High-Def Analog Cband

[Techfizzle]

i was scanning around yesterday with my big useful dish and hit a channel, it was crystal clear, i almost thought it was hd

then it went to a test patern and said something -HD FEED

to comply with forum rules, I am not posting the details of where this is, thats for me to know and you to find out.

i took it on a digital camera, so its not the greatest, you would have to see it to get all of its glory

also i wanted to ask, how many news companys still use analog for back-huals? i saw alot yesterday and thought they all went digital and fiber-optic

then that leads me to my last question, is there ever any hd analog feeds? and can they be picked up on a analog set?

also what causes the picture to have a little static to it, no sparkies, but like a tv channel of rabbit ears

videos soon, still uploading

 

[Mr Tony]

no such thing on C-Band as an analog HD channel

HD is digital only and you need a different receiver to process the channel.

 

[Techfizzle]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIU69x69x8A"]YouTube - MVI 0330[/ame]

 

[Mr Tony]

ok whats your point?

If it was from Wednesday, that would be a SD feed of the Rangers game that kdfi 27 in DFW broadcasts to other areas in Texas/Oklahoma for local feeds

KUIL on AMC4 KU is one of the affiliates of those games
http://www.satelliteguys.us/free-air-fta-discussion/171012-texas-rangers-kuil-tv.html

Wednesday May 6, 2009 at Oakland Athletics* ** 9:00 p.m.

it is not HD...it might have possiblyt been HD for the local DFW area but that feed is in SD

 

[eurosport]

ok whats your point?

Ice, I think it's just a "...fizzle" thing! :up

 

[tvropro]

Ice, I think it's just a "...fizzle" thing! :up

ROFL:clap

 

[Techfizzle]

ok whats your point?

If it was from Wednesday, that would be a SD feed of the Rangers game that kdfi 27 in DFW broadcasts to other areas in Texas/Oklahoma for local feeds

KUIL on AMC4 KU is one of the affiliates of those games
http://www.satelliteguys.us/free-air-fta-discussion/171012-texas-rangers-kuil-tv.html

Wednesday May 6, 2009 at Oakland Athletics* ** 9:00 p.m.

it is not HD...it might have possiblyt been HD for the local DFW area but that feed is in SD

was it my network tv? also was it analog?

if that was an sd feed, it had to be a really good camera

 

[Pismire]

Only you can tell us if it was analog. Were you using an analog receiver?

 

[Mr Tony]

was it my network tv? also was it analog?

yes kfdi is the My Network affiliate for DFW...what do you mean "is it analog"?
The feed is analog because it needs to go to about a dozen affiliates across Texas/Oklahoma. The station itself is not on analog.

if that was an sd feed, it had to be a really good camera

no it was good because it was analog...using a whole transponder on analog will do that to a picture

 

[DREAMFOX1]

Its clear because you are seeing 480p instead of 480i.

Thats the beauty of a feed.

 

[Smith P.]

Its clear because you are seeing 480p instead of 480i.

Thats the beauty of a feed.

480p could be produced by TV scaler/deinterlacer, not by the feed !

 

[Kb Cool]

I guess at one time there was analog HD.

Analog high-definition television system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Smith P.]

Yeah, in Europe and Japan.

 

[eurosport]

If analog HD existed, the picture quality would absolutely blow away all this digital junk, that's been forced on us! Just like there's no comparison, between an analog and digital SD satellite feed.
Digital SD looks OK...until something on the screen moves!

 

[hd fan]

it was Japan the only country who has tested and implemented Analog HD in the early days when USA was pushing for Digital TV (from Cameras , post production , distributing and later broadcasting all in SD at the begining). then USA pushed for Digital HD and Japan I belive has decided with an HD Digital system developed by them (I belive Brasil might use it as well and Venezuela was testing it, some other latinoamerican countries are still testing all standards and have not decided yet). Europe came up with the DVB-T standard and USA/Canada implemented ATSC.

the point in quality is related to what iceberg said, allocated Bandwith and of course greater amount of horizontal lines will result in greater detail. A properly configured and set up digital service with proper bandwith or bitrates if you will will render execptional result for the naked eye AT NORMAL VIEWING DISTANCE and Engineers exploit the performance or caracteristics of the human eye when designing. Some people even stand just a few inches off the tv for a few seconds and them post on the internet that they could see macroblocking or blurrines or what ever , yes of course!!. Sit at normal viewing distance and then let me know.

Transmition bandwith is expensive and therefore some broadcasters or distributers cut corners to save money and therefore especially on some foreing channels with sports you will see bad PQ big time. But that is not an inherent problem to the service being digital or analog. The same thing with audio, try listening to an FM radio station thorugh the phone service (only 3 khz including band guard I recall) and even an almost deaf person will notice the difference.

to the OP , HD gives you greater detail, more millions of colors combinations, no noise , 16x9 screen format not 4x3 like the baseball feed had (look at the postproduction graphics and they match the screen size perfectly) among other things that NTSC analog will not. It was definetely not HD.

the digital domain also optimizes everything from storage, distribution, post producton and you name it. the analog HD service would also be more expensive and bandwith hunger. imaging how many satellites a DBS provider would requiere to send the same amount of HD channels they send now.

thsi is an evolving technology and like anything it has minor things to work out. but digital has been an improvment not the other way around.

just my 1 cent , I am a very poor man, lol.

 

[eurosport]

YouTube - MVI 0330

I don't know how you'd tell any difference in definition on an old TV like that anyway!

 

[tvropro]

SD Analog backhauls always had beautiful picture quality. Digital SD with a high enough bitrate will look very nice. Once digital gets in the hands of the cram 10lbs of s**t in a 5 pound bag it's all over for quality.

 

[Mr Tony]

SD Analog backhauls always had beautiful picture quality.

agreed

I remember a couple years ago seeing a KU analog feed of a FB game. The grass was nice and bright green (not a off puke green because of compression)

 

[melgarga]

Digital vs Analog, this well beaten horse returns for another round. Everyone has an opinion on the subject. I cant speak to anything S2, but I have seen no DVB or ATSC based SD that can compare to the clairity and 'sharpness' of analog. (before anyone asks, 55" Hitachi RPTV) Digital is fickle, and unlike analog, is extremely prone to going lego-vision due to any one of a number of real world application shortcommings. From what I've been able to gather, the Messia HD format aka S2, is half again (or more) as fickle as DVB-S. I much prefer snow and sparkle on a fading (yet completely viewable) signal to freezing, pix'ing and fastmotion macroblocking.

Regarding analog HD, and it's murder in it's infancy, here is an excerpt on the subject from this site.
http://www.precisenetworking.com/~mcgatney/hdtv.html

NTSC is the set of standards for the OLD ANALOG TV broadcasts. The black and white NTSC Standards were based on a format finalized in March 1941 by the National Television System Committee... hence, NTSC. (Their standards were approved by the FCC in May 1941. The committee met again in the early 1950's to develop a set of standards for compatible analog color TV.) The NTSC system is the one scheduled to be withdrawn fully from broadcast use by full-power TV stations in the US in June 2009.

HDTV broadcasting was introduced in Japan with the "MUSE" system, an analog system using compression. In the US in the 1980's, both CBS and RCA developed analog HDTV systems that were compatible with existing NTSC TV sets. But the TV industry made the decision to leapfrog over analog and develop digital television. One reason was to stimulate television manufacturing in the United States. A "Grand Alliance" was formed within the television industry to agree upon a standard and to promote HDTV. The TV industry then lobbied Congress and the FCC for legislation and rules to foster HDTV, supposedly for the benefit of broadcasters and set manufactures.

This webpage is a long but very informative read of mostly OTA digital vs analog, govt/industry unpreparadness and related issues, but does get into some of the technical aspects of DVB and cable modulation techniques and differences near the end.
I am amused at the authors writing style. She has a unique sense of presentation and sarcasm that lends well to the subject.
Virtually anyone that enjoys this hobby that took the time to read it thoroughly would likely find it an interesting read as well.

 

[tvropro]

I much prefer snow and sparkle on a fading (yet completely viewable) signal to freezing, pix'ing and fastmotion macroblocking.

I have to agree. When I first got into digital it took me a long time to adjust. To this day when Im watching anything less than a digital master I can see the digital over compression characteristics.

The over compression characteristics bugged me so much that I spent countless hours designing a circuit to help to reduce the macroblocking and mosquito noise to a level I can live with. Once information is lost you can never get the original back but with proper filtering and boosting of certain area's in the video signal you can clean it up and enhance it quite a bit. After many circuit revisions Im happy with the results and use it in line with my 4DTV's S video output.