ATSC Digital TV Formats (18)

[Jerry Jones]

In my interaction with video professionals, I'm amazed by their lack of understanding about the basics of ATSC digital TV.

Here in Boise, I recently quizzed ten (10) individuals working directly in...

- independent video production

- television news

- digital filmmaking

Not one of these ten individuals could identify the 18 formats of the ATSC digital TV standard in the United States.

These 18 formats are EASY to remember.

There are only THREE (3) 1920 x 1080 formats.

1. 1920 x 1080 @ 24 frames per second PROGRESSIVE

2. 1920 x 1080 @ 30 frames per second PROGRESSIVE

3. 1920 x 1080 @ 30 frames per second INTERLACED

Then there are the THREE (3) 1280 x 720 formats.

1. 1280 x 720 @ 60 frames per second PROGRESSIVE

2. 1280 x 720 @ 30 frames per second PROGRESSIVE

3. 1280 x 720 @ 24 frames per second PROGRESSIVE

These six formats are the ONLY high definition formats currently included in the ATSC digital TV standard in the United States.

The ATSC digital TV standard also includes TWELVE (12) STANDARD DEFINITION formats.

Many of the videographers with whom I talked failed to understand that STANDARD DEFINITION will continue to be an important part of the new digital TV standard.

Many of them thought that standard definition would be scrapped with the old NTSC standard, which is a HUGE mistake.

To remember the TWELVE (12) STANDARD DEFINITION ATSC FORMATS, all you need to remember is that they all revolve around 24, 30, and 60 frames per second rates.

For example, the so-called "EDTV" standard definition formats include NINE (9) variations:

All of the "EDTV" formats are PROGRESSIVE.

THREE of the "EDTV" formats are 16:9.

SIX of the "EDTV" formats are 4:3.

The SIX (6) 4:3 aspect ratio "EDTV" formats only differ in terms of their frame rates and their frame sizes.

There are THREE "EDTV" 4:3 aspect ratio formats with a 704 x 480 frame size and they include:

1. 704 x 480 @ 60 frames per second PROGRESSIVE

2. 704 x 480 @ 30 frames per second PROGRESSIVE

3. 704 x 480 @ 24 frames per second PROGRESSIVE

The THREE "SDTV" formats are all INTERLACED.

So, they're best viewed on INTERLACED TVs, in my opinion.

1. 704 x 480 @ 30 frames per second, 16:9, INTERLACED

2. 704 x 480 @ 30 frames per second, 4:3, INTERLACED

3. 640 x 480 @ 30 frames per second, 4:3, INTERLACED

Now, let's consider something.

When purchasing a TV -- regardless of whether it's standard definition or high defintion -- the viewer should UNDERSTAND these 18 formats very thoroughly, in my opinion.

Why?

Because it is becoming INCREASINGLY CRITICAL to ***match*** your viewing material to the particular TV you intend to buy.

Accordingly, if one is shooting with one of the new SONY-branded HDV camcorders, which support the 1080 INTERLACED HD standard, then one should be better off buying an INTERLACED screen that supports high definition.

On the other hand, if one is shooting with a JVC JY-HD10, which supports the 720 PROGRESSIVE HD standard, then one should be better off buying a PROGRESSIVE screen with a resolution that meets or exceeds the 1280 x 720 frame size.

If one is wanting to view MiniDV tape footage, which supports the 704 (720) x 480 INTERLACED format, then one should know that such footage would display best on an INTERLACED standard definition TV screen.

If one is wanting to view Hollywood DVDs in all their glory, then one should understand that the best picture would likely result when using an "EDTV" monitor, which supports PROGRESSIVE frame formats @ 24, 30, and 60 frames per second!

My point is that it's going to be impossible for the average person to buy ONE screen that will display ALL formats in an OPTIMAL manner.

I've watched standard definition Hollywood DVDs on high definition displays and they often look WORSE on the high definition display than on the standard definition displays.

This can be overcome -- to a certain extent -- through UP-CONVERSION.

But -- still -- it's not ideal.

I also suspect that many OLDER FILMS -- with their grain and age and analog imperfections -- WILL LOOK SIMPLY AWFUL after being transferred to either "HD DVD" or "Blu-ray Disc."

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Gateway offers the following helpful table:

http://tinyurl.com/3jfvl

All 18 of the ATSC digital TV formats are detailed.

Note: THERE IS NO 60 FRAMES PER SECOND 1920 x 1080 FORMAT!!!

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Tjalfe]

http://www.jonesgroup.net[/url]

while not a standard for broadcast TV, is it not supposed to be one of the formats supported by the HD DVD , blue ray players... or am I completely off my rocker for this one?

[Dr Mordrid]

Note: THERE IS NO 60 FRAMES PER SECOND 1920 x 1080 FORMAT!!!

Jerry Jones

Yup....but oversights are their speciality

That said they do have two 60 field formats, which should be OK. It's worked for SD.

Wikipedia's ATSC page;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC

1920x1080 (16:9 High Definition; square pixel aspect ratio)

interlaced

29.97 (59.94 fields/s)
30 (60 fields/s)

progressive

23.976
24
29.97
30

[Jerry Jones]

while not a standard for broadcast TV, is it not supposed to be one of the formats supported by the HD DVD , blue ray players... or am I completely off my rocker for this one?

Good question.

According to this article from TV TECHNOLOGY...

http://tinyurl.com/cyt89

"...there does not currently seem to be any movement toward producing equipment that can record or transmit 1080/30p."

"...much television post production is done in the 1080/24p scanning format, with source material being obtained by the transfer of 24 fps film to video or direct 1080/24p video capture."

"There is a 1920 x 1080 studio/field video camera capable of 4:4:4 RGB output at 1080/60p, but no mention is made of any device that might be used to record or edit the images."

"The data sheets indicate that it is also capable of HD-SDI outputs at 1080/24p and 1080/30p, as well as 720/60p and 1080/30i."

So it would appear that even though there are cameras that can OUTPUT 1080/60p, there's no apparent way -- according to this 2005 article -- to RECORD or EDIT such material!

The article continues:

"Even with the announced coding gains provided by MPEG-4 over MPEG-2, it would seem to be difficult at best to successfully code 1080/60p into even a 7 or 8 MHz European television channel, even using MPEG-4."

"In fact, as you have read in this publication and elsewhere, the European Broadcasting Union is recommending broadcasting HDTV at 720/60p."

"What 1080/60p native signals are available for display on these visually stunning 1080/60p displays?"

"We are told that the PlayStation 3 console will have a 1080p output with games released on Blu-ray discs."

"We are also told that there are 1080p movie trailers available on the Internet."

"But wait! These started life as 24fps film, so are they really 60fps?"

"In sum, the resolution capabilities of advanced displays have caught up to the resolution of the 1920 x 1080/60p HD scanning format, but it will be a while before there is much native 1080/60p material available for viewing."

The article was written by ABC-TV's Randy Hoffner.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[paulw]

Hi Jerry,

What sort of programming would use 60 Frames per sec??

[Jerry Jones]

Hi Jerry,

What sort of programming would use 60 Frames per sec??

Sports.

The 60 frames per second is perfect for fast action scenes.

This is why 720/60p has been adopted by ABC and ESPN.

The 60 PROGRESSIVE frames per second capture the movement well.

Of course, 720/60p features a 1280 x 720 frame size.

It would be nice if one could instead use 1080/60p.

However, the technical hurdles mentioned earlier make that difficult at this point in history.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Fluff]

I would be happy with just 720/(x)p as the standard for HD broadcasting. All this complicated and expensive /scaling and deinterlacing would be a thing of the past for consumers.

Why the hell do HD ready panels have a screen res of 1366x768? when the content is 1280x720?

I hope that they havent gone to 1920x1080i just for the reason of selling more exp equipment as you could apply different deinterlacing/scaling algorithms to differentiate products



Best regards

Peter

[Jon P. Inghram]

As it is now, the extra 30 fps for 1280x720 @ 60p more than makes up for the difference in resolution, IMHO (that and my monitor tops out at 1280x1024. )

Just in case anyone hasn't seen these, there are some 720p shuttle videos at: ftp://ftp.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/pub/iHDTV/

You'll have to follow the instructions in the readme file to access the mpeg folder, I assume they put it that way to keep bots or whatever from just blindly downloading the huge files and eating bandwidth. With Firefox or IE you enter the user and password like this:

ftp://[i]username:password[/i]@ftp.somewhere.com/blah

There's a 1080p one here: ftp://ftp.heise.de/pub/ct/spezial/shuttle.mpg

[mmp121]

All this talk of 1080p has me confused. When companies say that their TV's can display 1080p, i.e. Sharp, Sony, HP etc., do they mean 1080@30FPS progressive, or 1080@60FPS progressive.

I ask because Sony is saying Blu-Ray will output at 1080P, but never says if its 30FPS progressive, or 60FPS progressive. Even CNET says that current gen HDTV's can't accept 1080P inputs. Do they mean 1080@60FPS progressive or 1080@30FPS progressive as an input?

Why don't companies define clearly what their TV's can or can't accept in terms of input resolution?