AVS Forum banner

SMPTE Webinar: Quad HD to UHDTV

Tags
frontpage
12K views 43 replies 21 participants last post by  mightyhuhn 
#1 ·


This webinar presented how UHDTV will be much more than simply four times more pixels than HDTV—in a couple of years.

This month's webinar from SMPTE (Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers) was entitled "Quad HD to UHDTV: Making the Difference." The presenters were Hans Hoffmann, Senior Manager and Head of Media Fundaments and Production Unit at the EBU (European Broadcasting Union), and Howard Lukk, a movie director and technologist who worked on Toy Story 3 and co-created the ASC-DCI StEM (American Society of Cinematographers-Digital Cinema Initiative Standard Evaluation Material), a sequence of scenes that is used as an image-quality reference for digital cinema.

Hans Hoffmann focused primarily on the work being done in Europe on UHDTV, much of which wasn't news to me or any AVS members who have been following the development of the next TV standard. In particular, he stressed that "4K" is a marketing term that really refers only to pixel resolution—and confusingly at that—while "UHDTV" encompasses resolution as well as frame rate, dynamic range/bit depth, colorimetry, and immersive audio, most of which is outlined in the ITU-R (International Telecommunications Union-Radiocommunication) recommendation called ITU-R BT.2020. (This spec is sometimes called Rec.2020 because it's an ITU official recommendation; "BT" stands for Broadcast Television.)

When talking about the current crop of 4K TVs, Hans called them "Quad HD," since they have exactly four times the number of pixels as so-called Full HD but no other enhancements beyond HDTV. This is also referred to by the EBU as "UHD Phase 1" or "UHD-1," which retains all other aspects of current HDTV, such as BT.709 (often called Rec.709) colorimetry, dynamic range, and frame rates.

The next stop on the UHD roadmap is UHD-2, which is expected to be implemented in 2016 to 2018 and should include BT.2020 colorimetry, frame rates up to 120 fps, bit depth up to 12 bits for high dynamic range, and immersive audio of some sort. Finally, UHD-3 retains the characteristics of UHD-2 but with a pixel resolution of 7680x4320 (so-called "8K"); this is being promoted mostly by Japan and is expected to emerge sometime between 2020 and 2025.


As pixel resolution increases, so does the recommended viewing angle. Not indicated in this diagram is the 60° viewing angle for 4K. These angles correspond to seating distances of 3H (three times the screen height) for HD, 1.5H for 4K, and 0.75H for 8K. BTW, this graphic is an example of the confusion surrounding the various phases of UHD; what is labeled UHD-2 here is actually UHD-3 in the EBU roadmap. However, SMPTE also uses UHD-2 for 7680x4320.

Of course, increasing the pixel resolution by a factor of four quadruples the bandwidth required to transmit the signal at a given level of compression, and adding HFR (high frame rate) and HDR (high dynamic range, i.e., greater bit depth) increases the required bandwidth even more. Hans cited a rate of 6-14 Mbps for current HDTV broadcasts using H.264 compression and 25-35 Mbps for test broadcasts of 2160/50p (remember, Europe uses a frame rate of 50 rather than 60 Hz) with current implementations of H.265, though he expects that bit rate to drop as H.265 is improved. And don't forget that current HDTV broadcasts are 720p or 1080i, and 2160p test broadcasts do not yet include high frame rate or increased bit depth.

One interesting tidbit from the presentation was the notion that content with HFR and HDR might be downscaled to 1080p to reduce bandwidth requirements, since upscalers are so good these days. I'm not sure I agree with this idea, but something's gotta give, at least until H.265 or some other high-efficiency codec can reduce the required bandwidth to a reasonable level.


This slide reveals the results of a perceived-quality study conducted by the EBU with many viewers; the display was a 56" 4K monitor, and people viewed six scenes at a distance of 1.5H (41") and 2.7m (8.9 feet), which was deemed the most common seating distance in the average home. Interestingly, the viewers slightly preferred the greater seating distance when viewing HD, possibly because of upscaling artifacts, but when shown native UHD content, there was no preference between the two seating distances.


Another perceived-quality study by the EBU focused on different frame rates and shutter settings. Clearly, viewers preferred higher frame rates and a 50% (180°) shutter more than a 100% (360°) shutter. The "Low Anchor" point is 30 Hz; I don't know what the shutter setting was.


According to Hans, the dynamic range of human vision encompasses 12 orders of magnitude ("decades") or 40 f-stops. The current TV system is limited to two orders of magnitude or 6.6 f-stops, while an HDR display would encompass five orders of magnitude or 16.7 f-stops, which corresponds to the capture capability of modern digital-video cameras.


Part of the BT.2020 recommendation is a definition of colorimetry, which includes more colors than BT.709 (the current standard), DCI P3 (the standard for digital cinema), or the gamut of real-life reflected-light surface colors. However, there are no displays capable of reproducing the BT.2020 color gamut, in which the colors of red, green, and blue are monochromatic. This might be possible using lasers or quantum dots.

Howard Lukk's presentation focused mainly on digital cinema and workflows during the production and post-production processes. He did show a few slides that were more germane to the consumer experience of UHD.


In this slide, Howard illustrated how a narrow dynamic range forces you to expose for and display different brightness levels without capturing the entire dynamic range in the scene. Seeing the detail in one brightness range means that darker ranges are underexposed and brighter ranges are overexposed.


In this Photoshopped composite image, the effect of a wide dynamic range is simulated; detail in the bright and dark parts of the image are visible.

As I said earlier, there wasn't much about UHDTV in this webinar that those who follow the subject from a consumer perspective don't already know. As I've been saying for some time, the so-called 4K TVs being sold today do not embody any of the enhancements promised by UHDTV except for increased pixel count, and the content-creation community is not yet geared up to deliver content with these enhancements. We should see these two paths converge in the next couple of years, at which point UHDTV will blow your socks off.

Thanks to SMPTE for hosting the webinar and to Hans Hoffmann and Howard Lukk for their presentations.

Like AVS Forum on Facebook
Follow AVS Forum on Twitter

+1 AVS Forum on Google+
 
See less See more
8
#6 ·
UHD-1 is already in place and it does not go beyond rec 709 colorimetry. Most of the consumer level "4K" content being made right now meets the UHD-1 standard.

The specs for 4K Blu-Ray are still a work in progress, but are likely to go beyond UHD-1. It is probably a safe bet that 4K Blu-Ray will include most, if not all, of the features included in UHD-2. Bear in mind that not every movie encoded onto a 4K Blu-Ray disc will take advantage of every feature supported by the format. For instance, not every movie will be filmed at 60 fps, even though the format will surely support 2160p60 content.

At this point in time, it seems unlikely that UHD-3 (or at least the 8K resolution portion of it) will ever be a part of the Blu-Ray spec. Without another large bump in compression capabilities, a 90 min 8K film won't fit on any optical disc that currently exists.
 
#7 ·
Great article. UHD TV prices are continuing to fall but sales won't truly pick up until they give people something they can see from any distance. I'm happy to see that UHD-Phase 2 addresses this issue. However, IMO 2016 is too far away. The UHD specs should have included wider color, HDR and higher frame rate from the beginning.

It is my hope that these companies start rolling out Rec.2020, HDR and possibly higher frame rate compatible displays on all of their 2015 flagship models. CES 2014 was all about 4K resolution. CES 2015 should be about giving us the full UHD experience.

I'm currently in the market for a bigger TV but I refuse to buy into an unfinished standard. This situation has got to be even more confusing for people who are not AV enthusiast. Worst yet the 4K Blu-Ray standard is STILL not set. This has been the most unorganized and confusing TV standard transition ever. Sure the move to HDTV wasn't perfectly smooth but it was a lot better than this transition.

Hopefully things get sorted out soon.
 
#8 ·
Great article. UHD TV prices are continuing to fall but sales won't truly pick up until they give people something they can see from any distance. I'm happy to see that UHD-Phase 2 addresses this issue. However, IMO 2016 is too far away. The UHD specs should have included wider color, HDR and higher frame rate from the beginning.

It is my hope that these companies start rolling out Rec.2020, HDR and possibly higher frame rate compatible displays on all of their 2015 flagship models. CES 2014 was all about 4K resolution. CES 2015 should be about giving us the full UHD experience.

I'm currently in the market for a bigger TV but I refuse to buy into an unfinished standard. This situation has got to be even more confusing for people who are not AV enthusiast. Worst yet the 4K Blu-Ray standard is STILL not set. This has been the most unorganized and confusing TV standard transition ever. Sure the move to HDTV wasn't perfectly smooth but it was a lot better than this transition.

Hopefully things get sorted out soon.
The average consumer doesn't even know this is happening, let alone be confused by it. The only thing they know is that "4k" is the latest thing in TV tech and they "gotta have it" (if they can afford it)

By the time the marketing blitz for true UHDTV including the phase-2 technology enhancements hit the airwaves, the general consumer will assume they just mean "4k" and will happily buy into phase-1 4k HDTV's which will be affordable by that time and be none the wiser.
 
#22 ·
Not really in broadcast terms. They are already broadcasting 720p60 (60 fps) to the consumer and have done for years, so having quadrupled the pixel resolution, doing 60 fps UHD tests isn't really high (in broadcast) terms any more - there has been no increase in temporal resolution to keep up with the increase in spatial resolution (4x pixel res). In broadcast terms, when they do 100/120 or higher it will be the "high"/higher frame rate tests.
 
#10 ·
Very nice to have this information and have mindset of where the technology is going.
Having funded R&D too often I'm simply waiting till 2016-2017 for UHD-2 to mature, become mainstream, object sound to also mature, etc.

Till then, my now getting long in the tooth 2008 Sony VW60 will do, along with my 2012 Denon 4520CI and 11.2 set-up.

Others on the upgrade-itis every 2 years bandwagon, thanks in advance for funding the R&D :D

Scott - as usual great info made easy to grasp.
 
#11 · (Edited)
Stop the Presses. The United States' consumers have been saved by that great humanitarian, Gary Shapiro, the President and CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association. Do you think Gary will win a Nobel Peace price for his work in safeguarding the American consumer from buying a pseudo UHD display? And the nice touch for the UHD standard from the CEA is that is voluntary. So if any manufacturer doesn't want to comply, but then again . . .

Starting in September 2014 a display manufacturer may only call one of its displays ultra High Definition (UHD) (remembers its voluntary) if at a minimum, it meets the following: (brace yourself, boy did Gary take on the tough issues and draw a line in the sand):


Pixels: 3840 x 2160. (more H or V pixels OK proved the multiplier for H meets the following for aspect ratio)

Aspect ratio: 16 x 9 (higher aspect ratios OK) (Sony projectors at 4096 x 2160 aspect are thus OK).


Able to Upscale 1920 x 1080 to 3840 x 2160.

HDMI. At least one and at least one must be able to input 3840 x 2160 at 24, 30, and 60 fps and one such UHD input MUST be protected by HDCP 2.2 or its equivalent. Political equivalent, no sense having an uprising over that. Bandwidth of inputs. No sir re, we are protecting the consumer and specify 18GBS would screw most of our members. Chroma subsampling. No need the consumer doesn't have a clue and doesn't care. Great job here CEA.

Colorimetry. Thank you once again CEA. 3840 x 2160 MUST do BT 709 at a minimum. Can be wider. Thank you. Thank you. We might have gotten BT 601 or something even worse. I am thinking of requesting my Congressman to nominate d the CEA for the Congressional medal of honor. We are saved.

Bit depth. Here is another biggie! In an exhibit of mooning and letting it all hang out, a minimum of 8 bits is required. No backward sliding to screw the consumer with 4 or 6 bits! Like it, love it, but if your display can't handle 8 bits you can't call it UHD. Thank you CEA. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Wait. There is more. You can call your display a Connected UHD device if its meets all the above and its has HEVC for one of its HDMI 3840 x 2160 inputs and it can decode multi channel audio. There is more for the connectivity but I am getting tired of typing.

Its interesting that as of Sept 2014 there may be displays out there that are not HDCP 2.2 or equivalent compliant nor have the ability to handle HVEC.


All this is designed to provide manufacturers with marketing flexibility while providing clarity for the consumer. God Bless. Thamk you CEA. They are working on a Logo so that the consumer can tell at a glance that he really has purchased a CEA UHD compliant set.
 
#12 ·
Wait there is more. You can call your display a Connected UHD devixe if its meets all the above and its has HEVC for one of its HDMI 3840 x 2160 inputs and it can decode multi channel audio. There more for the connectivity but I am getting tired of typing.

Its interesting that as of Sept 2014 there may be displays out there that are not HDCP 2.2 or equivalent compliant nor have the ability to handle HVEC.
the HEVC decoder in current TV will turn useless sooner or later the spec is still expending and the format may ADD 4:4:4 or high bit deep MVC both can't be decoded by those screens sooner or later.
 
#15 ·
Quandry Now! Need your thoughts!

We are having wall work done soon. I need to decide which TV to buy for it. My wife and I cut out a piece of clear plastic to simulate the size of a 65" TV. Although I had decided to go with either the Samsung 65" flat screen or 65" curved screen. We decided either would be lost on the wall. We cut more plastic and ended up feeling we need an 80". That pretty much takes us out of the 4K arena due to cost.

I was somewhat surprised when I checked out the 65" curved and flat Sammys sitting beside each other that I could hardly tell which one was which and really felt the flat panel looked somewhat bigger and had less distortion (minimal off center) than the curved model, but I really like the style of the curve-duh!

We are also considering the 75" Samsung flat screen (although I haven't been able to find one to check it out) as the curved model of this size is also too expensive.

Another option we have looked at is the Sharp 70" Flat screen which is a quasi 4K? for $2699.99. Good price, not sure what I'm getting for the price!:confused:

I saw a group of 6 Sony XBR 85" TVs boxed and banded together at Fry's. The next week they were no where in sight. :(Anyone know anything about the Sony XBR 85" the Sammy 75inchers, the Sharp, or any other TV I should be looking for?;)

As I need to make this decision in the next couple of weeks what you guys suggest and why?

One other question. The guy sales rep. telling me about the side by side Sammy 65s", the 75" Sammys as well as the 70" Sharp said all are full array local dimming sets! Any discussion here.:rolleyes:

At this point in the evolution of TVs would any of you thinK investing in an over 65" 4K TV (especially curved) is the way to go?
Thanks!!:)
 
#20 ·
We are having wall work done soon. I need to decide which TV to buy for it. My wife and I cut out a piece of clear plastic to simulate the size of a 65" TV. Although I had decided to go with either the Samsung 65" flat screen or 65" curved screen. We decided either would be lost on the wall. We cut more plastic and ended up feeling we need an 80". That pretty much takes us out of the 4K arena due to cost.

I was somewhat surprised when I checked out the 65" curved and flat Sammys sitting beside each other that I could hardly tell which one was which and really felt the flat panel looked somewhat bigger and had less distortion (minimal off center) than the curved model, but I really like the style of the curve-duh!

We are also considering the 75" Samsung flat screen (although I haven't been able to find one to check it out) as the curved model of this size is also too expensive.

Another option we have looked at is the Sharp 70" Flat screen which is a quasi 4K? for $2699.99. Good price, not sure what I'm getting for the price!:confused:

I saw a group of 6 Sony XBR 85" TVs boxed and banded together at Fry's. The next week they were no where in sight. :(Anyone know anything about the Sony XBR 85" the Sammy 75inchers, the Sharp, or any other TV I should be looking for?;)



One other question. The guy sales rep. telling me about the side by side Sammy 65s", the 75" Sammys as well as the 70" Sharp said all are full array local dimming sets! Any discussion here.:rolleyes:

At this point in the evolution of TVs would any of you thinK investing in an over 65" 4K TV (especially curved) is the way to go?
Thanks!!:)
Regarding the local dimming comment; the sales rep is full of Sh@$. All listed are edge lit. Overall, if I were you, I would buy something cheap or put up your existing set and wait a year to buy a larger and more future proof set. Read Mark's comments above.
 
#16 ·
i'd be content w/1080p in 12 or 16bit colors at variable fps!
 
#18 · (Edited)
The next stop on the UHD roadmap is UHD-2, which is expected to be implemented in 2016 to 2018 and should include BT.2020 colorimetry, frame rates up to 120 fps, bit depth up to 12 bits for high dynamic range, and immersive audio of some sort. Finally, UHD-3 retains the characteristics of UHD-2 but with a pixel resolution of 7680x4320 (so-called "8K"); this is being promoted mostly by Japan and is expected to emerge sometime between 2020 and 2025.

As pixel resolution increases, so does the recommended viewing angle. Not indicated in this diagram is the 60° viewing angle for 4K. These angles correspond to seating distances of 3H (three times the screen height) for HD, 1.5H for 4K, and 0.75H for 8K. BTW, this graphic is an example of the confusion surrounding the various phases of UHD; what is labeled UHD-2 here is actually UHD-3 in the EBU roadmap. However, SMPTE also uses UHD-2 for 7680x4320.
I've never heard the EBU call 7680x4320 "UHD-3" before. If they are now, it's a new thing. In the past the EBU have called 7680x4320 "UHD-2" - see https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/events/webinar049_BeyondHD-update/hoffmann_beyondHD_update.pdf

The EBU called it "UHD1 Phase 1" (for the 2160p at 50/60 fps etc.) and "UHD1 Phase 2" (for 2160p with 100 fps or more). I think it's a bad idea if they've now changed their terminology and are calling something else UHD2 (what they previously called UHD1 Phase 2).

This EBU document http://www.hoek.nl/dg/18mrt14/Dutch_Guild_2014_Yvonne_Thomas_handout.pdf from March 2014 from the EBU project manager also refers to 7680x4320 as UHD2 not UHD3 - and that looks practically the same as the one in the first post - and the picture in the first post, also has the "EBU" written on it where they refer to 7680x4320 as "UHD-2" not "UHD-3".

Do you have a link to an EBU document where they have now changed UHD2 to be called "UHD3"?

----
I think you are mixing up "Phase" with the UHD (level) number. It's "Phase 3", but not "UHD3". 7680x4320 is still UHD2, but it's "Phase 3" of the UHD rollout.
Phase 1 & Phase 2 are UHD1 (3840x2160) [though 2nd to last page of link below calls Phase 2 UHD-1H], Phase 3 is UHD2 (7680x4320).
See second to last page of this http://www.media-tech.net/fileadmin...tations/Media_Tech_UltraHD_GONSKA_handout.pdf
 
#29 ·
They could always go with something between rec 709 and rec 2020, such as DCI P3. That could be accomplished in the near future while still offering an improvement over the Full HD Blu-Ray spec. Going to a higher bit depth, such as 10-bit, is also well within the capability of current display technology. Rec 2020 color space is the only feature that really seems to be beyond the capabilities of current display technology. The main concerns with the rest of the specs is how it will impact bandwidth requirements from the source to the display, particularly if content is to be streamed, and ensuring backwards compatibility with new content on old displays.
 
#32 · (Edited)
The 4K TV should be big enought to create 60° angle between my eyes and the screen.
What if I lie down on my couch chair with my legs streched forward... 60 inch will not be ebnough to enjoy 4K.
60° is quite wide for a 50-60" TV so that you have to sit in front of it, closer than your leg length.


No "kick back and relax" for 50-60", you have to sit CLOSE to the TV to benifit from 4K.
Don't tell me we will be marketed to buy a 100" to enjoy 4K fully...

 
#36 · (Edited)
Its a pure political question. My guess is that the logo won't change but the manufacturers won't be authorized to use it on new models unless those models meet the phase two revisions. Of course this will lead to immense customer confusion. If they come out with a new name like UUHD or a new logo or something it will really piss Joe off. If they want to spike sales, phase II will have to be marketed as something other than UHD.

Joe consumer won't understand a phase difference. Its UHD. And if you remarkably improve it with the non resolution improvements of phase two, they will have to call it something else.
 
#40 ·
Hi,

For those interested by HDR, HEVC v2, HDMI 2.0, Blu-Ray 4K, ultra HD in general, let me submit you that link to the most comprehensive existing article in French. Please note it's very long to read (but also very informative) and please forgive me for the imperfect taduction due to google because i not feel the courage to translate myself.


https://translate.google.fr/translate?hl=fr&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.hardware.fr%2Fhfr%2FVideoSon%2FHiFi-HomeCinema%2Funique-haute-definition-sujet_141366_1.htm


Regards.
 
#43 ·
Hi,


Thanks to a french menber of EBU i had the final word wich explain the entire semantic about different phases :


There's only one standard ( worlwide specification ) for production & diffusion of UHD wich is ITU-BT.2020 specification. This is the standard wich introduce 2 résolutions ( not named in this document ) : 3840x2160 and 7680x4320.


Based on ITU-BT.2020, SMPTE specified UHDTV wich is the name for production of TV content in ultra HD ( see SMPTE-2036 worlwide specification ). This document describe more precisely parameters associated with UHDTV-1 ( 3840x2160 ) and UHDTV-2 ( 7680x4320 ). It concerns only production and not diffusion.


Based on SMPTE document, every area ( Europe, Japan, USA, China ) can set is own parameters for diffusion :
- Europe > EBU > DVB
- USA > NABA > ATSC
- Japan > MIC > ARIB
- China ( i don't know ) ...


For Europe, DVB ( wich has EBU delegation ) specified 2 résolutions of UHDTV in 3 phases :
- Phase 1 ( 2014-2015 ) > UHD-1 : 3840x2160, HEVC, 8-10bits, 4:2:0, 5.1 sound
- Phase 2 ( 2017-2018 ) > UHD-1 : 3840x2160, HEVC, 10bits, 4:2:0, HFR, HDR, Rec.2020, Immersif sound.
- Phase 3 ( 2020 ) > UHD-2 : 7680x4320, HEVC, 10-12bits, 4:2:0, HFR, HDR, Rec.2020, Immersif sound.
NB : parameters for phase 2 and 3 are still in negociation.


You should already know that ... but what the french menber of EBU said is that TV makers force them to specified 4k format because chips and socs are not available yet for commercialisation of UHD-1 phase 1 TV :


4K format : 3840x2160, AVC, 8bits 4:2:0


Then, what we must understand here is that 4K format has nothing to do with DCI4K resolution ( used by digital cinema ) and is only a commercial appellation for TV ( commercialised since 2012 ).


4K format is covered by Digitaleurope logo and the CEA's one as well > Only 4K format and not UHD ( even the phase 1 ) !


With theses explanations, we can easily understand that it could be more interesting to wait end of 2015, when the fisrt UHD-1 phase 1 TV compliant will be out.


Regards.
 
#44 ·
For Europe, DVB ( wich has EBU delegation ) specified 2 résolutions of UHDTV in 3 phases :
- Phase 1 ( 2014-2015 ) > UHD-1 : 3840x2160, HEVC, 8-10bits, 4:2:0, 5.1 sound
- Phase 2 ( 2017-2018 ) > UHD-1 : 3840x2160, HEVC, 10bits, 4:2:0, HFR, HDR, Rec.2020, Immersif sound.
- Phase 3 ( 2020 ) > UHD-2 : 7680x4320, HEVC, 10-12bits, 4:2:0, HFR, HDR, Rec.2020, Immersif sound.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top