Mbps of streamed HD programming

What is the average Mbps of streaming HDTV programming? I have a friend who suggests that the Mbps of streamed HD content is 15-20 Mbps. He also says that in order to save bandwith, the networks broadcast 1080i content at a resolution of 1600x1440 ( or something like that). Now I remember reading somewhere that the HD content to be released on Blu-ray discs is acutally going to be anywhere from 40-50 Mbps! This is a huge difference! What my friend says might actually make sense. The other day I was watching LOTR at 1080i on TV, so I popped in my LOTR DVD to compare the two and they were almost identical for picture quality, give or take a little sharpness. This can't be pure HD content, can it? I mean, when I was at the Computer show expo in Las vegas, they were playing "Kangaroo Jack" on a HD-DVD player and the picture was so vivd that it looked like the characters from the screen were going to pop out of the screen.

What is the average Mbps of streaming HDTV programming? I have a friend who suggests that the Mbps of streamed HD content is 15-20 Mbps. He also says that in order to save bandwith, the networks broadcast 1080i content at a resolution of 1600x1440 ( or something like that). Now I remember reading somewhere that the HD content to be released on Blu-ray discs is acutally going to be anywhere from 40-50 Mbps! This is a huge difference! What my friend says might actually make sense. The other day I was watching LOTR at 1080i on TV, so I popped in my LOTR DVD to compare the two and they were almost identical for picture quality, give or take a little sharpness. This can't be pure HD content, can it? I mean, when I was at the Computer show expo in Las vegas, they were playing "Kangaroo Jack" on a HD-DVD player and the picture was so vivd that it looked like the characters from the screen were going to pop out of the screen.

I think 8Mbps is the lowest a HD stream can be. Although I think HD is anywhere from 8-14Mbps. Correct me if I'm wrong. I think the 40-50Mbps you heard was the transfer limit of HD-DVD.

I ran a couple of mpeg-2 TS files through WMV encoder and it said that it was 18 mbps. 8-14 mbps is too low for HD. DVDs are 8 mbps so how can HDTV be that?

Yes, full 1080i's are about 15 - 20 mbp/s, DVDs are about 5 - 6 mbp/s, and it would make sense if Blu-ray or HD-DVD were up to 40 - 50 mbp/s, being that a 2 hour long movie would take about 16 GB at 18 mbp/s [7200 seconds * 18 (mbps) / 8 (bits to bytes) = 16200 (mb)]

16 GB + special features, would be no more than 18 - 20 GB, on a 40 - 50 GB disc??

But, at an average of 45 mbp/s it would be closer to 40 GB, which would make more sence, and plus extras it would fit nicely at 42 - 50 GB (assuming thats a dual layer Blu-ray) [7200 seconds * 45 (mbps) / 8 (bits to bytes) = 40500 (mb)]

If full 1080i is 15-20mbps (which it is) how would Blu-ray or HD-DVD be 3 times that? 1080i is already full HD, so what would they possibly do with all the extra bandwidth?

The fact is that 50GB blu-ray disks haven't been produced yet, and may not for awhile, and HD-DVD specs only go up to 25GB or 30GB I believe. So your math is pretty much right on, and the average HD or blu-ray disk will be 25-30GB, allowing plenty of room for 2-3 hours of HD video, and some extras. 50GB was put into the Blu-ray spec more for future enhancement, when resolution goes to 1080p and maybe higher? For the shorter term, 25GB disks are plenty.

I guess my copy of ROTK is pretty good (size wise) @ 27+GB, but I hope that BD will have better scans and compression methods than the copy i have.
(I took some caps, but bmp files seem to have a max file size of 8mb, so they look real ugly, but i can try some different app and post a cap if you want.)
Maybe we can get a two Blu-ray Disk edition of each LOTR?

If full 1080i is 15-20mbps (which it is) how would Blu-ray or HD-DVD be 3 times that? 1080i is already full HD, so what would they possibly do with all the extra bandwidth?

Everything is still compressed at 15 - 20 mbp/s though, although you may not notice unless you zoom in 1500%, but if you have seen the new Dolby Digital lossless compression (http://www.dolby.com/promo/HD/trueHD.html), which can go up to 18 mbp/s of 7.1 AUDIO, just audio!!!

Maybe that could be using an awful lot of space also, which would push the total bit rate up to 35 - 40 mbp/s..

As most people don't think about audio taking up so much space becuase most audio is only at 384 or 448 kbp/s but the highest you can get is 1536 kbp/s (DTS, although I have yet to come across a DVD with full bitrate DTS??)

True it's compressed, and I'm sure they'll compress it the least possible amount to fit onto the best HD/BR disk they can. Initially they might need to compress a little more to fit onto smaller disks, then down the road they can crank up the quality a little.

As for the Dolby HD, I hadn't read much about it, but it sounds good. It does say "up to" 18mbps. So if that's the maximum bandwidth, what's the average bandwidth they would use for it?

But what about the true resolution of streamed HD content? Is it true that the networks broadcast 1080i only at 1440x1080 to: A) Save Bandwith B) Know that there is no consumer receiver/player that can handle resolutions above 1440x1080. I mean, the HD technology we have is still in its infancy, so it would make sense. Also the fact that when you compare the quality to DVD, it is only marginably better. Going from 720x480 to 1920x1080 should be a great great difference.

P.S. I have a high resolution monitor, so it is not that my LCD is scaling the HD content down. I know how a 1920x1080 video looks like.

But what about the true resolution of streamed HD content? Is it true that the networks broadcast 1080i only at 1440x1080 ......... there is no consumer receiver/player that can handle resolutions above 1440x1080. ..

What? Really?

Actually, the stream size is mostly dependent on 2 things - what format it is, and whatever the provider of the content wants it to be. So, MPEG-2 streams are 19.2Mbps for high quality HD. MPEG-4 can achieve 40-60% reductions in the compression from 19.2Mbps. However, if the cable or satellite company wants to get more channels on their service, they will further compress the stream - down to as little as 6Mbps, which is what DirecTV has planned for all of their new HD channels.

6 Mbps??

Thats only DVD quality, which completly defeats the purpose of HDTV...

its one great smelly sh...t

Watchig celeb on red carpet covered with zilions flashing flashes makes you puke from zilions of squares :confused: :mad:
hate it, hate it

(sweet old analog :) )

Isn't the Japanese HDTV analog?

That pisses me off! I hate these F***ing networks and how they trick the public. I also hate this HD-war between blu-ray and HD-dvd. At this rate, HD movies will not be released in their entirety for many years to come. What's the point then!? I'm sticking to my DVDs and am not planning on buying a HDTV for a long time. There I said it.

HDCam, the tapes that most FTA networks receive, can be anywhere between 80-144mbps. That's uncompressed. The networks then compress it to fit within their alloted bandwidth. In Australia, each network is given 23mbps to work with, usually it's one SD channel @ 5-7mbps, one HD channel @ 11-15mbps and other channels that take up less than 1 mbps (such as a VPG or Radio). Furthermore, we have two HD formats in use here. Three networks use 576p and two use 1080i. The Australian Government has legislated that 576p is the minimum resolution that can be classified as HD. Every sane person knows that this is wrong, yet we as a nation can't do anything about it. Then there are the regional networks and metro networks that work independantly of the main transmitter. In the case of the regional networks, some of them have chosen to break away from their parent broadcaster and use 1080i instead of 576p. In the case of the independant metro networks, some of them use a much greater bandwidth, full horizontal resolution and no watermark on their HD broadcasts. (eg. they use 15mbps instead of 11mbps and use 1920x1080i instead of 1440x1080i)

SD is generally equal to that of DVD except in most cases the DVD has better audio.

1080i @ 9.00mbps is no better than a DVD. Though it may still be sharper due to the higher resolution and come from a better transfer (ie. when it goes from FILM to TAPE, the transfer will be a High Definition one instead of a Standard Definition one that most DVDs use) it will contain a whole heap of pixelation. In order to acheive minimal pixelation, you need at least 17mbps @ 1080i.

It has also been proven here in Australia that there is very little difference between 1440x1080i and 1920x1080i. Vertical Resolution is more important when it comes to clarity and sharpness.

It also helps if the display does not use BOB deinterlacing when displaying interlaced content. Almost all digital displays do and because of that, you will only get half the vertical resolution (ie. 540 lines) with a 1080i broadcast. It will still look good, but not as sharp or clear as a proper deinterlacer will give you, one that can deinteralce 1080i to 1080p properly. Analogue TVs are not limited in this respect and are only limited by their ability to resolve lines. The highest model in Australia is the Sony KVHR36M31, which is a 36" HD CRT and is capable of more than 800 lines.

Japan does not use Analogue HDTV anymore. They use ISDB-T, which is a Digital TV standard. The quality is much greater than most broadcasts I've seen coming from the States because of the higher bandwidth used.

It all comes down to Hollywood wants to suppress HD as much as possible because they worry about piracy "stealing" their profits.