A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old August 16th 15, 05:07 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,246
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 11:34:33 +0100, "_Unknown_Freelancer_" /dev/null
wrote:

Youre quite free to ditch your tv licence and wonder off to tax free Amazon
right now if you want.
Just make sure you cut off your tv and satellite co-ax cables so you can
show the inspector if they can be bothered to come round, so as to prove it
is impossible for you to receive television programmes.


Given that TV licence inspectors have no right of entry to your house,
and that in any case you should have no obligation to prove your
innocence in the face of a presumption of guilt, it shouldn't be
necessary to cut any cables. I certainly wouldn't vandalise any of my
own property in case somebody *might* think I was doing something
illegal with it.

Rod.
Ads
  #92  
Old August 16th 15, 05:12 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
_Unknown_Freelancer_
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 11:34:33 +0100, "_Unknown_Freelancer_" /dev/null
wrote:

Youre quite free to ditch your tv licence and wonder off to tax free
Amazon
right now if you want.
Just make sure you cut off your tv and satellite co-ax cables so you can
show the inspector if they can be bothered to come round, so as to prove
it
is impossible for you to receive television programmes.


Given that TV licence inspectors have no right of entry to your house,
and that in any case you should have no obligation to prove your
innocence in the face of a presumption of guilt, it shouldn't be
necessary to cut any cables. I certainly wouldn't vandalise any of my
own property in case somebody *might* think I was doing something
illegal with it.

Rod.


Lets put it another way, I, and probably including lots of other legitimate
licence fee payers, do not want you to continue receiving BBC services once
you have ceased paying your LF.

Whether you invite the LF inspectors in for tea and biscuits are tell them
where to shove their court case, Im not really fussed.
But fact remains, the LF is NOT compulsory. Other services ARE available by
other means.


  #93  
Old August 16th 15, 05:17 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 649
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

On Friday, 14 August 2015 12:03:44 UTC+1, _Unknown_Freelancer_ wrote:
Snippity snip snip delete (well, seems thats what the cool kids do)

4K ....over Freeview?
One hopes you are 'having a laugh'. Seriously.

Consider that this stuff originates at 12Gb/s.
Tweleve gigabits of data, per second.
In comparison, present HD originates at just under 1.5Gb/s.

And to compress this enough so that its transmittable over freeview,
you
would have to dispense with so much information that you would render
'UHD'
pointless.

You could use a whole DVB-T2 multiplex and the H.265 codec.

It would arguably be a better redition of 4K than the current HD
Freeview
is of 2K.

Yes, you could.

But it would contain f.all detail.


I don't think you understand how video compression works. In a [typical]
video stream there will be areas of the pictures which are the same as
neighbouring ones and / or the same from frame to frame. It is these that

are compressed, NOT the fine detail.

Even simple [and lossless] run length encoding will result in a substantial
reduction in the file size for an image.

MP3 compression of audio from original CD to 128kbps results in compression
of around 91%. Purists say you can tell the difference and so for a while
I abjured it, however even though I have quite good ears, I can't tell the
difference.

Obviously if one is able to compress in two dimensions and time one will
achieve much higher compression with relatively little loss. So the method
described above of using a [single] full [satellite] transponder and H..265

compression will result in a very good result at 4k resolution for most all
content.



I actually laughed out loud at my monitor when I read your first sentence!

sarcasm
n decades* working in live television, and n+1 decades programming computers
in up to sixteen different laguages.
I really do not have the slightest clue.
/sarcasm


My dear chap, I am very well aware of the constructs employed in standards
deployed by the moving picture experts group.
Ground zero for it was the technique employed in a jpg picture, and then
applying that over a time period.

Yes, when turning down the bitrate for a video stream, the first items to be
sacrificed ARE the non-moving areas*.
Keep turning down the bit rate, as has to be done for DTT, and very soon you
start to afffect the detail contained within anything moving.
In fact, whilst an object is moving, its detail is lost.
Only once the 'thing' stops moving is its detail restored. (Again, this is
detail lost because of compression, NOT motion blur.) Its restored quickly.
So much so that if you're not paying particulat attention to the moving
this, you miss the instant when a vauge fuzzy shape becomes a pitch, with
its skid marks and divots.
Thus, grass on any field based sport shown on DTT turns to VHS mush whilst
the camera is tracking play.


Certainly on BT Sport. Less so on [satellite] BBC HD during the World Cup.

Only when the camera becomes still is any detail added to the pictch.

* What goes against your suggestion was a 'reality' programme on ITV32 a
couple of years back.
Which showed a QR code at the top of the screen constantly. This would link
to chat rooms and a website.
The QR code was stationary, and on screen during the entire programme.
i.e. It was present on every frame and did not move.
No-ones phone could recognise it because the transmission chain crushed all
the detail out of it.
It was a stationary item, compressed to grey mush.
HD?
No 'definition'.

I digress.
If you saw such programmes at source quality, and then compared the DTT off
air signal, you would understand just how much detail Arqiva are removing
from the national viewing pleasure.

To get a 12Gb/s signal out over DTT, you are going to have to drop a vast
amount of detail.

Take a football match being covered in 4K. (Ive seen some.)
Now get your main gantry camera to frame on a stationary wide angle* facing
across the pitch.
*As wide as the lens will go. Not pointing at anything in particular.
Such is the detail in that picture you can make out individual facial
expressions of people in the crowd in the opposite stand (usually around
100metres away).
Its a fair wager that detail will _never_ be present in any "Freeview 4K"..


You are probably right about Freeview, but as discussed using a full transponder on satellite should get satisfactory results.


Instead of wasting so much bandwidth on such guff, why not just turn up the
bandwidth for present HD channels, and make Freeview better quality than Sky
satellite or BT TV???
i.e. Make HD.... the best HD. FOR FREE.




Bear in mind CD audio is sampled at 44.1KHz. The entire broadcast world uses
48KHz sample rates for everything. So that CD has already lost the very high
frequencies. Anything above 22KHz to be precise.


i.e. frequencies only dogs can hear...

Then compressing that in to a 128Kb/s mp3 file..... Any sound supervisor
worth their salt CAN recognise an mp3.
There are several who refuse to use mp3 files in their programmes, insisting
on .wav source files.

If you take a 96Kb/s mp3 file, its easy to hear how bad it is.
128Kb/s is only just a little above that.
i.e. That file is only just above the point where audio is defeningly
obvious how bad it is.



H265 is H264 tweaked.
The macroblock size is increased (the grid which the encoder chops the
picture in to), and they rejigged the colour space. Thats it.
Its really not worth getting all moist about h265 as being the best thing
since the Altair 8800.
Its not some amazing soloution that will allow cinema quality pictures to
pushed down a dial up connection.

Just like that 128Kb/s mp3 file, its h264, but just above the point where
the masses can tell its crap.


I bothered to check - my MP3's are 192kbps and I can rarely, if ever, tell them from an actual CD.

By contrast soon after CD's came out (1986/7) I was often driving up the M6 when Radio Stoke ran its 'latest CDs' program on a Friday evening. Not all the tracks played were CD, but even though the vinyl had been played on best professional decks, encoded, transmitted, received, decoded and played on my [BMW] car radio through fairly average speakers, whilst driving along at er 70mph, I could easily tell the difference between tracks played on CD and tracks played on vinyl before the DJ announced them.
  #94  
Old August 16th 15, 05:24 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,246
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:12:37 +0100, "_Unknown_Freelancer_" /dev/null
wrote:

But to output a stream of BALANCED content for the UK populous, accessable
by EVERYONE (technically illiterate Nans included), you MUST have FTA tv
channels.


A balance of cookery, DIY and quizzes? Really? And who decides what
sort of "balance" the news and current affairs should have?

All of these subscription services that are popping up at the moment have
some sort of niche. Each of them is very good at one sort of thing. None of
them offer a comprehensive balance. And Id be really grateful if you could
tell me which subscription service will offer me up to the minute
information when the great british summer weather dumps 20cm of rain in my
locality in 30minutes!


The accepted standard for weather forecasts in the UK doesn't seem to
be terribly high. There have been many occasions when I've believed
the BBC weather forecast and gone out without a coat or brolly and
been soaked. I'm sure the BBC can't be the only ones who can do the
job to this level of accuracy.

i.e. There has to be broadcasters offering a bit of everything for everyone.


I agree, there should be something for everyone, and for the sake of
"balance", not all from the same viewpoint, but doesn't a mix of lots
of different services amount to exactly this? We seem to manage
without a public service newspaper or a public service book or
magazine publisher, just lots of different ones, so why is it
essential to have a public service broadcaster? In the days when there
was one broadcaster, there had to be a way of making sure it
maintained a balance all by itself, but it's not the 1950s any more.

Rod.
  #95  
Old August 16th 15, 05:34 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
_Unknown_Freelancer_
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:12:37 +0100, "_Unknown_Freelancer_" /dev/null
wrote:

But to output a stream of BALANCED content for the UK populous, accessable
by EVERYONE (technically illiterate Nans included), you MUST have FTA tv
channels.


A balance of cookery, DIY and quizzes? Really?


Thats the job of the individual channel controllers. Yes, its a job. Actual
people do it.
Although they have come in for a lot of flak this last twelve months.


And who decides what
sort of "balance" the news and current affairs should have?


That would be the news editor.
Again, this job exists. Someone does it.
Each channel will have their own slant on how to report the news.
e.g. ITV is more cheeky/cheap/cheerful
RT is 'trying' to be more independantly objective, but with a Russian slant
CCTV, Chinese POV.

Do you complain about RTs Russian slant, and unceasing berating of the USA?
No.
But its about as balance as the BBC.



All of these subscription services that are popping up at the moment have
some sort of niche. Each of them is very good at one sort of thing. None
of
them offer a comprehensive balance. And Id be really grateful if you could
tell me which subscription service will offer me up to the minute
information when the great british summer weather dumps 20cm of rain in my
locality in 30minutes!


The accepted standard for weather forecasts in the UK doesn't seem to
be terribly high. There have been many occasions when I've believed
the BBC weather forecast and gone out without a coat or brolly and
been soaked. I'm sure the BBC can't be the only ones who can do the
job to this level of accuracy.


I wasnt refering to the actual forecast.
More to the sort of community based information.
e.g.. Dont use this bypass unless you have a submarine. I cant get in to
x/y/x because the road is closeD, can someone rescue my mum? Can anyone help
the a/b/c/ museum, its flooding.

Independant stations seem to be stuck in 1996, yet all with the identical
playlist.

What good is internet "radio" (HA!) for this?
The BBC has hundreds of local stations across this island of ours, all
working for the community, thanks to the LF.






i.e. There has to be broadcasters offering a bit of everything for
everyone.


I agree, there should be something for everyone, and for the sake of
"balance", not all from the same viewpoint, but doesn't a mix of lots
of different services amount to exactly this? We seem to manage
without a public service newspaper or a public service book or
magazine publisher, just lots of different ones, so why is it
essential to have a public service broadcaster? In the days when there
was one broadcaster, there had to be a way of making sure it
maintained a balance all by itself, but it's not the 1950s any more.

Rod.



  #96  
Old August 16th 15, 05:48 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Charles Hope
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

In article , Roderick Stewart
wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 11:34:33 +0100, "_Unknown_Freelancer_" /dev/null
wrote:


Youre quite free to ditch your tv licence and wonder off to tax free
Amazon right now if you want. Just make sure you cut off your tv and
satellite co-ax cables so you can show the inspector if they can be
bothered to come round, so as to prove it is impossible for you to
receive television programmes.


Given that TV licence inspectors have no right of entry to your house,

..
indeed they haven't, but I understsnd that HMRC can make a forced entry if
they believe there to be contraband on the premises. The two have been
know to work together.

  #97  
Old August 16th 15, 05:50 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Charles Hope
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

In article , Roderick Stewart
wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:12:37 +0100, "_Unknown_Freelancer_" /dev/null
wrote:


But to output a stream of BALANCED content for the UK populous,
accessable by EVERYONE (technically illiterate Nans included), you MUST
have FTA tv channels.


A balance of cookery, DIY and quizzes? Really? And who decides what sort
of "balance" the news and current affairs should have?


All of these subscription services that are popping up at the moment
have some sort of niche. Each of them is very good at one sort of
thing. None of them offer a comprehensive balance. And Id be really
grateful if you could tell me which subscription service will offer me
up to the minute information when the great british summer weather
dumps 20cm of rain in my locality in 30minutes!


The accepted standard for weather forecasts in the UK doesn't seem to be
terribly high. There have been many occasions when I've believed the BBC
weather forecast and gone out without a coat or brolly and been soaked.
I'm sure the BBC can't be the only ones who can do the job to this level
of accuracy.


The Weather Forecasts on the BBC are provided by the Met Office.

  #98  
Old August 16th 15, 08:16 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Vir Campestris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 439
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

On 15/08/2015 00:47, Andy Furniss wrote:
I am curious what bitrate you think is enough for HD?


Well, DVDs run at 3-10mbit usually. That's MPEG2, so we can halve that
for broadcast with the better CODEC - say 1.5-5mbit. But the picture is
~twice the resolution each way, so we want 4 times more. So 6-20mbit
should be OK. Another 4-fold for 4k, and we need 24-80...

Andy
  #99  
Old August 16th 15, 08:57 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
_Unknown_Freelancer_
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

"Vir Campestris" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 15/08/2015 00:47, Andy Furniss wrote:
I am curious what bitrate you think is enough for HD?


Well, DVDs run at 3-10mbit usually. That's MPEG2, so we can halve that for
broadcast with the better CODEC - say 1.5-5mbit. But the picture is ~twice
the resolution each way, so we want 4 times more. So 6-20mbit should be
OK. Another 4-fold for 4k, and we need 24-80...


EIGHT. Not four.

4K = four times the resolution, but eight times the data rate (because its
progressive scan, as opposed to interlaced)



Andy



  #100  
Old August 16th 15, 09:53 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,272
Default 4k TV on Freesat or Freeview?

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:50:25 +0100, Charles Hope
wrote:

In article , Roderick Stewart
wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:12:37 +0100, "_Unknown_Freelancer_" /dev/null
wrote:


But to output a stream of BALANCED content for the UK populous,
accessable by EVERYONE (technically illiterate Nans included), you MUST
have FTA tv channels.


A balance of cookery, DIY and quizzes? Really? And who decides what sort
of "balance" the news and current affairs should have?


All of these subscription services that are popping up at the moment
have some sort of niche. Each of them is very good at one sort of
thing. None of them offer a comprehensive balance. And Id be really
grateful if you could tell me which subscription service will offer me
up to the minute information when the great british summer weather
dumps 20cm of rain in my locality in 30minutes!


The accepted standard for weather forecasts in the UK doesn't seem to be
terribly high. There have been many occasions when I've believed the BBC
weather forecast and gone out without a coat or brolly and been soaked.
I'm sure the BBC can't be the only ones who can do the job to this level
of accuracy.


The Weather Forecasts on the BBC are provided by the Met Office.


Yes.

As well as the forecasts available online from the Met Office I use
those from Metcheck. Available free he
https://www.metcheck.com/UK/today.asp

Metcheck is a privately-owned organisation that operates globally.
Someimes its forecast are better for my location and sometimes the Met
Office does better. I think local geography is a factor.

https://www.metcheck.com/OTHER/about.asp


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2019 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.