examples you are using werent shot with HD visuals in mind, so they were MEANT to be shown in Sd so to speak, they are just prettier now. The story is what holds people interest after all of the luster of visuals goes away. THAT never changes.

We should probably just agree to disagree. correct?

 

[Sammy033]

All this discussion reminds me of South Park last week. The military turns to Hollywood for ideas on fighting the terrorists holding hostages in Imaginationland. Michael Bay comes up with explosions, giant meteors, fighting robots and the like. The general in charge says "Those arent ideas. Those are special effects." Bay replies "I... I dont understand the difference". General: "I know you dont. Get him out of here!".

 

[markh]

I'll try to make the OP happy and answer his question with a yes. I was a little leary of what the Voom channels would be like after reading all the knocks on here. I would still watch a lot of the stuff on Rave if it was SD and there are some good movies that I would watch. The sports channel has some NASCAR stuff that I try to catch, too. That said, if I have a choice, I'd rather watch it in HD. I have a feeling that's not the answer he wants to hear.

 

[Ronnie-]

I'll try to make the OP happy and answer his question with a yes. I was a little leary of what the Voom channels would be like after reading all the knocks on here. I would still watch a lot of the stuff on Rave if it was SD and there are some good movies that I would watch. The sports channel has some NASCAR stuff that I try to catch, too. That said, if I have a choice, I'd rather watch it in HD. I have a feeling that's not the answer he wants to hear.

It may not be but thats what i wanted to hear(which doesnt mean i wanted to hear its good or bad). Thank you for the honest insightful answer

 

[FlyingJ]

I'll try to make the OP happy and answer his question with a yes. I was a little leary of what the Voom channels would be like after reading all the knocks on here. I would still watch a lot of the stuff on Rave if it was SD and there are some good movies that I would watch. The sports channel has some NASCAR stuff that I try to catch, too. That said, if I have a choice, I'd rather watch it in HD. I have a feeling that's not the answer he wants to hear.

Actually, I wasn't looking for any particular answer except an honest one. Thanks for giving us that.