Re: [RE] Rev1 of my 1st presention at May meeting is in ResE area
I took a look at the ATSC document that Thomas referenced. It appears that
the signals described there are carried via
MPEG-2. I assume that the 19.4 Mbit/s rate is for 1080i29.97 or 1080p29.97,
and the 38.4 Mbit/s rate is for 1080p59.94.
In any case, the relevant jitter/wander requirements for these compressed
signals would be those given for MPEG-2 in slides 16 and 17 of my 3rd
presentation.
Best regards,
Geoff
----------------------------------------------
Geoffrey M. Garner
Samsung (Consultant)
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Gildred" <john@PIONEER-PRA.COM>
To: <STDS-802-3-RE@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 12:42 AM
Subject: Re: [RE] Rev1 of my 1st presention at May meeting is in ResE area
>I can confirm that 1080p is something we will need to support over ResE
>with NO loss in quality during the course of the streaming session. Keep
>in mind that the streaming session could mean an all day marathon of James
>Bond movies in HD. Even if the broadcast is in 1080i, you should consider
>that set-tops may have the ability to upconvert to 1080p for output (to
>HDMI or ResE for example).
>
> -John
>
> On Jun 17, 2005, at 12:09 PM, Richard Brand wrote:
>
>> Geoff:
>> The correction is noted however the 1.48 Gb/s rate is the HD capture
>> rate at 1920 X 1080 resolution. The ATSC HD specs (Annex A) allow for a
>> further compression down to 19.4 Mb/s for 1080i (interlaced) formats
>> which are 30 fps. Today most outlets are indeed further compressing
>> this bit rate down to as low as 8 Mbs but they assume that the customer
>> does not have a display that has concurrent resolution capability. I
>> get my HDTV out of the air and have an LCD flat panel 1280 X 768 and I
>> can see the degradation when the signal is further reduced, especially
>> when there is much motion in the content.
>> What is not well known outside of the industry, is that the ATSC spec
>> also allows for a 1080p (progressive) which is 60 fps. and therefore
>> spec'd at 38.8 M. 1080p was the buzzword at the recent NAB show and
>> will become fruit for discussion if not reality within the next two
>> years. 60 fps is a killer for wireless LAN due to the specified 802.XX
>> frame error rates, and I have had this confirmed by several large RBOCs.
>> One more reason for Res Enet.
>> John/Jim, any further comments?
>> Regards and Happy Father's day to all fathers,
>> Richard
>>
>> Geoffrey M. Garner wrote:
>>> During my first presentation at the May meeting (Description of ResE
>>> Video Applications and Requirements), I identified
>>> several typos (the most glaring of which was the indication of HDTV
>>> rates as Mbit/s rather than Gbit/s). A revision is now
>>> in the ResE public area (thank you to Mike Teener for posting it); the
>>> link is:
>>>
>>> http://www.ieee802.org/3/re_study/public/may05/garner_1_rev1_0505.pdf
>>>
>>> Geoff
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>> Geoffrey M. Garner
>>> Samsung (Consultant)
>>
>> <rbrand.vcf>
>