Why is the Tonight Show not in HD on WTMJ-DT?

[Fr8train]

How come recently the Tonight Show with Jay Leno and Late Night with Conan O'Brien have not been broadcast in HD on WTMJ-DT? It states on their website schedule that they are supposed to be in HD. I recall them being in HD before but now they are not. My Dad lives in the Eau Claire market and they are in HD there.

[kevbeck122]

I don't know why, but WTMJ has been extending their news til around 10:45. Our local channels don't have the capability to timeshift HD programs, so they either cut into the HD program late, or give you the full program in SD. In this case, WTMJ is doing the latter.

[Snard]

I don't know why, but WTMJ has been extending their news til around 10:45. Our local channels don't have the capability to timeshift HD programs, so they either cut into the HD program late, or give you the full program in SD. In this case, WTMJ is doing the latter.

Hmmm, that's funny, I can do this with HD programs just fine; all I have to do is hit "pause" on my DVR. Maybe we should chip in and buy a DVR for WTMJ, so they can hit "pause" when their news runs late ;)

(and yes, I know it's more complex than that, I was just being funny)

[gparris]

WTMJ:
I can watch Chicago Channel 5 is SD just as well, 'TMJ, as it comes on cable (in Kenosha) ON TIME without delays, too!
Love the Packers and hope they win again:
But WTMJHD screwing with the Tonight Show's HD signal does not work for me
-I have no "love" for your station whatsoever!
Why don't you mess up some of your weather or other features?

The shows are no longer in re-runs due to the writer's strike, remember?:rolleyes:

[Tom Snyder]

What? You mean Chicago TV isn't expanding their news to cover the Packers? (Yeah, but we beat them twice) :rof:

[bradsmainsite]

What? You mean Chicago TV isn't expanding their news to cover the Packers? (Yeah, but we beat them twice) :rof:

Tom-----you crack me up!:D

[klwillis45]

Timmy C. sez:

GREEN AND GOLD TV: Channels 4 and 12 have lengthened their late newscasts to accommodate more Packers stuff. They'll run until 10:45 for the duration.

That means NBC's "Tonight Show" won't air in high-definition for a while.

Because of technical limitations, Channel 4 can either join the HD broadcast in progress, missing the first 10 minutes, or air the standard definition feed in its entirety.

[Fr8train]

Thanks everyone for your replies.

This means that I will watch Letterman in HD instead. I prefer Leno but cannot stand watching it in SD.

It is utterly ridiculous that two hours of high-rated HD programming has to be downgraded to SD in order to show 15 extra minutes of already saturated Packers coverage. I mean do we really need to see an interview of some guy who created a Ryan Grant snow sculpture in his yard or interviews of random guys with Bears and Cowboys clothing who were shoveling out the stadium? Is that truly newsworthy?

I thought I was late on the HD bandwagon and that silly technical issues like this would have been resolved this late in the game.

[foxeng]

Truth is we are still early in the game.

[LoadStar]

Truth is we are still early in the game.

All due respect, when we're a year and a few days away from analog cut-off, we ain't "early in the game" by a LONG shot.

Broadcasters, IMHO, should have just about everything in place and ready to go by this point. The next year should be for fine tuning of existing systems in place, and installing non-essential bits and pieces.

Something like a HD-capable digital video library system that can allow broadcasters to time-shift HD programming really should've been installed by now (again, IMHO.)

Any broadcaster that is still saying "we've got time" or "it's still early" is deluding themselves. It always takes more time than it looks to implement new systems.

[Jimboy]

All due respect, when we're a year and a few days away from analog cut-off, we ain't "early in the game" by a LONG shot.

Broadcasters, IMHO, should have just about everything in place and ready to go by this point. The next year should be for fine tuning of existing systems in place, and installing non-essential bits and pieces.

Something like a HD-capable digital video library system that can allow broadcasters to time-shift HD programming really should've been installed by now (again, IMHO.)

Any broadcaster that is still saying "we've got time" or "it's still early" is deluding themselves. It always takes more time than it looks to implement new systems.

HD was never a mandate, nor is it required for the transition.

[Talos4]

HD was never a mandate, nor is it required for the transition.


Just because most of us that regularly participate in this forum were early adopters of HD technology we are still in the minority. While that gap is closing it's still there.

Mr/Mrs average public are still trying to figure whether their 25" trinitron is going to be a brick in a little over a year.

They also want to know how to get rid of those *(*&^ black bars on their TV.

In my own family who have all been exposed to HD television at my home, My parents still haven't signed up for the digital package on TWC!

I think we have to look at the expense local broadcasters have incurred just to make the transition to digital in the last couple of years and compare it to your experience.

In my case I didn't walk into Flanners one day and purchase everything I now have to enjoy my HD experience. I have a budget I have to watch and plan.

Local broadcasters also have an operating budget and have to plan accordingly.

I would think re-transmission of HD programming (time shifting) probably isn't priority one.

[Stanley Kritzik]

Just because most of us that regularly participate in this forum were early adopters of HD technology we are still in the minority. While that gap is closing it's still there.

Mr/Mrs average public are still trying to figure whether their 25" trinitron is going to be a brick in a little over a year.

They also want to know how to get rid of those *(*&^ black bars on their TV.

In my own family who have all been exposed to HD television at my home, My parents still haven't signed up for the digital package on TWC!

I think we have to look at the expense local broadcasters have incurred just to make the transition to digital in the last couple of years and compare it to your experience.

In my case I didn't walk into Flanners one day and purchase everything I now have to enjoy my HD experience. I have a budget I have to watch and plan.

Local broadcasters also have an operating budget and have to plan accordingly.

I would think re-transmission of HD programming (time shifting) probably isn't priority one.


I don't feel sorry for broadcasters who have had years to plan for this, who have been GIVEN their frequencies (now double frequencies), etc. They should step up to their responsibilities right away. Also, the rate of flat screen sales -- mostly HD screens -- is going up. Broadcasters can help the transition along by putting as much as possible in HD.

Stan

[Fr8train]

I guess I should be more patient and understanding of the broadcasters in some ways. Overall I am impressed with the OTA HD offerings that this market offers (for example MyNetworkTV and the CW in the Eau Claire/La Crosse market are strictly SD sub channels with no HD capabilities).

Based on the mentioned non-capability of HD time shifting, WTMJ obviously thinks it is in their best interest ratings-wise to air 15 minutes of extra football news rather than to air their two hour long late night programs in HD. That is their choice.

They also made the choice to air the programs in their entirety in SD rather than air the Tonight Show in HD with the first 15 minutes missing.

With that being said, I want to make it known that if they are going to make those choices I'm going to watch another channel instead (the local CBS affiliate).

Maybe I'm the minority and I don't matter in the big picture but as long as there are forums where I can make my voice heard like this with the hope of change; I'm going to voice it.

[Jimboy]

I don't feel sorry for broadcasters who have had years to plan for this, who have been GIVEN their frequencies (now double frequencies), etc. They should step up to their responsibilities right away. Also, the rate of flat screen sales -- mostly HD screens -- is going up. Broadcasters can help the transition along by putting as much as possible in HD.

Stan

As foxeng stated.... "Truth is we are still early in the game." This is very true.
When you think about what equipment was made available to playback HD material 3-6 years ago the price was way out of reach for most broadcasters. I'm talking about professional broadcast equipment not your home DVR. As with any electronic item the quality goes up and the price comes down the longer you wait. I'm sure most stations in this market have plans of some sort in the works to playback and produce local HD content.

Broadcasters are stepping up to their responsibilities by providing a digital signal which was mandated by the FCC. Again, HD is an option not a requirement. HD viewers are still a minority but that is slowly changing. What needs to happen for a smooth transition to digital is more consumer education, however I agree more HD will help and I'm sure it will happen.

[Tom Snyder]

So how much would it cost a local station today to outfit their operation with HD playback capability?

[Nels Harvey]

So how much would it cost a local station today to outfit their operation with HD playback capability?
Some stations locally are presently just passing their network feeds through to their digital transmitter. That includes having invested in, installing, and operating the transmitter itself. That expense is significant enough considering there is not any real additional revenue from those transmissions.

In order to pass the signals from network to the transmitter, basic equipment like audio and video switching, microwave systems, monitoring and analog to digital up-conversion equipment have had to be utilized. Very little from analog is usable.

In order to provide complete digital service, virtually everything in a TV station will need to be replaced. New routing switchers, studio switchers, character generators, recording systems (probably fancy computers with humungous storage capabilities), character generators, studio cameras, field ENG cameras, audio/video syncing capabilities, monitoring facilities, and a lot of other incidentals and supporting equipment, needs to be purchased. Manpower to install and setup all of this takes a lot of extra money and time over and above the equipment costs.

I'm sure all of the stations are working to prepare for the changeover next year, with budgets that are strained by all of this expense. I know for a fact that the progress at Ch. 10/36 has been very extensive, with literally years where the engineering hallway was, and is, filled with new, digital equipment waiting to be installed. Space needs to be provided for the new equipment, one item at a time, while everything stays on as normal for the rest of the system.

It is more than just jerry-rigging a digital playback capability. The new digital requirements demand a logical transition plan in order to provide us with the sort of digital service that the people on this site are clamoring for. For example, Ch. 6 needs to improve their digital transmission system to provide better service for us.

Their plan to turn off the digital system for those improvements is required by OSHA. Plans, and crews, were arranged for in order to accomplish the job. They want to do so during a low viewers period, in order to provide a minimum of interruption to their service. Think of the expense for this job alone, for engineers, and tower riggers. This is just one problem of many to be solved.

Yes, we, as viewers, are impatient for the digital improvements that are necessary to provide the routine, robust, and complete digital broadcast experience we are so accustomed to with analog television. It will come with time. It won't be cheap! There will be a few bumps in the road. Just let the engineers continue to work towards this difficult goal for us!

Nels....

[Tom Snyder]

I'm honestly not trying to pick a fight here.

But these are not mom and pop candy stores. A TV station in a market this size is worth what... $40-50 million? If their main analog transmitter completely failed and took all their processing equipment with it, they'd find the money to repair it.

The owners have the money.. and if it were prohibitively expensive, there wouldn't be such a growing number of TV stations that are already full HD all the way down to their local news and crews.

I believe it's simply their choice.

But then I'm only balancing the budget of a small company with ten employees, and not running a TV station.

[Fr8train]

I can understand what you are saying Nel and I'm trying to be as patient as possible but it is hard.

I have to agree with Tom though.

I'm an engineer too, a software engineer by trade. I am continuously responsible for updating and modifying our software to make sure it satisfies our customers needs and is compatible with newer technology. This sounds quite similar to the situation TV engineers are in here. I have other duties and responsibilities just as these engineers do but I find the time to keep our customers satisfied with our product.

It isn't cheap for my company to pay me to do this but it is the cost of doing business. My company realizes that technology is always changing and if they are going to compete in a technology field they can't just buy some hardware and write a program and expect it to run forever without any maintenance or replacement.

If we told our customers to "be patient" when our software wasn't running optimally for them they would take their business elsewhere. They wouldn't be empathetic.

If a station is not broadcasting their product in a way that satisfies me I'm going to take my "business" elsewhere and watch a channel that does.

[Nels Harvey]

I'm honestly not trying to pick a fight here.

But these are not mom and pop candy stores. A TV station in a market this size is worth what... $40-50 million? If their main analog transmitter completely failed and took all their processing equipment with it, they'd find the money to repair it.

The owners have the money.. and if it were prohibitively expensive, there wouldn't be such a growing number of TV stations that are already full HD all the way down to their local news and crews.

I believe it's simply their choice.

But then I'm only balancing the budget of a small company with ten employees, and not running a TV station.
Tom,

I don't mean to pick any fight here either. I just wanted to point out what the station owners and managers are facing in their efforts to provide digital TV for us.

Just because a TV station has a value doesn't mean the owners have money to upgrade their facilities. For example, Ch. 49 still hasn't shown us a digital signal that I'm aware of. Having done engineering for the Kinlows, and understanding their situation, I'm wondering what they will do by next year!

Ch. 6 is in the process of being sold by Fox. Fox has done less, apparently, than the other network stations in the area. While Rupert Murdock may be a very wealthy man on paper, I think it is obvious that the Fox organization has fallen behind, at least in Milwaukee. Is that the reason they are selling?

The economy has a great bearing on TV advertising, and with so many other signals available from cable and satellite, the cash cow that TV stations used to be really doesn't exist anymore. Advertising is the revenue source that keeps the stations going, and if it diminishes, the money isn't available for such a major upgrade. That means increasing the debt load, and interest expenses. If the profit drops, the stock associated with the station also loses value. TV stations are just like any other business. If there isn't a profit, eventually a business will fail!

I only wanted to point out that I believe the local stations are doing their best as they can to provide this radical upgrade to their facilities. I don't think the owners have the money you think they have. It's not just money, it's logistics. I tried to point out the real challenges the station managers are facing. People capable of the new technology are needed as well, and quite hard to find.

If one part of the overall system does fail, often there is some redundancy. A new part, or unit can be replaced, and such things are budgeted for. To replace an entire system with entirely new technology is another story altogether. Our local stations do not have a gadzillionaire owner who can wave his magic wand and plop a new facility there like in a Sims game. It's time to ease up a bit on the guys trying their best to accomplish this massive effort!

Nels....

[SRW1000]

Well, the good news is that the shows should be back in HD starting tomorrow night.

Scott

[Tom Snyder]

I appreciate your input Nels, and I hope you know that I'm just taking the other side for the sake of discussion. :)