Digital Television

OK - he was a bit right and a lot wrong...

In Europe we have moved to digital television - but not high definition digital...

In Britain we broadcast 16:9 widescreen digital pictures but at SDTV (Standard Definition) resolution - this is 720x576 at 25frames (50 half frames interlaced together) per second.

In the USA - their digital system can be both SDTV (640x480x30frames sec) or HDTV 1920x720x60 frames sec or 1920x1080x30 frames sec (60 half frames interlaced) This potentially gives a much clearer, and higher resolution picture. (Note 100Hz TVs in the UK are not HDTV - though the Sony DRC series do run at 1250 lines in DRC50 mode,though they are inventing the extra lines, not showing what is really there...)

TVs sold in the USA can contain HTDV digital off-air decoders, or ANALOGUE inputs similar in concept to the analogue SCART socket we have in europe (but actually 3xphono connnectors labelled component) to allow connection ot an external HDTV Digital receiver set top box (similar in function to an ITV Digital or Sky Digital receiver - depending on whether terrestrial or satellite digital HDTV is desired)

Part of the reason that Europe has benefitted from SDTV 16:9 is that it costs very little more to move to widescreen from 4:3 SDTV - whereas HDTV is still expensive to upgrade to as a broadcaster. (The cameras and VTRs are a lot more expensive) Most broadcasters in Europe moved to digital production at roughly the same time as it became easier to buy 4:3/16:9 switchable SDTV equipment than 4:3 only!

Also in Europe our TVs have had SCART (RGB) sockets for years, allowing digital set top boxes to link directly at the best analogue level to the TV, whereas in the US they only have NTSC composite or NTSC S-Video connections - both significantly reducing the picture quality between a TV and a Set top box.

To summarise - we do have true digital TV in Europe, on satellite, cable and over the air. The Americans have a technically better HDTV digital system over the air - but it costs a lot more, and very few programmes are actually made in it... Compare a few HDTV shows a week on the US networks compared to almost all of BBC and a large lump of C4 and ITV primetime being in 16:9 SDTV.

Noggin, you must have a brain the size of a planet

Surprised he's not gone for a job at Wood Norton


BTW, Blue Peter a couple of weeks ago was produced in HDTV. Those lovely people from Thomson brought their brand new OB truck into TV Centre to show off & make a few programmes from it. The quality looks smashing! Can I have one please

So, are we likely to get HDTV anytime soon? I take it no, as there has already been a lot of new equipment bought for widescreen...

In the UK? I doubt it for a while.

However, now that digits transport most of TV these days, it's highly probable that some programmes may be available as an experiment, such as Wimbledon Champions - it's coverage a few years back was in HDTV as an experiment, but broadcast in normal PAL.

HDTV technology is still way too expensive for most peoples pockets.

Even if he did mean that the UK only has analogue TVs with digital STBs which are converted back to analogue, this is exactly the same thing that happens on a digital television in any case. A CRT is analogue, and so are human beings' eyes.

It's a load of rubbish. As has been said before what we do not have is HDTV. To be honest I think our approach is better because the US are trying to sell HDTV and widescreen together which pushes the price up too high. In the UK (where both digital TV and widescreen were mainly developed in the first place) we're introducing WS first, with standard-quality digital.

And in addition, HDTV is not as necessary here as in the States. You have a 525-line NTSC image, we have 625-line PAL. The 525-line format is noticably inferior to 625, and is also noticably lacking in definition in everyday use (or maybe that's because I'm spoilt by 625, I don't know). Therefore there is naturally more demand for HDTV in the US.

HDTV will come to the UK for sure, eventually, but it's for the future, once digital technology becomes as cheap as analogue is now.

Sorry Techy - the BBC Wimbledon HD broadcasts weren't converted back to PAL for broadcast - they were run in parallel with the normal PAL 4:3 coverage. (One year there were THREE sets of parallel coverage - BBC PAL, BBC HDTV, Japanese HDTV - using a different system - I think the Japanese shot from the otherside of the court?)

The HDTV stuff was broadcast in HD-MAC on satellite (the then proposed HDTV standard for Europe - as were the 1992 Winter and Summer Olympics from Albertville and Barcelona) but the coverage from the HD cameras never got onto BBC One or Two.

(In fact some of the HD cameras used were still Tubed rather than CCD based - so would have stuck out a mile as evening drew in...)

(Edited by noggin at 10:50 am on Dec. 24, 2001)

Hmmm... Not all display devices are now analogue though - Plasma screens, LCD based displays and DLP / DMD projectors are all made of separate pixels (and in the case of Plasmas are binary - greyscale is created by using a high refresh rate)

The BBC has added a digital interface to a Sky set top box, a DVD player, and a Plasma screen (all now available to buy commercially - I've seen the plasma in Harrods and it is the best I have ever seen) The BBC's modified Plasma takes a digital video signal and keeps it digital all the way to the screen - all the interlaced to progressive (plasmas are not interlaced devices unlike CRTs) processing and sub-field creation (used to create different levels of colour/greyscale for each pixel) is done entirely digitally.

As for HDTV being a hit in the US - yep - whilst 720x488 (the US 525 video standard in digital form) can look pretty unmistakeable from 720x576 (the UK standard) - it all goes to mush when converted to NTSC for broadcast if you aren't very careful. This is why US TV can look fine (Good US DVDs and things like the X-Files are post produced in 720x488 and look great either native, or when they are well converted) or dreadful... HDTV must look great compared with the average Off-air NTSC or Cable signal...

The UK PAL broadcast system is much more robust - and has better colour resolution - so the difference between a good PAL signal and an HDTV signal is less obvious on an average screen size.

(Great story from the archives :

John Birt, then BBC Director General, was being shown round BBC R&D and commented on how fantastic the new HDTV picture was, so much better than the current system. They then pointed out he was watching a good PAL picture - he hadn't seen the HDTV display yet...

Compare with :

Greg Dyke, as soon as he arrived in his office, rang down and asked why the picture on his office telly was so bad. It was a 100Hz digital receiver I believe...)

I think we have the best TV in the world in Britain. I think are digital systems are fine, the picture is good enough for me. I've been to the US quite a few times and their TV isn't spectacular. DVD is starting to do well over here and recordable DVD players will be available from next year. I'm not as educated about this as some people like Noggin, all I know is the picture I recieve from Sky Digital with a SCART connection is perfect, if u worry too much about the picture then u don't enjoy the program:)

They do sell Widescreen televisions here, but they're hard to come by. And they're very expensive. Plus, most terrestrial channels, in fact, all channels will be shown in pillarbox format. Usually, Widescreen TVs here are mostly used for DVD purposes and such.

I dunno if I've mentioned this, but only a few terrestrial television stations here broadcast in actual digital - they're mostly the independent local channels, where you don't need an aerial to receive the channel and such.

Does anyone know how much exactly HDTV technology costs compared to the system that the UK is using now?