My suspicion is that the "new breed" management at the ABC are a bunch of over-promoted accountants "playing at" marketing!

Corporations need vision (and a few other things) at the top to see beyond the current quarter bottom line. Numbers men rarely* have that vision ... or customer focus ............................


__________________________________
* There are exceptions to every rule ... but the "New" ABC is not an exception.

Amazing, isn't it? I used to work for a huge international software company that would do exactly the same thing. It'd instigate "initiatives" which were thinly-disguised ways to save money and annoy customers, and we tried telling them it'd harm the company but nobody listened. And guess what happened? Revenue dropped through the floor. I lost my job in the sweeping redundancies that followed. And the company blamed market trends.

My redundancy was the best thing that ever happened to me. Very happy now running my own company, thanks. Totally enjoying the challenge of building something from scratch.

Thanks guys! Keep up the good work.

I found the ABC watermark particularly annoying on Sunday nights North and South.

I then thought about the many DVDs I have which are yet to be watched.

ABC off (and off for the next three Sunday nights at 8:30pm) and DVD on.

While I would prefer no watermark, I find the flat ABC logo to be the least intrusive off all watermarks on Aussie TV (and the easiest to artificially remove )

What annoys me is the inconsistensy of it. Sometimes It's flat, sometimes embossed, and it's never in the same position. Then there's issues with 2,3 or even 4! watermarks at a time.

If they cant do it properly, dont do it all at all.

Doing it properly is not doing it at all!

Hi,

Can someone give me a few pointers, i am trying to help someone out with an issue.

The person is from the U.K (like me) and would like to know if their STB works in Australia.

The box is a Netgem I-Player (U.K version of the TEAC ITV-D500)

The problem is if the tuner is compatable. What frequency do Australian DVB broadcast on? What muxes are there? FOR SD DVB BROADCASTS.

Any help is welcome!

The original conversation can be found here:

http://forum.netgem.com/viewtopic.php?t=3064

Wont work* - differences in system. Search for earlier discussions. SD STBs are pretty cheap, though...

BTW: Absolutely bizzare place to put this, though! (Subforum maybe, but watermarking thread?!?)
________________________________
*OK Someone, prove me wrong ... there's always a first time for everything!

Yes, the inconsistency is amazing.

Today was the second Monday running where Dr Who had no logo.

The U.K SD DVB-T is the same standard as Australian DVB-T (terrestrial) Only the U.S use a differing standard (they have to be different, dont they!) they use ATSC instead of DVB.

Its the frequency band that the Australian DTT network broadcast on which is the problem. UHF? VHF? both? (for the basic free-view & non PayTV channels)

I thought there was some difference with the EC/parity or something... can't remember ATM!

yeah, I could complain again, but based on a number previous attempts, the chances of it going are so slim its not funny.
But, I have another reason, I can get rid of that current WM on Dr Who very easy in a couple of minutes extra time. So my bigger fear is that the more I say now, the worse they will make it (hell 7 did with its banner ad everytime I complained) and hence the harder it will be to remove.

Yes. I know what you mean. The magic "Logo-Away" liquid is working wonders at the moment. A friend has been sending me digital captures of all the new series stuff from the UK, and I noticed some very horrible logo work. The CBBC logo is a kind of wobbly green blob that is animated and sits at the top left of the screen pulsating. Not impossible to remove, but a lot more difficult to do.

Sydney viewers only had a bug free Doctor Who, the rest of the country did cop one. This is due to Sydney (ABN) being split away from the main network feed at the time to run a 2BL voice over on the end credits of Doctor Who. Likewise how Enough Rope was bug free only in Sydney for the same reason, to run a Sydney only audience call voice over on the end credits. This is only temporary as more bug inserters are on the way my Ultimo spies tell me, for those of you that miss them on these programs if you live in the Sydney area. I am personally not annoyed by them, as I do not watch these shows.

ct

It'll probably work on UHF only as thats all they use now in England.

I am travelling in Europe at the moment and even though this is a little off topic, I hate to say that the ABC is proved right as to international practice on watermarks here. They all have them in all shapes and colours. Some are discrete most are not. The only channels I have seen without a watermark are BBC 1 and 2, but I haven't reached the UK yet to see the whole situation there. Even so there is no justification to ABC using this arguement as there are so many channels here in so many different languages that it can not be compared to the Australian situation at all. Let the ABC set the example on quality to the world and not lower itself to the bottom of the pack.

Agreed. It makes no sense to degrade your product to compete. The thing that makes (or rather, made) the ABC worth watching was that they don't (or rather, didn't) pander to commercial gimmicks (apart from maybe voice overs). It's highly ironic that a couple of weeks before the introduction of the watermark, the ABC ran 'Outfoxed' a part of which dealt with the pointless nature of lots of station graphics.

I'm curious as to what you're going to find in the UK. I've been led to believe that watermarks have only limited use, 'cause the British won't stand for it.

The argument of standard practice is bollocks anyway. It reminds me of a little kid squealing to his parents, "But everybody else is doing it!!"
"What about that nice SBS? - I always liked that boy."
"Yeah, but he's weird - he speaks in strange languages."
"ABC - you're not having a watermark and that's final!!!"

Ah, If only it were that easy...

The amateurism with the ABC watermark continues....

It disappeared in the middle of Dr Who this evening. Maybe the bug machine broke down, due to an attack of massive guilt at the wanton vandalism it has been causing.

I think it is amazing that this forum spends so much time commenting on watermarks.

It really is not the end of the world that there is a little logo in the corner of your screen.

We are lucky enough in Oz to have free quality tv programming - the downside of having good free to air programming is the networks want to advertise and brand their product. Who cares?

For those that don't watch TV anymore because of the watermark and only watch DVDs - Great - dont bother commenting on this forum anymore.

For the others, then get used to it, take a deep breath and maybe even get out a little.

:ph34r:

Keesha77 wrote"the downside of having good free to air programming is the networks want to advertise and brand their product.Who cares? "

Quite often it isn't the network's product that has a network logo on it.
A prime example being Dr Who on ABC which of course comes from the BBC.

Fortunately here in Perth there's SBS and STW 9 which don't watermark programming except sport and current affairs programming which is either exclusive to or is a product of the network.



Psst wanna buy a bootlegged copy of Gardening Australia...

Keesha is one of a handful of "ABC can do no wrong" types (some would call them apologists).

What some of these people forget is that us pseudo "ABC-bashers" are not the coalition-style abc-bashers (who operate from a misplaced ideology, and have been placed within the organisation to whiteant it), but those who want to see the ABC doing the best it can, and not being ruined by half-arsed and seriously misguided attempts at relevancy.

People who truly support the ABC, speak up when it falters... just as people who truly support their country speak up when its government heads off course.

On the other hand, apologists simply whine "me like ABC - you no hurt my ABC - it can do no wrong", while burying their heads in the sand...

:ph34r:

It did? I didn't notice that (ie I did notice the watermark the whole time) here in Adelaide.

So I assume this was a local state thing then.

There was a bad case of double vision today on the midday news. They showed a story that had at one point, footage from Lateline (recorded off-air I presume) with the watermark on.

This made the watermark look like there was a case of double vision and it looked horrible. It made the news (other than the stuff up after that part of the story) look a bit less un-professional.

If keesha77 has no interest in watermarks, then it is he who should not bother reading this thread.

Does he really believe that his opinion is the only valid opinion, and so we should all just shut up and agree with him.

For the record, those who are against the watermark accept that it does not bother many viewers. But I am someone who the watermark does bother, and there are others. I think we have the right to our opinion, and to discuss and act on our opinions.

keesha also thinks that it is appropriate for the ABC to act the same as the commercial privately owned networks. The ABC is owned by the Govenment (and thus by us), and thus should be acting in OUR interests.

Perhaps keesha77 should take a deep breath and realize that not everyone thinks the same as he does.

Michael

I like the ABC, but I do not like some of the monkeys in suits that think they know what is best for our ABC. I especially do not like the ones that get positions only because of their political affiliation.

Well, when you can return monitors with just a few dead pixels, it seems ridiculous to accept an apathetic response like that.

Of course there are more important things in life, but here the subject matter is about television, specifically in this thread, on the ABC watermark. The fact is some people are so distracted by permanent anomalies in the picture, that it is no different than dead pixels. It becomes annoying and considerably less enjoyable to watch anything. I am one of those people.

I work in TV. I spend hours making the pictures as good as possible. But I also pay for the ABC. I know the arguments in defence of the watermark are very weak. As a consumer, I am now getting substantially less value for money, and as a technician I'm watching the erosion of technical standards.

As an industry person, a consumer, and as a taxpayer, this decision is the worst in the history of the ABC, as it devalues the core product of the National broadcaster to the point where some people have switched off permanently. No competent management in any company strays from its core values to the point where it reduces their market share. Is it really that silly to want pictures to be as good as possible? Is it really that trivial to want a public national broadcaster to show some accountability when it has to direct considerable technical resources to something so obviously pointless?

I don't watch TV all my life, but when I pay for it - the experience should be as good as possible. And even if I don't watch the ABC, I'm paying for it.

On another issue: Watermark on Dr Who? I didn't watch it Saturday night, because by the end of the week, the DVD from the UK will have arrived and been watched. The show wasn't made with a faulty camera, or editing system, etc. So I really would prefer to watch it closer to the quality of the way it was made.

As one would expect from modern day production, the overall image quality of the New Doctor Who looked "fantastic", on close-ups you could count the pours on Chris and Billie's face and no video noise and all that. Its like chalk and cheese comparing the new with the old (even the cleaned up DVD releases of the old), just goes to show that it all comes down to orginal quality. No 5.1 sound, but it still had good sound, pretty sure the DVD's are 5.1.

Of course the main downside was the Watermark. Bright as normal and in the 4:3 area on the wide screen image. Only saving grace was that it was the flat one and not the two-tone one. At one point, there was a distance shot of Chris and Billie walking through a park, they 'walked' right under the watermark, which was basically as big as they were. If anyone says they can watch and not notice the WM, then they are not watching!!!

Your now the second person I've seen that has purchased the DVD's from the UK and not watching it on TV. One guy got the first vol a day before the ABC broadcast!!!!

Even so, at the end of the day, ppl can say what they like, but given that it was/is broadcast in the UK WITHOUT a watermark on BBC, it just makes the ABC look so "commercial" and there is no excuse that our public broadcast should deliver lower standards then the UK.

The DVD arrived today. And I found out about someone else who has ordered the DVD from the UK too. Amazon.co.uk must be wondering what's going on...

OK, so was it just me, just Adelaide or just a one off, but I'm pretty sure the good old Doc was watermark free tonight.

"City of Death", death to the watermark, hehe

No watermark in Sydney either which was nice.

Now in the UK, haven't seen much tv but the 5 main channels are watermark free as far as I can see. In France they have watermarks, but not all the time. I don't know how they decide which do and which don't. On Dr. Who volume 2 is out here in a few weeks time, so I will be able to get both before I leave. The only draw back is that they are so much more expensive here. Quite a few are the same price in pounds as we pay in dollars at BigW and KMart.
Back to watermarks. Good to see common sense prevailing here in the UK, please send all ABC execs. here to see how it should be done.

Thanks, stonewall, I was actually thinking about when we were going to hear from you last night.

Well, it's fantastic that you should report this - it means that the ABC has a major problem on their hands in regards to their justifications. It's obvious that the UK have gone back from clutter on their screens and that this dilutes the arguments for its use on the ABC substantially. I've taken to wondering how well Sony or Panasonic would do if you had to have their logo in the corner of the screen all the time.

The website is still on the way (I'm relying on someone else who knows how to do this web thing 'cause editing is my forte, after all)

Yeah, also noticed DW watermark-free here in Melbourne last night. Just happened to switch over as it was starting, expecting to switch off. But I never had to!

Gotta go - got an email to send to the ABC...

Did anyone see the end of Mediawatch on the 23rd of May.
An ABC kids watermark appeared for a few seconds in the top middle of screen.
Perhaps someone inside presentation having abit of fun...

Did you notice the community announcement before Dr. Who. Now the ABC is doing free "community" announcements (adverts) for the Entertainment Association of Australia (IEAA). So don't pirate video games people, it hurts the "community" of businesses.



www.mycriminalrecord.com.au

dryfry: yes I did notice that.

Submariner: Didn't see that, not sure it was shown in SA or I just flicked over to late. Still, it sounds just like the ones you can now get on sme DVD's, before anthing else starts playing, like the menu.


On a side note again, the watermark was back on the Doctor, so I guess it was a one off, surprise, surprise.

New to thia thread, but has anyone thought that maybe the watermarks are there to prevent pirating of broadcast shows. Legal issues I suppose.

This has been mentioned in other discussions on watermarking.

JB

hi ray888,

yeah, it's part of the abc's stock response. Ask yourself two questions.

How big of a threat to the abc is pirating considering most content has already been shown overseas and most Australian made content has a limited market for pirating?

Do you think anyone doing a serious level of pirating will care about a watermark? (consider those great quality bootlegs from asia)

And thirdly, the ABC watermark only appeared as part of ABC going fully on Foxtel as well as FTA TV.

Exactly, it's all about re-broadcasting issues, not piracy. The format's they broadcast in on foxtel at least wouldn't be worth anything to anyone I am really going to buck the trend here as well and say that I quite like watermarks I know what channel I'm on without having to press OSD, and without having to half stand up to see what number is on the STB. Ok, generally I know already, but when things are a little hazy, it's nice to know where you are...

JSmith :ph34r:

Even though (apparently) the watermark appeared around the same time as the ABC commenced supplying a programme service to Foxtel, I have trouble believing that this "re-broadcasting issue" is solely (or even partially) responsible for the introduction of the watermark itself on their FTA service.

Watermarks/bugs/branding/station logos are all easily added downstream of a presentation switcher, so an upstream "clean feed" can be easily supplied to their FTA services & a downstream "bugged feed" linked over to Foxtel.

Triggering of the bug to be on or off (ie: airing over programme, but not over breaks) can easily be triggered from their automation system via simple GPI control pulses or more complex control via RS-422 ports.

So it just doesn't make (technical) sense that the ABC added the watermark to ALL of their FTA services purely to "protect" a singular programme feed to Foxtel.

I believe the actual reason for the watermark's introduction (besides to p**s you all off) was purely to brand their product (ie: their transmission broadcasts) like any commercial business does. And this was probably more encouraged by the fact that the commercial FTA's were already doing it so the viewer impact was (hopefully) going to be less.

Copyright protection plays a very small part. It mainly serves as an easily dispensed "official reason". We all know that technically these days it is fairly easy to remove the logo. There are far more clever (& devious) ways of hiding copyright information in the vertical interval or part of the digital data streams.

The issue of Foxtel was actually brought up by the ABC early on, but was never mentioned again (I wonder why?!?)

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Spike/A-leg-up-...7228763938.html

I don't understand that - liking a policy because it saves you the trouble for a few seconds of figuring out what station you're watching (how hard is it to press a button?) - but it costs you sub-standard pictures 100% of the time?

I'd be happy to occasionally wonder what station I'm on if it means I can watch something the way the program-maker intended it to be watched.

Why oh why don't the networks all put the watermark in the corner of 16:9 transmissions in digital. Fair enough to leave it where it is for the 4:3 analogue transmission world, but most SD set top box viewers using a 4:3 set use letterboxing anyway if they want to see the whole program...

[quote=Toasted,Jun 3 2005, 01:01 AM]
[/quote]

I don't understand that - liking a policy because it saves you the trouble for a few seconds of figuring out what station you're watching (how hard is it to press a button?) - but it costs you sub-standard pictures 100% of the time?

I'd be happy to occasionally wonder what station I'm on if it means I can watch something the way the program-maker intended it to be watched.

[/quote]
Well, if I thought it was affecting PQ I would hate it... but it doesn't as far as I'm aware. Does it somehow? The ABC's HD is stuffed anyway, so like most I only watch the SD channel. Looking at a screen it easier than finding the remote down the side of the lounge, remembering where the button is, finding it and pressing it yes...

JSmith :ph34r:

Now this I agree with, for us WS viewers in the corner would be much more appropriate place... bit to the left please

JSmith :ph34r:

It capital city areas, this may well be do-able, but for regional and remotes, not likely (for commercial broadcasters that is). Why? From what I can tell, most of the networks derive their local analogue transmission from the 16:9 digital service rather than transmitting a separate 4:3 service to each area (and why not, it costs less to do it that way). So any watermarks have to be in the 4:3 safe area otherwise they would get lopped off for 4:3 viewers a lot of the time (14:9 letterbox mode etc).

Then again, if we all close our eyes tightly and wish reeeeaaallly hard, the logos may go away completely

Virtual Dub bug removers will have to reset their settings yet again, as Upper ABC Management, no doubt under direction from POXTEL, are arranging to change the ABC bug yet again, back to the 3D one as used initially, like the one on ABC POOH. This will occur sometime today or by early next week my ABC spies tell me.

If only the managment at the ABC spent some time on actual program making or bettering the patheticly low amount and in some cases, the poor standard of program making output that occurs thesedays instead of wasting time and money on this bug nonsense, the better. Me thinks the Launceston Fish Debacle is being left behind now when it comes to what is the biggest time waster of ABC Management with this pathetic and very amateur attempt to imitate the commercial networks via the introduction of a bug.

Pathetic!

If only all shows were broadcast in grey and white. That way the watermark wouldn't be noticable at all. It would just blend in nicely to the background.

hmmm, great, I take it we are talking across the board with the more ugly one and still in the 4:3 area.
So, if they change it for Doctor Who (both new and old repeats), who will be the first to come up with a zip file with the two bitmap images that we need. Unless someone already has them?

On a side note, it will be a good reason for another round of emails and phone calls, since I've not bothered for a while now.
I can here there arguement now, "Well, the bright flat one we were using just wasn't noticable enough by ppl that are BLIND. So we needed to make it even more "in your face", just so there is never any doubt that it is "your" ABC that you are watching."