[opendtv] Re: Ultra HD broadcasts demand higher frame rates
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 07:53:25 -0400
On Jun 6, 2013, at 4:58 PM, dan.grimes@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> Do we need a one-format-fits-all or can we be more diverse in our delivery
> formats? I do think the 30 fps structure is a lowest common denominator at
> present.
>
> However, when given the choice between 720p60 and 1080i30, it does appear
> that favor went to 1080i30, and thus, it appears that static spatial
> resolution is preferred to temporal qualities. Getting back to the beginning
> of this post, perhaps research in temporal qualities and audience preferences
> will show that the right decision was made or wasn't. But without the
> research, how do we know?
The lowest common denominators are 24P U.S., 25P Europe.
The evolution of HDTV formats has little to do with the underlying science; it
was driven by pragmatism, protectionism, and the limitations of CRT displays.
One can read the early NHK HD papers and quickly learn that they understood
that progressive formats were necessary for a high quality HD viewing
experience. But they developed the 1125/60 HD system because of processing
bandwidth and display limitations.
By the time we got to the 720P versus 1080i debate, protectionism became part
of the narrative. Bigger numbers are better for the retail sales nimrods, and
interlace became a barrier to competition with the computer industry.
20 years latter…
Regards
Craig
Other related posts:
