[opendtv] Re: Google: Upload High Dynamic Range (HDR) videos (also streaming with Chromecast)

  • From: cooleman@xxxxxx
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 11:24:52 +0100

Issue with OTA HD in Europe is that this was never in the requirements. With DVB-T2 it was in the cards, but the benefits were/will be taken up by the reduction in muxes. Locally there was talk of a 6th mux following analog shutt-off. We are down to 4 instead and in Europe the 600 mhz band is already reserved for LTE aswell, so we will be down to 3 muxes! Hence the condition upon renewal this year of KPN's (and the public broadcasters on their single mux?) DTT license to switch to DVB-T2 before 2020.

I bumped into the Digitenne (Dutch DVB-T Brand, now fully owned by incumbent telco KPN) launch CTO at IBC and he told me about how when he got on board the plan (around 15 years ago) was 30-40 channels. He told them well first look if the coverage plan actually works, and they tested in the field and found at FEC 2/3(?) half the area was not covered so it had to be 3/4(?) that cut bandwidth in half on the get go. And reception is still not stabile, even when there is no traffic or wind. And quality is the lowest around. So he added I decided it had to look good on a tube tv this size (smallish distance between hands), I can't help it that now they are watching on these huge LCD TVs. Of course even on them small CRTs the image shows/showed many compression artifacts. When they switched from the old Philips stuff to Harmonic (if I remember correctly) one set of artifacts was replaced by another, a very clear block structure, on brighter scenes or area's. The (LED) +plus light stage of the Eurovision Songcontest being the greates example, completely overladen compression chain.

In Europe there is the constant pressure to add channels.

Yes, there have been many tests and trials on DVB-T first with HD and more recently even with 4K, but that's what they are.

As for below 2 Mbit/s well Fraunhofer showed that at IBC 2014(?) for HD or 4xHD@ 2MBit/s average plus synchronisation 4K. Of course the monitors were tiny 10-12"-ers or so. I can't spot artifacts on a bright showfloor on those.

As for 4G alternative to broadband and TV, T-Mobile is planning on doing this, but they want to be freed from must carry (just 8 channels, so less than its current base package on the otherwise a-la carte oTT offer launched this year. And they take issue with net-neutrality for the KNIPPR service, on 4G.

T-Mobile has been wavering on fixed broadband here in Holland. Acquiring the Orange business in 2007 trying to unload it, unable to do so making a go of the internet business as it had to then finally unloading it to the M7 Group, and now it is acquiring the fixed customers of Vodaphone following the merger of the Dutch operations with Liberty Global's Ziggo cable op. A condition for approval of the merger.

Craig Birkmaier schreef op 17-11-2016 4:46:

On Nov 16, 2016, at 9:01 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Perhaps. But we have stations that transmit one HD plus four and even five SD subchannels. I submit to you that this is roughly equivalent. And it works.

If you say so. I see routine problems with CBS HD here in Gainesville,
and they have only one SD network in their multiplex. With "proper"
pre filtering you can cram a bunch of SD channels into a multiplex -
think 1.5 Mbps per channel, which is what cable and DBS did in the
early days.

I said that Europe missed out on HD (over DTT), and you come back with meaningless words? How many Euro TV markets support 12, 14, or more HD channels OTA, Craig? They can't, because of the simulcast requirement.
There is plenty of HD in Europe Bert. DVDs are still a major source,
and Blu-Ray delivers real HD and beyond. And guess what Bert - they
can stream HD in Europe too!

But you ignore the fact that digital 576i makes very good pictures;
much better than NTSC and digital 480i.

By the way, how many U.S. markets offer 12 to 14 or more HD channels?

In other words they threw away the HD information...

In other words, they used as much as they needed. A 480p plasma set made more use of the HD information than did those cheap 480i CRT sets. In a broadcast medium, this is the way to go. Without making any changes to the broadcast infrastructure, SD and ED sets faded into oblivion, and were replaced with HD sets, and all kept using the same HD streams.

All of these early sets were compromised to say the least. The
deinterlacing and scaling technology was crude, and there was almost
NO HD content available until the early 2000's.

SD and ED sets faded when LCD panel technology matured.

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.

Funny how Craig just can't get these concepts. No, Craig. It is much more difficult to introduce a new service that demands a lot of bandwidth, when your medium has to continue feeding 24/7 broadcast streams to a huge base of incompatible installed sets.

You mean when your industry is saddled with an early HD standard that
is hopelessly outdated.

There is no excuse for broadcasters to remain frozen in last century
digital technology.

With unicast, this is not the case. As long as your edge servers can feed the individual sets, system capacity is not much impacted. *Server capacity* might be, except that the 4K streams can use H.265 compression, and also the 4K stream can be downconverted to HD in real time, to feed legacy sets. Unicast, fed by servers on the network edge, makes all the difference.

So a viewer can spend about $100 to pull 4K streams from the Internet,
which can feed legacy HD sets and new 4K sets.  Do you see the
absurdity of your argument?

Broadcasters could easily offer new services alongside legacy streams
in their multiplexes. But there is one minor issue: commercials.

Folks who are watching 4K content are paying for it, and paying NOT to see ads.

When's the last time you saw a recent blockbuster movie on the
broadcast networks? Broadcasting does not need 4K; other than sports,
even HD is largely unnecessary.

On the other hand, ATSC 3.0 could be used as the way to solve this problem. Just like ATSC 1.0 did with HD, ATSC 3.0 will be compatible with 4K and H.265. So no matter what set you have, there won't be a need for simulcast. Any ATSC 3.0 TV set, or HDMI stick, or STB, will be compatible with 4K and H.265, and downconvert as required for legacy displays.

And your point is? You just told us they don't have the bandwidth.

So now you are saying they can just drop HD and move to incompatible
4K. Yeah, that's just what the market needs.

It's more than h.265 Bert. You'll need new tuners too.

And forget H.264, will you? We have to move beyond, with 4K. How is it that you were so anxious to have H.264 adopted, when H.262 was the norm, and now you're stuck?

H.265 is not here yet in any meaningful way. Ditto's for ATSC 3.0. If
broadcasters want to play leapfrog and move to h.265 fine. Let me know
the switchover date so I can plug it into my calendar app.

Everything can evolve if the system is designed properly

There's no problem with ATSC, as I've painfully explained to you on multiple occasions. The problem is that TV sets are not upgradeable. Broadcasters don't manufacture the TV sets, Craig. You didn't know? ATSC 1.0 can transmit H.265 compressed 4K video no problem. Just define a new container. What is so hard to understand about this, Craig?

Nothing. Just as it is easy to understand how Netflix et al are able
to deliver h.264 streams to tens of millions of legacy TVs, not to
mention a billion mobile devices.

TV sets are very upgradable.

A 43" 4K set is an oxymoron.

Again, you feel compelled to grind this axe. The simple fact is, just as HD sets became totally ubiquitous, even in small 22" sizes, heck even in smartphones, 4K is showing every sign of doing the same thing. The new normal. In spite of your protests.

There are good reasons for more resolution on computing device
screens. They use it for a lot more than 360P and 480P video streams.
But 4K is a stretch, especially for phones. The iPhone 7 plus is 1920
x 1080.

No, you don't. You mentioned smartphones and tablets. Smartphones use a camera that has to take three different exposures, to get a more pleasing image, and call that "HDR." And you fell for it. So no, Craig, you evidently still haven't a clue. And when I explain HDR, you think I'm changing the subject. Huh?

Stop the bullshit Bert. We're asking about displays, not cameras.

I've listed a number of products that offer displays with HDR and WCG.
I even gave you a link with a review of some of these displays.

This has NOTHING to do with high resolution audio Bert. It is just the
use of better transducers to deliver commonplace digital audio.

Poppycock. So Craig, you spend the time to explain what you think high resolution audio is, in full detail. That way I don't have to try to decipher what it is you're missing. Because clearly, you missing something. Invest the time to explain in detail.

You cannot decipher something you don't understand. High resolution is
well defined and a range of products support it. I provided a link.


No more responses to this thread. You've abused us enough.

You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at

- 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: