Doctor Who: Twice Upon a Time 4K UHD (2017)

[morphinapg]

Originally Posted by oddbox83

Making primary channels incompatible with existing TVs overnight. You just cannot do that. SD vs HD is easy as you can just do an up or down conversion. Stereo and surround is easy as stereo is still broadcast and incompatible equipment just ignores the surround stream. Changing the framerate is a lot more complicated and introduces a myriad of issues depending on the source being converted. Doing that for live broadcast would be nightmarish. I also wouldn't fancy watching every single one of my old favourites running too slow and de-interlaced.

If they did ever go this way, which for the reasons I cite would be unlikely or on a very slow changeover, I agree variable framerate is the only sensible option but true variable as opposed to switching refresh rate TVs are still something for the future and don't exist right now.

My point was that when they started with HD, their HD channel could have been an HD-only channel, not one you down convert to SD. Keep all the legacy stuff on the SD channel and progressively move things towards HD with the more universal standards.

Also you're wrong on the sound. I have channels that would switch between stereo and 5.1 dolby tracks, one or the other, not both. That started at the very beginning of HD. Every HD capable TV had to support dolby decoding, so it would be able to handle the downmix if it needed to. Similarly, HDTVs should support 24fps, so it would be able to handle switching formats just the same.

Originally Posted by laughingmaniac

Movies are filmed at 23.976 fps. Non-American TV shows are most certainly NOT filmed at that framerate.

There's zero reason to make the distinction between 24 and 23.976. They're visually identical, movies are actually usually filmed at proper 24fps and converted for home sales, and most people recognize that "24fps" is describing both formats. Most TVs also support both formats, just as they also support 59.94 or proper 60fps as well now, and some Blu-rays are proper 24fps.

Most shows outside of the UK that film at a film-like rate are doing so at 24fps, not 25.

Sure thing buddy, because everyone that doesn't live in America is outdated... You might be surprised to find that most of the world still films their TV productions in 25/50 fps because of PAL legacy.
Here is map: http://www.whatonearththemovie.com/s.../NTSC_PAL.html
Americans don't see a map of the world too often.

PAL is irrelevant today. It was an old format that HD sets were designed to move away from. Same thing with NTSC. This has nothing to do with those outdated formats.

LOL, Doctor Who is a BBC UK production not a BBC America production. If BBC America took creative and technical control over Doctor Who I would stop watching it because they would ruin it.

Where did I ever say anything about BBC America?

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by morphinapg

Also you're wrong on the sound. I have channels that would switch between stereo and 5.1 dolby tracks, one or the other, not both. That started at the very beginning of HD. Every HD capable TV had to support dolby decoding, so it would be able to handle the downmix if it needed to. Similarly, HDTVs should support 24fps, so it would be able to handle switching formats just the same.


Most shows outside of the UK that film at a film-like rate are doing so at 24fps, not 25.



PAL is irrelevant today. It was an old format that HD sets were designed to move away from. Same thing with NTSC. This has nothing to do with those outdated formats.

Broadcast TV is not just a single audio stream, in the UK at least. We can have multiple audio tracks, most commonly used for AD tracks.

You are also not getting the complexity of mixing different frame rates within the same stream. Even BD and 4K discs cannot do that, the different frame rates on a disc are encoded as different video tracks (eg the main film which could be 24p and the extras at 60i). You have to remember broadcast TV is a single stream per channel (and several channels per digital multiplex). Changing that to a variable framerate would be a long process requiring a new codec (or a variant on an existing one that can do it on computers) and a whole new generation of TV tuners. Even if as with the changeover to digital you could buy a STB to convert older TVs you've got the added nightmare of ensuring the populations TVs can play the framerates and switch between them without losing sync. Putting converters in the boxes would put up the price and thus reduce uptake and would also not be very good. You wouldn't be able to do speed-change conversions on the fly for live broadcast and 24p to 25p/50i looks bloody awful with a big judder every second.

You're wrong about the UK being an oddity in shooting at 25p or 50i. All countries using the 50i system do so in TV production. Some filmed series used to be the exception so they could cut and mix on standard film equipment but that goes back several decades.

While PAL and NTSC and colour subcarriers are irrelevant digitally and could be added to either framerate (Brazil using PAL at 30 frames a second for example), their legacy is not. The differences between them have informed today's state of play.

To boil all this down to the core, you're blaming everyone else for not matching the US standard when in reality the issue is purely down to the US not making 50i variants compatible their AV equipment whereas elsewhere we've long been able to play wither 60i or 50i on our equipment without even thinking about it. It's got an added layer of madness in that the HD panels now are almost always the exact same between territories and some manufacturers just lock it out on US sets.

[Member-167298]

This is probably a stupid question, but something I still don't understand is if a show is filmed in PAL or 25fps / 50hz does it slightly speed up what was captured during filming or is it 1:1 real time motion and sound?

So, in other words, are the UK Doctor Who episodes representative of the sounds and movements of the actors filmed on set?

[laughingmaniac]

Originally Posted by PrestonXI

This is probably a stupid question, but something I still don't understand is if a show is filmed in PAL or 25fps / 50hz does it slightly speed up what was captured during filming or is it 1:1 real time motion and sound?

If it's recorded at 25 fps and displayed at 25 fps then everything is shown and heard in real time exactly as recorded. But in the case here with the Doctor Who UHD the show was recorded at 25fps but displayed at 23.976 fps so the total run time is stretched by ~4% and the actors voices sound different to how they sound in real life. If you've always watched Doctor Who at the normal 25fps then you may well notice the difference, but if you're an American viewer everything will seem normal.

[oddbox83]

If it is indeed pitch corrected the pitch will be correct (so people won't sound like they're on tranquillisers), but the tempo will still be 4% slower which is why people often say they notice it on music more than voice and effects while others aren't as sensitive.

[StingingVelvet]

Lots of nationalist bullshit in this thread.

Anyway, the Doctor Who releases slowed to 24fps are indeed pitch corrected. You'd REALLY know if they weren't. Some people are genuinely bothered by it, which I understand. Hopefully the normal BDs stay 25fps for you in the UK. Maybe Season 11's UHD will be 25fps if enough people complain about this release (assuming it gets a UHD). Who knows.

I do wish the BBC switched to shooting in 24fps for the HD era, but I do understand the complications with that as far as legacy content and such are concerned.

[laughingmaniac]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I do wish the BBC switched to shooting in 24fps for the HD era,

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Record in 24 fps when you broadcast at 25 fps!
Why not record at 27 fps then?

[The Dark Shape]

I'm very grateful that I'm not sensitive to the slow down. I watch DW pretty regularly on iPlayer, but when I pull out my Blu-rays I can't hear anything being off.

I realize this is a fault in my hearing, but I'm thankful for it!

[morphinapg]

Originally Posted by oddbox83

Broadcast TV is not just a single audio stream, in the UK at least. We can have multiple audio tracks, most commonly used for AD tracks.

You are also not getting the complexity of mixing different frame rates within the same stream. Even BD and 4K discs cannot do that, the different frame rates on a disc are encoded as different video tracks (eg the main film which could be 24p and the extras at 60i). You have to remember broadcast TV is a single stream per channel (and several channels per digital multiplex). Changing that to a variable framerate would be a long process requiring a new codec (or a variant on an existing one that can do it on computers) and a whole new generation of TV tuners. Even if as with the changeover to digital you could buy a STB to convert older TVs you've got the added nightmare of ensuring the populations TVs can play the framerates and switch between them without losing sync. Putting converters in the boxes would put up the price and thus reduce uptake and would also not be very good. You wouldn't be able to do speed-change conversions on the fly for live broadcast and 24p to 25p/50i looks bloody awful with a big judder every second.

Digital TV uses transport streams, which can change their format at any time, and are designed to maintain sync while doing so. That's why the audio stream could change, and yes in some cases, the video stream has been known to change on the fly as well, although it's rare. Yes there would usually be maybe a half second or so of the screen dropping to black, much like you see when your player switches resolutions or switches to HDR, but it's done to maintain sync.

To boil all this down to the core, you're blaming everyone else for not matching the US standard when in reality the issue is purely down to the US not making 50i variants compatible their AV equipment whereas elsewhere we've long been able to play wither 60i or 50i on our equipment without even thinking about it. It's got an added layer of madness in that the HD panels now are almost always the exact same between territories and some manufacturers just lock it out on US sets.

As I mentioned, there simply isn't enough HD content at 25p or 50i to make sense to include support for those frame rates in most countries which don't use those formats anymore.

Originally Posted by oddbox83

If it is indeed pitch corrected the pitch will be correct (so people won't sound like they're on tranquillisers), but the tempo will still be 4% slower which is why people often say they notice it on music more than voice and effects while others aren't as sensitive.

For the Capaldi seasons at least, I don't think they corrected the pitch. I do believe it's very slightly lower pitch than the original, but really it's barely noticeable unless you compare them side by side. Speedup is usually more noticeable than slowdown in pitch changes. It does seem pretty obvious when you watch the special features though, which are often presented converted from 50i, so they have the correct speed and pitch. Watching an episode and then watching a special feature with a higher pitch can be a little jarring, but you really don't notice it in the episode itself unless you just watched a correct sounding episode directly before it.

On some of the earlier seasons I do think I noticed pitch correction artifacts, which can sound a bit echoey in spots. I hated that and personally prefer slowdown to keep the audio at a higher fidelity.

Originally Posted by laughingmaniac

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Record in 24 fps when you broadcast at 25 fps!
Why not record at 27 fps then?

They clearly meant they wished they recorded and broadcast at 24fps.

[oddbox83]

Watched the disc fully in a darkened room, there is definitely a big HDR boost going on. Yeah like most HDR it can be very subtle but the SDR clips in the extras look very bland after seeing it in HDR. This disc is why you should never rule out an upscale to 4K as the HDR alone can make all the difference (as well as the bitrate which frequently hovers around 80mbps).

[morphinapg]

Originally Posted by oddbox83

Watched the disc fully in a darkened room, there is definitely a big HDR boost going on. Yeah like most HDR it can be very subtle but the SDR clips in the extras look very bland after seeing it in HDR. This disc is why you should never rule out an upscale to 4K as the HDR alone can make all the difference (as well as the bitrate which frequently hovers around 80mbps).

imo HDR is always far more important than resolution.

It's nice if you can get both, but really not necessary at all if you have good HDR

[d514]

Originally Posted by oddbox83

To boil all this down to the core, you're blaming everyone else for not matching the US standard when in reality the issue is purely down to the US not making 50i variants compatible their AV equipment whereas elsewhere we've long been able to play wither 60i or 50i on our equipment without even thinking about it. It's got an added layer of madness in that the HD panels now are almost always the exact same between territories and some manufacturers just lock it out on US sets.

Exactly. NTSC content in PAL countries hasn't been a problem for over 20 years. Most VHS recorders and CRT TVs in the 90s could play NTSC content. When DVD came out, NTSC wasn't a problem anymore.

UHD would have been a great opportunity to let the NTSC countries catch up with the rest of the world. I'm pretty sure all UHD displays manufactured today are capable of 25 und 50 fps, it's just the firmware or some chips that lock out PAL content for no real reason.

Originally Posted by morphinapg

As I mentioned, there simply isn't enough HD content at 25p or 50i to make sense to include support for those frame rates in most countries which don't use those formats anymore.

Just because you don't watch many TV productions from 50 Hz countries doesn't mean there aren't many TV movies and shows produced today in that format. There are far more 50 Hz countries than 60 Hz countries.

[morphinapg]

Originally Posted by d514

Just because you don't watch many TV productions from 50 Hz countries doesn't mean there aren't many TV movies and shows produced today in that format. There are far more 50 Hz countries than 60 Hz countries.

First off, I said content, not countries, and secondly, if this was 20 years ago, you might be right, but things are different today. Just because the electrical systems are 50hz in those countries, or just because their older channels may have been 50hz-based, it doesn't mean they still produce mostly 50hz-based content anymore. It just isn't necessary. 24fps has been the standard for films for longer than TV was even a thing, so it just makes sense as a standard, and it's the most common frame rate for lower frame rate content worldwide, film and tv. 25fps is the minority now, and in terms of actual content, there's a good chance it was always the minority.

[Geoff D]

But they do still produce mostly 50Hz-based content, at least in the UK anyway.

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by laughingmaniac

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Record in 24 fps when you broadcast at 25 fps!
Why not record at 27 fps then?

Maybe they could shoot at 24.5 fps and with pitch correction the pitch would be correct on both 50Hz and 60Hz transmissions and the cadence only 1.02% fast on the 50z transmission and 0.98% slow on the 60Hz transmission and 24p discs

Sherlock's Abominable Bride and the Tennant Who Specials BDs got 25/50 re-releases afterwards in some other Europe countries. Will there be hope for WhoUHD?

[Indiana Jones]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Maybe they could shoot at 24.5 fps and with pitch correction the pitch would be correct on both 50Hz and 60Hz transmissions and the cadence only 1.02% fast on the 50z transmission and 0.98% slow on the 60Hz transmission and 24p discs

Sherlock's Abominable Bride and the Tennant Who Specials BDs got 25/50 re-releases afterwards in some other Europe countries. Will there be hope for WhoUHD?

I never knew the Tennant Specials got 25/50 releases any ideas which countries.

[Kschreck]

Has anyone's USA order shipped? Mine from Amazon isn't budging and is due here tomorrow...

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Kschreck

Has anyone's USA order shipped? Mine from Amazon isn't budging and is due here tomorrow...

Sounds like they'd better be loading up a drone.

[mhp68]

Originally Posted by Kschreck

Has anyone's USA order shipped? Mine from Amazon isn't budging and is due here tomorrow...

Same with my order

[sonicyogurt]

Originally Posted by Kschreck

Has anyone's USA order shipped?

My order from target.com (since they were first to the punch with a low price) has shipped and scheduled for delivery tomorrow.