# TNT HD Miseading HDTV Tags



## pjmayo (Feb 16, 2003)

TNT HD is on the air and as many have already noted they are broadcasting 4:3 versions shows in a stretched 16:9 format. This in itself is irritating, but what is bothering me more is they are also tagging every single show with the HDTV tag. So when searching for *true* HD programming, I get a bunch of TNT fakes filling up the list. It makes it impossible to know when a show on TNT is broadcast in true HD and when it is not.

For example, I saw Charmed 4:3 stretched to 16:9 followed by ER in true HD 16:9. Both showed up in the listing as "HDTV". If I had simply gone to the listing without viewing the shows, I would have not seen any difference.

BTW, TNT did pop up a "In HD where available" when ER started, so someone somewhere knows the difference.

This is not just a rant.

Does anyone know who to tell or where we can complain to possibly get these issues address? One the incorrect tagging of, and two the lack of side-letterboxes, for shows broadcast from a 4:3 source. I would love to provide some healthy feedback on acceptable HD practices.

Phil.


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

I haven't watched enough of TNT-HD to see what they're doing, but IMO, if they're showing 4:3 material WITHOUT pillarboxes, then I think they're doing the right thing.

Without the pillarboxes, you should be able to toggle the "Ratio" setting on the TiVo to see the show in either 4:3 or stretched to 16:9. If they insert pillarboxes (as many OTA stations do), then your only option is to view it in 4:3. I personally don't mind the stretching on my set for the little SD viewing I do anymore... But my point is - if this is what they're doing, they're leaving the choice up to the viewer - which is good!!!

Jeff


----------



## falz (Mar 29, 2002)

jautor said:


> I haven't watched enough of TNT-HD to see what they're doing, but IMO, if they're showing 4:3 material WITHOUT pillarboxes, then I think they're doing the right thing.


They're not. The're broadcasting a stretched signal for all 4:3 material, giving the viewer no other choice than to watch things stretched. They *should* fix this and broadcast a 4:3 at its "real" aspect ratio and give us the option to stretch it if we want it stretched, or pillar box if that's our choice (which is mine).

--falz


----------



## DavidS (Sep 27, 2000)

jautor said:


> Without the pillarboxes, you should be able to toggle the "Ratio" setting on the TiVo to see the show in either 4:3 or stretched to 16:9. If they insert pillarboxes (as many OTA stations do), then your only option is to view it in 4:3. I personally don't mind the stretching on my set for the little SD viewing I do anymore... But my point is - if this is what they're doing, they're leaving the choice up to the viewer - which is good!!!


No. As reported on one of the severeal other threads on this topic, they are doing an non-liniear stretch. If you try to squeeze it back to 4:3, the middle to too skinny.


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

Well, then... that's crap, then, isn't it!


----------



## MarathonMan (Feb 27, 2004)

Personally I think it's a good comprimise. I dislike the sidebars, for me at least after, viewing the "stretched image" for a few minutes it becomes, IMHO, a non issue.


----------



## zooie123 (Feb 22, 2006)

TNT HD is the worst HD channel I have. It is just plain ugly most of the time and looks stretched. It completely ruined great looking movies like Armageddon and The Fifth Element. Ugly, ugly, ugly.


----------



## gkinard (Sep 19, 2005)

All I have to say is that Basketball on TNT-HD looks awesome on my TV.


----------



## bbodin (Jan 21, 2004)

MarathonMan said:


> Personally I think it's a good comprimise. I dislike the sidebars, for me at least after, viewing the "stretched image" for a few minutes it becomes, IMHO, a non issue.


It's not a good compromise. It's a good solution for you because you like it that way. It leaves others who don't like it that way with no other option, so by definition it's not a "compromise".

A good compromise would be to broadcast it in 4:3 and let the user themselves use their TVs or settop boxes to stretch or not stretch based on their personal preferences.


----------



## coachO (Nov 26, 2004)

I agree with bbdodin and jautor - I was expecting much more from HD TNT


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

I would like the option to stretch programs. You can get used to some shows. But with TNT's non-linear stretch you can't even use your TV controls to put it back to normal. I will say that TNT's version of a non-linear stretch works better than the one in my TV. My TV starts the non-linear part closer to the middle than TNT does.


----------



## PhilipDC (Jun 23, 2005)

AFAIK, Charmed has never been filmed in HD, so how can they be claiming HD for it on TNT-HD?


----------



## LoopinFool (Feb 25, 2005)

zooie123 said:


> TNT HD is the worst HD channel I have. It is just plain ugly most of the time and looks stretched. It completely ruined great looking movies like Armageddon and The Fifth Element. Ugly, ugly, ugly.


Well, at least The Fifth Element wasn't stretched. The credits looked like true HD, but the movie was soft. More like DVD quality.

What gets me is that even when the movies are 4:3 stretched (all but a few newer ones, as far as I can tell), they show that "Available in Hi-Definition (sic) where available" logo. That's just wrong, and the guide data is even worse.

There is a real definition of what "HDTV" means, and they're not meeting it. Perhaps the FCC could pressure them...

- LoopinFool


----------



## BGLeduc (Aug 26, 2003)

LoopinFool said:


> Well, at least The Fifth Element wasn't stretched. The credits looked like true HD, but the movie was soft. More like DVD quality.
> 
> What gets me is that even when the movies are 4:3 stretched (all but a few newer ones, as far as I can tell), they show that "Available in Hi-Definition (sic) where available" logo. That's just wrong, and the guide data is even worse.
> 
> ...


Other than the fact that it was not OAR (its really 2.35:1, IIRC), 5th Element looked very good yesterday afternoon.

But other stuff that is using the non-linear stretch (Armageddon and The Mummy for example) look ridiculously bad. The picture is obviously blown up, and when there is a pan such that a head shot goes from center screen to the side, the actors head gets blown up too.

And the fact that they label that HD is absurd. I set-up a bunch of recordings from TNT, but after I saw what they were doing, cancelled them all. Not worth the aggravation to expect a half way decent HD picture, and end up with a lame non-linear stretch.

If thats what they want to do, fine, but it is completely wrong to call that crap HD.

Brian


----------



## SpankyInChicago (May 13, 2005)

AFAIK, there is no such thing as broadcasting 4:3 in 720p or 1080i. The broadcaster must broadcast in 16:9. 

With 4:3 source material this leaves the broadcaster two choices: 

1) stretch 4:3 material to fit 16:9 - or -
2) broadcast 4:3 with sidebars (pillar box) to fill the screen to 16:9

There is no way - from a standards perspectvie - that I am aware of to send 4:3 material in its "native" aspect ratio if the broadcast format is HDTV (720p, 1080i). ATSC "HDTV" demands that all broadcasts be 16:9.

Please correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## thepackfan (May 21, 2003)

It's ok to stretch an image, but don't stretch just the outside edges. This doesn't allow user to compress back to 4:3 without compressed middles. And these movies should never be noted as HDTV in there guides. By the nature of the name (TNTHD)we know that it 16:9 content.


----------



## pjmayo (Feb 16, 2003)

The problem is not just the stretch and lack of pillarboxes. It is the HDTV tagging of a show which is obviously not from a HD source.

For those who prefer the stretch, go to the regular TNT feed and stretch it yourself. That is all your getting on TNT HD; they just do it for you. Just because the broadcast comes in at 16:9 doesn't make it any better.

Still, no one replied with how do we go about getting TNT to meet the acceptable standard for HD broadcast. Anyone?

Phil.


----------



## Juppers (Jan 26, 2001)

I just removed that worthless channel from my guide. At least I'm paying $1 less for the mostly useless HD pak now.


----------



## PRMan (Jul 26, 2000)

Allegedly it was added to D* recently. I've been too busy watching nice Olympic HD to notice yet. I never watch almost anything on TBS or TNT anyway, so why would I watch non-linearly stretched crap on TNT-HD?


----------



## bbodin (Jan 21, 2004)

LoopinFool said:


> There is a real definition of what "HDTV" means, and they're not meeting it. Perhaps the FCC could pressure them...
> 
> - LoopinFool


I wouldn't expect that. Since TNT-HD was first launched and available with the cableco's (over a year ago?) people have been complaining about the "HDTV" label on non-HD shows. Now it's available on D* so all the D* people are now complaining about the same thing the cableco people have been complaining about for quite awhile.


----------



## bbodin (Jan 21, 2004)

Juppers said:


> I just removed that worthless channel from my guide. At least I'm paying $1 less for the mostly useless HD pak now.


well it does offer HD programming, particularly basketball and nascar, so I can't see why you would remove it from your guide. But I can understand why you'd prefer to watch the non-stretched SD version over the streched version.


----------



## Juppers (Jan 26, 2001)

bbodin said:


> well it does offer HD programming, particularly basketball and nascar, so I can't see why you would remove it from your guide. But I can understand why you'd prefer to watch the non-stretched SD version over the streched version.


I don't watch basketball, nascar, and law and order. Since those 3 things are about 90% of the programming on that channel, and most of the rest of the 10% is sent out distorted, well, you get the idea.


----------



## jfischer (Oct 14, 1999)

zooie123 said:


> TNT HD is the worst HD channel I have. It is just plain ugly most of the time and looks stretched. It completely ruined great looking movies like Armageddon and The Fifth Element. Ugly, ugly, ugly.


No kidding. I flipped to TNT during Armageddon, and it looked awful. Like I was watching through a telescope - yuck.


----------



## JfNebraska (Oct 2, 2001)

I have seen nothing good on TNT HD yet. 

In my view, the best looking HD satelite channel is HDNet, with HDNet movies, HBOHD and ShoHD tied for second. DiscoveryHD and UniversalHD are hit and miss. ESPNHD is usually not HD, and TNTHD just plain stinks.

In most cases, I still get the best looking image from my OTA networks, but sometimes HDNet can be equally excellent.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

jfischer said:


> No kidding. I flipped to TNT during Armageddon, and it looked awful. Like I was watching through a telescope - yuck.


I actually considered (for a second, anyway) moving my 100-gallon aquarium to in front of the screen to see if I could reverse the process.

I really think we need a petition. Either that or the vidiots at TNT need a 2x4 between the eyes. Wake up and smell the propane!


----------



## pjmayo (Feb 16, 2003)

Hey, check it out... http://www.tnt.tv/hd

TNT is actually bragging about their HD service. Everyone should give them some healthy feedback at [email protected]

Maybe someone will actually read them.

Phil.


----------



## DavidS (Sep 27, 2000)

Juppers said:


> I don't watch basketball, nascar, and law and order. Since those 3 things are about 90% of the programming on that channel, and most of the rest of the 10% is sent out distorted, well, you get the idea.


The Law & Order I saw this afternoon looked like it was stretched as well, even though that show is available in true HD, unlike Charmed.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

DavidS said:


> The Law & Order I saw this afternoon looked like it was stretched as well, even though that show is available in true HD, unlike Charmed.


Depends on the season, I think. But overall TNT-HD does not look good.


----------



## MeCurious (Feb 24, 2006)

After reading their web site, it sounds like they know what HDTV is. And they brag they broadcast it 24 hours a day/7 days a week. But obviously, this is not true. I saw a couiple of Law and Order shows in true HD and then I saw one in the stretched mode. The difference was very obvious. So is this false advertising? How can a business knowingly adverstise something that isn't true? The stretched mode is so shocking when I see it, I can't take it for long.


----------



## Mr. Bill (Jan 18, 2006)

SpankyInChicago said:


> AFAIK, there is no such thing as broadcasting 4:3 in 720p or 1080i. The broadcaster must broadcast in 16:9.
> 
> With 4:3 source material this leaves the broadcaster two choices:
> 
> ...


Absolutely correct. It has to be a 16:9 aspect ratio -- either by stretching or by adding & transmitting sidebars.

That's why I wish they would leave it in OAR for 4:3. 
(With my Sammy 160 I can stretch the bars away and have an equal stretch should I desire, and not the one they do.)


----------



## SpankyInChicago (May 13, 2005)

Mr. Bill said:


> That's why I wish they would leave it in OAR for 4:3.
> (With my Sammy 160 I can stretch the bars away and have an equal stretch should I desire, and not the one they do.)


I agree. My TV (Mits WS-65815) allows me to stretch away the sidebars.

I gues it is a toss up. If they broadcast sidebars and people want to watch without sidebars, then their TV must have that stretch mode. Since not all TVs have that stretch mode, then those people are screwed.

I guess either way someone ends up not getting what they want.


----------



## forecheck (Aug 5, 2000)

Maybe this is too simple, but:

If you want to watch TNT stretched, turn to channel 75
If you want to watch TNT with sidebars, turn to channel 245


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

MeCurious said:


> After reading their web site, it sounds like they know what HDTV is. And they brag they broadcast it 24 hours a day/7 days a week. But obviously, this is not true.... So is this false advertising? How can a business knowingly adverstise something that isn't true? The stretched mode is so shocking when I see it, I can't take it for long.


Unfortunately, the definition is tied to the format, not the content. My local UPN affil (not for long) has also been broadcasting HD 24/7 for years, defined as 1080i format (1920x1080 pixels interlaced at 30fps). But they have not ever broadcast one second of HD content. If you are broadcasting in that format, you have the potential to resolve images to that pixel depth, whether they are originally SD, originally HD, stretched, even completely out of focus. It doesn't matter what TNT does to the content...they could broadcast live with the lens cap on if they felt like it, and they would still be able to crow about it being in HD, because technically, it is.

It's just criminal that the folks behind TNTHD don't have the first clue how they are shooting themselves in the foot.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

forecheck said:


> Maybe this is too simple, but:
> 
> If you want to watch TNT stretched, turn to channel 75
> If you want to watch TNT with sidebars, turn to channel 245


What we all want is to see HD content resolved in HD without it being mucked up in multiple ways that defeat the purpose of it even being HD in the first place. You got a number handy for a TNT channel that can do that?


----------



## pjmayo (Feb 16, 2003)

forecheck said:


> Maybe this is too simple, but:
> 
> If you want to watch TNT stretched, turn to channel 75
> If you want to watch TNT with sidebars, turn to channel 245


Yes, too simple. The issue is not only the sidebars or pillarboxes, it is that they tag ALL their content as HDTV even though the source is a standard 4:3 recording.

When searching for content to record which IS is HD, you cannot trust the listing on the TNT HD channel.

Phil.


----------



## forecheck (Aug 5, 2000)

I do agree with you pjmayo about the HDTV tags, they need to fix that ASAP. My comment was more about the stretch vs. sidebar debate that was also going on in this thread.

Personally, I have given up on watching anything on TNT-HD unless it is a sporting event.


----------



## MeCurious (Feb 24, 2006)

When searching for content to record which IS is HD said:


> THis is slightly off subject. But is there a way to put in TIVO to show me all the programs in HD? I tried to put in a wishlist with keyword HDTV. It wouldn't pick up anything. The help says it will look for this keyword in the description. The HDTV is at the end of the description. I guess it's actually not officially part of the descritpion. If TNTHD programs popped up, I might be able to put in "except station TNTHD". Just curious.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

You can select program type of HDTV in a wishlist.


----------



## mx6bfast (Jan 2, 2004)

pjmayo said:


> Hey, check it out... http://www.tnt.tv/hd


Strange, the website didn't take up the entire width on my monitor. The website is more HD than the actualy channel is.


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

MarathonMan said:


> Personally I think it's a good comprimise. I dislike the sidebars, for me at least after, viewing the "stretched image" for a few minutes it becomes, IMHO, a non issue.


Only to people whose eyes function the same as fun house mirrors.


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

SpankyInChicago said:


> AFAIK, there is no such thing as broadcasting 4:3 in 720p or 1080i. The broadcaster must broadcast in 16:9.
> 
> With 4:3 source material this leaves the broadcaster two choices:
> 
> ...


You're not wrong, but you're not addressing the issue either.

People want it done as 4:3 with sidebars.

That isn't being offered.

The 4:3 image is being distorted on the outer edges to fill the 16:9 screen, and it looks just plain silly.


----------



## MeCurious (Feb 24, 2006)

stevel said:


> You can select program type of HDTV in a wishlist.


 Thanks for the tip Steve. I'll try it.


----------



## SpankyInChicago (May 13, 2005)

gastrof said:


> You're not wrong, but you're not addressing the issue either.
> 
> People want it done as 4:3 with sidebars.
> 
> ...


I think my point 2 addresses the issue of 4:3 with sidebars.

And I wouldn't say that "people" want it done in 4:3 with sidebars. I would say "some people" want it done in 4:3 with sidebars. You will find some (many?) who want the stretch. Not everyone has a set that will stretch away the sidebars. 100 IQ Joe Sixpack who just got a new wobulator for his birthday is going to ***** about sidebars simply because he doesn't understand the way his TV works.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

SpankyInChicago said:


> And I wouldn't say that "people" want it done in 4:3 with sidebars. I would say "some people" want it done in 4:3 with sidebars. You will find some (many?) who want the stretch. Not everyone has a set that will stretch away the sidebars. 100 IQ Joe Sixpack who just got a new wobulator for his birthday is going to ***** about sidebars simply because he doesn't understand the way his TV works.


Well myself, I don't lose a lot of sleep when someone *****es out of ignorance.

But ultimately here's the problem. If you broadcast it stretched, you hose the people who want 4:3. If you broadcast it 4:3, you hose the people who want it stretched.

There's no way around this, as not all TVs will stretch 4:3 (or unstretch the stretched stuff).

Personally I'd prefer to err on the side of non-distortion. But then, I still see people buying full-screen pan-and-scan DVDs, so I guess there's just no accounting for people. 

--chris


----------



## SpankyInChicago (May 13, 2005)

cheer said:


> Well myself, I don't lose a lot of sleep when someone *****es out of ignorance.
> 
> But ultimately here's the problem. If you broadcast it stretched, you hose the people who want 4:3. If you broadcast it 4:3, you hose the people who want it stretched.
> 
> ...


I agree with your post 169%. Well said.


----------



## pjmayo (Feb 16, 2003)

MeCurious said:


> THis is slightly off subject. But is there a way to put in TIVO to show me all the programs in HD? I tried to put in a wishlist with keyword HDTV. It wouldn't pick up anything. The help says it will look for this keyword in the description. The HDTV is at the end of the description. I guess it's actually not officially part of the descritpion. If TNTHD programs popped up, I might be able to put in "except station TNTHD". Just curious.


I case you did not find it under wishlists, yet. It is under Audio & Video. 

Pretty much all my wish lists are a combination with Audio & Video/HDTV. TNT HD just messes that up.

Phil.


----------



## pjmayo (Feb 16, 2003)

LoopinFool said:


> Well, at least The Fifth Element wasn't stretched. The credits looked like true HD, but the movie was soft. More like DVD quality.


I have been noticing that, too. When Showtime and HBO first showed up in HD, I was suspicious and spent many an hour comparing the broadcast to the DVD version. (My favorite method is pausing on the bullet in Replacement Killers.) Those broadcasts are definitely HD. Maybe not 1080i, but definitely 720p. (You can tell 1080i immediately...i.e. sports or Olympics on ESPNH or UHD.) TNT looks like the plain 480p of a DVD.

Phil.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

cheer said:


> But ultimately here's the problem. If you broadcast it stretched, you hose the people who want 4:3. If you broadcast it 4:3, you hose the people who want it stretched.


How about they just shut off the channel when they don't have actual HD to broadcast? Then at least the guide would be accurate.


----------



## SpankyInChicago (May 13, 2005)

pjmayo said:


> I have been noticing that, too. When Showtime and HBO first showed up in HD, I was suspicious and spent many an hour comparing the broadcast to the DVD version. (My favorite method is pausing on the bullet in Replacement Killers.) Those broadcasts are definitely HD. Maybe not 1080i, but definitely 720p. (You can tell 1080i immediately...i.e. sports or Olympics on ESPNH or UHD.) TNT looks like the plain 480p of a DVD.
> 
> Phil.


Isn't ESPN owned by the mouse? Aren't all mouse companies 720p?


----------



## mx6bfast (Jan 2, 2004)

SpankyInChicago said:


> Isn't ESPN owned by the mouse? Aren't all mouse companies 720p?


yes


----------



## Todd (Oct 7, 1999)

PhilipDC said:


> AFAIK, Charmed has never been filmed in HD, so how can they be claiming HD for it on TNT-HD?


As long as it was filmed and the film still exists, it can be remastered in HD. But obviously, they haven't taken the time to do that.


----------



## coachO (Nov 26, 2004)

I sent an email to HD TNT - thanks for the link. I really hate recording a show that I think is HD and finding it stretched especially when the provider is willfully misleading the viewer.


----------



## bobf_maine (Dec 1, 2004)

I watched NYPD today and it was s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d. Panning shots made me dizzy.

Sipowitz looked like an older Stewie from Family Guy.

I'll take sidebars over a headache (and football heads).


----------



## falz (Mar 29, 2002)

Todd said:


> As long as it was filmed and the film still exists, it can be remastered in HD. But obviously, they haven't taken the time to do that.


I'm fairly sure that when any recent (5 years?) movie is mastered to DVD, they're keeping uncimpressed/correct aspect ratio versions for future HD things, like.. HBO HD, HDNET Movies, HDVD/BluRay, etc.

TNT must have either a crappy deal with whoever they're getting these movies from, or just not have the proper equipment or distribution method to send 16:9 material.

Oh well, I guess that channel will only be HD for sporting events.

--falz


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

falz said:


> I'm fairly sure that when any recent (5 years?) movie is mastered to DVD, they're keeping uncimpressed/correct aspect ratio versions for future HD things, like.. HBO HD, HDNET Movies, HDVD/BluRay, etc.
> 
> TNT must have either a crappy deal with whoever they're getting these movies from, or just not have the proper equipment or distribution method to send 16:9 material.


Actually, I've caught HBO HD either cropping or pan-n-scanning movies that have a wider aspect ratio than 16:9. For example, Evita's OAR is 2:35:1, yet when I Tivo'd it on HBO HD it filled the screen.

Irritating, that. But it just goes to show that just because something is "HD" doesn't mean it's OAR.

--chris


----------



## vdubuclet (Jul 20, 2003)

Okay, sorry to repeat things that have been said here, but this bug just bit me. The basketball games on TNT HD have looked great until tonight. The Mavs vs the Rockets looked like a bunch of fat munchkins shooting an egg into an ellipse. This is awful. Basketball is the whole reason I was stoked about TNT HD. This has to violate the FCC mandate for HD when that does go into effect. Can we complain to them? Any hope for Fox sports in HD?


----------



## rickaren (Oct 30, 2002)

Never have seen this on TNT "Thursday Night NBA" but tonight (Tuesday) it was real bad and hard to watch. Hopefully this was a one-time mistake(?) if not, will not watch or record again! In the past DISH has sponsored their HD program. Notice tonight even DISH was no place to be seen as a sponsor of this crap!

PS I do have a HD Tivo too, but tonight I recorded it with my 942 DISH HD DVR, so it was not just a DirecTV issue!


----------



## FireDoc (Jan 30, 2006)

rickaren said:


> Never have seen this on TNT "Thursday Night NBA" but tonight (Tuesday) it was real bad and hard to watch. Hopefully this was a one-time mistake(?) if not, will not watch or record again! In the past DISH has sponsored their HD program. Notice tonight even DISH was no place to be seen as a sponsor of this crap!
> 
> PS I do have a HD Tivo too, but tonight I recorded it with my 942 DISH HD DVR, so it was not just a DirecTV issue!


Yes it did look like poop... The funny thing about it though was the highlights of the TNT game (Dallas vs. Houston) on ESPN HD, were in beautiful looking 720p

TNT-HD is a sham


----------



## ezwinner701 (May 18, 2005)

yeah.. the game on HD was CRAP, it seriously gave me a headache watching for a few minutes. But the hightlights on ESPN for the game were better, but not that great either. Are they Super Ultra HD lite-ting the games now!!!?



FireDoc said:


> Yes it did look like poop... The funny thing about it though was the highlights of the TNT game (Dallas vs. Houston) on ESPN HD, were in beautiful looking 720p
> 
> TNT-HD is a sham


----------



## Syzygy (Aug 17, 2000)

> _*forecheck* said:_
> Maybe this is too simple, but:
> 
> If you want to watch TNT stretched, turn to channel 75
> If you want to watch TNT with sidebars, turn to channel 245


Ugh. I don't want to watch *fuzzy*vision at all!

TNTH has Alias, along with a few other things, in true HD. I watch those, but I _hate hate hate _not knowing whether a show's really in HD or not 'til I record it and view it.


----------



## Stephen M. Smith (Mar 22, 2005)

Has anyone else noticed severe combing on some shows, eg. Charmed? It's very visible when things move around fast on-screen. And you can even pause and step through it.


----------

