WUSA in Washington, DC, who produces local news in HD, is now offering a simulcast over the internet, also in HD.

(They're actually streaming their newscast live from 4-5 ET. Not sure if it will continue after that)

( http://www.wusa9.com )

I think this is the first of its kind, but even if it's not, I still think it's pretty noteworthy.

Screencaps!
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/6668/wusa9hdtestdv1.th.jpg (http://img510.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wusa9hdtestdv1.jpg)

http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/9394/wusa9hdtest2zf3.th.jpg (http://img503.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wusa9hdtest2zf3.jpg)

http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/2577/testpatternuy4.th.jpg (http://img367.imageshack.us/my.php?image=testpatternuy4.jpg)

-------
The HD stream requires a VERY high speed internet connection, I got the occasional breakups over a 5MB FiOS connection.

As for the video itself, it looks a little worse than D* HD. They could improve, but it still kind of has that HD pop.

-------
And, yes, the DC area does go beserk every time there's a remote chance of snow.

---
Edit: As of 5:21, they're now just showing a test pattern. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

It's streamed at 1280x720, 3.19 Mbps in Windows Media 9 (Advanced Profile) format. It's commercial free.

The actual ATSC broadcast is 1920x1080 at much higher-bit rate.

wow, HD news streamed online before my local stations even offer HD news OTA. Guess that's one of the downfalls of living in a market in the 50's of the DMAs

Do you have a direct URL? I might be oblivious, but I can't see the link.

Do you have a direct URL? I might be oblivious, but I can't see the link.
They had one, but took it down around 5PM.

I suspect it will be back, as it later indicates that today was a test for something they're planning--I'm guessing just uploading videos and simulcasting news in HD. It's so bad that you guys never had a chance to see their awesome opening graphics.

Im just impressed by the embracing of the 16:9 aspect ratio on the web. WRAL still only uses 4:3 video on the web, even though it seems like the perfect place to show off the widescreen aspect of HD to people who dont have HDTVs yet (although, granted that most people wouldnt even notice the video was wide).

They must have some serious uplink speed!

I was able to watch it without too many breakups. It was pretty spectacular considering it was coming over the net.

As for the video itself, it looks a little worse than D* HD. They could improve, but it still kind of has that HD pop.
Of course the PQ isn't the greatest, as the bitrate's too low for 60fps (if it is). Now, to note, MPEG-4/AVC/H.264 (all are interchangeable) usually is able to deliver equal quality to MPEG-2 at half the MPEG-2 bitrate. The PQ of H.264 and VC-1/WMV9 Adv. Profile (again interchangeable) are similar at a given bitrate.

That said, high-quality faster-motion 720p 60fps video arrives somewhere around 14 mbps MPEG-2, and 7 mbps for VC-1. Of course, since it's the news, then there's less need for that kind of bitrate, so a bitrate of 5 to 5.5 mbps is more appropriate. All that concerns me is the video quality with a bunch flashing lights from cop cars, as that's sometimes featured. That kind of movement adds encoding processor demand.

Then there's the encoder itself. Even though VC-1 isn't as grueling as H.264 for encoding, it's still pretty demanding. There's no really good HD VC-1 (WM9 Adv. Profile) real-time hardware encoder available right now (the focus at Harmonic seems to be H.264, for understandable reasons). They're probably using a Windows computer, and they'd better be using one of those equipped with the best dual-core Intel available, otherwise who knows what kind of PQ can occur with a better encoder? Also, when those rumored quad-core processors come out, WUSA had better get a computer with one of those things, as when it comes to encoding, there's no such thing as too powerful a computer (OK, so there is, but that point is pretty darn high!)

Finally, there's the framerate. Since the news is pretty low movement, I suggest the video be reduced to 30 fps. In video encoding, each frame is individually encoded, and reducing the number of frames per second reduces the amount of encoding a processor needs to make for each second of video, allowing the PQ to potentially increase with an inferior encoding processor at an originally given bitrate. WUSA could also lower the bitrate to allow more bandwidth efficiency, or they could do a combination of both lowering the overall bitrate, and lowering the proportional bitrate, by improving the bitrate per frame.

OK, so maybe that went over everybody's head, but here's the meat of the argument: With a proper computer/encoder, high-quality 720p 30fps PQ could occur in at least 98% of situations at 2.5 to 2.7 mbps, fitting it within a 3 mbps downlink DSL connection.

Windows Media 9 audio should be at 148 kbps stereo, which will be fine for lower audio demand like this.

OK, I did my math a different way, and here's another, more accurate, analysis.

Generally, good-quality motion 720p/60 occurs at 15 mbps MPEG-2, and from what I can tell, good still/low motion PQ occurs at 12 mbps. Now divide that by half to support 30p, resulting in 6 mbps. Another cut by half to reflect VC-1? 3 mbps.

So I guess I was wrong at saying that 2.7 mbps would be good for WUSA-HD stream. Still, 2.9 to 3.5 mbps isn't bad for pretty good low-motion video, and that range is right where WUSA has set the bitrate. So all they need now is a powerful enough computer, the right settings, enough bandwidth to the Net, and IP filtering so only people inside the WUSA viewing area can pick up the broadcast. :)

Maybe carefully-crafted VBR would also help to reduce the bandwidth load while maximizing PQ.

Now, to note, MPEG-4/AVC/H.264 (all are interchangeable) usually is able to deliver equal quality to MPEG-2 at half the MPEG-2 bitrate.
To to avoid confusion, the terms aren't quite interchangable. AVC/H.264 is a version (or subset) of the MPEG-4 standard. You can say it's a version (or subset) of MPEG-4 but you can't say that MPEG-4 is AVC/H.264.

It's back!

http://www.wusa9.com/

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/6282/wusa9hdtestday2gw9.th.jpg (http://img502.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wusa9hdtestday2gw9.jpg)

Quality seems to have improved, but I'm getting SEVERAL more breakups than yesterday, but then again, maybe it's just me.

EDIT: After a breif period of horrid breakups, the picture seems to be fine now.

BTW, this is what the SD stream looks like for comparison:
http://img66.imageshack.us/img66/7743/wusa9sdpi3.th.jpg (http://img66.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wusa9sdpi3.jpg)

i woonder that they're encoding this with

It's back!

http://www.wusa9.com/
Looking at it right now on my 2nd monitor! Picture quality looks pretty good for the HD feed. With Verizon Fios, I'm only seeing a few very brief screen freezes. Pretty cool. Now we'll never get any work done...

D'oh!

They took it down again.

is the news shown inside that frame constantly? KUSA in denver does all their local news in HD but doesn't have the frame around the picture, they go full-screen with nearly everything.

is the news shown inside that frame constantly? KUSA in denver does all their local news in HD but doesn't have the frame around the picture, they go full-screen with nearly everything.

They're in school closing mode because of those big midwest snowstorms

They're doing it again today

http://www.wusa9.com/

Any other local stations doing this yet?

Sorry, my screen capture isn't working, so no pics yet....
But the quality looks significantly improved over last time, and there's alot less breakups.

Re. WUSA: They were streaming in HD yesterday, too. I don't have enough bandwidth for the HD feed.

HD podcasting from The Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/mmedia/podcastfront.htm

This will be interesting considering that major stockholders are now after Gannett to sell off the TV stations to increase shareholder value such as the NY Times Company and Tribune (which is selling the entire company).

It's a very bad time to have the bulk of your business in newspapers.

With the pressure within Gannett to sell off assets (and obviously converse money), this expense won't be cheap while producing no revenue to offset it.

This will be interesting considering that major stockholders are now after Gannett to sell off the TV stations to increase shareholder value such as the NY Times Company and Tribune (which is selling the entire company).

It's a very bad time to have the bulk of your business in newspapers.

With the pressure within Gannett to sell off assets (and obviously converse money), this expense won't be cheap while producing no revenue to offset it.
I'm guessing CBS can leverage the FCC to buy WUSA now that they've sold off a bunch of those low-market stations. Heck, why not buy WDCW while they're at it?

I'm guessing CBS can leverage the FCC to buy WUSA now that they've sold off a bunch of those low-market stations. Heck, why not buy WDCW while they're at it?

You assume that Gannett wants to sell.

Regardless, money will be very tight - and i dont see where this will bring in revenue in the short term.

KOMO 4 News in Seattle has been streaming HD online for sometime now. 4-5 PST and probably during other local news times as well at http://live.komotv.com/