I was totally surprised to see, in last night's episode of House, scenes that were clearly, totally, and entirely not 4x3 safe!

I noticed this, because there was one scene with two characters talking to each other, and their two faces were to the left and to the right of the 4x3 safe zone. It was if the director were making a statement "we are declaring ourselves free of the 4x3 safe straitjacket, and making maximum use of the 16x9 image".

Has anyone noticed this on any other show ?

Fox uses AFD. It would be interesting to check SD downconversions by sat and cable producers if it was letterboxed. Some CECBs, such as the Zenith, support AFD.

PBS SD is not 4:3 safe, or at least my affiliate is not. They crop wide screen to fit 4:3 and don't care in the least what falls off the edges. Text become unreadable because of the letters thrown away.

The Ken Burns film has key subjects at the far edges, and the SD version loses it all.

I once saw them stretch an SD program for wide screen broadcast on the HD channel, and then crop the wide screen back to 4:3 for broadcast on the SD channel. Wackiest thing I ever saw.

Here in Dallas, KDFW (Fox O&O) and KXAS (NBC O&O) were early adopters of AFD, working with Verizon to employ it on the SD versions of the channels delivered via FiOS. Starting back in May or so, Verizon switched from the station-delivered SD feeds to AFD-controlled downconverts of each station's HD feed. Both were sending out 16:9 on their scripted shows, and 4:3 on the live and reality stuff. KDFW has since reverted to a straight centercut of all programming, but the AFD on KXAS is alive and kicking, which makes for some interesting switching on commercials because the flip seems to be about a half second behind.

Is anyone else actually seeing AFD-controlled letterboxing from a Fox station? I'm curious to know if Fox elected to go to straight centercuts or if Verizon is no longer following the AFD flags on KDFW.

the AFD on KXAS is alive and kicking, which makes for some interesting switching on commercials because the flip seems to be about a half second behind.


I guess that must be an NBC problem?:confused: I thought it might have been the local affiliate or even my converter box(Zenith). The worst thing is even if you use Cropped all the time, the picture on NBC flickers between the show and commercial breaks. Sometimes even between commercials. They either need to fix it or preferably abandon it altogether.

Fox uses AFD. It would be interesting to check SD downconversions by sat and cable producers if it was letterboxed. Some CECBs, such as the Zenith, support AFD.

FOX Letterboxes via AFD the splicer HD signal since they do not offer a separate SD feed anymore. The cableco's in my area use AFD so it isn't a problem. Each cableco will ultimately determine what their subs see. We told our cablecos to use AFD with a default to center cut when no AFD was present and they have. We are just now starting to use AFD with locally produced material. Right now only using center cut or letterbox to keep things simple until we get a better handle on the inter workings of AFD.

All that about AFD is interesting, but my point is that up until now, I have not seen any HD TV programming that was not 4x3 safe, even when it was likely that SD broadcasts were going to be letterboxed anyway.

In other words, TV directors and their cameramen were putting all the content in the 4x3 safe zone. Everything on the left and right was unnecessary content. Watching the NBA playoffs, for example, the cameraman would always strive to put all the players in the 4x3 safe zone, with mostly just flooring in the areas outside.

So, the point is that I think that there has been a transition from:

" We need to use a 16x9 HD camera for those few rich geeks who have an HD TV, but be sure to put everything in the 4x3 safe zone. "

to

" We need to come up with some good artsy wide shots, so we look good on people's new HD sets. "

I hope so!

I hate SD picture!

My Name Is Earl did some jokes in the side areas specifically for HD viewers, though in general it was 4:3 safe. ER was shot safe for both 4:3 and 16:9 since the pilot, but IIRC the later seasons were 16:9-only. Smallville was 16:9-only for quite a while and was letterboxed on the SD feed from the network.

The primary reasons for AFD in ATSC were to prevent windowbox (aka postage stamp effect) on 4:3 material and to force letterbox on material framed for 16:9 on 4:3 displays.

NBC and FOX have taken the lead for broadcast network support of AFD. I haven't heard anything about ABC, but they did write a paper (http://www.nab.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Resources&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=12755) a few years ago that apparently supports the concept. Last I heard CBS/CW had no immediate plans, perhaps in part due to CBS's CEO reported dislike of letterbox. Obviously things can change.

As most of the dwindling number of 4:3 sets are getting feeds from sat and cable providers, their control of the aspect ratio conversion eliminates the variable of the viewer altering the original intent of the presentation - whether they like it or not. Without AFD I suspect providers will default to center cut (as foxeng's station has recommended). Perhaps letterbox will become the default at some point. Hopefully providers will make AFD support of those utilizing it a priority.

I think many producers are now thinking ahead to future syndication when HD will be the norm. This was the original motivation for prime time shows to go HD 10 years ago. AFD can give them greater confidence that their shows will be viewed with proper framing on 4:3 displays. My estimation is the OP is correct and (hopefully) we'll see this as a trend. 4:3 viewers will be dwindling and most will probably get used to letterbox.

My guess is that 16:9 framing will become universal when a 21:9 (2.35) video standard is rolled out. Then we all get to wait for that transition. The display is already here (http://www.consumer.philips.com/c/cinema-21-9/30849/cat/gb/).

A-dude, have you seen the discussions in this recent thread about the Today Show? No doubt we're in a transition,.... make that a long transition.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1177569

A-dude, have you seen the discussions in this recent thread about the Today Show? No doubt we're in a transition,.... make that a long transition.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1177569

Holy ****!!! :eek::eek::eek: I'd hate to see 4:3 content on that screen!

All that about AFD is interesting, but my point is that up until now, I have not seen any HD TV programming that was not 4x3 safe, even when it was likely that SD broadcasts were going to be letterboxed anyway.
That's the problem - it's not even close to likely. Many more networks center cut HD for SD than letterbox it. Fox and NBC are two of the select few. That's why we're seeing a larger and larger epidemic of network bugs hanging out practically in the middle of the screen.

Bugs are only for the broadcast. Short of remastering, framing is forever. The bug placement vs framing decisions are made by entirely two different groups. If producers start delivering 16:9 material to ABC and CBS, I think there will be pressure for those networks to join the party.

Commercials are another area where 16:9 framing will be an issue. Many are framed for 16:9 and letterboxed for SD presentation. Now that SD broadcasting is pretty much extinct, that option is gone and AFD becomes much more significant. This may be more of an influence than the programming itself.

I've been noticing the frame composition too. They also are no longer being careful about text and the top and bottom of the screen. My old HD RPTV has overscan (about 960 horizontal lines visible) so subtitles and sometimes text in some shows is partially cut off. From a CE report I read the other day many consumer replace their TVs every 4-5 years. That means in 4 years or so 4:3 will be really extinct as people who will be replacing their old analog 4:3 sets now can only replace them with digital 16:9 sets. There might be concerns about exporting some shows to countries which haven't like India what haven't caught up to DTV yet but then in some of those countries people don't seem to mind letterboxed TV unlike Americans. In fact I've seen the local Asian channels broadcast movies in letterbox for years.

Is HD finally the norm ?No.

I was also going to mention since someone else did that some commercials are not only 4:3 but streamed in different resolutions. I'm not sure this may be just a cable thing (in this case Comcast) but the SD Extended Basic channels which are currently open QAM in my area can be tuned in using my HDHomeRun. It is funny to watch VLC change the window size going from commercial to commercial. These are most likely cable "inserts." I know they do this on the HD versions which I can't see with HDHR because they are encrypted but before changing a setting on my Comcast DVR it was flipping the set from HD to SD for some of the insert spots. I don't see this on local channels but there may not be cable inserts on locals.

I also think the networks which are very cost conscious these days will no longer feel it is worth supporting the dwindling 4:3 set owners.

I don't think CBS does letterboxing for it's SD and if HD was finally the norm, "The Amazing Race" would have been laughed off the air a long time ago.

I guess it needs to be clarified. Is HD finally the norm - for what? In this thread I think the intent was framing. At what point do we say it's the norm? When more than half the programs frame for 16:9? We're not there yet, but at least we're seeing signs that 4:3 is not getting the near universal consideration that it once had.

Analog SD broadcasting did afford direct control by the networks and stations of the downconversion process, and there was a bit of a step backwards when that ability was lost with the analog cutoff. Conan was framed for 16:9 for a while. Bugs were in the corners. However, the analog cutoff made digital the primary transmission which, for the majority of major stations, is in an HD format (at least on their primary channel). Digital is no longer the secondary service that only a few people watch. It's now the money maker. As such I think that has accelerated the mindset of HD being the norm.

I suppose a milepost will be when the default downconversion by providers will be letterbox, and the viewing public sees video filling their 4:3 screens as something wrong.

I was totally surprised to see, in last night's episode of House, scenes that were clearly, totally, and entirely not 4x3 safe! ... Has anyone noticed this on any other show ?I was pleasantly surprised to see this on WUSA local news the other day. Occasionally they do a wide shot with four people at a desk, which would fit perfectly in 16:9; but instead, they'd been framing them in the 4:3 safe area, with lots of space around them. Until the other day.

A lot of the scripted network shows have been presented in letterbox on the SD feeds for a while now. But for the local news to break out of 4:3 struck me as a big moment.

HD may not yet be "the norm" but it is clear to me that the marketplace has decided it is (or will be). You will recall that when the ATSC standards came out, HD was not required and there was concern here that many stations would not offer HD because of costs and other considerations. There does seem to be some broadcasters not supplying HD but I bet that is a small percentage. So I do think that HD is well on the way to being the new standard for broadcast.

Another indication of HD's power can be seen in network advertising. While not yet 100%, there are now commercial breaks within programs that are all HD spots. I also notice that HD spots tend to be better produced and more compelling to watch (at least to me).

Without AFD I suspect providers will default to center cut (as foxeng's station has recommended). Perhaps letterbox will become the default at some point. Hopefully providers will make AFD support of those utilizing it a priority.

No one in the 4:3 world wants to see a letter boxed 4:3 image with bars on the side. (A 19 inch 4:3 TV reduced to a 13 inch picture.) To them it looks like a 4:3 picture with bars all around. They get REAL touchy about that one.

Our intent with the default center cut was until more material is available in 16:9 to letterbox, center cut was a better alternative with the station having final say on what the 4:3 viewer sees via AFD when a 16:9 image is available. Of course the station still has to be careful since many CECB's DON'T have AFD on them (or the viewer doesn't know how to turn it on or even cares) and your smaller cablecos don't provide AFD for their subs yet. We are definitely in a transitional period.

That was the thought anyway.

HD may not yet be "the norm" but it is clear to me that the marketplace has decided it is (or will be). You will recall that when the ATSC standards came out, HD was not required and there was concern here that many stations would not offer HD because of costs and other considerations. There does seem to be some broadcasters not supplying HD but I bet that is a small percentage. So I do think that HD is well on the way to being the new standard for broadcast.

If you look in the AVS archives, you will see I was saying years ago that even though HD wasn't required, it would be the norm eventually. The scathing comments I had said to me that I didn't know what I was talking about was amazing. There were no reasons for stations to do anything different was the battle cry of these naysayers.

The issue has always been that as long as stations had to maintain two different AR and resolution formats, stations would go with the predominate formats. Up until June 12, 2009, that was 4:3 480i. After the transition date was set in 2005, that is when you saw the tide shift in earnest toward HD. It amazes me just how fast the broadcast industry (equipment manufacturers and broadcasters) has moved in that direction.

In 2006 I had a conversation with my boss. We were talking about how long did we think it would be that HD would be a "requirement" of stations to have available to them to compete. I said within 3 to 5 years. He thought longer. I based that on the fact that once broadcasters could shed themselves of multiple formats and equipment costs come down, it would happen pretty quick. And that is what has happened.

Example (my boss and I were talking about this just the other day), in 2002 we paid $25k for a SIMPLE 480i digital (not EVEN analog) to HD (720p or 1080i) upconverter. That is ALL it did. It came in a box that weighed about 30 lbs and took up 5 rack units (about 9 inches vertical and about 30 inches deep). For that same $25k you can now buy 7 upconverters that not only will upconvert, they will downconvert, cross convert not only digital but analog to digital and digital back to analog along with audio and uses only 1 rack unit of space (1 7/8 inch high and 10 inches deep) and weighs about 3 lbs and most of that weight is the metal box and dual redundant power supplies. (It is the AJA FS-1).

With those kind of state of the art changes and price reductions, stations can see a HD future without breaking the bank, something just 5 years ago, didn't seem possible. The problem is now the damn recession is getting in the way of capital upgrades. With advertising off 40% national, that hurts capital purchases, BADLY. Stations only buy what they need to stay in business, not the latest and greatest widgets. That will be the one impediment to how fast stations upgrade to HD now. Money.

... but the AFD on KXAS is alive and kicking, which makes for some interesting switching on commercials because the flip seems to be about a half second behind.


Interesting.

In the UK we use AFDs internally on our 16:9 SD networks (where they are used to drive ARCs that derive the 4:3 analogue PAL feed for analogue regions), and broadcast them on the DVB-T OTA (aka Freeview) terrestrial broadcasts for receiver decoding. However the UK satellite platform doesn't support AFDs, so they are used internally to drive ARCs and are accompanied by MPEG2 header aspect ratio switching.

AFDs are frame accurate, but MPEG2 header switching only happens on GOP boundaries, so can be noticably out of sync with material changes. As a aspect ratio changes usually happen on transitions via black to avoid the burst of wrong aspect ratio frames.

(With AFD in SD you transmit a permanent 16:9 signal and AFD signal the active portions - and the safe areas. With MPEG2 signalling you deliver either 4:3 or 16:9 rasters and signal the ratio change on the GOP header AIUI. If fed via an AFD-ed source you need an ARC to do the conversion prior to MPEG2 encoding)

Interesting.

In the UK we use AFDs internally on our 16:9 SD networks (where they are used to drive ARCs that derive the 4:3 analogue PAL feed for analogue regions), and broadcast them on the DVB-T OTA (aka Freeview) terrestrial broadcasts for receiver decoding. However the UK satellite platform doesn't support AFDs, so they are used internally to drive ARCs and are accompanied by MPEG2 header aspect ratio switching.

AFDs are frame accurate, but MPEG2 header switching only happens on GOP boundaries, so can be noticably out of sync with material changes. As a aspect ratio changes usually happen on transitions via black to avoid the burst of wrong aspect ratio frames.

(With AFD in SD you transmit a permanent 16:9 signal and AFD signal the active portions - and the safe areas. With MPEG2 signalling you deliver either 4:3 or 16:9 rasters and signal the ratio change on the GOP header AIUI. If fed via an AFD-ed source you need an ARC to do the conversion prior to MPEG2 encoding)

In my case, we are inserting the AFD code at the source so when the switch occurs, the code changes at the same time to try and cut down on abrupt AR changes.

In my case, we are inserting the AFD code at the source so when the switch occurs, the code changes at the same time to try and cut down on abrupt AR changes.Which may look fine before encoding, but couldn't it be delayed as much as the GOP length minus 1 frame? It helps to be in 720P as the time length of the GOP in frames is half of interlaced. Worse case for a 15 frame 720/60P GOP would be about a quarter second. I suppose using scene change detection on the encoder for starting a new GOP would help this too.

On traditional mezzanine network feeds it seems this delay would be made worse with subsequent encoding. In NBC's case, especially as they are interlaced, the AFD boundary could be delayed by the network GOP length and then again by the local station's encoder. Are there encoders that can look at the AFD and create a new GOP when it sees that information change? That wouldn't be quite as drastic as using scene change detection. Can the AFD only be in the GOP header? It's not like it's that data intensive. I suppose I could look for that information too :D

BTW someone told me that ABC's lab did tests with AFD and found the switching delays to be an issue.

As a aspect ratio changes usually happen on transitions via black to avoid the burst of wrong aspect ratio frames.That could happen within a commercial break which typically has little if any time between the elements. Even program/ commercial transitions are often tight. Seconds add up for that $$$ (or £££ , €€€, etc :D).

No.

I agree, just watch the typical HD channel with commercials.

Which may look fine before encoding, but couldn't it be delayed as much as the GOP length minus 1 frame? It helps to be in 720P as the time length of the GOP in frames is half of interlaced. Worse case for a 15 frame 720/60P GOP would be about a quarter second. I suppose using scene change detection on the encoder for starting a new GOP would help this too.

On traditional mezzanine network feeds it seems this delay would be made worse with subsequent encoding. In NBC's case, especially as they are interlaced, the AFD boundary could be delayed by the network GOP length and then again by the local station's encoder. Are there encoders that can look at the AFD and create a new GOP when it sees that information change? That wouldn't be quite as drastic as using scene change detection. Can the AFD only be in the GOP header? It's not like it's that data intensive. I suppose I could look for that information too :D

BTW someone told me that ABC's lab did tests with AFD and found the switching delays to be an issue.

I will be the first to admit this is still evolving technology. We are just starting to get in to it so I don't have any real answers, yet. FOX Network seems to have it figured out though.

Are the AFD flags supposed to be passed all the way to our receivers? I see that Fox is passing the AFD flag (no surprise since they pass the whole MPEG-2 stream untouched) to indicate 4:3 safe 16:9 shows and shows that aren't 4:3 safe (namely the Simpsons) but I haven't found any NBC programs that have the flag set.

Excuse me, but what are AFDs? :confused:

Excuse me, but what are AFDs? :confused:

They are new flags (or old flags if you're British) that describe the content of the program in more detail than just the resolution and the aspect ratio. For example these will also tell your receiver if it's safe to show just the center 4:3 portion of the 16:9 widescreen frame. This can be used to tell a station that they have to letterbox a program on their SD feed if they can't show just the center, or it could be used to let people with 4:3 televisions automatically chop off the sides to fill the screen without missing anything too important.

That could happen within a commercial break which typically has little if any time between the elements. Even program/ commercial transitions are often tight. Seconds add up for that $$$ (or £££ , €€€, etc :D).

Ah - do you guys still have 4:3 commercials then?

We switched to all 16:9 commercial delivery to all outlets ("C Day") in 2000 (Think it was then - the same year that the BBC switched to 16:9 for Network News - though the BBC News 24 channel had been 16:9 since 1997) - whether 4:3 or 16:9. This means ad breaks on channels capable of broadcasting in 16:9 (HD or SD) can show a break with no aspect ratio switching. Similarly 16:9 channels produce all their network trails in 16:9 - even for 4:3 shows - so there are no ratio switches during a junction. Any 4:3 outlets that need to show commercials have to sort out their own ARCing to convert the 16:9 deliveries to 4:3. (Which some cheap satellite stations do get wrong). All commercials are delivered 4:3 text safe (so those who force 4:3 centre cut domestically don't miss out legal small print etc.), but are expected to be shown 14:9 letterbox on outlets that the broadcaster can control the ratio of.

The BBC used to switch aspect ratios going into the station ident that precedes all shows on their network (which is coupled with a station VO "Now on BBC One - EastEnders" kind of thing) so that the transition from ident to show was not disturbed (allowing a mix/dissolve rather than forcing the transition via black). However now there is so little 4:3 content they usually switch on the ident/programme transition.

Excuse me, but what are AFDs? :confused:

AFD = Active Format Descriptor

It is a very useful extra bit of data that can be embedded in a video stream (using a number of different methods depending on the video format) and signal the aspect ratio of the active area of a picture, where that differs from the actual aspect ratio of the transmitted video. It is also often used to signal the "safe" area of the active video for optimum conversion between ratios.

This allows broadcasters to permanently transmit a 16:9 signal (which is the only format available in HD, but is also useful in SD) but accompany it with data that allows a 4:3 receiver to decide what the optimal 4:3 display mode for that particular broadcast should be.

Thus if an HDTV station is broadcasting 4:3 content in 4:3 pillarbox (aka 12P16) and you are watching it on a 4:3 SDTV connected to a converter box, the optimal output would be 4:3 full-frame (which would be a centre-cut of the 16:9 HD signal) in 12F12. This avoids you getting a letterbox of a pillarbox, i.e. a postage stamp/window box, and a small 4:3 picture surrounded by black (or whatever the pillarbox bars are left and right)

However if the same station then switches to a 16:9 drama broadcast (16F16) that is shot so that it looks best letterboxed in 4:3 as a centre cut would crop the action) then the AFD can trigger the 4:3 SDTV output to be switched to 16:9 letterbox (16L12), without the viewer having to change any settings on their display.

This means that broadcasters can shoot and protect in different ratios for different content, whilst still offering 4:3 viewers an optimised experience.

We've used them in the UK on our terrestrial SD digital TV services (which are mainly 16:9) for many years (and they have been used to drive the ARCs that generate our analogue 4:3 network transmitter feeds automatically) - meaning that 4:3 shows and 16:9 content shot 4:3-safe (Sport) can be shown 4:3 centre cut on 4:3 TVs, most drama, news, entertainment and documentary can be shown 14:9 letterbox (the UK compromise format is to shoot 14:9 safe for most stuff) whilst movies and some arts content which is shot 16:9 safe can broadcast so that it is displayed 16:9 letterbox on 4:3 sets.

AFDs effectively remove the requirement to have a separate 4:3 network playout area (which is expensive - and was too expensive for the UK broadcasters to continue with!) - they allow dynamic rather than static aspect ratio conversion to take place downstream of the broadcast playout area.

In the UK we use the following notation to describe different conversion/presentation ratios, and for configuring ARCs :

12P16 = 12:9/4:3 pillarbox in a 16:9 frame
14P16 = 14:9 pillarbox in a 16:9 frame (a common compromise used when showing clips of 4:3 content in 16:9 shows - such as the news)
16F16 = 16:9 full-frame

12F12 = 12:9/4:3 full-frame
14L12 = 14:9 letterbox in a 4:3 frame (a common compromise used when showing 16:9 content on 4:3 displays where that material is shot 14:9 safe)
16L12 = 16:9 letterbox in a 4:3 frame (less commonly used in the UK - mainly for films and arts content that was shot 16:9 safe)

I won't consider HD the "norm" until all broadcast channels in my area are presented letterboxed 24/7 on the SD versions of the channels on the cable system.

Are the AFD flags supposed to be passed all the way to our receivers?

Yes. That is the purpose of AFD is for the consumer, not the station.

I see that Fox is passing the AFD flag (no surprise since they pass the whole MPEG-2 stream untouched) to indicate 4:3 safe 16:9 shows and shows that aren't 4:3 safe (namely the Simpsons) but I haven't found any NBC programs that have the flag set.

I don't know about NBC. I think CBS has said they are not sure if they will use AFD. I think ABC has flirted with it but hasn't perfected it like FOX has. Part of the issue is the station has to have updated software for their encoders to pass the AFD signal (AFD was an afterthought in the ATSC protocol). Not all stations have done that. I have two encoders and only one is upgradeable to AFD (which has been) so we can use AFD with local content. As you pointed out, it is easier for FOX Network since the the network encoder signal goes to all stations and then on to the consumer unadulterated, unlike the other networks. For those other networks, the stations have to be on board as well to let their network signals AFD through.

Ah - do you guys still have 4:3 commercials then?

In the U.S. there are tens of thousands of commercials produced for small businesses to be aired entirely by their local stations who have varying ability to air them in widescreen. It will be many many years before those are all produced in widescreen, especially since local stations are unable to air them in widescreen consistently.

One local mattress store here produced a commercial in 16:9 and it's regularly aired "squished" by some stations, especially outside of prime time. Other times it has started squished and then filled the screen a few seconds later. Who would buy a mattress that looks like you could barely fit on it? :D

In the U.S. there are tens of thousands of commercials produced for small businesses to be aired entirely by their local stations who have varying ability to air them in widescreen. It will be many many years before those are all produced in widescreen, especially since local stations are unable to air them in widescreen consistently.

One local mattress store here produced a commercial in 16:9 and it's regularly aired "squished" by some stations, especially outside of prime time. Other times it has started squished and then filled the screen a few seconds later. Who would buy a mattress that looks like you could barely fit on it? :D

That's the reason we had C-Day in the UK. You can't safely run a mixed economy - hence all commercials have to be delivered in 16:9 FHA. If you can't air them in this format - you convert them. (You might have to buy a low-cost ARC to do this on ingest, if you can't use a DVE or Edit Suite to do it as the low-cost 4:3 stations in the UK had to)

However we didn't have HD to worry about - and the delivery format remained the same (DigiBeta)

I think most advertisers also saw the merit in breaks being all one ratio - there would be a perceived "cheap-and-nastiness" about a 4:3 commercial in an otherwise 16:9 break. In fact many advertisers wanted to switch earlier than 2000 - when all commercials were still 4:3 delivered - but the commercial TV industry decided to act in a united manner on this. (It also makes lines playout of late breaking commercials much easier - you can guarantee that they will be in 16:9 - no need to double check!)

Oh, there's a definite "cheap and nastiness" to most locally produced 4:3 advertisements.

One of the great benefits of the decline in auto sales is that there are fewer insufferable local car dealer ads. You would not believe how loud, annoying, and cheesy some of these car dealer ads are.:eek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOsLdT4slsk

Then again, before I had a Tivo with a 30 second skip button I had a Scientific Atlanta DVR with only a fast forward button. In the good old days you could fast forward at the highest speed until the black pillar box went away and you would be right back to the HD show you actually wanted to watch.

In the olden days each of the (rare) HD commercials warranted at least one look-through just to reward the HD production and editing.:D

That's the reason we had C-Day in the UK. You can't safely run a mixed economy - hence all commercials have to be delivered in 16:9 FHA. If you can't air them in this format - you convert them. (You might have to buy a low-cost ARC to do this on ingest, if you can't use a DVE or Edit Suite to do it as the low-cost 4:3 stations in the UK had to)

However we didn't have HD to worry about - and the delivery format remained the same (DigiBeta)

I think most advertisers also saw the merit in breaks being all one ratio - there would be a perceived "cheap-and-nastiness" about a 4:3 commercial in an otherwise 16:9 break. In fact many advertisers wanted to switch earlier than 2000 - when all commercials were still 4:3 delivered - but the commercial TV industry decided to act in a united manner on this. (It also makes lines playout of late breaking commercials much easier - you can guarantee that they will be in 16:9 - no need to double check!)

I think it would be fair to say (correct me if I have this wrong) but the UK has FAR less independent stations than the US. having only "5 channels" (I know that isn't quite fair to say, but from our side of the pond, that is what it looks like) it is far easier to get everyone on board for 16:9. Just in my market, we have 6 different owners and out of the 6 (and these are medium to large station owners), my station is the only one doing 16:9 local commercials on a regular basis. We have gotten exactly ZERO local 16:9 spots in, and we ship out 4:3 center cuts of what we produce because that is all the local stations can handle. Yeah, it is frustrating as Hell, I admit it.

One of the great benefits of the decline in auto sales is that there are fewer insufferable local car dealer ads. You would not believe how loud, annoying, and cheesy some of these car dealer ads are.:eek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOsLdT4slsk

What you see as a benefit, is actually not because car dealers nationally make up 35% of a local stations revenue. That means the revenue has dropped 35% since the whole Detroit mess started. That means there is less money coming in to the stations. That means stations are not as willing to upgrade to HD until the revenue stream returns to some form of normalcy. People have been let go because of it. Capital upgrades have come to a screeching halt industry wide. So while you like not having the screaming car dealers, the money they provided is delaying your HD as well. You can't have it both ways. So enjoy your SD.

They're still loud and cheesy. :D

Yeah I know economics are bad, but production equipment is less expensive than it's ever been. SR machines are still around $100K, but that's not required for this kind of work. Formats like XDCAM EX and P2 would suffice.

I think it would be fair to say (correct me if I have this wrong) but the UK has FAR less independent stations than the US. having only "5 channels" (I know that isn't quite fair to say, but from our side of the pond, that is what it looks like) it is far easier to get everyone on board for 16:9.


Well you did ask!

While we only have three terrestrial analogue stations that carry commercials (ITV1, Channel Four and Five - BBC One and BBC Two are the other two stations, but they are commercial free as they are funded by the UK Licence Fee for TV ownership) - we do have a very significant digital TV set-up. OTA I get over 50 digital TV stations (yep - they're networked, and some are time-exclusive - and abut 6 of them are BBC so ad-free, but there are ITV2, ITV3, ITV4, CITV, E4, More4, Film4, Fiver, Five US, Sky News, Sky Sports News, CNN etc., along with Sky Three, Virgin 1 plus TMF, 4 Music etc.), and on satellite there are hundreds - some running on tiny budgets. Those that sell advertising still are able to accept 16:9 SD commercials. It's the UK standard - they just have to accept it.


Just in my market, we have 6 different owners and out of the 6 (and these are medium to large station owners), my station is the only one doing 16:9 local commercials on a regular basis. We have gotten exactly ZERO local 16:9 spots in, and we ship out 4:3 center cuts of what we produce because that is all the local stations can handle. Yeah, it is frustrating as Hell, I admit it.

I think the biggest difference between the US and UK is that although we have regionally split advertising on our networks (ITV1, C4 and Five all carry different adverts in different regions on OTA, Cable and Satellite - ITV have 20+ regions, C4 have 6 I think, not sure about Five), the culture of "local" advertising on most UK stations is less widespread. The regional variation is usually used by national advertisers to target specific areas. If there are local adverts for regional stores and businesses, they are usually for quite big ones.

So whilst there are a number of low-budget stations running 16:9 who broadcast adverts in 16:9, there are probably fewer low-budget advertisers advertising in the UK? (The most common UK regional adverts are for regional furniture and bed chains, regional department stores and regional supermarket chains)

Strangely, ITV HD (the single HD stream that accompanies the 20+ SD regional streams for ITV on satellite) carries adverts for the North West of England, not London. (I think it is because the ITV1 North West franchise has the largest population coverage?)

They're still loud and cheesy. :D

Yeah I know economics are bad, but production equipment is less expensive than it's ever been. SR machines are still around $100K, but that's not required for this kind of work. Formats like XDCAM EX and P2 would suffice.

Surely if budgets are tight surely you can shoot on 16:9 SD DV and upconvert? No need to go HD - I'm sure 16:9 SD would be an improvement over 4:3 SD and the cost difference is minimal with modern kit. If you're currently shooting local commercials 4:3 SD using decent kit, then it should be almost zero cost to switch to 16:9 SD production these days.

XDCam EX is an interesting one. AIUI you have to be very careful editing with the 35Mbs EX (Long GOP MPEG2) codec to keep it native, transcoding to DNXHD or ProRes HQ can be a bit nasty. AIUI XDCam 422 HD 50Mbs fairs a good bit better. (Though both are a lot better than 25Mbs HDV)

Well if one wanted to avoid the low bit rate with long GOP issue, they could use the nanoflash from Convergent Designs or a Ki Pro from AJA. For short form I'd think those could work well. They're both in the $3K range.

I won't consider HD the "norm" until all broadcast channels in my area are presented letterboxed 24/7 on the SD versions of the channels on the cable system.

That wouldn't work. Anything shot in SD would be appear cropped, stretched or postage-stamped on a regular TV screen. Our local PBS stations have tried it and the results are awful.

Or, as someone once said to Dick Wolf, 'I paid for my entire TV screen. Would you mind filling it?'

Or, as someone once said to Dick Wolf, 'I paid for my entire TV screen. Would you mind filling it?'
To which I'd say "Fill it yourself"

I won't consider HD the norm until a majority of viewers are actually SEEING HD on their TV sets and are actually seeing an improved picture.

I strongly disagree with that "letterbox 24/7" thing. That would imply either stretchovision or windowbox, both of which are bad. I still have two CRT sets and I don't take to kindly to networks that want to shrink my 19 and 27 inch TV sets by force.

To which I'd say "Fill it yourself"

With what? Should the 60+ years of programming shot in 4:3 be butchered or junked?

With what? Should the 60+ years of programming shot in 4:3 be butchered or junked?No, quite the opposite. I think material should be sent with OAR. If someone doesn't like letterbox or pillars and wants that screen filled, then they should do it themselves.

Well if one wanted to avoid the low bit rate with long GOP issue, they could use the nanoflash from Convergent Designs or a Ki Pro from AJA. For short form I'd think those could work well. They're both in the $3K range.

Yep - the Convergent Nano-flash appears to be gaining a degree of popularity here as well - though it's a bit more cumbersome and another "something to go wrong", and the extra costs means that you end up approaching P2 territory where you can use 100Mbs Intra codecs - DVCProHD or AVC out of the box (Though the XDCam EX cameras probably have better front-ends than the lower cost P2 stuff)

The BBC must stay busy deciding what is HD with these new recording options. What will they say about nano-flash? Where there be a minimum bitrate, and will 4:2:0 be acceptable? Is the 8 bits OK or does it have to be 10 now?

Although HD may not be what many consider the norm in the US, I think digital transmission may be more common than analog. I was thinking that legal gamut may be a fading requirement. There really was no need to worry about it for HD transmission, but there may have been concern for the downconverted analog distribution. Are there still restrictions for gamut in the UK on a digital master, and other places such as lenient countries that let anything through ... like Germany.

The BBC must stay busy deciding what is HD with these new recording options. What will they say about nano-flash? Where there be a minimum bitrate, and will 4:2:0 be acceptable? Is the 8 bits OK or does it have to be 10 now?


Current BBC guidelines are quite simple - well sort of :

1. Cameras must be 1/2" sensor or larger

2. Bit rate must be 100Mbs or more for intra-frame compression (DVC Pro HD, AVC Intra, HD Cam etc.) , or 50Mbs or more for inter-frame compression (HD Cam 422 HD) (with an exception for the EX1 and 3 which use 35Mbs MPEG2)

3. Minimum intermediate codec bitrate in post of 160Mbs (apart from XDCam EX 35Mbs stuff which must stay native as the concatenation artefacts are likely to be greater starting with something so heavily compresed)

4. Minimum live circuit bitrate of 60Mbs (MPEG2)

Delivery for pre-recorded shows must be HDCam SR tape.


Although HD may not be what many consider the norm in the US, I think digital transmission may be more common than analog. I was thinking that legal gamut may be a fading requirement. There really was no need to worry about it for HD transmission, but there may have been concern for the downconverted analog distribution. Are there still restrictions for gamut in the UK on a digital master, and other places such as lenient countries that let anything through ... like Germany.

Yep - though almost all shows are played out from edits via a legaliser to ensure that they comply AIUI. We do still have analogue outlets - but all analogue broadcasts in the UK are derived from digital component sources.

I've been looking for AFD flags on my local stations and was confused when my CBS station sent a "4:3 full frame image" AFD flag at the beginnings of both Survivor and CSI. Those are 16:9 and 4:3 safe so shouldn't they be sending "16:9 letterbox image, alternative 4:3 center" like Fox does for shows like So You Think You Can Dance?

4. Minimum live circuit bitrate of 60Mbs (MPEG2)That includes satellite?
Delivery for pre-recorded shows must be HDCam SR tape. Interesting as the transmission is limited to 1440 horizontal pixels, but SR does have other advantages such as 10 bit video, lower compression, higher color bandwidth, more audio channels, etc. D5 is not allowed?

4. Minimum live circuit bitrate of 60Mbs (MPEG2)


Am I reading that right that 60Mb/s = 7.5MB/s? If so, that's a low bar with MPEG2.

I've been looking for AFD flags on my local stations and was confused when my CBS station sent a "4:3 full frame image" AFD flag at the beginnings of both Survivor and CSI. Those are 16:9 and 4:3 safe so shouldn't they be sending "16:9 letterbox image, alternative 4:3 center" like Fox does for shows like So You Think You Can Dance?

Could either be a mistake, or the producers/network have decided that they would rather viewers watch it 4:3 centre-cut.

In the UK, 16:9 sport is AFDed 4:3 centre-cut, because sport is one of the few genres that research here showed viewers wanted to fill their screens. Other genres most people were happy with 14:9 letterbox on 4:3 displays.

That includes satellite?

Well the guidelines don't precluded it - but AIUI very few live satellite multilaterals are at that bit rate, as 60Mbs is quite a challenge in some situations...

Interesting as the transmission is limited to 1440 horizontal pixels, but SR does have other advantages such as 10 bit video, lower compression, higher color bandwidth, more audio channels, etc. D5 is not allowed?

Yes - it was HDCam until recently (1440x1080 on tape) but I guess the delivery spec is for futureproofing and Blu-ray as well as current transmission.

Am I reading that right that 60Mb/s = 7.5MB/s? If so, that's a low bar with MPEG2.

Not that low - bitrates for TV are never discussed in MB/s - if they were :

SD broadcast TV would run at 0.3-0.75MB/s
DVD would max out at 1.125MB/s
HD broadcast TV would run at 1-2.3MB/s
NBC's distribution system used to run at 3MB/s
XDCam EX acquisition runs at 4.4MB/s
Blu-ray would max out at around 5MB/s

So a minimum of 60Mb/s or 7.5MB/s for MPEG2 contribution circuits isn't that low a bar - and isn't actually that easy to achieve with satellite in all circumstances. In fact the EBU (European Broadcasting Union) uplinks its HDTV mutlilaterals for European broadcasters to downlink (for sporting events and things like the Eurovision Song Contest at 45Mb/s or 5.625MB/s)

Fibre connectivity will offer much higher bitrates in the 100-200Mb/s (12.5 to 25MB/s) range, some use is made of DiracPro or similar compression that gets HD into an uncompressed SD 270Mb/s (33.75MB/s) circuit, and there are HD uncompressed fibres around that will deliver over 830Mb/s (103MB/s) required for 1080/50i.

So - 60Mb/s for an HD MPEG2 contribution isn't THAT low a bar. Many broadcasters accept lower bitrates for contributions than that - particularly via satellite, where such bitrates may have a trade-off with robustness.

Could either be a mistake, or the producers/network have decided that they would rather viewers watch it 4:3 centre-cut.
I think my CBS station is screwing up the AFD flags. The only flag I've gotten from them is "4:3 full frame image" and no flags that would indicate anything is 16:9.

Fox is very precise about AFD. When an HD commercial is not 4:3 safe, they really do send out the "16:9 letterbox image" flag and the "16:9 letterbox image, alternative 4:3 center" flag afterwards for other HD commercials that are 4:3 safe.

Fox is very precise about AFD. When an HD commercial is not 4:3 safe, they really do send out the "16:9 letterbox image" flag and the "16:9 letterbox image, alternative 4:3 center" flag afterwards for other HD commercials that are 4:3 safe.

That's interesting. In the UK all 16:9 SD commercials have to be 4:3 safe for important text information, as viewers can still configure their SD boxes for 4:3 centre-cut (ignoring AFDs) and the satellite platform doesn't support AFDs (it has simple 4:3 / 16:9 broadcast aspect ratio switching on SD MPEG2 headers - which means postage stamp isn't an issue though) and by default all boxes are configured for 4:3 centre cut permanently. This means there are LOTS of people watching a 16:9 display filled with a stretched 4:3 centre cut of a 16:9 broadcast because they haven't discovered, or don't know, about the option to select between 4:3 and 16:9 TVs... This, even though it has been almost impossible to buy a 4:3 display in the UK for many, many years. (16:9 CRTs launched here around 16 years ago)

I don't think there are any hard rules regarding framing in the US. If a commercial wants to frame outside 4:3 for text I think they just risk loosing the it on the 4:3 viewers. Up until recently they had the luxury of making a letterbox version for SD broadcasts, but that is now not the case.

If a commercial doesn't meet the text framing requirements in the UK, would a broadcaster refuse to air it? I couldn't see that happening in the US. I don't know if most would even give any feedback to the advertiser, until they complained. This is where ABC and CBS may be coerced into AFD support.

I've been looking for AFD flags on my local stations and was confused when my CBS station sent a "4:3 full frame image" AFD flag at the beginnings of both Survivor and CSI. Those are 16:9 and 4:3 safe so shouldn't they be sending "16:9 letterbox image, alternative 4:3 center" like Fox does for shows like So You Think You Can Dance?

CBS favors center cut over letterbox. It is a Moonves thing I hear.

There are plenty of commercials here in the US that put text outside of the 4:3 area. They look incredibly stupid for doing so.

Yes, CBS favors center cut, hence the reason why I subscribe to the CBS school of thought over NBC. ;)

OMG! Advertisers coercing networks into changing their broadcast methods? Talk about talking the phrase corporate media to another level! :eek:

That's interesting. In the UK all 16:9 SD commercials have to be 4:3 safe for important text information, as viewers can still configure their SD boxes for 4:3 centre-cut (ignoring AFDs)
I think they just use big text here.

My CBS station appears to be using the flag for internal equipment during local commercials and screwing up occasionally. One time the flag flipped from "16:9 full frame image" to "4:3 pillarbox image" right when a local 4:3 pillarboxed commercial started. This made it narrower than 4:3. Then a second later the flag flipped back to "16:9 full frame image" and the pillarboxed commercial looked correct. And once the opposite happened. The "4:3 pillarbox image" flag came up and a 4:3 commercial (but letterboxed in the 4:3 area) started and it looked correct. A second later the AFD switched to "16:9 full frame image" and the commercial was incorrectly stretched across the screen. The 4:3 commercial following it looked correct but the AFD flag didn't change.

The flag will sometimes switch back and forth several times when they go back to the network feed. Looks like they have some bugs to work out. What fun to see new things being implemented on the air.

For those who aren't bored by this AFD trivia, here are some commercials that are flagged on Fox as not being 4:3 safe:

The Dominoes oven baked sandwich commercial (no apparent reason)

The Chevy Camaro commercial (the car fills the width of the 16:9 area)

Both Buick Enclave commercials (in one the three cars fill the entire width of the 16:9 area)

Remember, FOX uses AFD for its SD feed off the receiver. FOX no longer has a separate SD feed so when a station has to use it when a splicer dies or weather or a LP that is still analog, they are getting the HD feed, downconverting it and use AFD on the sat receiver to do the AFD conversion. It is the same flag that will change the AR of CECB's so equipped or cablecos who use AFD. FOX is using AFD in a multipurpose fashion.

Yes, and since Fox affiliates pass the stream directly from the network to the viewers, I get to see the flags which at other stations wouldn't pass the encoder (I get no AFD data from my NBC station for example).

It is correct to say that AFD serves no purpose for HDTV televisions, only for 4:3 televisions?

I found one more commercial flagged for 16:9: that annoying crunching Kit-Kat commercial. There was no apparent reason why it needed to be 16:9. I wonder if Fox is using AFD to give their advertisers an easy option to have their HD commercials letterboxed on 4:3 sets instead of center cut.

Not that low - bitrates for TV are never discussed in MB/s - if they were :

SD broadcast TV would run at 0.3-0.75MB/s
DVD would max out at 1.125MB/s
HD broadcast TV would run at 1-2.3MB/s
NBC's distribution system used to run at 3MB/s
XDCam EX acquisition runs at 4.4MB/s
Blu-ray would max out at around 5MB/s

So a minimum of 60Mb/s or 7.5MB/s for MPEG2 contribution circuits isn't that low a bar - and isn't actually that easy to achieve with satellite in all circumstances. In fact the EBU (European Broadcasting Union) uplinks its HDTV mutlilaterals for European broadcasters to downlink (for sporting events and things like the Eurovision Song Contest at 45Mb/s or 5.625MB/s)

Fibre connectivity will offer much higher bitrates in the 100-200Mb/s (12.5 to 25MB/s) range, some use is made of DiracPro or similar compression that gets HD into an uncompressed SD 270Mb/s (33.75MB/s) circuit, and there are HD uncompressed fibres around that will deliver over 830Mb/s (103MB/s) required for 1080/50i.

So - 60Mb/s for an HD MPEG2 contribution isn't THAT low a bar. Many broadcasters accept lower bitrates for contributions than that - particularly via satellite, where such bitrates may have a trade-off with robustness.

Thanks for the reply. I didn't realize that and your post was quite informative.

I would bet in the advertising industry not much has changed since the days explored in "Mad Men." If a client wants his ad to be produced and displayed in 16:9 it gets done that way even if the agency has concerns. Likewise if the client wants it displayed in 4:3 for whatever reason it gets displayed that way even if the agency has concerns. I learned years ago when working on commercials that advertising was not a rational world. :D

I analyse it this way:

Here in San Jose, I have 66 digital channels when I scan the air waves. Those include 14 HD channels and 52 SD 480i sub-channels.

The HD channels show primarily SD 4:3 upconverted material all morning and most of the day. With a few exceptions, prime time is the exclusive domain of HD programming.

A little quick figuring, and actual HD programming comprises between 5% and 10% of the total broadcasts.

So I'll have to say NO, HD has not arrived. It is barely in existence as yet.

If a commercial doesn't meet the text framing requirements in the UK, would a broadcaster refuse to air it? I couldn't see that happening in the US. I don't know if most would even give any feedback to the advertiser, until they complained. This is where ABC and CBS may be coerced into AFD support.

Not sure - but it would probably fail the "technical review" criteria of most UK broadcasters. However I don't know how these processes are undertaken - and many adverts are no longer delivered on tape and instead delivered in 50Mbs IMX format via FTP-style data delivery instead AIUI - and I don't know if or how these downloads are reviewed, and whether they are reviewed by the receiving broadcaster or the supplier.

However there are now UK-wide advertising standards for "loudness" compliance - where all commercials have to be passed through a "loudness" meter to ensure that they don't sound louder than the surrounding adverts and programmes. This compliance is provided by the main 3rd party company who also provide advert download services in the UK.

The UK has a pretty standard 4:3 text safe standard for all broadcasts (though it doesn't allow for a huge amount of domestic cut-off in 4:3) - independent of action safe and shooting safe. The only real exceptions to this are movies, where the text safety of graphics can't be controlled.

The UK 4:3 text requirement surprises me because no other country has done more to make letterboxing a standard practice. You created the compromise 14:9 AR so the letterboxing wouldn't bother too many viewers. There was even a new standard Pal Plus which relies on there being black bars on the top and bottom of the screen.