[opendtv] Re: Learning From the Veterans - local news in HD

  • From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:57:12 -0500

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

>> 2. The 16:9 image will not take advantage of the greater resolution
>> the 16:9 HD monitors have. It will show less image than the analog 4:3
>> screen, even if that residue image is displayed in glorious HD. You'd
>> be better able to make out the pores in the actors' faces, but not get
>> a bigger perspective of the scene. Which is what you want in HDTV,
>> isn't it?

> This is incorrect. The 4:3 common sides master is HD. What we are
> talking about is a master that would have say 1280 x 960 resolution;
> the 16:9 extraction would still have 1280 x 720 resolution, using "tilt
> and scan" extraction from the larger 4:3 frame, as I demonstrated in
> 1995, in a paper and presentation at a SMPTE conference.

This too misses the point I'm trying to get across.

A few years ago, in the era of NTSC TV games, you would often see graphics at 
low levels of resolution, such as 320 X 200. That is, lower than VGA, intended 
primarily to be viewed on TV screens.

Now sure, these low res graphics could be rendered on VGA or better screens, 
but the information content is NO DIFFERENT from what it was in the standard TV 
screen. The edges would look sharper on your computer monitor, and typically 
you'd even see aliasing, but that's about it.

This is what I'm talking about. If the HDTV picture must be set up to use 
common sides with a 4:3 aspect ratio display, and if that content is also to be 
viewed intelligibily in analog CRTs (which is THE reason for supporting 4:3 TV 
anymore), then the content displayed in the horizontal dimension is not going 
to be any more than the content that can intelligibly be displayed on an old 
analog set.

Ergo, the HD resolution has not been exploited properly. Similar to viewing 320 
X 200 graphics on a VGA display. Even if the original capture was in UHDTV, 
makes no difference. At best, you see more of the facial hair.

> If broadcasters would have been serious about the HD transition they
> would have started shooting everything in 16:9 HD and letterboxed it
> into the legacy 4:3 display. This would have solved the common sides
> problem and acted as a continuous advertisement to the holdouts to
> upgrade to a 16:9 display, where the screen would be filled AND
> higher in resolution.

I agree totally with the concept, but not with who's at fault. It wasn't 
necessarily BROADCASTERS. In fact, our Fox affiliate used to transmit their 
prime time shows letterboxed, on their NTSC channel, until the network found 
out, or until they got too many complaints, and then it was back to so-called 
"full screen." In the Fox case at least, it was network policy, Craig. No 
letterboxing on analog sets. Not the broadcasters.

Bert
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2010