What is HD Lite?

[dbconsultant]

I've seen the term used in this forum without a clear understanding of the definition of 'HD Lite'. Is that when an HD program is broadcast in 4x3 with bars on the side?

[Ron Barry]

No... dbconsultant.

HD-Lite does not have any official basis.. But here is a link that describes one possible definition for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD-Lite

[Jim5506]

It's the false assumption that 1080i transmitted a 1080X1280 or 1080X1440 is not High definition.

Step back and watch the hornets.

[dbconsultant]

Originally Posted by Ron Barry

No... dbconsultant.

HD-Lite does not have any official basis.. But here is a link that describes one possible definition for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD-Lite

Thanks, Ron!

[harsh]

Originally Posted by Jim5506

It's the false assumption that 1080i transmitted a 1080X1280 or 1080X1440 is not High definition.

Actually, the false assumption is that different de-facto standards cannot be established for different media. An example might be trying to hold newsprint print quality to that of magazines. It only seems fair not to call what DirecTV offers by the same name that broadcast television offers (as specifically defined by ATSC standards).

HD-Lite also takes into consideration that while the image is being compromised by horizontal pixel averaging, it is further being mushed by reduced bit-rates as compared with broadcast standards. Lossy compression damage goes up exponentially with repeated application.

I would note that we should all be thinking of HDTV in terms of 16:9 instead of your portrait view of 27:32; the "resolution" is discussed in terms of horizontal x vertical.

[dbconsultant]

Originally Posted by harsh

I would note that we should all be thinking of HDTV in terms of 16:9 instead of your portrait view of 27:32; the "resolution" is discussed in terms of horizontal x vertical.

So what do we call it when an HD program is broadcast in 4x3 with the 'HD bars' along the side (like you see sometimes on ESPNHD) instead of 16x9?

[Stewart Vernon]

Originally Posted by dbconsultant

So what do we call it when an HD program is broadcast in 4x3 with the 'HD bars' along the side (like you see sometimes on ESPNHD) instead of 16x9?

Not HD.

Every once in a while there is an old movie (like on one of the Voom channels) that has been been scanned from original film and the original aspect ratio was 4:3. In that case, the movie is still in HD just not 16:9 widescreen.

But that is usually the exception. Things like your ESPN example are not HD at all... though they are being broadcast at HD resolution, the video inside that signal is not significantly higher resolution than the 480i/p it was originally produced in.

[James Long]

Originally Posted by dbconsultant

So what do we call it when an HD program is broadcast in 4x3 with the 'HD bars' along the side (like you see sometimes on ESPNHD) instead of 16x9?

Pillarbox.


As for "HD Lite", I define that as "An often derogitory term applied to HD compression that involves using a lower resolution than 1920x1080."

[HIPAR]

Now I'm really confused. Is High Definition defined by what you see? Or, is it defined by the Advanced Television Standards Committee?

--- CHAS

[whatchel1]

Originally Posted by HIPAR

Now I'm really confused. Is High Definition defined by what you see? Or, is it defined by the Advanced Television Standards Committee?

--- CHAS

Here are the ATSC standards as they are now. "HD LITE" is an approved standard. Here is the site to the PDF that all can look at that list all the standards. It will list that there are 3 standards 1080 (both of the 3 have subsets for I & P) and 1 for 720p. The chart 7.3 pg 17 gives the comparison chart.

http://www.atsc.org/standards/a81.html

[Stewart Vernon]

Bottom line... there are several different standards for HDTV resolutions. Some of these standards permit resolutions that are less detailed than others.

"HD Lite" is a very much unofficial and undefined term which generally is used by people to denote an HD channel's resolution not appearing to be as good to them as another. In fact, "HD Lite" could be a non-standard resolution, or poor compression, or poor OTA signal, or any number of things combining to make the signal appear less pristine than a customer expects.

Essentially, "HD Lite" is a morphing term used to describe general dissatisfaction with reception of HD... and it may or may not be describing a standard/accepted resolution.

[Ron Barry]

Yep.. HDMe... That is my take on the term in a nutshell ....

[dude2]

Yep, and if you have a plasma or lcd set that is not 1080p all you can watch is hdlite as anything anyhigher in quality it can not image. You need a set that is 1080i or 1080p for full hd.

[Steve Mehs]

My official unofficial definition of HD Lite.

High definition programming that is sent out in one resolution by the content distributor, then lowered down by the programming provider. *Cough* DirecTV *cough*

[dave1234]

Originally Posted by HIPAR

Now I'm really confused. Is High Definition defined by what you see? Or, is it defined by the Advanced Television Standards Committee?

--- CHAS

High Definition is defined by the marketing department.

[robill]

Originally Posted by James Long

Pillarbox.


As for "HD Lite", I define that as "An often derogAtory term applied to HD compression that involves using a lower resolution than 1920x1080."

I define that as "An often ACCURATE term applied to HD compression that involves using a lower resolution....

[harsh]

Originally Posted by dude2

Yep, and if you have a plasma or lcd set that is not 1080p all you can watch is hdlite as anything anyhigher in quality it can not image. You need a set that is 1080i or 1080p for full hd.

Regardless of the brain damaged resolution of the transmission, the receiver converts it back to one of the ATSC broadcast standards. Most older plasmas and LCDs are displaying a triple (or quadruple) compromised image due to downscaling, recompression, upscaling and finally downscaling again.

[TBoneit]

Throwing gas on the fire....

It seems to me to be what owners of really big screen TV sets and high priced home theatres call anything they don't like the look of. Myself I don't have $50,000+ to drop on a Home video center.

They'd really be unhappy with the NJN signal I can receive here.... Four channels of digital content and all 4:3 and not very hi-res.

I find that in general the HD channels off of dish to look fine with a 32"LCD that I am sitting 3 to 4 foot away from. I even use it for my computer monitor now with wireless Keyboard and Mouse and 16' of VGA cable. Do the Dish Channels look the same as the OTA, of course not and they never will. Dish (and DirecTV) are taking the MPEG2 from the stations and compressing it with MPEG4 technology. Anytime you take a compressed source and recompress it there will be a quality loss. Basic Video rule. That's why you try and capture video in a DV format AVI to filter and edit before converting it to DVD format for example.

Cable will have the same problems as they need to compress the signal too. FIOS holds out the promise of better picture quality but whether or not we will ever see it?

The only way the picture won't suffer is if it is passed through untouched. I suspect that is what the purists really want and if we lose half our channels so that the signal can passed unchanged they'll be happy.

They sound to me as if they don't care how much it costs and if we need a forest of dishes on our roof to get the best signal, well to them thats OK as I see it.

One persons humble opinion after reading HD lite threads on several forums.

Cheers

[whatchel1]

FIOS compresses too. It has to change to files that are diff from the straight OTA as well.

[DP1]

Well I dont lose any sleep over this stuff but to me the definition of HD Lite is simple.

If a program source is in 1920x1080 but a retransmitter like E*, D* or cable decides to send it out in 1440x1080 or 1280x1080 then thats HD Lite.

If CBS for example were sending out 1440x1080 in the first place then it'd be a different story.

Sure bit rates play a role in PQ also but thats true of any type programming.. SD or HD. The whole premise of HD though is about resolution. So to just decide to whack a good percentage of it out is questionable.

[James Long]

Originally Posted by DP1

If a program source is in 1920x1080 but a retransmitter like E*, D* or cable decides to send it out in 1440x1080 or 1280x1080 then thats HD Lite.

And yet the output of my receiver is 1920x1080. E* has decided to send it out in full HD. (I can also choose to use 720p and 480 formats for output.)

What they do to compress the signal on the satellite is a choice. By your definition 1440x1080 at 19meg would be "HD Lite" but 1920x1080 at 7meg would not be "HD Lite". Which would look better?

[akron05]

Overcompressed HD, or cheaply-made HD.

[DP1]

Originally Posted by James Long

And yet the output of my receiver is 1920x1080. E* has decided to send it out in full HD. (I can also choose to use 720p and 480 formats for output.)

What they do to compress the signal on the satellite is a choice. By your definition 1440x1080 at 19meg would be "HD Lite" but 1920x1080 at 7meg would not be "HD Lite". Which would look better?

And the output of my upconverting DVD player is 1920x1080 also... so what.. thats not the resolution of the source. So what if the receiver is sending out a signal like that whether it's upconverting a SD channel or a 1440x1080 channel.

As to the second point, totally slashing bitrate isnt really an option regardless because then the channels would look like ass to everyone viewing them no matter what size display they had, the resolving capability it has, or how far away they sat from it because of macroblocking and whatnot.

Thats why they choose to throw out resolution instead. Most displays in peoples homes cant fully resolve 1920x1080 in the first place so the people dont even know what they're missing. Bitrate is a variable measurement anyway depending on what type of programming it is and where it's originating from.. resolution isnt. Not like CBS sends out a 1440x1080 signal sometimes and 1920x1080 other times.

But just because most people dont even know that resolution is being thrown out doesnt make it right. If 1440x1080 is simply "good enough" as far as resolution for HD goes, then the networks themselves might just as well send it out that way whether it's OTA or for retransmission.

Like I say, I'm not whining about it. I'm just giving *my* definition of HD Lite. For me, it's throwing out resolution. It *could* be bitrate too if they wanted to actually double dip us (skimp on both res and bitrate) but usually thats not a big problem since once they jack with resolution they dont need to dedicate the same bitrate anyway.

[James Long]

Please keep in mind that this is a family forum and keep your temper and language in check.

Thanks for your definition ... accept it's flaws or rewrite it.

BTW: The thing that gets me the most about those people who are generally angry and generally focused 100% on frame size and rarely acknowledge bitrate is that they also refuse to acknowledge that the 1440x1080 and 1280x1080 frame sizes are appropriate ATSC standards for transmitting DBS. There is the connotation that "HD Lite" is not HD. By the standards, D*'s and E*'s HD (and Voom's 1440x1080 HD) all remain "HD".

[William]

Originally Posted by James Long

...refuse to acknowledge that the 1440x1080 and 1280x1080 frame sizes are appropriate ATSC standards for transmitting DBS. There is the connotation that "HD Lite" is not HD. By the standards, D*'s and E*'s HD (and Voom's 1440x1080 HD) all remain "HD".

I'm only aware of 18 formats that are approved as ATSC standards. So you are saying that the ATSC has approved more formats (it is now at least 20) and now include resolutions like 1440x1080i and 1280x1080i? Where is this listed and when were this new formats approved? If the ATSC has approved these formats then they are officially HD but if not....