Everybody complaints about WFN, but where is the HD content on BravoHD?
- Thread starter Sean Mota
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 65
- Views 6K
Bravo will get its content going so give em time. Even so its the wrong argument. Because Bravo isnt showing enough HD yet doesnt mean the programming is bad. On the other hand, does it really matter if WFN is in HD or not? Either way its a channel I have zero interest in even if the picture looked perfect.
to be honest the new channel I'm MOST impressed with is Cartoon Network. there is NO HD programming on CN but thier upscale is awsome, i was delightfully suprised at the pic quality verses the SD chann. My kids and i watched CN all weekend, i had all but stopped watching the SD chann because the PQ was so bad. And i was in the camp that thought CNHD would be a waste of bandwidth but now it has returned as one of my favorite channels.
Now i need G4HD for Olivia Munn
Now i need G4HD for Olivia Munn
Those of who love watching paint dry in HD might be talked into watching a little fishing occasionally.
I kind of agree. The color is fantastic.
I usually watch CN from my bedroom right before bed on a 4:3 TV fed from a 622 in Single Mode. The TV unsqueezes the picture by default and it looks fantastic.
I've also seen a couple programs that I eventually decided were stretched upconverts, but I really couldn't tell at first. Normally, I spot it instantly.
It is painfully clear what you are doing. You are tearing down the other HD channels in order to further your argument against Dish removing Voom. Whether you mentioned it or not, it was obvious.
you are obviously barking at the wrong tree or you want to hijack this thread to speak about Voom. Please stop the conversation about VOOM. This thread is about Bravo HD.
BTW, Beverly Hills cop II last night on Bravo HD. An HD transfer that has aired numerously time o HDnet movies and the premium channels but yet on Bravo HD was not. Still looking for the first HD program on Bravo HD. Still a waste of channel.
Please refrain from comparing or speaking about VOOM. Why do you feel that you want to hijack this thread to make a comparison.
I would rather Bravo HD give me more than one program per month. Talk about missing the point here.
I think that we are seeing the start of all channels going hd . They are simply putting channel place markers and upconverting the sd picture to hd for now. I'm betting come next decade all of the new programming will most likely be in hd on these channels. But for now is just a matter of securing the hd channel on the cable and satellite services . It is like the transition from black and white to color. It didn't happen over night ,in fact it took like 10 years before everything was in color. Limited Color shows started in the 50s and all tv didn't get really 100% color till the early 70's. Hd started in limited amounts in the late 90s and It will take probably till the next decade or the middle of the next decade before most tv channels are in hd. IT will take probably till the early 2020s before every show on those channels is in hd. There is still a lot of older syndicated programming that will always be in 4 x 3 analog. So black bars for the foreseeable future. The point is be patient because HD is the future and I hear even 3-d hd is coming. Now that would be really cool to see shows in your living room without glasses in 3-d.
The MGM audio thread (started by the same OP) looked little more than a sideways complaint about VOOM.
http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-hd...d-does-not-do-dd5-1-some-movies-whats-up.html
Someone is known to champion OAR for video, but then complains when the (new) provider doesn't convert the audio?
So yeah, I gotta agree that the suspicions voiced by mlb have some merit.
WOW, you people are like Drama queens. Nobody can post negativity about channels here. Again let's keep this post about Bravo HD.
Yeah, Sean's been irritating me lately, but I gotta take his side here. He's got a legitimate complaint, and he made it. I take every post at face value.
It's like if I say I don't like purple in one thread, and I say I like green in another, I'm not saying I like green to put purple in a bad light. I just like green.
EDIT- In fact, Sean is just pointing out OTHER people's prejudice and bias. People have been bitching about WFN, saying it has no HD. But really, they're just bitching about WFN because it's a fishing channel.
It's like if I say I don't like purple in one thread, and I say I like green in another, I'm not saying I like green to put purple in a bad light. I just like green.
EDIT- In fact, Sean is just pointing out OTHER people's prejudice and bias. People have been bitching about WFN, saying it has no HD. But really, they're just bitching about WFN because it's a fishing channel.
So bizarre. Bravo HD used to be HD 24/7 back when hardly anyone got it.
How is it we have hundreds more channels than we did 20 years ago, but there's actually fewer niche's served. I mean, what's the real difference between, say, Bravo, VH1 and E!? 20 years ago, they were all completely different. Now, their programming is interchangable.
Didn't the original Bravo HD get changed over to one of the other stations. I think it became Universal HD. Also even the SD content was changed a lot after it was bought.
