DStv on 4K streaming and upgrading satellite-feed resolutions

"Although 1080p is used for Blu-ray, Cable, and Internet streaming, it is not used in over-the-air TV broadcasting. The reason for this is that when Digital TV broadcast standards were approved, 1080p was not part of the equation. As a result TV broadcasters do not transmit over-the-air TV signals in 1080p resolution."

https://www.lifewire.com/digital-vs-hdtv-1845697

Also, broadcasting via satellite in 1080p would use a lot of transponder bandwidth, which would mean less channels.
 
Apogee said:
"Although 1080p is used for Blu-ray, Cable, and Internet streaming, it is not used in over-the-air TV broadcasting. The reason for this is that when Digital TV broadcast standards were approved, 1080p was not part of the equation. As a result TV broadcasters do not transmit over-the-air TV signals in 1080p resolution."

https://www.lifewire.com/digital-vs-hdtv-1845697

Also, broadcasting via satellite in 1080p would use a lot of transponder bandwidth, which would mean less channels.
Click to expand...

What is your point?
 
genetic said:
Supersport has been producing 4K content for at least 4 years. They just haven't been broadcasting in 4K.

Look at any of the TV cameras at a rugby match. the're all 4K.
Click to expand...

Using 4K equipment or producing 4K content? If the latter, who's been buying/using it?
 
Interestingly enough the BBC tested streaming the Wimbledon tennis tournament in 4K.

In order to watch the 4K/50fps stream, you had to have a connection of at least 40Mb/s:

"The Ultra HD stream will be clearly labelled on the BBC iPlayer home screen as soon as programme coverage begins.

Audiences will need a connection of at least 40Mbit/s for the full 3840 pixel Ultra HD or 20Mbit/s for 2560 pixel Ultra HD.

Footage will be played at 50 frames per second. Given the variability of Wi-Fi connections, audiences may find a more consistent Ultra HD experience with a wired internet connection to the TV."

https://www.express.co.uk/life-styl...tch-Nadal-vs-Djokovic-in-4K-online-semi-final
 
Apogee said:
"Although 1080p is used for Blu-ray, Cable, and Internet streaming, it is not used in over-the-air TV broadcasting. The reason for this is that when Digital TV broadcast standards were approved, 1080p was not part of the equation. As a result TV broadcasters do not transmit over-the-air TV signals in 1080p resolution."

https://www.lifewire.com/digital-vs-hdtv-1845697

Also, broadcasting via satellite in 1080p would use a lot of transponder bandwidth, which would mean less channels.
Click to expand...

This is a chicken and egg argument. The broadcaster say, "show us the tvs capable of displaying 1080P" and the TV manufacturers say show us where we can access the correct broadcast quality for 1080p.However, TVs have long gone past this point, and now the broadcasters are faced with the catchup challenge.

yes it takes changes to infrastructure, changes in the modulation schemes used and not least of all, access to and a desire to use more transponder capacity per channel. If the broadcasters don't do that a 1080p channel can look worse than an old analogue channel!

MC can't claim to be short of bandwidth, BUT there are some really big issues they have to address before they will en mass convert to 1080p. And 4K is breathing down their necks already as well ....
 
Geoff.D said:
MC can't claim to be short of bandwidth, BUT there are some really big issues they have to address before they will en mass convert to 1080p. And 4K is breathing down their necks already as well ....
Click to expand...

MC will never go 1080p. They can't. The broadcasting standards set by the SMTPE (which all local and international broadcasters adhere to), defined HD broadcasts by either by 720p or 1080i.

There is no 1080p!
 
genetic said:
MC will never go 1080p. They can't. The broadcasting standards set by the SMTPE (which all local and international broadcasters adhere to), defined HD broadcasts by either by 720p or 1080i.

There is no 1080p!
Click to expand...

Only a few test channels in some parts of the World. Yes the broadcasters are another excellent example of a well controlled cartel and worldwide club. They all stick together pretty much.

Anyone interested in the future roadmaps can have a look at this site and check out the stuff in the public domain for starters such as the wall charts. https://www.smpte.org/.

Like all working groups, they all get bogged down in their own bureaucracy sooner or later.

Reminds me of the days when we all got together in Washington at Intelsat's HQ once a year to decide on how we would continue to milk the entire world with telephone tariffs :twisted:
 
Last edited:
Lord Farquart said:
So, soon you will have the 2014 Currie Cup on 4K Catchup?
Click to expand...

Very possible... but I doubt the 2014 Currie Cup would have been produced in 4k, but SuperSport started to invest in 4k from 2014.

You have to remember, to kit out an entire sports coverage game in 4K will cost 100's of Millions of Rands. Just one 4K television camera for example, can cost in excess of R3Mil per camera! - Never mind the entire broadcast backbone behind the scenes.
 
Geoff.D said:
Only a few test channels in some parts of the World. Yes the broadcasters are another excellent example of a well controlled cartel and worldwide club. They all stick together pretty much.
Click to expand...

/facepalm...

It's not a cartel. It's called broadcast standards. Maybe read up a bit on the subject; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_television_systems

You have to realise that manufactures of broadcast equipment design their equipment to specified standards.

It's costs millions of millions to kit out TV studios, and as a result, they keep their equipment for years. Standards also mean that everyone has access to TV signals.

It's the same in IT. IEEE1394 or IEEE802.3 ethernet standards are there for a reason - any device that meets the standard, can communicate to another device on the same standard.

It's not always about collusion.
 
Oh I don't have to read up on it! I am all for standards and the reasons behind it all. BUT I am in the game long enough to recognise when the need to cling to "standards" just becomes a delaying tactic to deliberately slow down development.
 
Geoff.D said:
Oh I don't have to read up on it! I am all for standards and the reasons behind it all. BUT I am in the game long enough to recognise when the need to cling to "standards" just becomes a delaying tactic to deliberately slow down development.
Click to expand...

Slow down development? :wtf:

For television signals to be sent globally to hundreds of networks and billions of televisions, there HAS to be standards. You don't go changing standards left, right and centre. The system would collapse and you'd have massive fragmentation. Many networks would die financially. Also due to the mass proliferation of television, changes can take years to filter through - even if consumer technology seems to be more cutting edge.

There is no deliberate tactic to slow down development, and just in you saying that, shows your ignorance on the subject.
 
genetic said:
Slow down development? :wtf:

For television signals to be sent globally to hundreds of networks and billions of televisions, there HAS to be standards. You don't go changing standards left, right and centre. The system would collapse and you'd have massive fragmentation. Many networks would die financially. Also due to the mass proliferation of television, changes can take years to filter through - even if consumer technology seems to be more cutting edge.

There is no deliberate tactic to slow down development, and just in you saying that, shows your ignorance on the subject.
Click to expand...

I am certainly not ignorant on the subject. Please don't presume to know what I know and don't know. Very often those too close to the game can't see the wood for the trees. May I suggest that you are maybe a little bit too close to the whole process to see where some developments have taken just a bit too long to "filter through" as you rightly point out. Yes a lack of standards would be detrimental to everyone including ultimately, the end user.


Lets step back to the topic. It started out with a statement that DStv only transmit in 720p. When that is certainly not the case. Do you agree? It might just be that those that believe that have not actually worked out what the settings on their decoders actually do?

DStv decoders offer 576p, 720p, 1080i, Original, and Native. How many users out there actually understand what those settings mean? and maybe the view that MC only transmit 720p, is governed by that setting on their decoders? Or some or other setting the user has set on his TV? And when last have you seen MC publish something that explains it all and what the settings should be now given the evolution of TVs and how MC have evolved since the very early days when MC recommended that users should set their decoders to "720p" ?
 
Geoff.D said:
Lets step back to the topic. It started out with a statement that DStv only transmit in 720p. When that is certainly not the case. Do you agree? It might just be that those that believe that have not actually worked out what the settings on their decoders actually do?

DStv decoders offer 576p, 720p, 1080i, Original, and Native. How many users out there actually understand what those settings mean? and maybe the view that MC only transmit 720p, is governed by that setting on their decoders? Or some or other setting the user has set on his TV? And when last have you seen MC publish something that explains it all and what the settings should be now given the evolution of TVs and how MC have evolved since the very early days when MC recommended that users should set their decoders to "720p" ?
Click to expand...

If someone does not know how to use their decoder or TV, then they should read the user manual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X