AUSTIN, Texas—Real-time video solutions provider Media Excel said Matthew Goldman, vice president of strategic and technical initiatives at station group Sinclair, has joined the company’s technical advisory board.

Goldman brings 30 years of experience to Media Excel, including pioneering work in developing digital television and video transport technologies, the company said. His resume includes contributions to the MPEG-2 Systems standard; co-developing the ATSC Program and System Information Protocol (PSIP) standard used to deliver channel metadata; and defining the industry’s first compressed-domain program splicer, Media Excel said.

Goldman has won multiple Technology & Engineering Emmy Awards and is a former president and current fellow of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE).

“We are honored to welcome Matthew Goldman to our Technical Advisory Board,” Media Excel CEO Narayanan Rajan said. “Matthew’s unparalleled experience in digital video transport and broadcasting will play an important role in pushing Media Excel forward as the company continues to deliver industry-leading transcoding and compression solutions. As we expand the capabilities of our products to meet complex industry challenges, Matthew’s guidance will be invaluable.”

Goldman is also a senior member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), an Academy of Digital Television Pioneers inductee and chair of the North American Broadcasters Association Technical Committee. He holds bachelor and master of science degrees in electrical engineering from Worcester Polytechnic Institute.

“I am excited to collaborate with Media Excel, a company which shares my vision for driving industry change through innovation and an unwavering commitment to advancing video technologies,” Goldman said of joining the board. “I look forward to contributing to its mission of shaping the future of media and entertainment.”

Sure, HDR (aka high dynamic range) is better than SDR (standard dynamic range, a term we didn’t even need until we had HDR), but why?

SDR is regular television—it can produce a maximum luminance level of around 100 nits limited to Rec.709. HDR gives a maximum luminance of 1,000 to 10,000 nits (and a minimum of 400 nits), with brighter brights, more detailed darks and more saturated colors with Rec, 2020 (Fig 1). The more realistic color is due more to WCG (wide color gamut) than to HDR itself. 

Three Formats
There are three main display formats for HDR: HDR10, HDR10+ and Dolby Vision. As you would expect, each handles HDR differently.

HDR10 is open standard, typically mastered between 400 to 4,000 nits. It’s a PQ (perceptual quantizer) transfer function with static metadata, delivering the same brightness and tone mapping for the entire program. 

HDR10+ is royalty-free for the content creator. TV/display manufacturers pay an annual license fee. Dolby Vision, similar to HDR10+, is proprietary from Dolby Laboratories. Both are mastered from 1,000 to 4,000 nits using dynamic metadata that adjusts the brightness and tone mapping per scene. 

For HDR10+ and Dolby Vision, most content is mastered at around 1,000 nits. While seemingly the same, Dolby Vision is considered better than HDR10+ in areas such as peak brightness minimum, tone mapping, TV support and content availability, according to a number of sources.  

Stretching the Truth
Marketing & PR are one-half truth, one-half half-truths and one half omitting the truth—it all depends on what’s being sold. But sometimes, the people doing the selling don’t really understand what they’re selling.

In a recent “Consumer Reports”’ story, “How to Watch Super Bowl LVII in 4K HDR,” buried deep in the story, there’s an image appearing to be from DirecTV to promote 4K HDR, comparing two images of a colorful parrot to show the better quality of “4K
HDR 2160p.” (Fig. 2)

But that image is being compared to “Full HD 1080p”—not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison with only one image being HDR. The message is clear: This is how great the Super Bowl will look, compared to your old fashioned 1080p SDR TV, if you can get it in 4K. But if the 1080p image had HDR, the difference wouldn’t be so… different.

Do We Really Need 4K if HDR is So Good?
SMPTE Life Fellow Mark Schubin has compared formats, frame rates and HDR to show what provided the best data option.

“HDR offers the most bang for the bit,” Schubin said. Preliminary HDR data that he presented at the annual HPA Tech Retreat in 2016 from EPFL (École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne/Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne) from 2014 showed a “tremendous improvement and very, very little additional bits required, anything from zero to maybe something around 20%.” 

That improvement was in peak brightness. Schubin compared it to EBU quality comparisons from 2013 between HD (720p, 1080i and 1080p) and 4K showing “very little improvement” in quality, as well as high frame rates up to 240Hz, which showed “a significant improvement [in quality], but you also have to double the bitrate for every doubling of the framerate.”

The greater brightness and contrast range of HDR is key. “What makes it more realistic is the human visual system because we perceive more contrast as spatial resolution,” said Matthew Goldman, senior director, Media Engineering & Architecture for Sinclair Broadcast Group. “It looks more real.”

Returning to Fox’s Super Bowl 4K upconversion, I asked Schubin: “What is
your opinion of the viewer’s quality difference between 1080p60 HDR and 2160p60 HDR on a 4K TV that would upconvert the 1080p
to 2160p?”

“Without knowing the specific equipment involved, I really can’t say which is better, but I’d say the difference is probably negligible,” Schubin said. “It’s not clear that Fox’s technology would necessarily be better than what’s in a TV. Yes, it costs more, but the TV stuff is integrated and amortized over tens of millions of sets. But the production in HLG could be significant. 

“When HDR has been perceived as problematic—such as the very dark ‘Game of Thrones’—the production has not been HLG,” he added. “In the dark areas, HLG is essentially the same as SDR; it’s in the bright areas that it offers much more range, so it’s probably good to use for the live
Super Bowl.”

Schubin didn’t watch this year’s Super Bowl in HDR, but added: “Having watched football in HLG HDR, I think it offers a substantial advantage, visible even on a small screen from across the room. Having watched football in HD, upconverted to 4K, and true 4K, on side-by-side monitors, I’d say differences are perceptible, but just barely—definitely not the big kick added by HDR.”

More Comparisons
1080p HDR, upconverted 4K HDR or native 4K HDR: which is better?

What do you mean by “better?”

Tim Walker, senior product manager (HDR image analyzers, frame syncs, routers, scaling and scan converters), at AJA Video Systems, puts it this way: “There’s broadcasters that are being bullish doing and promoting HDR,” he said. “Others question the extra expense in producing HDR. But for a top-end broadcaster, you’re investing in your archive for generations to come from the moments captured today.” 

That means producing the best possible imagery today: 4K HDR. 

“Doing [less expensive] upconversion at distribution gets you that 4K banner,” Walker added. Upconverters do an exceptional job—that’s one reason people do 1080p HDR and not worry about 4K in the truck.”

Walker, Goldman and Schubin are firmly in the “better pixels, not more pixels” camp.

“Having HDR makes for a better viewing experience from home,” said Walker. “Plus, you can absolutely see a benefit of down-mapping or tone-mapping to SDR. Viewers benefit from the entire signal processing chain using HDR. In live sports, you won’t get the highlights off the helmets, but you will get more detail in the image in the darks and brights. SDR will benefit from a native HDR production.”

Then There's Sinclair
Sinclair is doing HDR 24/7 with ATSC 3.0 over the air broadcasts in more than 30 markets nationwide (and growing).

“We absolutely see it as a business advantage at the end of the day, improving the viewing experience of our viewers,” said Goldman. ”Other than sports, it just looks more realistic—the screen pops. You don’t know you’re missing it until you’ve got it. All I have to do is show it to you. Consumers may not know what HDR is, but they know they like it, so there’s definitely a commercial advantage.”

What makes Sinclair unique is the HDR they’re using is not HDR10. “We’re using part of the ATSC 3.0 standard, A/341, and use Advanced HDR by Technicolor [SL-HDR1], as a transmission format,” said Goldman. “It’s not a new HDR format. What SL-HDR1 lets us do is send SDR video as a base layer plus an enhancement layer for HDR as part of the metadata stream. 

“The reason we do this is that it doesn’t matter how you get to the TV, it’ll display a useable picture,” Goldman added. “It’ll do great SDR—and with the SL-HDR1 metadata reconstruction—HDR with the SDR video without having to rely on the TV. We guarantee that the original artistic intent is maintained for both SDR and HDR.”

Every HDR TV uses HDMI with EDID (Extended Display Identification Data)—that’s part of the handshake between the TV and the signal device. But what are the capabilities of the display? Is it HDR? What formats? What’s the minimum light level, peak white level, colorimetry? The HDR is then adapted for that display. If it’s SDR only, that’s all it gets. Sinclair uses SL-HDR1 because, according to Goldman, it’s the only transport format that’s TV set-independent and delivers a useable picture. 

I asked both Goldman from Sinclair and Walker from AJA the same visual quality question: With all things being equal, on a scale from 1 to 10, if 1080p SDR is a 1 and 4K HDR is a 10, where would you place 1080p HDR and 4K SDR?

Both answered exactly the same: 1080p HDR sits at 8, while 4K SDR sits at 4 (Fig. 3). 

That’s the power of HDR, but it doesn’t negate shooting to archive in 4K HDR. The question is: How do you want your production perceived by viewers today… and in the years to come? 

Given the effect and pervasiveness of IT in our personal and professional lives, it is encouraging to see that the media and entertainment industry’s transition to All-IP has steadily gathered pace. IP is an enabling technology and our industry’s adapting its use to our needs, responding to a number of challenges across contribution, live production and playout that we see today.

Consider the hundreds of thousands—perhaps millions—of pieces of equipment that are used by broadcasters worldwide. Then, offset that against other operators who are developing the use of IT protocols, interfaces and infrastructure—and therefore utilizing the maturity of perhaps a trillion pieces of equipment—and you can see there are better economies of scale that exist elsewhere. By moving away from broadcast-industry-specific architectures towards IP-based infrastructure and solutions, the media and entertainment industry can become more agile in their operations.

In other words, the reasons to migrate are compelling and have gone beyond applications such as OTT or real-time internet video delivery, and are now permeating across mission-critical use cases at fledgling start-ups and major international broadcasters.

For many, the catalyst has been the demand from consumers for content everywhere, which has ramped up increasingly in the last 10 years as we move towards a mobile-first environment. Bringing new OTT services to market has been a natural fit for IP transformation. Launching a new service on a software- and IP-centric infrastructure, supported by the cloud and microservices, now means a lead time measured in weeks and months and not years, as would be the case in the legacy world.

FLEXIBILITY AND ELASTICITY

In the application-specific integrated circuit history of broadcast technologies, when capacity is reached, it requires a major CAPEX expenditure and significant hardware upgrade. In a software and IP-centric world, capacity, performance and connectivity can all scale quickly, based on demand and then contract if required. This flexibility and elasticity matches the current commercial imperatives that broadcasters face when expanding their content reach, while at the same time, helps to build new revenue models that take advantage of IP-compatible concepts such as targeted and dynamic advertising and OTT-based subscription models.

At the closest edge of the wave, real innovators are adopting fully software-defined media workflows. This starts at the production level from studio cameras, to editing suites and progresses through content processing and distribution. The rationale is simple. Creating, managing and distributing content across a real-time, IP-based workflow with software as the controlling entity is much easier than the myriad transitional steps that are limited by custom-built hardware solutions. Today’s broadcasters can handle more content across a wider range of distribution paths with fewer staff than ever before.

Capacity and resiliency is assured through the ability to spin up more virtualized capacity—not just across media processing but for critical connectivity requirements through network function virtualizations. The transition to All-IP has also gone beyond arcane technical requirements. According to the highly regarded Devoncroft 2019 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), IP networking and content delivery is the top-ranked trend this year—overtaking multiplatform content, which has ranked as “the most commercially important trend to the global broadcast and media industry” for the last decade.

EMERGING STANDARDS

Although closely linked, the move to All-IP has been accelerated by the emergence of several industry standards that have concentrated the minds of key broadcasters and provided a viable route for adoption that overcomes the inherent risk aversion of the industry. The arrival of Society of Motion Picture Television Engineers (SMPTE) ST 2110 Professional Media Over Managed IP Networks suite of standards and SMPTE ST 2059 Broadcast Profile for IEEE Precision Time Protocol standards specify the carriage, synchronization and description of the spate of real-time delivery of elementary essence streams over IP. This is for the purpose of live production and encompasses video, audio, timecode, sync and ancillary data. Media and entertainment’s future lies in technology stacks, where the enormous amounts of data can be stored in the cloud. Through standards such as SMPTE ST 2110 and ST 2059, broadcasters now have not only a standardized route towards replacing serial digital interface (SDI) with IP, but also the opportunity to usher in a new wave of applications based on, and leveraged off, IT protocols and infrastructure.

For broadcasters, a key advantage is no longer requiring two separate operations (staffing and infrastructure) for managing intra-facility traffic—SDI switches for professional media and IP/Ethernet switches for general data. Instead, facilities can rely on one common data center infrastructure. Alongside SMPTE standards, AMWA Networked Media Open Specifications (NMOS) define IP-based media network control and management, such as Discovery & Registration, Device Connection Management, Network Control and Interoperable Security. The transition to All-IP for the media and entertainment industry was envisioned and championed by the Joint Task Force on Networked Media (JT-NM), which is comprised of four major industry organizations: Advanced Media Workflow Association (AMWA), European Broadcasting Union (EBU), SMPTE and Video Services Forum (VSF).

As more vendors support these and other standards and specifications, the rate of customer adoption grows in tandem, leading to a virtuous circle which will help to alleviate one of the major obstacles in the way of All-IP transition—skills shortage. This is not insurmountable, and the broadcast industry has a good track record of attracting the best and the brightest—and the move to All-IP will hopefully mirror earlier technology shifts such as the move from analog to SDI in the late 1980’s.

SUMMARY

An All-IP broadcaster is no longer prefixed by the word “future”—it is a reality for the here and now. As legacy hardware reaches end-of-life, and as on-premises data centers run out of capacity, the logical upgrade path will be a move toward All-IP infrastructure and protocols, software defined media processing, virtualization and cloud-native solutions. The transition happening in the broadcast space in many ways mirrors the shift that telecoms providers and financial services organizations have embraced over the last decade, while the combination of commercial drivers and standards-based technologies is making the transition a far more orderly progression for the media and entertainment industry.

For those broadcasters just starting out on the journey, the ability to move through a hybrid adoption process—shifting discreet processes over to All-IP in a staged fashion—is also a compelling option, as is the use of Software-as-a-Service to limit the technical transition to more of a commercial decision. Over the next decade, the notion of a non-IP workflow will stand out as the exception and not the rule. By enabling production and content delivery providers to reduce time-to-market and benefit from more agile development environments, the realization of All-IP will provide the foundation for the media industry’s long-term future.

Matthew Goldman is the senior vice president of technology for MediaKind.

LOS ANGELES—In an effort to maintain its prominence as the premier global standards and education body for the film and television industries, the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers has announced a new strategic business plan that emphasizes its three pillars: standards, education and membership, with a commitment on inclusiveness and objectivity.

"The strategic business plan officially released today reflects the initiative championed by SMPTE president Matthew Goldman to examine the Society and to establish our guiding principles, vision, mission, and value propositions resulting in this new three-year strategic plan," said SMPTE Executive Director Barbara Lange. "I look forward to working with current and newly elected SMPTE Board of Governors leadership to achieve the ambitious objectives set out in this plan."

With its announcement during the annual SMPTE meeting this week, the society released its first mission statement:

“SMPTE enables the technical framework and global professional community that makes motion-picture, television, and professional media available for all humanity to enjoy for artistic, educational, and social purposes.”

Within its standards work, the society said it will create a "Knowledge Network" environment that enables state-of-the-art standards-development processes while improving how content is discovered, accessed, and monetized.

Within its education work, the society said it will continue to enhance its offerings to become the comprehensive resource for industry-relevant professional development. SMPTE will continue providing education on emerging technologies that professionals must understand for continued career success.

In continuing to build SMPTE membership around the world, the society will focus on extending its presence at the local section level and on ensuring high levels of volunteer engagement, including recognition of service, to create a more robust and diverse global community for its members.

The SMPTE Board of Governors will be responsible for overseeing the Society's new strategic business plan.

As more Silicon Valley companies focus their efforts on streaming video, the society faces the challenge of remaining relevant in a world where tech giants can quickly saturate the marketplace with proprietary formats, bypassing the more universal approach of industry agreed-upon standards. In an effort to navigate this new landscape, the society earlier this year announced its "Vision 2020" strategic plan, which includes expanding membership to other industries and segments that rely on motion imaging, such as gaming, corporate video and internet video, and bolstering its membership, education and standards work.

WHITE PLAINS, NY--The Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers has announced the new leadership for the 2019-2020 term, electing Patrick Griffis, vice president of technology in the Office of the CTO at Dolby Laboratories as its new president. Griffis, who succeeds current SMPTE President, Matthew Goldman, senior vice president of technology at MediaKind (formerly known as Ericsson Media Solutions) will take over, Jan. 1, 2019.

Griffis, who currently serves as SMPTE executive vice president and has previously held roles including education vice president, secretary-treasurer, and U.S. western region governor, will serve a two-year term as SMPTE president. Goldman will continue to serve as a SMPTE officer on the Executive Committee of the Board of Governors as the Society's immediate past president.

"SMPTE is building on the success of its centennial by focusing on new initiatives across its three pillars: standards, education, and membership," said Griffis. "We're embarking on some exciting new projects that will allow the Society to be even more agile in addressing the requirements of modern media and entertainment. I am particularly passionate about expanding our outreach to the next generation of membership and becoming an even more global organization. I look forward to working with my SMPTE and HPA colleagues to ensure the Society continues to meet the needs of the individuals and organizations advancing the science and the art of next-generation media and entertainment experiences."

Other incoming SMPTE officers elected for the two-year 2019-2020 term include:

• Executive Vice President: Hans Hoffmann, senior manager, media production technologies, for the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) Technology and Innovation department;

• Education Vice President: Sara Kudrle, product marketing manager at Imagine Communications, and

• Secretary Treasurer: John E. Ferder, director of engineering at MultiDyne Video & Fiber Optic Systems

Newly elected SMPTE Governors include:

• Sylvain Marcotte, systems architect and product owner at Grass Valley, a Belden Brand, for the Canada Region;

• Marina Kalkanis, CEO at M2A Media, for the United Kingdom Region;

• William T. Hayes, director of engineering and technology at Iowa Public Television, for the USA - Central Region;

• Michael DeValue, director of technology standards and strategy at Walt Disney Studios, for the USA - Hollywood Region, and

• Rosemarie Lockwood, northeastern U.S. regional sales engineer at Belden, for the USA - New York Region.

Six Governors were re-elected:

• Masayuki Sugawara, executive engineer at NEC Corporation, for the Asia-Pacific Region; François Abbe, president and founder of Mesclado, for the Europe, Africa, Middle East, Central and South America Region;

• Gary Mandle, consultant at Outtahand Displays, for the USA - Western Region;

• Michael Koetter, senior vice president for digital media systems at Turner, for USA - Southern Region;

• James M. Burger, partner at Thompson Coburn LLP, for the USA - Eastern Region, and

• Christopher Fetner, director, post partnerships and integrations (PPI) at Netflix, for the USA - Hollywood Region.

Governors who were not up for re-election and who continue on the SMPTE Board of Governors include:

• Merrick (Rick) Ackermans of MVA Broadcast Consulting (USA - Southern Region);

• Paul Briscoe of Televisionary Consulting (Canada Region);

• Mark Harrison of the Digital Production Partnership (DPP) (United Kingdom Region);

•  Siegfried Foessel of Fraunhofer IIS (EMEA and Central and South America Region);

• Paul Chapman of SIM Group (USA - Hollywood Region);

• Renard Jenkins of PBS (USA - Eastern Region), and

• Ward Hansford of Grass Valley (Asia-Pacific Region); and Ben Waggoner of Amazon (USA - Western Region).

Officers who were not up for re-election and who continue to serve on the SMPTE Board of Governors Executive Committee include SMPTE Standards Vice President Bruce Devlin of Mr. MXF and SMPTE Membership Vice President Peter Wharton of Happy Robotz LLC.

Newly elected officers and governors will be introduced to the SMPTE membership at the Society's Annual General Membership Meeting, 8:00 a.m., Oct. 23 at the Westin Bonaventure Hotel and Suites in downtown Los Angeles in conjunction with the SMPTE 2018 Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition (SMPTE 2018). The Annual General Membership Meeting is open to all attendees of SMPTE 2018, including those with exhibits-only passes. Further details and registration are available at smpte2018.org.

The election leaves the positions of finance vice president and governor for the New York Region vacant. These positions will be appointed by the SMPTE Board of Governors and will be announced at the Annual Membership Meeting. The Board of Governors will appoint governors-at-large as well as directors of standards, education, and membership at a later date.

Further information about the newly elected SMPTE leadership is available at smpte.org/2018-society-election-results. More information about the SMPTE Board of Governors is available at smpte.org/board.

BETHESDA, Md.—At a presentation to automotive executives near Detroit in late 2016, Advanced Television Systems Committee officials demonstrated how — in addition to traditional over-the-air broadcasting — ATSC 3.0 could also be used for telematics, infotainment and other services involving connected cars and autonomous vehicles.

The idea of using a broadcast standard for such uses is revolutionary but it’s anticipated that the emerging 5G wireless standard will be the dominant method for communicating with autonomous vehicles. On the other hand, the vastly increased bandwidth of 5G will give wireless carriers the ability to greatly expand their video offerings.

So could these two standards be headed for a “technology smackdown?” Not according to most broadcast executives.

The ever-upbeat Mark Aitken, vice president of advanced technology at Sinclair Broadcast Group, emphasized the ability of the technologies to work together.

“The new [ATSC 3.0] broadcast standard was designed with 5G convergence in mind,” he said at the event, emphasizing the internet protocol foundations of both technologies.

COLLABORATIVE POTENTIAL

In a follow-up discussion with TV Technology, Aitken expanded his thoughts: “5G is about heterogeneous networks and hybrid services,” he said, adding that the emerging technologies will give companies “the ability to align the data framing of 3.0 with LTE [Long-Term Evolution, the current 4G format] and 5G.”

Aitken and others have stressed the collaborative potential as both ATSC 3.0 and 5G technologies race to market on parallel courses in the coming months. Although there is competitive potential l— such as 5G’s broadband capability to deliver on-demand video services and 3.0’s prospect for transmitting voice messages over IP — broadcasters and suppliers are confident that the two technologies will both evolve into the market strongly. They emphasize that 3.0 is optimized for broadcast while 5G is tailored for unicast streaming and fixed wireless access.

“ATSC 3.0 and 5G address different use cases and scenarios,” acknowledged Mauricio Aracena, Media Standardization Manager at Ericsson. “Neither technology will interfere with the other. On the contrary, hybrid capabilities of ATSC — such as support for broadcast and broadband delivery — allows broadcasters to combine both 3.0 and 5G technologies for more personalized content.”

It’s still too early to determine just exactly what 5G will entail, according to Richard Chernock, chief science officer at Triveni Digital.

“We know exactly what 3.0 is, but don’t yet know what 5G is because it’s in the early part of its cycle,” he said. “5G is a collection of technologies that may work with each other.

“It has enormous bandwidth; its low latency [and other attributes] may work well together,” but other features are mutually exclusive, said Chernock, who until recently headed ATSC’s Technology Group 3, which guided the Next Gen TV standard to completion.

Chernock acknowledges that there are many “things you could do” to integrate 5G and 3.0 capabilities.

“There is flexibility in the 3.0 physical layer that you could include 5G,” he explained. He pointed out that the 3GPP (3rd Generation Partnership Project, a mobile industry technology standards group) is examining how 5G could move the wireless telecom business from its legacy one-to-one communications focus into a “one to more” role.

“We have different models,” Chernock added. “3.0 could do on-demand as a hybrid. Broadcast can cover it by parking content in the receiver, or you can go from broadcast to broadband and it can complement really well.”

FACING REALITIES

Technical optimism about the interplay between 5G and 3.0 is tempered by market realities. In particular, the ability for future 5G handsets, tablets and other customer equipment to receive over-the-air 3.0 signals is likely to be limited since the wireless carriers and handset makers are expected to continue their longstanding policy of not integrating OTA broadcast receivers into mobile devices. But ATSC 3.0’s strength in mobile reception could help get over that hurdle.

“You’re increasingly going to see the efficacy of 3.0 aligned with mobile, especially 5G,” Aitken said. “ATSC 3.0 is compatible with 5 MHz spectrum. We have demonstrated the ability of 3.0 in relationship to CDMA [Code-Division Multiple Access, the cellular technology used by Verizon and Sprint in the U.S.]. If you take that wide swath from the lowest frequencies and look across the spectrum, you have everything from 600 MHz spectrum to AWS4, where 3.0 can fit in.”

EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE, MARKET PRESENCE

Telecom and broadcast technology suppliers are evaluating when and how to plunge into both the 3.0 and 5G markets. Aitken says that prior to the NAB show, about 40 vendors offered 3.0 products. Now, he says, triple that number of suppliers are “talking about their product paths.”

“Vendors who have been diverted to other markets are coming back to broadcasting," Aitken said, “bringing with them lessons learned from their experiences in the telecom market.”

Triveni Digital’s Chernock agrees. “Encoder makers and others are agnostic,” he said.

Ericsson is one company with feet in both camps. The company is in the process of spinning off their business targeting broadcasters, TV operators and content owners into a new company, Ericsson Media Solutions, according to Matthew Goldman, senior vice president of technology for EMS.

“This was done at least in part to allow for more focused investments in media technologies independent from the networking business,” he said. “ATSC 3.0 is a new market in which Ericsson Media Solutions fully intends to provide solutions to broadcasters, and indeed initial solutions already are available.”

The next reality check will be with consumers who confront both technologies. Verizon has already started field testing of 5G in selected markets, and AT&T intends to do the same this year — even before final 5G standards are adopted, scheduled for 2019. Since 3.0 tests will be underway soon in Phoenix, Cleveland, Dallas and other cities, it is likely that some early adopters may encounter both technologies soon — albeit structured for different purposes.

PALM DESERT, CALIF.—Broadcasters at this week’s HPA Tech Retreat discussed two timely television technical topics: the introduction of the ATSC 3.0 DTV transmission standard and the on-going TV spectrum repack initiative.

The “Broadcasters Panel” included Dave Siegler, vice president of technical operations for the Cox Media Group; Del Parks, senior vice president and chief technology officer for the Sinclair Broadcast Group; Skip Pizzi, vice president of technology education and outreach at the NAB; and Fox Network’s Rich Friedel, who also chairs the Advanced Television Systems Committee’s board of directors.

Matthew Goldman, Ericsson senior vice president of technology at Ericsson and SMPTE president, moderated the Wednesday afternoon session and kicked off the discussion by asking the group to talk about the current status of ATSC 3.0.

“The good news is that the standard has been released and the government has allowed us, on a voluntary basis, to broadcast [ATSC 3.0],” said Friedel. “Things are very exciting in ‘ATSC land.’ It’s really real and you’re going to see it on the air.”

THE ADVANTAGES OF MOVING TO ATSC 3.0

Goldman also quizzed the group about what they considered to be the single best feature of the new standard and if its implementation was related to the on-going TV spectrum repacking operation.

“There are so many features associated with ATSC 3.0, so it’s hard to pick out just one,” said Pizzi. “But in the early term I would say greater transmission efficiency combined with more robustness. It’s going to allow broadcasters to do more in the same amount of spectrum and at the same time provide higher quality.”

“I would say it’s the marriage of broadband and over-the-air broadcasting,” said Friedel. “Consumers will be able to get an internet type of experience combined with television.”

[HPA Tech Retreat Plays to Sold-Out Crowd]

As for the tie-in between ATSC 3.0 and the repack, the panel agreed that while there was no direct connection, the timing of events was such that they could be coordinated in such a way as to provide introduction of 3.0 signals in a market as the channel changing is taking place.

“They’re not really related,” said Siegler. “But the coincidence of the timing is a good opportunity for broadcasters to make changes, including addition of 3.0,” noting that coordination and cooperation between broadcasters would be important elements in making both transitions happen. “It’s really an aggressive plan, but you have to start somewhere.”

MAKING THE TRANSITION HAPPEN

Parks acknowledged the challenges in store for broadcasters in achieving the joint goal of shifting channels and rolling out ATSC 3.0, but observed that there has been a long-standing spirit of technical cooperation among broadcasters, even those who are business competitors.

“The engineering departments in broadcasting have had a traditional role in cooperation,” he said. “Many of us are on the same towers and sometimes there are opportunities to use common antennas.”

He added that as the repack and its relatively short deadline for completion was occupying a lot of engineering time and vendor resources at stations and within station groups, it may be challenging to make the move to ATSC 3.0 at the same time.

“There are a lot of engineering ramifications to the repack,” said Parks. “Sinclair has some 95 stations to repack and this is a really significant effort on-going with the introduction of ATSC 3.0 at the same time. A lot of resources within our group are being expended to run both projects at the same time.

“It is very tricky. The government is taking spectrum away and has sold it, so we’re being repacked in a smaller amount of spectrum and at the same time we’re talking about how to deploy 3.0. The most popular approach put forward is to use channel sharing on one or two ATSC 1.0 sticks. So broadcasters have to cooperate or there will be no service.”

Goldman then asked the panel to comment on new services that ATSC 3.0 would enable for the consumer.

“I’m most excited about interactivity that comes with the broadband connection,” said Siegler. “This allows so much to be done.”

[Redefining Television]

“ATSC 3.0 is based on OFDM, rather than VSB and the associated fragility which 1.0 is based on,” said Parks. “With 3.0 and OFDM, you now have this ability for reception in a car while it’s while traveling at 70, 80, 90 miles-per-hour,” said Parks. The vehicle now is really a big computer and you need to have some way to get broadband to it,” noting ATSC 3.0 would be a big enabler in this regard due to its IP nature.”

“ATSC 3.0 is the first and, so far, the only IP-based TV transmission standard,” said Pizzi. “This could become a real advantage at the end of the day once the transition takes place.”

For a comprehensive list of TV Technology’s ATSC 3.0 coverage, see our ATSC3 silo.

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.   

HOLLYWOOD, CALIF.—A simple look at the numbers reveals the SMPTE 2017 Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition last week in Hollywood, Calif., was a success. More than 2,500 registered attendees (a record); 105 exhibitors, and 70 presentations on some of the most important technical issues facing the motion picture and television industry adds up to another high mark for the standards body.

More than 100 exhibitors showcased their latest technology at the SMPTE 2017.

However, there was a far more important number for the industry in general and SMPTE in particular being discussed at the event. That number is 30.

On the last day of the conference (Oct. 26), John Footen, a leader in Deloitte’s Technology Strategy and Architecture Practice for Technology, Media & Telecoms asked those attending his “The Future of Technology in the Future of Broadcasting” to stand up if they were younger than 30 years old. Of the estimated 200 people in attendance, two said they were younger than 30. One was a scientist, not an engineer, and the other declined to identify her role in the industry.

YEP PROGRAM

While certainly not a scientific survey, a casual observation of those attending other sessions—wandering the aisles from booth to booth in the two exhibit halls and participating in after-hour events like the SMPTE Oktoberfest and Spooktacular—indicates Footen’s poll wasn’t too far off the mark.

SMPTE has recognized the need to attract younger professionals for some time. On the creative side of the business, the organization—along with HPA, which consolidated with SMPTE two years ago—has attracted young filmmakers with the annual SMPTE-HPA Student Film Festival. Likewise, on the technical side—where SMPTE has made its bones for just over 100 years—the pair are tackling the dearth of young blood as well, according to Matthew Goldman, SMPTE president.

SMPTE President Matthew Goldman talks with attendees at SMPTE’s Young Entertainment Professional day-long conference.

“I just came from an all-day event here [at the Loews Hollywood Hotel] that is actually the HPA’s event—sponsored along with SMPTE—called the ‘Young Entertainment Professional,’ or the YEP, program,” said Goldman, who is also senior vice president of technology at Ericsson. YEP is a yearlong program for young engineers five to seven years into their careers, he said.

In Hollywood, the daylong YEP event was focused on mentorship for the “huge crowd” of YEP participants in attendance, Goldman added. “In broadcast in general, it’s the aging of the population. If you look at professional media as a whole, it’s not that way,” he said. “We are looking to strengthen our programs to be more relevant to people in the early part of their carriers, which is usually when you are in your 20s.”

VISION 2020

To that end, SMPTE is on a mission as part of its Vision2020 strategic plan to have 30 percent of its members under 30 years of age, according to Goldman. Back in Salon 2 at the Ray Dolby Ballroom where Footen was making his presentation, the conversation turned to changes in areas where television engineers and tech personnel work and what that may hold for the future. To illustrate the diminishing role for R&D engineers at broadcast organizations, Footen invited Bob Seidel, vice president of engineering and advanced technology at CBS and past president of SMPTE, to the microphone to talk for a few minutes about the CBS Technology Center in Stamford, Conn.

In its heyday, the lab, which closed in 1986, employed as many as 150 engineers tackling R&D projects in areas like videodisc, high definition television, color cameras, image processing and tape, he said. Today, there are five CBS R&D engineers, one of whom previously worked at the tech center.

While HPA has YEP and SMPTE its 30-under-30 goal, the industry at large must find a way to make television attractive to younger people, said Footen. “Our industry is not considered sexy anymore,” he said. “A TV station in the ‘60s or ‘70s was like a startup. It was the hot place to work. It was a place you wanted to go work.”

Footen sees the situation eventually working itself out with a large number of engineers retiring over the next several years and wages becoming more competitive with the IT industry. The approach to management must also change, he said. “I need to be able to walk into a TV station and see the ping-pong table and latte machine,” he said. “Make it sexy. Make it that the next generation will want to work in our field. Make it like it was before.”

Shortly before the start of the SMPTE 2017 Technical Conference & Exhibition, TV Technology spoke with Matthew Goldman, president of SMPTE, and senior vice president of technology, TV & Media, Media Solutions for Ericsson.

TV TECHNOLOGY: What are your top priorities for SMPTE going into your second year as the organization’s president?

MATTHEW GOLDMAN: My top priority for 2018 is to finish our business plan and accompanying roadmap so that we can meet the strategic goals we set out in our “Vision 2020” strategic planning efforts. Along these lines, we have several near-term tactical work items to complete in 2018 as well, such as defining and implementing a specification process that will address our industry’s transformation to software-defined media processing, with a more agile, DevOps style of specification creation. Specifications will exist an as adjunct to our due-process, global standards. As you know, SMPTE supports our industry in three main areas, known as our three pillars: Membership, Education, and Standards. The new business plan and road map will include strategic updates to each of the three pillars.

TVT: SMPTE has made great strides in its SMPTE ST 2110 suite of standards. What’s left to do coming out of the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition and what is the timeframe?

GOLDMAN: Yes, we have! The first three parts of ST 2110—Systems (-10), Uncompressed Video (-20) and PCM Audio (-30)—became approved standards back in mid-September. Traffic Shaping and Timing (-21) is undergoing ST audit at the time of this writing, which is the final stage in due process standardization to become an approved standard. Ancillary Data (-40)—which includes items such as closed captions, subtitling, time codes, active format description, dynamic range and color space—is undergoing final committee draft comment resolution. We expect that ST 2110-21 will be an approved standard prior to the end of this year, with ST 2110-40 following in early 2018. There are other areas under development that will become part of the SMPTE ST 2110 suite in the future.

TVT: What is the thinking behind moving to a new venue for next year’s gathering? What are the benefits of doingso?

GOLDMAN: We really have enjoyed the Hollywood & Highland location. The close proximity of the conference sessions and the exhibition halls is a great plus in the atmosphere, fostering hallway social interactions, while enabling a quick return to the conference sessions or exhibits. Having access to a top-end cinema for sessions, which require the theater experience, has been great as well.

We are moving because, simply put, we are a victim of our own success. We have outgrown the Hollywood & Highland location and so we sought a venue that will allow us to expand while still providing the social networking opportunities. The new location, Westin Bonaventure in Downtown Los Angeles, allows the conference and exhibition to continue to grow. We will be able to accommodate more exhibitors and delegates.

Shortly before the start of the SMPTE 2016 Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition, NewBay editors spoke with Matthew Goldman about his plans as incoming SMPTE President. He’ll take office on Jan. 1, 2017.

TV TECHNOLOGY: How does it feel to preside over year 101?What are SMPTE's primary goals or initiatives for 2017?

MATTHEW GOLDMAN: I am very excited to be leading SMPTE into its second century. There are moments over the past 100 years where new technology pushed us forward into new areas, or more efficient ways of performing our traditional workflows, or creating and delivering better quality, or new ways of thinking overall. With the advent of software-defined media processing, network function virtualization and more agile ways of responding to customer needs, this is definitely one of those times. Our primary goals for 2017 and beyond include bringing our expertise together to assist the industry in achieving the benefits of this new technology, through interoperability—fostered by relevant standards—and expanding on our education to increase the effectiveness of those passionate about motion pictures and television. We also plan to investigate how we can leverage adjacent industries and bring in more expertise from those sources.

TVT: How do you see SMPTE evolving to keep up with the enormous technological changes that will happen at a continually increasing rate for the foreseeable future?

MG: We already have started the evolution. We have and continue to embrace new software-defined methodologies into how we approach industry solutions. With our collaboration with the Hollywood Professional Association, we are addressing both the creative and the engineering sides of our business. And we plan to expand the influence of “people skills” by looking into user groups where “birds of a feather may flock together” to nurture ideas and grow our reach.

TVT: What aspect of SMPTE's identity do you feel the organization must retain in order to continue being SMPTE?

MG: One of our greatest assets is that our membership consists of independently minded professionals who truly are getting together for the benefit of our industry.

TVT: Does the industry at large have an accurate picture of what SMPTE does? Are there any misconceptions or outdated notions that SMPTE needs to address through industry outreach?

MG: This depends heavily on where you sit within the industry-at-large. Often, what SMPTE does is behind the scenes, and it may not be so obvious where hundreds, or possibly thousands, of team hours were invested to address or solve an industry need. This is why we have stepped up our educational programs to help the industry improve and grow, which in turn gives us the recognition of where the industry should turn to get such assistance.

MatthewGoldman, a SMPTE Fellow who has previously held SMPTE board roles including executive vice president, finance vice president, and Eastern Region Governor, will serve a two-year term as SMPTE president. He is Senior Vice President Technology, TV & Media, at Ericsson, where he is focused on video processing and media delivery solutions. He has been actively involved in the development of digital television systems since 1992.

WHITE PLAINS, N.Y.—A month before American voters head to the polls, Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers have made their voice heard on who will be leading them over the coming years. Matthew Goldman, senior vice president of technology, TV and media at Ericsson, has been elected as the new SMPTE president for the 2017-2018 term, along with other new officers and governors.

Matthew Goldman

Goldman has previously served on the SMPTE board as executive vice president, finance vice president, and Eastern region governor. He will take over for current SMPTE president Robert Seidel of CBS on Jan.1, 2017, and will hold the position for two years. Seidel will continue to serve on the SMPTE Board of Governors as the Society’s past president.

Other SMPTE officers elected for the 2017-2018 term include Patrick Griffis, VP of technology at Dolby Labs and SMPTE education vice president, as executive vice president; Richard Welsh, CEO of Sundog Media Toolkit, as the new education vice president; and Peter Wharton, VP of technology and business development at BroadStream Solutions, who was re-elected as secretary/treasurer.

Governors elected for the new term include François Abbe, president and founder of Mesclado, for the Europe, Middle East, Africa, and Central and South America regions; Brian Claypool, VP of business development at Barco, for the Central region; Christopher Fetner, director of engineering and partnerships at Netflix, for the Hollywood region; George Hoover, CTO at NEP Group, for the Eastern region; Michal Koetter, VP of digital media systems at Turner Broadcasting, for the Southern region; Gary Mandle, senior product manager for Sony North America, for the Western region; Masayuki Sugawara, executive engineer at NEC Corporation, for the Asia-Pacific region; and François Vaillant, executive director of engineering and infrastructure at CBC/Radio-Canada, for the Canadian region. Andrew G. Setos, CEO for Blackstar Engineering, and Douglas I. Sheer, CEO and chief analyst at DIS Consulting, were re-elected as Governors for the Hollywood and New York regions, respectively.

Governors-at-large and directors of standards, education and membership will be appointed by the Board of Governors at a later date.

BOSTON—I had the pleasure of being part of the 2016 NAB Show Super Session “4K, UHD, HDR and More: The Future of Video.” In a very large conference room completely full of attendees, my co-panelists and I—under the astute direction of TV Technology’s Deborah McAdams—talked about a variety of Ultra High Definition (UHD) related topics, describing the state of the industry with regard to UHD as well as opining about what we thought were the important issues to tackle and where we thought the industry was heading.

(L to R): Deborah McAdams, Mark Schubin, Robert Seidel, James DeFilippis and Matthew Goldman

“Ultra HD,” of course, means much more than just higher spatial resolution (4K and 8K), even though that is to what many in the industry and consumers equate it. It includes four other image as well as immersive audio technologies. The four other image technologies are high dynamic range (HDR), wide color gamut (WCG), deeper sample bit depth (higher number of coefficient bits for the digital samples), and high frame rate (HFR). All of these technologies combined create a much more realistic and immersive TV viewing experience than today’s conventional HDTV, without requiring any special head gear (such as that required for the near-totally immersive virtual reality techniques that are also a new exciting area of discussion).

BANDWIDTH CONSTRAINTS

As is typical, pre-produced content is ahead of live TV broadcasting for delivering UHD, with Ultra HD Blu-ray discs and some on-demand or over-the-top services already providing both 4K and HDR. This should not be a surprise: it’s much easier to implement new services when one controls both ends of the ecosystem, with only a passive delivery pipe in between. All post-production is done in advance, with the receiver/player/rendering/etc. acting on the content, unchanged by the delivery mechanism, whether via wire, wireless or “sneaker net.” With live TV broadcasting, there is no advanced post-production; all is done in real-time. Live changes (such as logo insertion, lower thirds, graphic overlays, picture-in-graphics, squeeze & tease, cross-fades for interstitials, or country-specific format conversions, etc.) could occur at each “node” along the live broadcast chain. Another major factor is available bandwidth; there simply may not be sufficient bandwidth to delivery UHD services, especially for the technologies that require a lot more bandwidth than today’s conventional HD services do. Lastly, there may be regulatory restrictions impacting new services over certain networks, such as over-the-air broadcasting, that prevent economically-viable transmission of UHD services.

As previously mentioned, all of the five image technologies combine to give a much more compelling visual user experience than today’s conventional HDTV, so if a content/service provider is able to offer a UHD service that includes all five, then fantastic. Definitely offer this compelling, much more realistic TV viewing experience. Consumers will be thrilled.

However, what if bandwidth constraints prevent the content/service provider from offering “full UHD,” so to speak? Should the provider just resign itself to continue with today’s conventional HD service? Absolutely not. The combination of HDR + WCG + 10-bit sample depth (which many of us refer to as “HDR+”) has been shown in numerous demonstrations to have fantastic “wow” factor for consumers. And the good news is, depending upon the HDR+ scheme chosen, the bandwidth increase over conventional TV (what’s now referred to as standard dynamic range + narrow color gamut + 8-bit depth) is minimal, in the general range of zero-20 percent when using the new HEVC video compression at direct-to-consumer bitrates… most definitely the Best Bang for the Bit. Compare this to 4K resolution: Even with the best video compression available today (HEVC), 4K resolution still requires somewhere around 250 percent the bandwidth of conventional HD (also coded using HEVC, for apples-apples comparison). And since the “bread and butter” of revenue still will be the conventional HD service, this bandwidth requirement most likely will be in addition to the existing service (that is, simulcast will be required).

IS 4K NEEDED? WHY NOT 1080P?

So in the case of bandwidth constraints, why not transmit in 1080p HDR+ and achieve the “wow” factor of HDR+? All 4K TVs upconvert 1080p to 2160p (4K) and the newer UHDTVs (4K + HDR+) will display an HDR+ image if the incoming stream has HDR+ coded, regardless of the spatial resolution. Many consumers may not even realize that the image was upconverted to 4K: An oft under-discussed issue is that the proper viewing distance for the human visual system to resolve 4K resolution is approximately 1.5x the picture height of a 16:9 display, whereas HD resolution can be resolved in full as far back as 3x the picture height. In most TV viewing environments today, consumers are sitting back from the display about 2.5-3.5x the picture height, therefore not really “seeing” much difference between HD and 4K.

Ericsson has done “unscientific” experiments at trade shows over the past two years, with two equal size flat screens side-by-side and we asked attendees which image they preferred (without telling them what they were looking at). Almost 100 percent would select the 1080p HDR display over the 2160p SDR display (and this was done at the proper viewing distance). This unscientific experiment is just one of many that have shown the “wow” factor of HDR+ to consumers, regardless of screen resolution.

So what about HFR? Like 4K resolution, HFR requires lots of changes in the studio and post production facilities. Its impact is also related to how fast or complex the scene motion is, so it’s extremely useful for high motion sports and nature documentaries, but doesn’t do anything much at all for “talking heads” and other low motion content. While there are examples of specialty content being shot at HFR—for video, this is defined as anything higher than 50 or 60 fps (country TV-standard specific), but it typically refers to 100 or 120 fps today—wider use of HFR likely will not occur for several more years to come, so it is not so big an issue for today.

In summary, if a provider is able to offer a UHD service that contains all of the five image technologies than definitely do it. This is just so much better than today’s conventional HD. However, if bandwidth constraints prevent “full UHD” from being delivered, the Best Bang for the Bit is definitely 1080p HDR+… with much of the “wow” factor and a far superior user experience over today’s conventional HD.

Matthew Goldman is the senior vice president of Technology, TV & Media Strategy for Ericsson.

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.”