Slashdot Mirror


Fifty Years of Color Television

peter303 writes "The Houston Chronicle notes that color TVs were first manufactured on March 25, 1954 at a price of $1000 (about $4000 in today's dollars). Some of the older folk here remember the excitement of your first neighbors acquiring one of these in the 1960s and as the TV series one-by-one switched to color. Ironically, for such a high tech nation, there hasn't been a major quality improvement in TV broadcast images for a half-century until the 2006 changeover to HDTV."

10 of 469 comments (clear)

  1. 1669 hours... a perspective by amyhughes · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Adults are projected to watch, on average, 1,669 hours of television in 2004, about 70 days worth, according to census figures.

    1669 hours... a perspective:

    If you are awake 16 hours per day 1669 hours is 104 days, not "just" 70. Apparently, on average, adults watch TV 29% of their waking hours. If you work/commute 45 hours per week, your "free time" is, if you do nothing else, about 9 1/2 hours per day, of which, on average, you watch TV 4 1/2 hours.

    So the average adult uses more than half of their available time watching TV.

    Pretty sad.

    Amy

    1. Re:1669 hours... a perspective by NotAnotherReboot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I concur, reading /. is much more productive.

    2. Re:1669 hours... a perspective by Jens_UK · · Score: 5, Insightful
      And years ago, the average American spent X amount of time listening to the radio, and before that, books. Years from now, it will be the internet, and then after that people will waste time on the holodeck.

      So your problem is with people, and not tv, right?

    3. Re:1669 hours... a perspective by rhadamanthus · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Goddam dude, the aprent did not say:


      1) Anything about Americans

      2) Anything about not owning a TV

      3) Anything about being superior


      That was not a troll comment, it was a sad commentary on just how much TV people watch. I think you might be a troll however...

      --rhad

      --
      Slashdot needs to interview Natalie Portman.
  2. improvements by wmeyer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, there have been numerous quality improvements, though they have come in the receivers, rather than in the NTSC standard. The standard itself is rather elegant, and apart from the error that resulted in shifting to a non-integer frame rate (and the problems that has created for designers of hardware for decades), it has proved very robust.

    --
    --- Bill
  3. A story... by pcmanjon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My dad recalls (born in 1952) when his neighbors got color TV and he remembers everyone on the street tried to get in the house to watch it.

    He remembers one time when it broke and the whole neighborhood pitched in to fix it...

  4. quality hasn't changed since ~1939. by millia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    actually, the quality hasn't changed, back even further than that. since color tv was to be able to be forwards and backwards compatible with black and white, the color signal was hacked into the black and white standard.
    this was not the case in britain, where a new, but incompatible, standard was created, that used bandwidth more effectively, and had better color.
    so hdtv is the first new standard since about 1939. it's about damn time.
    this proves, once again, that standards are a double-edged sword. use and choose carefully...

    --
    stored on computers from birth to the grave
  5. This Onion is for you by aliens · · Score: 5, Funny
    --
    -- taking over the world, we are.
  6. Quality was LOUSY until the 1970s... by dpbsmith · · Score: 5, Informative

    In theory, the quality should have been OK, and perhaps it was in a studio, on a high-quality monitor, via closed circuit.

    In practice, the home receivers of the late 1950s and 1960s were lousy. They were very temperamental beasts. They had no built-in degaussers and if you moved them or turned them you'd get color changes due to the earth's magnetic field.

    The tube circuits were unstable and drifted. They had no ability to compensate for any signal variation, so colors shifted from program to commercial, from program to station break, from program to program, and sometimes from camera to camera within a program. You were constantly leaping up to fiddle with the contrast, brightness, saturation, and hue adjustments.

    The tubes were never properly converged (and had about seventeen tweaks needed to converge them).

    The picture tubes were circular rather than rectangular and cut off significant parts of the picture. The phosphors couldn't deliver much brightness, so they couldn't put the usual neutral tint in the CRT face; a set when turned off looked pale grey rather than dark. When turned on, room light washed out the colors (and if you turned the brightness up the picture looked even worse).

    They were trophies and icons of conspicuous consumption, but it wasn't much fun watching them. I've often suspect that at least part of the reason for the popularity of the Disney show is that animated cartoons were relatively unharmed by slight color distortions.

    In the 1970s, solid-state circuits and the introduction of various AGC and other automatic-adjustment features finally brought home receivers to the point where they were worth watching.

  7. Re:Yes, but... by boarder8925 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    that's "colors" you insensive clod!
    Not all Slashdotters are American, insensitive clod!