-
How much longer for 720p?
-
[Andrew Kimery] “With all that being said, I think 720p will eventually ‘die out’ because it’s a smaller number than 1080 and not because people can actually tell a difference.”
I think a bigger deal is if we can get 1080p60 added to ATSC.
-
[Gary Huff] “I think a bigger deal is if we can get 1080p60 added to ATSC.”
I believe in 1080p60 was added to ATSC but turners made prior to this update won’t be able to decode the signal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p
I think 1080p60, like 4K, won’t make it to broadcast but will eventually be used by streaming video services.
-
[Gary Huff] ”
I wouldn’t bother uprezzing for “future-proofing”…just a good quality master at the highest resolution that was supported by the original material.”Okay, the best I could do today is 1080p anyway and since it seems there’s not a huge difference in 720p and 1080p, I’ll stick with what I’m doing. And frankly, because these classes go through the Adobe Connect servers anyway, the video quality is somewhere between okay and kinda crappy (did I mention my camera is the built-in webcam on my 2011 17″ MBP). I believe their frame rate is currently 10-15 fps, but in theory, they are supposed to be upgrading that soon. Maybe when they do, I’ll take a look at changing over to the 1920×1200 screen capture and 1080p timeline.
Thanks again,
Dave -
The networks’ intent will be 1080p/59.94 for internal prod/post. FCP X handles this quite well. Not so for others. Transmission may still be 720p for a while.Obviously conversion from 1080p/59.94 to 720p/59.94 is a no-brainer.
Right now with most internet speeds, 720p/23.976 is a real sweet spot for Internet videos.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Forgive me for sounding flippant but I find this thread frankly ignorant. Why would you want to shoot 1080 and edit 720? You are scaling and I’d rather have a true progressive image to start with for the web rather than relying on software to scale. Like the silly mine is bigger, the argument that 1080 is ‘bigger’ than 720 so it MUST be better is absurd. 720 is true progressive. 1080 is not. 1080 is two interlaced fields combined which makes for some pretty crappy issues related to motion and edges. It will look better as a still frame but once you moves watch out.
All this marketing crap for TVs has confused an awful lot of people. Sorry but 1080 can not be discerned on a computer screen from 720 nor a 42 inch set for that matter given comparable sets The only place were the slightly extra h rez of 1080 might make a difference is on a 40 foot screen and even then its about the process of how you got there not just because its a bigger number. And what you see on a TV screen NOT just about resolution Contrast and brightness being number the number one two and three factor (since resolution perception is about contrast) and then things like motion response, how the color is processed, and the video scaling circuitry in your TV are just some factors. And not all HDTVs and video processors are created equal. And yes that means a TV labeled 720p can make a better picture than a 1080.
As for the silly notion that ABC, etc are switching to 1080, poppycock. I work at all three listed and no one is switching to what is a less than perfect format for TV anytime. In fact I am at ABC now and shared this thread with some engineering coworkers and they got a good laugh.
Very simply 720 and 1080 are two different ways to send water down a pipe. Both have advantages and disadvantages but overall are really the same thing in the end. 720 is far better for motion, and 1080 offers slightly higher rez when blown up to large (over 4 foot size screens) but other than that who uses what is politics as in what company gave what network a deal to use their stuff in the beginning.
Frankly having so many formats is stupid and causes major hassles for us that work with it in the broadcast world. But everyone wants a piece of the puzzle.
As for 1080p for broadcast, don’t hold your breath. Everything is now 4K? Laughable. Some of what you watch now that says 1080 isn’t even and most all TVs scale any format to somewhere between 1080 and 720, that is if your cable company even broadcasts stuff anywhere near the resolution they claim.
Walter Graff
waltergraff.com -
[Walter Graff] “Forgive me for sounding flippant but I find this thread frankly ignorant. Why would you want to shoot 1080 and edit 720? You are scaling and I’d rather have a true progressive image to start with for the web rather than relying on software to scale. Like the silly mine is bigger, the argument that 1080 is ‘bigger’ than 720 so it MUST be better is absurd. 720 is true progressive. 1080 is not. 1080 is two interlaced fields combined which makes for some pretty crappy issues related to motion and edges. It will look better as a still frame but once you moves watch out.”
I’ve obviously been shooting and editing incorrectly for the last 7 years
Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure” -
No you haven’t been shooting and editing wrong, just not making the best use of your ingredients.
Walter Graff
BlueSky Media, Inc.
walter@bluesky-web.com
http://www.bluesky-web.com
Offices in NYC and Amherst Mass. -
[Walter Graff] “All this marketing crap for TVs has confused an awful lot of people. Sorry but 1080 can not be discerned on a computer screen from 720”
For someone tossing around a parcel of “ignorants,” that’s an awfully silly thing to say.
-
[Walter Graff] “720 is true progressive. 1080 is not. 1080 is two interlaced fields combined which makes for some pretty crappy issues related to motion and edges. “
This is not correct if you are talking about PsF recording. The whole frame – as an NLE sees – is the “same” (outside of spatial differences) in 23.98, 24, 25, 50, 59.95 P or PsF recordings. So scaling a 1080p frame to a 720p frame of the same frame rate DOES NOT introduce interlace, motion or interpolation artifacts.
In the 24p world, it’s quite common to edit 1080p/23.98 and cross-convert to 720p/59.94 (with pulldown added) for delivery. Besides, the rational offered in the OP was for creative and not technical reasons. By your reasoning, should he shoot 720p and blow up some shots? Is this better? That would introduce obvious image degradation by comparison.
[Walter Graff] “As for the silly notion that ABC, etc are switching to 1080, poppycock. I work at all three listed and no one is switching to what is a less than perfect format for TV anytime. In fact I am at ABC now and shared this thread with some engineering coworkers and they got a good laugh. “
The consideration is for 1080p/59.94 for INTERNAL infrastructure over 3G SDI. This may get messed up in translation as these rumors spread, but I do personally know of active discussions related to that. This would be independent of the broadcast and transmission side of the house.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Walter Graff] “1080 is two interlaced fields combined which makes for some pretty crappy issues related to motion and edges. It will look better as a still frame but once you moves watch out.”
1080i60 is interlaced but 1080p60, 1080p30 and 1080p24 are not. It’s fine to be flippant but not inaccurate. 😉
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up