The European Broadcasting Union will use the upcoming European Championships 2018 to carry out tests using UHD High Frame Rates.

The organization will work with industry partners to shoot, process, record, and distribute live ultra high definition content, with high frame rate, high dynamic range, and next generation audio at the event which runs Aug. 2-12.

The trials involve the world’s first live distribution of UHD content with both HDR (HLG/BT.2100) and HFR (100 frames per second, 2160p100). Current state-of-the-art live broadcasts don’t exceed a field or frame rate of 50Hz in Europe, and HD interlaced (1080i25) is still the dominant broadcast emission format even though commercial encoders and TV sets manage up to 2160p50 resolution.

In Berlin, a 2160p100 HLG/BT.2020 production workflow will be set up in collaboration with EBU Members BBC, France Télévisions, IRT, RAI and ZDF, and a range of technology partners. The 2160p100 feed will be used to derive two additional 1080p100 and 1080p50 signals. These three feeds will then be encoded in HEVC and multiplexed for a live transmission via the Eurovision satellite network to RAI's experimental test bed in the Aosta Valley, Italy, and via the Eurovision Fibre infrastructure to the European Championships Broadcast Operations Centre (BOC) based at BBC Glasgow.

The technology providers working with the EBU and broadcasters include:

• ATEME encoding and remixing technologies for the 1080p100 feed with all NGA flavours

• Dolby immersive and object-based audio technology (AC4)

• Ericsson contribution technology (HEVC, MPEG-H Audio) for 2160p50

• EVS server for near real-time 2160p100 editing

• Fraunhofer IIS immersive and object-based audio technology (MPEG-H Audio)

• Jünger Audio 3D audio monitoring and authoring units (MPEG-H Audio)

• KaiMedia encoding technology (HEVC, MPEG-H Audio) for 2160p50

• Klang and Areitec 3D audio monitoring over headphones

• LG prototype OLED TV sets capable of decoding the live UHD streams with HFR (2160p100Hz), HDR (HLG & PQ), and NGA (Dolby AC-4)

• NTT encoding technology for the 2160p100 signal

• b<>com scene-based production tools and Qualcomm compression technology (MPEG-H Audio)

• Rohde & Schwarz servers for uncompressed recording

• Schoeps and Areitec ORTF-3D microphone outdoor set

• Sony XVS video switcher, PWS Live production server and storage solutions configured for a 2160p100 video production workflow and HDR acquisitions, plus one complete Sony UHD camera and 2160p50 picture monitoring

• Solid State Logic System T S300-32 mixing console with 3D panning and Network I/O

• TPC the Swiss broadcaster’s operational subsidiary, will supply two other complete cameras, and a fourth camera will be provided by AMP Visual.

The EBU said the trials will enable all participants to build their understanding of the state of the art in immersive sports content production and its strategic potential. Some clips may also become available for public dissemination and for technical and scientific testing purposes.

BARCELONA—Sony unveiled a smartphone that does high-frame rate HD video clips and features a 4K, high-dynamic range display. The Xperia XZ Premium incorporates imaging techniques embedded on Sony ‘α’ and Cyber-shot cameras to create the new Motion Eye camera system that enables predictive capture.

Sony’s first smartphone to feature a memory stacked ExmorRS sensor is said to provide five times faster image scanning and data transfer, meaning, it's fast. Sony announced development of the stacked smartphone CMOS with 1,000 fps HD capability. (See, “Sony Creates 1,000 fps HD CMOS for Smartphones,” Feb. 9, 2017.) Sony said the Xperia can do up to 960 fps recording for super slow motion video playback that is generally our times slower than other smartphones, at 720p resolution.

The new 19 megapixel sensor is said to have 19 percent larger pixels to capture more light and detail, even in low-light and backlit conditions. Xperia XZ Premium features a 4K high-dynamic range, 2160 x 3840, 5.5-inch display, like a tiny Bravia TV


Xperia XZ Premium is powered by the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 Mobile Platform, making it among the first smartphones capable of Gigabit Class LTE where it is available via the integrated Snapdragon X16 LTE modem. File transfers over the USB 3.1 interface are said to be 10 times faster than USB 2.0 with a transfer speed of up to 5 Gbps.

The Xperia XZ Premium was introduced this week at the Mobile World Congress in Spain and is set to hit the market this spring.

BURBANK, CALIF. —Bexel has rolled out a high-frame rate, 1080p camera that fits in the palm of a hand. Bexel calls its Clarity 800 camera is the “the world’s first miniature, high-frame-rate, point-of view camera for live production.”

The current Clarity 800 HD version is said offer HFR of up to 480 fps in 1080p, 1080i or 720p. A upcoming 4K version is set to delivery 120 fps, though Bexel did not say at what precise resolution.

The camera dimensions are 4.7 inches high, by 2.56 inches wide, by one inch thick. It weighs 12 ounces, according to the specs at the bottom of Bexel’s product page. The camera uses a 4K 7mp Micro 4/3-inch CMOS imager and a seven megapixel sensor; it has sensitivity of F11 at 2000 lux, four shutter speeds and 1080p HD signal processing.

“Our own experiences supporting customers’ demanding production requirements — from the court to the ice — revealed there was a strong market demand for a high-speed camera with real-time processing,” said Edd Bonner, vice president of engineering and operations at Bexel. “We also identified growing demand for HFR, and a complete gap in the market for a POV camera with real-time processing optimized for live sports. The Clarity 800 will be a real game-changer for our industry, allowing for HFR to be easily used in any application.”

The Clarity 800 is said to integrate well into a live event ecosystem, operating as a broadcast camera system with real-time processing via fiber optics, and to be compatible with industry-standard video servers. Key features include a full-function camera remote control panel for paint control of the camera and a positive-lock lens mount with lens control of focus, iris, and zoom motors.

The Clarity 800 is the first model in Bexel’s new family of cameras targeting the POV market. Future camera models for both HD and 4K, using the same system design, will be introduced later in 2017.

“A robust and affordable camera of this size and with these features is highly desirable in the environments in which we operate,” said Tom Dickinson, chief technology officer, Bexel. “HFR for HD video will continue to expand, and broadcasters need to be ahead of viewer demand for the latest formats. As a longtime and successful provider to the broadcast industry, Bexel understands what it takes to produce the highest-possible picture and sound quality. This ingenuity is the driver behind the Clarity 800.”

The Clarity 800 camera is available for rent exclusively through Bexel and Camera Corps, which has an expansive global footprint spanning the Americas and Europe. Bexel will bring it to NAB 2017.

Moderator: Deborah McAdams, Executive Editor, TV Technology
Featured Speaker: Thomas Coughlin, Founder of Coughlin Associates

Featured Speaker: Tom McDonald, Technical Marketing, Quantum

LAS VEGAS—“Next-generation” television is like TV with sprinkles—4K, high dynamic range, wide color gamut, high frame rate. All come with complications and possibly, trade-offs.

Ericsson’s Senior Vice President of Technology for TV & Media Matthew Goldman, video expert Mark Schubin, SMPTE President and CBS Vice President of Engineering and Advanced Technology Robert Seidel, and broadcast veteran Jim DeFilippis and will parse these advanced television features with crowd-sourced questions from their peers during the NAB Show in a Tuesday, April 19 at 2:30 p.m. Super Session entitled, “4K, UHD, HDR and More—The Future of Video.” 

Here, we have Matthew Goldman taking on the crowd:

CROWD MEMBER:What provides the best bang for the buck: 2160p resolution, high dynamic, wide color gamut, or high frame rate (120 fps)?
­MATTHEW GOLDMAN: I like to call this “the best bang for the bit.” High dynamic range is clearly the best bang for the bit (or buck) for next generation Ultra HD technology.
There are three aspects that impact this: 1) the “wow” factor of HDR is immediately noticeable by consumers, 2) many consumers’ viewing position is too far back from the display to realize the full effect of 4K spatial resolution (best viewing distance is about 1.5 picture heights back from the screen, but most consumers view the display from about 3 picture heights away), and 3) 4K spatial resolution (2160p) requires significantly more bandwidth to deliver to the consumer than HD, while HDR requires a relatively small percentage.

CM:The Canadians are now doing baseball, basketball and hockey in 4K, and distributing it via cable. What is holding up the U.S. broadcasters? What are their immediate challenges?
GOLDMAN:Likely just plain sensibility, for multichannel video programming distributors that use set-top boxes anyway (cable, satellite, telco)… it’s not possible in either country today via terrestrial broadcasting! At this early adopter stage, it comes down to priorities—who wants to lay claim to being first to generate industry buzz versus waiting for all the pieces of the puzzle to come together to offer a full-featured next-gen immersive viewing experience.

CM:What about standards? What’s needed?
GOLDMAN:Ohhh, there is just so much to do still … lots of activities are occurring across multiple standards developing organizations and industry forums. Additional HDR and wide color gamut signaling is needed on both the production side (Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, ITU-R) and consumer side (Consumer Technology Association, HDMI Forum) interfaces. Finalization of HDR/WCG program exchange formats (ITU-R). Recommendations for preferred interoperability points (Ultra HD Forum), system definition for delivery to consumers (ATSC, DVB, SCTE, others), streaming media (Streaming Media Alliance, DASH Forum, others). The so-called UHD-1 Phase 1 specifications really only addressed the 4K spatial resolution and in some cases, WCG signaling. Hopefully, much of the so-called UHD-1 Phase 2a specification, which will add HDR for both 2160p and 1080p, will be complete by end 2016 or early 2017. HFR is even further out.

CM:Beyond sports, what other genre will benefit and have a business ROI?
GOLDMAN:Sports and nature documentaries benefit greatly from all the new immersive viewing technologies—4K resolution, HDR, WCG and high frame rates… well, HFR if the content is high motion—not needed for talking heads! The ROI question is an interesting one because 4K resolution and HFR require extensive changes to the end-to-end workflows and a lot more bandwidth. HDR/WCG have a much smaller impact. Limited bandwidth to the consumer is a particular challenge in terms of availability and costs.

CM:Will broadcasters be “forced” into 4K/UHDTV adoption similar to the evolution of HDTV? If so, by when?
GOLDMAN: I don’t think so. It comes down to the economics, even if there will be lots of premium content driving consumer interest. Now, 1080p with HDR/WCG – “Enhanced HD” as some call it—many of us just consider this part of the next generation of UHD—that’s much more interesting as a practical business case in terms of bandwidth and ROI.
As mentioned earlier, the consumer will definitely see the benefit of HDR/WCG over conventional TV and the increase to 1080p HD resolution from conventional 1080i or 720p HD will be noticeable to consumers as well.
To be very clear, this is not about inventing a new TV format! All UHD TVs upconvert 1080p to 2160p to display as 4K, so regardless of the transmission or delivery resolution, the display is 2160p. This presents an interesting business case for broadcasters wanting to provide much of the immersiveness of next-generation UHD, but with limited bandwidth, especially when a majority of viewers are not sitting close enough to the display to see the benefits of 4K resolution (see my earlier comments about this).
Of course, there will always be marketing folks espousing the difference between upconverted 4K and “real” 4K, but again, this comes down to economics. So, if a broadcaster is able to deliver all the next gen UHD technologies—2160p, HDR, WCG, HFR—then absolutely, they should go for it. However, a lot of the benefits of the next-gen UHD can be realized with 1080p HDR/WCG if that is all one can do.

CM:What are the key dominos in the chain that need to be knocked over for the consumers to feel this is real and start spending? Is it availability of “great titles,” consumer devices, branded premium channels, marketing or something else not yet concocted?
GOLDMAN: Lots of compelling content!

CM:The young adults of today are notorious for consuming social content on small, portable devices. They are the future money for this. Why do they need it?
GOLDMAN: The benefit of these new immersive viewing technologies with portable handhelds is complicated by the nature of the use case: What is the viewing environment? If the device is used in a brightly lit area, then much of the gain is lost because the environment will mask it. However, indoor viewing on a tablet or outdoors at night will see the benefit—so is that use case enough to justify?

CM:How do we as an industry start our advancement to UHD and HDR?
GOLDMAN:It’s already in motion! Via standards and interoperability forums.

CM:What is the immediate opportunity for a TV group with regard to these technologies?
GOLDMAN: Use them to evaluate what consumers really want. The practical versus the theoretical lexicon of next-generation TV.

CM:Are we now headed toward 1080p60 with HDR and wide color as a first step, with 4K used in production and on-set display etc.?
GOLDMAN: Ahhh, please see my earlier comments! 1080p HDR/WCG—the best bang for the bit, the best bang for the buck!

CM:What are your thoughts on HDR HD facilities versus native 4K HDR?
GOLDMAN: There are many implementation of 3Gbps facilities today (support 1080p) while very little for 12 Gbps (needed for native 2160p in baseband). For all the points mentioned earlier, is it worth the investment to build a native 2160p infrastructure for the gain in user experience? This is what the broadcaster needs to grapple. This question is very different between a Hollywood studio production and live TV production or distribution.

CM:Is the notion of HDR for HD now officially dead?
GOLDMAN:Huh? It’s barely even born yet! With all of the considerations mentioned above, I believe that broadcasters will be giving 1080p HDR very serious consideration, especially since the UHD TV will upconvert to 2160p.

CM:Will 4K become a standard transmission? 
GOLDMAN:“Standard” as in common use? Maybe someday. “Standard” as in standardized format? Already in place.

CM:What are you views on affordability of transmission methods for 4K, that is, broadcast, broadband and/or satellite?
GOLDMAN:Please see my previous comments regarding bandwidth limitations and cost of infrastructure and operation.

CM:Do any of you on the panel think there is benefit to using HDR and/or 4K to author a better HDproduct that can be delivered to consumers without significant changes to current infrastructure, instead of racing to provide 4K?
GOLDMAN: Absolutely!

CM:Shooting UHD side-by-side with HD is too costly. How can we reduce the cost of producing sports in UHD and HDR?
GOLDMAN:Just like with the transition from SD to HD, there is a learning curve. The shooting style of zooms and pans in higher resolution can have negative impact on the viewer, so these need to be considered. If the shooting style can be addressed successfully, then there are known technologies for down-rez of UHD and there are discussions occurring actively within SMPTE and the ITU-R regarding mapping a larger color volume (HDR+WCG) into a smaller one, even in real-time.

CM:Do you think that high frame rate is suitable for all genres?
GOLDMAN: Only of value to high motion content, such as some sports and nature documentaries.

CM:Given the propensity of advertisers for brighter brights and whiter whites, how do we avoid the CALM Act for brightness?
GOLDMAN:Ahhh, I’ve been calling this “video loudness.” The industry definitely will need to address how to handle transitions in programs, across interstitials, etc. This work effort is just in its infancy but I believe really will be needed.

CM:How do we integrate interstitials into programming without brightness and color wars?
GOLDMAN:We need to develop “video loudness” standards!

CM:How well can we produce for both HD and HDR without serious compromises, particularly in graphics or saturated colors?
GOLDMAN:We need to develop “video loudness” standards!

CM:Given the constraints of the television, cable and satellite system, how comparable will the broadcast experience be to the ultra Blu-ray?
GOLDMAN: It can be very comparable, especially driven by compelling premium sport content. See my previous comments regarding proper viewing distance and 1080p HDR WCG.

Also see…
April 13, 2016
“Q&A: Jim DeFilippis on 4K, UHD, HDR and More”
We have many standards, but what we are missing is clarity of the problem they are supposed to solve.

April 11, 2016
“Q&A: Mark Schubin on 4K, UHD, HDR and More”
“In my opinion, HDR and HFR offer the most bang for the buck. HDR might be easier to implement, but it can increase motion artifacts, bringing us back to HFR.”

LAS VEGAS—The video industry is moving into more—more resolutions, more color, more contrast, more frames. Ultra high-def 4KTVs are the new HD. More and more sets feature high dynamic range. Wide color gamut is on the way. The questions now revolve around the workflow—achieving these dynamics glass-to-glass—whether or not it’s worth it, and if so, what’s the best approach.

That’s what four top broadcast engineers take on during the NAB Show in a Tuesday, April 19 at 2:30 p.m. Super Session entitled, “4K, UHD, HDR and More—The Future of Video.” TV Technology’s Deborah D. McAdams will grill video expert Mark Schubin, SMPTE President and CBS Vice President of Engineering and Advanced Technology Robert Seidel, broadcast veteran Jim DeFilippis and Ericsson’s Senior Vice President of Technology for TV & Media Matthew Goldman with crowd-sourced questions from their peers.

Here, Jim DeFilippis takes a crack at the list.

CROWD MEMBER: What provides the best bang for the buck: 2160p resolution, high dynamic, wide color gamut, or high frame rate (120 fps)?
DeFILIPPIS: Good and interesting content! Ok, each provide a unique ability to capture and display content.

CM:The Canadians are now doing baseball, basketball and hockey in 4K, and distributing it via cable. What is holding up the U.S. broadcasters? What are their immediate challenges?
DeFILIPPIS: The difference is that this is one cable/broadcaster (Rogers Communications). DirecTV and Comcast have committed to delivering 4K (Masters Golf, Rio Olypmics). 

CM:What about standards? What’s needed?
DeFILIPPIS: We have many standards, but what we are missing is clarity of the problem they are supposed to solve.

CM: Beyond sports, what other genre will benefit and have a business ROI?
DeFILIPPIS:Cinema, perhaps documentaries.

CM:Will broadcasters be “forced” into 4K/UHDTV adoption similar to the evolution of HDTV? If so, by when?
DeFILIPPIS: Different situation today. Back then, with government and private cooperation, the spectrum sell-off traded the mandatory digital tuners. This time around, government is taking spectrum and providing a one-time payout or compensation for re-location to the under-500 MHz ghetto. No mandate to update the digital tuners nor upgrade of the broadcast technology.

CM:What are the key dominos in the chain that need to be knocked over for the consumers to feel this is real and start spending? Is it availability of “great titles,” consumer devices, branded premium channels, marketing or something else not yet concocted?
DeFILIPPIS: Well the key growth driver is mobile/OTT; so how will 4K play in these devices? When a Google Nexus supports native 4K decoding, when Apple promotes their “8K” screens and iTunes UHDTV offerings, then UHD will take off.

CM:The young adults of today are notorious for consuming social content on small, portable devices. They are the future money for this. Why do they need it?
DeFILIPPIS: Cause as they get older, need to have larger screens so they can read their tweets.

CM:How do we as an industry start our advancement to UHD and HDR?
DeFILIPPIS: Run around, start many organizations that advocate people go out and spend more for larger TV’s.

CM:What is the immediate opportunity for a TV group with regard to these technologies?
DeFILIPPIS: Let the other guy go first. 

CM:Are we now headed toward 1080p60 with HDR and wide color as a first step, with 4K used in production and on-set display etc.?
DeFILIPPIS: Maybe.

CM:What are your thoughts on HDR HD facilities versus native 4K HDR?
DeFILIPPIS: Well while HDR HD is more affordable, so much of the industry is in shell shock and can’t rationalize spending any capex. So if a channel has the opportunity to upgrade, might as well go for 4K.

CM:Is the notion of HDR for HD now officially dead?
DeFILIPPIS: Stillborn perhaps?

CM:Given the file sizes, do you think we should be significantly compressing in acquisition and post, just as we did in the early stages of HD?
DeFILIPPIS: All aspects of 4k makes the workflow more of a problem. However if there can be a universal file format for UHDTV, this alone would speed adoption.

CM:HDCam, while not perfect, was a pragmatic way of getting to HD and getting material out to audiences. What’s the equivalent for UHD?
DeFILIPPIS: Good news is that in the time from HDCam (130Mbps) we are now able to support 250Mbps in production. Given that video compression is not linear—4K does not take four times the bitrate of HDTV—the production bitrate maybe close to the 250Mbps range.

CM:4K, 8K, UHD, and HDR require a very large network topology to support file transport. How do we justify that investment when the delivery to the home will not support the transport without heavy compression for years to come?
DeFILIPPIS: A bit of apples and oranges. Yes live UHD requires large amounts of bandwidth and storage. Given that HDTV/MPEG-2 routinely uses 11-18Mbps, UHDTV using HEVC can be delivered without much more (or less) bandwidth. The more difficult problem is agreeing to the distribution modalities.

CM:Will 4K become a standard transmission? 
DeFILIPPIS: Sure. Just numbers on a piece of paper.

CM:What are you views on affordability of transmission methods for 4K, that is, broadcast, broadband and/or satellite?
DeFILIPPIS: 4K is as affordable in it’s time as HD was in the late ’90s. The real issue is the cost for any change to the established infrastructure.

CM:Do any of you on the panel think there is benefit to using HDR and/or 4K to author a better HD product that can be delivered to consumers without significant changes to current infrastructure, instead of racing to provide 4K?
DeFILIPPIS: This is happening today… use of 4K cameras to capture and then downsampled in post to 2K, while preserving the 4K digital negative.

CM:Shooting UHD side-by-side with HD is too costly. How can we reduce the cost of producing sports in UHD and HDR? 
DeFILIPPIS: Ultimately, side-by-side is not practical. So we have to develop the ability to interoperate between UHD, HDR and HDTV.

CM:How can we do live production of HDR sports without needing separate “shaders” for an HDR/wide color gamut output and an SDR/normal color gamut output for legacy TVs?
DeFILIPPIS: We need to develop tools and monitoring techniques to allow video ops to “shade” for both HDR and SDR.

CM:Do you think that high frame rate is suitable for all genres?
DeFILIPPIS: Yes, in the context that HFR capture can be used for any frame rate (24, 25, 30…). However, artistically we are accustomed to seeing some content at low frame rate and other content at high frame rate.

CM:Given the propensity of advertisers for brighter brights and whiter whites, how do we avoid the CALM Act for brightness?
DeFILIPPIS: Have Congress work on more important matters such as the budget, hunger, terrorism, etc…

CM:How do we integrate interstitials into programming without brightness and color wars?
DeFILIPPIS: Ultimately, this is a self-correcting problem. If commercials are obnoxious, people will tune out, or cut cords or go read a book.

CM:How well can we produce for both HD and HDR without serious compromises, particularly in graphics or saturated colors?
DeFILIPPIS: By it’s nature, HDR is a different pallet than SDR. One could “paint” within the Rec. 709 lines, and HDR will convey these colors but no real benefit. Or paint outside the Rec. 709 lines and try to downsample to SDR, with mixed results.

CM:Given the constraints of the television, cable and satellite system, how comparable will the broadcast experience be to the ultra Blu-ray?
DeFILIPPIS: Apples to oranges. Ultra Blu-ray is not limited by bitrate nor have to support both HDR and SDR.

CM:Given the wide disparity of displays and capabilities on the market, how well can we author once and use everywhere, and how much will the user experience vary?
DeFILIPPIS: Hey, just like NTSC, Never the same color!

CM:As HDR displays get better and do a nice job of presenting SDR-graded content better than it would look on a legacy UHD display, does this challenge the value of specific HDR grading? What percentage of average consumers will appreciate the difference?”
DeFILIPPIS: Unless some one has a side-by-side set of UHDTVs, one showing the SDR upsampled and the other HDR graded, who knows? Try watching a movie on DVD and then Blu-ray HD. Not exactly the same.

CM: When will lower-end 4K cameras offer servo lenses?
DeFILIPPIS: Not sure what lower-end 4K cameras exist… but the key issue about 4K cameras is the optics not the cost or electronics.

Also see…
April 16, 2016
“Q&A: Matthew Goldman on 4K, UHD, HDR and More”
“Is it worth the investment to build a native 2160p infrastructure for the gain in user experience? This is what the broadcaster needs to grapple. This question is very different between a Hollywood studio production and live TV production or distribution.”

April 11, 2016
“Q&A: Mark Schubin on 4K, UHD, HDR and More”
“In my opinion, HDR and HFR offer the most bang for the buck. HDR might be easier to implement, but it can increase motion artifacts, bringing us back to HFR.”

LAS VEGAS: There are few set standards for 4K, UHD, high dynamic range, high frame rate or wide color gamut. Each has a particular path from capture to the home through an HDMI cable into a 4KTV set from one of several manufacturers offering a variety of technologies. So how will adoption be achieved?

That’s what four top broadcast engineers take on during the NAB Show in a Tuesday, April 19 at 2:30 p.m. Super Session entitled, “4K, UHD, HDR and More—The Future of Video.” TV Technology’s Deborah D. McAdams will grill video expert Mark Schubin, SMPTE President and CBS Vice President of Engineering and Advanced Technology Robert Seidel, broadcast veteran Jim DeFilippis and Ericsson’s Senior Vice President of Technology for TV & Media Matthew Goldman with crowd-sourced questions from their peers.

Here, Mark Schubin provides a preview.

CROWD MEMBER:What provides the best bang for the buck: 2160p resolution, high dynamic, wide color gamut, or high frame rate (120 fps)?
SCHUBIN: In my opinion, HDR and HFR offer the most bang for the buck. HDR might be easier to implement, but it can increase motion artifacts, bringing us back to HFR.

C.M.:The Canadians are now doing baseball, basketball and hockey in 4K, and distributing it via cable. What is holding up the U.S. broadcasters?
SCHUBIN: They’re more sensible.

C.M.:What are their immediate challenges?
SCHUBIN: Viewers.

C.M.:What about standards? What’s needed?
SCHUBIN: Agreement (as usual in the case of standards).

C.M.:Beyond sports, what other genre will benefit and have a business ROI?
SCHUBIN: HFR is primarily for sports. HDR works on everything; 4K and wider color gamut are tough sells to viewers for anything.

C.M.:Will broadcasters be “forced” into 4K/UHDTV adoption similar to the evolution of HDTV?
SCHUBIN: I don’t think so. There is a much smaller perceptual improvement from HD to 4K than there was from SD to HD.

C.M.:What are the key dominos in the chain that need to be knocked over for the consumers to feel this is real and start spending? Is it availability of “great titles,” consumer devices, branded premium channels, marketing or something else not yet concocted?
SCHUBIN: 4K, again, has very limited perceptual grab. Anyone who doubts that should visit Bob’s demo at CBS with side-by-side giant screens. Wider color gamut sells only in a side-by-side demo; consumers would have to see it in stores that way, and store shopping is on its way out. HDR and HFR are both perceptually significant.
Some fear HFR is perceptually significant in the wrong direction for scripted programming. HDR might be easier to implement, but it depends a lot on the home viewing environment. HFR needs agreement on a bit-rate reduction system (compression).

C.M.:The young adults of today are notorious for consuming social content on small, portable devices. They are the future money for this. Why do they need it?
SCHUBIN: HFR is significant on any size screen at any viewing distance but primarily for fast-moving content. HDR is going to be tough on a handheld screen outdoors. 4K is largely irrelevant on a handheld screen, and WCG probably won’t be noticed. But even young adults are using larger screens for longer programming.

C.M.:How do we as an industry start our advancement to UHD and HDR?
SCHUBIN: Standards.

C.M.:What is the immediate opportunity for a TV group with regard to these technologies?
SCHUBIN: PR.

C.M.:Are we now headed toward 1080p60 with HDR and wide color as a first step, with 4K used in production and on-set display etc.?
SCHUBIN: From your words to the powers that be! Except maybe it’ll be just HDR on regular HD, and forget the 4K.

C.M.:What are your thoughts on HDR HD facilities versus native 4K HDR?
SCHUBIN: HDR works just fine on HD.

C.M.:Is the notion of HDR for HD now officially dead?
SCHUBIN: No one told me!

C.M.:Given the file sizes, do you think we should be significantly compressing in acquisition and post, just as we did in the early stages of HD?
SCHUBIN: For 4K, it’s probably necessary. For the other improvements, no.

C.M.:HDCam, while not perfect, was a pragmatic way of getting to HD and getting material out to audiences. What’s the equivalent for UHD?
SCHUBIN: HD.

C.M.:4K, 8K, UHD, and HDR require a very large network topology to support file transport…
SCHUBIN: I don’t understand that statement. What does “topology” have to do with anything? And the increased data rate for HDR borders on the insignificant; for the Philips version, it’s just 35 bytes per scene (not per frame or per second).

C.M.:…how do we justify that investment when the delivery to the home will not support the transport without heavy compression for years to come?
SCHUBIN: As you can tell from my other answers, I’m not a big fan of a move to 4K, but, if I were, I would point out that, for entropy coding, the sharper the pixels and the less change between pixels, the easier the compression. So raw 4K might be 8x the data rate of HD (1080i or 720p), but the compressed-data-rate increase would be a small fraction of that. Gary Demos showed some compression at the HPA Tech Retreat in February with extraordinary spatial resolution and dynamic range and not a high bitrate.

C.M.:Will 4K become a standard transmission? 
SCHUBIN: Not on my account.

C.M.:What are your views on affordability of transmission methods for 4K, that is, broadcast, broadband and/or satellite?
SCHUBIN: See my comments on “heavy compression” above.

C.M.:Do you think there is benefit to using HDR and/or 4K to author a better HD product that can be delivered to consumers without significant changes to current infrastructure, instead of racing to provide 4K?
SCHUBIN: In the case of HDR, absolutely. Grass Valley likes to show an image of a combined HDR/SDR sports production in which the SDR video controllers are constantly making adjustments (as usual) and the HDR video controllers were leaning back with their hands behind their heads. In general, the more you can offer post, the better. As for 4K, there have been mixed opinions about extracting an HD image from a portion of the frame. Potentially, increased sensor resolution would improve sharpness even for HD.

C.M.:Shooting UHD side-by-side with HD is too costly. How can we reduce the cost of producing sports in UHD and HDR?
SCHUBIN: For 4K, relatively simple downconversion is probably fine. For HDR, many people have been working on some form of algorithmic downconversion; at the moment, human intervention might be necessary (no worse than the job of a video controller).

C.M.:How can we do live production of HDR sports without needing separate “shaders” for an HDR/wide color gamut output and an SDR/normal color gamut output for legacy TVs?
SCHUBIN: See answer above. At worst, it would be one “shader” converting the HDR to SDR.

C.M.:Do you think that high frame rate is suitable for all genres?
SCHUBIN: Tough question! I think it’s great for anything intended to look “live” (sports, news, talk, game shows, concerts, operas, ballets, etc.). For scripted programming, everyone alive today has been watching it largely at 24 or 25 fps, and they are accustomed to that look. Is it just that they are accustomed to it, or is there some psychophysical reason that 24 or 25 fps helps suspend disbelief? I don’t yet know.

C.M.:Given the propensity of advertisers for brighter brights and whiter whites, how do we avoid the CALM Act for brightness?
SCHUBIN: Those helpful algorithms, again! But there is a real issue associated with long-term exposure to very high light levels: retinal “bleaching.” If you’re watching skiing for half an hour at high brightness and change channels to a night scene in a noir movie, it might be like driving into a tunnel at noon on a sunny day.

C.M.:How do we integrate interstitials into programming without brightness and color wars?
SCHUBIN: Those helpful algorithms, again!

C.M.:How well can we produce for both HD and HDR without serious compromises, particularly in graphics or saturated colors?
SCHUBIN: Keep the graphics in the SDR subset of HDR, and don’t sweat the saturated colors. As George Joblove pointed out at the HPA Tech Retreat, we should be dealing with gray as a reference, not black or white.

C.M.:Given the constraints of the television, cable and satellite system, how comparable will the broadcast experience be to the ultra Blu-ray?
SCHUBIN: Could be the same; could even be better.

C.M.:Given the wide disparity of displays and capabilities on the market, how well can we author once and use everywhere, and how much will the user experience vary?
SCHUBIN: Never mind the equipment! If the viewer turns lights on or off or opens or closes drapes, the experience changes. But that’s always been the case. Viewer experiences today vary greatly; that’s why The New Yorker was able to run a cartoon by Joe Dator on Sept. 8 showing a doctor telling a patient that he’d like to see about fixing his aspect ratio. Plenty of viewers are watching stretched people today.

C.M.:As HDR displays get better and do a nice job of presenting SDR-graded content better than it would look on a legacy UHD display, does this challenge the value of specific HDR grading? What percentage of average consumers will appreciate the difference?”
SCHUBIN: I haven’t yet seen HDR upconversion; I have no idea what it might look like.

C.M.:Whenwill lower-end 4K cameras offer servo lenses?
SCHUBIN: Define “lower end.” AJA’s “RovoCam” 4K camera has a built-in servo lens and costs $2,495 including the lens; is that “lower-end” enough?

Also see…
April 16, 2016
“Q&A: Matthew Goldman on 4K, UHD, HDR and More”
“Is it worth the investment to build a native 2160p infrastructure for the gain in user experience? This is what the broadcaster needs to grapple. This question is very different between a Hollywood studio production and live TV production or distribution.”

April 13, 2016
“Q&A: Jim DeFilippis on 4K, UHD, HDR and More”
“We have many standards, but what we are missing is clarity of the problem they are supposed to solve.”

We’ve known about TV personalities and make-up artists and their concern over how HDTV is a little “too revealing,” but film makers also have to weigh the pros and cons of how movie fans react to higher frame rates (“The Hobbit: Un Unexpected Journey,” one of the more notable examples). 

Bloomberg has a story about how prop masters deal with this dilemma as well.