WONDER WHY consumer's are confused?
 

This year's Rose Bowl parade has been on for 15 minutes now. I don't know who this guy is, but the logo on his mic should confuse the heck out of another 100,000 TV owners. HD on a CT-100? :D

Wow, Pete, that's really neat...I didn't know CT-100s were "HD ready"...<grin>

special space age decoder !!!!

That RCA is future proof! :scratch2:

When I was 8 or so I didn't understand why the shows they announced as being "In Color" weren't, of course we had a B&W TV at the time. :D

Back when they decided to upgrade from 441 lines to 525 lines, they called it "high defination" or "high resolution". :D

The CT-100 screen shot next to the hi-tech, hi-falutin' rootin'-tootin' HDTV speaks volumes...HDTV IS a little better than NTSC, but it ain't the Second Coming like they'd have us believe...

Two comments:

I notice the larger set has a "HD" bug in the corner, but the 100 just has the ABC ball. Is this how we tell a HD broadcast from a NTSC?

I also notice that the announcer's head is turned slightly from one shot to the other... Because HD or NTSC is "delayed"?

It would be interesting to see something displayed on the HD set that only used, say 10" of the screen, (about 25% of it's size) and then the same object on the old set, using 10" of space (about 75% of it's size)... Do you follow me?

In other words, a good head-to-head comparison.

Hum. Well yeah. That and the roundie vs rectangular:D

It's the HDTV that lags the NTSC (around here anyway, and the amount of delay varies from station to station)

You jumped the gun on me. After adding a bunch of screen shots to my site of today's parade, I have yet to put together this little bit about flesh hues reproduced by vintage and modern TV. For the illustration, I prepared these two shots where I tried to make them equal in size in a similar manner as your suggestion. Full screen CT-100 and equal subject area cut from the wide screen HD version. Here they are. Hope it helps. The HD will be sharper. ...Now that I think about it, back in 2002, and for a few good years thereafter, the CBS HD programs had stunning closeups of actors in their 'The Agency' type shows. Now, after beaucoup criticism by media people, who have to keep/make controversy up to keep their jobs, about the harsh look of aging actors, people like Terry Hatcher have obviously had a lot of work done and so are not as visually interesting in HD anymore.

Here's the text I've prepared so far covering the pictures. It's once through the typewriter and so is subject to change or even the 'Delete' key, so read it accordingly.

A ct-100 matrix may generate RBG signals that reproduce better flesh tones on a 15GP22, since the bright, modern phosphors emit a different color than that of their 1953 NTSC counterparts. If so, there could be a difference between the vintage and modern hardware images. That seems to be the case. Here's an example from the 2007 Rose Bowl parade telecast in both ATSC and NTSC. what you see is part of the screen from the digital broadcast and all the CT-100 screen, modified as necessary to produce nearly same size images.

The poinsettias along the bottom of each image serve as an eyeball reference. The cluster of leaves on the right of the analog image match rather well the same plants reproduced digitally. (There's a slight red purity issue on the left.)

Facial hues in digital broadcasts (and analog broadcasts reproduced on a modern set) tend to my eyes to be more red than the same puss reproduced with 1953 hardware.

And here's a link to the other CT-100 Rose Bowl '07 screen shots:
http://home.att.net/~pldexnis/potpou...arade2007.html

Pete

The HD white guy looks a bit too purple on my computer...?

ditto.

I really think they only started pushing HD because standard resolution on a huge tv set looks like crap. This is where 720 and 1080 lines makes more sense. however, unless you have a huge TV or you're using your CT-100 as a computer monitor, I don't see the point in killing NTSC.

Another thing is digital compression. The more and more channels cable and satellite companies cram into their head-end, the more compression they have to use per network in order to cram everything into their alloted bandwidth. This produces that 'digital "fringe" or tiled like picture. Its really a joke when i go to my buds house to watch a game on his 'HD' set. when the camera is on the ball everything else moving in the background is chunky.

Digital HD looks great, but only is really worth it when you do it the right way:
1. a large CRT set, preferably a sony XBR with the super fine dot pitch CRT.
2. A high bandwidth true HD player, or at least something that upscales to HD
3. Decent cables
4. Proper calibration of the set after install

Otherwise, gimmie my old school sets and let me be. I don't watch TV much as it is, why spend bucks to watch it in HD?

pete, ive been following your site since you first started to 'repair' the CT100 with the bad CRT, then decided to restore it only to find the CRT was a dud, i was so happy to see that you found another CT100 with a good CRT. Since that time the site has grown to be IMHO the most elaborate CT100 site on the internet, from studies on the quality of reproduction of old verses new technology, to ongoing tweaks, to everything CT100. I just wanted to throw you a thank you for keeping the site going (i was worried there for a few months between the dud tube and the other set while we all were waiting on the possability of a 15GP rebuild.) Great job and happy new year.

-keith

I looked at the Rose Parade on ABC in HD off-air (recorded on HD PVR and viewed on CRT rear projector), also recorded it on the HGTV satellite PVR, and on the Travel Channel via DVD recorder off the satellite. Results: ABC HD was generally better, except they seemed to be using 30 fps progressive cameras for their special closeup shots (which they even preceded with special graphics), which were awful due to double images when the camera did not follow the motion of the float. Also, their sound levels on the announcers were varying all over the place. So, I would say I like HD, but crap in = crap out.

The HGTV production was wonderful as always - now I'm going to check if it was/will be offered in HD - that might be enough to tip me over to paying the extra for Dish Network's HD service.

Thanks for the kind words Keith. My reason for starting the site was to share my interest in the CT-100.

That's how I saw it. More often the difference is more orange facial hues on the modern set, which incidentally has its color temperature control set to normal.

Wayne: NBC around here broadcast the parade for the first hour; definitely noticed an inferior picture compared to ABC. Like the old days when digital channel rebroadcasts were decidedly inferior. Also, NBC digital was not in 16 by 9.

don't worry consumers are mostly always confused