Free 8K Broadcasting

Postmaster said:
Given, that the SD signal was also compressed to death and far from the nominal SD resolution, you actually see more information now. Especially when that crappy compressed SD was blown up by a cheap uprezzer in your HD TV set, to fill a HD screen.

But that doesn't mean that you see 1920 x 1080 pixels worth of information in you HD image now.
Read some whitepapers on compression and how they manage to squeeze uncompressed HD to a fraction of the size.
Do you really think you can do that without throwing information out of the window?
Click to expand...

Totally agree....
I think the point that continues to escape is the price to quality ratio and what that means economically. Many people have just recently gone to Blu Ray and TV packages with a decent amount of HD programming. Many content creators have just made the switch to tapeless HD cameras. Infrastructure has only recently been upgraded in some areas as well, some haven't.

All those creators, broadcasters, networks, and consumers aren't gonna jump til is viable to do so. That's kind of the end of the argument really. One can WANT 4k and 8k til they are blue in the face, it won't be a new "standard" until there is a good amount of profit to be made.
 
Postmaster said:
But that doesn't mean that you see 1920 x 1080 pixels worth of information in you HD image now.
Read some whitepapers on compression and how they manage to squeeze uncompressed HD to a fraction of the size.
Do you really think you can do that without throwing information out of the window?
Click to expand...

The quality loss from production to consumer has always been there so that's really a non-issue, IMO. Film prints get scratched, TV distribution gets compressed (VHS anyone?)... hell, even native 1920x1080 cameras can't resolve a full 1920x1080. You have to employ over sampling like Alexa or Red to actually record a clean, fully resolved 1920x1080 to start with.


pulpfiction007 said:
All those creators, broadcasters, networks, and consumers aren't gonna jump til is viable to do so. That's kind of the end of the argument really. One can WANT 4k and 8k til they are blue in the face, it won't be a new "standard" until there is a good amount of profit to be made.
Click to expand...

Consumer electronic makers and camera manufacturers see profit to be made in 4K because they want people to keep upgrading to 'bigger and better' things. Netflix sees profit in 4K because they aren't limited to the specs OTA b'cast and cable/sat are which gives streaming companies a competitive advantage. Sony probably sees profit too as it can remaster its movies in 4K, stream them from their 4K movie service to the PS4 (which supports 4K video pass through) to the 4K TV sets they sell. All it takes is one company pressing forward and the others will follow as they don't want to fall behind, or even appear to fall behind, the competition. OTA is at a disadvantage because that delivery method is not nearly as flexible as IP-based delivery. YouTube, for example, went from 240p to 1080p in about 5 years and it was basically invisible to end users. I would honestly be surprised to see OTA go beyond HD.

And as ripupthehwy pointed out, the push to move from SD to HD came from the private sector, not the government. Public interest in going from SD to HD wasn't very high but when companies stop making SD TVs and SD cameras the change over was inevitable. I suspect the same thing will happen again. In a few years companies will start phasing out HD consumer electronics in favor of 4K TVs and 4K cameras. Consumers by and large will roll with it, even if they can't tell the difference, because 'bigger is better', the sales person keeps saying "Wow, isn't this so much better than that old HDTV you have?" and Jim next door keeps bragging about how awesome everything looks on his new 4K TV.


-Andrew
 
When they can multiplex 8K which is 500 megabits per second on just 2 UHF channels that to me is a major technological breakthrough. That means the effective bandwidth has been increased 12 times without any change in compression. Factor in high efficiency Video codecs and we have a 48 fold increase in effective bandwidth. The only thing holding this technology back is that it is not backward compatible and will require new set top boxes which the taxpayers will refuse to pay for even though billions will be made auctioning off bandwidth.
 
[h=1]8K Ultra HD compact camera and H.265 encoder developed by NHK with UHD trial broadcasts slated for 2016[/h]
Click to expand...

"This video is encoded at 85 Mbps. Considering the encoder input, it's being compressed from 30 Gbps by a factor of 1/350. To encode Ultra HD video, which has very high resolution, encoding is done in real time by dividing the screen into 17 strips. Compression to 85 Mbps enables one Ultra HD channel to be transmitted using one satellite transponder."
http://www.diginfo.tv/v/13-0043-r-en.php


8905397225_36e403bc52_o.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top