Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

DirecTV planning for Ultra-HD


  • Please log in to reply
140 replies to this topic

#26 OFFLINE   mdavej

mdavej

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,279 posts
Joined: Jan 30, 2007

Posted 15 March 2012 - 04:03 PM

How about they concentrate on going from 480 lines to 1080 before making the leap to 4000?

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#27 ONLINE   harsh

harsh

    Beware the Attack Basset

  • Registered
  • 20,736 posts
  • LocationSalem, OR
Joined: Jun 14, 2003

Posted 15 March 2012 - 04:14 PM

I agree with you. Ku or Ka really doesn't determine if UHD is possible. It's more like transponder bandwidth and most importantly, the encoding / compression used. If anything Ku would allow them to use higher order modulation like 8PSK and lower error correction.

DIRECTV is running fewer and wider transponders with Ka but the yield is relatively low if they can only fit 5-6 channels in 36MHz. Looking at what they're doing on 119W, they have seven HD channels set up (only two are active) on transponder 23 which is only 24MHz wide.

As far as DVRing it, maybe in 5 years the price of SSD's will be more consumer friendly along with a higher storage capacity.

The larger the files, the more grass that will be trampled on the SSD by each one. I don't think SSD is going to replace magnetic storage for DVR use.

Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. -- JFK


#28 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,064 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 15 March 2012 - 04:21 PM

Just to be clear (no pun intended :P), I was referring to the same HD source content viewed from 10' away on a calibrated 42" 1080p display sitting next to a calibrated 42" 480p display, as opposed to, e.g., viewing the same DirecTV HD vs. SD channel on the same 1080 display.


I wasn't planning on letting you live down your earlier statement, but I'll give you a little slack based on your clarification above, even though I could still see the difference.

I have an HR24-100 connected to a 20-inch SDTV. Not a great comparison, but I used to have an HR24-100 and TiVo Series 3 connected to a 50-inch SDTV, as well as an Hughes HTL-HD receiver and HR10-250 connected to a 30-inch FP widescreen SDTV. When connected to high quality sources, the picture was impressive. However, any focusing on the differences would reveal the massive differences... particularly in the areas of depth and color reproductions.

However, the fact that the differences are even comparable is due to the fact that they both started with a GREAT source. Good quality DirecTV HD or OTA was far superior to HD-LITE, and Blu-ray was far superior to DirecTV HD and OTA. I strongly suspect that Ultra-HD sources downconverted to HDTVs will look superior to the current 1920x1080 feeds.

On the other hand, it has been said that current 1920x1080 feeds will look far superior when viewed on Ultra-HDTVs.

I understand the viewing distance part. But in my media room at 10-12', would someone be able to tell the difference on my 70" display?


Depends on the person. Some people can't tell the difference between DVDs and Blu-ray. Some can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080i/p. The technology will be there, but it will be dependent upon the abilities of the person viewing it.

~Alan

#29 OFFLINE   David Ortiz

David Ortiz

    "How will playing cards help?"

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 2,287 posts
  • LocationFresno, CA
Joined: Aug 21, 2006

Posted 15 March 2012 - 04:27 PM

Yes, they can. The difference wasn't night and day when I saw 4K, but it was distinguishable from 1080p.

And screen size doesn't matter, it's the screen size vs seating distance ratio that matters.


If you have a 150" screen, the image is going to look a lot better if the source is 4K. There is only so much enlargement 1920x1080 can take before it falls apart.

#30 OFFLINE   Steve

Steve

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 22,802 posts
  • LocationLower Westchester County, NY
Joined: Aug 22, 2006

Posted 15 March 2012 - 04:45 PM

I have an HR24-100 connected to a 20-inch SDTV. Not a great comparison, but I used to have an HR24-100 and TiVo Series 3 connected to a 50-inch SDTV, as well as an Hughes HTL-HD receiver and HR10-250 connected to a 30-inch FP widescreen SDTV. When connected to high quality sources, the picture was impressive. However, any focusing on the differences would reveal the massive differences... particularly in the areas of depth and color reproductions.

It may have to do with the type of display as well, because what you're describing above is not the case with my calibrated Panny 480p ED plasma. With HD source material, the differences were subtle, at best, from ~ 10 feet away.

FWIW, I think this is a pretty good take on when 1080p resolution matters. It includes a nifty chart that's helpful (IMHO) calculating what screen sizes and resolutions are optimal for given viewing distances.
/steve

#31 OFFLINE   Hoosier205

Hoosier205

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,617 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2007

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:18 PM

+1. I've got 20/20 vision, and I can't tell the difference between a well-calibrated 480p ED display and a calibrated 1080p HD display from normal viewing distances, sitting 8'-10' away.


Haha...now that is some funny BS!
DTV = Digital Television

#32 OFFLINE   RAD

RAD

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,237 posts
  • LocationDripping Springs, TX
Joined: Aug 05, 2002

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:25 PM

Really don't understand this:

In four or five years, our Ku-band [transmissions] could end.

Why would they want to give up 32 transponders in prime real estate?

See post My Setup for configuration info.


#33 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,064 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:25 PM

FWIW, I think this is a pretty good take on when 1080p resolution matters. It includes a nifty chart that's helpful (IMHO) calculating what screen sizes and resolutions are optimal for given viewing distances.


You used the word optimal... I can't argue either way with that.

However, they are not "equivalent."

~Alan

#34 OFFLINE   LameLefty

LameLefty

    I used to be a rocket scientist

  • Registered
  • 12,181 posts
  • LocationMiddle Tennessee
Joined: Sep 28, 2006

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:30 PM

Really don't understand this:

Why would they want to give up 32 transponders in prime real estate?


I don't think FCC allocations expire unless a broadcaster cease using them. So maybe they are considering bargaining, trading or leasing to other providers in exchange for more bandwidth in another segment of spectrum?

"Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!"
Directv since 1997
Will Work for Beer


#35 ONLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,334 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:36 PM

Really don't understand this:

Why would they want to give up 32 transponders in prime real estate?


can they use the KU band for mpeg 4? or is it cheapter to just put a new KA sat in the KU place?
I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#36 OFFLINE   Davenlr

Davenlr

    Geek til I die

  • Registered
  • 9,090 posts
Joined: Sep 16, 2006

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:37 PM

can they use the KU band for mpeg 4? or is it cheapter to just put a new KA sat in the KU place?


The compression used has nothing to do with the band used. There is mpeg4 currently on C band, KU band, and KA band from various companies.

Tivo Premier XL4, Tivo Premier, Tivo HD whole home on Xfinity HD, DirecTv Whole Home with 39" high gain KaKu dish, Roku3,SageTv 8 TB Win8 Server -> DVDO Edge-> Denon AVR, Klipsch KB15's/Panasonic 55ST60 plasma"


#37 OFFLINE   RAD

RAD

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 16,237 posts
  • LocationDripping Springs, TX
Joined: Aug 05, 2002

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:47 PM

can they use the KU band for mpeg 4? or is it cheapter to just put a new KA sat in the KU place?


The satellites don't care what it is, it's just 0's and 1's to them.

See post My Setup for configuration info.


#38 OFFLINE   LameLefty

LameLefty

    I used to be a rocket scientist

  • Registered
  • 12,181 posts
  • LocationMiddle Tennessee
Joined: Sep 28, 2006

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:56 PM

can they use the KU band for mpeg 4? or is it cheapter to just put a new KA sat in the KU place?


The compression used has nothing to do with the band used. There is mpeg4 currently on C band, KU band, and KA band from various companies.


The satellites don't care what it is, it's just 0's and 1's to them.


Yep.

And furthermore, Directv has to have a direct-to-home license for whatever bandwidth they use. For instance, right now they broadcast Ku from 101. The also broadcast Ka from 101, but only to and from their own uplink facilities, as "backhaul" feeds. So far as I know (but I haven't looked lately), they do not have a license for Ka to the home from 101.

"Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!"
Directv since 1997
Will Work for Beer


#39 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 20,289 posts
  • LocationMediterranean Sea
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:56 PM

It's just a PR buzz to raise attention to the company ...

#40 OFFLINE   spartanstew

spartanstew

    Dry as a bone

  • Registered
  • 12,533 posts
  • LocationWylie, Texas
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:59 PM

If you have a 150" screen, the image is going to look a lot better if the source is 4K. There is only so much enlargement 1920x1080 can take before it falls apart.


Your missing the point. 4K on a 150" screen from 20' away is not going to look better than 1080p, because at that distance the "eye" isn't even getting the full benefit of 1080p.

4K on a 46" display from 3', however, will look a lot better.

I'm sure Directv can't wait to get their hands on your unit.

 
Directv customer since 2000

#41 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,064 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:15 PM

It's just a PR buzz to raise attention to the company ...


:rolleyes:

Your missing the point. 4K on a 150" screen from 20' away is not going to look better than 1080p, because at that distance the "eye" isn't even getting the full benefit of 1080p.

4K on a 46" display from 3', however, will look a lot better.


Real life from 30' feet away looks far superior to 1080p 3' feet away. :D

~Alan

#42 OFFLINE   spartanstew

spartanstew

    Dry as a bone

  • Registered
  • 12,533 posts
  • LocationWylie, Texas
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:16 PM

Real life from 30' feet away looks far superior to 1080p 3' feet away. :D

~Alan


Lol, depends on what you're looking at eh?

I'm sure Directv can't wait to get their hands on your unit.

 
Directv customer since 2000

#43 OFFLINE   David Ortiz

David Ortiz

    "How will playing cards help?"

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 2,287 posts
  • LocationFresno, CA
Joined: Aug 21, 2006

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:22 PM

Your missing the point. 4K on a 150" screen from 20' away is not going to look better than 1080p, because at that distance the "eye" isn't even getting the full benefit of 1080p.

4K on a 46" display from 3', however, will look a lot better.


Well, if I'm evaluating a TV, I have a viewing distance in mind. I chose a 55" model because I thought that the 60" picture looked a little too blocky to me.

#44 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,064 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:25 PM

Lol, depends on what you're looking at eh?


LOL!!! Fair enough... I'll give you that one! :lol:

Seriously though... the farther one's distance might indeed influence how many pixels one's eye can decipher, but that doesn't mean that the viewer is unable to benefit from a higher resolution source and display.

~Alan

#45 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,064 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:30 PM

Well, if I'm evaluating a TV, I have a viewing distance in mind. I chose a 55" model because I thought that the 60" picture looked a little too blocky to me.


I view it as bigger is always bigger when it comes to TVs... though money has kept me from fully embracing that belief... hence why I only have a 46" model. However, that's a fair point as well... when I get too close to my 46", it becomes too blocky for me, and I start losing the detail... the whole point of HDTV.

Granted, some sources like Blu-ray is better about it, and I believe that LED's are superior when it comes to that issue over LCDs, but I'm not lucky enough to have an LED.

~Alan

#46 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 20,289 posts
  • LocationMediterranean Sea
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:33 PM

:rolleyes:
~Alan

I don't know how old are you, but some people wouldn't see it. :nono2:

#47 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,064 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:35 PM

I don't know how old are you, but some people wouldn't see it. :nono2:


So... you're seriously suggesting that just because not everyone would benefit from something, they shouldn't bother?! :eek2:



P.S.: I turned 31 last month! :(

~Alan

#48 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 20,289 posts
  • LocationMediterranean Sea
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:39 PM

The discussion is revolving around PR statement without real base. Especially if you will pay attention to fake "8000-lines" part.
"Fata Morgana".

#49 OFFLINE   Alan Gordon

Alan Gordon

    Chancellor

  • Registered
  • 9,064 posts
  • LocationDawson, Georgia
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:47 PM

The discussion is revolving around PR statement without real base. Especially if you will pay attention to fake "8000-lines" part.
"Fata Morgana".


He simply stated that "4,000 and 8,000-line services are great for the satellite industry." Everywhere else in the article it simply refers to the 4,000-line services.

The discussion is Ultra-HD... which appears to be both 4,000 and 8,000-line services.

Maybe I'm stupid, but I don't understand what you're getting at... :confused:

~Alan

#50 OFFLINE   Davenlr

Davenlr

    Geek til I die

  • Registered
  • 9,090 posts
Joined: Sep 16, 2006

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:49 PM

So... you're seriously suggesting that just because not everyone would benefit from something, they shouldn't bother?! :eek2:

~Alan


My personal opinion on the matter is, until they finish the HD rollout, with 100% HD for all channels, they should not waste money on it, unless they plan to use their 3 transponders on 110 for a 4K ESPN3D with Smell-o-vision. I would be highly put off if they expanded their niche formats further before at least matching the rest of the providers on basic HD.

I would actually prefer, for a format that is so bandwidth intensive, they just start a new company, launch its own satellite (how about 101 KA?) and put all the niche format (4K etc) on it, so those that have the money to buy 4K monitors can support the effort to broadcast it.

Tivo Premier XL4, Tivo Premier, Tivo HD whole home on Xfinity HD, DirecTv Whole Home with 39" high gain KaKu dish, Roku3,SageTv 8 TB Win8 Server -> DVDO Edge-> Denon AVR, Klipsch KB15's/Panasonic 55ST60 plasma"





Protected By... spam firewall...And...