What is HD Lite?

7282 Views 57 Replies 22 Participants Last post by HIPAR, Jan 13, 2007

dbconsultant

Discussion Starter · Nov 21, 2006

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?

Status: Not open for further replies.

21 - 40 of 58 Posts

James Long

· #21 · Nov 24, 2006

DP1 said:
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

· #22 · Nov 24, 2006

Overcompressed HD, or cheaply-made HD.

DP1

· #23 · Nov 25, 2006

James Long said:
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.

See less See more

James Long

· #24 · Nov 25, 2006

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

· #25 · Nov 25, 2006

James Long said:
...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....

DP1

· #26 · Nov 25, 2006

James Long said:
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".

Oh I totally acknowledge that those formats are in place for DBS so like you said.. it's a choice they're making to change the incoming resolution to something else.

To me it's not much different than ordering a mixed drink at a club. I can order a Rum and Coke and some bartenders would put a lil extra Rum in it, some would put a textbook amount in it and some might skimp a tad bit. Either way it's still a Rum and Coke. Some patrons would whine about it.. some would just belt it down and say mmmm gimme another!

And I dont think using the term "HD Lite" is a negative connotation. Again no different than "Bud Light". It's still beer either way... it just has a little less of "something" and thats how it's differentiated.

The only difference is in that case Budweiser admits it through labelling.

James Long

· #27 · Nov 25, 2006

William said:
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....

They are not part of the 18 approved formats for OTA, but satellite isn't OTA. They are compression formats -- listed as HD by the ATSC for DBS.

William

· #28 · Nov 25, 2006

James Long said:
They are not part of the 18 approved formats for OTA, but satellite isn't OTA. They are compression formats -- listed as HD by the ATSC for DBS.

I understand they aren't for OTA but where does the ATSC say (and listed) that they are "official" ATSC DBS HD formats?

P Smith

· #29 · Nov 25, 2006

The other problem is TV manufacturers FOLLOW ATSC standard (excluding EDTV sets), but the sat prividers doesn't, giving watering down resolution and bandwitdh

.

dave1234

· #30 · Nov 26, 2006

William said:
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....

Table 7.3 of the following ATSC standard lists 1440X1080i as a valid format. One could still argue(and I'm sure many will) whether this is HD or not...

http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_81.pdf

James Long

· #31 · Nov 26, 2006

P Smith said:
The other problem is TV manufacturers FOLLOW ATSC standard (excluding EDTV sets), but the sat prividers doesn't, giving watering down resolution and bandwitdh .

Yet every E* HD receiver (D* ones too) provide ATSC standard HDTV on their HD outputs. The HD Lite crowd is arguing over the form of compression chosen.

whatchel1

· #32 · Nov 26, 2006

It is nice to see someone else post the ATSC DBS standards other than myself. Was beginning to think no one else could read a white paper.

James Long

· #33 · Nov 26, 2006

I've posted them enough times, so I agree with whatchel1!

P Smith

· #34 · Nov 26, 2006

dave1234 said:
Table 7.3 of the following ATSC standard lists 1440X1080i as a valid format. One could still argue(and I'm sure many will) whether this is HD or not...

http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_81.pdf

If you still remember calc of 4th grade

, you can find by yourself - it does not fit in HD definition because of weird ratio ie NOT 16:9. Same concern raise when you see 1280x1080 format.
Remember - all HD formats have mandatory ratio 16:9 !

William

· #35 · Nov 26, 2006

P Smith said:
If you still remember calc of 4th grade , you can find by yourself - it does not fit in HD definition because of weird ratio ie NOT 16:9. Same concern raise when you see 1280x1080 format.
Remember - all HD formats have mandatory ratio 16:9 !

Normally that would be true but while 1920 (x 1080) uses 1:1 (square) pixels 1280 uses 1:1.5 ratio pixels and 1440 uses 1:1.33 ratio pixels to make a faux 1.78 (16x9) picture. Also 1280 throws away 691,200 pixels and 1440 throws away 518,400 pixels. That's a lot of lost info that can't be regained by up-scaling. I was surprised to see that the ATSC approved the non square pixel approach.

Also that leads to the question: Which one does E* uses on MPEG 4 channels?

DP1

· #36 · Nov 26, 2006

William said:
Also that leads to the question: Which one does E* uses on MPEG 4 channels?

I believe the 1920x1080 MPEG 4 channels like the LiL CBS and NBC's for example they convert to 1440x1080. It's just the Vooms that are 1280x1080.

At least according to the chart here:

http://www.satelliteguys.us/bfg/dish-hd.htm

tnsprin

· #37 · Nov 26, 2006

DP1 said:
I believe the 1920x1080 MPEG 4 channels like the LiL CBS and NBC's for example they convert to 1440x1080. It's just the Vooms that are 1280x1080.

At least according to the chart here:

http://www.satelliteguys.us/bfg/dish-hd.htm

1280x1080 is in the atsc standard as well (as a constraint). Not that I like it but it is HD.

P Smith

· #38 · Nov 27, 2006

For TV sets (EDTV) with non-square pixels.

Jim5506

· #39 · Nov 27, 2006

Question: When is a standard not a standard?

Answer: When it does not fit my idea of what the standard should be.

DP1

· #40 · Nov 27, 2006

Jim5506 said:
Question: When is a standard not a standard?

Answer: When it does not fit my idea of what the standard should be.

Sure, Jim. But personally I still dont see this issue as having anything to do with standards anyway.

Yeah we've established it's well within written "standards" for a provider to take an incoming 1920x1080 signal and send it out as 1440x1080.

But whats wrong with simply referring to it as HD-Lite if and when the provider(s) choose to do that?

For the sake of conversation if the topic comes up what else would people rather it be called.. "resolution reduction" or something?

21 - 40 of 58 Posts

Status: Not open for further replies.