Home cinema - psychological problem

wrote:
On Jul 28, 7:31 am, Mark Carver wrote:

Yes, but remember that archiving is still done on tape based systems [1], the
servers don't hold the entire programme library, only what is to be broadcast
in the coming days.

That seems odd - because if a programme was repeated at some point in
the future, it'd have to be recopied?

No, you only need to ingest the programme once. It then becomes a file, that
can be transferred back and forth between the playout server, and the 'deep'
archive storage ad-infinitum. Think of it like transferring an mp3 file from
your PC, to portable player. If you get bored with the track, you can erase it
from you player, but you'll still have it stored on the PC, without the need
to rip it from the original CD.

I don't think I've ever noticed an ARC artefact on analogue TV. Have you got a
screen shot to illustrate your point ? I've not seen in the 10 years I've
occupied these groups a single mention of such an effect (yours excepted).

What sort of thing are you looking for? In the case of 16:9FHA
converted to 14:9 and 16:9 letterbox, the artefacts would simply be a
loss of sharpness, due to the rescaling process, and an unnatural
tracking of movement, due to the deinterlace-reinterlace process.

Where do you get the idea the image is de/re interlaced ?

ftp://ftp.axon.tv/Brochures/SynapseProductDescriptions/ARC20PD.pdf

AIUI each field is treated in its own right.

You seemed to have missed my original point. Upconverted C4 SD, via the C4 HD
channel looks better than the same output as seen on analogue.

I was merely pointing out the reasons why it looks better - ie. the
shortcomings of the SD broadcast chains, most of which could be
avoided or improved upon if broadcasters cared.

I'm with you on that one. However there are so many opportunities for the
analogue tx chain to suffer degradation, that ARC and server artefacts are the
least of your worries IMHO.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.