Home cinema - Just how expensive is it to compress HD

HomeCinemaBanter (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/index.php)

- High definition TV (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - Just how expensive is it to compress HD (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/showthread.php?t=54543)

Just how expensive is it to compress HD

Just how expensive is it to compress HD? I'm not asking for some dollar
figure becuase clearly there will be a range of prices. Compression for
professional or broadcast purposes is going to be more expensive because
it needs to be better quality (reliable, more effective, etc). But my
interest here is the consumer and high-end consumer markets.

We do see HD camcorders on the market. They have to be compressing the
video because the media capacity would be quickly exceeded both in terms
of capacity as well as bit rates. The focus of the question would be
more on what portion of the cost of the camera would be involved in the
compression.

Other than the above, apparently somewhere between few and zero cameras
for the consumer markets exist which are HD capable, whether they include
the compression or not. Such cameras are SD right now, and may well stay
that way for quite a while. As HD becomes what everyone expects over the
coming years (or maybe, if ...), even other kinds of cameras such as those
used as baby monitors, home security, and hobby purposes like astronomy,
will end up going to HD (maybe not all of them, but at least some of them).

The big question is will they compress the video inside the camera?

Maybe compression will become dirt cheap in the future such that one tiny
inexpensive chip can compress 1080p60 for no more than maybe $10 for the
chip, giving us inexpensive $30 cameras.

Suppose such a camera comes on the market today, and you happen to have
some interest in what it was for. Before you see the technical specs on
it, what might your expectations be? Would you expect it to connect to
your TV via HDMI or DVI? Would you expect it to have analog output (which
for HD would certainly mean component)? If you expect it to have compressed
output, would you expected it to be connectable directly to the TV at all
(if so, by which means)? Or would expect to have to intervene between the
camera and TV with a computer (that could take the compressed bit stream in
through ethernet, USB, or Firewire).

How would you expect to connect today's HD camcorders directly to your TV?

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

Just how expensive is it to compress HD

wrote:
Just how expensive is it to compress HD? I'm not asking for some
dollar
figure becuase clearly there will be a range of prices.
Compression for
professional or broadcast purposes is going to be more expensive
because
it needs to be better quality (reliable, more effective, etc). But
my
interest here is the consumer and high-end consumer markets.

We do see HD camcorders on the market. They have to be compressing
the
video because the media capacity would be quickly exceeded both in
terms
of capacity as well as bit rates. The focus of the question would
be
more on what portion of the cost of the camera would be involved in
the
compression.

Other than the above, apparently somewhere between few and zero
cameras
for the consumer markets exist which are HD capable, whether they
include
the compression or not. Such cameras are SD right now, and may
well stay
that way for quite a while. As HD becomes what everyone expects
over the
coming years (or maybe, if ...), even other kinds of cameras such
as those
used as baby monitors, home security, and hobby purposes like
astronomy,
will end up going to HD (maybe not all of them, but at least some
of them).

The big question is will they compress the video inside the camera?

Maybe compression will become dirt cheap in the future such that
one tiny
inexpensive chip can compress 1080p60 for no more than maybe $10
for the
chip, giving us inexpensive $30 cameras.

Suppose such a camera comes on the market today, and you happen to
have
some interest in what it was for. Before you see the technical
specs on
it, what might your expectations be? Would you expect it to
connect to
your TV via HDMI or DVI? Would you expect it to have analog output
(which
for HD would certainly mean component)? If you expect it to have
compressed
output, would you expected it to be connectable directly to the TV
at all
(if so, by which means)? Or would expect to have to intervene
between the
camera and TV with a computer (that could take the compressed bit
stream in
through ethernet, USB, or Firewire).

How would you expect to connect today's HD camcorders directly to
your TV?

--

|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the
address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net /
|

|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

You seem to not comprehend the staggering data rate in HD video. Its
150 Mega samples / SECOND. I say samples because they are 10 bits/
sample but your computer works in 8 bit bytes so that is 187,500,000
bytes every second. There isn't a hard drive built (yet) that can deal
with it. Instead you have expensive RAIDs (I can't afford the UPS to
protect the RAID) that can deal with it or you use $100,000 tape
machines. The compression is done in the video source because there is
no point in moving it around in raw form for home use. The silicon to
compress it should be about the complexity to un-compress it -
approximately a video card which we all can afford.

These are not a camcorders but it can record clips of 30fps clips in
720p (memory card limited).

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQueri...q-locale=en_US

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQueri...q-locale=en_US

GG

Just how expensive is it to compress HD

G-squared wrote:
wrote:
Just how expensive is it to compress HD?

Blather snippage has happened

|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the
address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net /
|

|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

You seem to not comprehend the staggering data rate in HD video.

Or much of anything else, it seems.

Matthew

--
"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of
people". Alexander Bullock ("My Man Godfrey" 1936):

Just how expensive is it to compress HD

In article ,
"Matthew L. Martin" wrote:

You seem to not comprehend the staggering data rate in HD video.

Or much of anything else, it seems.

Matthew

Matthew, just call Phil on the phone and offer him the blow job, already.

You girls need to take this elsewhere.

Just how expensive is it to compress HD

Ray Goldenberg wrote:
In article ,
"Matthew L. Martin" wrote:

You seem to not comprehend the staggering data rate in HD video.
Or much of anything else, it seems.

Matthew

Matthew, just call Phil on the phone and offer him the blow job, already.

You girls need to take this elsewhere.

If you can't figure out how to ignore me, that's your problem.

BTW, great way to reveal your latent homosexuality. It is latent, isn't it?

Matthew

--
"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of
people". Alexander Bullock ("My Man Godfrey" 1936):

Just how expensive is it to compress HD

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 08:50:42 -0800 G-squared wrote:

| You seem to not comprehend the staggering data rate in HD video. Its
| 150 Mega samples / SECOND. I say samples because they are 10 bits/
| sample but your computer works in 8 bit bytes so that is 187,500,000
| bytes every second. There isn't a hard drive built (yet) that can deal
| with it. Instead you have expensive RAIDs (I can't afford the UPS to
| protect the RAID) that can deal with it or you use $100,000 tape
| machines. The compression is done in the video source because there is
| no point in moving it around in raw form for home use. The silicon to
| compress it should be about the complexity to un-compress it -
| approximately a video card which we all can afford.

I comprehend it perfectly. I also comprehend that it is not that difficult
to transfer such data rates. It's already done over things like DVI and
HDMI. Were you aware that these are UNcompressed?

So now, do you think that a device to compress HD is too expensive, due to
the high data rate, to exist?

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

Just how expensive is it to compress HD

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 12:31:45 -0500 Ray Goldenberg wrote:
| In article ,
| "Matthew L. Martin" wrote:
|
| You seem to not comprehend the staggering data rate in HD video.
|
| Or much of anything else, it seems.
|
| Matthew
|
| Matthew, just call Phil on the phone and offer him the blow job, already.
|
| You girls need to take this elsewhere.

Please look very carefully at the pattern. Matthew L. Martin always makes
the personal attacks. I have long ago stopped initationg any attacks back
at him. As soon as HE stops (since he always starts it), it ends. Period.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|