|
I think u mean standard def digital, not analog. analog is the channels your 20 year old tv can get plugged directly into the cable. I don't think many providers have much more than 60 analog channels. each of those channels is gigantic and static so they block off a huge amount of bandwidth on the coax. by switching everyone to digital they free up that space for switched digital.
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:12 |
|
|
ah, yeah, i meant digital sd, nevermind
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:I think u mean standard def digital, not analog. analog is the channels your 20 year old tv can get plugged directly into the cable. I don't think many providers have much more than 60 analog channels. each of those channels is gigantic and static so they block off a huge amount of bandwidth on the coax. by switching everyone to digital they free up that space for switched digital. yeah pretty much. one standard analog cable channel's space could provide 2 or 3 high quality 720p or 1080i digital channels, or up to 8 SD resolution digital channels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
is there still analog cable in canada? because ota is 100% digital now i think
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
theres probably lots. ota is totally separate and way way way way easier to switch from analog to digital cause you only need to do it at a few source broadcasters and let the consumers deal w/ switching their own gear. whereas w/ cable cos they are responsible for switching each individual customer from analog to digital. this is almost entirely about getting into old people's houses to install an adapter between the tv and the cable. its quite a struggle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:is there still analog cable in canada? because ota is 100% digital now i think yes. lots of cable systems simply haven't carried out the conversions
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
eventually cable cos will get to a point where they have a handful of holdouts who wont let them convert and the cable cos will just drop them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
yeah cell companies did the same thing. my old roomate got an offer from ATT or us cellular or whoever offering him their most baller (at the time) phone for free just so they could get his 10 year old analog phone off the network. his options were take the baller phone, take any other phone he wanted, or be dropped.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:yeah cell companies did the same thing. my old roomate got an offer from ATT or us cellular or whoever offering him their most baller (at the time) phone for free just so they could get his 10 year old analog phone off the network. his options were take the baller phone, take any other phone he wanted, or be dropped. was he literally old, in this case?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
no just one of those technophobes who hated using a cell phone for anything but phone calls and his laughably huge old nokia was "good enough", he was like early 20s at the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:eventually cable cos will get to a point where they have a handful of holdouts who wont let them convert and the cable cos will just drop them. yeah thats what they did here. except instead of drop people they issued the absolute most basic digital cable box you can imagine for free to anyone with an analog only subscription and told them they could have a free install job from comcast, install the free device themselves, or just not ever watch cable again. the cable box is like the size of an apple tv 3 and all it has on the remote is power, change channel and volume
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
they give those to the ones that let them in to install them. theres a whole other category of olds who refuse to let them change anything. my grandma has one of those little boxes which is for the best cause she really wouldn't understand how a digital box works. its actually pretty slick, imo, cause she really cant tell that its there
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:they give those to the ones that let them in to install them. theres a whole other category of olds who refuse to let them change anything. it turns out that when you inform them that "no really, you aren't getting anymore of your cable if you don't let us install this, because the signal is shutting off on may 1st" they change their minds p quick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
When they announced ATSC standards for OTA broadcasts I was like "really? thats it?" in 2013 it's the highest quality tv source you can get now in the home.  (((((
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:-Every person over 50 ever every person ever i have to explain to people toat 720p and 1080p are just resolutions and that just because the number is bigger doesn't mean the video is magically better
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
pagancow posted:When they announced ATSC standards for OTA broadcasts I was like "really? thats it?" Depends on the market-- here we negotiated a full QAM channel for our cable carriage, so OTA we have a 720p @ ~9 mbit plus 4 SD subs, but over cable we ship basically unmolested 1080i at close to 16. Some other locals did the same so OTA looks noticeably worse than what cox delivers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
pagancow posted:
that's not a big deal, gifs have independent frame delays already. speaking of video codecs that suck: webp, the image format that is based on webm, has animation support. at least there are tools that let you construct webp animations, but i don't know if any viewers support animated webp. apparently animated webp frame delays are expressed in ms instead of 1/100 of seconds, so you will be able to get closer to traditional frame rates than with gif.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 19:21
|
|
|
pagancow posted:When they announced ATSC standards for OTA broadcasts I was like "really? thats it?" the ATSC standards are 18 years old
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
it's weird here in aus cable is a premium tier service and just about everybody else watches poo poo OTA for free
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
ahmeni posted:it's weird here in aus cable is a premium tier service and just about everybody else watches poo poo OTA for free thats pretty much how it is in every country that had like only 2 channels up until the late 80s. like in the us and canada cable systems started to get subscription over tv services by the mid 70s, and later satellite did too. but in australia there wasn't any regular broadcast tv at all until 1956 and they didn't get more than 5 channels nationwide til the 90s iirc
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 20:36
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:thats pretty much how it is in every country that had like only 2 channels up until the late 80s. surprised they even had 5 channels what with all the thunderdomes and gas wars everywhere
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Are there really cable networks in first world countries which aren't on DOCSIS 3.0? Here modems were rolled out in 2008 starting at 100Mb/s, 200Mb/s in 2011, now its up to 350Mb/s, alongside a shitload of SD digital channels and a bunch of HD ones.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
Some guys are working on a vector based video codec instead of a pixel based one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_f1ukhy2ZE http://www.rawcomms.net/index.php?%2Ftopic%2F5-vector-based-video-and-death-of-the-pixel-within-5-years#.UTUGlDDFTTr quote:Digital pictures are built from a rectangular grid of coloured cells, or pixels. The smaller and closer the pixels are together, the better the quality of the image. Pixel-based movies need huge amounts of data and have to be compressed, losing quality. They are also difficult and time consuming to process. ~my computer programme~
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
It's gonna easily be like 20 years before cable companies switch to h.264.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
JumpinJackFlash posted:It's gonna easily be like 20 years before cable companies switch to h.264. yeah and like 50 before the telegraph companies switch to fiber optics
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 22:26
|
|
|
Bensa posted:Are there really cable networks in first world countries which aren't on DOCSIS 3.0? Here modems were rolled out in 2008 starting at 100Mb/s, 200Mb/s in 2011, now its up to 350Mb/s, alongside a shitload of SD digital channels and a bunch of HD ones. what tiny monoculture do you live in?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
Our OTA is DVB-T, the raw bit rate is like 6-8 Mbps 720p H.264 with AAC audio at 50p. Turns out it looks pretty good when it's not displayed on a POS TV with ~*post processing*~ that seems to consist of saturation to 150%, lovely noise reduction filter that blurs everything to poo poo followed by a sharpening filter to make up for the lovely noise reduction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
50p? grossss
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
IIRC they said they do internal processing at 720i50 and then deinterlace for output, it looks really good though, literally never seen a macroblock on digital TV. Also works well for recording and watching on a PC with a USB dongle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 22:47
|
|
|
everything should be at least 60 imo
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:everything should be at least 60 imo I seriously doubt a normal person can tell the difference between a 50 Hz and a 60 Hz signal on an LCD.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
MY SPECIAL EYES
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
like I know 50 Hz CRTs are loving poo poo but I have never heard anyone say 50p is not enough for silky smooth video
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
longview posted:I seriously doubt a normal person can tell the difference between a 50 Hz and a 60 Hz signal on an LCD. more is better
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:MY SPECIAL EYES
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 23:37
|
|
|
longview posted:like I know 50 Hz CRTs are loving poo poo but I have never heard anyone say 50p is not enough for silky smooth video i mean 48 is good enough for peter jackson
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 00:34
|
|
|
60P is best becuase 24P pulldown in it is p hard to see 50P sucks becuase you cant do 24P, you have to speed it up and do 25P.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 01:29
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:MY SPECIAL EYES
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
can I be the first to say that framerates are gay? also can't WE just make a standard for looping h264 with a header that defines framerates and 1 video stream alone and that's all yos264
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 01:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:12 |
|
|
pagancow posted:60P is best becuase 24P pulldown in it is p hard to see yeah 3:2 has problems and all but its better than having hosed up pitch and such
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 01:37
|
|