Why should I care about Picture Quality since "bits is bits"?
- Thread starter highdefjeff
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 12
- Views 2K
Why should I care about Picture Quality since "bits is bits"?
...sounds like something a DishHD-Lite/TurboHD engineer would ponder.
...this is something you'll never hear a FiOS HD engineer think and/or speak.
...sounds like something a DishHD-Lite/TurboHD engineer would ponder.
...this is something you'll never hear a FiOS HD engineer think and/or speak.
WHO?
Who are you talking about. Ignore what is there someone there that seems to know anything about digital?:haha
Seems like almost every thread that he post in I have to ask what are you talking about. Sorry Jeffie but just don't know from where you are coming .
Who are you talking about. Ignore what is there someone there that seems to know anything about digital?:haha
Seems like almost every thread that he post in I have to ask what are you talking about. Sorry Jeffie but just don't know from where you are coming .
I don't need to read them, I understand the way their DVB transmissions work and correct the bad bits with FEC. Maybe one day I'll record a snapshot of the non-encrypted 101 channel with two different signal strengths on two DVB cards at the same time. I'll ask you which is which.
I sure hope HDJeff isn't talking about signal conditions where the errors are completely correctable. I think he's talking about error rates well beyond that, and their is no way the receiver can completely reconstruct the original digital signal. Then what? Does your receiver immediately pop up the "signal lost" window, or does it try to compensate for missing data using whatever data it did get, or whatever it got last, for example by freezing the picture briefly?
The name of this article is:
"Overview of the Scalable Video Coding Extension of the H.264/AVC Standard"
(Let me just add here that the previous name of SVC scalability was SNR scalability. That's Signal-to-Noise Ratio Scalability.)
The abstract states it very simply:
Abstract—With the introduction of the H.264/AVC video coding standard, significant improvements have recently been demonstrated in video compression capability. The Joint Video Team of the ITU-T VCEG and the ISO/IEC MPEG has now also standardized a Scalable Video Coding (SVC) extension of the H.264/AVC standard. SVC enables the transmission and decoding of partial bit streams to provide video services with lower temporal or spatial resolutions or reduced fidelity while retaining a reconstruction quality that is high relative to the rate of the partial bit streams. Hence, SVC provides functionality such as graceful degradation in lossy transmission environments as well as bit rate, format, and power adaptation.
And,
Moreover, the basic tools for providing temporal, spatial, and quality scalability are described in detail and experimentally analyzed regarding their efficiency and complexity.
Index Terms—H.264/AVC, MPEG-4, Scalable Video Coding (SVC), standards, video.
Read it for yourself! Very interesting! http://ip.hhi.de/imagecom_G1/assets/pdfs/Overview_SVC_IEEE07.pdf
What does this statement mean, Digi?
"SVC provides functionality such as graceful degradation in lossy transmission environments..."
Digi, "graceful degradation" is the opposite of "All-or-nothing" and
"decoding of partial bit streams to provide video services with lower temporal or spatial resolutions or reduced fidelity"...
...refers to compromised bit streams, PARTIAL bit streams that can happen if your signal quality is too low for whatever reasons. (Too little signal strength or too much noise.)
Digi show him TSReader snapshot after 24 hours run with a number of lost packets for some video PIDs. It would be less then hundred per GB of data.
So, in real life there is no remarkable lossy transmission.
So, in real life there is no remarkable lossy transmission.
