Talk:High-definition video

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general): Filmmaking task force

Contents 1 Format Consideration 2 Resolution 3 See my post at Talk:YCbCr 4 Once Upon a Time in Mexico 5 High def VIDEO versus TELEVISION 6 Cheaper 1080i/p displays 7 HD in Filmmaking 8 Merge "High-definition video" with "High-definition television". 9 Merge "High Definition Video" with "Digital Photography" 10 Film to High Definition Transfer section 11 Compression?

[edit] Format Consideration

Would you agree that in its current form, it is a random lump of facts? I'm sure it is the product of good efforts of several editors, but it calls for cleaning. Should it just be about what factors one's choice for a particular HD format (24/25/30/i/p/720/1080)? Spare the poor reader from 0.01% pulldowns, which are off-topic and better explained in telecine. Binba 06:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Resolution

"High-definition television (HDTV) resolution is 1080 interlaced lines or 720 progressive lines.": I was under the impression 1080p is also a possibility. Could anyone clarify? Mikecron 18:51, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, 1080p is (currently) the "best" form of HD video. --Wulf 07:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

However, 1080p can only be broadcast at 24-30 frames per second. That rate is fine for movies, but high motion content such as sports require 50-60 images per second. An interlaced "frame" is two images, so 1080i is acceptable for sports, whereas 1080p is not.

[edit] See my post at Talk:YCbCr

Please see my post about Sony Extended Video/Sony Higher Definition/xvYCC at Talk:YCbCr. (P.S., is there a way to superscript text in MediaWiki? Please reply on my talk page.) Thanks :) Wulf 07:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Once Upon a Time in Mexico

Do we have references for this movie having been shot in HDTV? If this is true, it's the first time HD has ever fooled me.Algr 00:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

See here: [1]. --Cab88 23:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Well how about that. Thanks! Algr 07:25, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] High def VIDEO versus TELEVISION

Seems to be a lot of bleed from the HDTV article into this one. I agree that there is a distinction between HD video content in general and HDTV (though I'm not completely familiar with the relative standards, and whether such are similar or in constrast). However, this article is not doing enough to make that distinction. Alot of duplication with HDTV. So, I've added the following sentence "It is important to note the difference between general purpose high-definition video as discussed in this article, and its specific applictions in television (HDTV), filming (HDV) and video storage systems (HDDVD and |Blu-ray)." Hopefully we can work to make the as discussed in this article statement more true. Audiodude 18:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted every duplicate section with HDTV and other articles High-definition pre-recorded media and compression, Analogue High-definition television systems. This does not mean this page is meaningless. In fact, it should ocus more on the visual advantatges of high definion, as technical details have already been described in other pages. Thewikipedian 11:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Well said and done, I clarified Audiodude's statement. There are still numerous instances of using "HDTV" instead of "HD". If it's specific to HDTV it shouldn't be here, and if it applies to HD it should be renamed (and shouldn't be in HDTV). Binba 06:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cheaper 1080i/p displays

The last line of the heading Format Considerations is inaccurate.

It says "An LCD capable of native 1080i resolution still costs over a thousand US dollars." However a Dell 24" monitor (resolution: 1920x1200) can be had for well under $1000 now.

[edit] HD in Filmmaking

The current text for this reads:

"Arguing that film is not high quality enough to make movies (in part because of poor film development processing, poor monitoring system, and a general inabilty to see what the camera is actually capturing) and the increasing usage of computer generated, augmented or edited picture sequences has led some directors to engage in shooting their movies using the HD format via high-end digital cameras. Although this argument is flawd as film has a much wider dynamic range as it can generally handle twice to four times the contrast as even the best HD cameras, not to mention that 35mm film can resolve up to 6000 lines while the best in HD so far can only resolve less than 1900 usable lines. Generally if somebody is pushing for HD, it's actually to save money on film stock and transfers to digital for special effects. Some examples are George Lucas and Robert Rodriguez.

Many television shows with science fiction themes and special effects — such as Star Trek: Enterprise and Stargate — have also begun to use digital cameras."

This includes bald statements that are pushing one view. Would it not be better for a pro and con argument as to the benefits of HD vs the benefits of film and then the disadvantages. An analysis of visual acuity, the general seating distances in theatres and the colour gamut that the average person can perceive would be useful. After all, it's what the audience perceives that is the issue. There is also no mention in the current article of sensitivity to light. If the director wants to shoot in available street light at night, what are their options? What happens as you increase the speed of the film stock and also its grain? It states that 35 mm film can resolve up to 6000 lines (reference please as this seems a lot), but does not state what the final release print resolution is. What are the implications when matting is used? In normal film technology this introduces a third process of degradation. If you are using lots of matting, such as in Sci-Fi, this might be a good argument for using HD digital.

If I knew the answers to these issues I might try to address them, but sadly I do not. --CloudSurfer 02:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

The recent edits to this section have removed the POV issues. Thank you. The issues of matting and losses in the processing to the release print are still not mentioned. Do we have any facts with references on the effective resolution, colour gamut and contrast ratios of the final product? Another issue that occurs to me is that of shutter speed in terms of its effect on motion. Isn't there someone who is studying this at film school? --CloudSurfer 23:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I renamed the title from "Movies that have been shot in HD". It sounded like a mere list. This topic is big, I can give a shot at rewriting it, as long as we're sure that this is the place for it and there are no duplicates? (I already removed one from HDTV) Binba 06:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Very good points cloud and bindba, wish I could help but this is not my are of ecpertise. As is the article is seriously lacking unfortunately. As an inegral part of both historical, popular and technological culture, past future and preseent, such details are a sine qua non of this encyclepdia. 62.38.17.143 15:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge "High-definition video" with "High-definition television".

against - While HDV is used with HDTV it is also used in film and for viewing on a computer and soon to be used with HD DVD's..

Against - "Television" implies broadcast and mass media, whereas "Video" includes computer monitor displays, digital cinematography, and even security cameras.Algr 08:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Against - While HDTV uses high def video, they are not same. hdv can be used in reference to not just presentation on tv but also on monitors etc. hdtv, at max can encompass hd transmission, but not hd video.

Against - BUT there needs to be a sharper seperation between hdtv and hdv facts, e.g. hd ready is a label for hd-tv. these tv sets are also able to display hdv, but their main funcion is to display broadcasted hd content. greets, --Andreas -horn- Hornig 20:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Against - A non issue for me. 62.38.17.143 15:26, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Against - HDV and HDTV are two different things. ~Eljay

Against - If anything, HDTV should be merged into HDV
--FastLizard4 (Talk•Links•Sign) 16:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge "High Definition Video" with "Digital Photography"

Against: Video (including HDTV) is not necessarily digital, despite today's standards. Against: Digital photography generally refers to still photography.

Against: Video doesn't necssarily to be digital, but HDTV is a digital format. However, I am against the suggestion to merge with Digital photography; The term refers to taking still picture using digital technology, not motion picture.

Against --Wulf 07:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Against --myselfalso 20:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Against --what?! Who is for that? HD is a specific set of standards for moving images, digital photography is about an acquisition process of a still image. Binba 06:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Against - Who came up with this one? Photography and television are two completely different things!
--FastLizard4 (Talk•Links•Sign) 16:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Film to High Definition Transfer section

My 2 cents here as a longtime avid reader/contributor here, albeit anonymous. I think a lot of people on wikipedia are getting too anal for our own good, and I consider the diction in this section to be both very formal and up to par with wikipedia's standards. I also found it very informative, presenting the issues in very concise and, above all, comprehensible manner, unlike other technical articles that do not merit from a very dried up text neither in presentation nor in their ease of understanding. And on a side note here, letting an article have a balanced portion of formality and encyclopaedia tone with the writers indiosyncrasies are what we should be after. Traditional encyclopaedia's benefited from this a lot, where, whilst all articles maintained a set of rules for writing standars and editors made sure of this, they also had the authors signature in writing. Essentially what I am saying is that making it too cut and dry or getting too anal about diction will only hurt our efforts. 62.38.17.143 15:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Here's my one cent. This article struck me as one of the most concise and informative pieces I have seen anywhere on Wikipedia.69.122.62.231 15:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compression?

Do all HD formats use some kind of compression, and if not, which are compressed and which aren't and which uses what kind of compression - and how does compression factor into image quality when transferred to and projected from film? --98.202.73.104 (talk) 05:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)