4K \ UHD New TV question
Discussion
TheInternet said:
Further to this, IIRC the first BBC HD was broadcast in 2006, the equivalent 4k broadcasts are still a long way off.
I think this must have been around the time I built a PC with suitable parts to receive (and record) the 1080i broadcasts, using the Freesat transmissions at first, then later the ones via Freeview. I remember it was quite a black art to get it all working and every Windows update seemed to cause another issue for me to sort out, but it was at least one way to get some content up on the 1080p projector I had around that time.I don't think I'll bother trying to build a PC to receive any 4K test transmissions though when the time comes. TBH upscaled 1080p onto a 4K (5 metre wide) projector screen looked pretty impressive to me anyway, but on a small (relatively) TV screen I'm just not convinced it's worth the effort for 4K.
Super Slo Mo said:
Yes, that's probably right. The Olympics do tend to be a little conservative with regards to output and capture.
I don't remember exactly when SKY first started in HD, but they trailed it well before they started broadcasting, as will be the case with 4K. At the moment there are OB trucks being built and/or converted for 4K, but standards have yet to be finalised for distribution (particularly around methods of capture/transfer), and as yet there are no cameras being made available for testing, although again, no doubt that'll change quite soon.
Having said that, there'll be investment needed in new lenses etc anyway, again, I've not seen any broadcast spec 4K lenses yet, but I guess we won't until new cameras become available.
You might wonder how they did the Ryder Cup. Apparently they had 250 fps cameras too. I don't remember exactly when SKY first started in HD, but they trailed it well before they started broadcasting, as will be the case with 4K. At the moment there are OB trucks being built and/or converted for 4K, but standards have yet to be finalised for distribution (particularly around methods of capture/transfer), and as yet there are no cameras being made available for testing, although again, no doubt that'll change quite soon.
Having said that, there'll be investment needed in new lenses etc anyway, again, I've not seen any broadcast spec 4K lenses yet, but I guess we won't until new cameras become available.
Magic919 said:
You might wonder how they did the Ryder Cup. Apparently they had 250 fps cameras too.
250 fps cameras are nothing special in tv these days. We've been using cameras running higher frame rates than this for several years on rugby coverage for instance. Off hand I don't know what was in the Ryder cup, I will ask a colleague in a bit though, he worked on it this year.
I'm a TV cameraman and I wouldn't waste your money mate. This Morning on ITV is still made and broadcast in SD and the majority of the stuff that is supposedly HD is shot on s
tty cheap cameras that can be bought in PC World.
HD broadcast is a bit of a con as the pictures where fine when we had only 5 channels then the bandwidth per channel went down as channels increased thus the pictures started to look crap on the new big flatscreens.
So HD came about in order to make the pictures look good again.
We use 4k so that the picture can be zoomed in and still have at least 1k. They are also playing with 8k on football matches so that the camera can be locked off and the frame digitally panned and zoomed. Thus putting us out of work.
My personal opinion is that a true 4k picture is too hyper realistic and not how we see things.
tty cheap cameras that can be bought in PC World. HD broadcast is a bit of a con as the pictures where fine when we had only 5 channels then the bandwidth per channel went down as channels increased thus the pictures started to look crap on the new big flatscreens.
So HD came about in order to make the pictures look good again.
We use 4k so that the picture can be zoomed in and still have at least 1k. They are also playing with 8k on football matches so that the camera can be locked off and the frame digitally panned and zoomed. Thus putting us out of work.
My personal opinion is that a true 4k picture is too hyper realistic and not how we see things.
Magic919 said:
Point I'm making is they had a few 4K cameras and OB trucks to back it up.
Just found out some details.OB truck, singular. It's a re-hashed 3D truck, it's all a bit of a Heath Robinson approach currently, none of the 4K stuff was shot live, but was recorded on board each camera, what we call 'ENG', then processed in the truck.
The cameras used were not broadcast cameras, as they don't yet exist. They're small versions of movie cameras, hence the on-board recording.
The live footage was HD, as per usual.
croyde said:
I'm a TV cameraman and I wouldn't waste your money mate. This Morning on ITV is still made and broadcast in SD and the majority of the stuff that is supposedly HD is shot on stty cheap cameras that can be bought in PC World.
HD broadcast is a bit of a con as the pictures where fine when we had only 5 channels then the bandwidth per channel went down as channels increased thus the pictures started to look crap on the new big flatscreens.
So HD came about in order to make the pictures look good again.
We use 4k so that the picture can be zoomed in and still have at least 1k. They are also playing with 8k on football matches so that the camera can be locked off and the frame digitally panned and zoomed. Thus putting us out of work.
My personal opinion is that a true 4k picture is too hyper realistic and not how we see things.
You'll be having to hang up your white gloves.... tty cheap cameras that can be bought in PC World. HD broadcast is a bit of a con as the pictures where fine when we had only 5 channels then the bandwidth per channel went down as channels increased thus the pictures started to look crap on the new big flatscreens.
So HD came about in order to make the pictures look good again.
We use 4k so that the picture can be zoomed in and still have at least 1k. They are also playing with 8k on football matches so that the camera can be locked off and the frame digitally panned and zoomed. Thus putting us out of work.
My personal opinion is that a true 4k picture is too hyper realistic and not how we see things.
.Actually, I ended up having to operate a hand held live for the first time ever on Saturday, as most of the crew failed to get over to France due to the ATC problems last week. I delivered probably the worst footage they've ever seen, but better than nothing I guess
. The problem is that I'm used to looking at images from an Engineering point of view, not a creative/cameraman's point of view, so found that aspect a little difficult, even with my photography background. Enjoyed it though, but I don't think anyone's going to be asking me to do it again any time soon.croyde said:
I had to use a 4k camera in a studio as a test using a film lens. Not yet practical for use as a TV camera, well studio anyway, would be fine on a drama.
We've got a 4k cinematography camera.You are right, as you've said before I think, the main use we've got is for filming in 4k so we don't have to do zooms and pans on the fly and do it in post.
That said, the output is very very nice in 4K.
Another interesting point is the 'hyperreality' scenario. That is, we've culturally accepted the slight softness and motion blur of film to show that something is a 'quality' cinematographic production.
I think for sports it's different, but for film, as I thought with the 48fps Hobbits, it did have a possibly unintended appearance of 'soap opera'.
Super Slo Mo said:
You'll be having to hang up your white gloves.... .
Actually, I ended up having to operate a hand held live for the first time ever on Saturday, as most of the crew failed to get over to France due to the ATC problems last week. I delivered probably the worst footage they've ever seen, but better than nothing I guess. The problem is that I'm used to looking at images from an Engineering point of view, not a creative/cameraman's point of view, so found that aspect a little difficult, even with my photography background. Enjoyed it though, but I don't think anyone's going to be asking me to do it again any time soon.
Was that on the rugby?.Actually, I ended up having to operate a hand held live for the first time ever on Saturday, as most of the crew failed to get over to France due to the ATC problems last week. I delivered probably the worst footage they've ever seen, but better than nothing I guess
. The problem is that I'm used to looking at images from an Engineering point of view, not a creative/cameraman's point of view, so found that aspect a little difficult, even with my photography background. Enjoyed it though, but I don't think anyone's going to be asking me to do it again any time soon.croyde said:
Super Slo Mo said:
You'll be having to hang up your white gloves.... .
Actually, I ended up having to operate a hand held live for the first time ever on Saturday, as most of the crew failed to get over to France due to the ATC problems last week. I delivered probably the worst footage they've ever seen, but better than nothing I guess. The problem is that I'm used to looking at images from an Engineering point of view, not a creative/cameraman's point of view, so found that aspect a little difficult, even with my photography background. Enjoyed it though, but I don't think anyone's going to be asking me to do it again any time soon.
Was that on the rugby?.Actually, I ended up having to operate a hand held live for the first time ever on Saturday, as most of the crew failed to get over to France due to the ATC problems last week. I delivered probably the worst footage they've ever seen, but better than nothing I guess
. The problem is that I'm used to looking at images from an Engineering point of view, not a creative/cameraman's point of view, so found that aspect a little difficult, even with my photography background. Enjoyed it though, but I don't think anyone's going to be asking me to do it again any time soon.Edited by Super Slo Mo on Wednesday 17th December 12:36
So,
In a kind of summary
Cheers for all the info (especially from those in the video industry)
T1b
In a kind of summary
- 1 - 4K currently is awesome for the up scaling
- 2 - Bandwidth will get strangled if \ when 4K hits broadcast
- 3 - Curved 4K is awesome (if that's your bag)
- 4 - It may come into its own with dedicated non broadcast content via dedicated media
- 5 - Might be good via streaming service (providing you've got enough bandwidth)
Cheers for all the info (especially from those in the video industry)
T1b
Super Slo Mo said:
It was. I'm slightly amused that you know about it already.
Edited by Super Slo Mo on Wednesday 17th December 12:36
'Cept I was thinking about the Rugby a couple of weeks back. Down in the South of France and I was dead jealous of the guys that went but it then rained with biblical consequences.
Happy I didn't go when I saw the pictures
croyde said:
Super Slo Mo said:
It was. I'm slightly amused that you know about it already.
Edited by Super Slo Mo on Wednesday 17th December 12:36
'Cept I was thinking about the Rugby a couple of weeks back. Down in the South of France and I was dead jealous of the guys that went but it then rained with biblical consequences.
Happy I didn't go when I saw the pictures
Tell you what though, manic though it was, I really enjoyed it. Normally I'd be sitting on the floor in the corner of a truck somewhere waiting for the de-rig, hoping my kit didn't stop working, but this time I pretty much didn't stop all day.
I also enjoyed the camera work, terrible though my operating was, it certainly livened up the day from my perspective.
I also enjoyed the camera work, terrible though my operating was, it certainly livened up the day from my perspective.
Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff