[stampeder]

Apples and oranges

audioguy_on_ca, there is no such thing as an "HD", "Digital", "4K", etc. etc. antenna. We've been telling people that for years and years here. An antenna is the means of receiving what the transmitter outputs via its electromagnetic waves. It is not involved in resolving what a receiving tuner makes of the digital data gathered by that antenna. As always, go for the best reception available, but don't get the concepts of OTA signal and digital payload mixed up. Even if/when the UHF channels are repacked, the antenna will simply need to be strong on those replacked channels.

As mentioned earlier here, one of the ATSC's guiding principles for 2.0 and 3.0 is that they must be transparent to passive signal gear already in use (antennas, preamps, switches, splitters, etc.) so let's not forget that.

 

[audioguy_on_ca]

Even if/when the UHF channels are repacked, the antenna will simply need to be strong on those repacked channels

which could necessitate a change in your Antenna System

This was my concern. Thank you all.

As far as 4k doubters go (never mind the Japanese 8k), consider how many 4k cameras are actually around RIGHT NOW. The new Apple phone, the Samsung phones have been there a year or more, the 8-9MP DSLRs being used to shoot feature films and episodic television for how long now? There's an army out there...it's happening. Manufacturers have driven this change, and now we're close to (or driving towards) having the infrastructure to deliver to the end user, although I suspect "channel surfing" may take a different form in the future...GUI anyone?? NOW does net neutrality seem important to you?

Driverless cars are coming, as is immersive entertainment (we'll need SOMETHING to do while we're being driven to/from work - Dolby Atmos in cars, anyone?) /tinfoilhat /leftturnofftopic

 

[Titanium48]

Camera manufacturers are marketing megapixels, and people are buying because it doesn't cost much for still images and it allows for a substantial amount of digital zoom before there is significant quality loss. Resolution is much more costly with video (in terms of increased bitrates), especially if you want high framerates to reduce jitter and motion blur, and even 1080p is beyond to the resolution limit of your eye in many viewing situations. Most people's eyes can resolve approximately 1 minute of arc, or about 1 mm at a distance of 3 m. A 1920 x 1080 image at 1 mm per pixel is 1.92 x 1.08 m, or 2.2 m on the diagonal. That means you need a bigger than 90 inch TV from 10 feet away before you see the limits of 2k, nevermind 4k. Introduce any significant motion and you will notice compression artifacts with that setup, even at a full ATSC 1.0 bitrate. Better codecs should be used to reduce motion artifacts before upping the resolution.

 

[Frankzappa]

Checking the news recently and I came across an article regarding Sinclair Broadcasting showcasing to a South Korean delegation a live demonstration of of 4K, High Dynamic Range, Scalable High Efficiency Video.

Sinclair demoes ATSC UHD HDR |

With South Korea looking to broadcast the 2018 Olympics in 4k and Japan looking to broadcast the 2020 Olympics in 8K things are moving ahead at breakneck speed.

Resolution crazy?
First 4K commercial broadcast in Japan, NHK record the Yankees in 8K and Samsung to develop a 11K display

Considering how cheap 4K displays are already with very little content I suspect next Christmas that 8K Sharp 85" Display that's currently about $150,000 will go for a paltry $75,000, something to ask Santa for next year:wink

Sharp is selling the world?s first 8K TV for $133K

Considering I payed $448 @ Krazy Kellys ($1,060 today money) back in 1983 for a 20" (really 19") middle of the road RCA TV we're getting one heck of a bargain....or I got ripped off as a youngun:laugh

P.S. Has anyone signed up to see the Blue Jays in 4K next year @$149.00/month and what's the cost of the STB?

 

[majortom]

with NAB last week,imagine there is probably more about ATSC 3.0 floating around out there in "blogger land"...

But this sounded interesting... sounds like LG/Zenith is essentially combining a smart antenna with hdhomerun like functionality...

NAB 2016: LG Demos ATSC 3.0 Wireless Network Antenna | TvTechnology

 

[rob50312]

ASTC 3.0 internet content/capability

Will this content not end up getting geo blocked between Canada and US for those receiving cross border broadcast ?

 

[Wheelman]

Are we going to skip ATSC 2.0? Sounds like a good idea with TV manufacturers pushing the 4K panels.

 

[Wayne]

It is disappointing that OTA is so far behind the curve with 4K. OTA was one of the first ways to be able to get HD content about 15 years ago. But now we have had 4K from streaming services like Netflix for a while and 4K BluRays are now out as well. But I guess it is just too hard to change broadcasting standards in short periods of time.

 

[ExDilbert]

It took about 10 years to transition from analog to ATSC. At that pace, it could take until 2026 to transition to ATSC3. It does look like ATSC2 is going to be skipped.

The other question to ask is whether there will be any demand for ATSC3. OTA stations are being squeezed out of the UHF spectrum used by ATSC and VHF is less than ideal. In a few years, there may not even be enough spectrum to implement ATSC3 in major markets. In addition, younger viewers are ignoring traditional broadcasting in favour of streaming. Even traditional TV viewers are opting for OTT services. By 2026, OTA may be obsolete.

 

[audacity]

But I guess it is just too hard to change broadcasting standards in short periods of time.

Exactly. Because when you do those sorts of "cut-over" transitions, everyone with the old gear is immediately left out in the cold. I suppose they could setup new UHD channels that broadcast at the same time as the old HD channels. But then that's sitting on extra spectrum unnecessarily.

I don't think we'll see ATSC3, or whatever, for a good decade from now.

Blu-ray discs also have a similar "cut over" problem to the new 4k format. I fully expect all future physical formats to be stillborn, but for different reasons than the "cut over" problem.

Ultimately, streaming is the best option for integrating the latest tech. When your piece of equipment (Apple TV, smart TV, or whatever) connects to a service like Netflix, they can do the protocol negotiation thing and send the highest quality format that both the client and the server supports.

At the end of the day though, I don't perceive much of a difference between 1920x1080 and 3840x2160 unless I'm really close to the TV set. I don't see this resolution improvement as a "must have" upgrade unless you have a really large TV, or you sit really close to it.

The main thing that I'm looking forward to in future formats are: eliminating interlaced video, 10 bit color, and higher frame rates. If we could get 1920x1080, progressive scanned @ 60fps with 10 bit color, I think that would be sufficient for most scenarios.

 

[rob50312]

ASTC 3.0 internet streaming ability

ASTC 3.0 has live streaming simulcasting capability and multiple transmitters abilities.So the US stations will likely be forced to geo.block their internet feed and if they deploy the low power/multiple transmitter approach we may loss all US OTA access that we now have.Or they may stick with the single big tower transmission.In Canada a non mandated transmission change will likely not be deploted as the providers what you to buy their services.

 

[ExDilbert]

ATSC 3.0 may not even be mandated for broadcasters in the US or Canada. UHDTV is not a must have by any means. It may be mandated for TV receivers and implemented by broadcasters if and when desired.

 

[majortom]

here is another public notice from the FCC...
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0426/DA-16-451A1.pdf

I almost wish they would just get off the North American high horse, bite the bullet and scrap the entire ATSC thing just make everyone use DVB-T2 like everywhere else in the world. Would save broadcasters and consumers money in the long run, as the hardware is already out there on both ends and is dirt cheap in comparison... rather than redesigning a new system every 10 years...in the end making us pay a premium because we have to be "different".

 

[mugging]

CNET ATSC 3.0 article

ATSC 3.0: What you need to know about the future of broadcast television - CNET

 

[JJMoney]

4KTV with ATSC3.0 Tuner

Curious if anyone has seen any 4KTV?s on the market that have a ATSC3.0 tuner built-in. I?m in the market for a new TV but I haven?t found any that offer this yet - I?d like to future proof myself a bit since it seems some of the U.S. broadcasters will be pushing to start adopting this standard in 2018.

Wondering if anyone has any info.

 

[ProjectSHO89]

You'd have to go to S. Korea for one right now.

Since the standards are not yet finalized, you're premature.

 

[17671]

I remember when everyone wanted to Future Proof when changing from NTSC to ATSC 1.0 and pretty much everyone owns at least one ATSC TV in their house. Even if a TV is released with ATSC 3.0, it might take a decade for networks to upgrade their transmitters, cameras, studios and their master controls to support it, it was a big investment back in the day and a lot of networks have not been able to be profitable after such heavy investment. I don't think everything should be in 4K UHD, maybe sports and movies, everything else is fine in HD

 

[rob50312]

FCC is voting on approval NOV 16 for ASTC 3.0.It does seem like some US broadcasters want it ASAP.Most of the repack US stations are purchasing 3.0 compatible equipment.Makes sense to wait it out for new TV if you use OTA .

 

[ExDilbert]

The last set I purchased doesn't have a tuner. I use an HTPC with PVR software and a PC tuner to record OTA. Recordings can be watched using media players or on smart TVs with network playback capabilities. DLNA enabled TV tuners such as a HDHomerun can be used to watch live TV using DLNA media players or on smart TVs with DLNA enabled apps. That way the tuner can be upgraded as needed at a much lower price than replacing the entire TV.

 

[Satellite97]

The 3.0 standard is still years from a widespread rollout, but the countdown has officially begun.

It is not backward compatible, so broadcasters will have to simulcast in the current 1.0 during the transition. MVPDs must continue to carry ATSC signals but don't have to carry the new 3.0 signals.

ATSC 3.0 is the new broadcast transmission standard that will allow TV stations to do video on demand, other interactive services, provide 4K video, and more.