BBC HD resolutions

I am not sure if BBC HD broadcasts were always 1920*1080 or they vary? Only
last night I was watching Rick Stein and 'Christmas in Wales' and was
suprised to see all recordings a
Video: MPEG4 Video (H264) 1440x1080 25.00fps [Video]
Audio: Dolby AC3 48000Hz stereo [Audio]
Even the links between programs were 1440x1080
I assume that lower res = less bandwidth needed?
Would hate to think they might sacrifice resolution to fit their quart into
a pint-pot.

GTS wrote:
I am not sure if BBC HD broadcasts were always 1920*1080 or they vary? Only
last night I was watching Rick Stein and 'Christmas in Wales' and was
suprised to see all recordings a
Video: MPEG4 Video (H264) 1440x1080 25.00fps [Video]
Audio: Dolby AC3 48000Hz stereo [Audio]
Even the links between programs were 1440x1080
I assume that lower res = less bandwidth needed?
Would hate to think they might sacrifice resolution to fit their quart into
a pint-pot.


The BBC HD channel on Astra 28E has always been at only 1440 x 1080.

Andy Quested explains why he-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/12/the_hitchhikers_guide_to_encod_2.html

He points out the HD tape formats used by the Beeb (Sony HD-CAM and
Panasonic DVCPROHD) only record at 1440 (which is true).

Of course to do things properly they require VTRs, that record at 1920 x
1080. Like for instance:-

http://www.sony.co.uk/res/attachment...7030651806.pdf

However, what he doesn't mention is the HD studio cameras used at TV
Centre, (Sony HDC-1500s) are 1920 x 1080, so there's no reason why live
programming cannot be transmitted at that res ?

http://www.sony.co.uk/biz/view/ShowProduct.action?product=HDC-1500&site=biz_en_GB&pageType=TechnicalSpecs&imageT ype=Main&category=HDseries

GTS wrote:
I am not sure if BBC HD broadcasts were always 1920*1080 or they vary? Only
last night I was watching Rick Stein and 'Christmas in Wales' and was
suprised to see all recordings a
Video: MPEG4 Video (H264) 1440x1080 25.00fps [Video]
Audio: Dolby AC3 48000Hz stereo [Audio]
Even the links between programs were 1440x1080
I assume that lower res = less bandwidth needed?
Would hate to think they might sacrifice resolution to fit their quart into
a pint-pot.



I believe other Euro nations (and possibly the US) get the full 1920 x
1080 decent bitrate signal.

Here in the UK us plebs who actually pay for the BBC are restricted to
1440 x 1080 minimum bitrate.
Hardly worth calling it HD - it's more of an 'enhanced SD'.

G

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:04:11 +0000, Bigguy wrote:

GTS wrote:
I am not sure if BBC HD broadcasts were always 1920*1080 or they vary? Only
last night I was watching Rick Stein and 'Christmas in Wales' and was
suprised to see all recordings a
Video: MPEG4 Video (H264) 1440x1080 25.00fps [Video]
Audio: Dolby AC3 48000Hz stereo [Audio]
Even the links between programs were 1440x1080
I assume that lower res = less bandwidth needed?
Would hate to think they might sacrifice resolution to fit their quart into
a pint-pot.



I believe other Euro nations (and possibly the US) get the full 1920 x
1080 decent bitrate signal.

Here in the UK us plebs who actually pay for the BBC are restricted to
1440 x 1080 minimum bitrate.
Hardly worth calling it HD - it's more of an 'enhanced SD'.

Yes. Except, except... using the same bitrate/bandwidth for SD might
give better results using it for HD.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:36:25 +0000, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

give better results using it for HD.

or "give better results than using it for HD."

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Peter Duncanson wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:04:11 +0000, Bigguy wrote:

GTS wrote:
I am not sure if BBC HD broadcasts were always 1920*1080 or they vary? Only
last night I was watching Rick Stein and 'Christmas in Wales' and was
suprised to see all recordings a
Video: MPEG4 Video (H264) 1440x1080 25.00fps [Video]
Audio: Dolby AC3 48000Hz stereo [Audio]
Even the links between programs were 1440x1080
I assume that lower res = less bandwidth needed?
Would hate to think they might sacrifice resolution to fit their quart into
a pint-pot.


I believe other Euro nations (and possibly the US) get the full 1920 x
1080 decent bitrate signal.

Here in the UK us plebs who actually pay for the BBC are restricted to
1440 x 1080 minimum bitrate.
Hardly worth calling it HD - it's more of an 'enhanced SD'.

Yes. Except, except... using the same bitrate/bandwidth for SD might
give better results using it for HD.

Why don't they just go 1280 x 720p at a decent bitrate?
It would generally look far better than the current mangled 'HD'
offerings...
Could use same/less bandwidth too.

I'm watching some 720 rips from the US that look superb - no visible
blocking/artifacts at all.

G

In article , Bigguy
scribeth thus
GTS wrote:
I am not sure if BBC HD broadcasts were always 1920*1080 or they vary? Only
last night I was watching Rick Stein and 'Christmas in Wales' and was
suprised to see all recordings a
Video: MPEG4 Video (H264) 1440x1080 25.00fps [Video]
Audio: Dolby AC3 48000Hz stereo [Audio]
Even the links between programs were 1440x1080
I assume that lower res = less bandwidth needed?
Would hate to think they might sacrifice resolution to fit their quart into
a pint-pot.



I believe other Euro nations (and possibly the US) get the full 1920 x
1080 decent bitrate signal.

Here in the UK us plebs who actually pay for the BBC are restricted to
1440 x 1080 minimum bitrate.
Hardly worth calling it HD - it's more of an 'enhanced SD'.

G


Yes that British Bull**** Corp Danielle Nagler was on again today, Radio
4 you and yours spouting absolute crap for all she was worth re
"artistic effects" and that not everyone might like those clean sharp
pictures.

Absolute disgrace(...
--
Tony Sayer

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:56:17 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

Yes that British Bull**** Corp Danielle Nagler was on again today, Radio
4 you and yours spouting absolute crap for all she was worth re
"artistic effects" and that not everyone might like those clean sharp
pictures.

I'm already taking pills for high blood pressure. Please don't add to my
woes.

--
Alan White
Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent.
Twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow, overlooking Lochs Long and Goil in Argyll, Scotland.
Webcam and weather:- http://windycroft.gt-britain.co.uk/weather

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:56:17 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

Yes that British Bull**** Corp Danielle Nagler was on again today, Radio
4 you and yours spouting absolute crap for all she was worth re
"artistic effects" and that not everyone might like those clean sharp
pictures.


1. People who do not like clean sharp pictures could be introduced to
the Sharpness adjustment in their TV menus.

2. From the artistic point of view there is no point in "artistically
fuzzying" pictures if such pictures are almost indistinguishable from
normal pictures. The artistry relies on having a contrast between sharp
scenes and fuzzy scenes.

Absolute disgrace(...

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

In article , tony sayer
writes

Yes that British Bull**** Corp Danielle Nagler was on again today, Radio
4 you and yours spouting absolute crap for all she was worth re
"artistic effects" and that not everyone might like those clean sharp
pictures.

Can't they just watch the less than SD blocky DVB-T version
if they don't like the detail that HD on Freesat enables?
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)