Atsc 3.0 - Page 64 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 941Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1891 of 1952 Old 06-16-2019, 11:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rdgcss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Salisbury,NC
Posts: 1,300
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 208 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
Just because it's in 4k doesn't mean new viewers will be drawn to it, regardless of the content. You're either going to watch Thursday Night Football (the most likely to see 4K streaming) or you're not. I'm not a fan of the NBA. Being in 4K won't make me one, either. Ditto any sport you can think of. Sure, a few curious eyes might tune in once or twice, but PQ doesn't drive ratings. If anything, the NBA and MLB are testing the waters. If it works, expect a 4K upgrade package to the out-of-market services similar to the way NFLST is set up w/r/t streaming, RZ, etc. You want 4k? Be prepared to pay for 4k. And, to the topic, if people will pay for 4K, then nobody's going to give it away OTA for free.

Also to the topic, I can't imagine any television station (especially smaller market ones) shelling out the cash for something that won't bring in additional viewers. People who like "NCIS" are going to watch it, no matter the resolution. People who don't, won't, no matter the resolution. Unless Sony or LG or someone pays the freight to bring 4K to broadcast, it ain't happening.

Agreed.


Which was the a la carte argument I made on this forum a dozen years ago. Full circle. (see your PM inbox for more as I don't want to go totally OT, here)
In the early days of HD, if you had an HD tv many people would watch anything just because it was HD. They wanted to get the maximum benefit of that $3000+ TV. It’s hard to find a TV over 50” today that is not 4K. The number of people with a 4K TV is going up fast. We will have another “I want my MTV” moment.
rdgcss is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1892 of 1952 Old 06-16-2019, 12:09 PM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,777
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2176 Post(s)
Liked: 4083
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdgcss View Post
In the early days of HD, if you had an HD tv many people would watch anything just because it was HD. They wanted to get the maximum benefit of that $3000+ TV. It’s hard to find a TV over 50” today that is not 4K. The number of people with a 4K TV is going up fast. We will have another “I want my MTV” moment.
The leap from NTSC to 1080i digital is a far bigger leap than from 1080i to 4k. That said, the ratings for any regularly-scheduled program did not increase when those programs began telecasting in HD. It brought in no new viewers. 4k won't, either.

As I've said, before. If there were that big of a demand, HBO and ESPN would be doing it and getting a premium for it. Even Mark Cuban is sitting this one out.

As for the "I want my MTV moment," the vast majority of 4K set owners are happy with the picture NOW. My neighbor, a teacher, thinks everything he watches is in 4k. There is no "I'm not watching if it's not in 4k" moment coming anytime soon, if ever. Outside of us, anyway. We're different.
scowl, nathill and JHBrandt like this.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #1893 of 1952 Old 06-16-2019, 01:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rdgcss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Salisbury,NC
Posts: 1,300
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 208 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
The leap from NTSC to 1080i digital is a far bigger leap than from 1080i to 4k. That said, the ratings for any regularly-scheduled program did not increase when those programs began telecasting in HD. It brought in no new viewers. 4k won't, either.

As I've said, before. If there were that big of a demand, HBO and ESPN would be doing it and getting a premium for it. Even Mark Cuban is sitting this one out.

As for the "I want my MTV moment," the vast majority of 4K set owners are happy with the picture NOW. My neighbor, a teacher, thinks everything he watches is in 4k. There is no "I'm not watching if it's not in 4k" moment coming anytime soon, if ever. Outside of us, anyway. We're different.
The jump to HD was a big jump in picture quality but the real desire for HD was to get rid of those pesky black bars on the sides of a 4x3 video on their fancy/expensive HD set. 1080i to 4K isn’t a huge jump but add in HDR10/DolbyVision/HLG & wide color gamut & suddenly you have a big jump. Today’s 4K TVs have really improved and the prices have really dropped. The default screen size for their primary TV is now 55”. With these larger sets upscaled 1080i doesn’t look so great. The less expensive TVs don’t have good scaling software.
The push to 4K will be driven by the growing number of 4K sets!

Last edited by rdgcss; 06-16-2019 at 01:16 PM.
rdgcss is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1894 of 1952 Old 06-16-2019, 02:59 PM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,777
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2176 Post(s)
Liked: 4083
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdgcss View Post
1080i to 4K isn’t a huge jump but add in HDR10/DolbyVision/HLG & wide color gamut & suddenly you have a big jump. Today’s 4K TVs have really improved and the prices have really dropped. The default screen size for their primary TV is now 55”. With these larger sets upscaled 1080i doesn’t look so great. The less expensive TVs don’t have good scaling software.
Preaching to the choir, here. WE aren't the general public. If upscaled 1080i looks so terrible, then why are sets flying off the shelves to the point they don't make many 1080i sets, anymore? Nobody's bringing them back. And the same programming in 4k just moves viewers from the HD feed to the 4k. The end result is ...THE SAME TOTAL NUMBER OF VIEWERS. That's where 4k on ATSC 3.0 won't matter. Everyone's happy with their current picture and upping the resolution won't result in additional viewers and, therefore, additional ad revenue. It didn't for HD. It won't for 4K. Those who want 4k will have to pay for it, in one way or another. It's the only way any provider, broadcast, cable or streaming, can recover the cost. There's no financial benefit for broadcast stations and networks to offer 4K. And there's no financial detriment for not doing it. 1080p with targeted advertising and mobile viewing is the Holy Grail for broadcasters.
tenthplanet likes this.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #1895 of 1952 Old 06-16-2019, 03:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rdgcss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Salisbury,NC
Posts: 1,300
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 208 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
Preaching to the choir, here. WE aren't the general public. If upscaled 1080i looks so terrible, then why are sets flying off the shelves to the point they don't make many 1080i sets, anymore? Nobody's bringing them back. And the same programming in 4k just moves viewers from the HD feed to the 4k. The end result is ...THE SAME TOTAL NUMBER OF VIEWERS. That's where 4k on ATSC 3.0 won't matter. Everyone's happy with their current picture and upping the resolution won't result in additional viewers and, therefore, additional ad revenue. It didn't for HD. It won't for 4K. Those who want 4k will have to pay for it, in one way or another. It's the only way any provider, broadcast, cable or streaming, can recover the cost. There's no financial benefit for broadcast stations and networks to offer 4K. And there's no financial detriment for not doing it. 1080p with targeted advertising and mobile viewing is the Holy Grail for broadcasters.
If we could predict the future we would all be wealthy. The future almost always turns out differently than predicted.
aaronwt, rcman2 and Bruce Watson like this.
rdgcss is offline  
post #1896 of 1952 Old 06-16-2019, 06:21 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Trip in VA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA, US
Posts: 16,453
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1407 Post(s)
Liked: 514
Send a message via AIM to Trip in VA
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdgcss View Post
1080i to 4K isn’t a huge jump but add in HDR10/DolbyVision/HLG & wide color gamut & suddenly you have a big jump.
None of those things require 4K. Everything I've heard suggests that most broadcasters are eyeing 1080p with HDR/WCG.

- Trip
aaronwt, nathill, NashGuy and 1 others like this.

N4MJC

Comments are my own and not that of the FCC (my employer) or anyone else.

RabbitEars

"Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand..." - Rush "Witch Hunt"

Trip in VA is offline  
post #1897 of 1952 Old 06-16-2019, 06:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,424
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
Preaching to the choir, here. WE aren't the general public. If upscaled 1080i looks so terrible, then why are sets flying off the shelves to the point they don't make many 1080i sets, anymore? Nobody's bringing them back. And the same programming in 4k just moves viewers from the HD feed to the 4k. The end result is ...THE SAME TOTAL NUMBER OF VIEWERS. That's where 4k on ATSC 3.0 won't matter. Everyone's happy with their current picture and upping the resolution won't result in additional viewers and, therefore, additional ad revenue. It didn't for HD. It won't for 4K. Those who want 4k will have to pay for it, in one way or another. It's the only way any provider, broadcast, cable or streaming, can recover the cost. There's no financial benefit for broadcast stations and networks to offer 4K. And there's no financial detriment for not doing it. 1080p with targeted advertising and mobile viewing is the Holy Grail for broadcasters.
I do believe that being able to boast that you have 4K HDR is one -- just one -- differentiating factor for a subscription streaming service. Netflix has it, Amazon Prime Video has it. Disney+ has announced that they will have it and I bet you $20 that Apple TV+ will have it (using Dolby Vision, no less). It's gradually becoming table stakes. I'll be shocked if HBO Max (or whatever the forthcoming WarnerMedia service is called) doesn't include 4K HDR by the time it exits beta and fully launches in early 2020. Showtime (which will probably acquire and fold in Starz in 2020) will follow suit; their sister service CBS All Access will probably do so at the same time. At some point in the coming year I expect Hulu to jump on board the 4K HDR train as well, now that Disney is fully in charge and they don't have multiple chefs in the kitchen.
rdgcss likes this.
NashGuy is online now  
post #1898 of 1952 Old 06-16-2019, 06:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,424
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post
None of those things require 4K. Everything I've heard suggests that most broadcasters are eyeing 1080p with HDR/WCG.

- Trip
Yes, 1080p HDR for ATSC 3.0 OTA broadcasts. 4K HDR for their associated streaming outlets.
aaronwt likes this.
NashGuy is online now  
post #1899 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 12:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Matt L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Flushing, MI
Posts: 5,887
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 660 Post(s)
Liked: 534
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
Preaching to the choir, here. WE aren't the general public. If upscaled 1080i looks so terrible, then why are sets flying off the shelves to the point they don't make many 1080i sets, anymore? Nobody's bringing them back. And the same programming in 4k just moves viewers from the HD feed to the 4k. The end result is ...THE SAME TOTAL NUMBER OF VIEWERS. That's where 4k on ATSC 3.0 won't matter. Everyone's happy with their current picture and upping the resolution won't result in additional viewers and, therefore, additional ad revenue. It didn't for HD. It won't for 4K. Those who want 4k will have to pay for it, in one way or another. It's the only way any provider, broadcast, cable or streaming, can recover the cost. There's no financial benefit for broadcast stations and networks to offer 4K. And there's no financial detriment for not doing it. 1080p with targeted advertising and mobile viewing is the Holy Grail for broadcasters.
Quite honestly I do not feel the upscaled 1080 content looks that bad on my TCL. Sure it's not 4K, I don't expect it to be, but I do not feel it's dramatically inferior. I gotta say I was more than surprised at how well the 1080 from my DirecTV HR 24 looks, I expected crap but it's not. I'm willing to pay something for 4K, I'm paying Netflix and Amazon at the moment, a reasonable fee might entice me to cough up a few more $, but the content and the image would have to be worth it.

Now if Netflix would get their act together and get the supposed Roku TV Atmos feed working as they claim I'd be happier paying the increased price they are charging.
Matt L is offline  
post #1900 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 05:14 AM
UHD Addict
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 35,391
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8952 Post(s)
Liked: 5731
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
For the Tokyo 2020 games, they can just use the NHK 8k feed, I would guess, and stream them.



Where it will really move the needle in the US is if they started regularly streaming 4K of NFL, NBA, etc.



But again, will it help them drive incremental subscriptions? Or at least slow down people cutting the cord?



Doubtful.





I just listened to an interview with the author of an article in The Atlantic about how fast the streaming landscape is changing. He summarized it as, we're moving from the Wild West days of one or two streaming services providing a lot of legacy content and one or two original shows like House of Cards or Orange is the New Black to a world of siloed streaming services where you have to subscribe to several of them to get all the content you would want to watch.



With Netflix paying $100 million for the rights to Friends, subscribers will just have to have multiple accounts. The end result will be that the monthly TV bills will approach the prices which caused so many people to cut the cord in the first place. So instead of paying $200 a month, the streaming services will have you paying $150 a month.
I would say it's been like that for many years. For the past eight years of so I've needed to subscribe to multiple streaming services to get the content I want. That will never change.

Sent from my Galaxy S10
tenthplanet likes this.

49TB unRAID1a--53TB unRAID2--70TB unRAID3
TCL 6 Series--Sony UBP-X800--Philips BDP7502--Onkyo HT-S7800
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme
aaronwt is offline  
post #1901 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 05:17 AM
UHD Addict
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 35,391
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8952 Post(s)
Liked: 5731
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
The leap from NTSC to 1080i digital is a far bigger leap than from 1080i to 4k. That said, the ratings for any regularly-scheduled program did not increase when those programs began telecasting in HD. It brought in no new viewers. 4k won't, either.



As I've said, before. If there were that big of a demand, HBO and ESPN would be doing it and getting a premium for it. Even Mark Cuban is sitting this one out.



As for the "I want my MTV moment," the vast majority of 4K set owners are happy with the picture NOW. My neighbor, a teacher, thinks everything he watches is in 4k. There is no "I'm not watching if it's not in 4k" moment coming anytime soon, if ever. Outside of us, anyway. We're different.
Yes. That is what I ws thinking. I would actually co sider subscribing to HBO if they were in UHD/HDR. But for just HD, it isnt worth it for me. I'll continue subscribing once or twice a year when they have a show on that I want to watch.

But the same thing was true for me in the switch to HD. I watched some shows or stations because they were broadcast in HD. Back in 2001

Sent from my Galaxy S10

49TB unRAID1a--53TB unRAID2--70TB unRAID3
TCL 6 Series--Sony UBP-X800--Philips BDP7502--Onkyo HT-S7800
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme
aaronwt is offline  
post #1902 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 05:20 AM
UHD Addict
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 35,391
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8952 Post(s)
Liked: 5731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post
Quite honestly I do not feel the upscaled 1080 content looks that bad on my TCL. Sure it's not 4K, I don't expect it to be, but I do not feel it's dramatically inferior. I gotta say I was more than surprised at how well the 1080 from my DirecTV HR 24 looks, I expected crap but it's not. I'm willing to pay something for 4K, I'm paying Netflix and Amazon at the moment, a reasonable fee might entice me to cough up a few more $, but the content and the image would have to be worth it.

Now if Netflix would get their act together and get the supposed Roku TV Atmos feed working as they claim I'd be happier paying the increased price they are charging.
UHD/HDR from Netflix is what makes it worth it to me. I've been subscribing to that tier since 2015. Most of what I watch on Netflix is in UHD.

Sent from my Galaxy S10

49TB unRAID1a--53TB unRAID2--70TB unRAID3
TCL 6 Series--Sony UBP-X800--Philips BDP7502--Onkyo HT-S7800
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme
aaronwt is offline  
post #1903 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 06:10 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,865
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
I think you can rule out 2020. NBC isn't going to trot out something insanely expensive if their own flagship can't carry it. I still say the video payload currently on WNJU is too high for a channel-share with any other stations. The resulting ATSC 1.0 would be nearly unwatchable in the headquarter city for nearly every advertising agency. The terrible PQ could also be detrimental for ratings. This is their bread-and-butter event. Those ads have to look really good on the mothership.

Plus, producing a nightly 4k production, even if it's culled from some 4k and some HD cameras is also going to be quite expensive. Who's gonna pay the freight? There's no benefit to advertisers and equipment makers can't sell gear in cities that aren't lit up. Not gonna be enough NBC affiliates lit up by next summer for NBC to justify the expense, let alone recover it.

That said, NBC already does 4k Olympic material ripped from the already-available 4k productions. You can see it on DirecTV and Dish and likely Xfinity, next summer.

2022 might be different. We'll have to wait and see.
Presumably NBC will show the linear Olympic stuff in UHD OTT or streamed (and possibly via cable or satellite outlets?)

I expect the BBC will be doing Tokyo 2020 in UHD HDR on their iPlayer (and possibly in UHD on the Sky Q satellite platform if politically they can do that, though Sky Q doesn't support HDR)
NashGuy likes this.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #1904 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 06:56 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,777
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2176 Post(s)
Liked: 4083
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
Presumably NBC will show the linear Olympic stuff in UHD OTT or streamed (and possibly via cable or satellite outlets?
Given that AT&T is NBCU's top sponsor for the Olympics, you can bet on having a 4K Olympic channel on at least DirecTV. I would hazard a guess any streaming will require a provider login as it has in the past. My personal favorite was the Gold Zone Channel with RZC's Andrew Sciiliano.

To keep things on topic, this is the sort of thing that could be a big draw for ATSC 3.0. It's not giving them the same thing with slightly better PQ.. it's giving them something they can't get anywhere else. Say NBC is airing a soccer match. Non soccer, cord-cutting fans would simply turn it off and watch something else. Putting something such as GZC on a subchannel would keep those viewers watching an NBC affiliate and viewing the same set of national and local commercials they'd see if they were watching soccer. Just a thought.
aaronwt and tenthplanet like this.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #1905 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 09:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 7,717
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2286 Post(s)
Liked: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post
I would say it's been like that for many years. For the past eight years of so I've needed to subscribe to multiple streaming services to get the content I want. That will never change.

Sent from my Galaxy S10
Yeah but this trend is now going to accelerate with more players getting into the game, Disney, Warners (via AT&T). I think Comcast may also do something with Universal content.

So the studios are going to silo their content off.

Now Apple is trying to be kind of an aggregator and supposedly Amazon as well.

I don't know if it will bother people to have to use different apps. for different shows and movies or if this aggregator will gain some traction as people just want to be able to do one search and find whatever they want across all the streaming services.
wco81 is online now  
post #1906 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 09:09 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 7,717
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2286 Post(s)
Liked: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
Presumably NBC will show the linear Olympic stuff in UHD OTT or streamed (and possibly via cable or satellite outlets?)

I expect the BBC will be doing Tokyo 2020 in UHD HDR on their iPlayer (and possibly in UHD on the Sky Q satellite platform if politically they can do that, though Sky Q doesn't support HDR)

Another big event coming up would be Euro 2020.

But not sure of the state of streaming or UHD throughout Europe. There may be broadcasts of 4K content but not sure 4K and UHD TV installed base is as high as it is here in the US.
wco81 is online now  
post #1907 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 02:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,271
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 796 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by NashGuy View Post
Yep. Don't know if this will happen before the 2020 Olympics but I'd definitely bet that by the 2022 Winter Games, Xfinity TV (their live "cable TV" service) will be offered nationwide as an OTT option, not just over Comcast's own wired network. I can even see them start selling their little 4K HDR X1 boxes with voice remote (the Xi6 or a subsequent similar model) at Walmart, Target and Best Buy nationwide, competing against Roku, Fire TV and Apple TV. It would be positioned as the best way to experience their Xfinity TV service as well as the upcoming NBCU OTT streaming service (Hulu competitor) that is set to launch in early 2020. (Actually, I expect both services to be sold nationwide through the same app, at least eventually if not immediately.)
There will be some on DirecTV on linear broadcasts, but for cable especially, I think the TV Anywhere login might be the future for 4k stuff. That allows the content providers to collect their retransmission fees for it, and control the UX in the app and how it is displayed/controlled.
BiggAW is offline  
post #1908 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 04:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,865
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
Another big event coming up would be Euro 2020.

But not sure of the state of streaming or UHD throughout Europe. There may be broadcasts of 4K content but not sure 4K and UHD TV installed base is as high as it is here in the US.
It's been pretty difficult to buy a non-UHD HDR TV here for quite a while once you get past about 32" screen size. We're on our second UHD TV at home in London (actually our third set as Sony had a type-fault with the XE900 series - aka XBR900E - and replaced our XE9005 under warranty with an XF9005)

Sky Q - the current Sky set-top box (which integrates up to 12 tuners) is UHD capable (HDR not yet enabled) and Sky are running UHD football (aka soccer). BT Sport are also running UHD football. This is the main driver other than Netflix/Amazon Prime.

Only stats I can find for BBC iPlayer UHD HDR tests are
Quote:
Live UHD for the first time

In summer, BBC iPlayer ran two major trials, streaming both the World Cup and Wimbledon in Ultra-High Definition and High Dynamic Range for the first time. Fans were able to stream every BBC One match from the summer’s FIFA World Cup and every centre court match from Wimbledon, enabling them to watch the summer of sport in unprecedented quality. And they proved a hit with audiences, receiving over 1.6 million requests across the trials, with England’s quarter final match against Sweden the most popular UHD programme.
Not all UHD HDR displays were able to take part in the BBC iPlayer trial, and not everyone has the high speed broadband connection required to hit the 2160p50 top tier.
BiggAW likes this.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #1909 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 04:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rdgcss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Salisbury,NC
Posts: 1,300
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 208 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post
Quite honestly I do not feel the upscaled 1080 content looks that bad on my TCL. Sure it's not 4K, I don't expect it to be, but I do not feel it's dramatically inferior. I gotta say I was more than surprised at how well the 1080 from my DirecTV HR 24 looks, I expected crap but it's not. I'm willing to pay something for 4K, I'm paying Netflix and Amazon at the moment, a reasonable fee might entice me to cough up a few more $, but the content and the image would have to be worth it.

Now if Netflix would get their act together and get the supposed Roku TV Atmos feed working as they claim I'd be happier paying the increased price they are charging.
I assume you are on the Netflix premium plan so that you can watch 4K, around $14-15 the last time I looked.
rdgcss is offline  
post #1910 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 05:03 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,424
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
There will be some on DirecTV on linear broadcasts, but for cable especially, I think the TV Anywhere login might be the future for 4k stuff. That allows the content providers to collect their retransmission fees for it, and control the UX in the app and how it is displayed/controlled.
To the extent that cable providers stay in that business, they'll incorporate whatever 4K HDR content that the channels provide into their own UIs somehow. Comcast is already doing this on X1. Altice is doing this with AlticeOne. DirecTV and DISH satellite are doing it the only way that they possibly can, really, which is via dedicated linear "4K events" channels that carry stuff from multiple originating sources.

At some point, I expect we'll see DirecTV roll out a dedicated "HBO 4K" or "HBO Max 4K" linear channel, given that they have the satellite capacity for it and they own HBO. But outside of that specific instance, I'm not sure if we'll ever see 4K content from HBO distributed through linear channels as AT&T wants to transition HBO to an on-demand streaming service competing directly against Netflix.
NashGuy is online now  
post #1911 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 05:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Falcon_77's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 2,666
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Where are we at in ATSC 3.0 deployments? Any recent news? A $70 stick like I saw above would definitely interest me, well when I can travel somewhere that has a 3.0 station.

I confirmed 17 is still 3.0 in Santa Barbara on a trip a month ago, but still don't see any in LA yet. But then, there are so few channels available here to launch it.

We will need to see more sharing to free up channels for 3.0 and this is not a good trend considering how poor the "HD" picture quality has already been getting. e.g., the NBA Finals on KABC. The news isn't much better with CBS announcing another sub.

It's almost like we need 3.0 to get back to the 1080i that used to look good on smaller HD screens. It doesn't make sense; TV's are getting bigger and compression is getting worse. It's a double hit on quality.
Falcon_77 is offline  
post #1912 of 1952 Old 06-17-2019, 06:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 6,800
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2720 Post(s)
Liked: 1336
Quote:
Originally Posted by kc9pke View Post
I had a chat with a rep at Geniatech, their $70 ATSC 3.0 sticks are in stock but the media player software is being worked on with an anticipated release date in October they say.

They actually have the hardware, but of course there's no sense in selling it to consumers until they can bundle the software to make it useful.
I'll be very surprised if they pull this off at that price by October. Very pleasantly surprised, but surprised nonetheless.

And pardon my cynicism, but even if they pull it off, it may only work for a few months before being neutered by DRM. That's what happened to my 7" ATSC M/H TV.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falcon_77 View Post
Where are we at in ATSC 3.0 deployments? Any recent news? A $70 stick like I saw above would definitely interest me, well when I can travel somewhere that has a 3.0 station.

We will need to see more sharing to free up channels for 3.0 and this is not a good trend considering how poor the "HD" picture quality has already been getting.... It's almost like we need 3.0 to get back to the 1080i that used to look good on smaller HD screens. It doesn't make sense; TV's are getting bigger and compression is getting worse. It's a double hit on quality.
Well, D/FW has its SFN broadcasting KSTR in 3.0; it'll be moving to RF 34 next week. But I think it's just carrying two 720p channels at the moment. Of course, without a 3.0 tuner I have no way to confirm that.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #1913 of 1952 Old 06-18-2019, 06:16 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,777
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2176 Post(s)
Liked: 4083
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHBrandt View Post
I'll be very surprised if they pull this off at that price by October. Very pleasantly surprised, but surprised nonetheless.

And pardon my cynicism, but even if they pull it off, it may only work for a few months before being neutered by DRM. That's what happened to my 7" ATSC M/H TV.
I didn't say it at the time, but I'm wondering if the low hardware price point suggests a subscription model for the software. Or a stripped-down version included, with full-functioning versions costing extra, along with updated versions as 3.0 rolls out and new features are factored in. Doesn't make economic sense to sell the bundle for $75, then update it umpteen times over 5 years or so.
JHBrandt likes this.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #1914 of 1952 Old 06-18-2019, 07:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
pachinko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,503
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 997 Post(s)
Liked: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
I didn't say it at the time, but I'm wondering if the low hardware price point suggests a subscription model for the software. Or a stripped-down version included, with full-functioning versions costing extra, along with updated versions as 3.0 rolls out and new features are factored in. Doesn't make economic sense to sell the bundle for $75, then update it umpteen times over 5 years or so.
Going by their A681 (ATSC 1) tuner, which includes all the bells and whistles for $39.99, I'd expect their A683 (ATSC 3) tuner would include the same, likely using software based upon the A681 model.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	MyGica A681 PC TV Tuner (ATSC 1).jpg
Views:	21
Size:	51.8 KB
ID:	2581532  
pachinko is offline  
post #1915 of 1952 Old 06-18-2019, 07:58 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,777
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2176 Post(s)
Liked: 4083
The "bells and whistles" for ATSC 3.0 go well beyond video, audio and PSIP guide info. And, as they're still evolving, many updates and changes may be necessary along the way as broadcasters roll out new features, which may be different from market to market. Each new update will cost the company money to design and produce. Pretty sure there aren't any after-sales expenses for their 1.0 tuner. If they spit out a 3.0 tuner, this fall, there likely will be. Unless they're working on a planned obsolescence model. As mentioned above, if DRM wrecks this one, then they trot out verson 2.0, then 3.0 and so on.

Maybe they only plan to produce a bare-bones, tuning-only model that won't do the alerts, won't handle targeted advertising and won't have any interactive features or recording capabilities. That'd be sad.

But we'll see. And hopefully be pleasantly surprised.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.

Last edited by DrDon; 06-18-2019 at 08:02 AM.
DrDon is offline  
post #1916 of 1952 Old 06-18-2019, 09:35 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,424
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
The "bells and whistles" for ATSC 3.0 go well beyond video, audio and PSIP guide info. And, as they're still evolving, many updates and changes may be necessary along the way as broadcasters roll out new features, which may be different from market to market. Each new update will cost the company money to design and produce. Pretty sure there aren't any after-sales expenses for their 1.0 tuner. If they spit out a 3.0 tuner, this fall, there likely will be. Unless they're working on a planned obsolescence model. As mentioned above, if DRM wrecks this one, then they trot out verson 2.0, then 3.0 and so on.

Maybe they only plan to produce a bare-bones, tuning-only model that won't do the alerts, won't handle targeted advertising and won't have any interactive features or recording capabilities. That'd be sad.

But we'll see. And hopefully be pleasantly surprised.
This question of how the industry handles the necessary user-facing software component of ATSC 3.0 is what I've thought about many times over the past few years since this topic first struck my fancy. If I understand correctly, I believe that 3.0 allows the broadcaster to "publish" their own HTML-5-based UIs as part of the broadcast stream. So maybe the UI that you'll see will be the same regardless of which brand of tuner that you use? But will the UI change from one channel to another? Or will the major players -- Pearl, Sinclair, etc. -- work together to develop a common UI design that they'll all use?

Lots of questions...
NashGuy is online now  
post #1917 of 1952 Old 06-18-2019, 09:41 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,777
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2176 Post(s)
Liked: 4083
Quote:
Originally Posted by NashGuy View Post
Lots of questions...
All questions software developers will not only need answered, but need real-world functioning examples for thorough design testing. Until that point, they can't even begin a design phase, let alone get to beta. October for a basic tuning design is a stretch. It's impossible for a device and software that'll handle everything broadcasters (have yet to) plan to throw at it.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #1918 of 1952 Old 06-18-2019, 10:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 6,800
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2720 Post(s)
Liked: 1336
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
Maybe they only plan to produce a bare-bones, tuning-only model that won't do the alerts, won't handle targeted advertising and won't have any interactive features or recording capabilities.
Well, it plugs into a PC, so the PC can provide the Internet access needed for all those other things. My suspicion is, for $70 you'll get bare-bones software that just does tuning (and will probably be broken by DRM a few months after these come out). But perhaps by then, you'll be able to purchase DRM-enabled software for all the other bells and whistles (though the price may make you feel like you fell for a bait-and-switch).
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
That'd be sad.
Well, not necessarily; I for one would be quite happy to pay $70 for an ATSC 3.0 tuner that does nothing beyond what an iView ATSC 1.0 STB can do (tuning and basic recording). Those who want targeted ads and "interactive" TV will be willing to pay more for a different tuner with those features.

But features do sell, and it would be sad if these go on the market, only to dry up again for lack of sales due to missing features.
aaronwt, DrDon and nathill like this.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #1919 of 1952 Old 06-18-2019, 12:05 PM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,777
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2176 Post(s)
Liked: 4083
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHBrandt View Post
But features do sell, and it would be sad if these go on the market, only to dry up again for lack of sales due to missing features.
Hence my "subscription model" theory.

Though, in the early going, the lack of sales will be due to lack of signals. Yeah, it'll work with 1.0 as well, but without a lot of markets lit up, sales will be limited to you, me and other gotta-have-it leading-edge types.
nathill, tenthplanet and rdgcss like this.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #1920 of 1952 Old 06-18-2019, 12:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Brian Conrad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Martinez, CA, USA
Posts: 8,051
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2306 Post(s)
Liked: 1788
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdgcss View Post
I assume you are on the Netflix premium plan so that you can watch 4K, around $14-15 the last time I looked.
$15.99 to be precise. And Amazon charges nothing extra for 4K.


As a relative in the industry confirmed manufacturers like to focus on making higher density panels so that's why most TVs over 32" sold now are 4K. I noticed this years ago when even the smartphones were coming out with high density displays.
Brian Conrad is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
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