Yeah, tell me about it. They should just stick to running mega-huge stereo adverts in the newspaper, where they belong … where you um, can’t hear the stereo at all! They’d probably sell twice as many. What the hell were they thinking? :rolleyes:
Big deal. I remember the ads Archimedes pasted on see-saws when his Lever went into production.
Bah. I remember when meiosis was the Next Big Thing.
I know it’s different in the US, but here in good old Blighty, there are precious few HD channels, and only on Sky. And HD players aren’t cheap, with precious few films or series to view on them.
So it’s not really worth buying HD here.
Meh, I remember seeing billboards proclaiming the upcoming Big Bang. Apparently it didn’t affect my universe, but the one next door took quite a jolt.
Oh yeah, well, I can remember hearing about the singularity before… umm…
Many public places have HDTVs now. Sometimes those HD commercials will run on those TVs. A person who does not own an HDTV can then experience the high quality in the commercial and be convinced to purchase.
It’s kinda like a commercial on HBO that advertises how great HBO is and tells you to call your local cable company to order HBO. WTF. If I didn’t already have HBO, how could I see the commercial.
But sometimes people who dont yet personally subscribe to HBO end up watching it at other places. . .
In the same vein, I’d like to say something to the world’s car manufacters:
Stop trying to make me feel a RUSH OF SPEED in your goddamn commercials. Listen up: my television is STATIONARY. My sofa is STATIONARY. Got it? I don’t care if you put a camera in a freaking F-15, my TV is not going to move one damned inch. Are you guys retarded or what?
How I missed this thread until now is a mystery. In any event, the rant has a great beat, and I can dance to it. Brings the funny, with an undercurrent of venom. Mandatory deduction for failure to include a single “fuckwit” applies.
8/10.
I think that was an unfair rating. Now if YOU didn’t include a "fuckwit " I would
wholeheartedly agree 
Actually, they could show you HDTV on a regular def TV.
Imagine a split-screen, where one camera is focused on the HDTV, and the second is focused on a regular def TV. Then both cameras slowly zoom in. The closeup of the HDTV will still show a picture that is as sharp as possible on a low def TV, while the closeup of the regular TV on the right will just be a blurry mass.
If you are watching on a low def tv, I should think they would both be blurry masses.
Really? I watch low def TV all the time and in fact watched low def TV most of my life and somehow those poor low def TV’s managed to produce recognizable pictures. I’m fairly certain that if regular low def TV’s were only capable of showing blurry masses, no one would have ever watched them, ever.
I obviously mistated my arguement.
If they zoom the TV picture (which we are watching on “low def”) which is LD on one side and HD on the other side of a split screen, the LD and HD sides should look the same. When the LD side begins to blur, our LD TV we are watching should blur, too so that the HD picture rendered in LD will be blurry, too.
Damm. Now I’m confused.
What the fuck are you doing? Jesus, grow up. Nobody gives a goddamn about your stupid ass ratings.
To those who feel the need to rail on television ads for not completely enveloping you in a the sort of visual/physical feedback you seem to think you’re missing out on via a TV advert, please allow your testicles to descend and try to realize: they’re trying to create false appeal through the use of visual bravado to get you to go see the product in person because you obviously can’t use it through the goddamn television set. Of course, we all know that the folks who are critical of something so trifling as whether or not the finite physical details of a product can be conveyed faithfully through a TV are so hopelessly thick in the skull that they can’t be appealed to anyway.
Sam Stone is right though, adverts for cars shouldn’t show them moving at high speeds. They should be sitting perfectly still. In traffic. With a tired person driving home after a long day. Dirty too. I mean, why try to make the product appealing through the use of fantasy when they could simply show us the day-to-day reality of using the vehicle? I’m sure folks would flock to buy the car then! One would certainly imagine that discovering a product doesn’t generate the kind of life-enriching fantasy shown in its commercial would be enough to get people to stop buying it. I suppose that explains why people continue buy alcohol even though they don’t suddenly become surrounded by young, well-dressed, and physically-toned people of the opposite sex who proceed to fawn all over them, right?
So how would you sell a car, Sam, since you’re obviously much less of a “retard” at this than the advertisers are?
As for Carnivorous and those whose minds can’t seem to wrap around the concept of how it’s even remotely possible to convey the drama of an HDTV image on an SDTV television (or LDTV as he likes to call it … we’re obviously in the company of experts here!), I’ll let you in on a little secret. They fake it. GASP They show you a shiny new product whose color and clarity are exaggerated via the use of high contrast, black backgrounds, glossy finishes, and bright imagery to create appeal for the same reason that a peacock flaunts its tail feathers at another peacock: to draw attention. Why, they might even be showing you a peacock flaunting its tail feathers as an example of how colorful and eye-catching the new product is. Satellite radio gets advertised on terrestrial radio all the time because (yes, it’s true) the people who listen to terrestrial radio are the same people who might pay for satellite radio. Imagine that … selling a product to the audience most likely to buy it! Brilliant! I know it’s kinda hard to digest for the thickskulls here who probably throw a tantrum when somebody sharpens a pencil in the office next to them, who are the same kind of people that stomp their feet and say “How do I know that the high definition image they’re showing me is actually high definition on my standard definition set, and how could the advertisers be so dumb as to think I can truly appreciate it as a result?” It’s okay though, this is an expected response since you’re stubborn, hard to communicate with, and just stoopid in general. Well, fuckwit, I can only say that you’ll just have to take a deep breath, take their word for it and try not to be so upset at television commercials. That and maybe go buy an HDTV because pretty soon everything’s gonna be in high definition and we don’t want you to have an embolysm over all the misdirected stress which will surely accumulate in your thick skull after viewing all that digital content on your SDTV.
Look, I said fuckwit! In context too. I’m excited now.
Let me guess.
You work in advertising, right? 
Heh, work in advertising? No, I just understand its reason for being. This pitting is so completely stupid because it’s not even about the ad itself, but about the inherent paradox in the evolving broadcast industry – that of promoting the new technology by means of the old technology. What exactly are the broadcasters supposed to do to appease those who agree with the OP? I suppose they should wait until all the luddites finally get an HDTV before they can begin broadcasting ads for the product that the customer just bought? By that time, I expect to see another pit thread from the OP boycotting Taco Bell and calling the people at their advertising agency idiots because he couldn’t taste a chalupa through his HDTV set.
You might find that a stretch, but it’s the same type of logic, I’m afraid.
That would be making money if I’m not mistaken. From the guy they make the ad for, not me.
I’d love to have an HDTV, but trying to sell me one by showing the picture on a normal TV is just silly.
So how should they sell it to you? On the radio? In print? Door-to-door salesperson?