"The 1980s have been the trailblazing years for ... high-definition"
May 10, 2013 11:14 AM Subscribe
The hair. The eyeglasses. The 80s.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:29 AM on May 10, 2013
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:29 AM on May 10, 2013
It's amazing how long this technology was around before we were allowed to have it -- basically for no better reason than that the broadcast networks, supported by an archaic regulatory structure, were unwilling to give up one tiny cent of their profits, no matter how much it might improve the user experience.
Thank goodness there are no technologies that are being similarly constrained by corporate greed and archaic legal regimes today.
posted by The Bellman at 11:50 AM on May 10, 2013 [6 favorites]
Thank goodness there are no technologies that are being similarly constrained by corporate greed and archaic legal regimes today.
posted by The Bellman at 11:50 AM on May 10, 2013 [6 favorites]
I was confused by the "Hurricane Irene" footage, but then after searching, there's this. 1981. It's so weird how long it took it to get going. I remember in the mid-90s talk about it (especially in Wired and such)... So weird that it was a thing even so far ago.
BEYOND 2000!!! OMFG!, reprazent thecjm :)
posted by symbioid at 11:50 AM on May 10, 2013
BEYOND 2000!!! OMFG!, reprazent thecjm :)
posted by symbioid at 11:50 AM on May 10, 2013
It's so weird how long it took it to get going.
Well, yes and no -- in retrospect, it's not surprising that it didn't become common until digital compression meant that you could broadcast an HDTV signal in the same bandwidth as SD.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:24 PM on May 10, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well, yes and no -- in retrospect, it's not surprising that it didn't become common until digital compression meant that you could broadcast an HDTV signal in the same bandwidth as SD.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:24 PM on May 10, 2013 [1 favorite]
Thank goodness there are no technologies that are being similarly constrained by corporate greed and archaic legal regimes today.
sarcasm?
btw, HD is slowly being replaced by 4K
posted by PipRuss at 12:26 PM on May 10, 2013
sarcasm?
btw, HD is slowly being replaced by 4K
posted by PipRuss at 12:26 PM on May 10, 2013
Still stuck on SD here. Can't say I feel any need to move to HD either, especially as long as Comcast insists on charging me extra for the privilege of their mediocre HD channels. Sadly, where I live, I might be able to pull in maybe 3 or 4 OTA HD channels.
posted by Thorzdad at 12:27 PM on May 10, 2013
posted by Thorzdad at 12:27 PM on May 10, 2013
I wasn't entirely sure whether to have the Innovation episode as the main link and Cowbell as teh bonus or vice-versa.
posted by RobotHero at 12:37 PM on May 10, 2013
posted by RobotHero at 12:37 PM on May 10, 2013
btw, HD is slowly being replaced by 4K
Not yet, not in real-world consumer applications. The "problem" is that you need an outrageously large screen for actual human eyes to be able to tell the difference between 1080p and 4K, unlike the obvious-even-to-my-mom advantages of HD over SD.
posted by Tomorrowful at 12:54 PM on May 10, 2013 [1 favorite]
Not yet, not in real-world consumer applications. The "problem" is that you need an outrageously large screen for actual human eyes to be able to tell the difference between 1080p and 4K, unlike the obvious-even-to-my-mom advantages of HD over SD.
posted by Tomorrowful at 12:54 PM on May 10, 2013 [1 favorite]
Actually, the problem with 4K isn't the screens. The problem is the bandwidth required to send video to the screens. A 1080p video stream uncompressed is 3Gb/s of data just to fill the pixels. With 4K, it's 12Gb/s. HDMI only has 4.65 Gb/s, which means that current consumer connectors cannot send enough data to fill a 4K screen. Currently, the only way to push a full 4K video stream to a 4K projector or screen is through 2 6G HD-SDI connectors, or 2 dual-link HDMI connectors. And no consumer products use those. None. In fact, there are virtually no HD-SDI consumer electronics. It's all in the professional and broadcast space, and it ain't cheap. There's also the fact that even with BluRay, you can't get enough data pushed from the disc to the output to get a full 4K image. Almost every 4K is run from a fileserver with either SSD drives in a RAID stripe, or some other form of high bandwidth data storage.
posted by daq at 1:32 PM on May 10, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by daq at 1:32 PM on May 10, 2013 [1 favorite]
So in addition to nearly destroying The Rolling Stones, Mick Jagger's dreadful solo music put High Definition TV in a 20 year coma.
posted by punkfloyd at 1:55 PM on May 10, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by punkfloyd at 1:55 PM on May 10, 2013 [1 favorite]
HD was one of those things you had to see in person, probably at the mall on in Best Buy, probably on a set playing that one HD feed that seems to only show "Live at Montreux" concerts or stock footage of some Pacific island.
Or home electronics show at the local convention center. My dad took us to one in the early '90s where Pioneer (I think) was heavily pumping their brand new 16:9 TVs with a demo loop on their state of the art laserdisc player. As a child who hated letterboxes with a passion (without understanding the technical merits), it was the coolest thing ever.
Looking back on it now, and with a quick Googling, they apparently pressed about 10 16:9 LD titles, four of which reached the US. But I bet Free Willy and Grumpy Old Men never looked better.
posted by hwyengr at 2:19 PM on May 10, 2013
Or home electronics show at the local convention center. My dad took us to one in the early '90s where Pioneer (I think) was heavily pumping their brand new 16:9 TVs with a demo loop on their state of the art laserdisc player. As a child who hated letterboxes with a passion (without understanding the technical merits), it was the coolest thing ever.
Looking back on it now, and with a quick Googling, they apparently pressed about 10 16:9 LD titles, four of which reached the US. But I bet Free Willy and Grumpy Old Men never looked better.
posted by hwyengr at 2:19 PM on May 10, 2013
It's amazing how long this technology was around before we were allowed to have it
I wouldn't exactly blame the conspiratorial boogymen of Big Gubm't or the Broadcast Networks on the HDTV process. I followed most of the standards work in the 1990s and it was a fucking mess..
Remember NAFTA was about to happen as well, which completely threw the consumer electronics industry into the lake.
posted by JoeZydeco at 2:26 PM on May 10, 2013
I wouldn't exactly blame the conspiratorial boogymen of Big Gubm't or the Broadcast Networks on the HDTV process. I followed most of the standards work in the 1990s and it was a fucking mess..
Remember NAFTA was about to happen as well, which completely threw the consumer electronics industry into the lake.
posted by JoeZydeco at 2:26 PM on May 10, 2013
Looking back on it now, and with a quick Googling, they apparently pressed about 10 16:9 LD titles, four of which reached the US. But I bet Free Willy and Grumpy Old Men never looked better.
Those 16x9 LDs weren't high-definition, though. They had the same resolution as normal LDs but the picture was squeezed anamorphically to fit in the 4x3 NTSC frame. The 16x9 TV simply unsqueezed the picture to its proper proportions again. DVD used the same trick to increase resolution of a standard-def frame, but the unsqueeze was built into the standard for people who didn't have a 16x9 screen at home.
Anyway, the first movie shot on (analog) HD video was Julia and Julia in 1987. It featured Sting. Trivia!
posted by Mothlight at 2:28 PM on May 10, 2013
Those 16x9 LDs weren't high-definition, though. They had the same resolution as normal LDs but the picture was squeezed anamorphically to fit in the 4x3 NTSC frame. The 16x9 TV simply unsqueezed the picture to its proper proportions again. DVD used the same trick to increase resolution of a standard-def frame, but the unsqueeze was built into the standard for people who didn't have a 16x9 screen at home.
Anyway, the first movie shot on (analog) HD video was Julia and Julia in 1987. It featured Sting. Trivia!
posted by Mothlight at 2:28 PM on May 10, 2013
HDMI 1.4 can support 4k with a "high-speed" cable. The other issue (besides the screens) is that very few current set-top or blu-ray SoCs (system-on-chip ICs) support HEVC, a.k.a h.265. That codec offers roughly double the compression of AVC/h.264 and is a baseline requirement for 4k content. All of the major video IC vendors are at least sampling new chips with these capabilities, so expect the proliferation to begin shortly.
posted by SpookyFish at 2:44 PM on May 10, 2013
posted by SpookyFish at 2:44 PM on May 10, 2013
Oh lord, at 20:30 there's this snippet of a stumbling and confused person superimposed over a massive cat and a bunch of floating vegetables, apropos of nothing, that I swear was the result of some sort of quantuum tear from Internet Future during production of the segment.
posted by passerby at 5:59 PM on May 10, 2013
posted by passerby at 5:59 PM on May 10, 2013
Okay, I can't help it. I have to do this.
Metafilter: a stumbling and confused person superimposed over a massive cat and a bunch of floating vegetables, apropos of nothing
posted by RobotHero at 7:33 PM on May 12, 2013
Metafilter: a stumbling and confused person superimposed over a massive cat and a bunch of floating vegetables, apropos of nothing
posted by RobotHero at 7:33 PM on May 12, 2013
« Older Happy Mother's Day | Teenage Diaries Revisited Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by thecjm at 11:20 AM on May 10, 2013 [3 favorites]