France goes HDTV terrestrial

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

As predicted France will go HDTV next year. This is the first country in
Europe to have terrestrial over the air HDTV. TPS will offer HDTV via
cable and satellite also.

SKY is going to offer HDTV via satellite too and possibly the BBC so
Europe will have three new satellite HDTV offering and one terrestrial
added to the one satellite service already operating. All services will
use either DVB-T, S or C. T with COFDM.

Expect to see this combination with MPEG4 in all countries from now on
with others who have already started broadcasting adding HDTV capability.

The combination of MPEG4, HDTV, COFDM, SFNs and terrestrial broadcasting
will blow the socks off what we have in the US. Count on it.

"TPS Star in High Def from 2005
From Sotires Eleftheriou in Paris

Emmanuel Florent, CEO of TPS, the number two DTH operator in France
(with 1.3 million subscribers) announced that from next year the group’s
premium channel, TPS Star, would be broadcast in high definition.

Florent was speaking in Paris at the Les Echos European Forum on
Telecommunications. TPS has already cleared the rights for all of the
content on TPS Star, which specialises in movies and sport. The
executive added that the MPGEG-4 standard, which enables an additional
40 per cent compression, would be used. "A launch within 12 months is a
realistic possibility," he said.

The DVB group is set to adopt MPEG-4 as a standard at the beginning of
July and decoders will be available from the autumn from BT, Thomson and
ST Microelectronics. TPS Star will be available in high definition via
all platforms: satellite, cable, ADSL (on the TPS-L platform that TPS
launched in a number of cities earlier this year) and DTT.

Other channels on TPS will be available in HDTV.The national channels
TF1 and M6 have already agreed to be broadcast in HDTV.

On the costs for broadcasting in HDTV, Florent admitted that outside
broadcasting units do currently charge a 30 per cent premium for
shooting in HDTV, but explained that these ‘technical costs’ form a very
small proportion of the budget of a channel. He expected these costs
will come down and there will ultimately be little extra cost for the
whole channel stream being in HDTV."

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <cavfu5$94o$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>,
Doug McDonald <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> writes:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>> As predicted France will go HDTV next year
>
> What do they mean by HDTV? 1080@50i?
>
Whether or not 50i is tolerable on a small screen, when
using HDTV on a wide screen, more completely filling the
field of view, it would be a good thing to add a helper
signal for 100p display. (The peripheral vision is
MUCH MUCH more susceptable to flicker.)

John

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"John S. Dyson" <toor@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:cavj9e$2c7a$2@news.iquest.net...
> In article <cavfu5$94o$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>,
> Doug McDonald <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> writes:
> > Bob Miller wrote:
> >> As predicted France will go HDTV next year
> >
> > What do they mean by HDTV? 1080@50i?
> >
> Whether or not 50i is tolerable on a small screen, when
> using HDTV on a wide screen, more completely filling the
> field of view, it would be a good thing to add a helper
> signal for 100p display. (The peripheral vision is
> MUCH MUCH more susceptable to flicker.)

Out of interest how does MPEG4 cope with interlace? And does it have
provision for helper signals to aid frame-rate upconversion and
interlace/progressive conversion?

(Is it likely that 1080/25p stuff could be broadcast without vertical
pre-filtering to avoid 1080/50i interline twitter issues?)

Steve

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <W6XAc.17860283$Of.2962594@news.easynews.com>,
"Aztech" <az@tech.com> writes:
> "Stephen Neal" <stephen.neal@nospam.as-directed.com> wrote in message
> news:cb08gd$f26$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> "Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
>> news:cavfu5$94o$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
>> > Bob Miller wrote:
>> > > As predicted France will go HDTV next year
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > What do they mean by HDTV? 1080@50i?
>>
>> Suspect it will be 1080/50i or 1080/25p. (Very outside possibility of
>> 720/50p - well it is France!)
>
> Well, they did have that 800 line B&W system before SECAM, it's very important,
> those were better than the US systems, isn't that the main criteria?
>
Well, for a proof of 'French insanity' :-), refer to the downgrade to
625line/50Hz/SECAM from 800line B+W!!! Since the French always want to
be incompatible anyway, why didn't they use the superior (to SECAM) PAL,
but use it with a 800 line system?

In the 1960 timeframe, there was little excuse for downgrading to 625lines
and little excuse for the 50Hz flicker. (I am not arguing for 60Hz per
se, but the fact that something better than 50Hz would be superior.)
Geesh, perhaps a tradeoff of 72Hz and 625lines would have been the best
of all worlds!?!?! (instead of 50Hz and 800lines.)

Back when NTSC was finalized, there were real limitations (6MHz was
actually uncomfortable), and some sync with the power line was a reasonable
tradeoff. In the middle 1960s, these limitations were nil.

John

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

In article <40d49852$0$32574$a0ced6e1@news.skynet.be>,
Kristoff Bonne <compaqnet.be@kristoff.bonne> writes:
>
> Well, I'm not an expert in this but isn't SECAM the best of the three
> main analog TV-standards?
>
In some ways SECAM is better (very robust WRT timebase errors), but
in other ways it isn't (AFAIR, PAL with better potential decodeability.)
Decodeability isn't the only important criteria, however (otherwise
NTSC would be the best without contest.)

It would be an interesting 'project' to research the various advantages
and disadvantages in detail...

John

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Richard" <rfeirste@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9x1Bc.363718$M3.161693@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> "Kristoff Bonne" <compaqnet.be@kristoff.bonne> wrote in message
> news:40d49852$0$32574$a0ced6e1@news.skynet.be...
> > Gegroet,
> >
> > Aztech schreef:
> >>>>What do they mean by HDTV? 1080@50i?
> >
> >>>Suspect it will be 1080/50i or 1080/25p. (Very outside possibility of
> >>>720/50p - well it is France!)
> >
> > All HDTV in the EU is 1080i (as descided by the European Parlement).
> >
> >
> >
> >> Well, they did have that 800 line B&W system before SECAM, it's very
> >> important,
> >> those were better than the US systems, isn't that the main criteria?
> >
> > Well, I'm not an expert in this but isn't SECAM the best of the three
main
> > analog TV-standards?
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECAM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> Az
> > Cheerio! Kr. Bonne.
> > --
> > Kristoff Bonne, Bredene, BEL
> > H323 VoIP: callto://krbonne.homelinux.net/
> > [nl] [fr] [en] [de]
>
> I believe that a 50 Hz version of NTSC is feasible, and we know there is
an
> active 60 Hz PAL system.
>
>
I seem to vaguely recall experimental NTSC transmissions using 405/50 in the
UK way back, being displayed on Murphy? colour TV's using round 21 in RCA
CRT's


> Richard.
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

ivan wrote:
> "Richard" <rfeirste@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:9x1Bc.363718$M3.161693@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>>
>> "Kristoff Bonne" <compaqnet.be@kristoff.bonne> wrote in message
>> news:40d49852$0$32574$a0ced6e1@news.skynet.be...
>>> Gegroet,
>>>
>>> Aztech schreef:
>>>>>> What do they mean by HDTV? 1080@50i?
>>>
>>>>> Suspect it will be 1080/50i or 1080/25p. (Very outside
>>>>> possibility of 720/50p - well it is France!)
>>>
>>> All HDTV in the EU is 1080i (as descided by the European Parlement).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Well, they did have that 800 line B&W system before SECAM, it's
>>>> very important,
>>>> those were better than the US systems, isn't that the main
>>>> criteria?
>>>
>>> Well, I'm not an expert in this but isn't SECAM the best of the
>>> three main analog TV-standards?
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECAM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Az
>>> Cheerio! Kr. Bonne.
>>> --
>>> Kristoff Bonne, Bredene, BEL
>>> H323 VoIP: callto://krbonne.homelinux.net/
>>> [nl] [fr] [en] [de]
>>
>> I believe that a 50 Hz version of NTSC is feasible, and we know
>> there is an active 60 Hz PAL system.
>>
>>
> I seem to vaguely recall experimental NTSC transmissions using 405/50
> in the UK way back, being displayed on Murphy? colour TV's using
> round 21 in RCA CRT's

Yep 405/50i and 625/50i NTSC were both broadcast in the UK as tests (625/50i
SECAM was also evaluated - not sure if 405/50i SECAM or PAL were - though
ISTR ITV were early supporters of a 405 compatible colour system for obvious
reasons). There is an enthusiast who has renovated a 405/50i NTSC TV to
working order and built some kit to feed it!

The BBC came very close to launching a 625/50i NTSC system - they switched
to PAL quite close (about 1 year?) before the launch of colour on BBC Two in
1967? Certainly a lot of the early BBC training notes had 625/50i NTSC
stuff in them and the early SPGs (or was it NATLOCK?) were converted from
NTSC subcarrier systems. (NATLOCK, ISTR, was an audio controlled remote
genlock system that steered an OB SPG into sync with a studio by sending
audio tones to correct the remote SPG phase/frequency - in the days before
synchronisers?)

Steve

>
>
>> Richard.

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech wrote:
> "John S. Dyson" <toor@iquest.net> wrote in message news:cb1v7e$309
> <
>> Well, for a proof of 'French insanity' :-), refer to the downgrade to
>> 625line/50Hz/SECAM from 800line B+W!!! Since the French always want
>> to be incompatible anyway, why didn't they use the superior (to
>> SECAM) PAL, but use it with a 800 line system?
>
> It think required a 10MHz channel or something daft, apparently there
> may have been 819 line SECAM tests. Maybe it was then a case of
> making SECAM almost standard but proprietary enough for
> protectionism, France uses a lot of PAL kit, the colour system used
> on the broadcast system was just something other.

Yep - 819 required wider RF channels for decent quality. ISTR that there
were some reduced channel width 819 transmissions - some were squeezed into
the 7MHz channel plan - but presumably they were much softer horizontally?

Steve

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Stephen Neal" <stephen.neal@nospam.please.as-directed.com> wrote in message
news:cb437v$bd$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
> ivan wrote:
> > "Richard" <rfeirste@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:9x1Bc.363718$M3.161693@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> >>
> >> "Kristoff Bonne" <compaqnet.be@kristoff.bonne> wrote in message
> >> news:40d49852$0$32574$a0ced6e1@news.skynet.be...
> >>> Gegroet,
> >>>
> >>> Aztech schreef:
> >>>>>> What do they mean by HDTV? 1080@50i?
> >>>
> >>>>> Suspect it will be 1080/50i or 1080/25p. (Very outside
> >>>>> possibility of 720/50p - well it is France!)
> >>>
> >>> All HDTV in the EU is 1080i (as descided by the European Parlement).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Well, they did have that 800 line B&W system before SECAM, it's
> >>>> very important,
> >>>> those were better than the US systems, isn't that the main
> >>>> criteria?
> >>>
> >>> Well, I'm not an expert in this but isn't SECAM the best of the
> >>> three main analog TV-standards?
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECAM
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Az
> >>> Cheerio! Kr. Bonne.
> >>> --
> >>> Kristoff Bonne, Bredene, BEL
> >>> H323 VoIP: callto://krbonne.homelinux.net/
> >>> [nl] [fr] [en] [de]
> >>
> >> I believe that a 50 Hz version of NTSC is feasible, and we know
> >> there is an active 60 Hz PAL system.
> >>
> >>
> > I seem to vaguely recall experimental NTSC transmissions using 405/50
> > in the UK way back, being displayed on Murphy? colour TV's using
> > round 21 in RCA CRT's
>
> Yep 405/50i and 625/50i NTSC were both broadcast in the UK as tests
(625/50i
> SECAM was also evaluated - not sure if 405/50i SECAM or PAL were - though
> ISTR ITV were early supporters of a 405 compatible colour system for
obvious
> reasons). There is an enthusiast who has renovated a 405/50i NTSC TV to
> working order and built some kit to feed it!
>
> The BBC came very close to launching a 625/50i NTSC system - they switched
> to PAL quite close (about 1 year?) before the launch of colour on BBC Two
in
> 1967? Certainly a lot of the early BBC training notes had 625/50i NTSC
> stuff in them and the early SPGs (or was it NATLOCK?) were converted from
> NTSC subcarrier systems. (NATLOCK, ISTR, was an audio controlled remote
> genlock system that steered an OB SPG into sync with a studio by sending
> audio tones to correct the remote SPG phase/frequency - in the days before
> synchronisers?)
>
The first colour receiver I saw was one constructed by an engineer friend
who worked for Phillips in Eindhoven, he brought back a receiver to the UK
in about 1966, as far as I can recall this consisted of an all valve
line-up, and used a round RCA? CRT.

At the official start of colour in 1967 all of the UK produced colour
receivers had rectangle CRT's, and the overwhelming majority of them were at
least of hybrid construction, with the notable exception the BRC 2000, which
was the world's first commercially produced fully solid-state large-screen
TV receiver.. 19 to 25 inch screen size.


> Steve
>
> >
> >
> >> Richard.
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:cb4qgk$60t$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> Richard wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>Well, I'm not an expert in this but isn't SECAM the best of the three
main
> >>analog TV-standards?
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECAM
>
>
> it is arguably so, perhaps, but ONLY if the bandwidth is
> enough that there is a guard band so that the luminance and
> chrominance information does not overlap in frequency.
> Otherwise there are horrible artifacts.
>
> However, probably in fact it is not. If there is enough frequency
> range, NTSC (with symmetric R-Y and B-Y bandwidth) or simple
> PAL (with no complex phase sequence) is better, because they
> allow twice the vertical color resolution. Note that in the modern
> world neither NTSC nor PAL needs "two line" averaging to
> correct color errors, so that a simple PAL and NTSC are
> equivalent.
>
> After all, remember what SECAM was designed for, and what the
> acronym means.
>
Thought you'd be watching F1 from the Brickyard Doug.


> Doug McDonald
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:cb4tlv$706$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> ivan wrote:
> > "Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
> > news:cb4qgk$60t$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> >
> >>Richard wrote:
> >>
> >>>>Well, I'm not an expert in this but isn't SECAM the best of the three
> >
> > main
> >
> >>>>analog TV-standards?
> >>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECAM
> >>
> >>
> >>it is arguably so, perhaps, but ONLY if the bandwidth is
> >>enough that there is a guard band so that the luminance and
> >>chrominance information does not overlap in frequency.
> >>Otherwise there are horrible artifacts.
> >>
> >>However, probably in fact it is not. If there is enough frequency
> >>range, NTSC (with symmetric R-Y and B-Y bandwidth) or simple
> >>PAL (with no complex phase sequence) is better, because they
> >>allow twice the vertical color resolution. Note that in the modern
> >>world neither NTSC nor PAL needs "two line" averaging to
> >>correct color errors, so that a simple PAL and NTSC are
> >>equivalent.
> >>
> >>After all, remember what SECAM was designed for, and what the
> >>acronym means.
> >>
> >
> > Thought you'd be watching F1 from the Brickyard Doug.
> >
>
> I did. Quite a crash ... and typical French stupidity black flagging
> Montoya.
>
>

One also has to wonder what was going on in the minds of the BAR team, for
not pulling in at least one of their drivers during the safety car period...
it's anyone's guess, but it could even possibly have cost them a win.


> Doug McDonald

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On 22/6/04 8:04 pm, in article 10dh0lu7l7cipf8@corp.supernews.com, "Richard"
<rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> wrote:

>
>>
>>>
>>>> Well, they did have that 800 line B&W system before SECAM, it's very
>>>> important, those were better than the US systems, isn't that the
>>>> main criteria?
>
> I remember my visit to Paris when they still had 800 lines. My hotel color
> TV set also received that station. It looked very very very very bad. But
> then we all know about hotel TV's; don't we.

Yep - though ISTR that towards the end of 819 there were all sorts of
optical converters being used. If your hotel TV was receiving an 819->625
downconversion, or the 819 transmitter was rebroadcasting a 625->819
upconversion, rather than being a dual standard (B&W 819, SECAM colour 625)
TV then I can't imagine the pictures looked that great at the transmitter...

Steve

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
10dh0lu7l7cipf8@corp.supernews.com...
>> main criteria?
>
> I remember my visit to Paris when they still had 800 lines. My hotel color
> TV set also received that station. It looked very very very very bad. But
> then we all know about hotel TV's; don't we.
>
If it was at the end of life of 819 lines (after mid 70's), then it was not
anymore true 819 lines because the studios of the first programme (now TF1)
were already converted to 625 lines / colour.
The first programme was duplicated during 7 or 8 years in 819 lines for
those still having 819 lines only B&W sets, and this gave a very poor
quality.
Hervé