Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
jeremy@pdq.net wrote:
> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>>Mack McKinnon wrote:
>>
>>>720p and 1080i have been designated "HD" by the powers-that-be in
>
> the
>
>>>industry. You know what they are talking about; you are just
>
> arguing about
>
>>>this to hear yourself arguing.
>>>
>>
>>The answer this simple question: At what point between 1x720 and
>>1280x720 is a display considered to be HD according to the
>
> "powers-that-be"?
>
>>Matthew
>
>
> I think that question is becoming more difficult to answer. I think
> it's bad because it confuses customers, but it's good because there are
> sets on the market now that are more capable than "EDTV" standards, but
> aren't quite HD.
> Comparing EDTV to HD, there is a signifigant enough difference (on
> paper anyway) to set them apart in the specs. "EDTV" is 480p (704x480p
> -or- 640x480p) or 337,920 pixels. Using the progressive scan HD format
> (to compare apples to apples), HD is 720p (1280x720p) or 921,600
> pixels. HD is almost 3x the resolution of EDTV, even if you're not
> seeing that quality difference in the content being broadcast today, I
> think it's fair to let customers know and sets advertised as HDTV sets
> should be able to get pretty close to the mark on one of the ATSC
> formats.
>
>
> The ATSC is the standards group that has given us these resolutions.
> Interesting enough the ATSC does not acknowledge "EDTV" by that label,
> as part of their 18 formats they do have serveral resolutions below HD
> that the industry has stamped "EDTV". According to the ATSC only 1080p,
> 1080i and 720p are High Definition. If a set has to scale down to
> display that it is not HD. There's a bit of controversy over CRT RP TVs
> being unable to display true 1080i. I've spoken with a few vendors via
> e-mail who state this is not the case and that their product has to
> meet display critera (not simply scale) to be branded 1080i native. If
> the CRTs in a 22" CRT (DirectView) computer monitor can do 1280x1024
> with ease, I don't see why a 30" CRT DirectView -or- a 51" CRT RP
> couldn't do 1920x1080i. I understand there are some differences, but we
> are talking about the same core technology (CRT guns)
>
> If a set does 1378x768 (1058304 pixels) interlaced native then it's
> around 1/2 the resolutuon of 1080i(1920x1080 (2073600 pixels)) when
> scaled up 1080i it looks very good. Again, it all comes down to the
> picture quality you eyes see not what's on paper. If the set can take
> in a 1080i or 720p signal and make it look fantastic on screen that's
> what counts the most.
>
I would love to set anyone who says they know what is better, 720P, 480P
and 1080i, 10 feet in front of three Plasma 42" screens. A 42'
represents at least 95% of all screens in homes today.
All the best Sony's. One plasma would be native 480P ED with a real 480P
source, one 720P, one 1080i and then ask the viewer to pick out the
1080i. Most people pick the 42" native ED plasma as best. At 10 feet you
can squint all you want but picking the true 1080i will be very difficult.
So for at least 95% of the public ED for anything equal to or less than
42" is as good as it gets. And ED can be delivered without all that
macroblocking that 1080i incurs trying to squeeze 1080i into a 6 MHz
channel with MPEG2.
Far better to deliver multiple ED programs without macroblocking with
MPEG4.
And I love HD. But HD today and for a lot of the future is an elitist
hobby that waste a lot of OTA bandwidth for 95% of the public.
It would be better and I think broadcasters realize that letting cable
and satellite handle real HD while they deliver ED will be a better use
of OTA spectrum.
Once the battle over must carry of multicasting is over we will know
better what broadcasters intend to really do with their spectrum.
HINT HINT HINT!!!! The battle over multicasting is all about
multicasting. YOU CAN'T MULTICAST HD 1080i with MPEG2 on a 6 MHz channel.
Another HINT HINT. In my talks with broadcasters and listening to
Congressional hearing over the last 5 years the ONLY ONLY thing
broadcasters want to talk about is MUST CARRY of MULTICASTING.
I wonder what the future intentions of broadcasters might be. Any ideas?
Bob Miller
jeremy@pdq.net wrote:
> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>>Mack McKinnon wrote:
>>
>>>720p and 1080i have been designated "HD" by the powers-that-be in
>
> the
>
>>>industry. You know what they are talking about; you are just
>
> arguing about
>
>>>this to hear yourself arguing.
>>>
>>
>>The answer this simple question: At what point between 1x720 and
>>1280x720 is a display considered to be HD according to the
>
> "powers-that-be"?
>
>>Matthew
>
>
> I think that question is becoming more difficult to answer. I think
> it's bad because it confuses customers, but it's good because there are
> sets on the market now that are more capable than "EDTV" standards, but
> aren't quite HD.
> Comparing EDTV to HD, there is a signifigant enough difference (on
> paper anyway) to set them apart in the specs. "EDTV" is 480p (704x480p
> -or- 640x480p) or 337,920 pixels. Using the progressive scan HD format
> (to compare apples to apples), HD is 720p (1280x720p) or 921,600
> pixels. HD is almost 3x the resolution of EDTV, even if you're not
> seeing that quality difference in the content being broadcast today, I
> think it's fair to let customers know and sets advertised as HDTV sets
> should be able to get pretty close to the mark on one of the ATSC
> formats.
>
>
> The ATSC is the standards group that has given us these resolutions.
> Interesting enough the ATSC does not acknowledge "EDTV" by that label,
> as part of their 18 formats they do have serveral resolutions below HD
> that the industry has stamped "EDTV". According to the ATSC only 1080p,
> 1080i and 720p are High Definition. If a set has to scale down to
> display that it is not HD. There's a bit of controversy over CRT RP TVs
> being unable to display true 1080i. I've spoken with a few vendors via
> e-mail who state this is not the case and that their product has to
> meet display critera (not simply scale) to be branded 1080i native. If
> the CRTs in a 22" CRT (DirectView) computer monitor can do 1280x1024
> with ease, I don't see why a 30" CRT DirectView -or- a 51" CRT RP
> couldn't do 1920x1080i. I understand there are some differences, but we
> are talking about the same core technology (CRT guns)
>
> If a set does 1378x768 (1058304 pixels) interlaced native then it's
> around 1/2 the resolutuon of 1080i(1920x1080 (2073600 pixels)) when
> scaled up 1080i it looks very good. Again, it all comes down to the
> picture quality you eyes see not what's on paper. If the set can take
> in a 1080i or 720p signal and make it look fantastic on screen that's
> what counts the most.
>
I would love to set anyone who says they know what is better, 720P, 480P
and 1080i, 10 feet in front of three Plasma 42" screens. A 42'
represents at least 95% of all screens in homes today.
All the best Sony's. One plasma would be native 480P ED with a real 480P
source, one 720P, one 1080i and then ask the viewer to pick out the
1080i. Most people pick the 42" native ED plasma as best. At 10 feet you
can squint all you want but picking the true 1080i will be very difficult.
So for at least 95% of the public ED for anything equal to or less than
42" is as good as it gets. And ED can be delivered without all that
macroblocking that 1080i incurs trying to squeeze 1080i into a 6 MHz
channel with MPEG2.
Far better to deliver multiple ED programs without macroblocking with
MPEG4.
And I love HD. But HD today and for a lot of the future is an elitist
hobby that waste a lot of OTA bandwidth for 95% of the public.
It would be better and I think broadcasters realize that letting cable
and satellite handle real HD while they deliver ED will be a better use
of OTA spectrum.
Once the battle over must carry of multicasting is over we will know
better what broadcasters intend to really do with their spectrum.
HINT HINT HINT!!!! The battle over multicasting is all about
multicasting. YOU CAN'T MULTICAST HD 1080i with MPEG2 on a 6 MHz channel.
Another HINT HINT. In my talks with broadcasters and listening to
Congressional hearing over the last 5 years the ONLY ONLY thing
broadcasters want to talk about is MUST CARRY of MULTICASTING.
I wonder what the future intentions of broadcasters might be. Any ideas?
Bob Miller
Facebook
Twitter