Steve Backshall - Nature's Microworlds - 2 Serengeti.mp4, b01l4906
tony at tqvideo.co.uk
Mon Apr 9 11:22:53 PDT 2018
On 09/04/2018 18:34, MacFH - C E Macfarlane wrote:
> Please see below ...
> On 09/04/2018 16:54, Tony Quinn wrote:
>> On 09/04/2018 16:23, MacFH - C E Macfarlane wrote:
>>> Can't see the logic, if there is any?! Surely, for the same disk
>>> space and bandwidth, the customer viewer would get a better download
>>> from 1440 25fps rather than 720 50fps?
>> It doesn't scale quite like that ..... in professional terms, 1080p25
>> is the same data rate as 720p50
> Yes, I can see that that might be so, but I don't think it alters the
> thrust of my argument, does it? Wouldn't 1080p25 still be better to
> watch than 720p50?
Not "MIGHT be so" ..... ***IS*** so - having spent 35 years as an
engineer in broadcast TV (some of it at the BBC) , I've heard too many
bloody amateurs dismiss the physics/maths with phrases like "might be
In my opinion 25p has a nasty "cinematic" feel to it (50i is better) -
50p has smoother movement.
Added to which just having eyes (which are not stationary) reduces the
spatial resolution by the square root of 2 in each direction -
increasing temporal resolution is much more effective at convincing the
brain that something is "better".
Read this, and see what I mean
More information about the get_iplayer