[opendtv] Re: 20040921 Twang's Tuesday Tribune (Mark's Monday Memo)
- From: Tom Barry <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 12:35:36 -0400
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> And all of what I said was predicated on something that does not
> exist. REAL EDTV. EDTV was purposely crippled to make sure that it
> would not cannibalize HDTV. A progressive raster of 1024 x 576 can
> deliver incredible pictures...but the equipment to produce it is
> almost non-existant. BUT.
I'd agree that, when properly done, 1024x576p could probably match
almost all of what is currently sent in HDTV today, especially if it was
really in 4:2:2 format. But, as you said, it mostly does not exist
here. And 720p is only 25% greater in each direction so it's probably
close enough to have similar economics.
The intermediate resolution I miss would probably have been something
like 1280x1080i or even 1440x1080i since I think this would be closer to
"effectively square" pixels in a 16x9 format. But I suppose I have a
bias towards interlaced resolutions since most HD RPTV's like mine still
use them. This of course may change with new technology.
- Tom
> At 11:36 PM -0400 9/23/04, Tom Barry wrote:
>
>>Can't agree here. A 40" diagonal set in a 16:9 ratio is less than 20"
>>high. I think there is a fairly large market for wide screen sets
>>bigger than this as the prices come down. But that means HD, not just
>>704x480p. While all content won't be that way we should at least plan
>>for it. And 1080p microdisplay based TV's will be inexpensive by a few
>>years from now.
>
>
> I'm not sure we are in disagreement. Clearly there is a market for
> big screen TVs. I think it is reasonable to believe that 20-30% of
> U.S. homes will have a screen that is 40 inch or larger in the next
> 5-10 years. And those same homes will continue to have 2-3 additional
> sets that will be smaller than 40 inch. It is not uncommon in our
> home for three sets to be on at the same time, as people migrate to
> their private lairs, so they can watch the stuff that is of interest
> to them. Sorry, but I do not see HDTV or big screens pulling the
> family back together again.
>
> I strongly believe that there IS ALREADY a niche market developing
> for HDTV content. Clearly, many content producers understand this.
> But I also believe that there are MANY markets that do not need HD
> quality, especially when 90% or more of their audience will be
> watching a small screens.
>
> And all of what I said was predicated on something that does not
> exist. REAL EDTV. EDTV was purposely crippled to make sure that it
> would not cannibalize HDTV. A progressive raster of 1024 x 576 can
> deliver incredible pictures...but the equipment to produce it is
> almost non-existant. BUT.
>
> You can shoot in HD and downconvert to a properly defined EDTV format
> for emission.
>
> By the way, one of the most popular EFP cameras being produced today
> is the Panasonic AJ-SDX900. It is based on the DVCPro 50 Mbps 4:2:2
> recording format and captures widescreen images at 24P/30P/60i.
>
> 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.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
