# OTA Picture Resolution



## Mike109 (Jun 28, 2010)

I understand Dish uses a maximum resolution of 1440 x 1080. But will the DVR record a 1920 x 1080 picture when using the OTA tuner for a 1920 x 1080 broadcast?


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

It should be...DISH may lower the resolution on the sat channels, but I don't believe they fiddle with the OTA channels


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

"Mike109" said:


> I understand Dish uses a maximum resolution of 1440 x 1080. But will the DVR record a 1920 x 1080 picture when using the OTA tuner for a 1920 x 1080 broadcast?


They can't mess with it. The tuner just records the raw mpeg2 digital signal.


----------



## Mike109 (Jun 28, 2010)

So if I want to record a CBS program for example, which is 1920 x 1080 by me, than I'm better off using my OTA antenna. I'm new with Dish, but it appears using the OTA as much as possible seems to be the way to go, and there should be no rain/snow fade. Does that make sense?


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Mike109 said:


> So if I want to record a CBS program for example, which is 1920 x 1080 by me, than I'm better off using my OTA antenna. I'm new with Dish, but it appears using the OTA as much as possible seems to be the way to go, and there should be no rain/snow fade. Does that make sense?


Yes, but also remember that recording the OTA channels results in much larger recordings, due to higher bandwidth and OTA is MPEG2, and not MPEG4 compression


----------



## HDlover (Jul 28, 2006)

I don't believe any OTA channel is broadcasting higher than 1440x1080. Then half of them are 1280x720. That being said, the OTA is just slightly sharper on my set but not enough to favor the OTA AFAIC. Taking up half the space on the DVR is very compelling.


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

The reason I record OTA is the fact that the _trick plays_ work. I always record sports programming OTA for that very reason.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

HDlover said:


> I don't believe any OTA channel is broadcasting higher than 1440x1080. Then half of them are 1280x720. That being said, the OTA is just slightly sharper on my set but not enough to favor the OTA AFAIC. Taking up half the space on the DVR is very compelling.


Just curious where that info comes from? Regarding the OTA being no more than 1440x1080?

For the record, as far as I'm aware...

CBS, NBC, CW are 1080i
ABC, FOX, MyNetwork are 720p

Some markets PBS is 720p, others 1080i.

I am not 100% sure about Ion and other local stations that might be HD in different markets. Also, some local broadcasts of the networks are not the same if they have stuck a major network on a sub-channel (Some markets have CBS and CW on the same main channel + subchannel).

As far as I'm aware, if you are getting 1080i via OTA then you are always getting 1920x1080. Of course the programming being broadcast could be an up-convert from lower resolution source... so no guarantee that you are getting 1920x1080i content on a 1920x1080i channel.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

HDlover said:


> I don't believe any OTA channel is broadcasting higher than 1440x1080. Then half of them are 1280x720.


OTA stations are required to transmit in one of three resolutions: 1920x1080i, 1280x720p, or standard def 480i. The SOURCE material may or may not be that resolution, but the transmitter is.

FWIW, a 1080i station running one subchannel has a reduced PQ due to the lower bitrate used. 720p stations can usually get away with one subchannel without lowering their main channel bitrate too much, as most broadcasters (at least in my dma) use stat-mux encoders which steal bits from the subchannels if the main channel requires a high bitrate burst to maintain PQ.

There are lots of variables available to broadcasters, but resolution outside of the ATSC spec is not one of them.


----------



## Mike109 (Jun 28, 2010)

In the Chicago area, CBS, NBC & CW are 1080i. ABC, Fox & PBS are 720p. There are others but these are the biggies. Many people consider CBS the best because there are no subchannels to steal bits.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

HDlover said:


> I don't believe any OTA channel is broadcasting higher than 1440x1080. Then half of them are 1280x720. That being said, the OTA is just slightly sharper on my set but not enough to favor the OTA AFAIC. *Taking up half the space on the DVR is very compelling.*


Thats what larger drives are for....


----------



## HDlover (Jul 28, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> OTA stations are required to transmit in one of three resolutions: 1920x1080i, 1280x720p, or standard def 480i. The SOURCE material may or may not be that resolution, but the transmitter is.
> 
> FWIW, a 1080i station running one subchannel has a reduced PQ due to the lower bitrate used. 720p stations can usually get away with one subchannel without lowering their main channel bitrate too much, as most broadcasters (at least in my dma) use stat-mux encoders which steal bits from the subchannels if the main channel requires a high bitrate burst to maintain PQ.
> 
> There are lots of variables available to broadcasters, but resolution outside of the ATSC spec is not one of them.


I think real resolution is being confused with the broadcast standard. The standard is 1080 or 720 or 480. No one is required to broadcast HD, only digital 480. There is no overall resolution requirement. When HD first came out, the HD cameras available could only do 1440x1080i. Here is max measured resolution for broadcast HD.- http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=326565#post326565

There is a reason why Blu-Ray blows away OTA.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

HDlover said:


> I think real resolution is being confused with the broadcast standard. The standard is 1080 or 720 or 480. No one is required to broadcast HD, only digital 480. There is no overall resolution requirement. When HD first came out, the HD cameras available could only do 1440x1080i. Here is max measured resolution for broadcast HD.- http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=326565#post326565
> 
> There is a reason why Blu-Ray blows away OTA.


You're still mixing apples and oranges a bit...

You have to use certain kinds of boxes to mail something via the post office... but that doesn't mean you can only mail square things... just that you have to fit your things inside of an acceptable package.

In this case... the acceptable OTA packages are 1920x1080i, 1280x720p, 720x480i, 640x480i (I can't remember if 480p modes are in the new standard or not)... but that doesn't mean every HD channel will be using HD resolution source to make their upconversion.

Someone might very well shoot using a 1440x1080 camera, but it will be transmitted as 1920x1080 via OTA.

The reason why Blu-ray usually is superior to broadcast is purely because of two things:

1. Blu-ray movies are compressed with a smarter algorithm that doesn't have to compress in real-time like broadcast TV, so it can take longer for optimal quality tweaking.

2. Blu-ray movies have more bandwidth for "bps" whereas OTA is limited to around 19 Mbps maximum...

There's nothing that requires a Blu-ray to be made from high-quality source. There are LOTs of Blu-rays that have been released with less-than-optimal source... consider Highlander TV Blu-ray season 1 that was made from an upconverted master... which meant you got 1080p from your Blu-ray disc BUT the source was considerably less resolution... so it definitely did not look like high-quality high-def.

The same holds true for OTA... You might be getting a 1920x1080 signal via OTA that is an upconverted original source with less detail.


----------



## HDlover (Jul 28, 2006)

I'm not mixing anything, the broadcast standard and real resolution are two different things. No, Blu-ray does have more real (1920x1080 different pixels) resolution. Did you click on the link? It maintains it in motion- where it blows away OTA. If the source does not have enough resolution it isn't the fault of Blu-Ray. But full 1920x1080 isn't possible with ATSC. I'll bet it is possible with Dish's MPEG4.

I still maintain, no broadcaster is sending out 1920x1080 different pixels, 1440x1080 at the most. And that 1080 figure is really only 800 by ATSC measurements. Down to 400 with movement.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

HDlover said:


> I still maintain, no broadcaster is sending out 1920x1080 different pixels, 1440x1080 at the most. And that 1080 figure is really only 800 by ATSC measurements. Down to 400 with movement.


I'm sorry, but now you're just making stuff up.

To be technically accurate, no Blu-ray has 1920x1080 "different" pixels either.

The compression scheme works by sending out a "key" frame every so often that contains a full 1920x1080 image... then the rest of the time only changes from one frame to the next are sent... That's why "bps" bandwidth comes into play. The higher the available bandwidth, the more you can communicate of those changes.

Also, the smarter the compression, the less loss... but all of the compression is lossy by-design.

So Blu-ray is much better than OTA... but not because OTA isn't capable of delivering 1920x1080 images.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HDlover said:


> I'm not mixing anything, the broadcast standard and real resolution are two different things. No, Blu-ray does have more real (1920x1080 different pixels) resolution. Did you click on the link? It maintains it in motion- where it blows away OTA. If the source does not have enough resolution it isn't the fault of Blu-Ray. But full 1920x1080 isn't possible with ATSC. I'll bet it is possible with Dish's MPEG4.
> 
> I still maintain, no broadcaster is sending out 1920x1080 different pixels, 1440x1080 at the most. And that 1080 figure is really only 800 by ATSC measurements. Down to 400 with movement.


You mixing everything into BS type. 
Take a hike to that hill - get OTA PC card, install TSReader Lite and measure by yourself the frames, pixels, resolution of OTA stations.

And before that stop posting non-sense.


----------



## HDlover (Jul 28, 2006)

Yeah, my link to the ATSC test of resolution is nonsense. Unbelievable-out.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

For me, who is running the setup and check the parameters many times - real utter nonsense and pure BS.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

HDlover said:


> Yeah, my link to the ATSC test of resolution is nonsense. Unbelievable-out.


Umm... you posted a link to a post from 2001, last edited in 2003, that quoted data from 1995... and there's no data to suggest what was actually being broadcast OR used to receive it.

That isn't proof of anything.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

HDlover said:


> [/url]
> 
> There is a reason why Blu-Ray blows away OTA.


Yes there is, higher *bitrates*, not higher *resolutions* is the reason.....most of your other claims are just hogwash.

Blur-rays can be up to around 50Mb/sec, OTA can be up to around 19.3Mb/sec


----------

