I don't think there
is any confusion here. All streams of data ranging from kilobits per
second for low quality audio to 3 gigabits per second for 1080p/60 are
potentially valid for transmission over a consumer network. It all
depends on the functionality of the display device. If it is a dumb
video display you may need to send it uncompressed video. If it has any
one of a number of possible decoders then you can send the video compressed in
those formats at lower data rates. All I was pointing out is that there
are many other potential data rates for video between the 25Mbs DV and HDV
formats and 1.5Gb/s (or higher) of uncompressed HD video.
Fred
-----Original
Message-----
From: Geoff
Thompson [mailto:gthompso@nortel.com]
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 2:38
PM
To: Tuck, Fred
Cc:
STDS-802-3-RE@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [RE] Video
question
Lest we confuse...
There is a
significant difference between the requirements for transmitting live
video from a camera in DV vs. transferring recorded video from a
camera.
It is only the live case that is within the scope of problems
that is driving the formation of a new project.
Geoff
At 10:26
AM 7/1/2005 , Tuck, Fred wrote:
Also I would expect
as the HDV or other HD formats evolve that 50 or 100 mbs variants will
emerge. If you want to do high quality frame accurate editing of your
video you don't really want to capture it in an MPEG format with P and B
frames. You want the original in an all I frame format like DV. That
takes a lot more bandwidth.
Fred
Tuck
-----Original
Message-----
From:
owner-stds-802-3-re@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-re@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Jim Battaglia
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 12:37
PM
To:
STDS-802-3-RE@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [RE] Video
question
Mike,
I was also add
conventional (digital) consumer camcoders to your list. It is my
understanding that most of these still use DV, which is no where near as
compressed as MPEG-2. I realize that many camcorder manufacturers are
moving to MPEG compressed format, but there are still a a lot of DV cameras
out there.
It's not inconceivable that you may want to move this
content on a home network without further
compression.
Jim
Michael Johas Teener wrote:
Not speaking for Kevin, but
based on earlier conversations with CE vendors,
MSOs, and content providers, uncompressed
video is useful for: 1) Games (from console to display) ... currently
only SD quality (that's about 270 Mbit/sec in the US, as you noted) ... GigE
can carry ... but the next generation consoles support HD at 1080i or roughly
1.5Gbit/sec ... 2) Overlaying the UI from a STB or other residential
gateway ... currently requires uncompressed video because low cost STBs do not
include MPEG2 *encoders* ... 3) Security/monitoring cameras ...
although the fidelity requirements are rather low, so cheap compressors are
becoming available that meet this need ... On 6/30/05 9:36 PM,
"Geoffrey M. Garner" <gmgarner@comcast.net> wrote:
In the discussions so far, the digital
video has been assumed to either enter the residence from a service provider
or originate in the residence at a DVD player. It seems that both cases,
at least at present, use compressed digital video. Are there
applications that involve uncompressed digital video (or are there expected to
be such applications)?
-- Jim Battaglia Digital
Entertainment Networking Pioneer Research Center USA, Inc. 101 Metro Drive,
Suite 264 San Jose, CA 95110-1343 408-437-1800x203 408-437-1717 (fax)