<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Engadget - Comments for HD Net understands something</title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</link>
<description>Engadget Comments for HD Net understands something</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on HD Net understands something]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</guid><description><![CDATA[That just doesn't make sense at all.  So an upconverted show from the 60s is now better than something current?  This is why I think most HD programing is a sham and why I'm perfectly happy with my upconverting DVD player.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Eagle117]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 24th 2005 11:12AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on HD Net understands something]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</guid><description><![CDATA[Is it just upconverted?  Or was it originally shot in film, and remastered to HD?<br><br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Buzzcut]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 24th 2005 11:28AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on HD Net understands something]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</guid><description><![CDATA[Hogans Heros was originally shot in film and then remastered in HD. This is not a simple up-conversion process but rather a lengthy and time-consuming ordeal. But the end result is obvious. It looks great.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt Burns]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 24th 2005 11:37AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on HD Net understands something]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</guid><description><![CDATA[What people fail to realize is that things shot in film are of much higher resolution/quality than even HD supports.  Granted, a show from the 60s might not be as good as something shot now.  But, the point is, it's not upconverting.  It's transferring from one medium to another.  In this case, it's being transferred to HD which is keeping more of the original detail compared to the original SD transfer where a lot of the details were lost.  People always seem to be confused with how you can have an HD version of a show or movie that was created before HD.  The reason is because analog SD TV was/is WAY worse quality than what those shows/movies were originally shot in.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[TakeFlight]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 24th 2005 1:15PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on HD Net understands something]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</guid><description><![CDATA[A new transfer of course from film (duh).  Still though, you're watching HD in a 4x3 window right?  Or did they actually film it widescreen originally?  Or do they crop a 16x9 frame?  Would really like to see some Original Series Star Trek.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Cecil]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 25th 2005 11:56AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on HD Net understands something]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/24/we-all-owe-hd-net-a-big-thank-you/</guid><description><![CDATA[Wouldn't 16mm film be very close to 1080p resolution natively, or would it still be about 1,000 lines of resolution more?  I'm basing my estimate considering many report 35mm film to be equal to about 4,000 lines of resolution.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[The Jeremy]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Oct 25th 2005 7:51PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
