How good is HD supposed to be?

[Dave Lambley]

On 28 April 2016 at 10:41, Dave Liquorice <allsorts at howhill.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 03:08:38 +0300, Vangelis forthnet wrote:
>
> >> In addition a high bit-rate (8000kbps) 1920x1080, interlaced at 25fps,
> >> full HD encode is generated, but has not yet been made available.
> >
> > but it has not yet been released publicly...
> > At ca. 8Mps, those will be really huge files!
>
> 3.2 GB/hour roughly. The current 2.5 Mbps (ish) uses about 1 GB/hr.
>
> > NB hvfhd DOES NOT OFFER HIGHER RESOLUTION (CLARITY), only doubled
> > framerate (25FPS x2), which results in smoother scenes where motion is
> > involved!
>
> How does repeating frames improve smoothness of movement? Or does this
> encode upscale each field(*) and encode that to increase the temporal
> resolution?
>
> (*) If good ole 25 frames/50 fields per second has any relevance in the
> digital world.

The BBC could well have non-interlaced 50 frames/s master copies, and
for when they don't there are de-interlacing algorithms which can give
smooth 50 fields/s output from interlaced 25 frames/s video. (I
believe MPlayer has some.)

Dave