my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » HD on NBC... Sound Sync Problem? +OT Rants on all things bad with network TV (Page 5)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

Author Topic: HD on NBC... Sound Sync Problem? +OT Rants on all things bad with network TV Jesse Skeen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1517 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Aug 2000 posted 10-11-2007 12:41 AM                     I just got a new DVD recorder (which I'm going to have to return because discs recorded on it have problems on my older player) and it happens to have a digital TV tuner, so I recorded 2 minutes of NBC and put it online as INDISPUTABLE proof that HDTV is pointless: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BChnI33tDvs  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 10-11-2007 10:44 AM                    Last year, ABC six here in Philly used to drop Lost out of HD into SD about 30 seconds before the end of every single episode. Why you ask? So they could show the Power Ball drawing live in a small box on the screen concurrently with the shows climax. Fucking morons.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 12-29-2007 10:17 PM                        These are HD captures from tonight's Patriots-Giants game. I've resized them to fit the forum restrictions and yes they're JPEG, but they still illustrate the magnitude of the insufficient bandwidth problem visible on most HDTV broadcasts. The horrendous digital artifacts shown in pic #2 are visible here on either Comcast Cable, or over-the-air. Static shots with little or no motion look pretty good: But as soon as there's any camera or player motion, this is what you get: Did this broadcast look this bad on every station?  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-29-2007 10:48 PM                        Those are great pics. Someone really dropped the ball (pun intended) when they chose MPEG2. Have I already mentioned my dislike for MPEG2? Well, it probably won't be the last time.  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 12-30-2007 01:24 AM                        Definitely noticed the horizontal banding that occured with any horizontal motion during the game tonight. And yeah, something was going on with the replays, as shown in David's second screen grab. It looked like they were also having problems in the truck with signal timing on certain source transitions, like when coming back from replay or when bringing up the down marker overlays. I was seeing huge changes in detail level during the transitions. Guess there must still be some growing pains associated with engineering live HD broadcasts.  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-30-2007 02:55 AM                     Cheers to whomever was switching at Channel 7 Sydney yesterday afternoon during the screening of the great movie 'Lawrence Of Arabia'. I gave it two segments for you guys to work out it was at least a second out of sync then gave up. You guys are just useless.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-31-2007 09:16 AM                     quote: Paul Mayer Guess there must still be some growing pains associated with engineering live HD broadcasts. If you want to see motion without artifacts then live action 720p is going to be the better choice. The bandwidth of 720p is about the same as 1080i... though what it lacks in spatial resolution it makes up for in temporal resolution because the picture is at 1/60th of a second, not 1/30th x 2. On 1080i this would show as flickered or jagged edges on bright horizontal objects like in the background of a camera pan, it may also look like data breakup is occuring in parts of the image. Now... you all see why Joe is right about interlace anything sucking big time for HD!! Literally... no camera can pan nor can anyone move quickly with interlace HD. Some day... not soon enough... that will all disappear and all TV will be progressive scan... As it sits now transmitters just don't have enough bandwidth to pull it off anmd they are in fact barely able to transmit 1080i or 720p without major compression. Cable systems may or may not make that bottle neck even worse. Mark  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 12-31-2007 10:48 AM                        If the idiots running the HD show behind the scenes would get rid of subchannels and allocate all a channel's b/w to the HD programming, it would look a whole lot better, whether it's 720p or 1080i. Subchannels are the devil's spawn. The artifacts in the CBS football broadcast are 99% the result of insufficient bandwidth allocation. The networks know full well how overcompressed these broadcasts are. They want to see how far they can push the public with this crap before there's a backlash. If the public accepts this artifacting as being "just the way it is", it'll never be fixed. Kinda like how low bitrate MP3s, $10 earbuds, etc. have basically destroyed high-quality audio for the masses.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-31-2007 02:33 PM                     Dave, They have to limit themselves now in the sub channel realm to have a full time HD channel, many here have no sub channels operating but that doesn't mean better HD The HD stuff is limited within the design of the HD system itself and more so by the transmitters. Transmitters can only pump through so much bandwidth... your TV can only receive so much bandwidth, etc, etc. Innterlace HD is just a poor system to begin with and it's not going to get any better until they get rid of it. Mark  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-31-2007 04:36 PM                     quote: Mark Gulbrandsen The bandwidth of 720p is about the same as 1080i... though what it lacks in spatial resolution it makes up for in temporal resolution because the picture is at 1/60th of a second, not 1/30th x 2. 720p broadcast is 30 frames per second progressive. Not 60. Nevertheless, progressive scan at 30fps is still better than any 60i stuff because it eliminates certain types of flicker, sawtooth artifacts and other stuff that makes anything interlaced stink.  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 12-31-2007 05:28 PM                     PBS in Phoenix is broadcasting FOUR digital SD programs in their OTA bandwidth and the religious channel is broadcasting FIVE SD programs. It's no wonder I never watch television. My absolute favorite thing to see in the middle of an HD broadcast is material inserted in letterboxed SD. My second absolute favorite thing to see in an HD broadcast is a bug placed in the SD safe-zone.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 12-31-2007 05:43 PM                        Correction to my earlier posts: The CBS affiliate here (KVAL) isn't doing any subchannels (all the other local stations are). So theoretically there's ~18mbps or so of b/w allocated to their HD. So are you guys saying this is the best that 1080i can do with content containing lots of motion at a bitrate of ~18mbps? I find that hard to believe, but I also have nothing to compare it to.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-31-2007 06:22 PM                        quote: Bobby Henderson 720p broadcast is 30 frames per second progressive. Not 60. Wrong. It is 60 frames per second progressive. 1080i broadcast = 1440x540x60 = 46,656,000 pixels per second 720p broadcast = 960x720x60 = 41,472,000 pixels per second Broadcast bitrate is around 19.2 mbps I believe.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-31-2007 07:30 PM                     If most 720p over the air broadcasts are truly going out at 60 frames per second progressive then it sure seems like a bunch of bandwidth wasting overkill. Hardly anything is shot in native 60fps frame rates (even though a few HD cameras can record it). Most TV programs, from TV movies to talk shows are shot at/near 30fps. 60fps would just double flash each frame. Most any feature film is still just 24fps.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-31-2007 08:52 PM                        Sports games are ALL 60fps without exception. Let's also not forget about news and soap operas. Talk shows like Jay Leno/David Letterman/etc are also 60fps (ie: 60 different moments in time shown each second). Also, a "double flash" of a frame wouldn't really kill bandwidth in MPEG since it is an interframe-style codec. In fact it'd actually help it. MPEG2 needs all the help it can get.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.