Question:
To a screen not so near to you
Europe to get first taste of high definition broadcasting in June=
Following is a press release from Astra that brings hope to us all. You know, this high-def broadcasting thing just might happen here after all…
SES ASTRA, an SES GLOBAL company and Alfacam, the Belgian high-definition TV facilities company, are pleased to announce their cooperation in bringing high-definition television - "HDTV" - to selected electronic cinemas (e-cinemas) in Denmark and Norway.
Alfacam's digital HDTV trucks will uplink "HD" signals of the European Championship qualifying match Denmark versus Norway on June 7th, 2003, via the ASTRA 3A satellite at 23.5° East. The HD transmissions will then be received by a number of targeted e-cinemas in Kopenhagen (DK) and Bergen (N) where the match will be displayed on 12 meter cinema screens using an HD projector.
Comments Ferdinand Kayser, President and CEO of SES ASTRA: "While HDTV is already a reality in countries like the US or Japan, where all major programmers offer HDTV channels and more than 7 million HDTV sets have already been sold, there is growing evidence that High Definition Television will become available in Europe as well in the coming years. As satellites are ideally suited to manage the higher bandwidth requirements of HDTV transmissions, SES ASTRA intends to kick start European HDTV distribution with special events like the Denmark-Norway soccer game and proposes to create an "HDTV for Europe" Forum bringing together all the players in the television and hardware industry to promote HDTV, to drive standardization and to prepare for a coordinated and market driven introduction of HDTV in Europe."
Gabriel Fehervari, General Manager of Alfacam, adds: "The live HD transmission on June 7th to several European e-cinemas is the first official test case for Euro1080, the first European HDTV channel that goes on air on January 1st 2004. This new channel will broadcast exclusively in high definition, and offer high-quality programs on music, sports, shows, cultural events, and documentaries. It actually consists of two channels: the Main Channel serving European households, and the Event Channel, providing special event programs, such as the football match in Copenhagen, to e-cinemas. This formula is proving to be a real success: the demand for tickets in the e-cinemas is tenfold of what we have available. We are convinced that Europe is ready for HDTV!"
Good job I didnt buy myself a projector yet :)
http://www.homecinemachoice.com/news/frame.html?http://www.homecinemachoice.com/cgi-bin/displaynews.php?id=4500
America is so far ahead of us in HDTV it's a joke... :oh-hum:
But at what price, in the states most wide screen TVs are HDTV and cost an absolute fortune. Most yanks on visits here comment on the supposed low prices of wide screen TVs before they realise that they are normal TVs but in wide screen.
Does this mean I shouldn't buy that 42" Rp tv I've been thinking about treating myself to?
Originally posted by TheFatBoy
America is so far ahead of us in HDTV it's a joke... :oh-hum:
I was under the impression that it was a fairly stagnant market as far as HDTV was concerned. Most American are more concerned with buying the biggest TV that money can buy.
Was wondering about this whilst watching baseball the other night - they broadcast some games in the States in HD.
Originally posted by IAmATeaf
I was under the impression that it was a fairly stagnant market as far as HDTV was concerned. Most American are more concerned with buying the biggest TV that money can buy. Which could still be HD compatible AFAIK.
Originally posted by IAmATeaf
I was under the impression that it was a fairly stagnant market as far as HDTV was concerned. Most American are more concerned with buying the biggest TV that money can buy. True. Hardly saw any widescreen sets in a US electronics store I went to in LA. But there seemed to be an infinite number of 60"+ 4:3 TVs!!
So I guess we have to buy a new decoder box for this.
Glad to see it seems to be 1080i transmissions (assumed from the name Euro1080). I will buy IF and only IF they have up to date films broadcast in HD with a 5.1 dolby stream as a minimum.
What's this mean for dvds?
....and freeview?
Originally posted by Dr Hfuhruhurr
What's this mean for dvds?
AFIK DVD's cant cope with the bitrate required for HDTV rez.
Originally posted by RobDickinson
AFIK DVD's cant cope with the bitrate required for HDTV rez. But HDtvs are backwards compatible?
Originally posted by Jowser
So I guess we have to buy a new decoder box for this.
I thought it was a new TV? Being HDTV, surely it would be pointless to take a higher definition picture, stick it through a box to reduce the resolution back to that of normal TV for viewing on a standard TV?
And in that case, wouldn't the TVs come with decoders capable of decoding it in the first place?
Ian
Originally posted by IAmATeaf
I was under the impression that it was a fairly stagnant market as far as HDTV was concerned. Most American are more concerned with buying the biggest TV that money can buy.
HDTV is a big thing now here, almost all large screen projection TV's are HDTV monitors and you can get HDTV cable here for about $5 per month more. I have a HDTV unit and its superb.
Oh and this is better in the Hardware forum :)
Moving...
uh, this is news, I wasnt talking about hardware, and HDTV is technicaly software..
:humph:
Move my threads will ya.....
I have been working with HD material for three years now and it's an everyday experience for me.
2K is also used heavlily here.
Originally posted by IAmATeaf
But at what price, in the states most wide screen TVs are HDTV and cost an absolute fortune. Most yanks on visits here comment on the supposed low prices of wide screen TVs before they realise that they are normal TVs but in wide screen.
If I recall correctly WS set cost a fourtune in this contry when they were first introduced? At least it is up and running in the US it will eventually become the standard.
I can not imagine HD launching here still for a few years.
Excellent news.
http://www.euro1080.tv/
Originally posted by Jowser
So I guess we have to buy a new decoder box for this.
Glad to see it seems to be 1080i transmissions (assumed from the name Euro1080). I will buy IF and only IF they have up to date films broadcast in HD with a 5.1 dolby stream as a minimum.
If the box is circa £200, and there's football on free-to-air stuff, i'll get it. It'd be nice if Sky went HD and we had an all singing Sky+HDTV box, but that's years away unfortunately.
Hasn't this already been posted?
Before everyone gets too excited it seems something for cinemas rather than home viewing. I expect any sort of progress to be slow on that front for some reason :rolleyes:
I wonder if it'll come in through the backdoor of HD-DVD's? They didn't start widescreen broadcasts untill ages after W/S was launched
Europe will probably end up with something like pixelplus sets for standard tv with actual hdtv modes for high res dvds etc. Its annoying how badly thought out the uk has been for broadcasting in recent years. Still the BBC are a major influence and they have to steal people's money to keep going as its not as if we have a choice so they can be as incompetent as they want to be.
I think it will be available in the home, it's just that the small amount of programming available and probably the cost, will put most people off. Just be the hardcore home cinema nuts (i.e. us) that buy into it, though that might help.
I can't see any of the main broadcasters going hi-def, for years, if ever. If they were going to change they should have done it during the change over to digital (but they decided that we were much better off having 1000 channels full of rubbish than 100 decent hi-def channels, so yippee, we can have 20 music channels that all play exactly the same stuff anyway), they're having enough trouble getting people to subscribe to that, if they turn round in a few years and say they're changing it again, it would be a disaster.
Originally posted by RobDickinson
HDTV is technicaly software..
Uh-huh. Apart from the, um, new receiver, decoder, recorder, player and/or display you need to actually do something with the signals. ;)
You can forget about UK mainstream channels doing HDTV for at least 10 years. They've only just been convinced to go widescreen (Sky especially), and HDTV requires more expensive equipment compared to the upgrade to widescreen PAL (because widescreen PAL really is just a bit of an electronic switch. They can shoot with the same cameras effectively, but HDTV requires totally new equipment).
As BlueDwarf mentioned above, http://www.euro1080.tv/ are now lined up to broadcast this coming January - infact, they're already testing now as we speak, and several over at the avforums.com are picking up the signal.
From what I can gather, there's no decryption necessary and once you've paid for the new set top box the programs are on freeview - if this is the case I'll be snapping one of the boxes up for certain!!
Excellent news :clap:
As someone in the AV forusm said: Portugal 2004 in HDTV :drool:
It's just going to be mostly Euro-trash though :gag:.
Hmm... "The display format Euro1080 has chosen to use for HDTV is 1920 pixels x 1080 lines @ 50 hertz"
50Hz! Flicker tastic :oh-hum:.
Will they do decoders for PCs?
Originally posted by DeadKenny
Will they do decoders for PCs?
As I understand it you won't need a decoder - hence there are several cheap PC cards on the market that will do the job - just make sure your PC can handle the processing required!
Originally posted by DeadKenny
It's just going to be mostly Euro-trash though :gag:.
Hmm... "The display format Euro1080 has chosen to use for HDTV is 1920 pixels x 1080 lines @ 50 hertz"
50Hz! Flicker tastic :oh-hum:.
Will they do decoders for PCs?
Is that 50hz interlace or progressive? If its progressive thats 50 full frames a second which should be pretty good especially when you consider the pixel rate is something like 6 times standard pal if its interlace or about 12 times as much screen detail if its progressive. You'll never have to go to the cinema again!
It's 1080i:(
Ignore the stuff above. Here's the real news:
The BBC have announced plans to start a HDTV service within 5 years. They admit that it'll most likely be via cable/sat because of bandwidth issues and that it's a way of getting people to move to digital tv. The strange thing is they seem to think that it's only people with huge TV's who'll want it :thinking:
Despite that, here's the article
See HDTV at it's best:
http://doug.le.home.comcast.net/ (go to superbowl then "on the field" and "stadium") Stunning
An article about cableCARD (HDTV's with built in cable box)
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#cc
Originally posted by camaj
The strange thing is they seem to think that it's only people with huge TV's who'll want it :thinking:
Well, that's the case in the US. I'm not sure there is such a thing as a small HDTV set over there, but then there aren't many small TV's over there anyway :D
As a lot of people here are spending a lot of money to "upgrade" to digital TV and PAL based low-res widescreen TVs, there's not going to be anywhere near the level of interest as HDTV gets in the US, where HDTV is really the route into digital and widescreen TV. If we hadn't picked the cheap option first here the demand would likely be much greater. Sure, we'll get the rich home cinema fans who will adopt it, but I bet there won't be much programming or available HDTV sets for a good 5 years after the initial "launch" until the general public get around to their next TV upgrade.
It will also require a completely new set of digiboxes and a new standard as the current Euro DVB standards I believe are based on naff old interlaced PAL:gag:. That also means a new box for Sky+ as these won't support HDTV (though TiVo in the US is developing an HDTV version of their box... just a shame they couldn't give a rats about the UK :oh-hum: ).
Originally posted by DeadKenny
That also means a new box for Sky+ as these won't support HDTV (though TiVo in the US is developing an HDTV version of their box... just a shame they couldn't give a rats about the UK :oh-hum: ).
I'm sure sky+ would replace boxes for free or a small fee. At worst all they need are new tuners and larger HDD's. Of course the current ones could record from a PAL signal from HDTV which wouldn't look as good but it wouldn't be worse than now and it wouldn't cost anything.
I think you're being harsh on Tivo, they didn't leave the UK, Thompson did AFAIK. Don't Tivo continue to support existing UK customers? Humax are also rumored to be thinking of launching a Tivo box possibly with a freeview tuner and/or dvd-writer on board.
Like you say the US peeps want big tellys anyway and HDTV should look as sweet on a small set as it does on a big one. The disadvantage of having a big set now is it's easier to see video artifacts but HDTV is better than having an artifact free image.
There's no real reason to buy widescreen other than to watch widescreen material more comfortably, which is nice but nothing more. HDTV OTOH is a far bigger step and more akin to the switch from VHS to DVD and we all know how successful that launch was.
Look at the number of plasma sets that get sold today and there's nothing that great about plasma compared to a normal TV. Sure it's better but not HDTV better.
I wonder when sky will do it, I always expected them to do it first although there limited subscriber base would probably work against them the amount of HDTV they could broadcast now is pretty high
Originally posted by FunkyD
....and freeview?
You won't be seeing HDTV being boardcast over DVB any time soon. The bitrate needed for HD would mean you could only get a single channel on each multiplex!
Originally posted by [TPR] Mincer
You won't be seeing HDTV being boardcast over DVB any time soon.
You misunderstand, that was in relation to the "shame they couldn't give a rats about the UK" comment NOT HDTV. There seems to be some confusion about the capacity HDTV needs. Apparently it will take up the space of 4 normal channels and AIUI more multiplex's will become available when analogue is switched off. Also if they use MPEG 4 encoding they could fit more channels in.
Here's my idea chain of events
0 HDTV standard agreed (if different from the US standard)
<12 months - HDTV sets go on sale
<12 months - HD-DVD goes on sale
<18 months - HD sky launches
<24 months - HD cable launches
<36 months - HD terrestrial launches
<36 months - HD recorders launch
Once a standard is agreed HDTV ready sets should be available asap so that new TV buyers won't be stuck with a "new" TV
Originally posted by camaj
I'm sure sky+ would replace boxes for free or a small fee.
:lol:
I'm sure Sky would say "here's a new HD-Sky+ box, it will cost you £300, and another £10 a month sub" ;)
At worst all they need are new tuners and larger HDD's.
Probably will need totally new motherboard and software as well as I doubt the current sets have any design for High Def. Effectively a completely new box design.
Whatever required, there's certainly no way they'll just hand out new boxes to customers. It would be like Sony giving free new TVs to owners of old TVs :lol:.
Now cable is another matter as the boxes are rented. However, cable companies could take 5 to 10 years longer than Sky to get around to updating (just take how long it took NTL to go "digital" :oh-hum: ).
I'll admit that it turns out the DVB spec has an allowance for HDTV, but that doesn't mean any of the current DVB boxes do. Also the standard is based on MPEG-2. MPEG-4 would require a re-write of the standard.
P.S. Found this on DVB...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB
and HDTV...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_definition_television
I would imagine it would be easiest for the Cable companies and Sky to go HDTV, as you point out the current DVB speck does include support for this format, they would obviously need to upgrade their broadcasting suites and the customer hardware. Plus there are is already one CRT on the market that supports 1080i and it won’t be long before these start cropping up in more and more, I would imagine a HD tunerless model would only be slightly more then current models. Also the DVD forum has already decided on a format for HD-DVD which is bound to push more interest in HDTV.
Of course none of this means anything because as pointed out above no one out side AV enthusiasts know what HD is anyway.
Originally posted by DeadKenny
I'm sure Sky would say "here's a new HD-Sky+ box, it will cost you £300, and another £10 a month sub" ;)
Probably will need totally new motherboard and software as well as I doubt the current sets have any design for High Def.
I'm not sure they'll need a new mobo the tuner should take care of that. AFAIK the only difference between the formats is HDTV's higher datarate and possibly different decoding method (I think it uses MPEG2 but they might use MPEG 2 and 4 here). Yes a software update would be required.
While cable owners rent their boxes Sky customers need the box to continue to pay for sky so if cable go HDTV and sky charge people for the upgrade then they may loose people to Cable. On way of doing it is to put the subs up for HD channels for a bit.
What happened when sky switched from analogue to digital?
What is the 1080i set in the uk?
Originally posted by camaj
I'm not sure they'll need a new mobo the tuner should take care of that. AFAIK the only difference between the formats is HDTV's higher datarate and possibly different decoding method (I think it uses MPEG2 but they might use MPEG 2 and 4 here). Yes a software update would be required.
While cable owners rent their boxes Sky customers need the box to continue to pay for sky so if cable go HDTV and sky charge people for the upgrade then they may loose people to Cable. On way of doing it is to put the subs up for HD channels for a bit.
What happened when sky switched from analogue to digital?
What is the 1080i set in the uk?
It's a JVC isn't it?
Brock.
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=128268
Maybe that clears it up a bit?
Originally posted by camaj
What happened when sky switched from analogue to digital?
I think they were charging people full price for brand new boxes initially.
They then introduced the discount with "free" boxes, but that was subject to you signing up for a 12 month contract on their new service and taking a particular package level.
However when Sky+ boxes were introduced, they didn't (and still don't) give them away for free.
HDTV will be a luxury service so I can see them charging a premium for the boxes and service.
Originally posted by DeadKenny
I think they were charging people full price for brand new boxes initially.
They then introduced the discount with "free" boxes, but that was subject to you signing up for a 12 month contract on their new service and taking a particular package level.
However when Sky+ boxes were introduced, they didn't (and still don't) give them away for free.
HDTV will be a luxury service so I can see them charging a premium for the boxes and service.
Your right it will be a luxury service to start with, but as cable move to HD and dare I say it over the air broadcast as well and as HD becomes the norm I would imagine that this luxury premium will disappear.
Originally posted by DeadKenny
However when Sky+ boxes were introduced, they didn't (and still don't) give them away for free.
That's true but you don't need sky+ to watch sky, it's a luxury and always will be. I see it more akin to the change from analogue to digital
I dont get all this HDTV rubbish...to me its just another excuse to squeeze even more money from a saturated market. Soon every audio/visual piece of equipment will be branded obsolete every two years.
I want no part of it.. I watch films on dvd more for the audio experience and convenience than the picture quality...I havent even upgraded my old jerrold black box for digital yet..and I have no plans to unless telewest are going to do it for free.
Where will it all stop?
and yeh..I still have a square telly!!
Originally posted by tizza
I dont get all this HDTV rubbish...to me its just another excuse to squeeze even more money from a saturated market. Soon every audio/visual piece of equipment will be branded obsolete every two years.
I wouldn't say that. There's nothing on the horizon. HDTV has been on the verge of launch in the USA for ages and it was no secret it was coming. DVD is now 7 years old (6 in the uk) so upgrading now isn't a huge stretch after HDTV, HD-DVD I don't think we'll see anything new for a good 10 years.
If you're not bothered then fair enough some people are happy with black and white, but it's not an excuse when it's something people want unlike widescreen (broadcast rather than TV's)
Tizza's comments do ring true, to an extent, in that a lot of consumers - particularly the man in the street (not lumping Tizza in that category) are quite often happy to make do with a format that is 'good enough'.
Take CD. Still the dominant format. When was it introduced, 20 years ago? SACD? DVD-A? Whilst demonstratably better, pick up is still slooow and no signs of them replacing CD as the dominant format.
HDTV might well have to sneak in the back door by having the odd broadcast by technology pushers like the bbc, by next gen dvd supporting it, by top of the range tv's being hi-def ready.
I don't know if the switch to colour broadcasting was done in a similar fashion but I'd imagine the difference in viewing was a lot more obvious to the general public.
I'd still love to see some hope of hi-def broadcasting in the UK although I don't fancy rebuying all my films again when hi-def dvd comes out!
Once you have watched something in HDTV and you realise how good a picture can be its hard to go back. My mum lives in the US and when she was buying a TV I told her to make sure it was a HD one, as I didn't want her to have to invest again in a few years. She bough a 55" Sony RP and man the picture quality rocks, almost to the extent that when you look at a normal NTSC broadcast its amazing to think they have put up with it for so long.
As for Tizza, I take it you were happy to shell out for a 5.1 system to take advantage on DVD as the 5.1 signal played through a TV is no better the VHS. Could you go back to having to watch movies on VHS?
HD is the future and the those idiots who need to be legislating such things need to get their fingers out of their asses and do some work. The US went HD because there was legislation to force the terrestrial networks to broadcast a minimum of HD programming.
Originally posted by zantarous
Once you have watched something in HDTV and you realise how good a picture can be its hard to go back. My mum lives in the US and when she was buying a TV I told her to make sure it was a HD one, as I didn't want her to have to invest again in a few years.
And therein lies the problem.
In the US, the "next" thing from crummy old NTSC is HDTV and so when everyone's out there buying new TVs they're all considering HDTV for future compatibility.
In the UK, the next big thing was plain old PAL... digitised, and cheap widescreen PAL sets. These are selling like hot cakes and people are paying huge amounts of money for them. To then be told that they should be buying HDTV at twice the price, will just result in the public sticking their noses up at it.
The majority of the UK consumers won't see the big benefit, even if it does look amazingly better. Most of them can't even tell the difference between composite and RGB :oh-hum:. They can see the difference with digital though, mostly in the number of channels, and the benefit of a widescreen TV is obvious.
If we hadn't taken the cheap option, I'm sure we'd have HDTV much quicker in the UK, but then on the other hand widescreen sets may be far fewer and that may have had a major impact on the number of anamorphic DVDs on the market ;) (as in the US there was much reluctance to bother as everyone has big 4:3 TVs... until HDTV took off).
Originally posted by Gizmo
Take CD. Still the dominant format. SACD? DVD-A? Whilst demonstratably better, pick up is still slooow and no signs of them replacing CD as the dominant format.
HDTV might well have to sneak in the back door by having the odd broadcast by technology pushers like the bbc, by next gen dvd supporting it, by top of the range tv's being hi-def ready.
The BBC won't do the odd HDTV broadcast since it would take a large expense to do it. Not worth it unless you do a certain amount of programs.
Not really fair to compare it to the new audio formats. Firstly they're new, secondly there are competing formats, thirdly I don't think there's a lot of stuff being released on either and lastly I don't think they're even given much room in music stores. As I think I said earlier, the difference between CD and these formats is probably tricky to spot. The difference between HDTV and SDTV is much much larger and can be seen by anyone.
The majority of the UK consumers won't see the big benefit, even if it does look amazingly better. Most of them can't even tell the difference between composite and RGB
I can't either unless I've never seen RGB. The difference between HDTV and SDTV is far bigger than composite and RGB. HDTV was always the next big thing but widescreen was just an improvement and I think the majority of people who upgraded did so 4 or 5 years ago but I think most people still have 4:3, most people I know do. HDTV is a much biger thing. I'm sure most of the 4:3 crowd will be interested as well as the 16:9 buch. I doubt the average person who bought a 16:9 this year or last will be first in line for HDTV but they're probably not the sort who'd be early adopters, but might buy 2 or 3 years after launch which will make it 5 or 6 years between sets.
You'd also have to consider that most people who have bought 16:9 sets are likely to be reluctant to buy a CRT as their next set. I've heard a lot of people say they'd rather have a flat TV if they're going to spend another small fortune on a TV, like a plasma (okay they don't know that plasmas look :gag:, but anyway). Even my parents have been saying that for an upgrade on their 4:3 TV, but proper flat TVs (not flatscreen CRTs) are beyond their price range so the next for them will be a standard 16:9 PAL TV. No amount of "but HDTV looks so much better" will convince them to buy another set for at least 10 years after that (the last one's been going about 10 years and they'd rather pay a lot on repairs than buy a new one :oh-hum: ). Plus many people are noticing the black bars on programmes on 4:3 TV now, especially those with digital TV (or they're noticing the edges being chopped off if they've set the box into the cropped 4:3 mode), and think that a widescreen TV will solve these "problems" as they see it.
You have to consider the mentality of the British Public majority (not the technophiles, the average Joe who buys stuff from Dixons;)). HDTV is not something they'll appreciate unless it's shoved in their face. A widescreen TV at current PAL resolution is immediately obvious though because of the physical shape (and a lot of TVs are sold more on asthetics than picture quality).
I'm all for HDTV but I just doubt the public are at the moment (vast majority won't have a clue what it means).
Europe to get first taste of high definition broadcasting in June=
Following is a press release from Astra that brings hope to us all. You know, this high-def broadcasting thing just might happen here after all…
SES ASTRA, an SES GLOBAL company and Alfacam, the Belgian high-definition TV facilities company, are pleased to announce their cooperation in bringing high-definition television - "HDTV" - to selected electronic cinemas (e-cinemas) in Denmark and Norway.
Alfacam's digital HDTV trucks will uplink "HD" signals of the European Championship qualifying match Denmark versus Norway on June 7th, 2003, via the ASTRA 3A satellite at 23.5° East. The HD transmissions will then be received by a number of targeted e-cinemas in Kopenhagen (DK) and Bergen (N) where the match will be displayed on 12 meter cinema screens using an HD projector.
Comments Ferdinand Kayser, President and CEO of SES ASTRA: "While HDTV is already a reality in countries like the US or Japan, where all major programmers offer HDTV channels and more than 7 million HDTV sets have already been sold, there is growing evidence that High Definition Television will become available in Europe as well in the coming years. As satellites are ideally suited to manage the higher bandwidth requirements of HDTV transmissions, SES ASTRA intends to kick start European HDTV distribution with special events like the Denmark-Norway soccer game and proposes to create an "HDTV for Europe" Forum bringing together all the players in the television and hardware industry to promote HDTV, to drive standardization and to prepare for a coordinated and market driven introduction of HDTV in Europe."
Gabriel Fehervari, General Manager of Alfacam, adds: "The live HD transmission on June 7th to several European e-cinemas is the first official test case for Euro1080, the first European HDTV channel that goes on air on January 1st 2004. This new channel will broadcast exclusively in high definition, and offer high-quality programs on music, sports, shows, cultural events, and documentaries. It actually consists of two channels: the Main Channel serving European households, and the Event Channel, providing special event programs, such as the football match in Copenhagen, to e-cinemas. This formula is proving to be a real success: the demand for tickets in the e-cinemas is tenfold of what we have available. We are convinced that Europe is ready for HDTV!"
Good job I didnt buy myself a projector yet :)
http://www.homecinemachoice.com/news/frame.html?http://www.homecinemachoice.com/cgi-bin/displaynews.php?id=4500
Answers:
America is so far ahead of us in HDTV it's a joke... :oh-hum:
Answers:
But at what price, in the states most wide screen TVs are HDTV and cost an absolute fortune. Most yanks on visits here comment on the supposed low prices of wide screen TVs before they realise that they are normal TVs but in wide screen.
Answers:
Does this mean I shouldn't buy that 42" Rp tv I've been thinking about treating myself to?
Answers:
Originally posted by TheFatBoy
America is so far ahead of us in HDTV it's a joke... :oh-hum:
I was under the impression that it was a fairly stagnant market as far as HDTV was concerned. Most American are more concerned with buying the biggest TV that money can buy.
Answers:
Was wondering about this whilst watching baseball the other night - they broadcast some games in the States in HD.
Answers:
Originally posted by IAmATeaf
I was under the impression that it was a fairly stagnant market as far as HDTV was concerned. Most American are more concerned with buying the biggest TV that money can buy. Which could still be HD compatible AFAIK.
Answers:
Originally posted by IAmATeaf
I was under the impression that it was a fairly stagnant market as far as HDTV was concerned. Most American are more concerned with buying the biggest TV that money can buy. True. Hardly saw any widescreen sets in a US electronics store I went to in LA. But there seemed to be an infinite number of 60"+ 4:3 TVs!!
Answers:
So I guess we have to buy a new decoder box for this.
Glad to see it seems to be 1080i transmissions (assumed from the name Euro1080). I will buy IF and only IF they have up to date films broadcast in HD with a 5.1 dolby stream as a minimum.
Answers:
What's this mean for dvds?
Answers:
....and freeview?
Answers:
Originally posted by Dr Hfuhruhurr
What's this mean for dvds?
AFIK DVD's cant cope with the bitrate required for HDTV rez.
Answers:
Originally posted by RobDickinson
AFIK DVD's cant cope with the bitrate required for HDTV rez. But HDtvs are backwards compatible?
Answers:
Originally posted by Jowser
So I guess we have to buy a new decoder box for this.
I thought it was a new TV? Being HDTV, surely it would be pointless to take a higher definition picture, stick it through a box to reduce the resolution back to that of normal TV for viewing on a standard TV?
And in that case, wouldn't the TVs come with decoders capable of decoding it in the first place?
Ian
Answers:
Originally posted by IAmATeaf
I was under the impression that it was a fairly stagnant market as far as HDTV was concerned. Most American are more concerned with buying the biggest TV that money can buy.
HDTV is a big thing now here, almost all large screen projection TV's are HDTV monitors and you can get HDTV cable here for about $5 per month more. I have a HDTV unit and its superb.
Oh and this is better in the Hardware forum :)
Moving...
Answers:
uh, this is news, I wasnt talking about hardware, and HDTV is technicaly software..
:humph:
Move my threads will ya.....
Answers:
I have been working with HD material for three years now and it's an everyday experience for me.
2K is also used heavlily here.
Answers:
Originally posted by IAmATeaf
But at what price, in the states most wide screen TVs are HDTV and cost an absolute fortune. Most yanks on visits here comment on the supposed low prices of wide screen TVs before they realise that they are normal TVs but in wide screen.
If I recall correctly WS set cost a fourtune in this contry when they were first introduced? At least it is up and running in the US it will eventually become the standard.
I can not imagine HD launching here still for a few years.
Answers:
Excellent news.
http://www.euro1080.tv/
Answers:
Originally posted by Jowser
So I guess we have to buy a new decoder box for this.
Glad to see it seems to be 1080i transmissions (assumed from the name Euro1080). I will buy IF and only IF they have up to date films broadcast in HD with a 5.1 dolby stream as a minimum.
If the box is circa £200, and there's football on free-to-air stuff, i'll get it. It'd be nice if Sky went HD and we had an all singing Sky+HDTV box, but that's years away unfortunately.
Answers:
Hasn't this already been posted?
Before everyone gets too excited it seems something for cinemas rather than home viewing. I expect any sort of progress to be slow on that front for some reason :rolleyes:
I wonder if it'll come in through the backdoor of HD-DVD's? They didn't start widescreen broadcasts untill ages after W/S was launched
Answers:
Europe will probably end up with something like pixelplus sets for standard tv with actual hdtv modes for high res dvds etc. Its annoying how badly thought out the uk has been for broadcasting in recent years. Still the BBC are a major influence and they have to steal people's money to keep going as its not as if we have a choice so they can be as incompetent as they want to be.
Answers:
I think it will be available in the home, it's just that the small amount of programming available and probably the cost, will put most people off. Just be the hardcore home cinema nuts (i.e. us) that buy into it, though that might help.
I can't see any of the main broadcasters going hi-def, for years, if ever. If they were going to change they should have done it during the change over to digital (but they decided that we were much better off having 1000 channels full of rubbish than 100 decent hi-def channels, so yippee, we can have 20 music channels that all play exactly the same stuff anyway), they're having enough trouble getting people to subscribe to that, if they turn round in a few years and say they're changing it again, it would be a disaster.
Answers:
Originally posted by RobDickinson
HDTV is technicaly software..
Uh-huh. Apart from the, um, new receiver, decoder, recorder, player and/or display you need to actually do something with the signals. ;)
Answers:
You can forget about UK mainstream channels doing HDTV for at least 10 years. They've only just been convinced to go widescreen (Sky especially), and HDTV requires more expensive equipment compared to the upgrade to widescreen PAL (because widescreen PAL really is just a bit of an electronic switch. They can shoot with the same cameras effectively, but HDTV requires totally new equipment).
Answers:
As BlueDwarf mentioned above, http://www.euro1080.tv/ are now lined up to broadcast this coming January - infact, they're already testing now as we speak, and several over at the avforums.com are picking up the signal.
From what I can gather, there's no decryption necessary and once you've paid for the new set top box the programs are on freeview - if this is the case I'll be snapping one of the boxes up for certain!!
Answers:
Excellent news :clap:
As someone in the AV forusm said: Portugal 2004 in HDTV :drool:
Answers:
It's just going to be mostly Euro-trash though :gag:.
Hmm... "The display format Euro1080 has chosen to use for HDTV is 1920 pixels x 1080 lines @ 50 hertz"
50Hz! Flicker tastic :oh-hum:.
Will they do decoders for PCs?
Answers:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
Will they do decoders for PCs?
As I understand it you won't need a decoder - hence there are several cheap PC cards on the market that will do the job - just make sure your PC can handle the processing required!
Answers:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
It's just going to be mostly Euro-trash though :gag:.
Hmm... "The display format Euro1080 has chosen to use for HDTV is 1920 pixels x 1080 lines @ 50 hertz"
50Hz! Flicker tastic :oh-hum:.
Will they do decoders for PCs?
Is that 50hz interlace or progressive? If its progressive thats 50 full frames a second which should be pretty good especially when you consider the pixel rate is something like 6 times standard pal if its interlace or about 12 times as much screen detail if its progressive. You'll never have to go to the cinema again!
Answers:
It's 1080i:(
Answers:
Ignore the stuff above. Here's the real news:
The BBC have announced plans to start a HDTV service within 5 years. They admit that it'll most likely be via cable/sat because of bandwidth issues and that it's a way of getting people to move to digital tv. The strange thing is they seem to think that it's only people with huge TV's who'll want it :thinking:
Despite that, here's the article
See HDTV at it's best:
http://doug.le.home.comcast.net/ (go to superbowl then "on the field" and "stadium") Stunning
An article about cableCARD (HDTV's with built in cable box)
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#cc
Answers:
Originally posted by camaj
The strange thing is they seem to think that it's only people with huge TV's who'll want it :thinking:
Well, that's the case in the US. I'm not sure there is such a thing as a small HDTV set over there, but then there aren't many small TV's over there anyway :D
As a lot of people here are spending a lot of money to "upgrade" to digital TV and PAL based low-res widescreen TVs, there's not going to be anywhere near the level of interest as HDTV gets in the US, where HDTV is really the route into digital and widescreen TV. If we hadn't picked the cheap option first here the demand would likely be much greater. Sure, we'll get the rich home cinema fans who will adopt it, but I bet there won't be much programming or available HDTV sets for a good 5 years after the initial "launch" until the general public get around to their next TV upgrade.
It will also require a completely new set of digiboxes and a new standard as the current Euro DVB standards I believe are based on naff old interlaced PAL:gag:. That also means a new box for Sky+ as these won't support HDTV (though TiVo in the US is developing an HDTV version of their box... just a shame they couldn't give a rats about the UK :oh-hum: ).
Answers:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
That also means a new box for Sky+ as these won't support HDTV (though TiVo in the US is developing an HDTV version of their box... just a shame they couldn't give a rats about the UK :oh-hum: ).
I'm sure sky+ would replace boxes for free or a small fee. At worst all they need are new tuners and larger HDD's. Of course the current ones could record from a PAL signal from HDTV which wouldn't look as good but it wouldn't be worse than now and it wouldn't cost anything.
I think you're being harsh on Tivo, they didn't leave the UK, Thompson did AFAIK. Don't Tivo continue to support existing UK customers? Humax are also rumored to be thinking of launching a Tivo box possibly with a freeview tuner and/or dvd-writer on board.
Like you say the US peeps want big tellys anyway and HDTV should look as sweet on a small set as it does on a big one. The disadvantage of having a big set now is it's easier to see video artifacts but HDTV is better than having an artifact free image.
There's no real reason to buy widescreen other than to watch widescreen material more comfortably, which is nice but nothing more. HDTV OTOH is a far bigger step and more akin to the switch from VHS to DVD and we all know how successful that launch was.
Look at the number of plasma sets that get sold today and there's nothing that great about plasma compared to a normal TV. Sure it's better but not HDTV better.
I wonder when sky will do it, I always expected them to do it first although there limited subscriber base would probably work against them the amount of HDTV they could broadcast now is pretty high
Answers:
Originally posted by FunkyD
....and freeview?
You won't be seeing HDTV being boardcast over DVB any time soon. The bitrate needed for HD would mean you could only get a single channel on each multiplex!
Answers:
Originally posted by [TPR] Mincer
You won't be seeing HDTV being boardcast over DVB any time soon.
You misunderstand, that was in relation to the "shame they couldn't give a rats about the UK" comment NOT HDTV. There seems to be some confusion about the capacity HDTV needs. Apparently it will take up the space of 4 normal channels and AIUI more multiplex's will become available when analogue is switched off. Also if they use MPEG 4 encoding they could fit more channels in.
Here's my idea chain of events
0 HDTV standard agreed (if different from the US standard)
<12 months - HDTV sets go on sale
<12 months - HD-DVD goes on sale
<18 months - HD sky launches
<24 months - HD cable launches
<36 months - HD terrestrial launches
<36 months - HD recorders launch
Once a standard is agreed HDTV ready sets should be available asap so that new TV buyers won't be stuck with a "new" TV
Answers:
Originally posted by camaj
I'm sure sky+ would replace boxes for free or a small fee.
:lol:
I'm sure Sky would say "here's a new HD-Sky+ box, it will cost you £300, and another £10 a month sub" ;)
At worst all they need are new tuners and larger HDD's.
Probably will need totally new motherboard and software as well as I doubt the current sets have any design for High Def. Effectively a completely new box design.
Whatever required, there's certainly no way they'll just hand out new boxes to customers. It would be like Sony giving free new TVs to owners of old TVs :lol:.
Now cable is another matter as the boxes are rented. However, cable companies could take 5 to 10 years longer than Sky to get around to updating (just take how long it took NTL to go "digital" :oh-hum: ).
I'll admit that it turns out the DVB spec has an allowance for HDTV, but that doesn't mean any of the current DVB boxes do. Also the standard is based on MPEG-2. MPEG-4 would require a re-write of the standard.
P.S. Found this on DVB...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB
and HDTV...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_definition_television
Answers:
I would imagine it would be easiest for the Cable companies and Sky to go HDTV, as you point out the current DVB speck does include support for this format, they would obviously need to upgrade their broadcasting suites and the customer hardware. Plus there are is already one CRT on the market that supports 1080i and it won’t be long before these start cropping up in more and more, I would imagine a HD tunerless model would only be slightly more then current models. Also the DVD forum has already decided on a format for HD-DVD which is bound to push more interest in HDTV.
Of course none of this means anything because as pointed out above no one out side AV enthusiasts know what HD is anyway.
Answers:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
I'm sure Sky would say "here's a new HD-Sky+ box, it will cost you £300, and another £10 a month sub" ;)
Probably will need totally new motherboard and software as well as I doubt the current sets have any design for High Def.
I'm not sure they'll need a new mobo the tuner should take care of that. AFAIK the only difference between the formats is HDTV's higher datarate and possibly different decoding method (I think it uses MPEG2 but they might use MPEG 2 and 4 here). Yes a software update would be required.
While cable owners rent their boxes Sky customers need the box to continue to pay for sky so if cable go HDTV and sky charge people for the upgrade then they may loose people to Cable. On way of doing it is to put the subs up for HD channels for a bit.
What happened when sky switched from analogue to digital?
What is the 1080i set in the uk?
Answers:
Originally posted by camaj
I'm not sure they'll need a new mobo the tuner should take care of that. AFAIK the only difference between the formats is HDTV's higher datarate and possibly different decoding method (I think it uses MPEG2 but they might use MPEG 2 and 4 here). Yes a software update would be required.
While cable owners rent their boxes Sky customers need the box to continue to pay for sky so if cable go HDTV and sky charge people for the upgrade then they may loose people to Cable. On way of doing it is to put the subs up for HD channels for a bit.
What happened when sky switched from analogue to digital?
What is the 1080i set in the uk?
It's a JVC isn't it?
Brock.
Answers:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=128268
Maybe that clears it up a bit?
Answers:
Originally posted by camaj
What happened when sky switched from analogue to digital?
I think they were charging people full price for brand new boxes initially.
They then introduced the discount with "free" boxes, but that was subject to you signing up for a 12 month contract on their new service and taking a particular package level.
However when Sky+ boxes were introduced, they didn't (and still don't) give them away for free.
HDTV will be a luxury service so I can see them charging a premium for the boxes and service.
Answers:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
I think they were charging people full price for brand new boxes initially.
They then introduced the discount with "free" boxes, but that was subject to you signing up for a 12 month contract on their new service and taking a particular package level.
However when Sky+ boxes were introduced, they didn't (and still don't) give them away for free.
HDTV will be a luxury service so I can see them charging a premium for the boxes and service.
Your right it will be a luxury service to start with, but as cable move to HD and dare I say it over the air broadcast as well and as HD becomes the norm I would imagine that this luxury premium will disappear.
Answers:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
However when Sky+ boxes were introduced, they didn't (and still don't) give them away for free.
That's true but you don't need sky+ to watch sky, it's a luxury and always will be. I see it more akin to the change from analogue to digital
Answers:
I dont get all this HDTV rubbish...to me its just another excuse to squeeze even more money from a saturated market. Soon every audio/visual piece of equipment will be branded obsolete every two years.
I want no part of it.. I watch films on dvd more for the audio experience and convenience than the picture quality...I havent even upgraded my old jerrold black box for digital yet..and I have no plans to unless telewest are going to do it for free.
Where will it all stop?
and yeh..I still have a square telly!!
Answers:
Originally posted by tizza
I dont get all this HDTV rubbish...to me its just another excuse to squeeze even more money from a saturated market. Soon every audio/visual piece of equipment will be branded obsolete every two years.
I wouldn't say that. There's nothing on the horizon. HDTV has been on the verge of launch in the USA for ages and it was no secret it was coming. DVD is now 7 years old (6 in the uk) so upgrading now isn't a huge stretch after HDTV, HD-DVD I don't think we'll see anything new for a good 10 years.
If you're not bothered then fair enough some people are happy with black and white, but it's not an excuse when it's something people want unlike widescreen (broadcast rather than TV's)
Answers:
Tizza's comments do ring true, to an extent, in that a lot of consumers - particularly the man in the street (not lumping Tizza in that category) are quite often happy to make do with a format that is 'good enough'.
Take CD. Still the dominant format. When was it introduced, 20 years ago? SACD? DVD-A? Whilst demonstratably better, pick up is still slooow and no signs of them replacing CD as the dominant format.
HDTV might well have to sneak in the back door by having the odd broadcast by technology pushers like the bbc, by next gen dvd supporting it, by top of the range tv's being hi-def ready.
I don't know if the switch to colour broadcasting was done in a similar fashion but I'd imagine the difference in viewing was a lot more obvious to the general public.
I'd still love to see some hope of hi-def broadcasting in the UK although I don't fancy rebuying all my films again when hi-def dvd comes out!
Answers:
Once you have watched something in HDTV and you realise how good a picture can be its hard to go back. My mum lives in the US and when she was buying a TV I told her to make sure it was a HD one, as I didn't want her to have to invest again in a few years. She bough a 55" Sony RP and man the picture quality rocks, almost to the extent that when you look at a normal NTSC broadcast its amazing to think they have put up with it for so long.
As for Tizza, I take it you were happy to shell out for a 5.1 system to take advantage on DVD as the 5.1 signal played through a TV is no better the VHS. Could you go back to having to watch movies on VHS?
HD is the future and the those idiots who need to be legislating such things need to get their fingers out of their asses and do some work. The US went HD because there was legislation to force the terrestrial networks to broadcast a minimum of HD programming.
Answers:
Originally posted by zantarous
Once you have watched something in HDTV and you realise how good a picture can be its hard to go back. My mum lives in the US and when she was buying a TV I told her to make sure it was a HD one, as I didn't want her to have to invest again in a few years.
And therein lies the problem.
In the US, the "next" thing from crummy old NTSC is HDTV and so when everyone's out there buying new TVs they're all considering HDTV for future compatibility.
In the UK, the next big thing was plain old PAL... digitised, and cheap widescreen PAL sets. These are selling like hot cakes and people are paying huge amounts of money for them. To then be told that they should be buying HDTV at twice the price, will just result in the public sticking their noses up at it.
The majority of the UK consumers won't see the big benefit, even if it does look amazingly better. Most of them can't even tell the difference between composite and RGB :oh-hum:. They can see the difference with digital though, mostly in the number of channels, and the benefit of a widescreen TV is obvious.
If we hadn't taken the cheap option, I'm sure we'd have HDTV much quicker in the UK, but then on the other hand widescreen sets may be far fewer and that may have had a major impact on the number of anamorphic DVDs on the market ;) (as in the US there was much reluctance to bother as everyone has big 4:3 TVs... until HDTV took off).
Answers:
Originally posted by Gizmo
Take CD. Still the dominant format. SACD? DVD-A? Whilst demonstratably better, pick up is still slooow and no signs of them replacing CD as the dominant format.
HDTV might well have to sneak in the back door by having the odd broadcast by technology pushers like the bbc, by next gen dvd supporting it, by top of the range tv's being hi-def ready.
The BBC won't do the odd HDTV broadcast since it would take a large expense to do it. Not worth it unless you do a certain amount of programs.
Not really fair to compare it to the new audio formats. Firstly they're new, secondly there are competing formats, thirdly I don't think there's a lot of stuff being released on either and lastly I don't think they're even given much room in music stores. As I think I said earlier, the difference between CD and these formats is probably tricky to spot. The difference between HDTV and SDTV is much much larger and can be seen by anyone.
The majority of the UK consumers won't see the big benefit, even if it does look amazingly better. Most of them can't even tell the difference between composite and RGB
I can't either unless I've never seen RGB. The difference between HDTV and SDTV is far bigger than composite and RGB. HDTV was always the next big thing but widescreen was just an improvement and I think the majority of people who upgraded did so 4 or 5 years ago but I think most people still have 4:3, most people I know do. HDTV is a much biger thing. I'm sure most of the 4:3 crowd will be interested as well as the 16:9 buch. I doubt the average person who bought a 16:9 this year or last will be first in line for HDTV but they're probably not the sort who'd be early adopters, but might buy 2 or 3 years after launch which will make it 5 or 6 years between sets.
Answers:
You'd also have to consider that most people who have bought 16:9 sets are likely to be reluctant to buy a CRT as their next set. I've heard a lot of people say they'd rather have a flat TV if they're going to spend another small fortune on a TV, like a plasma (okay they don't know that plasmas look :gag:, but anyway). Even my parents have been saying that for an upgrade on their 4:3 TV, but proper flat TVs (not flatscreen CRTs) are beyond their price range so the next for them will be a standard 16:9 PAL TV. No amount of "but HDTV looks so much better" will convince them to buy another set for at least 10 years after that (the last one's been going about 10 years and they'd rather pay a lot on repairs than buy a new one :oh-hum: ). Plus many people are noticing the black bars on programmes on 4:3 TV now, especially those with digital TV (or they're noticing the edges being chopped off if they've set the box into the cropped 4:3 mode), and think that a widescreen TV will solve these "problems" as they see it.
You have to consider the mentality of the British Public majority (not the technophiles, the average Joe who buys stuff from Dixons;)). HDTV is not something they'll appreciate unless it's shoved in their face. A widescreen TV at current PAL resolution is immediately obvious though because of the physical shape (and a lot of TVs are sold more on asthetics than picture quality).
I'm all for HDTV but I just doubt the public are at the moment (vast majority won't have a clue what it means).
1 2