On 13/11/2023 19:43, Davey wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 18:51:57 +0000
> Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>> On 13/11/2023 15:59, Davey wrote:
>>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 15:32:54 +0000
>>> Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You lucky, lucky, lucky man. Work taught me how to see the
>>>> artefacts that are common in broadcast TV, and I can't not see
>>>> them. I will refrain from pointing out (again) my current pet
>>>> hate.
>>
>>> That sounds like me and reel film transfer indicator marks. I
>>> learned them, and I cannot miss them when they are shown on TV. My
>>> wife did not know about them, and always said that they were just
>>> dirt marks on the film.
>>
>> You don't mean the cue marks in the top right of the screen do you?

> Yep, them. I find them very annoying since I don't need to respond to
> them any more. Especially the ones that look as though somebody has
> scratched them in with an angle grinder.

What are people supposed to do with them? I had a VHS version of a film
where they were like cog wheels. The DVD version replaced them with
black blobs, so were still visible.

--
Max Demian

On 12/11/2023 19:41, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> On Sunday, 12 November 2023 at 14:25:09 UTC, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 10/11/2023 12:06, NY wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I'm gobsmacked at how good that standards conversion is these days. I
>>> noticed at the time of Trump's inauguration there were interviews with
>>> supporters and "anti-supporters" in bars where US news programmes were
>>> being shown, so there were US TVs visible in the background. Given that
>>> those pictures did not have even the remotest hint of 25/30 frame
>>> beating, I wonder whether the *UK* news crews were using 1080i/29.97
>>> equipment to avoid the frame bars, and then standards-converting that to
>>> 1080i / 25 fps for showing on UK news, whereas normally they'd shoot in
>>> 1080i/25 even in the US.
>> 'Foreign' news bureaux usually operate at the local frame rate.
>> Primarily because they then don't have to faff around when using local
>> material to standards convert to integrate into packages they are editing.
>>
>> You can go one step further, ITV ran the entire UK studio facility used
>> for the Rugby World Cup at 59.94, because the host coverage in Japan was
>> obviously run at that too.
>>
>> Modern kit is easily and quickly switchable between line and frame rate
>> standards.
>
> Modern? - I had a Philips CRT TV in ~1997 that would auto-switch between PAL, NTSC and SECAM (internally or on composite) at various rates and support an external D2-MAC box on component...

Good for you. I'm talking about modern broadcast equipment, a completely
different kettle of fish

On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 15:18:54 +0000, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:

> There's going to be some *horrible* problems upscaling/downscaling 3840
> and 4096 material since they are such similar numbers, probably with
> blurring and anti-aliasing - eg when 4096 film is shown on 3840 TV. They
> may choose to crop 64 pixels from either side, rather than zooming out
> very slightly.

128.

On 18/11/2023 00:41, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 15:18:54 +0000, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> There's going to be some *horrible* problems upscaling/downscaling 3840
>> and 4096 material since they are such similar numbers, probably with
>> blurring and anti-aliasing - eg when 4096 film is shown on 3840 TV. They
>> may choose to crop 64 pixels from either side, rather than zooming out
>> very slightly.
>
> 128.

I'd be dangerous if I could actually do subtraction ;-)