[opendtv] Re: Learning From the Veterans - local news in HD

  • From: Mark Schubin <tvmark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 18:58:01 -0400

On 4/27/2010 6:14 PM, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:

Mark Schubin wrote:


Imagine watching HD football with the common sides approach. You
get nice closeups of the players, don't you? You don't get the
wider view of the stadium, that you'd expect compared with your
old analog set.

Again, you are confusing resolution with aspect ratio. Suppose I
have a 16:9 standard-definition TV and a 4:3 standard-definition
TV, both 20 inches wide. I can have close-ups or wide shots on
either. Why would a wide shot on the 16:9 TV be wider than a wide
shot on the 4:3 TV when both screens are 20 inches wide and have
the same resolution?

Because they don't have the same resolution in the real world.
16:9 penetration is much greater in Europe than in the U.S. because Europeans own standard-definition 16:9 TVs. Here in the U.S. there are plenty of small 16:9 TVs, some with low resolution and others with higher screen resolutions effectively eliminated by long viewing distances, optical impairments, and even encoder restrictions. 



Your hypothetical case is not the case people encounter when they buy their 
wide screen sets. People go from smallish fuzzy 4:3 analog CRTs to much larger 
16:9 LCDs. Restricting the horizontal content to what was okay for the old 
analog set will be seriously suboptimal for the new set.
Tell that to the cable operators who continue to make money on channels that they transmit at less than even 704-pixel resolution. 



I fully understand the difference between aspect ratio and resolution. I'm 
saying that WITH the wide aspect ratio ALSO came the higher resolution, in the 
real world.

But it didn't  RCA's first U.S. 16:9 TV predated digital or HDTV.



  So that separating the two effects always sounds like the whole story is not 
being told. IOW, along with the wide screen also came the possibility of 
cramming more image content in that width, which the common sides approach 
throws out the window.

I take your point of the wide screen hand-held appliances. I've long been of 
the view that the transmissions to these devices need to be tailored for them, 
not be identical to what is intended for large, wide screen HDTVs.

Also, while I agree that wide screen movies shot on 35mm film do not have more 
resolution than the previous 35mm movies had, that would not be the case for 
either 65mm (like Ben Hur, IIRC) nor any of the Cinerama movies, right?
Let's see... There were a total of seven true Cinerama movies made, of which the last was, I think in 1963. Then there were 11 70-mm Cinerama movies, of which the last was in maybe 1969. As for 65 mm, you are correct about Ben Hur (1959).
In the last 10 years, exclusive of IMAX or effects shots, has there been any film released that was shot in 65 mm? 



  Those could indeed show wider panoramas with more image detail. Seems to me 
that 35mm anamorphic was used to fill the front wall of theaters more 
effectively, but was not higher resolution (unless they used slower, finer 
grain film, I suppose).
And, based on 65 mm dying out and 35 mm continuing, which better reflects the economic reality?
In my professional career, I have worked on many hundreds of HDTV productions. The first, in 1989, used HDTV as it was theoretically intended. The show had four HD cameras, feeding an HD truck, feeding satellites that eventually fed the small number of HDTVs then in Japan. Separately, many more standard-definition cameras fed a standard-definition truck, which fed many countries (including Japan). The HD director made the best-possible HD show, and the SD director made the best-possible SD show. Life was good.
Somewhat later, I worked on another HD show, not live, in which the director shot the best HD show. Unfortunately, there was no separate SD show. In editing, the producers struggled (unsuccessfully, I think) to make something that would work on SD sets.
The era of dual SD/HD shooting is over, and, like it or not, SD-style won. On today's live HD event shoots there are many cameras (not just four) and plenty of close-ups. And the video often feeds countries that don't yet have any HD TV sets. 

And now I will quit so I can work on another of those HD productions.

TTFN,
Mark



----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org 
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2010