I'm not saying iTunes videos are as good as studio DVD's.
I agree 320x240 is a really low pixel count.
On a good television it is softer than broadcast television.
But its not as bad as what many proclaim.
What I find really funny is when people demand they'll wait for HD.
To move and store HDCAM. Which has subsampled luminance and chroma - 8 bit at 7:1 compression and weighs in at 4MB's per frame. Requires large high speed hard drives and dual link component high bandwidth data connections at 143Mb per second.
I can only imagine what's being downloaded on Bitorrent may meet HD by resolution but is highly compressed and has a really low bit depth.
I'm not saying iTunes videos are as good as studio DVD's.
I agree 320x240 is a really low pixel count.
On a good television it is softer than broadcast television.
But its not as bad as what many proclaim.
What I find really funny is when people demand they'll wait for HD.
To move and store HDCAM. Which has subsampled luminance and chroma - 8 bit at 7:1 compression and weighs in at 4MB's per frame. Requires large high speed hard drives and dual link component high bandwidth data connections at 143Mb per second.
I can only imagine what's being downloaded on Bitorrent may meet HD by resolution but is highly compressed and has a really low bit depth.
But psychologically people believe its better HD.
good points but obviously people wanting HD downloads are NOT talking about HDCAM!! we're talking 5-8megabits/second 1280x720[24p, 25p, or 30p] h.264 compressed. this may not be "better" than even DVCPRO but it is probably better or close to "DVD quality" when watching on the screen or on tv
bittorrent downloads are generally a different kettle of fish of which quality varies between "better than VHS" up to "not quite as good as DVD". very few HD bittorrent downloads are available... also these HD bittorrent downloads are "problematic" for our discussion in that they are usually recompressed (sometimes with divx/xvid!) off HD(720p or 1080i) Mpeg2 sources.
edit:
i would assert that $2.99 for 1280x720(24p, 25p, or 30p) h.264 video smartly compressed to 5-8mbps off studio master 2k or 4k would be quite acceptable to many people, marketed as "apple itunes video store high definition downloads"
A guy sells a a totally ridiculous product, so it he crazy? Maybe. A whole bunch of people buy the totally ridiculous product? Are they crazy? Maybe, but at least the salesman does not seem so crazy anymore.
That's business. Apple's price scheme might be crazy, but it hasn't stopped people from buying their products. Not everyone perceives pricing in the same way. No one is forcing you to buy from the Apple Store. As an alternative you can always buy the episodes on DVD.
BTW I think putting a few episodes from TLC or Discovery on there would be cool.
good points but obviously people wanting HD downloads are NOT talking about HDCAM!!
I know they won't be downloading HDCAM. People around the net are throwing out specs on what makes great video and demanding HD and have never seen an HD image from its source. And HDCAM is just a middle HD format.
ATSC broadcast HD is ok. HD sports is pretty good more than likely because its 60i. I don't think current HD broadcast is up to par. I imagine once the broadcast industry is forced to give up its analog wavelengths and finally focuses on digital and HD. The quality of HD broadcast should improve. At this point they do just enough to claim they broadcast in HD.
Quote:
we're talking 5-8megabits/second 1280x720[24p, 25p, or 30p] h.264 compressed. this may not be "better" than even DVCPRO but it is probably better or close to "DVD quality" when watching on the screen or on tv
DVC-Pro HD is 100 Mb per second.
Yes I know they are talking about 5-8 Mb/s. At that low of a data rate you've lost most of what makes HD - high definition. For contrast a full uncompressed HD stream is so large there is no tape format for it. Its data rate is 2Gb per second.
I can imagine on Bittorrent they are recording from broadcast HD. Which already isn't that great. Compressing it into a smaller file for downloading. What you end up with is a superemly degraded image that fills up a designated pixel space and then calling it HD.
Quote:
also these HD bittorrent downloads are "problematic" for our discussion in that they are usually recompressed (sometimes with divx/xvid!) off HD(720p or 1080i) Mpeg2 sources.
I've seen on other lists people posting they will never use Apple's service because they can download HD shows on Bittorrent now. Which is fine its their choice. I just don't believe the images they are watching are all that good. They've never seen good HD to compare it too.
Quote:
i would assert that $2.99 for 1280x720(24p, 25p, or 30p) h.264 video smartly compressed to 5-8mbps off studio master 2k or 4k would be quite acceptable to many people, marketed as "apple itunes video store high definition downloads"
Of course something like this will happen in the future. Once they figure out how to get around bandwidth issues. A more likely interim solution would be for Apple to offer 720x480. At least that way people would stop complaining about them being lower than DVD resolution.
I imagine part of the reason Apple can make these deals is because the videos are lower resolution. Television producers probably wouldn't be too happy if the iTunes videos cannibalized the more profitable DVD sales.
I know they won't be downloading HDCAM. People around the net are throwing out specs on what makes great video and demanding HD and have never seen an HD image from its source. And HDCAM is just a middle HD format.
ATSC broadcast HD is ok. HD sports is pretty good more than likely because its 60i. I don't think current HD broadcast is up to par. I imagine once the broadcast industry is forced to give up its analog wavelengths and finally focuses on digital and HD. The quality of HD broadcast should improve. At this point they do just enough to claim they broadcast in HD.
DVC-Pro HD is 100 Mb per second.
Yes I know they are talking about 5-8 Mb/s. At that low of a data rate you've lost most of what makes HD - high definition. For contrast a full uncompressed HD stream is so large there is no tape format for it. Its data rate is 2Gb per second.
I can imagine on Bittorrent they are recording from broadcast HD. Which already isn't that great. Compressing it into a smaller file for downloading. What you end up with is a superemly degraded image that fills up a designated pixel space and then calling it HD.
I've seen on other lists people posting they will never use Apple's service because they can download HD shows on Bittorrent now. Which is fine its their choice. I just don't believe the images they are watching are all that good. They've never seen good HD to compare it too.
Of course something like this will happen in the future. Once they figure out how to get around bandwidth issues. A more likely interim solution would be for Apple to offer 720x480. At least that way people would stop complaining about them being lower than DVD resolution.
I imagine part of the reason Apple can make these deals is because the videos are lower resolution. Television producers probably wouldn't be too happy if the iTunes videos cannibalized the more profitable DVD sales.
i think at the end of the day, yeah, people are ready for the next stage of legal video downloads, 852x480 16:9 h.264 (what apple calls "480p") would be the first step.
this would definitely compete directly with dvds. but eventually movie and television studios will have to face this fact just as the music labels have come to terms with cds and digital downloads side-by-side. here's a prediction: total revenue for tv and movie studios would increase remarkably with "480p" downloads and DVDs
in terms of bandwidth and what the studios can deal with, i think moving to "480p" legal downloads will be complete by middle of 2006. because:
1. 480p and DVDs can happily coexist. legal downloads if you just want to watch something and backup/burn your copy yourself or get a DVD, you've got the nice booklet, case, a DVD *is* a backup copy of a movie
2. 480p 16:9 is the next phase for first half of 2006 portable media players, moving beyond 320x240 as many pdas, phones, media players etc. have started to go to higher res.
3. bandwidth increases over 320x240 would be somewhat in line with global increase in bandwidth availability at the same price point. 3-4mbit/sec including sound, 852x480 24/25/30p smartly encoded h.264, is really quite acceptable for downloads.
4. 852x480 is a resolution that would look great on standard crt tvs (letterboxed or keyholed), fits well into those with edtvs (eg. our groverat), and is a good transitional format for those going to 1280x720 or 1024x768 plasmas and lcds
5. and here's the clincher: digital downloads can be positioned appropriately with true highdef (720p or 1080p bluray). the movie and tv industry can significantly reduce expensive marketing distribution and production of DVDs, make digital downloads available at low cost to them, and now focus on bluray. revenue streams can be maintained via dvds and digital downloads, while bluray offers opportunities for high profit margins assuming production costs are sensibly managed. tie in of content with bluray player and plasma/lcd tv manufacturers may offer synergies too...
btw, tenoBell, what do you think about this as "720p high def"
i think it is a great encode, and what people would mean and expect of a digital download high definition movie...film grain is preserved and darker areas do not suffer from ugly quantisation or "lakes of hues" effects. 6 megabits/second :thumbs:
Comments
I agree 320x240 is a really low pixel count.
On a good television it is softer than broadcast television.
But its not as bad as what many proclaim.
What I find really funny is when people demand they'll wait for HD.
To move and store HDCAM. Which has subsampled luminance and chroma - 8 bit at 7:1 compression and weighs in at 4MB's per frame. Requires large high speed hard drives and dual link component high bandwidth data connections at 143Mb per second.
I can only imagine what's being downloaded on Bitorrent may meet HD by resolution but is highly compressed and has a really low bit depth.
But psychologically people believe its better HD.
I'm not saying iTunes videos are as good as studio DVD's.
I agree 320x240 is a really low pixel count.
On a good television it is softer than broadcast television.
But its not as bad as what many proclaim.
What I find really funny is when people demand they'll wait for HD.
To move and store HDCAM. Which has subsampled luminance and chroma - 8 bit at 7:1 compression and weighs in at 4MB's per frame. Requires large high speed hard drives and dual link component high bandwidth data connections at 143Mb per second.
I can only imagine what's being downloaded on Bitorrent may meet HD by resolution but is highly compressed and has a really low bit depth.
But psychologically people believe its better HD.
good points but obviously people wanting HD downloads are NOT talking about HDCAM!! we're talking 5-8megabits/second 1280x720[24p, 25p, or 30p] h.264 compressed. this may not be "better" than even DVCPRO but it is probably better or close to "DVD quality" when watching on the screen or on tv
bittorrent downloads are generally a different kettle of fish of which quality varies between "better than VHS" up to "not quite as good as DVD". very few HD bittorrent downloads are available... also these HD bittorrent downloads are "problematic" for our discussion in that they are usually recompressed (sometimes with divx/xvid!) off HD(720p or 1080i) Mpeg2 sources.
edit:
i would assert that $2.99 for 1280x720(24p, 25p, or 30p) h.264 video smartly compressed to 5-8mbps off studio master 2k or 4k would be quite acceptable to many people, marketed as "apple itunes video store high definition downloads"
That's business. Apple's price scheme might be crazy, but it hasn't stopped people from buying their products. Not everyone perceives pricing in the same way. No one is forcing you to buy from the Apple Store. As an alternative you can always buy the episodes on DVD.
BTW I think putting a few episodes from TLC or Discovery on there would be cool.
good points but obviously people wanting HD downloads are NOT talking about HDCAM!!
I know they won't be downloading HDCAM. People around the net are throwing out specs on what makes great video and demanding HD and have never seen an HD image from its source. And HDCAM is just a middle HD format.
ATSC broadcast HD is ok. HD sports is pretty good more than likely because its 60i. I don't think current HD broadcast is up to par. I imagine once the broadcast industry is forced to give up its analog wavelengths and finally focuses on digital and HD. The quality of HD broadcast should improve. At this point they do just enough to claim they broadcast in HD.
we're talking 5-8megabits/second 1280x720[24p, 25p, or 30p] h.264 compressed. this may not be "better" than even DVCPRO but it is probably better or close to "DVD quality" when watching on the screen or on tv
DVC-Pro HD is 100 Mb per second.
Yes I know they are talking about 5-8 Mb/s. At that low of a data rate you've lost most of what makes HD - high definition. For contrast a full uncompressed HD stream is so large there is no tape format for it. Its data rate is 2Gb per second.
I can imagine on Bittorrent they are recording from broadcast HD. Which already isn't that great. Compressing it into a smaller file for downloading. What you end up with is a superemly degraded image that fills up a designated pixel space and then calling it HD.
also these HD bittorrent downloads are "problematic" for our discussion in that they are usually recompressed (sometimes with divx/xvid!) off HD(720p or 1080i) Mpeg2 sources.
I've seen on other lists people posting they will never use Apple's service because they can download HD shows on Bittorrent now. Which is fine its their choice. I just don't believe the images they are watching are all that good. They've never seen good HD to compare it too.
i would assert that $2.99 for 1280x720(24p, 25p, or 30p) h.264 video smartly compressed to 5-8mbps off studio master 2k or 4k would be quite acceptable to many people, marketed as "apple itunes video store high definition downloads"
Of course something like this will happen in the future. Once they figure out how to get around bandwidth issues. A more likely interim solution would be for Apple to offer 720x480. At least that way people would stop complaining about them being lower than DVD resolution.
I imagine part of the reason Apple can make these deals is because the videos are lower resolution. Television producers probably wouldn't be too happy if the iTunes videos cannibalized the more profitable DVD sales.
I know they won't be downloading HDCAM. People around the net are throwing out specs on what makes great video and demanding HD and have never seen an HD image from its source. And HDCAM is just a middle HD format.
ATSC broadcast HD is ok. HD sports is pretty good more than likely because its 60i. I don't think current HD broadcast is up to par. I imagine once the broadcast industry is forced to give up its analog wavelengths and finally focuses on digital and HD. The quality of HD broadcast should improve. At this point they do just enough to claim they broadcast in HD.
DVC-Pro HD is 100 Mb per second.
Yes I know they are talking about 5-8 Mb/s. At that low of a data rate you've lost most of what makes HD - high definition. For contrast a full uncompressed HD stream is so large there is no tape format for it. Its data rate is 2Gb per second.
I can imagine on Bittorrent they are recording from broadcast HD. Which already isn't that great. Compressing it into a smaller file for downloading. What you end up with is a superemly degraded image that fills up a designated pixel space and then calling it HD.
I've seen on other lists people posting they will never use Apple's service because they can download HD shows on Bittorrent now. Which is fine its their choice. I just don't believe the images they are watching are all that good. They've never seen good HD to compare it too.
Of course something like this will happen in the future. Once they figure out how to get around bandwidth issues. A more likely interim solution would be for Apple to offer 720x480. At least that way people would stop complaining about them being lower than DVD resolution.
I imagine part of the reason Apple can make these deals is because the videos are lower resolution. Television producers probably wouldn't be too happy if the iTunes videos cannibalized the more profitable DVD sales.
i think at the end of the day, yeah, people are ready for the next stage of legal video downloads, 852x480 16:9 h.264 (what apple calls "480p") would be the first step.
this would definitely compete directly with dvds. but eventually movie and television studios will have to face this fact just as the music labels have come to terms with cds and digital downloads side-by-side. here's a prediction: total revenue for tv and movie studios would increase remarkably with "480p" downloads and DVDs
in terms of bandwidth and what the studios can deal with, i think moving to "480p" legal downloads will be complete by middle of 2006. because:
1. 480p and DVDs can happily coexist. legal downloads if you just want to watch something and backup/burn your copy yourself or get a DVD, you've got the nice booklet, case, a DVD *is* a backup copy of a movie
2. 480p 16:9 is the next phase for first half of 2006 portable media players, moving beyond 320x240 as many pdas, phones, media players etc. have started to go to higher res.
3. bandwidth increases over 320x240 would be somewhat in line with global increase in bandwidth availability at the same price point. 3-4mbit/sec including sound, 852x480 24/25/30p smartly encoded h.264, is really quite acceptable for downloads.
4. 852x480 is a resolution that would look great on standard crt tvs (letterboxed or keyholed), fits well into those with edtvs (eg. our groverat), and is a good transitional format for those going to 1280x720 or 1024x768 plasmas and lcds
5. and here's the clincher: digital downloads can be positioned appropriately with true highdef (720p or 1080p bluray). the movie and tv industry can significantly reduce expensive marketing distribution and production of DVDs, make digital downloads available at low cost to them, and now focus on bluray. revenue streams can be maintained via dvds and digital downloads, while bluray offers opportunities for high profit margins assuming production costs are sensibly managed. tie in of content with bluray player and plasma/lcd tv manufacturers may offer synergies too...
btw, tenoBell, what do you think about this as "720p high def"
http://www.apple.com/trailers/magnol...testindian/hd/
i think it is a great encode, and what people would mean and expect of a digital download high definition movie...film grain is preserved and darker areas do not suffer from ugly quantisation or "lakes of hues" effects. 6 megabits/second :thumbs: