Ok... by now you've all heard that DS9 is returning to the screen [for those that haven't had it in syndication this entire time I should say]. SpikeTV starts it in April. So my questions are:
Will Flare revive a DS9 forum?
What should we be looking for during this rerun of the series [specifically the tech questions]?
And, is there anything that an uncut DS9 can give us?
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Well, first of all, saying that DS9 is returning to the screen (when it is rather returning to RERUNS) is a little misleading. You imply renewal.
To answer your questions:
No. TNG has been on reruns on Spike for years, and do you see an open forum for it?
I don't know about you, but I'm looking for nudie pics of Morn.
You are aware, I hope, that all seven seasons of the best Star Trek series (EVAR!) is available on DVD, in its uncut form. This isn't something new.
Question for you: when is Spike planning on airing our beloved most wonderful show of the not quite so beloved Star Trek franchise?
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Ok, two questions
1) (Snay) do you mean Voyager? and 2) (in general) uncut how, versus what we already have seen?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I'm pretty sure that Spike is showing the DS9 reruns in the evening, in the 7 or 8 PM timeslot currently held by TNG. But I could be wrong about that.
Oh, and don't forget that some people don't have $700 to spend on DVD's... Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Uncut as in not missing little snipets for extended commercial breaks like sometimes happens in syndication, I think is what he's talking about.
For instance, two parters frequently lose several minutes of footage when rerun.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Exactly. It's imporntant to see the USS Yeager patrolling around the station at least a dozen times. Love that ship. Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
At least the DS9 forum would be better than the ENT forum.
And yes, not everyone is capable of forking over that much for a set of DVDs... if I had that much I would continue saving until I got $1200 for a new guitar.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I am constantly confused by US television, but has DS9 not been on over there for the past couple of years at all?
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I know that there are several Canadian channels that show DS9 on a regular basis, although our sci-fi channel doesn't show DS9 in the daily Trek run, though, which is odd. They only show TOS, TNG, and VGR in a run.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
Local television in the Akron/Cleveland area was showing DS-9 in reruns last year.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
DS9, B5, Voyager and Farscape are not being aired in my area at all, unless you happen to have some sort of uber-TV with 6,000 channels. And I'm pissed. Except about Voyager, which sucked. And B5, which I've seen.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by J:
And yes, not everyone is capable of forking over that much for a set of DVDs... if I had that much I would continue saving until I got $1200 for a new guitar.
Ebay: I havent paid more than $60 for any season...I still need seasons 5 and 7 though. Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I don't think DS9 has been aired here since shortly after it ended. And TNG has been gone since before that, I think. (That's discounting cable, obviously.)
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
On the local Northern Michigan stations, TNG and then later DS9 (during its 7th season) was run in syndication on NBC at the ungodly hours of 3 or 4am during week, it was eventually replaced by a version of the Home Shopping Network.
As of recently, the last two years I was in college I caught DS9 on Fox at random times after midnight throughout the week or whenever they needed a filler show on the weekends before or after a sporting event.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
When I was in college, the local FOX affiliate angered me by playing the early seasons of DS9 out of order. Youd have 3 shows in a row, then they'd skip the one I really wanted to see, then jump 3 shows ahead. I wrote the station and they sent back some letter about contractually only being able to show an episode a certain number times, which made no sense. I missed the two episodes DS9 that I've never seen because of such moronitude.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I missed the episode "The Reckoning" when it first aired, and dispite the series being in syndication for a year after the run ended, I only got to watch the episode for the first time last week when I bought to DVD set of Ebay.
Good episode and it was great to actually see a "new" episode of my favorite Trek series after so long.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"...unless you happen to have some sort of uber-TV with 6,000 channels."
I thought Americans always prided themselves on having seven billion TV channels available even in the remotest middles of nowhere? B)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Seven billion channels only means there might be ten worthwhile things to watch a day. Hell, between spanish channels, shopping channels and religous channels, theres only about 100 channels nationwide.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I get about 200 or so channels through a satellite dish, but a bunch of those are movie channels, specialty channels, PPV, and only about 50 or so are channels that air normal (i.e. current) shows and some of those are just different timezone locales of the same station.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
That's not much different than the digital satellite system I've got. And our answer to FOX (being Sky One), managed to show at least 5 billion episodes of Trek a year. The final two seasons of DS9 were on nightly for the last couple of months.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Ebay: I havent paid more than $60 for any season...I still need seasons 5 and 7 though.
If I had $60... I'd probably save it because that would be enough for gas for the next three weeks until I get more work in.
I want a fuel-cell car that runs on water...
And no... in this area of the country they haven't shown a DS9 episode in over two years. It used to be on early morning Sunday, however that was before I got a VCR.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
You only got a VCR in the past two years? Are you living in 1984?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
It's not Beta, is it?
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
YOU SHOULD UPGRADE TO THE NEWEST TECHNOLOGY THE DVD
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Yes.
Have you been missing your pills recently? You've become very odd.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ultra Magnus: YOU SHOULD UPGRADE TO THE NEWEST TECHNOLOGY THE DVD
No, no - LASER disc.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
It's the new thing!
Posted by oracleguy (Member # 1257) on :
Is Spike still going to be playing TNG when they start airing DS9?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Probably: Trek is their only show that doesnt suck on ice.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Oh dear - just a bad thought then... "Trek on Ice"
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
SEE: HITLER ON ICE!
Ever see the TCM commercial where they're doing the Dirty Dozen on ice? Absolutely the strangest and most brilliantly done promo I've ever seen.
Yes... I only recently got a VCR, I also only recently got my own TV... and I got a VCR because at the time the only DVD-RW cost 500 dollars and only lasted for 4 hours on each disc... Fri-Mon can be 9 hours each day. A VCR was and still is the best choice--- well... actually if I could afford a TiVo device, but that's got a monthly payment [the bastards].
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
All I know is, the more available DS9 is, the better. TNG was the rebirth . . . DS9 was the culmination. Fuck Voyager.
There for awhile, my Trek fandom was waning, along with my interest in fiction in general. Deep Space Nine reminded me of the possibilities of fiction, and the rewards of it. But beyond that, it reminded me of what Trek was for me, and has become for me again.
As I've been acquiring DS9 on DVD, I've seen things I'd never seen before. DS9 wasn't available in my area after the first or second season, and what little I'd seen since was what a friend was able to snag from satellite feeds almost a decade ago, and what was available online since then. Sure, I'd read episode synopses, transcripts, Jammer's reviews . . . in my quest for tech info, I'd read it all.
But as I've watched the series, I've seen the fulfillment of Trek's potential. Voyager, Enterprise . . . even The Next Generation . . . in my personal opinion, these don't hold a candle to a Cardassian monstrosity and its extraordinary cast of characters.
It's funny, really. My limited exposure to DS9 from back in the day gave me a limited sense of the series. If each series could be said to have a texture and a color to it, then what little I knew of DS9 left it as dark and dingy and brocade. But now that I'm watching it all, I see more. I see the rainbow hues, and can appreciate the depth of that brocade fiber that before seemed so ugly and unfinished. Now I realize it is a tapestry, and a surprisingly beautiful and moving one.
I am a Niner. And, at the moment, a drunken Niner, but that's not important right now. And as I race through my newly-acquired Season Six, I can think of nothing better than the fact that others might come to know DS9 . . . on Spike or anywhere else. Then maybe there will be others who will look at this and understand, instead of just saying "the fuck was he drinking?"
That is all.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
OH! Look for the lone Sabre class starship that manages to survive both the re-taking of the station from the Dominion, but also the battle at Chintoka.
Each time they show it, it's zipping gracefully past all the other starships.
Worth watching in frame-by-frame.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Crewed by Andorians.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"You've become very odd."
When was he ever normal?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by J: DVD-RW cost 500 dollars and only lasted for 4 hours on each disc... Fri-Mon can be 9 hours each day.
If you're taping 9 hours of TV a day, there is something seriously wrong with you.
How on earth do you find time to watch it?
Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
He probably doesn't. I know at least two persons just like that.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Further, how do you tape nine hours? I assume you mean while you're not home. Most standard VHS tapes will only do six, though I THINK I've seen eight.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Eight isn't uncommon, as far as I know. But I've never seen anything higher.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
two or more tapes... and I was exaggerating... And usually I watch it when nothing else is on, like right now.
PS: I mean, the fact that the computer is right by the TV... watching a 30 min show takes about 20 fast forward through the commercials... and a 1 hr show takes 45 min. Also, I sometimes record stuff I'm already watch, but I just erase it afterwards. It's only recorded in case I'm out.
And don't bash it, while the good shows are on during the weekend, during weekdays it's all crap. So it essentially equals out.
Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
T-160 tapes will give you up to 8 hours (instead of the usual 6 for T-120 tapes) in SLP/EP (ack!) mode. Far more rare are T-180 tapes, which will give you 9 hours in that mode...
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
I've never found a T-180. And while the audio is sometimes iffy, it's rare and usually you would have noticed an audio problem in the live broadcast if my VCR picks it up.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
E180 (as they are called over here) are the most common tapes available in the UK. And they put "3 hours" on them, not "9 hours, if you don't mind the playback looking like absolute shit".
I can't stand LP. SLP would probably cause me to set fire to my eyes, if any of our VCR's supported it. Especially if I'm watching an NTSC tape.
You lot are shit.
Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
Actually, E180 is not the same as T180, as the tapes run at different speeds (and no, I don't mean SP, LP and EP/SLP, but the speed tied to the 25 or 30 FPS and 625 or 525 lines, respectively), so they are of different (physical) lengths. In fact, an E180 tape is the same as a T120 one... and a T180 would be an E260. Take a look here for further details.
And yes, SLP is awful.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
I'm highly confused, I rarely noticed a difference in it because I've got a 4-head VCR? I do know that when the tape is recorded on at SP when it's paused the picture stays crisp, this never happens with EP. That's essentially the only difference I've found.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
The picture is blurry, and the sound loses all treble and becomes shit.
You, sir, are the sort of person who can't tell the difference between 640 x 480 and 1024 x 768, or VHS and DVD.
You, in short, suck.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
I can honestly say I've never before encountered VHS elitists, PsyLiam. Posted by Manticore (Member # 1227) on :
lol, there's elitists everywhere G2K, for everything. I wouldn't be surprised if there were porn elitists... Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Ever since I bought my DVD player five years ago I have rarely touched a VHS tape again. A friend of mine had a collection of over 400 films on VHS. Now he has all of them on DVD and has thrown away most of his VHS cassettes. He gave me about 40 of the better movies and they are now rotting in my basement.
Honestly, once one has access to DVDs or HDTV, who needs VHS crap anymore?
*puts on asbestos suit*
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Everyone who doesn't have a DVD or HD recorder.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
I haven't got a DVD recorder myself...
What is there to record? 40 TV stations, almost all of their programs crap. And even if there is a decent show or program, it's ruined by commercials.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
There is plenty to record. And, if you have a VCR, you can even fast-forward past the commercials! Cool, huh? B)
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"40 TV stations, almost all of their programs crap. And even if there is a decent show or program, it's ruined by commercials."
As you say, "almost all". What about the ones that aren't crap? If there's a really good show, you'll just refuse to watch it because of the commercials?
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
Hey my friend, I do know the difference between 640 x 480 and 1024 x 768:
640 is too small of a screen area and makes everything look like I'm seeing it through a magnifying glass.
1024 is a gawdy amount of screen area and makes everything look like ants.
600 x 800 is the best for my aged 15" monitor. _____
Back to the tape... The speakers suck anyway, if it was surround sound maybe there would be a reason to want it to record good sound but no... it's on board speakers. And as I've said before, I've never noticed a difference in screen clarity unless I record something from a tape again [IE hook up to VCR's so that I can cut out all the commerials and keep a copy of something], and then it's darker than it was before.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN: As you say, "almost all". What about the ones that aren't crap? If there's a really good show, you'll just refuse to watch it because of the commercials?
Well, to avoid discussing anything that might be illegal. Lets just say the amount of tv I watch has dropped to such a low level, its much easier not get cable or sat tv, and just ah....have it conveniently drop into my hands in digital form. And this convenient dropping only takes maybe oh...three or four hours per week, in the background while I'm doing actual work.
Anything I really enjoy, I just buy on DVD afterwards. I haven't done the math, but I think you come out ahead if you only buy two or three dvd sets a year vs. cable/sat subscriptions for a year.
Hypothetically.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
40 channels? Maybe in Russia.
HA HA THE PAST.
(Sorry.)
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Yes, we have around 40 channels (not including all the Homeshopping ones). Yet the program was better when there were only 3 stations - sans commercials. In those days I used to record TNG for example. And I didn't have to fastforward through any commercials.
The time I watch TV every week has also dropped to such a low level that it comes to about two to three hours (a week that is).
I HATE commercials. And it's getting worse every year.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, it's either that or you pay the television stations directly yourself. I mean, they have to get money from somewhere.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Well, we do have to pay for watching TV you know! Even if we don't watch the "public" stations.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Speaking of which, can one of our UK friends explain their TV tax?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
it covers their amazing Sci-Fi SFX.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
You mean there is no TV "tax" - or whatever you want to call it - in the US? (a certain amount of money you have to pay each year if you own a TV or radio - in Germany that's currently around 120 Euro (about 145 US-Dollars) per year!)
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Nope.
We have to pay for things like satellite or cable, but I can buy a TV, plug it into the wall, and receive probably 3 or 4 channels completely free. However, I am forced to listen to commercials every few minutes for everything from Viagra and tampons to Kitty Litter.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Why cant they just combine those three products somehow and save us two commercials?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
There is no TV tax. There is the TV License, something completely different in ever way. If you have a TV, you have to have it. Legally. So, not a tax, then.
You pay around �110 a year. This money basically pays for BBC 1, 2, 3 and 4, BBC News 24, the 5 radio stations, Childrens BBC, Ceebeebees (or however that's spelt), and some other stuff. None of them have adverts. You can't watch any of them other than BBC 1 and 2, or listen to any more than the 5 radio stations unless you have some form of digital or cable equipment.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Actually, Aban, you can just plug it in and get up to twelve (depending on how many you have in your broadcast area) -- up quite a bit more if you hook up a UHF antenna, too.
Back in the moldy days of the mid-80s, our pre-cable TV got ABC (4), NBC (5), CBS (7), PBS (9), local independent (11), and local independent 2 -- later Fox (13) on the regular dial, and two more independents (22 and 28) on UHF. We had an awesome local public TV station. They would have regular marathons of Red Dwarf and Black Adder, as well as slotting them into regular programming along with old Monty Python, Hitchhiker's Guide, and Fawlty Towers eps. Loved those growing up, but then I wasn't exactly a normal child.
--Jonah
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Well, I was just talking about what *I* can get when I plug my TV in. I get NBC (16), CBS (22), ABC (Don't know the number cause I never watch it), FOX (28) and WB(25). I think I get a PBS station too, which might be 13... but I don't know. If I get it, it comes in like crap.
I never watch CBS or ABC because I don't like their programming and they don't come in all that well.
Question about British television... if you can only watch BBC 1 and 2, why are there 5 stations? Or did you mean that you can watch the other 3 if you have digital equipment...?
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Any idea on the numbers of folks who cheat and don't pay? How would they know if you didn't?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Question about British television... if you can only watch BBC 1 and 2, why are there 5 stations? Or did you mean that you can watch the other 3 if you have digital equipment...?"
That's what he said. The other ones require cable/digital.
Which I guess means you pay for them twice?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
No. Confusion has arisen.
There are 5 terrestrial stations (ie, stations you don't need any extra equipment to pick up). The other are ITV, C4, and C5. They are all funded by advertising, and hence have advert breaks.
If you want to pick up the other BBC channels, you need extra equipment, but you don't need to pay for them. If I let my Sky (digital satellite) subscription run out, I'll still be able to use the equipment to get BBC 3, 4, and the others.
You can also buy a "freeview" box for around �90 which gives you access to all other BBC channels, if you don't want to get a digital or cable subscription.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Ah. Alright. Confusion sustained.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
'Round these parts, you pay a monthly fee to your local cable service provider for their channel package (a mix of public and commercial stations which you have zero control over and varies from area to area), a seperate municipial tax just for the privilege of HAVING a cable connection (like you do for electricity, water, etc) even if you don't own a single TV, AND a yearly national tax (which I suppose is the equivalent of a British TV license) by which the public stations are funded, despite the fact that said public stations often push more ads than most commercial ones do. Then there are the digital and satellite providers which you can also get a subscription from. Fun, eh?
Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: Actually, Aban, you can just plug it in and get up to twelve (depending on how many you have in your broadcast area) -- up quite a bit more if you hook up a UHF antenna, too.
You can't get "up to twelve", since per technical specifications, there has to be a one-channel (6MHz) separation between stations in VHF to avoid them interfering each other. Here in Lima we have the maximum possible: 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13 in VHF. That's 7 channels in total. 4 and 5 can both operate simultaneously because there's actually a 4MHz gap between them assigned to police/military communications IIRC.
In UHF, the required gap was 5 channels (30MHz), so we used to have channels 15, 27, 33, 45 and 51 some years ago, though lately it seems they've relaxed a bit as there have appeared, for example, channels 19 and 21, with just a 6MHz gap between them like in VHF. Well, back then when it was up to channel 83 (and not 69 like nowadays that the upper end of the UHF spectrum has been reassigned to cellulars, argh) the 30MHz gap would have meant a maximum of 12 channels: 15, 21, 27, 33, 39, 45, 51, 57, 63, 69, 75 and 81 in our case. The reduction to 69 as the uppermost channel reduced the maximum to just 10. The reduction of the gap to 6MHz would give a theoretical maximum of 28 channels (squeezing another 2 between each 2 of the former 10 maximum).
Of course, all this is just for M systems, as the frequency assignments and channel bandwidth are different depending on the TV system used... (NTSC, PAL, SECAM = norm, specifies how color information is encoded into the TV signal; A, B, G, I, N, M, etc. = system, everything else, as defined before color TV existed)
Posted by machf (Member # 1233) on :
Oops, actually the difference between system and norm is just the other way around, system defines the color coding (NTSC, PAL, SECAM) and norm, everything else...
That's what happens when you don't sleep enough during the night...
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)