Compression Discussion

[Greg]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

The basic goal should just simply be "Quality In equals Quality Out", even if it's not entirely possible with todays technology.

Of course it's possible today! We've had the technology for a long time, ever since we've started the digital age: what you send on one end of the pipe is what is received on the other end, bit for bit.

It's technology from the last millenium! Where have you been for the past 30 years!?

-- Greg

[HeadHodge]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

With that there would be a true benchmark for quality. I just get tired of all the subjective observations where it's left up to the observer to rate the quality of the content. There are just too many variables, the time of day they watch it, the equipment they use to watch it on, the room lighting, their mood, etc. etc. etc.

In addition to my previous post. If there was such a benchmark then VUDU could offer and justify the cost for different tiers of service.

For example an internet provider will charge you one rate for 2Mbs down speed and extra for 4Mbs or 6Mbs down speeds. They're very capable of providing all 3 options but you have to pay different rates for each.

With a valid benchmark, VUDU get offer various tiers like Basic - with 50% bit-loss for one rate and then HD - with 30% bit-loss for another rate and Ultra with 10% bit-loss for an even higher rate.

Then you could also set the customers expectations as well. Basic = Instant Viewing @ 2MB Download speed, HD = Instant Viewing @ 4MB Download speed, and Ultra = Instant Viewing @ 100MB Download speed.

These speeds may not be to scale and are meant for demonstration purposes only. The only person that knows the real rates of bit-loss is Shultzy. And guess what......

[HeadHodge]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

Of course it's possible today! We've had the technology for a long time, ever since we've started the digital age: what you send on one end of the pipe is what is received on the other end, bit for bit.

It's technology from the last millenium! Where have you been for the past 30 years!?

-- Greg

Oh what a nit picker!

You know what I mean, the quality of the digitized content you get from the studio compared to the quality of the digitized content you get at the VUDU box. Talk to Volker the Encoder, if you don't know what I mean.

And I'll have you know I've been on a long trip for the past 30 years man!!! One week it's purple, the next it's pink. But no matter what they are all pretty colors!!

[redwein]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

My argument is with the HD nomenclature, of course, I'm aware of the present limits on bandwith for delivery of TRUE HD content. As an analogogy I give you upconverting DVD players. Yes, for the most part some of the better ones will make your standard DVD look better, by messing with the encoded digital file, but they are not true HD players, and don't claim to be. Should VUDU, along with the Cable and Satellite VOD providers claim that their content is really HD, when in fact, it seems to me they are doing something similar to what these players are doing? Jus asking, not wanting to upset anyone. As I said on my original post I am satisfied with the VUDU model so far.

Rad

That isn't what is going on here. An upconverting DVD player takes a lower resolution source and converts it to a higher resolution one, basically "guessing" to fill in the extra pixels. Vudu, on the other hand, starts with a high resolution source and compresses it. This does cause some loss of pixels but the original resolution is maintained. The compression tends to "whack" more pixels where there is very low detail and retain them where there is high detail. This is very much in contrast with what an upconverting DVD player can do. That will never let you read fine print on a newspaper that wasn't in the original source material.

[HeadHodge]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

Vudu, on the other hand, starts with a high resolution source and compresses it. This does cause some loss of pixels but the original resolution is maintained.

I very well could be mis-interpreting your statement. But if I'm not, that sounds a lot like an Oxy-Moron to me.

[HeadHodge]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

Then you could also set the customers expectations as well. Basic = Instant Viewing @ 2MB Download speed, HD = Instant Viewing @ 4MB Download speed, and Ultra = Instant Viewing @ 100MB Download speed.

BTW.... Since I got to Sacramento I found that in my service area, I'm only able to get a Max of 1.5mb down from my DSL provider (AT&T).

So, no matter what I rent I'm not able to instantly view it here anyway.

But I have not found that to be a big problem. So I would still be willing to pay for and use the ULTRA service.

[redwein]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

I very well could be mis-interpreting your statement. But if I'm not, that sounds a lot like an Oxy-Moron to me.

Ok, I was implying lines of resolution, not overall resolution. Like when you set your output resolution to 1080p, it indicates there are 1080 lines of resolution. Compression causes low value pixels to get eliminated. Upscaling causes guessing to make up pixels that were never there in the first place.

[redwein]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

BTW.... Since I got to Sacramento I found that in my service area, I'm only able to get a Max of 1.5mb down from my DSL provider (AT&T).

What about cable? Do they offer that there?

[HeadHodge]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

What about cable? Do they offer that there?

No cable at all. I called Comcast and they said that since it's such a rural area where I live (mostly farm land and wildlife preserves) that it's not cost effective to provide service here (even though I can see downtown Sacramento from here).

That's one of the reasons I have Directv and I was kind of hoping that Hughes Net would be an option. But after looking into it, I wouldn't be able to get anything better than what I have now.

But cable modems are definitely my preference when I can get it.

FIOS sounds great too, but I'm not going to hold my breath for getting it any time soon.

[aaronwt]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

How long are you willing to wait for a movie with the quality of a Blu-Ray disk to download so you can view it? If we get into Blu-Ray bitrates, we'd be talking about days.

Just a couple of hours for some us with fast INternet connnections.
A 1GB Xbox Live demo only takes a few minutes with my FIOS connection.

[aaronwt]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

You seem to quote alot of your own posts.

1.5mbs
I couldn't live with that. I had 5mbs down and 1mbs up in 1997. One year I downgraded and tried 3mbs DSL, I was so glad when that year was up.
Now my 30mbs FIOS connection seems slow. I'll be glad when they offer a 50mbs connection in my area.

BTW.... Since I got to Sacramento I found that in my service area, I'm only able to get a Max of 1.5mb down from my DSL provider (AT&T).

So, no matter what I rent I'm not able to instantly view it here anyway.

But I have not found that to be a big problem. So I would still be willing to pay for and use the ULTRA service.

[HeadHodge]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

You seem to quote alot of your own posts.

I like to listen to myself!

No one else will, so I'm all I've got!!!

[NA9D]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

Very informative thread - thanks. Perhaps what is needed is a real VOD industry standard as to what HD files should be.

There is:

HD is defined as a resolution of 1280 x 720 pixels or greater. It says NOTHING about bit rate, amount of compression, etc. If the source has 1280 x 720 pixels it is considered HD. This is true throughout the industry...

[NA9D]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

My argument is with the HD nomenclature, of course, I'm aware of the present limits on bandwith for delivery of TRUE HD content.

TrueHD is a marketing term that some marketer figured out. It says nothing about anything.

I repeat: HD is defined as a pixel resolution of 1280 x 720 or greater. Period.

[NA9D]

Re: User-requested enhancements & features?

This is always the reply I get when I discuss this topic.

I don't think the issue has anything whatever to do with bitrates, video resolutions, or anything like that.

Remember the old adage "Garbage In equals Garbage Out"?? Well with video and audio there should be a new adage called "Quality In equals Garbage Out".

It does have to do with bit rates. It's all about how much bandwidth you have in the download pipe. It has to do with how much storage you have.

A BluRay disc is what, 25 Gigabytes or something. That would equaly about 8 to 10 movies or so that you could store or the standard 250 Gig Vudu (after the OS and all). Do you really want a device which could download what you want to watch in 10 to 15 hours and you could keep 10 movies in your library at a time?

No, I really think you'd rather have what you have now and live with the very slight image imperfections. I've seen imperfections in BR content too. It ain't perfect either...