[opendtv] Re: Redefining anamorphic
- From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 09:45:17 -0800
Adam Goldberg said (in part)
" Ha! Someone figured out that I got elected to the ATSC board. Sorry 'bout
that."
I believe I saw the news the day it was announced. I held back alluding to
it due to the NDA that applies to the ATSC-Admin email list, but I just saw
that it is mentioned on the ATSC web site.
I was also hoping someone else would make the connection; it can be fun
seeing the 'discoveries' of others.
I'm all for AFD or pan/scan - bar data. If I had real-time access to
picture headers, I would include the former in my PSIP generator and make it
mandatory to use. Alas, I don't have such access. Since AFD and pan/scan -
bar data are mutually exclusive, sadly, I can't make the latter mandatory,
since the PSIP generator can't, without access to the whole transport stream
output, determine which video elements contain AFD.
Whenever possible, I try to make 'useful' optional elements in ATSC
standards mandatory in my PSIP generator. Others might permit a user to
define an audio element without providing for an ISO-639 language label.
Not me. If you have an audio element, it is labeled with the language,
defaulting to "eng."
Right before the FCC's new PSIP rules take effect, I will make one change in
my database to indicate the new version of the AC-3 descriptor is to be
used. (Per ATSC, it went into effect on March 1, but I listen to a higher
authority on what is permitted in transport streams.) The next time
generators create Virtual Channel Tables (within 3 hours), or if selected,
Program Map Tables (change could happen at any time), the new version of the
AC-3 descriptor will be in service.
Come to think of it, I don't think I've tested the new version for
compliance and checked that the switchover works flawlessly. Something to
add to the punch list.
John Willkie
-----Mensaje original-----
De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En
nombre de Adam Goldberg
Enviado el: Friday, March 07, 2008 9:29 AM
Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: [opendtv] Re: Redefining anamorphic
Ha! Someone figured out that I got elected to the ATSC board. Sorry 'bout
that. I'm sure ya'll already know, but my comments are not ATSC's, and
usually, unless I'm explicit about it, not my Pioneer's either.
The tone seems a bit defeatist, though. There were TWO lanterns in the old
church; AFD is coming. AFD is coming.
Yes, of course, Europe is ahead of us on AFD (but then again, it was their
idea and it was standardized & promulgated before ATSC got started on it),
but it's coming. Certainly one setting for the user to pick from could be
"Fill the screen with the content, eliminate bars when possible, but don't
distort the aspect ratio of the active video". I'm sure those who implement
this mode will have some TM'ed name for it.
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of John Willkie
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 12:10 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Redefining anamorphic
Craig;
Right on. However, were AFD universal in ATSC-land, like it is in DVB-land,
the sets could end up with controls for "make image as large as my set will
allow without stretching" in the mix, and you could eliminate several of the
distorto modes. You might even be able to eliminate them all!
Without AFD being transmitted, we're left with 'various nightmares.'
I think this is what Adam Goldberg (an ATSC board member, by the way) of
Pioneer was implying a few weeks back.
Funny that after criticizing the 'table 3" format restrictions, you are now
advocating a new one. That is a very bad idea.
John Willkie
-----Mensaje original-----
De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En
nombre de Craig Birkmaier
Enviado el: Friday, March 07, 2008 6:10 AM
Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: [opendtv] Re: Redefining anamorphic
Another data point to consider for this thread.
Even if we could get AFD right and deliver the correct metadata to
every TV, it would not solve the problem.
For better or worse, the CE industry has given those "dumb consumers"
HD capable TVs with enough smarts to screw things up. These TV now
come with a variety of modes for accommodating 4:3 content on that
big new display. My Samsung has five picture size modes:
4:3 - non-distorted display of the 4:3 source with pillarbox sides
Wide - uniformly distorted stretch to fill the screen - can you say
"short round?"
Panorama - non-uniform stretch: no distortion at center of screen
with significant distortion at the edges of the screen - can you say
"shape shifters?"
Zoom 1 - enlargement of the 4:3 frame with mild cropping of top and
bottom to fill the screen. There is a vertical position adjustment to
adjust the centering of the zoom. Looks like about a 25% zoom with
loss of about 12% top and bottom.
Zoom 2 - greater enlargement of the 4:3 frame with cropping of both
of top and sides to fill the screen. There is a vertical position
adjustment to adjust the centering of the zoom. Not sure the
percentage of the zoom, but this is most useful when a 4:3 program is
letterboxed into 16:9 at the source, leaving a small 4:3 image in the
center of the screen.
Given the reality that a TV can be in any of these modes, it seems
that broadcasters are settling on what they believe to be the best
fix for the moment. I am told at the HPA Tech retreat that during the
broadcast panel all of the network representatives told the audience
that they are specifying that original 4:3 source have black
pillarbox added to create a full 16:9 frame, with the content - and
their precious logo bugs - in the 4:3 safe area. This is then
transmitted as a 16:9 native source.
This seems to work get the 4:3 content displayed properly in all of
the modes listed above, however, the log bug may get cropped in the
zoom modes, depending on the vertical centering adjustment.
What would make more sense to me is to add one more spatial
resolution format, which would use the MPEG-2 MP@HL profile/level,
which must be supported for the HD formats. That format would be 854
x 480 @ 24/30/60P, square pixel 16:9. I would prefer 1024 x 576P, but
this simply looks too good when compared with the HD formats.
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
