The European Broadcasting Union has released a statement calling for broadcasters and content producers to opt for progressive high definition wherever possible.
The EBU has been giving HDTV demonstrations over the past two years, and asked the core question: "what image format standard should be chosen for the future of HDTV?"
Conclusion: 1080p is the ideal. 720p is an acceptable intermediate step. 1080i shouldn't be used.
They state that: "All cameras and all displays, whether in broadcasting organizations or in private households, are either already using, or will use, progressive scanning. Technically speaking, nothing justifies an intermediate stage with interlaced scanning. Converting a scanning system from interlace to progressive can never be perfect. We have everything to gain from moving on to progressive. In addition, modern compression technologies that adapt to the picture content are less efficient with an interlaced signal. All computer and flat panel television screens use progressive scanning.
"It would be incoherent not to adopt the same principle for new broadcast services. Finally, manufacturers of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray DVD equipment use progressive scanning for virtually all their products."
The EBU's demonstrations feature three screens positioned precisely in relation to the viewer, showing the same sequences in 1080i/25, 720p/50, and 1080p/50. Each screen will be divided into two, demonstrating the impact of the production process on HDTV image quality.
They continue: "The optimal migration from the current 625i/25 is to 1080p/50, though an intermediate stage of 720p/50 may be needed. Producing programmes in 1080p/50 now means that the quality is ready for when consumers can watch 1080p, and it ensures a longer life for productions. The downside is that it is twice as demanding in terms of uncompressed data rate as the 720p or the 1080i. Consequently there are still some years to go until an end-to-end 1080p/50 chain will become available."
There's certainly a greater degree of "future proofing" when producing content at 1080p than 1080i, even if it is some time before it can be successfully Omni builds first ever high-definition broadcast unit in Walest, and is viewable by the majority of HDTV owners.
(Via Broadcast Buyer)
Related posts
Ireland airs its first HD broadcast on terrestrial TV
Omni builds first ever high-definition broadcast unit in Wales
Japan's NHK broadcasters demo Super Hi-Vision system
It is obvious that the sooner we get proper native 1080p material being broadcasting with 1920x1080p resolution the better.
Some of the things that the article doesnot mention are:-
1)Health problems - of interlace that is rarely
mentioned. There is a reason why the computer
industry stopped using interlace about ten years ago.
2) Picture quality - using best native 1080p sources.
3) Improved contrast - picture clarity.
4) What happens with the picture and sound quality
when films are shown in slow and fast motion for
example a frame at a time (1x), 3x, 5x 7x or 9x?
5)Reduced picture problems (artefacts) for example
coloured blocks.
6)Refresh rate must be at least 75Hz and probably
should be at least 100Hz or 120Hz.
7) The cost of broadcasting in 1080p has probably
been hyped compared to how much money is wasted on
loss making films etcetera.
8)How much does a 1080p video camera cost compared
to a 1080i camera or over paid actors etcetera?