Last Time, Our Blu Hero was…

Last time I made some predictions about the future of Blu-ray, I set some specific targets I saw as the direction that Blu-ray needed to move,  in order to enjoy some success. I said that if there was a $5 difference in the price of media and a $50 difference in the price of players, then it would be a no-brainer for the typical consumer to pay a little more for a jump in quality. I didn’t think people would pay double for better quality, though, which was where we were when I made that prediction. And yet the times, they are a-changin’.

Recently, I was at a store. I won’t say which one, but it rhymes with Bostco. This store often has high-end merchandise, but only high-end merchandise for which there is strong demand. This store doesn’t go in for fads on things like movies, it waits until there is an established market. Blu-rays have been on the market for years, but this store didn’t until very recently sell movies on Blu-ray, although they have sold the players for several years. This store typically sells DVDs of older movies for $10-$12. When I saw that they had Blu-ray versions of some movies for $15, I knew that the price barrier had finally been broken and things were looking up for Blu-ray.

While media is adopting appropriate mass-consumer pricing, its still hard to find a Blu-ray player at a reasonable price. Players can be found for as little as $199, but that’s still a hefty premium over a bottom-of-the-barrel DVD player, as those start at around $50. Blu-ray Players still need to drop another $50-100. If they hit $100 by Christmas, almost everyone will find one under the tree, and Sony’s gambles will have paid off. It’s been a rough road, Blu-ray, but I think you’re gonna make it after all.

MiniDV

MiniDV, or Miniature Digital Video, was a breakthrough for home video enthusiasts. The format used analog tapes, but encoded a digital signal. This is like the old style modems that sent a digital signal over telephone lines. When it first connected, you heard that series of squeals and beeps that was the sound of digital information being communicated in an audible format. These cameras are all able to transfer video to a computer through a Firewire cable. This technology ushered in the era of desktop video publishing. Software to edit video has become a standard feature for operating systems, and many excellent software video editing packages are available at a reasonable cost.

MiniDV is on the way out as a standard format, and the cameras are starting to get rare in stores. But, no other format has emerged which completely surpasses MiniDV in every respect. Every other format that has come out since MiniDV is also digital, but instead of storing a digital signal on an analog medium, the new formats store a digital signal on a digital medium, like a Hard Drive or Flash Memory. This makes a difference, because analog tapes have way more room for information than a Hard Drive or Flash Memory. That means that MiniDV required very little compression to make things fit. It’s able to store video information that hasn’t been shrunk down to a lower quality. Newer formats, because they have less space to work with, need to compress video down to fit onto a digital medium.

Compressed video isn’t a problem if all you want to do is play the video back. But, if you want to edit the video, then that compression means that you have less raw material to work with. When you apply effects and transitions, a compressed signal is not going to produce as nice a picture as raw video. For most people who just want to capture video of the kids as home movies, this isn’t a serious issue, but if you want to make a short film, you might want to pay attention to how much compression your video camera is putting on the video you capture, and what options the camera has to reduce that level of compression if you want video that is higher quality.

MiniDV tapes can stretch or become caught in the camera mechanism, but on the whole it is still a good option for Standard Definition, because it stores uncompressed video on an inexpensive medium, and the cameras are getting dirt cheap…if you can still find them.

Mini DVD

Mini DVD, which annoyingly has almost the same name as MiniDV, is an all-digital format. DVDs are highly compressed, and the minature discs don’t hold a lot of video. This format is most suitable for those who do not wish to edit video at all. If you primarily want to record and be able to watch the video on your DVD player without having to bother with editing it on a computer, then this might be a good option for you.

The primary drawback of this format is that discs need to be ‘finalized’ before they can be played on a regular DVD player. The process of finalizing a Mini-DVD can take up to twice as long as the recording time. This means that if you shoot an hour of video, it could take the camera as long as two hours after you finish shooting to prepare the DVD for a DVD player. Different cameras do better or worse at cutting this time down, but be aware this can be an issue and read some reviews on the camera before taking the plunge. This format is also on the way out, and while the discs are cheap right now, the cameras are getting rare, and are only available in Standard Definition models.

Hard Drive

Hard Drive video cameras are currently the popular choice. A 30-40 GB Hard Drive will store several hours worth of recording, and offloading it is quick and easy. MiniDV transfers video information in real time. This means that if you want to transfer an hour of video to a computer, it takes an hour to copy it over. Mini DVD takes a long time to finalize a disc. The advantage of a Hard Drive camera is that it stores computer files on a Hard Drive, just like the files you would store on your computer, so when it comes time to transfer from camera to computer, it only takes a few minutes to move those files, just like you were transfering a file from one computer to another. Quick and easy.

The inherent drawback of a Hard Drive camera is that the Hard Drive is sealed inside the camera and you can’t swap it out for another when it gets full. If you’re out shooting for a day or two then returning to your computer, it’s no problem, just offload the files. But, what happens when you go on a two-week vacation? Unless you have a laptop, you might run out of space pretty quick.

The answer is flash memory. When 2GB memory cards were the only reasonably-priced option, buying a dozen of those and swapping them out regularly would be a terrible hassle. But, now that 8 or 16 GB cards are getting into a decent price range, buying several of those cards gives you the flexibility to significantly increase the amount of recording time available on a Hard Drive video camera.

The good thing about Hard Drive cameras is that many of them are available in High Definition formats. This means that they can record in 720 or 1080 resolution. The tricky thing is that the abbreviation for Hard Disk Drive is HDD, and the abbreviation for High Definition is HD. So, there are a lot of letters stamped on the side of one of these units and you need to look closely to see whether it’s a HDD unit, yet only Standard Definition, or both HDD and HD. In order to be able to shoot in HD, a lot of these cameras will significantly compress the image they shoot and often will only offer 1080i resolution (interlaced) which alternates lines of video, not progressive, which displays each line each time. See earlier posts for a further explanation of the difference.

Flash Memory

The next step is to entirely skip the Hard Drive, and only use flash memory. As memory becomes less expensive, this becomes a more attractive option. Without a Hard Drive, the bulk of the unit can be significantly reduced and the power required takes less of a toll on the battery. These cameras can often take High Definition still images, and the line between where Flash Memory camcorders ends and regular Digital Cameras begin blurs a little. This is especially true since some regular Digital Cameras are now offering High Definition video as an option.

If I’m just taking a short video that I want to upload to Facebook or YouTube, then I just use a point-and-shoot Digital Camera. It is able to record at Standard Definition, the video responds reasonably well when I put it into a desktop video editor, and the result is more than enough resolution to look good online. If your job is posting to the Internet, you’ll want a real video camera, but if you’re just having fun, a regular digital camera is really all you need. Some Digital Cameras even come with a ‘YouTube’ mode, which records in the format YouTube uses, to make it easier to upload your videos.

Digital SLRs

Some Digital SLR (Single Lens Reflex) Cameras have begun to offer video. This is a huge development, because the ability to change lenses and control focus directly is really what separates consumer video cameras from professional equipment, and the price difference is HUGE between the two. Now that DSLR makers have started to add in video, they have been able to offer a product that gives amazing control over video shots for thousands of dollars less than professional equipment.

Early DSLR models that offer video do so with some limitations. The units that have just come out tend to overheat if used too long. The auto-focus these cameras use is often designed around taking still pictures and hasn’t yet been optimized to be effective when shooting video, so manual focus tends to be a better option. That manual focus is possible with these cameras is a real positive, but there are times when you just want the camera to do its thing. DSLR Video is still a very new thing, and some of the limitations that currently exist will soon be overcome, but this is a very exciting development and will soon become the must-have tool for those who are serious about shooting amateur video.

Standard Definition

A Movie DVD contains compressed video at what we refer to as Standard Definition, 480 lines of resolution. DVDs introduced progressive video, which was an improvement over older interlaced signals. Instead of alternating odd and even lines, progressive video presents every line every time. This results in a smoother picture than older television systems were capable of producing.

High Definition

Television has now moved beyond the limits of standard definition. 720p and 1080p dramatically increase the number of pixels displayed on a screen. Screens can display better images, but the medium that distributes the stuff you want to watch lags behind. DVDs are stuck at Standard Definition.

This isn’t the first time that there has been a lag between the ability of a TV to display a better picture and the lack of a medium to store video. VHS (Video Home System), the most popular form of VCR (Video Cassette Recorder)  could only display 240 lines of resolution. I was recently attending a seminar delivered over the course of several weeks, and each week we watched a DVD. There was a problem with the group who had lent the DVDs, and they needed them back. The organizer managed to borrow an alternate copy, but it was a set of VHS tapes. I was amazed at what a difference it made to go back to the old format. Faces were fuzzy and indistinct. I never had a problem with VHS 15 years ago, but once you get accustomed to something better you realize the difference and going back is painful.

The Contenders Vie for the Crown

DVD has not yet been succeeded by another format. HD-DVD and Blu-ray were two new formats that were meant to replace the DVD. One is now defunct, and the other is struggling to gain traction. There is speculation it will never become popular enough to truly replace DVDs. One reason why Blu-ray struggles is that DVDs are really, really inexpensive. This is partly because those who sell DVDs see the end of the line and are rushing to make all the money they can before the gravy train ends. This doesn’t make a whole lot of sense because they’re the same people who want to Blu-ray to take off. Making DVDs dirt cheap changes people’s expectations of what a movie should cost, so the movie industry is shooting itself in the foot.

Fortunately, the people behind Blu-ray have announced plans to lower costs for the new format in the near future to kick-start the transition. Let’s hope that happens.

The Conversion Experience

Upconverting DVD players are the other reason Blu-ray hasn’t taken off. Older DVD players didn’t always look all that great on the new high-resolution screens. This is because the screens are so precise. To illustrate, let’s assume that you have a bar with 4 lights on it. The lights flash according to a pattern. If you want to display that same pattern on a bar that has 8 lights, it’s easy because you just double the pattern, and wherever light number 1 was flashing, both 1 and 2 now flash. Wherever light number 2 was flashing, both 3 and 4 flash, and so on. The pattern translates easily, because it’s just double. But, what if there are only 6 lights? Now, you can’t just double the pattern, you need to make choices about which lights will flash when to best represent the original pattern, but you’ll never get a pattern that identically represents the original pattern because the math doesn’t divide evenly.

One of the great ironies of Digital television is that it is so precise, it shows up flaws. Older, analog TVs could fudge an image and come out looking OK. It is important that that you feed a Digital TV a properly formatted signal so that it displays correctly. The better the TV the better a good signal will look and the worse a bad signal will look. It cuts both ways.

An upconverter improves the way your existing DVD collection looks on your big screen TV. An upconverter doesn’t improve the resolution, it still works from 480 lines of resolution because that’s all that’s available on a DVD, but it takes the original image and stretches it smoothly over the larger space, fudging the numbers to keep things looking smooth, despite the fact that the numbers don’t translate evenly.

To understand the difference, imagine a balloon with words written on it. Before the balloon is blown up, the words are small and clear and you can read them. An old DVD player playing on a big screen TV is kind of like stretching the balloon with your hands to try and make it bigger. The image will be uneven. An upscaler or upconverter stretches the image smoothly, like blowing up the balloon. The even pressure causes each part of the image to be smoothly stretched as the balloon increases in size. It’s still the same image, starting small and stretched big. Nothing new has been added. High definition is like printing in a large font on a piece of paper. There’s no need to stretch the paper image, it’s already as large as the words on the balloon when the balloon is blown up, and it’s going to be a clearer and sharper than the stretched balloon. Even if the balloon has been stetched smoothly by blowing it up, there’s only so much ink to spread out, and it won’t be as crisp and clear as the printed page, but will still be better than stretching by hand.

In addition to smoothly stretching the image, an upconverter can output video via an HDMI cable, which is a digital cable. Older DVD Players are only able to output analog video. This means that the digital signal from the DVD gets converted to analog for the cable, then when it reaches a digital television, it gets converted back into digital. The conversion process to and from analog reduces the quality of the video signal. By using a digital cable, an upconverting DVD player maintains the digital quality of the picture from start to finish, resulting in a better picture, as long as your TV can accept HDMI.

So, an upconverting DVD player provides a smoother, clearer image on a big screen TV by stretching the image smoothly and delivering it to the TV in a digital format.

Normally televisions in North America run at 60Hz, which means that images flash on the screen approximately sixty times per second. New 120Hz TVs double that, which means that the image flashes more often, and should theoretically result in a smoother image. In practical terms, the human brain is not capable of perceiving the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz, so it makes little difference for normal television watching.

Visualizing the Process

Imagine a fan, with a light behind it and slightly to one side, so that when the blades of the fan spin, they cover and uncover the light. Each time a gap in the blades passes in front of the light, the light shines through. If the fan is spinning slowly, then you will be able to see the blades, with flashes of light in between. As the fan spins faster, it becomes harder to see the blades, until they are simply a blur. At this point, the light will still seem to be flashing, but very quickly. If the blades turn fast enough, the flashes of light will come so fast that the light will seem to be a constant, continuous light, instead of a series of discernable flashes. In the same way, a TV that flashes quickly enough will appear to be smooth and continuous, even though it is made up of a series of very quick still images. The threshold at which the human brain begins to perceive motion as smooth is known as ‘flicker fusion’. The point of fusion changes in different lighting conditions, but the point at which the human brain is guaranteed to perceive motion as smooth is around 60 times per second.

If the fan, already spinning fast enough that the light appears to be one solid light was to spin faster, would it make a difference to your perception of the light? No, there comes a point where the light appears smooth, and if the fan spins 10% faster, 100% faster, or 1000% faster, it won’t make any difference to how you perceive that light shining through the blades. Your TV, just like the light behind the fan, only needs to be so fast. Hardcore users might be able to pick up on subtle details which are affected, but for the typical user 120Hz is not going to make a significant improvement in image quality.

NTSC, Film and PAL

‘Frames per second’ indicates how many unique pictures are displayed every second in a video stream. NTSC, which is the standard for broadcast television in North America, displays 29.97 frames per second. So then, if there are only 30 pictures each second, how does the screen flash 60 times each second? Well, remember interlacing (part of an earlier blog post) where only the odd lines are shown, and then the even lines? Cut 30 pictures in half, and you have 60. Progressive video simply displays each of the 30 images twice. Even though you’re seeing 30 doubles every second, the human brain perceives it as smooth motion. Most hand drawn cartoons were 15 frames per second, and they showed each picture four times, which is about the lower end of the limit of this Jedi mind trick that TVs are able to do.

The earliest film images couldn’t get beyond the threshold at which the human brain perceived them as smooth motion, which is why the famous footage you’ve probably seen of a train running down the tracks looks like the image is stuttering or flickering. The image isn’t flashing often enough to seem smooth. Modern movies run at 24 frames per second, which is doubled to 48 frames per second, which is sufficient in the controlled environment of a theatre to appear smooth.

PAL is the standard for video in Eastern Europe and Asia. It displays 25 frames per second, and doubles them for a total of 50 flashes per second. This is a little slow, and can result in a bit of flicker, depending on the conditions. Newer televisions for the Eastern Europe/Asian market also double the Hz for a total of 100 flashes per second, and the difference between 50Hz and 100Hz is noticeable in some situations.

One Good Reason for 120Hz

There is one clear situation in which a 120Hz TV makes real sense. When a video camera is pointed at a TV, a 120Hz display will appear better than a 60Hz display. If the TV you are recording with a video camera is displaying 60Hz, and the camera is recording 60Hz and those two devices are out of synch at all, then the image will look blurry or only partially there. That’s because the exact moment that the camera records a frame is out of synch with the exact moment that the TV is displaying the image to be captured. With a 120Hz TV, it’s putting out way more information than the camera needs to record a smooth image, so it looks better.

The Bottom Line

Should you buy a 120Hz TV? Well, there’s nothing wrong with 120Hz. Only the newest and best TVs available right now have it, because it’s new. When I was working in retail, however, I often had people coming in and asking about 120Hz, and a few who insisted that any TV they purchased had to have it. For typical viewing, 120Hz makes little difference, and you have to be paying very close attention to see the difference. It is technically a better television, but the human brain is not capable of perceiving the difference under normal conditions. If you’re buying a television, this is one of the last criteria that should influence your decision. Nice to have, but certainly not critical for the average consumer.

Why is there an ‘i’ or a ‘p’ on my resolution? That letter at the end of the number refers to whether a television signal is ‘interlaced’ or ‘progressive’. To give a full explanation, I’m going to give you some history. If you’re not interested in the history lesson, all you need to know is that interlaced is lower quality, because it only displays half the screen at a time (odd lines, even lines, odd, even, etc). Progressive does a full screen every time.

Where’s My Ray Gun?

When TVs first came out, they used something called a Cathode Ray Gun to paint dots of light on a glass screen. If you think about an ink-jet printer, it worked something like that but with dots of light shot from inside the TV onto the back of the screen, not drops of ink on a page. That’s why we still call an old style television a ‘CRT’ which stands for Cathode Ray Tube.

There were a lot of challenges for engineers designing the first TV sets to overcome. One of those was that the guns they first built were a little slow. Painting a full screen of dots, the gun had to move really, really fast. It was hard to build guns that would hold up to that kind of speed over a long life span. So, to make it easier on the guns, instead of painting a full screen 60 times per second, they painted two half-screens thirty times each, alternating between the odd lines and the even lines. This meant that the gun didn’t have to move nearly as fast, and they could build more reliable sets with decent picture quality.

Imagine if your inkjet printer worked like that. What if it just painted the odd lines, and then rewound it back to the beginning and printed all the even lines the second time through? It wouldn’t be able to match all those lines up perfectly on the second pass, and you’d get spots where two dots that were supposed to be side by side would be on top of one another or too far apart, resulting in a jagged image. Same with TV. Interlaced images are often jagged. They’re aren’t as clear.

Lacking Upgrade Mobility

It worked, and it was good enough, but the problem is, once you standardize on something, it can be hard to change. Eventually they could build reliable screens that could handle progressive images, but if they switched all the broadcast, cable, and satellite systems to a progressive image, it would mean that all the older televisions would no longer work. If they changed the system, people who just bought a new TV the year before, expecting it to last for 15-20 years would be understandably upset.

The solution, of course, was to build a new televisions that could play both interlaced and progressive signals, and that’s what happened. The first time that people were able to actually get commercial content that was progressive was with DVD players. When DVD players first came out, there were interlaced and progressive models. Today, virtually every DVD player sold will display a progressive signal.

So, old Standard Definition television comes in two flavours, interlaced 480i and progressive 480p. The new higher definition standard 720p does not come in an interlaced variety. The highest level of resolution, 1080, does come in both 1080i and 1080p. This is somewhat confusing, I know.

The reason why 1080 comes in both flavours is that a true 1080p signal is a LOT of information. Broadcast systems and even the cables which run between your TV and other devices simply weren’t able to handle a true HD signal. That’s why all HD broadcasts are still at the time of this writing either 720p or 1080i, not 1080p. The infrastructure to deliver that much information isn’t in place yet and won’t be until TV broadcasters switch to an entirely new system which can handle the new requirements.

The DTV Transition

When that happens, old TVs built before the new standards were in place (March 2007) will stop functioning without a special device to convert the new type of signal into the old type of signal. As of March 2009, anyone in the US who wants to watch TV will need a converter box. In Canada, the transition to all digital isn’t scheduled to happen until 2011. Some countries have already made the transition, and others are on track. You can check your country’s progress on the Wikipedia Digital Television Transition page.

The US first tried to mandate a switch over to all digital years ago, but abandoned the attempt when it became clear what a mess it would be, and extended the deadline several times. The North American television system is complex and involves a lot of different companies working together. I don’t know how things will all work out, but I have two expectations:

1. It’s going to be messy. The system is too big and there are too many cooks in the kitchen for a smooth transition.
2. It’s going to get fixed before too long. There is just too much money at stake for the big companies that run TV to let chaos reign for an extended period of time. The US government has required the change. While big TV companies may have been too lazy to get all the work done in advance (let’s hope I’m being pessimistic), as soon as they start losing money, expeditious action will surely be taken.