AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 608 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts
Best line: "keep in mind that ABC and its network partners currently broadcast in 720p". Yeah, who needs any higher resolution than that?


Besides higher resolution, 4K also brings Rec 2020 which greatly expands the color gamut. This is why I think broadcasting is now going to fall behind other delivery systems and become the AM radio for distribution. ATSC 3.0 is not backwards compatible to the current system, and I doubt with shrinking broadcast spectrum that simultaneous transmissions will be made. Comcast is the one with more to gain with 4K, so maybe, like the transition to color, NBC will lead the broadcasters via cable & streaming.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
'ATSC 3.0 is not backwards compatible to the current system'


you got your answer, 4k is not needed,

1080 is a very good picture quality..


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


Anyway, where does it stop?, 4k?, no then you will say we need 8k then 16k,, it just never ends.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
TVOD,


It is interesting that you should mention Comcast because the trade media reported some months ago that they conducted tests of 4K broadcasts on their system back during the London Olympics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,414 Posts
With so many OTA customers being perfectly happy with a converter box feeding an old analog set via RF, why would broadcasters be in any hurry to completely start over on something else?


Until the programming catches up, maybe a better alternative would be to simply enable a "spare" TV channel in each market for special events...but, even that is unlikely, with the looming "Spectrum Repack". Maybe it's time for broadcasters to move to a different kind of licensing, where each market has a common transmission site (run by a common "Transmission Provider"), and multiplex channels on an as-needed basis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdowney717  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24491110


'ATSC 3.0 is not backwards compatible to the current system'


you got your answer, 4k is not needed,

1080 is a very good picture quality..


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


Anyway, where does it stop?, 4k?, no then you will say we need 8k then 16k,, it just never ends.
It's funny to hear how long most people thought the HD transition took, but it was much longer from its inception. I first saw HD in 1981 as purely experimental. It was nice but was predicted to fail as no one really needed that at home. I heard that pretty much up to ATSC broadcasting in 1998. Now HD is mainstream. The big breakthroughs were digital compression and solid state imagers (CCD & CMOS). Hard to believe now the early stuff was all analog recording on open reel 1" from tube pickup cameras (I think Saticons). Now compression techniques are improving with HEVC (h.265), much improved imaging which should finally kill film (some think the Red Dragon has), upgradeable systems at home via software and all with steadily declining prices. I have said 4k will come quicker than most expect and have wondered (tongue-in-cheek) when the Is Your Local News In 4K thread will start.


Cameras with 8k or higher resolution will improve 4k further, much like 1080 cameras improved SD (and 720p for that matter). Screen sizes common now are already straining HD resolution. 80" or more could be the new norm. 4k movies from services like Netflix may truly be a threat to the survival of theaters.


8K, 16K, 1M? Obviously there are limits to even the best vision, but even with 4k I think we have a ways to go. When I stop seeing excessive detail enhancement used I know we're getting close. It surprises me to see some outlines on 8K demo material. But I should stop here before going off on a tangent about good vs bad detail processing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by kenglish  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24492517


Maybe it's time for broadcasters to move to a different kind of licensing, where each market has a common transmission site (run by a common "Transmission Provider"), and multiplex channels on an as-needed basis.
Even with rising provider fees, most viewers still receive their TV from them. They will probably start sending 4K channels, especially if Comcast begins to do so. Even before ATSC 3.0, broadcasters could join the 4K party with direct feeds to the providers as well as streaming. While ATSC 3.0 holds a lot of promise, I don't see an effective way to transition individual channels.. Another government subsidy doesn't seem likely. Perhaps a common OTA 4K service might work, but mainly for those with deeper pockets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
Comcast network is strained as it is which is why they compress the hell out of 1080i signals...not sure how they will fit in 4K on a coax infrastructure that is already maxed out today without doing some serious infrastructure upgrades...IE running fiber to homes instead of coax. As for 4K in general can one really see the difference? I haven't seen 4K yet, so I don't know. My understanding is it helps on an 80" screen but not on smaller screens and if that's the case then what's the sense. The majority of homes in America can't really accommodate an 80" as they are just too big for the room.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by bac522  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24494074


Comcast network is strained as it is which is why they compress the hell out of 1080i signals...not sure how they will fit in 4K on a coax infrastructure that is already maxed out today without doing some serious infrastructure upgrades...IE running fiber to homes instead of coax. As for 4K in general can one really see the difference? I haven't seen 4K yet, so I don't know. My understanding is it helps on an 80" screen but not on smaller screens and if that's the case then what's the sense. The majority of homes in America can't really accommodate an 80" as they are just too big for the room.

I saw the Sony 84" UHDTV about a year ago, and I had to sit about seven feet from the screen to be able to tell the difference (there was a 1080p 55" HDTV next to it). The colors and the contrast ratio seemed so much more improved on the 4K set....so much so that everything just looked a lot more "real". Especially in outdoor scenes shot at eye-level...everything appeared so three-dimensional I felt like I could walk right into the image. Sports will definitely benefit the most from the added color depth and increased resolution...one clip from a soccer match was so clear you could read the names of the players on their uniforms.


But as you pointed out, Comcast is definitely going to have to make extensive improvements in their infrastructure in order to be able to handle the bandwidth requirements. They're bound to charge extra (at least initially) for any 4K channels they may carry, and subscribers are just not going to pay if they cannot see the difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,094 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by bac522  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24494074


Comcast network is strained as it is which is why they compress the hell out of 1080i signals...not sure how they will fit in 4K on a coax infrastructure that is already maxed out today without doing some serious infrastructure upgrades..

^+1 and


Comcast is not in the business of giving you new, better technology; better picture; better anything. They are in the cash flow business (nothing wrong with that) and don't move unless they: see competitive threats that are real, implement technologies that enable them to maintain their regional cable monopolies, expand their business from existing infrastructure (home security, voice, etc.) or sell more ads, VOD, on boxes in additional rooms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts
By 2020 I suspect 8K (or higher) may be fairly common for feature and possibly TV episodic production. 8k really does a need a larger display to be advantages, but 8K imaging should help 4K and possibly 1080 sharpness. Bottom line though is broadcasters will probably be last to move to 4k, so I don't expect them to embrace it now. Streaming or download services will probably be early adopters, and with 4k sets decreasing quickly in price, they may have an audience that will grow much faster than HD did. While Comcast, like other providers, are currently bandwidth constrained, as a major content provider now it should be interesting to see if they offer some limited 4k services such as premium VOD or sports. 4k desktop and notebooks are coming out, how long till we have 4k tablets?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24504692


By 2020 I suspect 8K (or higher) may be fairly common for feature and possibly TV episodic production. 8k really does a need a larger display to be advantages, but 8K imaging should help 4K and possibly 1080 sharpness. Bottom line though is broadcasters will probably be last to move to 4k, so I don't expect them to embrace it now. Streaming or download services will probably be early adopters, and with 4k sets decreasing quickly in price, they may have an audience that will grow much faster than HD did. While Comcast, like other providers, are currently bandwidth constrained, as a major content provider now it should be interesting to see if they offer some limited 4k services such as premium VOD or sports. 4k desktop and notebooks are coming out, how long till we have 4k tablets?

It's funny you should mention desktop computers...I have a late 2012 Mac Mini and a 2014 Windows 7 computer both feeding a 3840 x 2160 (30 Hz) signal to a Seiki 50" display. Don't think I could ever go back to a 1080p desktop on either OS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bombertodd

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,958 Posts
Interesting thread.


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


Here in Europe OTA is still a major force (in the UK more people watch TV OTA than any other delivery system) we're already on our second generation digital broadcasting standard for OTA, though at the moment often simulcasting SD on the old standard and HD in the new standard. However as more people migrate to the new standard, we will be able to transition fully. Whether this will allow more bandwidth to be used for 4K - or whether mobile broadband will continue to reduce the broadcast spectrum is another matter.


4k is entirely feasible with current DVB-T2 modulation (and is being trialled in Korea for 4k - where the US ATSC 8VSB system is used for HD) if H265/HEVC compression is used AIUI. You may even be able to get two 4K services into a single DVB-T2 Mux (40Mbs) We currently carry 5 1080i HD services (using H264/AVC encoding) in a 40.25Mbs 8MHz DVB-T2 mux in the UK, with generally OK picture quality (not perfect, but not as bad as some 1080i MPEG2 I've seen OTA in the US).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24504979


(not perfect, but not as bad as some 1080i MPEG2 I've seen OTA in the US).
Sad thing is OTA is still usually significantly better than after the rate shaping or re-encoding by most providers. Even CBS, the last hold out for full bandwidth 1080i on their owned stations, now allows subchannels. It wouldn't surprise me to see more 720p even on stations sourcing from 1080i networks. In fact, why not just go with widescreen SD as more subchannels in the US are doing. Viewers can't tell the difference as long as it fills their screen, right? If it were up to the Feds, TV broadcasting would be eliminated to sell off the spectrum to wireless providers.- so much for "public airwaves".


Netflix, Amazon, M-GO and YouTube are or will be providing 4K. No wonder Netflix is making deals for direct distribution to ISPs with 4K House Of Cards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oneeyeblind

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,958 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24507413


In fact, why not just go with widescreen SD as more subchannels in the US are doing. Viewers can't tell the difference as long as it fills their screen, right? If it were up to the Feds, TV broadcasting would be eliminated to sell off the spectrum to wireless providers.- so much for "public airwaves".
We're going in the opposite direction. When the US went HD in 1998, we went 16:9 SD. HD really took another 8 or so years to begin to be sensible for Europe - by which time we'd improved the modulation to allow more than double the data payload to be carried and improved encoding to allow content to occupy around half the bitrate. However as HD has launched the picture quality on SD channels is no longer a prime concern it seems, and it has definitely dropped. Quite a few broadcasters have switched from 720x576 to 544x576 16:9 I think...


The BBC 'digital only' channels, which launched on digital TV, alongside the simulcasts of the analogue stations, have recently started simulcasting HD (though with a reduced coverage area) We even have SD channels launching on the newer modulation scheme and encoding - as it is more cost effective (as you take up less RF bandwidth)
Quote:
Netflix, Amazon, M-GO and YouTube are or will be providing 4K. No wonder Netflix is making deals for direct distribution to ISPs with 4K House Of Cards.

Yes - though they are still at the low end of the quality scale for bitrates aren't they? I know of one UK broadcaster which won't drop below 13Mbs H264 for their 1080i sports channels on satellite. (That's roughly equivalent to 26Mbs MPEG2?)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24507469


Yes - though they are still at the low end of the quality scale for bitrates aren't they? I know of one UK broadcaster which won't drop below 13Mbs H264 for their 1080i sports channels on satellite. (That's roughly equivalent to 26Mbs MPEG2?)
From what little I've have from Youtube and elsewhere, it seems bitrates are around 12-20 Mbs. There is some blocking on some material in the chroma, but the Y resolution is noticeably better than HD.


HEVC is just starting, and that should help out. We'll know that has become an obsolete codec when US broadcasters are using it. Should be interesting to see how hardware support evolves, especially on mobile devices. The 4K demos from the upcoming S5 look better than I expected. But what about 4K displays on mobile? Too much? Maybe not. Not quite 4K but getting there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,893 Posts
They would if they could charge ads by the pixel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edllguy

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,866 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000  /t/1522813/u-s-broadcasters-diss-4k#post_24504979


Interesting thread.


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

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

 

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

 

When I put up my antenna this year my friends and family had no idea that OTA was as good as it is.  There are at least three of my friends and family members going through the process of cutting the cord because they saw how good OTA was at my place.  I am helping a friend tomorrow morning assemble his Winegard HD8200u... long story short, people here in the U.S. just don't understand OTA like people do overseas.  There needs to be more antenna installers here IMO.  
 
1 - 20 of 608 Posts
Top