# 1080P?



## clarkbaker (Sep 23, 2006)

Anyone know why E* wouldn't go after 1080P for a competative advantage? I imagine the bandwidth must be the reason.. but a new Sat. would solve that one. Anything on the books or news that would indicate any Sat providers going this direction?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I have not heard of any channel proposing to go to 1080p. There is a 1080p 24 fps as part of the broadcast standard... but really that would not offer anything above the current 1080i at 60 half-frames per second (30 full fps)... and going to 60 fps of 1080p would require double the bandwidth... and I don't see any channel provider or service provider jumping at offering that.

Also, OTA simply could not handle it as they are barely able to get the current 1080i in the allocated channel space... so you'll never see network programs in 1080p broadcast OTA.

Expect to see HD/BluRay/whatever wins high-def 1080p movies for purchase... but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for broadcast.


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

HDMe said:


> I have not heard of any channel proposing to go to 1080p. There is a 1080p 24 fps as part of the broadcast standard... but really that would not offer anything above the current 1080i at 60 half-frames per second (30 full fps)... and going to 60 fps of 1080p would require double the bandwidth... and I don't see any channel provider or service provider jumping at offering that.
> 
> Also, OTA simply could not handle it as they are barely able to get the current 1080i in the allocated channel space... so you'll never see network programs in 1080p broadcast OTA.
> 
> Expect to see HD/BluRay/whatever wins high-def 1080p movies for purchase... but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for broadcast.


You clearly haven't seen anything in 1080P24. There were some expermental broadcasts in NY in 1999 and they clearly looked better (and take up less bandwidth) then 1080i60. Probably even better on a 1080P monitor (mine is not). Perhaps they look better because they could up the bit rate in the bandwidth. Remember movies are almost all recorded at 24 frames and so are many TV shows (particularlly pre HD shows).

I don't think the dish receiver can deliever 1080P24, but similar to my old HD OTA receiver they should be able to convert to 1080i and 720P.


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

the reason 1080p24 may look better is there is no frame rate change occuring.

if you have 24 frames in one second in the source material, and you have to display it using 30 frames in one second, then you have to repeat some frames and cause a "hiccup" effect. actually you will see a pretty major improvement converting it to 1080p60 since you have twice as much time resolution to align these frames.

even still I can very readily identify frame rate conversion artifacts when watching DVDs. 1080p24 is a good idea but does any display even support it? most customers seem to think 1080p60 is the only true "1080p" solution and that's what the displays do.


----------



## patmurphey (Dec 21, 2006)

To answer the OP's question. 1080p is not being broadcast by anyone and is not planned to be broadcast by anyone.


----------



## projectorguru (Mar 5, 2007)

patmurphey said:


> To answer the OP's question. 1080p is not being broadcast by anyone and is not planned to be broadcast by anyone.


Sure about that? the olympics will be in 1080P, HD theatre will be in 1080p for some shows next year, big movie corps are getting ready to do 1080P filming, I have no links for this, but I talked to a sony rep and he told me it comes up all the time at their big shows they go to.


----------



## LinkNuc (Jul 4, 2007)

Rumours of Superbowl XLII being in 1080p have surfaced, but I wouldn't bank on it. And as far as the Olympics, I never saw anything about it being broadcast in 1080p...now each of these events are filmed in 1080p/24, but broadcast in 1080i (CBS's preferred format), 

Bottom Line I doubt we'll see anything this year or next broadcast in 1080p.


----------



## bobukcat (Dec 20, 2005)

projectorguru said:


> Sure about that? the olympics will be in 1080P, HD theatre will be in 1080p for some shows next year, big movie corps are getting ready to do 1080P filming, I have no links for this, but I talked to a sony rep and he told me it comes up all the time at their big shows they go to.


How are they going to broadcast it OTA, use two channels, compress it all to hell?? Seriously there is not enough bandwidth to send it in the allotted spectrum of a channel unless they seriously compressed it and then why bother?


----------



## LinkNuc (Jul 4, 2007)

bobukcat said:


> How are they going to broadcast it OTA, use two channels, compress it all to hell?? Seriously there is not enough bandwidth to send it in the allotted spectrum of a channel unless they seriously compressed it and then why bother?


Yup, that's a fact too much info to send OTA now, and too much bandwisth to send via Sat or Cable..I guess they could remove a channel or two and reclaim some of it..yeah right, however they are all filmed in 1080p so you can later buy on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD and watch it in 1080p goodness,


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

well yes but if it's 1080p24, there is no advantage whatsoever over 1080i. in fact the effective frame rate is SLOWER. the ONLY advantage of 1080p24, besides marketing hype that 1080p>1080i and the marketing fallacy that 1080p>720p, is that 1080p24 is a frame for frame conversion of FILM.

so for sources not originating on film, there is no advantage to 1080p24. for sports, this is a major step back, especially if it's going to be eventually converted to 1080i. You get the worst of both worlds. you'd be better off with regular 1080i, and way better off with 720p for sports.

of course as slow as things move in football I kind of doubt it'd make a noticeable difference <ducking>


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I have heard of studios shooting in 1080p and then downconverting to 720p or converting to 1080i as that is an easier conversion than shooting at 720p and upconverting. This would not surprise me if movie studios even shot at 1080p 60 fps to have a high quality master and then convert from there.

There is NO way any 1080p 60 fps will see OTA, ever, unless they redefine the channels to have more bandwidth OR use MPEG4 and require everyone to buy new TVs again. 1080i barely fits in the available bandwidth OTA. Satellite/cable could do it, but at the expense of having more channels so I don't see that happening anytime soon either.

That said... I believe both 1080p 24 fps and 1080p 30 fps are part of the broadcast spec... but as already pointed out, these are not different than 1080i 60fps we have now... both could be broadcast with the current bandwidth, and 1080p 24fps actually takes less than 1080i 60fps... but I see no advantage in doing this.

Bottom line... don't expect to ever see 1080p on OTA, and expect to wait until your twilight years for anything more than a special event in 1080p via satellite/cable.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Dish officials told us last year - they are working on 1080p.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

LinkNuc said:


> Rumours of Superbowl XLII being in 1080p have surfaced, but I wouldn't bank on it. And as far as the Olympics, I never saw anything about it being broadcast in 1080p...now each of these events are filmed in 1080p/24, but broadcast in 1080i (CBS's preferred format),
> 
> Bottom Line I doubt we'll see anything this year or next broadcast in 1080p.


Someone in a D Forum said they'll won't broadcast in 1080p for 10 to 15 years.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

P Smith said:


> Dish officials told us last year - they are working on 1080p.


Let's be honest though... given the bandwidth crunch, if channels cannot be added at 720p or 1080i then we shouldn't be holding our breaths for 1080p.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

> Let's be honest though... given the bandwidth crunch, if channels cannot be added at 720p or 1080i then we shouldn't be holding our breaths for 1080p.


At some point, things are going to have to slow down a bit until the delivery system catches up. In my area Comcast started offering HD this month. Direct really just started. And Dish has a satellite launch problem. All this struggle to provide bandwidth so that we can receive maybe an average of 6 hours a day of HD programming per channel! And you guys want 1080p now?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Exactly... which is why I'm not waiting for or looking for 1080p. Honestly, a lot of the "i" vs "p" is based upon wrong data and incorrect conclusions based upon assumptions that are not valid either.

Most of the problems we see with "noise" in our 1080i has more to do with the 1920x1080 amount of data... so 1080p on the current compression mechanisms with the current bandwidth per channel would yield the same or worse results. The main reason why 720p sometimes looks better than 1080i is because less compression is required for the smaller amount of data to fit in the same stream.

1080p just makes all that data as much as double, and would have to be compressed even more... and we'd have no better picture quality for the efforts. If we could get 1080i at proper bitrates without overcompressing, we would not have near the conversations that we have now.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

That's right, and same time just technically visible to cram 1080p with H.264 ( or VC-1 ) compression to same bandwidth what we had 3-4 years ago for one MPEG-2 channel, at least from Dish.


----------



## LinkNuc (Jul 4, 2007)

Right I don't excpect 1080p braodcasts anytime soon, hell, D* and us get HD-Lite as it is...Ok start flaming me on that one but its true. I am really anxious to see how Verizon FiOS works out, technically they are still getting their prohramming from Sattelites but pushing over optics...should be interesting...More competition the better!


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

HDMe said:


> Let's be honest though... given the bandwidth crunch, if channels cannot be added at 720p or 1080i then we shouldn't be holding our breaths for 1080p.


But as said 1080P24 definitely takes less bandwidth and is perfect for movies. 1080P30 is said to compress better then 1080I60 and that would also mean less bandwidth. So Dish might be able to increase picture quality. More likely they would try and squeeze another channel onto a transponder.


----------



## Mr.72 (Feb 2, 2007)

well 1080p24 is only "perfect for movies" if the movies themselves have been converted using that format. It just depends on the source at the programmer's discretion. So "1080p" IMHO is just pure unadulterated marketing hype since only one of the three flavors of 1080p is any improvement over 1080i in an absolute sense, and one of them is only an improvement if you have control over the source material processing.

Mastering movies/film at 1080p60 does not make nearly as much sense as doing them at 1080p24. 1080p60 results in frame rate conversion artifacts and over double the storage requirement. So if films are mastered at 1080p24 then it can be up to the programmer how to put that into an HDTV broadcast, or use it for a DVD etc. But until films are shot in 60fps there is no reason for 1080p60.

I think the best thing we could hope for is that they quit telling us whether it's 1080i, 720p, 1080p, whatever and just let the programmers decide what works for them on a channel by channel, or program by program basis. This whole thing currently is about marketing hype, but taking these numbers out of the public's misunderstanding would go a long way towards improving the outlook for quality program delivery and eliminating confusion.


----------



## LinkNuc (Jul 4, 2007)

Being that our HD signals are compressed anyway, I sincerely doubt we'll ever see 1080p over direct satellite systems...I'm pretty sure all of our HD on E* is now compressed @ 1440x1080, I know for a fact that D* (i used to have them) was 1280x1080...yes they are all reconverted at the box, but it just shows some limitations of the equipment...The next big thing will come along, but for now I would bet we don't see anything in 1080p24 let alone 60 broadcat for at least 3 years..


----------



## geoff (Jan 3, 2004)

Last I checked most non-CGI intense movies are shot on film at 24fps, so a TRUE film to HD convert at 1080P would be 24fps, 60 fps would require everyframe send twice with 4:3 pulldown, or every frame sent 3 times with 4 fps dropped from the film. The repeating frames with a 100% repeat would get digitally compressed back to 24fps with code to duplicate the previous frame, as opposed to re sending the whole frame. Now something that is mostly or all CGI, or 'shot' (I won't say filmed) with an HD Digital camera could actutally be shot at a higher frame rate, but unless it was fast action sports or similar, who would care? No one would notice,


----------



## GutBomb (Jun 17, 2004)

P Smith said:


> Dish officials told us last year - they are working on 1080p.


They probably mean working on getting their receivers to output at 1080p to the TV, not actually transmitting 1080p down from the satellite.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Who knows.


----------



## aim2pls (Jun 18, 2007)

clarkbaker said:


> Anyone know why E* wouldn't go after 1080P for a competative advantage? I imagine the bandwidth must be the reason.. but a new Sat. would solve that one. Anything on the books or news that would indicate any Sat providers going this direction?


doubt it as its not part of the broadcast standard


----------



## LinkNuc (Jul 4, 2007)

aim2pls said:


> doubt it as its not part of the broadcast standard


Again they can't even deliver us true 1080i as it is, I mean if weren't for the price and the lack of HD cable by far has better PQ, and I doubt you'll find a true videofile that will argue and OTA is by far leaps and bounds over anything, but we all knew that.

BUt all in all I like E but they've got to cut the HD pack in half because its getting very hard not to go back to D*


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

aim2pls said:


> doubt it as its not part of the broadcast standard


1080P24 and p30 are part of the standard. I would expect them to be considering them, particularly P24, for Movie channels. The chips in the 622/722 should be able to convert this as needed to 720P60 or 1080i. Perhaps they can also output them to compatible TVs.


----------

