Email from Dishquality!

[SRW1000]

http://www.atsc.org/standards/a81.html

This page lists the 3 standards for 1080. There is a chart on page 17 (Chart 7.3) giving all the accepted standards for 1080 ATSC Direct-to-Home Broadcasts over satellite. Not only are all three acceptable for 1080i but also for 1080p.

All three are acceptable direct-to-home satellite broadcast standards. But that's all they are. The document does not define them as high definition, and citing it only serves to muddy the issue.

The ATSC has only defined two resolutions as HD: 1080x1920 and 720x1280. That's it. There aren't any others.

Scott

 

[Jim5506]

Where?

 

[Dog6869]

The email said, “Please be aware, the HD world is relatively new”
What exactly is relatively new, HDTV is not New I have seen High Def in Japan back in 1977.. that is 30 years ago.. If we where talking about age of the earth, No!! 30 years is not Old, but in HD world it is a very long time,,,, NOT RELATIVELY NEW!!!!! The Japanese’s already have super HD that is 2160X4096 pixels… Not 1920X1080 pixels…. that we think is true HD... Think about that for a minute…
And send that to DISH and see what they say about that….

 

[richiephx]

I wish I could get the demo channel on 61.5 but I can't. I understand that the resolution is 1920x1080i with a bitrate above 17. It's amazing that E* can market HD using a demo channel to lure people into getting HD, lock them into an 18month committment then down-rez most of the HD channels to something less than the demo channel. Seems deceptive to me.

 

[SRW1000]

Where?

As found it the Guide to Use of the ATSC DTV Standard:

Underlining added by me for clarity​

Scott

 

[SRW1000]

The email said, “Please be aware, the HD world is relatively new”
What exactly is relatively new, HDTV is not New I have seen High Def in Japan back in 1977.. that is 30 years ago.. If we where talking about age of the earth, No!! 30 years is not Old, but in HD world it is a very long time,,,, NOT RELATIVELY NEW!!!!! The Japanese’s already have super HD that is 2160X4096 pixels… Not 1920X1080 pixels…. that we think is true HD... Think about that for a minute…
And send that to DISH and see what they say about that….

Not to mention that Dish offered their first HDTV receiver on 1/6/2000. That's right, we're just a week away from their 7-year HD anniversary. While HD is still changing, it really can't be argued that it's still new.

Scott

 

[Tom Bombadil]

The World Cup tournament was first broadcast in HD in 1998. Mitsubishi was a sponsor of it and used the broadcast to push their line of HDTV sets, which were in stores at that time.

I remember shopping for a new TV in 1999 and deciding to not purchase an HDTV, as there wasn't enough HD programming available. The images on those big Mits with their 9" CRTs being driven with a full-res, high-bandwidth HD source, were stunning. Better than what you can see today if you are using E* or D* as your HD provider.

 

[Drone35]

We apologize for this; however, we are doing this in an attempt to continue to offer more choices to our customers without serious quality degradation.

Seems like they are planning in know way to go back to full resolution or not until they get more birds up or improve on the mpeg4! I guess I'm just impatient, but true HD is what I'm hungry for! Seems their more interested in quanity than quality, I'm hoping that will change in the future!

 

[HDTVFanAtic]

As found it the Guide to Use of the ATSC DTV Standard:

Underlining added by me for clarity​

Scott

While I wish you were correct, you are mixing the Direct-to-Home Satellite Broadcast Standard and the ATSC Digital Television Standards - 2 different standards.

That's as different as comparing specs for XM Satellite Radio to CDs - though both are marketed as CD Quality sound.

 

[AT&TDishman]

Just got this e-mail:

Dear Customer,

Thank you for your recent e-mail. We apologize for whatever you are complaining about this time. However, we wouldn't be doing anything about it. In the meanwhile, please send us more money. Why? Because we want more money, and you are too stupid, or afraid, to refuse.

Do you for a moment think we care a rat's ass about you? You are just a sap playing our shell game. You think you know where the pea is, but you have no clue. All you care about is your televsion picture quality while there are children who are starving in third-world countries, who have no HDTV, or worse yet, no broadcast HD locals or RSNs. (Please note we are working with their corrupt officials to bring them service in the near future)

How do you think we became multi-millionaires and billionaires? We just followed the advice of long departed P.T. Barnum and applied it to our company. After all, it's all about money, no more or no less. I guess you haven't read the famous quote of a former GM president about his business was about making money and not cars, and if making cars was not profitable his company would make something else that made money.

Oh, by the way, if you are thinking about going to that other company for your service--go right ahead. In a few years there is only going to be one company and you will be paying twice as much and thanking us for it.

Have a nice day, and don't forget to send us that extra money.

Sincerely,

Ubeen Screwedski

 

[Poke]

Yeah right!

 

[ccash]

I wish I could get the demo channel on 61.5 but I can't. I understand that the resolution is 1920x1080i with a bitrate above 17. It's amazing that E* can market HD using a demo channel to lure people into getting HD, lock them into an 18month committment then down-rez most of the HD channels to something less than the demo channel. Seems deceptive to me.

Where is the Demo Channel currently located?

 

[richiephx]

Where is the Demo Channel currently located?

As I stated in my response, it's on the 61.5 satellite. It's NOT on the 129 satellite.

 

[Smith P.]

While I wish you were correct, you are mixing the Direct-to-Home Satellite Broadcast Standard and the ATSC Digital Television Standards - 2 different standards.

That's as different as comparing specs for XM Satellite Radio to CDs - though both are marketed as CD Quality sound.

Logically true, but I can't stand if I'll not reply
- I have other point: look at the HDTV sets what made by ATSC HDTV specs (16:9, 1920x1080i and 1280x720p plus newest 1080p);
it's should be simple - providers (cable, satellite,etc) should feed our TVs with STANDARD A/V stream. And the standard quoted above.

 

[SRW1000]

While I wish you were correct, you are mixing the Direct-to-Home Satellite Broadcast Standard and the ATSC Digital Television Standards - 2 different standards.

That's as different as comparing specs for XM Satellite Radio to CDs - though both are marketed as CD Quality sound.

There is no mention of HD in the Direct-to-Home Satellite Broadcast Standard, so it doesn't apply to the discussion of what is, or isn't HD. I wasn't the one to bring it into this thread; I only replied to it.

So, that leaves us with an unfortunate choice - either HD has no meaning when applied to Direct-to-Home broadcasting, or we're forced to look at similar standards.

Dish, itself, has chosen to reference the ATSC standards that do define HD, as can be seen on this webpage:

Underlining added by me, for emphasis.​

So while you are technically correct, in respect to the document, but Dish and I will both agree to accept the two ATSC HD resolution standards. This is especially true considering "Specifically, ATSC is working to coordinate television standards among different communications media focusing on digital television, interactive systems, and broadband multimedia communications."

Scott

 

[navychop]

It doesn't matter if it's sent in 1920x1080 if, as is commonly done, the original capture was done using a 1440x1080 camera. Then the editing and transport must support the full resolution, too. There's been a post here somewhere from someone who works in the field, talking about this. We're enamored with larger numbers, even when the actual data is not really there to support it.

 

[SRW1000]

It doesn't matter if it's sent in 1920x1080 if, as is commonly done, the original capture was done using a 1440x1080 camera. Then the editing and transport must support the full resolution, too. There's been a post here somewhere from someone who works in the field, talking about this. We're enamored with larger numbers, even when the actual data is not really there to support it.

That is a point, but it will soon become irrelevant. Newer cameras/recording equipment are being developed and deployed that natively handle 1920x1080. True, some material is up-converted to HD today, but to take that material and then down convert it again will affect picture quality.

In addition, film is almost always remastered in HD theses days, and live events are usually sent out that way, also.

We shouldn't let limitations of the past constrict our current and future expectations.

Scott

 

[Smith P.]

Yes, I recall that posts, but time changing everything - sure, some of old HD equipment works with 1440x1080i source,
but today more and more cameras/equip in fields do streaming in true 1920x1080i as you can see on the picture of local news track;
and I'm not talking about movies shooting/converting in 4K standard.

BTW, there was a thread with a links to a companies who renting such track. Check that site what spec the equip have.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

I wish I could get the demo channel on 61.5 but I can't. I understand that the resolution is 1920x1080i with a bitrate above 17.

I haven't watched the Demo channel for at least a couple of months, but tuned it in tonight to take a look at the picture quality.

Wow! It's great!

I saw a number of clips from VOOM programming that looked much better than when I watched them on a VOOM channel. So sharp with such great color. I sure wish we actually got HD like this from E*.

I may record a few minutes of it to keep for comparisons.

 

[hammerdown]

IMO the 1440 cameras are not an issue. The material ends up mastered in 1920, then sent by the channel in 1920 (and in full 19Mbps or better bandwidth). At this point its as good as it can be.

The quality degrades the minute the pizza dish company uses its process to chop the resolution by as much as one third, and re-encode the stream to 14Mbps (or less) in real time.

Now if the material was shot 1440, mastered 1440 (non-real time), sent out in a 15Mbps stream by the channel, then passed without alteration by the pizza dish equipment to our receivers we might see a very nice HD picture that I wouldn't classify as HD-Lite.

BTW, I strongly believe there are only two standard HD resolutions 1920x1080 & 1280x720.

Hammer