Loss of quality at the transmitting end isn’t anything new these days. Any of you old enough to have been in the broadcasting industry before satellite know this. If you could see the difference in the quality of a network signal at it’s originating studio as compared to after it traveled hundreds of miles through co-ax and microwave relay centers to the local affiliates, you would have been shocked! It was truly amazing how good a program looked at the studio compared to what it looked after being received at home. As “bad” as you think todays digital compression and transmission look, the degraduation of the signal was FAR worse in the pre-satellite, analog days. Satellite transmission cleaned up the picture a lot, especially in the audio department, but the transmission chain was still just a bunch of analog compromises set in a long string from the Network to the viewer. Digital content delivery though, still has a long way to go and will depend largely on how much compression is applied (read: how greedy is the broadcaster). Broadcast quality is an exact science and a subjective one all at the same time. With all of today’s delivery formats, I fear it will only get worse before it gets better. I now have people sending me (with alarming regularity) DVD source materials for use in productions. Yikes! To some, the phrase “it’s digital” seems to justify any piece of crap material that can be utilized in a produstion. The process of all digital production/editing is facing quality problems like never before. It’s up to us to at least attempt to educate our clients and do our best to keep things looking as good as possible for as long as possible.
So, despite all of the problems digital transmission faces today, it’s still a step in the right direction.
Now, if I could only say the same thing about the content od today’s programming…
Tom