Tom, I just can't answer at this point; I've read of and know about frame rate, but I'm not sure that I've read anything about that in unclassified sources, so I must be silent for the time being. I can maintain my consistency; MDTV will not work with legacy receivers, and even if it did, it's unlikely that consumers at home will be interested in the perceived quality of the "common" video offered. I can say that the whole architecture has been gone-over to make it future-proof to the maximum extent possible. Also, notice that I've never said anything about the status of the document(s), nor about release dates, except to say that it "should" be out before the end of the year. That article mentioned a 600 kb/second data payload in a 2 mb/second bit-budget per "parade." This is significant, since 2 mb/second basically means that even a single MDTV parade can't co-exist well with high-motion MPEG-2 HDTV content, without some fancy encoding of the MPEG-2 video/audio. John Willkie -----Mensaje original----- De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En nombre de Tom Barry Enviado el: Thursday, November 13, 2008 4:35 AM Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Asunto: [opendtv] Re: Information on ATSC M/H (MDTV) John - 416x240 is quite easy to make from 480i without any fancy deinterlacing if you send only 30 frames per second. Do you know if that's what they intend for mobile? - Tom John Willkie wrote: > I had some free time today, and I took a look at the October issue of > Broadcast Engineering. > > > > Lo and behold, there's an article by Jay Adrick of Harris and Wayne Bretl of > Zenith on ATSC MDTV. The article is available on-line > http://broadcastengineering.com/RF/mobile-dtv/index1.html > > > > One tidbit that might be of interest here is the video size: 416 x 240. > They call it 16:9, but the ratio is 1.73333, where 16:9 is 1.77777. More > accurately, it's somewhere between 15.7 and 15.8 to 19. > > > > The yarn isn't in tremendous detail, but one can learn how the system works > on the transmit side. > > > > I did notice one (presumed) nit: they refer to the Initial Demonstration of > Validity (IDOV) tests that were performed earlier this year. The report I > read on May 15 was called the "Independent Demonstration of Validity" tests, > and as one participant told me at NAB: "that's three distinct concepts." > > > > Alas, I and the many other members of this reflector who have read that > report can't talk about it, but "initial" doesn't do it justice. > > > > Also, I thought it was interesting that the article mentioned the h.264 > video codec version in the proposed system, but not the version number of > the audio codec. > > > > Only time will tell when or if the candidate standard is released to the > wild. I have read all sorts of articles on the dates when things should be > finalized, but I've never actually read an article that provides dates that > coincide with the planned dates, so I choose not to mention those. And, > things could change . > > > > So, who's excited enough to watch MDTV simulcast content in not-quite 16:9, > at much less resolution than is available in HDTV? And, does your TV have > an IP stack? > > > > By the way, there are several significant proposed features that - at best - > are only alluded to in these articles. So, this is only a peek behind the > curtain. > > > > John Willkie > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.