[opendtv] Re: 4k @ 60 fps encoded into 15 Mbps using HEVC

  • From: Mark Schubin <tvmark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:51:29 -0400

On 10/22/2012 12:11 PM, Mark A. Aitken wrote:
While everyone is focused on the spacial resolution, temporal resolution is every bit as important. I would submit that 120Hz (for 4 k...240Hz @ 8k?) should become the future (grows proportional to spacial), and interlace must die. Thoughts?
I can't wait for interlace to die, and I LOVE high frame rates, but I think there's something worth at least thinking about: what high frame rates do to the storytelling look.  Even high-frame-rate evangelist Doug Trumbull has spoken of that effect, and there has been some buzz about "The Hobbit."

The issue may be able to be dealt with in other ways, but it is worth noting.



Which leads me to another question??? Why is CBS (and dragging Sony & others) so adamant about making sure 1080i is included in the upcoming h.265 spec? Is there more than religion at stake here?



(the other one...)


-----Original Message-----

From: Manfredi, Albert E [mailto:albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx]

Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 7:39 PM

To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Subject: [opendtv] Re: 4k @ 60 fps encoded into 15 Mbps using HEVC


Mark Schubin wrote:


> As to cognitive dissonance, watching a movie (or opera) in a cinema

> requires a financial outlay for a ticket, travel to the cinema,

> blocking out time, and possibly such other costs/requirements as

> getting a baby sitter, parking/transit fees, dinner, etc. If, after

> all of that, the viewer doesn't like the movie, then all of the

> expenditures of money and time were foolish. But the viewer doesn't

> want to be a fool, so there is a predisposition to like the event.


That cracked me up.


I completely agree with this and your other points. I suppose that if the average joe went to the movies every day, some other activity would become the "event," and the movie-going would be more like watching TV.


The theaters we usually go to suddenly all switched over to Sony Digital Cinema 4K, which is just about exactly twice as much horizontal and vertical as 1080p HDTV: 4096 X 2160. The ads and other features that come before the show, and before the actual movie previews, are instead 16:9 SDTV.


We like to sit about half-way up the seats, in the stadium style theaters. So the screen looks quite large, compared with how we watch the 42" HDTV at home.


Anyway, it's easy enough to "count the pixels" when the SD pre-show stuff is showing, but the Sony 4K, even on the 2:35:1 blockbuster format, is beyond reproach, as far as I'm concerned. I'm wondering whether any more than that even makes sense in a home format, even if 100" screens became the new normal.


A 100" screen is about 50" high and 87" wide. At say 10' viewing distance (too close for comfort, IMO), that's a distance of 2.4 picture-heights. So that calculates out to an angular separation of the pixels of 0.66 arcminutes at the viewer's vantage point, which ought to be well within what the majority of people can discern (the literature indicates anything from 1 to 2 arcmin, many claim 1.5). Even acknowledging that any such numbers are just first order approximations of actual visual acuity.







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.

Mark A. Aitken
Vice President, Advanced Technology

(410) 568-1535 OFFICE
(443) 677-4425 MOBILE

"Let us have faith that right makes might,
and that in faith, let us,to the end,
dare to do our duty as we understand it.“
~ Abraham Lincoln ~

Other related posts: