[opendtv] Re: Why Europe should choose 720P for HDTV
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:42:06 -0500
At 12:06 PM -0500 12/15/04, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
>Tom Barry wrote:
>
>> It is true that 1024x576 RGB could look very good but
>> we might as well go the whole way once we can afford
>> the bits.
>
>EXACTLY!
>
>Whether it's recorded material on DVD or broadcast
>material, why fiddle around with lower quality
>compromises if you have the room available to provide
>the true high quality images?
First, the images I have been describing ARE of HIGH QUALITY. Yes it
is possible to make better images...it is likely that this will
ALWAYS be the case as technology evolves.
So the real question is:
How much quality is enough?
There is no clear answer to this question because the answer will
depend on what you are trying to accomplish.
Let me put this into personal terms that Bert MIGHT be able to understand.
I have been working closely with a friend for years, who has built a
moderately successful project studio business. When he started this
business in 1998, he invested more than $100,000 in a
state-of-the-art DVCPro SDTV camcorder, decks and the rest of the
gear needed to produce HIGH QUALITY video.
Barely a week passes by now, that he does not ask if it is time to go
HD. We are currently at odds about the new HDV format, because I
think it is a transitional TOY, but he is concerned that others might
use this toy to compete with him. I keep telling him to wait, because
there will be tremendous competitive pressure to build HD acquisition
products at affordable prices - products that will NOT COMPROMISE the
quality of the source by using excessive compression, as is the case
for HDV.
If I were to follow Bert's logic, I should be telling my friend to
rush out and spend another $100,000 for a Varicam and the deck needed
to support it. The only problem with this approach is that he would
need a completely new business model, one in which he would go
head-to-head with a handful of independent producers who are shooting
in HD now. In the past two years, he has lost exactly ONE job because
he could not provide a competitive bid for an HD project.
The reality of the marketplace today is that HD production is the
premium niche. If you are a Hollywood post facility, there may be
enough business to support an investment in HD today. But for 95% or
more of the video production marketplace, including 99.5% of local
broadcasters, the return on investment in HD gear today just does not
compute. These folks are still going through the transition to
digital...SDTV.
And there is an even more important aspect of the economics of HDTV.
It is simply overkill for the vast majority of video production
"customers" today. Why would you produce a local car ad in HDTV? Why
would you produce a local public affairs show in HD? Why would you
try to sell someone up to HD if they are trying to produce a DVD for
mass distribution?
Yes, we will see more and more HD as the years pass and the cost of
entry is lowered. But we will NEVER see a total transition to HD,
because there are tons of applications that simply do not need it.
But MANY of these applications would benefit from the removal of the
legacy artifacts of interlace and analog video compression. The vast
majority of video applications would benefit from the simple switch
to progressive formats in the 0.5 Mpixel range; This is adequate
resolution to saturate 100% of legacy TVs in the world today, and at
least 60-70% of the new digital TVs that will be sold in the next
decade (i.e. anything with a screen size smaller than 40 inch
diagonal).
So just because we can, is not a justification to push a premium
niche product on everyone. Hell, we're still arguing whether 1080i is
better than 720P (for the record it is not). I will repeat once again
that there is NO technical benefit to 1920 x 1080 (I or P) until the
screen size approaches 100 inch diagonal. And this is simply NOT a
consumer market.
>
>The only reason to go for the lower quality is if you
>need room on the media (disk or RF channel) for other
>stuff. If not, why obsess?
This is absurd.
There is no technical reason that ANY gasoline powered car cannot run
on premium gasoline. So let's just make all gas 92 octane or higher,
and charge accordingly. Think of the economies of scale. Consumers
will benefit...
RIGHT?
The only reason to go for HIGHER QUALITY is IF the market place
demands and supports it for specific applications. The DBS services
are the MOST constrained today in terms of bandwidth. They are
crunching SDTV pictures down to less than NTSC quality routinely.
Despite this, they have captured more than 20 million subscribers
from cable. How can this be Bert?
Could it have something to do with the quality and choice of content,
rather than the quality of the pictures? Could it be that most
consumers are comfortable with the current level of quality for many
forms of content?
I find it very ironic that Bert is telling us to go for the golden
ring, when he is still recording his TV programs on VHS...
Actions speak louder than words.
Regards
Craig
>
>Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
