M-Net HD on DStv

[PeterCH]

Well, its depends on the recording and broadcasting equipment - maybe there just isn't enough to go around.

Incidently, I was speaking to a video editor friend of mine. He produces programmes in 1920 x 1080 resolution, real real HD, and has to downscale to 720 x 576 for most broadcasters as they have no ability to handle anything higher.

My rig can edit in full 1080P DVCPro HD. Only problem is that the
Panasonic camcorder is SD, however decen HD camcorders
can now be had for $4K although the cost of storage
is expensive, P2 cards go for $800 per 8GB (or 8 minutes of HD video).

 

[eitai2001]

I find this story a bit amusing as I have some inside knowledge of this story:

M-Net have one - that's right, just one HD truck, which was delivered earlier this year.

Thanks to Telscum, the OB productions will never be in glorious 1080i due to the fact that there is not enough bandwidth to get a full 1080i television picture back to Randburg, and the fact that using ATM lines to send the picture is prohibitively expensive, so M-Net are uplinking via Satellite, but even this is not going to be 1080i, but rather 720p - a small improvement over PAL's 625 lines. Unless of course M-Net starts to pay for extra satellite bandwidth! At present the truck downconverts to SDI and then send the pics to Randburg, and they will be able to master in 1080i, recording on tape.

On top of this issue, comes the fact that the entire bandwidth of Multichoice's satellite signal is equivalent to an uplink in SDI! So the quality from the Satellite is going to be pretty poor - unless Multichoice fork out the bucks and start charging a whole lot more for subscription....

720p is better than 1080i (due to the fact it is progressive, not interlaced)... you might be thinking of 1080p ... but at the moment, there still isn't any true 1080p content, contrary to popular belief, there aren't any true full-hd video cameras on the market, even the professional ones are 1080i/720p. (At least until I stopped working at cats digital last month).
SD is somewhere around 480 lines or so (can't remember the exact number), not 625 ... the maximum resolution of CRT isn't even that high.

My rig can edit in full 1080P DVCPro HD. Only problem is that the
Panasonic camcorder is SD, however decen HD camcorders
can now be had for $4K although the cost of storage
is expensive, P2 cards go for $800 per 8GB (or 8 minutes of HD video).

There is already software on the market that can edit Full HD, however no cameras that can record in true 1080p (Until last month anyway).

Most bluray movies these days are just upscaled, hence why you see that snow in the detail when you look closely.


Correct me if I'm wrong with the above statements.

 

[UnoPanelvan]

Since NoChoice will only be doing 720p (1280by720 at 25progressive fps)
I think a cheaper "HD" TV will suffice, one can get a decent 1280by720 set
right now for under R15K at 40+ inches. No need to get those 1920by1080
sets.

Why? Then when you buy the new GFX cards with HD capability and/or get a decent HD capable player/decoder, like the PS3 , then you have to upgrade the TV again, all that just because DSTV HD is limited? and take note the HD PVR can do upscaling to 1080i

 

[feo]

720p is better than 1080i

Didn't we get into this debate a while ago?

 

[arf9999]

Since NoChoice will only be doing 720p (1280by720 at 25progressive fps)
I think a cheaper "HD" TV will suffice, one can get a decent 1280by720 set
right now for under R15K at 40+ inches. No need to get those 1920by1080
sets.

720p will be 50p... not 25p.

 

[arf9999]

720p is better than 1080i (due to the fact it is progressive, not interlaced)... you might be thinking of 1080p ... but at the moment, there still isn't any true 1080p content, contrary to popular belief, there aren't any true full-hd video cameras on the market, even the professional ones are 1080i/720p. (At least until I stopped working at cats digital last month).
SD is somewhere around 480 lines or so (can't remember the exact number), not 625 ... the maximum resolution of CRT isn't even that high.

PAL is 576i lines. A progressive SD signal will usually be 540 (from PAL) or480 lines (from NTSC).

There is already software on the market that can edit Full HD, however no cameras that can record in true 1080p (Until last month anyway).

Are you talking about consumer cameras or professional broadcast units. The real problem with 1080p isn't the camera but rather bandwidth. 1080p uses nearly four times as much BW as 720p or 1080i. However there are professional cameras capable of recording at 4K (4 times the resolution of 1080p).

Most bluray movies these days are just upscaled, hence why you see that snow in the detail when you look closely.

Nonsense. You see "snow" because they are converted from film and you're seeing film grain and digital grading artifacts. Blu-Ray movies are not "upscaled", if they were you wouldn't see snow, but rather aliasing, edge artifacts and softness.

Correct me if I'm wrong with the above statements.

Done.

 

[ldmelsa]

I find this story a bit amusing as I have some inside knowledge of this story:

M-Net have one - that's right, just one HD truck, which was delivered earlier this year.

Thanks to Telscum, the OB productions will never be in glorious 1080i due to the fact that there is not enough bandwidth to get a full 1080i television picture back to Randburg, and the fact that using ATM lines to send the picture is prohibitively expensive, so M-Net are uplinking via Satellite, but even this is not going to be 1080i, but rather 720p - a small improvement over PAL's 625 lines. Unless of course M-Net starts to pay for extra satellite bandwidth! At present the truck downconverts to SDI and then send the pics to Randburg, and they will be able to master in 1080i, recording on tape.

On top of this issue, comes the fact that the entire bandwidth of Multichoice's satellite signal is equivalent to an uplink in SDI! So the quality from the Satellite is going to be pretty poor - unless Multichoice fork out the bucks and start charging a whole lot more for subscription....

You have not even seen it yet. Lets rather wait and see, hey?


720p vs 1080i
You guys are still stuck on that one.
720p50 (1280 x 720 x 50 = 46,080,000)
1080i50 (1920 x 1080 x 25 = 51,840,000)
About the same bandwidth.

BTW - It's usually 1440x1080 anamorphic pixels for broadcast:
1440 x 1080 x 25 = 38,880,000

blah blah blah
technical mumbo jumbo
blah blah blah

Lets wait for the broadcast before we make up our minds.

HD-SDI: 1.485 Gbit/s
Serial Digital Interface is the standard.
What's your issue with HD-SDI?


While I agree with you that it could be crap, your reasons are not why it will be crap. It has to do with so much more, like the people. They can make or brake it, regardless of whether it's 720p or 1080i. It has to do with the right decisions and bitrate and soforth.

720p - a small improvement over PAL

625 lines you talk about is for analogue of which 576 are for video. The rest is for data like sync. Digital is 720x576. Some DSTV channels are lower.
576i50 (720x576x25 = 10,368,000)
720p50 (1280 x 720 x 50 = 46,080,000)
That's a lot more bandwidth. That's not a small improvement.

 

[arf9999]

I find this story a bit amusing as I have some inside knowledge of this story:

M-Net have one - that's right, just one HD truck, which was delivered earlier this year.

True. But at R70+ Million per truck, it is kinda understandable. FYI: The SABC has just ordered an additional 4 HD Outside Broadcast trucks for R380 Million Rand! HD aquisition is not cheap.

Thanks to Telscum, the OB productions will never be in glorious 1080i due to the fact that there is not enough bandwidth to get a full 1080i television picture back to Randburg, and the fact that using ATM lines to send the picture is prohibitively expensive, so M-Net are uplinking via Satellite, but even this is not going to be 1080i, but rather 720p - a small improvement over PAL's 625 lines.

Not quite. It has less to do with bandwidth than the progressive nature of the signal. For sport 720p performs better than 1080i, and Sport will be the majority of content produced. Actually 1080i and 720p use a similar amount of bandwidth. Nothing to do with Telkom or satellites, purely a picture quality decision.

At present the truck downconverts to SDI and then send the pics to Randburg, and they will be able to master in 1080i, recording on tape.

SDI stands for Serial Digital Interface, and this is what Multichoice uses for all their signal distribution - it has nothing to do with HD or SD. So there is no "downconverting". It is also unlikely that they will master to tape... the workflow is mostly server based and final masters will be recorded on XDCAM disks as far as I'm aware.

On top of this issue, comes the fact that the entire bandwidth of Multichoice's satellite signal is equivalent to an uplink in SDI! So the quality from the Satellite is going to be pretty poor - unless Multichoice fork out the bucks and start charging a whole lot more for subscription....

Are you talking about the uplinks from their OBs or the distribution to the decoder?

 

[UnoPanelvan]

Didn't we get into this debate a while ago?

Some just believe what they want. Don't we all. What was the debate anyway. IMHO before true 1080p there was many HD ready devices that was touted as better or an upgrade from the 720p, price was even higher, So when the real 1080p devices came to market that sort of dropped away.

I presume it depends what hardware is used and what unit does the decoding

Maybe this will help (from an expert)
http://www.hometheatermag.com/gearworks/1106gear/

Need more convincing

http://digg.com/hardware/ACTUAL_difference_between_720p_v_1080i_v_1080p

The 'i' stands for interlaced and 'p' stands for progressive. 1080i and 1080p/720p represent two different methods used to display HDTV video on a screen.

When video is interlaced, a single video frame only draws every other line. If you numbered each horizontal line in a 1080i frame from 1 (as the top line) to 1080 (as the bottom line), each successive video frame alternates between drawing the odd-numbered lines and the even-numbered lines. Therefore, a display supporting a 1080i format may draw all of the odd-numbered lines (totaling 540 lines) in one frame, and then draw the 540 even-numbered lines in the next frame. This format is used by CBS and NBC.

A display supporting 1080 or 720 progressive format will sequentially draw all 1080 or 720 lines in each frame. You will notice a difference in picture depending on whether the program is being shown using the progressive or interlaced method. ABC and FOX use the 720p format.

Thus 1080p/1080i draws 1080 lines but differently 1080 draw all of them each frame and 1080 draw all if them in alternating frames (more than one frame)

Thus 720p only draws 720 lines per frame. Much less detail than 1080i

Some more?

http://www.dvdtown.com/messageboard/topic/5773/2/0

1080" is one thousand and eighty lines of resolution. If sent progressively it remains the full 1080. If sent by interlaced form, it remains the full 1080 - IF the TV display has an adequate processing chip, so as to correctly DEINTERLACE the 1080 in full, before converting to the native resolution of the display (whether 720p or 1080p).

If done correctly, you will not see any difference, as they are both 1080, and it would not matter if the player processed it progressively, or if the TV did it - just as long as it's done accurately (FULL 1080, not half/540 upconverted), and this depends on either the TV display's processing chip (or the player's).

If done incorrectly, YOU WILL SEE THE DIFFERENCE. The picture will look softer, with more artifacts/jaggies (overall noisier image than progressive), and this is because an interlaced signal is NOT the same as a progressive signal. I've explained this in detail here before, so will not repeat again now. You would do well to research it further.

Again, 1080i vs 1080p is equal ONLY if the signal processing done to an interlaced signal matches the quality (or equals) the signal processing done by a progressive signal (whether it's the player or the TV display). But beware, as MANY HDTV DISPLAYS do not have superior quality processing chips and cannot properly deinterlace film-based signals back into progressive form. Hence a visable difference in quality. (see various reviews, like the sample I provided above)

So if the quality is the same with 1080i and 1080p on good or proper hardware how can 720p be better?

 

[arf9999]

So if the quality is the same with 1080i and 1080p on good or proper hardware how can 720p be better?

It depends on the footage. Fast moving footage (especially sports) works better with a faster frame rate, as there is less blurring and no interlace issues. Thus, although 1080i has a higher single frame resolution (1080 lines), 720p has twice the temporal resolution (50 frames/sec vs 25 frames/sec).

 

[UnoPanelvan]

It depends on the footage. Fast moving footage (especially sports) works better with a faster frame rate, as there is less blurring and no interlace issues. Thus, although 1080i has a higher single frame resolution (1080 lines), 720p has twice the temporal resolution (50 frames/sec vs 25 frames/sec).

How does that increase the HD resolution or Pixels for that matter per single frame, hence 720p is lower HD reswolution than 1080i. That was the argument. Someone said 720p is better than 1080i. Concerning Blurr due to lower frame frequecy, thats another issue alltogether, nothing to do with HD resolution but more a question of the speed of the display refreshing. So yeah more bandwith at less resolution. Akin to the GFX cards on PC's to get a acceptable frame rate lower the detail or lower the resolution. Running at higer refresh rate could compensate if the hardware can cope or compensate.

 

[semiautomatix]

720p is better than 1080i (due to the fact it is progressive, not interlaced)... you might be thinking of 1080p ... but at the moment, there still isn't any true 1080p content, contrary to popular belief, there aren't any true full-hd video cameras on the market, even the professional ones are 1080i/720p. (At least until I stopped working at cats digital last month).

If that is the case what exactly are video editors working with? The 1920 x 1080 resolution. I'm not being difficult, I honestly don't know - what would you call it? I know its definitely downscaled for all major broadcasters at the moment.

 

[Lino]

Personally I think it is fantastic that M-Net will be HD, if I could afford the equipment (tv etc) I would definitively get one. However until then, I am stuck with standard

 

[arf9999]

How does that increase the HD resolution or Pixels for that matter per single frame, hence 720p is lower HD reswolution than 1080i. That was the argument. Someone said 720p is better than 1080i. Concerning Blurr due to lower frame frequecy, thats another issue alltogether, nothing to do with HD resolution but more a question of the speed of the display refreshing. So yeah more bandwith at less resolution. Akin to the GFX cards on PC's to get a acceptable frame rate lower the detail or lower the resolution. Running at higer refresh rate could compensate if the hardware can cope or compensate.

It makes no difference if your hardware can refresh faster if there is no data in the signal to refresh. i.e. If I have a display that refreshes at 90Hz, it's not going to look any better if I put a 50Hz signal in.

As far as temporal resolution goes think about the number of new pixels for every interlaced frame (i.e. 1/25s). For 1080i this will be maximum (1920*540){Field Resolution}*2{no of fields in a frame} = approx 2 Million pixels. However in reality most equipment (HDCAM, XDCAM, HVD, DVC-ProHD etc) actually produces 1440x1080 for 1080i, and uses "non-square" pixels to extrapolate to the 16:9 aspect ratio. Thus actual resolution for 1080i = (1440*540)*2= 1.5 Million refreshed pixels per frame .

In the same time sample, a 720p signal will produce 2 discrete frames. Each frame will have 1280 x 720 pixels (920 thousand pixels), thus in 1/25s we have a total of 1.8 Million refreshed pixels.

So, each frame for 720p has a lower resolution, but there are twice as many of them and thus fast moving footage is going to be rendered better without field tearing.

The ideal is obviously 1080p @ 50hz, but that is not an option for the broadcasters because it will increase the bandwidth required dramatically.

 

[johncookiedough]

True. But at R70+ Million per truck, it is kinda understandable. FYI: The SABC has just ordered an additional 4 HD Outside Broadcast trucks for R380 Million Rand! HD aquisition is not cheap.

Not quite. It has less to do with bandwidth than the progressive nature of the signal. For sport 720p performs better than 1080i, and Sport will be the majority of content produced. Actually 1080i and 720p use a similar amount of bandwidth. Nothing to do with Telkom or satellites, purely a picture quality decision. SDI stands for Serial Digital Interface, and this is what Multichoice uses for all their signal distribution - it has nothing to do with HD or SD. So there is no "downconverting". It is also unlikely that they will master to tape... the workflow is mostly server based and final masters will be recorded on XDCAM disks as far as I'm aware.

Are you talking about the uplinks from their OBs or the distribution to the decoder?

I work for as a freelancer for M-Net outside broadcast, so I do know what is happening there. I also worked for Sky in the UK for the past 3 years, and Sky went HD a couple of years ago. They do their Premiership games in full 1080i.

As for 720p vs 625 lines of SDI, trust me, there is a slight difference - nothing noticeable. I pretty much am not too impressed with 720p HDTV. I did however do one production in the UK at 1080p - the only that was ever done for the Isle of Wight festival - now that was amazing!

As for the downconverting - M-Net's OB3 truck has to downconvert its output to a standard SDI signal, as Randburg has not had the capabilities of receiving HDTV! Add to that, you can no longer purchase SDI equipment anywhere - all the manufacturers have moved along to HDTV. That is why SABC have gone HDTV, but even they will have to downconvert their signal at the truck before transmission - because SABC's FCCs are SDI.

As for mastering to tape - once again ICR at Randburg does not have the equipment as yet to record and master. Any master record is currently being done in the truck to HD VTRS. This will change - I am aware of this.

In my discussions with both the engineers and the uplink people, it was mentioned that M-Net does not have the bandwidth as yet to send HDTV - the ATM lines do not have enough bandwidth available. To broadcast HDTV, you need to go at least at 40gbps - and there is nothing with that capability as yet - you can uplink to satellite, but it is going to cost huge money.

My original posting is about the way that Multichoice/M-Net Broadcast Services have put the cart before the horse again. Even Sky took ages before they went full HDTV at 720p. Sky's productions were even mastered on tape in the OB truck - so that SKY had archive footage of their Premiership games.

 

[arf9999]

I work for as a freelancer for M-Net outside broadcast, so I do know what is happening there. I also worked for Sky in the UK for the past 3 years, and Sky went HD a couple of years ago. They do their Premiership games in full 1080i.

As for 720p vs 625 lines of SDI, trust me, there is a slight difference - nothing noticeable. I pretty much am not too impressed with 720p HDTV. I did however do one production in the UK at 1080p - the only that was ever done for the Isle of Wight festival - now that was amazing!

As for the downconverting - M-Net's OB3 truck has to downconvert its output to a standard SDI signal, as Randburg has not had the capabilities of receiving HDTV! Add to that, you can no longer purchase SDI equipment anywhere - all the manufacturers have moved along to HDTV. That is why SABC have gone HDTV, but even they will have to downconvert their signal at the truck before transmission - because SABC's FCCs are SDI.

you mean SD. SDI is an interface standard. HD equipment uses HD-SDI. No offense intended but I think you're misunderstanding the process.

As for mastering to tape - once again ICR at Randburg does not have the equipment as yet to record and master. Any master record is currently being done in the truck to HD VTRS. This will change - I am aware of this.

Go visit Studio 6 at MNet. The studio is a full HD production studio and they are able to utilise it for key sports events. Gradually all the systems will be upgraded, but MNet can go acquire HD now, and probably will for some of the TriNations Rugby.

In my discussions with both the engineers and the uplink people, it was mentioned that M-Net does not have the bandwidth as yet to send HDTV - the ATM lines do not have enough bandwidth available. To broadcast HDTV, you need to go at least at 40gbps - and there is nothing with that capability as yet - you can uplink to satellite, but it is going to cost huge money.

Where did you come up with 40Gbps?? There is no way that that kind of bandwidth is necessary. 50-100Mbps (depending on the number of feeds) is more likely and that doesn't take into account any additional compression that could be applied.

My original posting is about the way that Multichoice/M-Net Broadcast Services have put the cart before the horse again. Even Sky took ages before they went full HDTV at 720p.

Sky is 1080i.

Sky's productions were even mastered on tape in the OB truck - so that SKY had archive footage of their Premiership games.

That is standard operating procedure - every OB will record each camera stream seperately, it makes no sense to send all the video to the central production facility live. The OB packages a stream and sends it live and archives the rest. This happens for SD at the moment, it has nothing to do with HD.

 

[mountainman]

HD tv

Well let me tell you what I know. I'm looking at channel 170 on my HD television right now and it looks fantastic. Now before you question what fantastic is, know that I have had my ps3 for a year and have a growing blu ray collection. Anyone who says it's a small improvement over standard def obviously hasn't watched HD before. 720p is great, no complaints from me.

 

[BBSA]

Well let me tell you what I know. I'm looking at channel 170 on my HD television right now and it looks fantastic. Now before you question what fantastic is, know that I have had my ps3 for a year and have a growing blu ray collection. Anyone who says it's a small improvement over standard def obviously hasn't watched HD before. 720p is great, no complaints from me.

I must agree, the picture quality is amassing, although they may still work on the audio quality.

 

[matrixweb]

is the hd pvr out yet?

 

[UnoPanelvan]

It makes no difference if your hardware can refresh faster if there is no data in the signal to refresh. i.e. If I have a display that refreshes at 90Hz, it's not going to look any better if I put a 50Hz signal in.

I disagree because a lot of the artifacts and shuddering disappears as the Hz increases. Samsung now have a 120 Hz refresh rate compared to philips 100Hz(3ms). It the same with normal PC screen If the panel can refresh the display in 3ms as opposed to the older 8+ standard the quality and display is much better. Specially for gaming. It has little to do with the resolution but more about the speed of the panel refresh rate