U.S. Broadcasters Diss 4K - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 5Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 174 Old 05-23-2014, 08:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTOLfreak View Post

I'm in Belgium and the cable company is called Telenet. All the cable boxes are either purchased or leased from the cable company directly. The only other option for digital TV is an IP-TV box that runs on VDSL2 service from the phone company (Belgacom) or putting a satellite dish on your roof (TV Vlaanderen) but that won't allow VOD services.

And Netflix just announced their intention to launch service in my country but I'm already watching Netflix over a VPN.

Interesting. Did the cable company allow ownership of boxes on their own, or were they forced by the government to do so?
BiggAW is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 174 Old 05-24-2014, 05:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTOLfreak View Post

I'm in Belgium and the cable company is called Telenet. All the cable boxes are either purchased or leased from the cable company directly. The only other option for digital TV is an IP-TV box that runs on VDSL2 service from the phone company (Belgacom) or putting a satellite dish on your roof (TV Vlaanderen) but that won't allow VOD services.
Do Telenet provide CAMs to allow DVB-T/C TVs to be used with their services? I know that in some parts of Scandinavia this is an option (allowing you to watch pay-TV cable directly on your TV without a set top box), though it isn't with Virgin in the UK (who only rent cable boxes and don't allow purchase) In the areas of Scandinavia that allow CAMs (Conditional Access Modules) to be used in the European-standard CI slot (Common Interface), you can often buy 3rd party Cable PVRs as well. I assume they use an Open Standard DVB EPG to allow programme guide access and recording scheduling?

Presumably TV Vlaanderen could do what Sky do in the UK and allow VOD via IP on their satellite PVRs. (Sky in the UK use DVB-S2 for linear channels, but if you connect your set top box to a broadband connection - ADSL, VDSL etc. - you can download broadcast quality HD and SD movies, TV shows etc. either included in your subscription or PPV depending on content. All the main UK broadcasters also have their Catch-Up services hosted via the same system, so we can watch BBC iPlayer this way)
Quote:
And Netflix just announced their intention to launch service in my country but I'm already watching Netflix over a VPN.

In the UK Sky are very competitive with Netflix (Sky also have an IPTV box called Sky Now which offers similar content). Tivo is on Virgin Media Cable in the UK and also, I believe, offers Netflix on these boxes. (Virgin offer Tivo and non-Tivo PVRs)
sneals2000 is offline  
post #93 of 174 Old 05-24-2014, 05:33 AM
Member
 
VTOLfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 66
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 14
A year ago the government forced Telenet to start selling CI+ CAM's. The CAM's refuse to work in any kind of recorder but they do work on any TV with a DVB-C tuner and CI+ slot. Some people have been able to bypass those restrictions by using TV's that can record to external USB hard drives. Although usually these drives become encrypted and will only play back on the TV the recording was made on.

TV Vlaanderen does not lock down your hardware choice so you can use any satellite box with their CAM. And just checking their site they do seem to offer VOD if you buy their custom satellite box. (using the mechanism you just described.)
VTOLfreak is offline  
post #94 of 174 Old 05-24-2014, 07:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTOLfreak View Post

A year ago the government forced Telenet to start selling CI+ CAM's. The CAM's refuse to work in any kind of recorder but they do work on any TV with a DVB-C tuner and CI+ slot. Some people have been able to bypass those restrictions by using TV's that can record to external USB hard drives. Although usually these drives become encrypted and will only play back on the TV the recording was made on.

TV Vlaanderen does not lock down your hardware choice so you can use any satellite box with their CAM. And just checking their site they do seem to offer VOD if you buy their custom satellite box. (using the mechanism you just described.)

Can you get a DVR through the provider?
BiggAW is online now  
post #95 of 174 Old 05-24-2014, 07:06 AM
Member
 
VTOLfreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 66
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post

Can you get a DVR through the provider?
To clarify, they had to start selling CI+ CAM 's in addition to their own DVR's and cable boxes.
VTOLfreak is offline  
post #96 of 174 Old 05-24-2014, 04:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTOLfreak View Post

A year ago the government forced Telenet to start selling CI+ CAM's. The CAM's refuse to work in any kind of recorder but they do work on any TV with a DVB-C tuner and CI+ slot. Some people have been able to bypass those restrictions by using TV's that can record to external USB hard drives. Although usually these drives become encrypted and will only play back on the TV the recording was made on.
Yes - that appears to be a common feature (almost standard) on European DVB TV sets. You can attach USB storage to your TV to allow you to live pause and to record shows (including scheduled recordings via the EPG). but the recordings are encrypted and tied to the TV that made them. I think some sets with two tuners (one for DVB-S/S2, one for DVB-T/T2/C) allow you to watch one channel and record another (using both tuners). You get a lot of the DVR benefits without a DVR.
Quote:
TV Vlaanderen does not lock down your hardware choice so you can use any satellite box with their CAM.
Yep - quite a few DVB satellite platforms allow this - but not all. (Sky don't in the UK for instance)
Quote:
And just checking their site they do seem to offer VOD if you buy their custom satellite box. (using the mechanism you just described.)

Yes - I think if you use your own DVB-S/S2 receiver and a CAM you get a basic EPG, World Systems Teletext and not much else. If you use the platform operators boxes you get additional stuff like VOD, Interactive TV etc. But you get a choice of hardware, and in some cases can chose to switch platforms without having to change your box.

When it comes to copy protection of recordings - I think DTCP is being used by some devices these days. (This is effectively like an IP version of HDCP I believe)

Apologies though - this has gone off topic from 4K.

Thought Sky are testing 4K in the UK - and it is likely that their next gen boxes will be 4K compatible with HEVC decoding. (They were able to add 3D to existing HD boxes by tweaking the firmware to do side-by-side EPG and subtitle display without having to release new boxes)
sneals2000 is offline  
post #97 of 174 Old 06-06-2014, 01:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
The BBC have announced that they are trialling 4K OTA and IPTV for the three World Cup (soccer) matches being covered in 4K in Rio. The broadcasts are part of a "closed" test, and will be using HEVC.

http://www.dtg.org.uk/news/news.php?class=countries&subclass=0&id=5143

I wouldn't be surprised if they used DVB-T2 that could be received by standard PC DVB-T2 tuner cards, so FFMPEG decoding/transcoding of the HEVC content may allow them to be viewed. Be interesting to see. Time to get scanning the main London transmitter (Crystal Palace) I guess.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #98 of 174 Old 06-07-2014, 12:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,580
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post

The BBC have announced that they are trialling 4K OTA and IPTV for the three World Cup (soccer) matches being covered in 4K in Rio. The broadcasts are part of a "closed" test, and will be using HEVC.

http://www.dtg.org.uk/news/news.php?class=countries&subclass=0&id=5143

I wouldn't be surprised if they used DVB-T2 that could be received by standard PC DVB-T2 tuner cards, so FFMPEG decoding/transcoding of the HEVC content may allow them to be viewed. Be interesting to see. Time to get scanning the main London transmitter (Crystal Palace) I guess.
Will they be keeping it at 60 fps or converting it to 50 fps? Will it be another year or more till they trial 100/120/150/240 fps UHDTV?
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #99 of 174 Old 06-08-2014, 02:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

Will they be keeping it at 60 fps or converting it to 50 fps? Will it be another year or more till they trial 100/120/150/240 fps UHDTV?

No idea. If I'm able to receive the DTT stuff in London (am hoping it will be DVB-T2 and I'll be able to receive the HEVC stuff with a USB T2 tuner on my PC) I'll see what ffmpeg says. I believe it's a UK team providing the production expertise - though not using a UK 4K truck (we've got a couple here now)
Joe Bloggs likes this.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #100 of 174 Old 06-22-2014, 05:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Well the BBC 4K Test transmissions are up in London. DVB-T2 at approx. 37Mbs HEVC at 3840x2160 at 59.94p (presumably because standards conversion isn't going to be easy for 4k 59.94 World Cup football). ffmpeg/ffplay and Lavfilters both cope with tuning, and DVBViewer, Transedit and TSReader will all tune and record fine. 4k HEVC takes a LOT of CPU...


Will post a screen shot when I can.
**EDIT : Here it is. It's a JPEG created in FFMPEG from the HEVC off-air recording. Definitely not optimal quality. The video is a very short loop with a test tone sequence. The buildings are the BBC White City Media village - one of them is now empty **


screenshot windows
Joe Bloggs likes this.

Last edited by sneals2000; 06-22-2014 at 05:59 PM.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #101 of 174 Old 06-23-2014, 10:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,580
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Thanks. So is the quality not optimal because it's an early HEVC (hardware?) encoder/not using the best parameters (I wasn't sure if you meant the JPG), and because of realtime encoding? Could the moving tree branches/leaves have meant it was complex video for the HEVC encoder to encode, but that it's still better than the same shot encoded with AVC? Does it look a lot better in motion (ie. still frames may not always look better with HEVC but in motion should be?)? Is the 37 Mbps sufficient do you think? If the BBC decide to have UHD1 broadcast channels won't they reduce it to more like 15 Mbps (though I suppose it might depend on what UHD1 parameters they go with)?
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #102 of 174 Old 06-24-2014, 03:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs
Thanks. So is the quality not optimal because it's an early HEVC (hardware?) encoder/not using the best parameters (I wasn't sure if you meant the JPG), and because of realtime encoding?
I meant the JPEG - which has probably been encoded a couple of times (once by ffmpeg to create it, and again by the image hosting site to reduce the file size!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs
Could the moving tree branches/leaves have meant it was complex video for the HEVC encoder to encode, but that it's still better than the same shot encoded with AVC? Does it look a lot better in motion (ie. still frames may not always look better with HEVC but in motion should be?)? Is the 37 Mbps sufficient do you think? If the BBC decide to have UHD1 broadcast channels won't they reduce it to more like 15 Mbps (though I suppose it might depend on what UHD1 parameters they go with)?
I'm not basing any form of evaluation on a single shot of a moving tree! I have no idea if this is being encoded in realtime or whether it's a pre-encoded data stream being broadcast as a test. I've also got no idea how complete the HEVC decoder implementation in ffmpeg is - there are all sorts of things that presumably could go wrong on decoding whilst still delivering a picture. I have only done quick and dirty H264 conversions using the preset x264 settings in ffmpeg - so am not making any quality judgements on the transcode either (though at least I can play that in real time!)

I'd also not base any discussion of the form of future BBC decisions on this test - it's at 59.94p for example ! (There is very little chance of the BBC running a non-50Hz multiple for all sorts of reasons - lighting flicker being a very important one)

I suspect, as with HD in the UK, Sky will be significant too. They appear to be trialling 3840x2160/50p 10bit 4:2:0 for their most recent tests. The 10 bits are significant I think - 8 bit depth is a real limiting factor in picture quality - particularly on saturated blue content (where there is very little luminance contribution so quantisation issues are visible at 8 bit sampling)

If you look back to 2006 - the BBC trialled H264 (using a very primitive early encoder which was little better than MPEG2 encoding) using DVB-T modulation (as DVB-T2 wasn't available) for the World Cup test transmissions (and the 6 month trial) These went out at approx 18Mbs ISTR. We currently have DVB-T2 with much more advanced AVC encoding (including dynamic 25p/50i encoder switching) statmuxed with an average bit rate of 8Mbs-ish, though it can peak to over 13Mbs and drop to below 5Mbs as demand for the pool and content encoding difficulty vary. Trials are - just that - trials!

It will be interesting to see whether 2160/100p becomes a serious contender here. It could deliver huge benefits for sport - which is a major driving force - but will the manufacturers (who have only just delivered 2160/50p compatible interconnects with HDMI 2.0) support it, and will broadcasters ? I'm not sure how feasible it is to run current 4K trucks at 100p - that would need 24G interconnects and I think 12G is tricky enough (and in some cases they are using 4 3G connections instead)
Joe Bloggs likes this.

Last edited by sneals2000; 06-24-2014 at 03:37 AM.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #103 of 174 Old 06-28-2014, 04:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Well - the Colombia Uruguay match from the Maracana was the first 4K 2160p World Cup match broadcast on the BBC 4K test service - which is being broadcast OTA in London (and I think in the North West of England region, where BBC Sport are based) It's described as a "closed" test - mainly because you can't buy 4K receivers compatible with the transmissions yet. However it is possible to receive the transmissions using a consumer USB DVB-T2 stick (available for around US$50) and watch them using open source software. Of course not that many of us have 4K displays to watch the stuff on...

The feed was 3840x2160/59.94p - and although I don't have a 4K TV I was able to watch a 1920x1080 quarter-screen section cropped and pixel matched 1:1 on my 1920x1080 display, as well as a 3840x2160 -> 1920x1080 full-screen down-scale.

The 1:1 crop showed they were using some HD content upconverted (interlaced 1080i unconverted to 2160p is pretty noticeable) for the arrival shots, but the main match coverage appeared to be full 4K. The downscale to 1080p showed that there could be significant benefits for HD viewers UNLESS the bulk of the benefits I saw was because the compression artefacts were 4K not 2K and thus filtered out significantly by the downscale after encoding/decoding rather than before.

Didn't notice any high frame rate content... (Understandable - AIUI a 2160/59.94p normal speed recording takes 4 ports of an EVS - turning a 4 channel HD EVS into a single channel 4K one.... Recording 2160/180p would require 12 HD ports - which is close to insane...)

Was interesting to be able to watch it though!

Last edited by sneals2000; 06-28-2014 at 04:30 PM.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #104 of 174 Old 06-28-2014, 05:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,580
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
It will be interesting to see whether 2160/100p becomes a serious contender here. It could deliver huge benefits for sport - which is a major driving force - but will the manufacturers (who have only just delivered 2160/50p compatible interconnects with HDMI 2.0) support it, and will broadcasters ? I'm not sure how feasible it is to run current 4K trucks at 100p - that would need 24G interconnects and I think 12G is tricky enough (and in some cases they are using 4 3G connections instead)
Another option could be a bit of compression. eg. visually lossless. The type that wouldn't get noticeably worse with further encoding. Yes I know that compression is bad and it would be better without it but it could be an interim thing until they have the necessary infrastructure for uncompressed high fps UHDTV in the trucks. Since in tests they've seen noticeable improvements in 120 fps and 240 fps, it could be even with the added compression (mezzanine?) it could look better at the consumer side than if they were sending uncompressed UHDTV at 50/60 fps to the trucks.

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 06-28-2014 at 05:39 PM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #105 of 174 Old 06-28-2014, 05:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
The BBC have put a couple of blog posts up with details of their 4K/UHD trials here :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/blog/2014/06...inition-trials

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/blog/2014/06...ition-trials-1

Interesting that the backhaul to the UK is via Quad AVC (presumably 4 x 1080/59.94p streams for top-left, top-right, bottom-left, bottom-right quadrants?) I wonder at what bitrate.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #106 of 174 Old 06-28-2014, 05:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
Another option could be a bit of compression. eg. visually lossless. The type that wouldn't get noticeably worse with further encoding. Yes I know that compression is bad and it would be better without it but it could be an interim thing until they have the necessary infrastructure for uncompressed high fps UHDTV in the trucks. Since in tests they've seen noticeable improvements in 120 fps and 240 fps, it could be even with the added compression (mezzanine?) it could look better at the consumer side than if they were sending uncompressed UHDTV at 50/60 fps to the trucks.
Yep. Mezzanine compression is in widespread use in the BBC to carry 1080/50i HD content over existing 270Mbs uncompressed 576/50i SDI circuits in the form of Dirac Pro. (You get a very noisy SD picture showing the HD content, allowing circuits to be identified and viewed for routing purposes without needing a Dirac Pro decoder).

However I'm not sure what you are suggesting - where are you suggesting that mezzanine compression is used - and where would the decoding happen? Or are you suggesting hierarchical compression (where you send different qualities of signals at differing levels of compression/robustness)?
sneals2000 is offline  
post #107 of 174 Old 06-28-2014, 06:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,580
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
Yep. Mezzanine compression is in widespread use in the BBC to carry 1080/50i HD content over existing 270Mbs uncompressed 576/50i SDI circuits in the form of Dirac Pro. (You get a very noisy SD picture showing the HD content, allowing circuits to be identified and viewed for routing purposes without needing a Dirac Pro decoder).

However I'm not sure what you are suggesting - where are you suggesting that mezzanine compression is used - and where would the decoding happen? Or are you suggesting hierarchical compression (where you send different qualities of signals at differing levels of compression/robustness)?
I thought they used uncompressed connections (uncompressed video) for the UHDTV tests (in trucks or wherever prior to conversion to HEVC or AVC) but you were saying connecting them was taking too many connections (eg. 4x 3G or using 12G). I was suggesting they could temporarily use those same connections to send compressed video at 100 to 240 fps instead of uncompressed video at 50/60 fps and it may look better, including at the consumer side - on the consumer's UHDTV.

edit: In "SMPTE UHDTV Ecosystem Study Group Report (28/March/2014)" they say something like it (page 21) but in their example they're talking about converting 12 Gbps (I assume for 60 fps) uncompressed to 3 Gbps. I was thinking you could have higher fps uncompressed (100-240) and convert to eg. 12 Gbps compressed.

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 06-28-2014 at 06:45 PM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #108 of 174 Old 06-29-2014, 02:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
I thought they used uncompressed connections (uncompressed video) for the UHDTV tests (in trucks or wherever prior to conversion to HEVC or AVC) but you were saying connecting them was taking too many connections (eg. 4x 3G or using 12G).

I was suggesting they could temporarily use those same connections to send compressed video at 100 to 240 fps instead of uncompressed video at 50/60 fps and it may look better, including at the consumer side - on the consumer's UHDTV.
Uncompressed SD-SDI, HD-SDI, 3G-SDI and now 12G-SDI are the standard interconnects for SD, HD, 3D or 1080/50-60p and 2160/50-60p respectively. However for 3D you could use 2 x HD-SDI instead of 1 x 3G-SDI, and for 4K you could use 4x3G-SDI rather than 1x12G-SDI.

Mezzanine encoding could in theory help, but you'd need a standard, and one of the reasons that you use 4x3G-SDI isn't because of a lack of interconnects - it's because the kit you are connecting to is modified HD/3G-SDI stuff so is implementing 4K by re-configuring itself internally to use the 4xHD feeds. So whilst you could bolt on external mezzanine compression boxes to reduce your cabling and routing issues, the core, current, issue of needing 4 channels of, say an EVS, would not be solved, as you'd still currently need to decode back to the original uncompressed formats to feed the inputs, and if you wanted a higher frame rate you'd need even more inputs.

This is because at the moment 4K is experimental, and rather than build and entire range of 4K production gear (as we did for HD), they are (as they did for 3D - which often used 2xHD-SDI inputs and outputs and halved your processing on standard HD-SDI gear), instead modifying existing HD production gear to work in 4K, but by using 4x the I/O and processing capability you effectively end up with 1/4 the amount of inputs, outputs and processing available to you. So you need 4x the kit to do it. If you wanted to double the frame rate the core processing would still increase to 8x (i.e. you'd have 1/8th the capacity), though if you could agree a compatible mezzanine IO standard (as the BBC have internally with Dirac Pro for HD over SD-SDI) you could simplify your routing. Mixers/Switchers and servers are unlikely to be benefit in processing terms though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs
edit: In "SMPTE UHDTV Ecosystem Study Group Report (28/March/2014)" they say something like it (page 21) but in their example they're talking about converting 12 Gbps (I assume for 60 fps) uncompressed to 3 Gbps. I was thinking you could have higher fps uncompressed (100-240) and convert to eg. 12 Gbps compressed.
Yes - you could for interconnects potentially, but processing of images is still baseband (i.e. you need to uncompress the mezzanine compressed content before you process it) and still requires the increased processing. The current requirement for more IO is purely a reflection of this - and the fact that currently HD kit is being repurposed rather than dedicated 4K kit being used. So even if you could use a single 12G-SDI feed to carry 2160/120p content (rather than 2x12G-SDI feeds as a pair), you'd still need twice the amount of 12G processing, or 8x the 3G processing, so an 8 input EVS would drop to a single input (and I'm not sure EVS make an 8 input 3G-SDI box - so you may need 2 x 4 input models slaved together some how)

And the key thing is ensuring that all the different manufacturers agree on a single mezzanine standard and it is cost effective to implement. Some companies will see mezzanine coding as a way of delaying implementing full baseband quality, and being very much a temporary thing, seen as 'second best' once non-mezzanine interconnects kick in, so that could mitigate against it every being implemented. It's a lot of R&D and development costs which may not actually last for very long as it is a stop-gap, and a more expensive stop-gap in some ways than cable bundling.

Unlike HD, 4K specific production kit is still not being produced (with a few exceptions like BlackMagic Design who do offer 4K and 12G-SDI stuff - but at the very low-end), even the camera chains are using HD/3G-SDI Camera Control Units with bolt on pre-processors to split off the 4K video (whilst letting stuff like production talkback, reverse vision, prompter, camera colour balance and exposure control data carry on as if an HD system camera were being used), and the cameras being used are 4K D-Cinema cameras with a bolt on live-broadcasting fibre back, rather than being 4K broadcast system cameras. Sony and GrassValley don't currently have a 4K system camera. (BlackMagic would appear to - but nobody would seriously use the BlackMagic 4K Studio camera in this environment - it has almost non-existent real-world production facilities.)

As I say, the BBC do use Dirac Pro mezzanine compression extensively internally. This is to allow existing 270Mbs uncompressed SD-SDI circuits within buildings and between buildings to carry HD-SDI content at tolerable quality without requiring a total upgrade to the circuits in question. However it isn't perfect, and there is a quality loss (albeit small), particularly since you want very low-delay in mezzanine compression (it has to compress across only a few lines - you can't use frame-based compression as the additional frame delays they introduce are a nightmare in production chains) It's a useful stopgap IF you can implement it.
Joe Bloggs likes this.

Last edited by sneals2000; 06-29-2014 at 02:30 AM.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #109 of 174 Old 06-29-2014, 02:48 AM
Member
 
cranster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdowney717 View Post
'ATSC 3.0 is not backwards compatible to the current system'

you got your answer, 4k is not needed,
1080 is a very good picture quality..

Look how long and how delayed the HDTV transition took, and we are just in it for a few years now.

Anyway, where does it stop?, 4k?, no then you will say we need 8k then 16k,, it just never ends.
I prefer 4k by far over hd. Is it needed... no, would I ever go back to 1080p... absolutely not. Once you see 4k there's no going back. The technological march forward will never stop, nor should it. At 8k, and above they will probably need to re-engineer the eyeball to appreciate the higher resolutions, but rest assured that too will take place.
cranster is offline  
post #110 of 174 Old 07-07-2014, 01:06 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 107
Rudy1 is offline  
post #111 of 174 Old 07-17-2014, 09:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by cranster View Post
I prefer 4k by far over hd. Is it needed... no, would I ever go back to 1080p... absolutely not. Once you see 4k there's no going back. The technological march forward will never stop, nor should it. At 8k, and above they will probably need to re-engineer the eyeball to appreciate the higher resolutions, but rest assured that too will take place.
Without native content, where is it going.

I can see broadcasters not being interested in 4k. Even 10-15 years ago, local stations were balking at the capital they'd have to invest for broadcasting, switching, editing and other production hardware.

It would take millions just as broadcast ratings, both for network and local newscasts, were declining.

Now they're just trying to hold onto their spectrum while mobile is trying to poach any spare spectrum.


Now have the studios indicated any interest in releasing 4k media?

Is there any work being done on 4k Blu Ray? Rather skeptical of 4k streams that Netflix and YouTube might bring.
wco81 is online now  
post #112 of 174 Old 07-25-2014, 04:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
The BBC have now switched their OTA 4K tests to 2160/50p for experimental 4K coverage of the 20th Commonwealth Games (kind of like a mini-Olympics for 71 countries that are in the Commonwealth - mainly British territories and former countries in the British Empire - like Canada, Australia, New Zealand and many of the Caribbean nations).

They are using their "IP Studio" techniques for production where each camera output is carried over IP networks rather than conventional SDI-type baseband video cabling. This means that you can record a camera just by using IP recording techniques (no video input stages required) and cutting and viewing can be done in the IP domain. Sony and others are looking at this for future production systems. Not sure what bitrate the IP streams are working at and what - if any - compression is being used. I'd imagine some is being used rather than 10Gb Ethernet being used for each camera feed?
sneals2000 is offline  
post #113 of 174 Old 07-26-2014, 05:29 PM
Member
 
SteveBagley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
Not sure what bitrate the IP streams are working at and what - if any - compression is being used. I'd imagine some is being used rather than 10Gb Ethernet being used for each camera feed?
There's a good blog post about it from one of the people working on it -- apparently the camera feeds are compressed to about 1.2gb/s (so presumably still 10G ethernet?). I'm fairly certain other places have listed it as being H264.

Steve
SteveBagley is offline  
post #114 of 174 Old 07-27-2014, 02:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, Not as far east as Vegas
Posts: 1,487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhughy2010 View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by sneals2000

Interesting thread.

I suspect that because OTA is less dominant in the US than it is in other countries, development of OTA is less likely?


You've hit the nail on the head... frankly I just don't understand it. I recently "cut the cord" from the beastly Comcast. I have sooo many friends and family that hardly watch TV and they continue to subscribe to Comcast or ATT Uverse. These companies are genius' in how they convince people to subscribe and their tactics to keep subscribers.

The people that I know that want to cut the cord don't really understand that their is an alternative. It's almost like people missed the "memo" that OTA going digital was going to improve signal quality and make things incredible for all. I specifically remember the media and they way they handled the digital switch. I believe it caused a lot of people unwillingly to switch to cable.

When I put up my antenna this year my friends and family had no idea that OTA was as good as it is. There are at least three of my friends and family members going through the process of cutting the cord because they saw how good OTA was at my place. I am helping a friend tomorrow morning assemble his Winegard HD8200u... long story short, people here in the U.S. just don't understand OTA like people do overseas. There needs to be more antenna in stallers here IMO.
I have OTA, but if you want any programming that takes chances, you won't get it with over the air programming. No HBO, no AMC, no Sundance channel. Sure you can get some stuff on the internet but it will cost you, which defeats part of the idea of cord cutting in the first place.

"Bring out yer dead!".."Wait I'm not dead yet!"..(Sound Austrian here) "WRONG !!" (You know what happens next..)
tenthplanet is offline  
post #115 of 174 Old 07-27-2014, 07:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
I have OTA, but if you want any programming that takes chances, you won't get it with over the air programming. No HBO, no AMC, no Sundance channel. Sure you can get some stuff on the internet but it will cost you, which defeats part of the idea of cord cutting in the first place.
Again - a major difference between the US and Europe. Here in many countries in Europe it is the OTA broadcasters who are producing the programming that takes the chances - not the Pay-TV operations, which are really just conduits for sport, movies and US TV shows.

In the US to get high quality natural history or science programming you have to pay for Nat Geo or Discovery. In the UK the BBC do it OTA.
In the US to get shows like The Bridge or The Killing you have to pay FX or AMC. In Sweden and Denmark the originals were produced by the main OTA broadcasters, and the BBC picked them up and showed them OTA. (Though Sky - a pay-TV operation in the UK - produced "The Tunnel" - an Anglo/French remake set in the Channel Tunnel linking the UK and France)
In the UK a lot of pretty edgy drama is produced by the BBC, ITV and Channel Four - our main OTA broadcasters (Happy Valley, The Fall, The Honourable Woman, Luther, The Shadow Line, Broadchurch etc.)

This may be why the BBC and Sky are both quite aggressively trialing 4K, just as they both led the way with HD in the UK.

Last edited by sneals2000; 07-27-2014 at 07:19 AM.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #116 of 174 Old 07-27-2014, 07:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
I have OTA, but if you want any programming that takes chances, you won't get it with over the air programming. No HBO, no AMC, no Sundance channel. Sure you can get some stuff on the internet but it will cost you, which defeats part of the idea of cord cutting in the first place.
This is getting way off-topic, the thread is about OTA 4K not specialty and subscription channels. Besides despite the belief of some I am pretty sure the vast majority of the population could care less about HBO, AMC, Sundance, etc, etc. If someone wants to pay through the nose for such channels which means also the ones that put on CSI re-runs then fine.
wuther is offline  
post #117 of 174 Old 07-27-2014, 07:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Liked: 70
But the uk has a TV tax to fund the bbc.
wco81 is online now  
post #118 of 174 Old 07-27-2014, 08:32 AM
Senior Member
 
quad4.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: here
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
But the uk has a TV tax to fund the bbc.

Where I live in NYS our local NBC affiliate is still on SD local broadcast. Network is 1080i. Small Theaters are struggling to keep up with digital tech, and now are we to expect higher res.?
Where is the money coming from? They can't even get new HD cams!
quad4.0 is offline  
post #119 of 174 Old 07-27-2014, 01:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
But the uk has a TV tax to fund the bbc.
Many countries outside the US fund national TV broadcasters via non-commercial routes.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #120 of 174 Old 07-28-2014, 06:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Stu03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kingdom of Fife, Scotland.
Posts: 1,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 167
I am friendly with a BBC broadcast engineer with tens of years experience and who is worried about broadcast compression now and in the future.
Stu03 is offline  
Reply HDTV Technical

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off