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 4K UHD plans

DirecTV DTV 4k UHD

  • Please log in to reply
354 replies to this topic

#341 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,044 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 11 July 2014 - 04:00 PM

People would buy tickets to watch a 4k movie content, just to see what the hype is all about,  Then when it's all settled and done

And the hype wears off, they'll go back to watching on any resolution.  But would rather watch 4k on TV instead.

 

I don't believe that for a second. There are theaters already that have 4K movies and projection equipment, and no one goes to them especially because of that. The only 4K hype is around 4K TVs only, and they can satisfy that curiosity in Best Buy.

 

This isn't like 3D, where the theater/TV watching experience is (supposedly) going to change. Adding a third dimension, even if poorly and only as a gimmick, is a lot bigger change than a slightly sharper image. When theaters went digital, the resolution went down versus 35mm, and you didn't see a bunch of people up in arms about how blurry films suddenly looked.

 

I'll bet even the 4K proponents in this forum wouldn't notice if they went into a theater to watch a film they knew had been produced in 4K and it was shown in 2K because the 4K equipment was broken down.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#342 OFFLINE   GregLee

GregLee

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,594 posts
Joined: Dec 28, 2005

Posted 11 July 2014 - 04:16 PM

Let's be absolutely real...

 

The prospects of 4K network broadcasts are so remote, I think we're more likely to see free unlimited broadband first.  For a broadcast channel to move to 4K will either require the allocation of second frequency to each and every TV station, or the development of new compression that can get a 4K signal down to about half what h.265 or VP9 can achieve.  Since a LARGE portion of what most people watch is on their local broadcast network affiliate, this will make 4K a non-factor for most content.  

...

 

Most 4K TVs on the market today are also crippled.  To get 60fps 4K requires HDMI 2.0, which is not yet available.

 

Why do you think a 4k signal can't be carried on a broadcast channel?  Since a 4k signal can be compressed down to a very small bandwidth, I think it can.  I've seen an estimate of 18mbps for current HD broadcast video, and IIRC, Netflix requires a download bandwidth of 17mbps before it will stream you a 4k video.

 

Hot news: my 4k TV, Samsung HU8550, has HDMI 2.0.


Greg

#343 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 39,305 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 11 July 2014 - 04:48 PM

The technology exists to fit a 4K broadcast into the 6 MHz band now, using h.265. Remember they're currently using MPEG2 which is roughly 4x less efficient, and are able to deliver 720p and 1080i along with a subchannel or two today.
 
They are already working on standardization of future ATSC versions that will allow for 4K delivery. The problem is as you say they'll need a second frequency since they can't stop delivering HD, and the FCC is reducing the available frequency by auctioning off channels 31-51 next year. Big cities won't have much if any room for dedicated 4K channels.


FCC action would be needed to allow anything but the current standards the FCC has accepted for ATSC. Theoretically broadcasters could transmit any format along side a valid SD stream but with a lack of tuners that would do anything other than the FCC approved formats stations would want to keep HD alive.

With the direction the FCC is going cutting broadcast frequencies I don't see them offering double channels to stations again. 4K broadcast is pretty much a non-starter.

They can still produce in 4K for secondary markets and "future proofing" ... but there are a lot of shows that never make it past the "the show failed ... sell DVDs to the few fans we had" phase. It would take a lot of faith that the program would succeed and become one of those seven season mega-hits that air 24/7 on some station somewhere.

And then you have to convince the cable networks doing syndication to upgrade to 4K channels. Considering how many years it took to get networks to spend to be HD I do not expect a lot of takers.

VODs ... PPVs ... the main movie channels ... a "demo" channel of 4K only content like 3DNet. That is the future I see.
Welcome to DBS Talk - Let's talk about DBS! (The Digital Bit Stream)
DISH Network vs DirecTV: HD Channel List - DISH Network HD Capacity, HD Conversion and more.
DISH Network complete channel lists and lists by satellite location are in The Uplink Activity Center.
Unless otherwise noted, I speak for myself. Content is not controlled by DISH Network, DirecTV or any other company.

#344 OFFLINE   Diana C

Diana C

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 1,768 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey
Joined: Mar 30, 2007

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:31 AM

Why do you think a 4k signal can't be carried on a broadcast channel?  Since a 4k signal can be compressed down to a very small bandwidth, I think it can.  I've seen an estimate of 18mbps for current HD broadcast video, and IIRC, Netflix requires a download bandwidth of 17mbps before it will stream you a 4k video.
 
Hot news: my 4k TV, Samsung HU8550, has HDMI 2.0.


Any video content can be compressed to any bit rate desired. The question is: "how much detail is lost in the process?" All high efficiency compression algorithms are lossy - details are lost as part of the compression. H.265, like H.264 before it, simply improves on the cleverness with which sections of the image are selected for maximum compression. I can tell you one thing for certain...a 17Kbps stream from Netflix is not going to resemble the 4K demo material you'll see in stores.

Which HDMI 2.0 features does your Samsung have? See this: http://www.avsforum....ia-webinar.html

My point is that there are a ton of 4K TVs out there that will never be able to display a 60fps image.
  • edpowers likes this

Dish Network Customer from 9/1998-11/2001
DirecTV Customer 10/2001 - 7/2014

FiOS TV/TiVo Customer since 6/2014
Moderator, DBSDish.com 1999-2000
Co-Founder and Administrator, DBSForums.com 2000-2006

Current setup:
DirecTV: HR34-700 (1TB) / HR24-100 (1TB) / HR24-500 (1TB) / HR21-700 (320GB) / HR21-100 (1TB) / 2 H25s / C41-500 / SWiM16 / Nomad / CCK

FiOS: 2 Tivo Roamio Pros (6 TB total) / 5 Tivo Minis attached via MOCA


#345 OFFLINE   txfeinbergs

txfeinbergs

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 124 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 12 July 2014 - 10:52 AM

Any video content can be compressed to any bit rate desired. The question is: "how much detail is lost in the process?" All high efficiency compression algorithms are lossy - details are lost as part of the compression. H.265, like H.264 before it, simply improves on the cleverness with which sections of the image are selected for maximum compression. I can tell you one thing for certain...a 17Kbps stream from Netflix is not going to resemble the 4K demo material you'll see in stores.

Which HDMI 2.0 features does your Samsung have? See this: http://www.avsforum....ia-webinar.html

My point is that there are a ton of 4K TVs out there that will never be able to display a 60fps image.

 

Honestly, once DirecTV offers 4K channels (likely at a premium), I would like the option of being able to pay that premium to watch them on my 1080P set but at a higher bitrate (i.e. less compression). This is the thing that really irritates me. We are paying for a heavily compressed 1080P signal already. Why not give me the option of using my current television at a much higher bitrate instead of having to go out and buy a 4K TV. We aren't even using the full quality of our current sets yet.


  • edpowers likes this

#346 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 567 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 12 July 2014 - 10:56 AM

Any video content can be compressed to any bit rate desired. The question is: "how much detail is lost in the process?" All high efficiency compression algorithms are lossy - details are lost as part of the compression. H.265, like H.264 before it, simply improves on the cleverness with which sections of the image are selected for maximum compression. I can tell you one thing for certain...a 17Kbps stream from Netflix is not going to resemble the 4K demo material you'll see in stores.

Which HDMI 2.0 features does your Samsung have? See this: http://www.avsforum....ia-webinar.html

My point is that there are a ton of 4K TVs out there that will never be able to display a 60fps image.

 

True BUT... I owned a TV that could only do 720p.  If I recall correctly there were then models that could do 1080i but not 1080p.  Then 1080p but only at 24 or 30 fps.  This same trickle of feature enhancements will continue.

 

It will only be a few years until everything but the bottom will be 4K 60fps.

 

No doubt there will then be HDMI 2.1, 2.2, ..., HDMI 3.0, ...  8K...

 

There were arguments about 720p vs 1080i.  Then 1080i vs 1080p.  etc, etc, etc.

 

History proves one thing.  Technology will continue to advance.  At each step there will be those that argue against the technical feasibility, need, economic sanity, etc.  But its only an issue of when, not if.

 

Sure, we can think of 3D and say some things will fail.  But that won't stop the process.

 

It's a long time until we have holographic seeing, hearing, and smelling (and I suppose wind, temperature, humidity, IR heat, vibration, tactile, etc) that is indistinguishable from reality.

 

The only realistic discussion to have here is when.



#347 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 567 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 12 July 2014 - 11:04 AM

Honestly, once DirecTV offers 4K channels (likely at a premium), I would like the option of being able to pay that premium to watch them on my 1080P set but at a higher bitrate (i.e. less compression). This is the thing that really irritates me. We are paying for a heavily compressed 1080P signal already. Why not give me the option of using my current television at a much higher bitrate instead of having to go out and buy a 4K TV. We aren't even using the full quality of our current sets yet.

 

Agreed.

 

I suspect that quality is too difficult to quantify for joe public.  In other words, nothing short and sweet to sell.

 

Nobody in the industry is going to want to talk about how a 4K program can look worse than a 720p.  Or that even if both were uncompressed a consumer may not see a difference depending on the features of a particular TV or viewing distance.

 

Marketing is about obfuscation - terse glitz.  Its what works for the majority - that aren't here on this forum.


  • edpowers likes this

#348 OFFLINE   GregLee

GregLee

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,594 posts
Joined: Dec 28, 2005

Posted 12 July 2014 - 11:15 AM

 I can tell you one thing for certain...a 17Kbps stream from Netflix is not going to resemble the 4K demo material you'll see in stores.

Which HDMI 2.0 features does your Samsung have? See this: http://www.avsforum....ia-webinar.html

My point is that there are a ton of 4K TVs out there that will never be able to display a 60fps image.

 

I don't know what HDMI 2.0 features my HU8550 has.  I doubt that it accepts 60fps 4k video.  Samsung says they'll later offer an add on box implementing features not yet available, so if it doesn't now, it probably will do 60fps in the future.

 

I would be interested to know how you became certain that  "a 17Kbps stream from Netflix is not going to resemble the 4K demo material you'll see in stores."  I've at least seen both in store demos and an approximately 17mbps 4k stream (from youtube).  Have you?


Greg

#349 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,044 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 12 July 2014 - 11:57 AM

Any video content can be compressed to any bit rate desired. The question is: "how much detail is lost in the process?" All high efficiency compression algorithms are lossy - details are lost as part of the compression. H.265, like H.264 before it, simply improves on the cleverness with which sections of the image are selected for maximum compression. I can tell you one thing for certain...a 17Kbps stream from Netflix is not going to resemble the 4K demo material you'll see in stores.

 

The 4K Directv and cable companies provide won't resemble what you get on a 4K Blu Ray any more than the HD pictures you get from them resemble what you get from a Blu Ray today. So while you're right that you can't deliver Blu Ray quality 4K through the ATSC bit rate of 19.39 Mbps, that's irrelevant. They can deliver the same quality Netflix does today with its 4K, or have less quality and have subchannels. Just like many TV stations do today with HD.

 

Obviously the idea of 4K OTA broadcasts is many years away, if it ever happens, since the standards need to be completed/tested, the FCC has to approve it and come up with some scheme for its deployment, and TV stations need to make the investment necessary to broadcast it. It may never happen for broadcast, but if 4K really caught on the TV stations could deliver 4K video to those cable/satellite providers who receive it via fiber/co-lo, even if they only broadcast HD. That would allow the networks to provide 4K network programming without the TV stations needing to make the size of investment that would be required to actually broadcast 4K.

 

There's a big difference in HD quality from Blu Ray, to top quality HD broadcasts, to crap quality HD broadcasts. The same will be true for 4K. Oh, initially it'll all be pretty high quality stuff, because there will only be a couple 4K channels and they'll want to show it off in the best light possible to get more people to pay for 4K service. But if it starts to catch on as some people here believe/hope, it'll eventually get treated just like HD does now, and some channels will be allowed better quality and many will end up worse than good quality HD - just as quite a few "lesser" stations are laughably bit starved on HD today on many providers.

 

If we go through this whole game again in a decade with 8K, the same will be true then.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#350 OFFLINE   GregLee

GregLee

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,594 posts
Joined: Dec 28, 2005

Posted 12 July 2014 - 01:12 PM


Obviously the idea of 4K OTA broadcasts is many years away, if it ever happens, since the standards need to be completed/tested, the FCC has to approve it and come up with some scheme for its deployment, and TV stations need to make the investment necessary to broadcast it.

 

This opinion may be hasty.  Dolby has claimed, "Dolby Vision is a “dual-codec” technology that uses the HEVC 10-bit base layer plus an 8-bit AVC enhancement layer or two 8-bit AVC encodes.  With this approach, existing broadcast and encoder/decoder technology may easily adopt Dolby Vision while retaining backward compatibility."  http://www.display-c...dolby-vision-2/


Greg

#351 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,044 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 12 July 2014 - 01:25 PM

I'm not sure if I read that to mean what I think you're implying: that they can broadcast a bitstream that will be decoded as HEVC 4K by 4K capable devices, and decoded as AVC HD by HD capable devices. It would have to work with 100% of existing ATSC capable devices for the FCC to approve it. If it works with 98% of them, no go.

 

It isn't clear what Dolby means here:

 

Is a special chip needed or can the algorithm be implemented on GPU or CPU processors already in the TVs, or licensed into brand specific IC cores?

 

We are integrating Dolby Vision into the TV and STB SoCs currently under development for next generation products.

 

Is that the Dolby Vision image enhancement? Or is that the combining of 4K and HD data into a single stream?


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#352 OFFLINE   Steve

Steve

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,436 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2006

Posted 12 July 2014 - 02:01 PM

If we go through this whole game again in a decade with 8K, the same will be true then.

 

You can be sure if it's not 8k, it'll be something else manufacturers come up with that will make folks want to replace perfectly good displays with some other technology that won't look any better at normal viewing distances. :P


/steve

#353 OFFLINE   GregLee

GregLee

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,594 posts
Joined: Dec 28, 2005

Posted 12 July 2014 - 02:08 PM

Is that the Dolby Vision image enhancement? Or is that the combining of 4K and HD data into a single stream?

 

I don't know what they mean.  Dolby Vision doesn't seem to have anything intrinsically to do with 4k resolution, but here they seem to be saying that it is compatible with 4k, and it's compatible with broadcast standards (given a modest extra bandwidth requirement).  But if 4k is now incompatible with broadcast standards, maybe Dolby is just saying that adding in Dolby Vision doesn't make things any worse -- it's no more incompatible than it was before.


Greg

#354 OFFLINE   Diana C

Diana C

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 1,768 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey
Joined: Mar 30, 2007

Posted 13 July 2014 - 10:03 AM

...I would be interested to know how you became certain that  "a 17Kbps stream from Netflix is not going to resemble the 4K demo material you'll see in stores."  I've at least seen both in store demos and an approximately 17mbps 4k stream (from youtube).  Have you?


I have seen both...that's what makes me certain.

Dish Network Customer from 9/1998-11/2001
DirecTV Customer 10/2001 - 7/2014

FiOS TV/TiVo Customer since 6/2014
Moderator, DBSDish.com 1999-2000
Co-Founder and Administrator, DBSForums.com 2000-2006

Current setup:
DirecTV: HR34-700 (1TB) / HR24-100 (1TB) / HR24-500 (1TB) / HR21-700 (320GB) / HR21-100 (1TB) / 2 H25s / C41-500 / SWiM16 / Nomad / CCK

FiOS: 2 Tivo Roamio Pros (6 TB total) / 5 Tivo Minis attached via MOCA


#355 OFFLINE   GregLee

GregLee

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,594 posts
Joined: Dec 28, 2005

Posted 16 July 2014 - 08:25 PM

I don't know what HDMI 2.0 features my HU8550 has.  I doubt that it accepts 60fps 4k video.

 

Correction: The HU8550 does accept 60fps 4k video.  According to the review here, http://hdguru.com/sa...d-4k-tv-review/, "All of the HU8550′s HDMI ports were compatible with video signals up to 2160p at 60Hz – as confirmed with the DVDO AVLab TPG – 4K Test Pattern Generator."


Greg





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: DirecTV, DTV, 4k, UHD

spam firewall