[opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:41:39 -0500
On Nov 15, 2016, at 3:40 PM, Manfredi, Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
For most programming, MPEG-2 compression needs ~9 Mb/s average, or less.
Yeah, if you love watching compression artifacts and the loss of delivered
resolution.
MPEG-2 and its successors are effectively low pass filters when they are
stressed. One of the most effective techniques to prevent these artifacts is to
run the encoder in a closed loop with a low pass filter, reducing the image
detail when the encoder is stressed.
In other words, two HD streams in a 19.3 Mbps channel is an invitation for
crappy video. This is the reason it is almost never done.
You could fit two HD broadcasts. And my bet is that with the repacking of
channels, that will happen. Especially if broadcasters really do decide to go
to ATSC 3.0. Stations in TV market areas will be sharing the same 19 Mb/s
channel for their main stream.
Not with MPEG-2 . If they move to h.264 maybe. 1080i sports broadcasts are
still riddled with artifacts, even when they get >15 Mbps.
Europe simply missed out. HD is still a separate, premium service.
No, Europe chose to take full advantage of the digital video infrastructure
already in place at most state broadcasters - digital SD. By doing so they
increased program choice (e.g. on Digita/Freeview), and delivered image quality
appropriate for the TVs available between 1995 and the mid 2000's. This is no
different than what happened here with DVD, which was the driving force behind
HDTV purchases until HD content began to appear on cable and OTA broadcasts.
There are many free HD services in Europe now, and HD has been available in
MVPD packages for years.
Whereas here, in the early days when this was still an issue, there were SD
TV sets sold that used the HD broadcast streams with no problem. Some of
these sets were really cheap CRTs, costing well under $200, and some were
quite pricey but still only 480p plasma sets. They all did quite well with
the HD broadcast stream, making as much use of the information as they could.
In other words they threw away the HD information...
With unicast streaming, as opposed to broadcast, the equation changes. Now
Internet streaming is supporting 4K content, and HDR, without having to worry
about compatibility with the existing TVs. That's why these new standards are
appearing first online. Not in legacy cable or OTA broadcast streams.
Yes, because - unlike broadcasters - new Internet competitors are willing to
offer these streams, and device makers like Google and Roku are building boxes
to support these streams. Broadcasters could move to h.264 and beyond without
changing the current ATSC modulation standard and MPEG-TS layers; most TVs
today have h.264 deciding capabilities as part of their "smart TV" features.
So stop the bull. Everything can evolve if the system is designed properly and
the content distributor WANT to move forward.
It's still a nicer picture. Even when upconverting HD material, it's a
smoother picture. Just get out there and do some comparison shopping, Craig.
Plus, people are going to bigger, not smaller TV screens.
That is your opinion. I have looked closely at these sets in stores, and do not
find them to offer better pictures unless they are being fed higher quality
source from Blu-Ray or a loop server. In some cases the top of the line sets do
use better format conversion technology (deinterlacing/scaling), which can
provide a slight improvement, especially for 1080i source.
4K is getting cheaper, but is still $300-$500 more than an equivalent
1080P display.
This is TOTALLY false.
Sorry, I looked before I wrote that Bert.
How can a set that costs $400 be $400 more than a competing set? You need to
get out more, Craig. I can get a 43" 4K set today that costs already less
than my 42" 1366 X 768 set, and some cheap 4K sets (e.g. Westinghouse) cost
even less than some of the more expensive HD sets.
A 43" 4K set is an oxymoron.
But yes, there is some cheap CRAP out there.
Why do you change subject when you are losing an argument Bert?
What argument am I losing, according to you, Craig? You've made multiple
erroneous assertions in this thread too, in particular about what HDR is, and
I pointed out each one. As to audio quality, for audio at home, people still
want quality sound, hence the sound bars I mentioned. For audio on the move,
people will always compromise. Even 40 years ago, people would compromise
with audio cassettes, when on the move. They did not carry their hifi setups
with them.
You keep missing it completely.
I know exactly what HDR is, and where you can buy products that support it. I
mentioned a few and you turned the discussion to a technique used to acquire
HDR exposures with a smartphone camera. Totally irrelevant.
I mentioned that high resolution audio is not selling to the masses, and you
tell us people are buying sound bars for their TVs. Earth to Bert: these sound
bars ARE NOT delivering high resolution audio.
But even on the move, people use ear buds or headphones, rather than relying
on tinny speakers. In cars, many people want expensive audio.
This has NOTHING to do with high resolution audio Bert. It is just the use of
better transducers to deliver commonplace digital audio.
If someone is using a high quality set of headphones connected to one of these
Hi Res audio players you would have a point:
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-Ksjyllgbjab/g_158150/Portable-High-res-Music-Players.html?XVINQ=DST&XVVER=AAA
But those white earbuds are typically plugged into smartphones and iPods.
It's always going to be a compromise, but it's false to claim people don't
care about audio. They compromise, when they need to, or for convenience.
That's a cop out. People care about good quality, but at some point the quality
is good enough; they don't always buy the highest quality products.
I love steak, but I don't often eat prime and Kobe beef; there are more
affordable options that are good enough.
They may not want huge stereo speakers at home, but they instead demand
separate subwoofers and multichannel sound. And there will always be points
where improvements are not dramatic.
This has nothing to do with high resolution audio, just as watching a true 4K
HDR source on a cheap 43" 4K TV has NOTHING in common with The UHDTV viewing
experience.
Not quite. CDs use uncompressed 44.1Ksample/sec, Craig, and 16 bits per
sample. So, roughly 1.5 Mb/s for two channels. Compressed audio for DVDs uses
a number of update rates, 48Ksamples/sec to 192Ksamples/sec, and 16, 20, or
24 bits/sample. But with perceptual coding, they can reduce the bit rate
required. So it's a mixed bag. You get better sampling rate than CDs, and
usually more bits per sample, but the lower level components of the audio,
determined for several frequency range windows, are dropped. So the bit rate
for audio varies. It is about 384 kb/s for 5.1 channel sound, thanks to
perceptual coding. Audio from streaming, to my PC and to my WiFi radio, is
excellent. Hardly a compromise.
And none of this is high resolution audio.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Mike Tsinberg
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- cooleman
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Mike Tsinberg
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- cooleman
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- cooleman
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Mike Tsinberg
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- cooleman
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- John Shutt
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast) - Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- cooleman
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- cooleman
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)- Jeroen Stessen