HDR Discussion Thread

[gkolb]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Democratic Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said the new technology would force consumers to buy new televisions. “The FCC calls this approach market driven. That’s right — because we will all be forced into the market for new television sets or devices.”


Ugh. This is why politicians should stay away from technology. First: 4K TVs are already on the market for a few years now. Second: most people get their signals from a device like a cable or satellite box. Third: you can get an adapter to receive an OTA ATSC 3.0 signal. Fourth: AFAIK there's no mandatory phase out like there was for NTSC->ATSC.

That may be, but I kinda have a hate/hate relationship with my cable box, so there is only one, and we have 6 other TV's. Only watch the cable box when I want to see SNL off the dvr. I think the tv signal might be a little cleaner off the cable itself, thru the box seems filtered somehow (compressed ??).

[PaulGo]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

[I] Fourth: AFAIK there's no mandatory phase out like there was for NTSC->ATSC.

No mandatory cutoff but "Current televisions cannot carry the new signal and the FCC on Thursday said it was only requiring broadcasting both signals for five years after deploying the next-generation technology."

So ultimately all owners of older 4K TVs that use OTA will need converter boxes.

I do predict after the five year transition period most broadcasters will abandon ATSC 1.0

ATSC 3.0 basics tutorial | features, Protocol Stack, Physical Layer, Frame structure, advantages or benefits

http://www.rfwireless-world.com/Tuto...-tutorial.html

[FilmFreakosaurus]

And yet, all those broadcast video and audio advancements will still be compressed to complete shit.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

And yet, all those broadcast video and audio advancements will still be compressed to complete shit.

Spec is up to 28Mbps HEVC, not too shabby actually.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

More HDR progress.
Refining what we’ve got….
https://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.as...oration%20(BBC)

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...l#post12876569
^ Richard, you desired free open access for all, so → this report just recently uploaded online, BT.2408-0 “Operational practices in HDR television production”.....http://www.itu.int/pub/R-REP-BT.2408-2017/en

among other things, covers the skin tone issue we discussed previously.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by PaulGo

....ATSC 3.0 basics tutorial | features, Protocol Stack, Physical Layer, Frame structure, advantages or benefits

http://www.rfwireless-world.com/Tuto...-tutorial.html

I don’t see it noted ^ as a feature, but it should be mentioned because HFR offers significant value (even at *only* HD rez) and many are interested in it (esp. those who have seen it firsthand ) –

https://ibc.gallery.video/ibctv/deta...ge=0#t=1h1m16s ,

that ATSC 3.0 includes frame rates up to 120fps (with temporal sub-layering for less complex devices - https://www.atsc.org/wp-content/uplo...deo-HEVC-1.pdf ).

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Spec is up to 28Mbps HEVC, not too shabby actually.

That's pretty high anyway for broadcast, probably almost 3 times what broadcast HD gets on Freeview in the UK.

I'm also very impressed by HEVC from what I've seen so far, which is admittedly only on high bitrate discs. On paper it can provide better quality than h264 at the same bitrates.

[Robert Zohn]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Democratic Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said the new technology would force consumers to buy new televisions. “The FCC calls this approach market driven. That’s right — because we will all be forced into the market for new television sets or devices.”


Ugh. This is why politicians should stay away from technology. First: 4K TVs are already on the market for a few years now. Second: most people get their signals from a device like a cable or satellite box. Third: you can get an adapter to receive an OTA ATSC 3.0 signal. Fourth: AFAIK there's no mandatory phase out like there was for NTSC->ATSC.

ATSC 3.0 also integrates IP so it will cover more of the rural USA. ATSC 3.0 will also be employed in cable and satellite boxes.

We all need and will greatly benefit by ATSC 3.0.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Spec is up to 28Mbps HEVC, not too shabby actually.

That's not very good for 4k content, even with HEVC, and most broadcasts will never see that kind of bitrate.

You still see compression artifacting on UHD Blu-ray when it gets that low... and when I work with 4k video footage. I could see that rate for 1080p, but again, not for 2160p.

The ATSC 3.0 specs committees still insist on bitstarving. They don't seem to understand the abilities of the video codec they chose. It's the same issue when they speced out the initial HD broadcast standards.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

That's not very good for 4k content, even with HEVC, and most broadcasts will never see that kind of bitrate.

You still see compression artifacting on UHD Blu-ray when it gets that low... and when I work with 4k video footage. I could see that rate for 1080p, but again, not for 2160p.

The ATSC 3.0 specs committees still insist on bitstarving. They don't seem to understand the abilities of the video codec they chose. It's the same issue when they speced out the initial HD broadcast standards.

Realistically you don't have unlimited bandwidth out there. It's what fits on a 6 Mhz broadcast channel.


It's more than you get on streaming like Netflix 4K, which doesn't look half-bad as it is.


Physical is better, no doubt about it. But being able to watch live TV in ATSC 3.0 is going to be amazing.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

But being able to watch live TV in ATSC 3.0 is going to be amazing...

...ly average.

They will use the bandwidth for subchannels and other sundry items, mark my word.

So, then average quickly becomes poor.

That's exactly what happened to ATSC last time. It looks terrible. With sports, it's almost unwatchable.

[Robert Zohn]

Yes, we will have sub-channels, just as we do now. Regarding sports, I'm expecting ATSC 3.0 to improve sports content.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

That's exactly what happened to ATSC last time. It looks terrible. With sports, it's almost unwatchable.

Don't know what you're watching but I watch sports fairly often and still amazed at the quality compared to what I grew up with most of my life.
It's still MPEG2 at that.

Encoders & compression are optimized over time. Even if actual resolution isn't much more than 1080p in reality it's still quite a jump over what we have now - much less artifacting with HEVC over MPEG2, added HDR and REC2020 and it's still a good picture. Not to mention the Dolby AC-4 Atmos sound.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

Yes, we will have sub-channels, just as we do now. Regarding sports, I'm expecting ATSC 3.0 to improve sports content.

I'm not as optimistic. Quantity over quality, that's their motto and I've seen nothing to change my mind.

[2themax]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Don't know what you're watching but I watch sports fairly often and still amazed at the quality compared to what I grew up with most of my life.
It's still MPEG2 at that.

Encoders & compression are optimized over time. Even if actual resolution isn't much more than 1080p in reality it's still quite a jump over what we have now - much less artifacting with HEVC over MPEG2, added HDR and REC2020 and it's still a good picture. Not to mention the Dolby AC-4 Atmos sound.

You haven't experienced Comcast's 720p AVC @ 3Mbps. It's worse than streaming.

[mrtickleuk]

Originally Posted by zmarty

A few months ago I had a chat with them about this and they said they won't do that until they ship HDR support on Desktop and HDR is widespread.

Ok. Sincere thanks to you for trying.

It means of course, they are flipping hypocrites, and that is a ludicrous idiotic position for them to take.

• 4K is not widespread on desktop PCs, yet they provide a filter for it.
• 360° is not widespread on desktop PCs, yet they provide a filter for it.

etc.

I'm not expecting to WATCH the HDR content on my PC. I just want to use that browser to FIND the things, because I am casting to my TV in the same room which can play it!

They've implemented all this technology to allow you to cast from YouTube in Chrome on a PC to the YouTube app on a Smart TV which can display HDR. Did they think no-one would use it?!

FFS.

[Penton-Man]

I’m feeling a little mischievous today.
File under -

Originally Posted by mrtickleuk

Did they think no-one would use it?!

This by Parker & Stone - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/li...e-home-1039035

[gkolb]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I’m feeling a little mischievous today.
File under -

This by Parker & Stone - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/li...e-home-1039035

Okay, way more adults watch South Park than I ever imagined, and of course it was on purpose Parker & Stone are f'ing with your first world toys, you knuckleheads!

[mrtickleuk]

Yes that was a hilarious prank. And great episode. I'm glad that South Park it still top quality entertainment and hasn't declined like The Simpsons has (which really needs to be killed off, it's getting silly now).

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I watch sports fairly often...

A fellow local bike rider showing HDR and stereoscopic 3D with Autodesk Flame for a class at a local academic setting….https://twitter.com/gochya/status/931940258739978240

before the big game (UCLA vs. USC) this evening.