Well, you can call me one of those 'new fangled' Broadcasters, I am squarely for TRUE HD (progressive, and cleanly divided...). I thank you for the intel, and make sure you let the 'kiddies' know that not ALL Broadcasters are dinosaurs. A few young lions and tigers in the bunch fighting the good fight. :-) Regards, Mark HTTP://MisterDTV.wordpress.com ________________________________ From: Ron Economos [w6rz@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:56 PM To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [opendtv] Re: 4k @ 60 fps encoded into 15 Mbps using HEVC "Manufacturing parties at IBC" makes a lot of sense. In the compression community, we just use the terms "broadcasters" (CBS falls directly in this category) and "smartphone kids" (Qualcomm, Apple, etc.). Broadcasters are folks that have been in the business for many years and realize that there is 60+ years of interlace content floating around. They are all for progressive content, but know damn well that a compression standard that ignores interlace will be crippled (at least for their application). Smartphone kids aren't concerned with broadcast. It's just some dinosaur to be ignored until it dies off. At the last HEVC meeting, the general direction has turned to scalable video coding technology, which implies that the base specification is pretty much done. It seems very unlikely that real interlace tools will be proposed at this late a date. However, "broadcasters" are still concerned about interlace. At the last meeting in Shanghai earlier this month, there were quite a few proposals about interlace. For your reading enjoyment: From Harmonic and Ambarella: http://phenix.int-evry.fr/jct/doc_end_user/documents/11_Shanghai/wg11/JCTVC-K0160-v2.zip http://phenix.int-evry.fr/jct/doc_end_user/documents/11_Shanghai/wg11/JCTVC-K0165-v3.zip From Broadcom: http://phenix.int-evry.fr/jct/doc_end_user/documents/11_Shanghai/wg11/JCTVC-K0146-v2.zip From Sony: http://phenix.int-evry.fr/jct/doc_end_user/documents/11_Shanghai/wg11/JCTVC-K0153-v2.zip From Ateme: http://phenix.int-evry.fr/jct/doc_end_user/documents/11_Shanghai/wg11/JCTVC-K0216-v3.zip All HEVC documents can be found here: http://phenix.int-evry.fr/jct/ Ron On 10/24/2012 11:56 AM, Mark Aitken wrote: Ron, the comments came from a couple manufacturing parties at IBC. It was simply stated, and sounded “CBSish” to me. I note that , yes, technically it is supported in a not so forward way via integration of (effectively) alternate fields via the 1920 x 540 frames you mention (‘interlace helper tools’). :) Seems sloppy, and I have read that this has some less than desirable results as well (additional note: Panasonic seems to have a level of involvement and IPR as well). So…water cooler? Maybe. Attending, did not mean to indicate such, that was not said. I will attempt to run down the sources… Mark From: Ron Economos [mailto:w6rz@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:55 AM To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [opendtv] Re: 4k @ 60 fps encoded into 15 Mbps using HEVC Including 1080i and including interlace in HEVC are two different things. 1080i has always been included in HEVC. It can be coded as 1920x1080 at 29.97 progressive frames per second (not recommended) or as 1920x540 at 59.94 progressive fields per second. There are no interlace tools in HEVC. However, there are proposals to make HEVC at least be usable for interlaced sequences by adding metadata that describes the field sequence. For example, there's no way to signal a repeat field in HEVC (which seems like a step backward). These "interlace helper" proposals are coming from encoder/decoder companies such as Ambarella, Harmonic, Broadcom and Ateme. Ateme has also noted that coding 1080i as 1920x540@xxxxx<mailto:1920x540@xxxxx> causes chroma problems due to field misalignment (chroma "bleed"). I don't see anyone from CBS attending the HEVC meetings. Do you have a reference for your comment or is it just water cooler talk? Ron On 10/22/2012 9:11 AM, Mark A. Aitken wrote: 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? Thanks...Mark (the other one...)