Duration of HD ( as a system ) ?

David Kennett · February 15th, 2006, 02:16 PM

Today's broadcast standards have been established, and it will take a significant improvement to warrant scrapping it and establishing a new standard. Directv is enduring a considerable upheaval to convert to MPEG4. I doubt they'll want to do that again soon either. Cable systems have to see the carrot before they spend the money!

Kristian Indrehus · February 16th, 2006, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Kennett

Today's broadcast standards have been established, and it will take a significant improvement to warrant scrapping it and establishing a new standard.

A very good point. Distribution is today´s bottleneck. Apart from slowly refining the present HD-standards, upgrading cameras to better color, bigger LCD´s and less compression, high end for cinema distribution is probably where new formats will appear.

That being said, what kind of glass would you need to resolve more the 4K ?

Steven White · February 16th, 2006, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Per Kristian Indrehus

what kind of glass would you need to resolve more the 4K ?

Wrong question - you should be asking how big a sensor is required to resolve 4K. The sensor and the glass are coupled of course, but it's much easier to resolve detail on a large format sensor with a good lens than to resolve detail on a small sensor with a spectacular lens.

Simply put - you can achieve Gigapixel resolutions if you have an appropriate system. http://www.gigapxl.org/

-Steve

Kristian Indrehus · February 16th, 2006, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven White

it's much easier to resolve detail on a large format sensor with a good lens than to resolve detail on a small sensor with a spectacular lens.

Obviously yes, but since good high rez glass cost a fortune I just wonder what kind of lens it will take to make justice to such a large sensor. Seems to me that could be the bottleneck when it comes to mass production. Would it not?

Robert M Wright · February 18th, 2006, 01:51 PM

I just looked at some big Sony 1920x1080 HDTVs at Circuit City (50" or in that neighborhood), that use some sort of LCD/DLP hybrid technology. Made me go "wow." Looked pretty close to starting to reach the limits of human visual perception ability (for video). Starts to make me wonder how much real world viewing benefit UHDTV could actually offer.

Evan Donn · February 18th, 2006, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Wisniewski

Higher resolutions could take advantage of technology like this. It sure would be nice not to have to worry about focusing while shooting!

Not only would you not have to worry about focusing - you could also record stereoscopic images with a single lens. I hadn't seen that link before - it's really amazing.

So take that technology, cross it with sanyo's little HD camera, and stick it in a 4G networked phone. You'd have the ability to broadcast live 3D HD video around the world with something you can carry in a shirt pocket. I'd be surprised if it's more than a decade before this is a reality - and it'll only cost $199 if you're willing to sign a contract with Verizon.

I think more than just going to higher resolutions it'll be this type of change in the nature of the video technology that will be most significant in the near future.

Kevin Wild · February 18th, 2006, 09:50 PM

The next large jump, in my opinion, will not happen for a LONG time in the consumer/prosumer world. I see this HD leap more similar to the transition to CD's...which have been "good enough" for a LONG time. There was an attempt at the SuperCD that has failed miserably. Now, the trend is towards convenience (MP3's) rather than just high quality.

At this point, the images we can get with HD are simply awesome and good enough for 95% of filmmakers not doing 100 million dollar films. There will always be a niche for UHD, but it will be a niche. HD is "good enough" for most for many years, imo. I think the next trend and it's already happening, is making it a "convenient medium." We're obviously JUST at the start of this...since we can't even play back our HD for friends yet!

I hope now that the high end tools are democratized, that filmmakers will finally get back to really great storytelling and stop talking so much about the tools. Sorry Chris...sacrilege here, I know. :-)

That said, I don't think the Sony's, Canons, JVC's & Panny's are going to pay any attention to my post. They'll be TRYING to sell you the UHD stuff in a couple years and telling you how much you need it! :-)

Okay, now back to discussing the H1, P2, HVX200, Red, H100, HDP2, XYZ...

Kevin

Kristian Indrehus · February 19th, 2006, 02:39 AM

Coming from the music business I remember back in 83 when I was recording my second album (life was all analog) and the first digital drum-machine was brought into the studio. The Linn Drum. It came with an operator handling it with white glows. Well, that´s how it felt anyway. And digital sampled sound was like, WOW, unbelievable. We imagined how the future would be and agreed that the tape recorder some day would be digital. The mixer? Never... Impossible...

It turned out of course, to be more then possible. The future was beyond our dreams. Still. Today we´re using the same microphones recording basically the same instruments (though a few new arrived) And when listening to analog recordings it seems clear that when it comes to quality, the end product didn´t evolve THAT much. You still depend on skilled engineers, great songs, good singers, awesome musicians and so on.
So one part of the production line evolved. The other didn´t. End result?
You tell me.

The audience (those who pay for the evolution of technology) couldn´t care less about technology. It´s all about the results, ease of use and of course cost. For some time now we´ve seen high quality recordings distributed as highly compressed files on the internet. And taking over. Because it´s easy and "good enough" (for rock & roll)

It´s simply amazing to see how the same things are happening now in the world of film & video. High end production meets low end distribution (internet or mobile players). Living side by side with new HD TV´s etc.

So for how long will HD last? Quality wise it could last for a very long time specially if producing for TV and smaller screens. Long enough to justify the investment for sure.

For how long will HDV last? Not that long. HDV is a compromise depending on the processing power of today, and we all know where that future is heading.

Good productions though, will last for a very long time.

Kevin Shaw · February 19th, 2006, 08:43 AM

I predict we'll get by for a very long time just trying to get the most out of current HD formats, with a gradual migration toward full 1080p quality. Given the compression and data storage requirements of working with today's HD options, the likelihood of leaping from HD to UHD seems slim for at least 10-20 years or more. So if you're worried about picking equipment that will last, just getting from SD to HD should be enough for now, and today's cameras will easily be depreciated long before we get serious about going past 1080p.

Peter Ferling · February 20th, 2006, 11:56 AM

1. So long as HD makes money, and ROI for capital expenditures is realized.
2. Workflows and technology will manifest to a point wherein folks whom are more creative at telling better stories vs. explaining how their equipment works, will earn the lions share of the money.
3. The very nature of the business will shift to how the viewer becomes immersed in the experience, and we'll begin to see 3D holograms, or even plugging oneself in to the hardware for an experience that goes beyond the visuals.

The one thing that will never change is that we'll always have a better medium in which to sell our message on. However, HD is still catching on, it has yet to replace SD. The cost to produce 4 times the resolution is only twice that of SD equipment, a bargain. But it's nearly 10 times the cost for the adverage viewer to see it. Not everyone can afford to replace their $300 SD sets with a $3000 LCD.

Robert M Wright · February 20th, 2006, 12:47 PM

Very shortly, consumers will essentially have no choice when purchasing television sets, since the only sets for sale will be capable of playing ATSC HDTV source (and the prices will drop fast as mass production savings kick in bigtime). Congress finally set the hard limit for the end of NTSC analog broadcast. Thank goodness.

Kurth Bousman · February 20th, 2006, 05:35 PM

oh, Robert , that's great to hear ... that congress is doing something that won't be changed again 30 times before it's over and done ! I think that's probably the reverse of what will happen. First prices will drop to the point where most people own hd sets , then the broadcasters will move . And the congress , well , when has the congress ever lead in anything ? It's always the technologists that lead the way , thank goodness ! Kurth
ps - has anyone seen the new toshibas' 1920 x 1080 lcds' - very nice !

http://www.engadget.com/2006/02/17/t...wlt66-hd-lcds/
kurth

Pierre Barberis · February 21st, 2006, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Wisniewski

Higher resolutions could take advantage of technology like this.

Dont you think that technology like this could also be used to encode / decode( ie make viewable through fancy glasses..) movies /pictures in "REAL 3D ??

Robert M Wright · February 21st, 2006, 10:03 PM

The biggest difficulty with 3D video (or stills), is that a flat display is, well, flat.

Pierre Barberis · February 25th, 2006, 03:12 PM

That's why i spoke of glasses, so that you would get an image per eye, which the very basis of real 3D...

February 15th, 2006, 02:16 PM	#16
David Kennett Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Ridgeville, Ohio Posts: 407	Today's broadcast standards have been established, and it will take a significant improvement to warrant scrapping it and establishing a new standard. Directv is enduring a considerable upheaval to convert to MPEG4. I doubt they'll want to do that again soon either. Cable systems have to see the carrot before they spend the money! __________________ Dave

February 18th, 2006, 01:51 PM	#20
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	I just looked at some big Sony 1920x1080 HDTVs at Circuit City (50" or in that neighborhood), that use some sort of LCD/DLP hybrid technology. Made me go "wow." Looked pretty close to starting to reach the limits of human visual perception ability (for video). Starts to make me wonder how much real world viewing benefit UHDTV could actually offer.

February 18th, 2006, 09:50 PM	#22
Kevin Wild Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 540	The next large jump, in my opinion, will not happen for a LONG time in the consumer/prosumer world. I see this HD leap more similar to the transition to CD's...which have been "good enough" for a LONG time. There was an attempt at the SuperCD that has failed miserably. Now, the trend is towards convenience (MP3's) rather than just high quality. At this point, the images we can get with HD are simply awesome and good enough for 95% of filmmakers not doing 100 million dollar films. There will always be a niche for UHD, but it will be a niche. HD is "good enough" for most for many years, imo. I think the next trend and it's already happening, is making it a "convenient medium." We're obviously JUST at the start of this...since we can't even play back our HD for friends yet! I hope now that the high end tools are democratized, that filmmakers will finally get back to really great storytelling and stop talking so much about the tools. Sorry Chris...sacrilege here, I know. :-) That said, I don't think the Sony's, Canons, JVC's & Panny's are going to pay any attention to my post. They'll be TRYING to sell you the UHD stuff in a couple years and telling you how much you need it! :-) Okay, now back to discussing the H1, P2, HVX200, Red, H100, HDP2, XYZ... Kevin

February 19th, 2006, 02:39 AM	#23
Kristian Indrehus Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Norway Posts: 123	Coming from the music business I remember back in 83 when I was recording my second album (life was all analog) and the first digital drum-machine was brought into the studio. The Linn Drum. It came with an operator handling it with white glows. Well, that´s how it felt anyway. And digital sampled sound was like, WOW, unbelievable. We imagined how the future would be and agreed that the tape recorder some day would be digital. The mixer? Never... Impossible... It turned out of course, to be more then possible. The future was beyond our dreams. Still. Today we´re using the same microphones recording basically the same instruments (though a few new arrived) And when listening to analog recordings it seems clear that when it comes to quality, the end product didn´t evolve THAT much. You still depend on skilled engineers, great songs, good singers, awesome musicians and so on. So one part of the production line evolved. The other didn´t. End result? You tell me. The audience (those who pay for the evolution of technology) couldn´t care less about technology. It´s all about the results, ease of use and of course cost. For some time now we´ve seen high quality recordings distributed as highly compressed files on the internet. And taking over. Because it´s easy and "good enough" (for rock & roll) It´s simply amazing to see how the same things are happening now in the world of film & video. High end production meets low end distribution (internet or mobile players). Living side by side with new HD TV´s etc. So for how long will HD last? Quality wise it could last for a very long time specially if producing for TV and smaller screens. Long enough to justify the investment for sure. For how long will HDV last? Not that long. HDV is a compromise depending on the processing power of today, and we all know where that future is heading. Good productions though, will last for a very long time.

February 19th, 2006, 08:43 AM	#24
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	I predict we'll get by for a very long time just trying to get the most out of current HD formats, with a gradual migration toward full 1080p quality. Given the compression and data storage requirements of working with today's HD options, the likelihood of leaping from HD to UHD seems slim for at least 10-20 years or more. So if you're worried about picking equipment that will last, just getting from SD to HD should be enough for now, and today's cameras will easily be depreciated long before we get serious about going past 1080p.

February 20th, 2006, 11:56 AM	#25
Peter Ferling Trustee Join Date: May 2005 Location: Wyomissing, PA Posts: 1,141 Images: 57	1. So long as HD makes money, and ROI for capital expenditures is realized. 2. Workflows and technology will manifest to a point wherein folks whom are more creative at telling better stories vs. explaining how their equipment works, will earn the lions share of the money. 3. The very nature of the business will shift to how the viewer becomes immersed in the experience, and we'll begin to see 3D holograms, or even plugging oneself in to the hardware for an experience that goes beyond the visuals. The one thing that will never change is that we'll always have a better medium in which to sell our message on. However, HD is still catching on, it has yet to replace SD. The cost to produce 4 times the resolution is only twice that of SD equipment, a bargain. But it's nearly 10 times the cost for the adverage viewer to see it. Not everyone can afford to replace their $300 SD sets with a $3000 LCD.

February 20th, 2006, 12:47 PM	#26
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	Very shortly, consumers will essentially have no choice when purchasing television sets, since the only sets for sale will be capable of playing ATSC HDTV source (and the prices will drop fast as mass production savings kick in bigtime). Congress finally set the hard limit for the end of NTSC analog broadcast. Thank goodness.

February 20th, 2006, 05:35 PM	#27
Kurth Bousman Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: san miguel allende , gto , mexico Posts: 644	oh, Robert , that's great to hear ... that congress is doing something that won't be changed again 30 times before it's over and done ! I think that's probably the reverse of what will happen. First prices will drop to the point where most people own hd sets , then the broadcasters will move . And the congress , well , when has the congress ever lead in anything ? It's always the technologists that lead the way , thank goodness ! Kurth ps - has anyone seen the new toshibas' 1920 x 1080 lcds' - very nice ! http://www.engadget.com/2006/02/17/t...wlt66-hd-lcds/ kurth

February 21st, 2006, 10:03 PM	#29
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	The biggest difficulty with 3D video (or stills), is that a flat display is, well, flat.

February 25th, 2006, 03:12 PM	#30
Pierre Barberis Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: MANILA Philippines Posts: 117	That's why i spoke of glasses, so that you would get an image per eye, which the very basis of real 3D...