U.S. Broadcasters Diss 4K - Page 5 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 5Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 174 Old 07-29-2014, 09:13 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,206
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Results of early trials:

http://www.techradar.com/us/news/tel...-ahead-1259434
Joe Bloggs likes this.
Rudy1 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 174 Old 07-29-2014, 01:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,054
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy1 View Post
That seems to major on the IP MPEG-DASH streaming trials and not really cover the DVB-T2 stuff. I'm not surprised there were relative delays between IPTV solutions - different levels of buffering and implementations I guess.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #123 of 174 Old 07-29-2014, 01:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,054
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stu03 View Post
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.
Well SD in the UK is close-to-unwatchable on decent screen sizes. Compare BBC DVB-T MPEG2 in 2003 with BBC DVB-T in 2014 (I have off-air transport stream recordings from 2003) and you can clearly see the increases in compression (PAL analogue looked better on a decent display...)

However that is partially mitigated by DVB-T2 H264 HD stuff, which is streets ahead of the SD services. It isn't artefact-free, but what is. It is, however, very watchable, and massively better than MPEG2 HD stuff I've seen in the US.

I guess if 4K OTA happens here (big if) it will allow the HD stuff to be quality reduced a bit, to provide a clearer advantage for 4K. Just as most broadcasters pragmatically accepted an SD quality drop when HD arrived. (Sky switched from 720x576 to 544x576 on lots of their SD channels when they launched HD at decent quality ISTR, and Sky still push for high quality HD on their sports channels)
sneals2000 is offline  
post #124 of 174 Old 07-30-2014, 12:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
scowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 10,487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
I guess if 4K OTA happens here (big if) it will allow the HD stuff to be quality reduced a bit, to provide a clearer advantage for 4K. Just as most broadcasters pragmatically accepted an SD quality drop when HD arrived. (Sky switched from 720x576 to 544x576 on lots of their SD channels when they launched HD at decent quality ISTR, and Sky still push for high quality HD on their sports channels)
We can't do that with ATSC because some receivers refuse to display any resolution that isn't in the ATSC specification. Our PBS station tried reducing the resolution of their SD subchannels this way but had to set them back after some viewers only saw blank screens. For a while the MPEG header on our CBS station said it was 1920x1088 which was technically correct (1088 is a multiple of 16) but some receivers even refused to display that.

NOW: my post on AVS Forum.
NEXT: someone else's post on AVS Forum.
scowl is online now  
post #125 of 174 Old 07-30-2014, 01:00 PM
Senior Member
 
bobby2478's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
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.

BluRay has the ability to support 4k, the main limitation is file size (limited to 50GB dual layer discs). Today's disks are mostly 1/2 or more full with special features etc, so it wouldn't be hard for them to put the main feature on 1 disc and the special feature on another (like is done for DVD today). That said, there is still this notion that somehow all 4k content will be downloaded and/or streamed with little to no physical media.


Think of the infrastructure and bandwidth required to have nothing but 4k content getting transmitted all over the place. The current infrastructure simply couldn't handle this level of traffic. Goes for both streaming over internet as well as OTA. Also, consider how more and more ISP's are moving towards capped or tiered data plans to help minimize stress on their networks. Those caps would be hit immediately with a bunch of 4k content.


Lastly, consider that HD has been out for over 10 years now and the dominant OTA resolution is still 720p (or at best 1080i). NO ONE transmits in 1080p, the only way you can get full 1080p content is via Blu-ray or download. So we aren't even using current HD 1080p sets to their maximum ability yet.


If the jump from 720p or 1080i to 1080p would be too vexing on infrastructure and bandwidth to allow, and it's been 10 years since HD started gaining popularity, that would indicate we are likely at least 10 years away if not longer from broadcasts of full 4k content.
bobby2478 is offline  
post #126 of 174 Old 07-30-2014, 01:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,054
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobby2478 View Post
BluRay has the ability to support 4k, the main limitation is file size (limited to 50GB dual layer discs). Today's disks are mostly 1/2 or more full with special features etc, so it wouldn't be hard for them to put the main feature on 1 disc and the special feature on another (like is done for DVD today). That said, there is still this notion that somehow all 4k content will be downloaded and/or streamed with little to no physical media.
The optical media and UDF file format does, but AIUI the Blu ray video spec doesn't include support for 2160p video using either H264/AVC or H265/HEVC encoding does it? So it's a bit like saying that Blu-ray supports Word or Excel isn't it?

You're right that HEVC at <40Mbs is still likely to be pretty good for HEVC 2160p content - though higher bitrates would always be nicer. There are 100GB Blu-ray discs now aren't there?
Quote:
Think of the infrastructure and bandwidth required to have nothing but 4k content getting transmitted all over the place. The current infrastructure simply couldn't handle this level of traffic. Goes for both streaming over internet as well as OTA. Also, consider how more and more ISP's are moving towards capped or tiered data plans to help minimize stress on their networks. Those caps would be hit immediately with a bunch of 4k content.
Though ISPs will leverage this by creating agreements with content providers (unless Net Neutrality kicks in) which will circumvent this to a degree. See Netflix. OR ISPs will make it a selling point that they will exempt certain content from their caps.
Quote:
Lastly, consider that HD has been out for over 10 years now and the dominant OTA resolution is still 720p (or at best 1080i). NO ONE transmits in 1080p, the only way you can get full 1080p content is via Blu-ray or download. So we aren't even using current HD 1080p sets to their maximum ability yet.
Though in reality most scripted drama and comedy is shot 1080/24p (or 25p in Europe) - and this can be carried pretty well in a 1080i stream and reconstructed to be 1080p at the receiver. It is only 1080/50p and 1080/60p which would suffer hugely from being carried 1080i.

And in the UK our OTA standard flips the H264 encoders dynamically between 1080/50i and 1080/25p based on content - so stuff shot 1080/25p is broadcast 1080/25p...

Quote:
If the jump from 720p or 1080i to 1080p would be too vexing on infrastructure and bandwidth to allow, and it's been 10 years since HD started gaining popularity, that would indicate we are likely at least 10 years away if not longer from broadcasts of full 4k content.
OTA possibly. Pay TV is much closer than that I suspect. With 3D a failure, 4K is the 'next big thing' to drive up-selling subscribers...

Last edited by sneals2000; 07-30-2014 at 01:15 PM.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #127 of 174 Old 07-30-2014, 01:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,054
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post
We can't do that with ATSC because some receivers refuse to display any resolution that isn't in the ATSC specification. Our PBS station tried reducing the resolution of their SD subchannels this way but had to set them back after some viewers only saw blank screens. For a while the MPEG header on our CBS station said it was 1920x1088 which was technically correct (1088 is a multiple of 16) but some receivers even refused to display that.
Ouch. DVB does seem a bit more flexible in many areas.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #128 of 174 Old 07-30-2014, 01:24 PM
Senior Member
 
bobby2478's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
The optical media and UDF file format does, but AIUI the Blu ray video spec doesn't include support for 2160p using either H264/AVC or H265/HEVC encoding does it? So it's a bit like saying that Blu-ray supports Word or Excel isn't it?

Without truly finalized 4k specs we won't know for sure. Where I was going was that Blu Ray is the last physical media to be made in disc format: there will never be anything created that would go beyond Blu Ray. So in terms of physical media, Blu Ray is about the only option (outside of flash drives). And they have up to 50gb to work with in terms of main feature file size.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
Though ISPs will leverage this by creating agreements with content providers (unless Net Neutrality kicks in) which will circumvent this to a degree. See Netflix. OR ISPs will make it a selling point that they will exempt certain content from their caps.
Possibly, depending on how the whole "net neutrality" debate plays out.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
Though in reality most scripted drama and comedy is shot 1080/24p (or 25p in Europe) - and this can be carried pretty well in a 1080i stream and reconstructed to be 1080p at the receiver. It is only 1080/50p and 1080/60p which would suffer hugely from being carried 1080i.

I was referring to here in the USA where a majority of broadcasts are 720p, with the max being 1080i. No one broadcasts full 1080p.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
OTA possibly. Pay TV is much closer than that I suspect. With 3D a failure, 4K is the 'next big thing' to drive up-selling subscribers...

True, but again here in the USA at least the big factor is what resolution do you actually receive. For example, watching anything over cable or satellite, even pay channels like HBO, regardless of what they are transmitting, due to compression what is actually displayed on your TV is less than full 1080p today. So even if they broadcast in full 1080p (which doesn't happen today in US), by the time the content makes its way onto your screen it will be substantially less than full 1080p quality. Which is why watching local channels OTA you get much better picture quality than watching the same channel over cable or satellite. So regardless of how content is transmitted, the signal you display on your TV will be less than full 4k quality, and the only ways you can get the closest to full 4k with no loss of picture quality would be OTA, Physical media (blu ray) or download. Cable/Satellite and streaming will all result in a picture less than 4k quality even if they are transmitted in full 4k.
bobby2478 is offline  
post #129 of 174 Old 07-30-2014, 02:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Consumer market has repeatedly demonstrated that they will take lower cost and convenience instead of quality.

So MP3, photos taken on phones, etc.

Laser Disc was niche. The higher resolution audio formats never caught on.

If we get 4K at all, there's a good chance it'll be limited to streamed media. Then a 15 Mbps Netflix 4K may become the de facto standard.

Ugh.
wco81 is offline  
post #130 of 174 Old 07-30-2014, 05:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,206
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
Consumer market has repeatedly demonstrated that they will take lower cost and convenience instead of quality.

So MP3, photos taken on phones, etc.

Laser Disc was niche. The higher resolution audio formats never caught on.

If we get 4K at all, there's a good chance it'll be limited to streamed media. Then a 15 Mbps Netflix 4K may become the de facto standard.

Ugh.
I believe the Asian manufacturers will be key in getting UHD to the masses in great numbers. Once the big box retailers start selling stripped-down, super cheap UHD sets, the "Keeping up with the Joneses" mentality will take over. People who (for lack of a better term) are "clueless" will buy these TVs just to be able to brag that they got "cutting edge" technology at a bargain price on Black Friday. We saw a similar scenario when 1080p sets first went "mainstream" with the Walmart set...people with little in-depth knowledge of the tech bought these sets (along with the first batch of truly cheap Blu-Ray players), only to watch low-bitrate cable signals and their old DVDs on them.

American TV broadcasting has a lot of catching up to do, and may very well never get there unless they're dragged by the government into the UHD camp kicking and screaming. Cable sees UHD as a potential cash cow, and so does Hollywood. Movie studios will not pass over the opportunity to re-sell their entire catalogs in restored, digitally enhanced ultrahigh definition versions. Their preoccupation with piracy will mean that these versions will (at least initially) only be available on physical media. The BDA has already trialled UHD disc-pressing techniques, and are moving towards standardizing the specs for the news discs and the players. A formal announcement is expected sometime around November, with sales of players and discs slated for the 2015 Christmas shopping season.
Rudy1 is online now  
post #131 of 174 Old 10-08-2014, 02:25 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,206
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 115
FIRST US-BASED DEMO OF 4K BROADCAST

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/...oadcast/272758
Rudy1 is online now  
post #132 of 174 Old 10-08-2014, 02:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy1 View Post
FIRST US-BASED DEMO OF 4K BROADCAST

http://www.tvtechnology.com/article/...oadcast/272758
Hmm wasn't Sinclair the company which tried to hijack the atsc standard about 10 years ago just as hdtv broadcasts were starting?

They wanted to push some proprietary modulation scheme which would have been incompatible with the TVs already out in the field and the suspicion at AVS was that they wanted to split up the bandwidth to multiple SD channels, undermining hdtv.
wco81 is offline  
post #133 of 174 Old 10-08-2014, 04:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dr1394's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mizar 5
Posts: 3,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
Hmm wasn't Sinclair the company which tried to hijack the atsc standard about 10 years ago just as hdtv broadcasts were starting?

They wanted to push some proprietary modulation scheme which would have been incompatible with the TVs already out in the field and the suspicion at AVS was that they wanted to split up the bandwidth to multiple SD channels, undermining hdtv.
Sinclair was trying to push COFDM modulation. Almost every other country in the world uses some kind of COFDM based standard, either DVB-T, ISDB-T or DTMB. COFDM is used in other standards like Wi-Fi and LTE.

https://www.dvb.org/news/worldwide

If you look at how COFDM handles multipath, it's clearly technically superior to ATSC. Sinclair and others realized this around 1998, but by then the ATSC political ship had already sailed.

I believe the current Sinclair tests are based on DVB-T2. DVB-T2 is a modern standard that employs the latest and greatest digital modulation techniques. One of them, LDPC (Low Density Parity Check) has an interesting story. It was developed by Robert G. Gallager in 1960 for his Ph.D thesis at MIT. Too computationally difficult to implement in 1960, LDPC was re-discovered 36 years later in 1996 and selected for both DVB-S2 (2003) and DVB-T2 (2006), beating out Turbo codes in performance.

Ron

HD MPEG-2 Test Patterns http://www.w6rz.net
dr1394 is online now  
post #134 of 174 Old 10-08-2014, 07:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Interesting.

I do remember though that there was a lot of opposition to Sinclair back in the day, not necessarily for technical reasons but because changing the standard at that point would have delayed the rollout. Supposedly the stations they owned were among the pioneers of all these sub channels which antagonized the enthusiast community.
wco81 is offline  
post #135 of 174 Old 10-09-2014, 11:18 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
scowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 10,487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 22
The article says they were using their "experimental OFDM transmission system" so at least they're trying to set new standards early this time.

I don't know how excited broadcasters will be about having two transmitters again but I guess there's no way around it.

NOW: my post on AVS Forum.
NEXT: someone else's post on AVS Forum.
scowl is online now  
post #136 of 174 Old 10-09-2014, 12:31 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,206
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Well, we are still at least a year away from ATSC 3.0 so broadcasters have plenty of time to get their acts together. With the FCC so eager to "repurpose" the airwaves for use by the cellular carriers, broadcasters may find that they have no other choice than to embrace the new format if they want to remain in the OTA business.
Rudy1 is online now  
post #137 of 174 Old 10-09-2014, 03:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy1 View Post
Well, we are still at least a year away from ATSC 3.0 so broadcasters have plenty of time to get their acts together. With the FCC so eager to "repurpose" the airwaves for use by the cellular carriers, broadcasters may find that they have no other choice than to embrace the new format if they want to remain in the OTA business.
And we need new standards why? The 720p/1080i system we have today sort of works. And it would work just fine if the broadcasters would cut out the vampire sub-channel bull****.
BiggAW is online now  
post #138 of 174 Old 10-09-2014, 03:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Is ATSC 3.0 backwards compatible with all the current HDTV sets out there?

Will it work within the same spectrum allocations broadcasters already have?

That said, I don't know how quickly networks, let alone local stations, would spend to adopt 4K production and switching equipment. Most local SportsNets may have the same cameras and equipment that they bought about 10 years ago. They are not even at the state of the art for 1080i or 720p.

The 4K TVs are going to have to drop under $1000 before the adoption rates become high enough for them to notice. It was hard enough getting people and local stations to upgrade from NTSC to HD. Have a feeling it will be even harder for this transition, which may never happen.
wco81 is offline  
post #139 of 174 Old 10-09-2014, 04:31 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,206
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 115
If the ATSC has its way, broadcast TV in the USA will advance to a state where it can directly compete with VOD, live streaming, and cable....and this will require adoption of the ATSC 3.0 standards. In South Florida, every broadcaster is multi casting and this has increased revenue significantly while dramatically reducing the quality of the 1080i and 720p signals. I recently viewed some old DVHS recordings of the HD demo loops PBS ran when ATSC first went live in this area, and the difference between 1080i then and (what passes for) 1080i now is shocking. If the broadcasters find a way to make money off UHD, those that can afford the equipment will fight bitterly to keep the spectrum to themselves. But time is not on their side: the cellphone carriers want the spectrum and are willing to pay for it, and the cable and satellite companies see UHD as the new cash cow. Over the air TV may soon become history if the broadcasters adopt the same "wait and see" attitude that delayed the transition from NTSC to ATSC. Some think the time is now to get on board, but many feel that ship has already sailed.
Rudy1 is online now  
post #140 of 174 Old 10-09-2014, 04:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dr1394's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mizar 5
Posts: 3,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
Is ATSC 3.0 backwards compatible with all the current HDTV sets out there?
We don't know yet. The physical layer of ATSC 3.0 hasn't been selected yet. The proposals are listed here.

http://www.atsc.org/cms/index.php/th...-for-proposals

The Guarneri Communications proposal is the only one that offers any backwards compatibility.

http://www.guarneri-communications.c...ROPOSAL_v2.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
Will it work within the same spectrum allocations broadcasters already have?
Yes. DVB-T2 is the most flexible. It can use any channel width by just changing the clock rate. The specification includes 1.7, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10 MHz channel widths, so US 6 MHz channels are not a problem.

Ron

HD MPEG-2 Test Patterns http://www.w6rz.net
dr1394 is online now  
post #141 of 174 Old 10-09-2014, 06:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dr1394's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Mizar 5
Posts: 3,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Here's the schedule for ATSC 3.0. Looks like they're already behind, since the physical layer was supposed to be selected in June. FOBTV means Future of Broadcast Television.



Ron

HD MPEG-2 Test Patterns http://www.w6rz.net
dr1394 is online now  
post #142 of 174 Old 10-09-2014, 06:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 83
OK, ATSC was pretty much forced on the stations.

Will ATSC 3.0 be forced as well or will adoption be voluntary?

Seems like there would have to be a rollout with hard deadlines, as there was for ATSC.

Otherwise, what would be the impetus for broadcasters to adopt?
wco81 is offline  
post #143 of 174 Old 10-10-2014, 08:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
John Mason's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 10,658
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobby2478 View Post
I was referring to here in the USA where a majority of broadcasts are 720p, with the max being 1080i. No one broadcasts full 1080p.
Mentioned, undisputed, several times here. My impression is that 1080i, whether OTA, cable or satellite, vastly outnumbers 720p program sources. Anyone come across authoritative research? -- John


EDIT: Here's a Wikipedia table , although no doubt more authoritative sources exist.

Last edited by John Mason; 10-10-2014 at 08:52 AM. Reason: add-on
John Mason is offline  
post #144 of 174 Old 10-10-2014, 12:59 PM
Advanced Member
 
Mark12547's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Salem, Oregon, United States
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Liked: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason View Post
My impression is that 1080i, whether OTA, cable or satellite, vastly outnumbers 720p program sources. Anyone come across authoritative research? -- John

EDIT: Here's a Wikipedia table , although no doubt more authoritative sources exist.

Counting just the rows on the that Wikipedia table, I came up with:

Rows From Wikipedia Table
FormatNo. Channels% of Channels
1080i13677%
720p4023%
Adding the 37 additional channels that are listed (e.g., a premium movie channel collection has one row but multiple separate channels, look at HBO, Showtime, Starz, Encore, etc.), I come up with

After Breaking out Individual Channels from Wikipedia Page
FormatNo. of Channels% Channels
1080i17381%
720p4019%


Using my viewing habits (on Comcast "Digital Starter Package" in Salem, OR), limiting to just HD channels and shows I had recorded for viewing between February 24 and October 12 (yes, that's in the future, but I had already planned it out), my numbers are:

My DVR'ed Channels (HD Only)
FormatNo. Channels% of Channels% of DVR time
1080i3576%63%
720p1124%37%


I think it is more helpful to state that 4 out of 5 HD channels (based on that Wikipedia page) are 1080i, or that 3 out of 4 HD channels that I DVR are 1080i, than saying 1080i channels "vastly outnumber" 720p channels.

If I threw in SD content for what I have the DVR record, I might be thrown off the thread because I do catch a lot of old movies and some specialized content on SD-only channels & sub-channels, skewing my numbers to:

My DVR'ed Channels (Including SD)
Format% of DVR time
1080i39.3%
720p22.9%
48037.7%

My very humble setup:
Man Cave:Vizio E500i-A1 "Smart TV" (50-in 1080p 120Hz LED/LCD, has Netflix app.), Blu-ray players (Sony BDP-S3100, old LG BD390), Roku (the original model: N1000), PC (Windows 7), Comcast Internet (25Mbps/5Mbps).
Bedroom:LG 32LV3400-UA TV (32-in 768p 60Hz LED/LCD), HD DVR (Motorola RNG200N), Xfinity Comcast cable (Digital Starter Package), DVD/VHS player.
Mark12547 is offline  
post #145 of 174 Old 10-10-2014, 02:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
scowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 10,487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
And we need new standards why? The 720p/1080i system we have today sort of works. And it would work just fine if the broadcasters would cut out the vampire sub-channel bull****.
The television industry doesn't want to fall into another decades-long technological coma. There is now a consumer expectation that the technology of television will continue to improve and there will be a reason to upgrade their sets regularly. Before HDTV, there wasn't much of an incentive to buy a new television if you had one that worked.

BTW, my local CBS station broadcasts full bitrate HD and still looks terrible. I think they're using an ancient encoder.

NOW: my post on AVS Forum.
NEXT: someone else's post on AVS Forum.
scowl is online now  
post #146 of 174 Old 10-10-2014, 02:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post
The television industry doesn't want to fall into another decades-long technological coma. There is now a consumer expectation that the technology of television will continue to improve and there will be a reason to upgrade their sets regularly. Before HDTV, there wasn't much of an incentive to buy a new television if you had one that worked.

BTW, my local CBS station broadcasts full bitrate HD and still looks terrible. I think they're using an ancient encoder.
Yeah, if they are doing 19mbps and it looks bad, shame on them. Over the last few months, Comcast has actually gotten their ~11mbps MPEG-2 to look pretty darn good. Which is freaky, given how little bandwidth that is for MPEG-2 1080i60...

The broadcasters have no reason to go to 4K. Many OTA users are either cheap or poor, not great target markets for 4K. We still don't know if any cable or satellite providers are going to have ANY linear 4K content, or the ability to transmit it. There's just no reason for them to do anything other than improve their current offerings using current technology.
BiggAW is online now  
post #147 of 174 Old 10-10-2014, 03:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
scowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 10,487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
The broadcasters have no reason to go to 4K. Many OTA users are either cheap or poor, not great target markets for 4K. We still don't know if any cable or satellite providers are going to have ANY linear 4K content, or the ability to transmit it. There's just no reason for them to do anything other than improve their current offerings using current technology.
Cable and satellite could provide 4K content far more quickly than the networks and their affiliates. VOD Internet services like Netflix could provide it even more quickly -- it's just a stream of bytes to them. If that happens, every content provider will have to choose whether to move forward like they did with HDTV or be left behind.

4K will have the highest expectation of quality so it will be less likely to be the bit-starved messes that pass for HD these days. If it's not better it will fail.

NOW: my post on AVS Forum.
NEXT: someone else's post on AVS Forum.
scowl is online now  
post #148 of 174 Old 10-10-2014, 04:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked: 83
I don't see this big outcry for better quality from the masses.

Otherwise Blu-Ray would be selling a lot better.

I wish it were true and broadcasters would even go the intermediate step of doing 1080p60 broadcasts, especially for sports.

But my sense is that TV business is not growing, especially local stations. And so they may not have the resources to go 4K nor would they see increased revenues for doing so.

Instead, there seems to be more interest in convenience and easy access to content, so binge-watching seasons of shows that aired a couple of years ago on Netflix on the iPad or one of several other devices which can stream Netflix seems to be more popular.

Certainly more popular than people buying Blu-Rays for the optimal picture and sound. Wouldn't be surprised if it becomes more common to watch upscaled Blu-Rays on those 4K TVs than it is to watch native 4K content.
wco81 is offline  
post #149 of 174 Old 10-10-2014, 08:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post
Cable and satellite could provide 4K content far more quickly than the networks and their affiliates. VOD Internet services like Netflix could provide it even more quickly -- it's just a stream of bytes to them. If that happens, every content provider will have to choose whether to move forward like they did with HDTV or be left behind.

4K will have the highest expectation of quality so it will be less likely to be the bit-starved messes that pass for HD these days. If it's not better it will fail.
No one has shown a large demand for 4K among the general population. Sure, there's streaming, but 4K streaming can be set up for a tiny minority of users. Cable, satellite, or broadcast bandwidth has to be set up for the masses. Considering that many people today can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080i and 1080p, I don't think 4K will see widespread adoption. At some point most TVs are going to end up being 4K, and some streaming will be done in 4K, but many of those users are not going to be clamoring for 4K content- they'll just keep using whatever they have now.
BiggAW is online now  
post #150 of 174 Old 10-10-2014, 09:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
scowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 10,487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
No one has shown a large demand for 4K among the general population.
No demand for HDTV either, ten years ago. I couldn't even convince people that HDTV was being broadcast for free.

Quote:
Sure, there's streaming, but 4K streaming can be set up for a tiny minority of users. Cable, satellite, or broadcast bandwidth has to be set up for the masses.
Cable and satellite is easy. Comcast is still sending out MPEG-2 streams for HD. They could send UHD streams with MPEG-4 with the same bandwidth. A cable box would simply downconvert for people with HDTV.

OTA broadcast of course is a much more difficult problem requiring more investment, FCC approval, and much of the stuff they went through last decade. At least it's familiar territory for them but it wouldn't surprise me if the American networks will remain content with HD for the next fifty years like they were with NTSC and UHD OTA will be something we see in other countries like Japan and Germany.

But don't count on my predictions. Ten years ago I thought Fox would still be broadcasting "Digital Widescreen".

Quote:
Considering that many people today can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080i and 1080p, I don't think 4K will see widespread adoption.
And that's why most channels are 720p... wait, most are 1080i! Apparently a significant number of viewers can tell the difference.

NOW: my post on AVS Forum.
NEXT: someone else's post on AVS Forum.
scowl is online now  
Reply HDTV Technical

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