Is there a High Definition Standard?

[titlis]

Literally


Is there any standard which standardize High Definition?

[Ghitulescu]

Oh, yes, probably several dozens. Probably hundreds if one counts all the equivalents (standards that are identical, eg SMPTE = EBU = JIT = IEC etc.).

[Keiyakusha]

titlis
You can't say "standardize High Definition" because in the current phrase there is nothing to standardize. There is a lot of standards that define compression, delivering, etc. of the video that is high definition. If your question is "which one is HD" then basically this is any standard resolution that is higher than DVD resolution.

[titlis]

titlis
You can't say "standardize High Definition" because in the current phrase there is nothing to standardize. There is a lot of standards that define compression, delivering, etc. of the video that is high definition. If your question is "which one is HD" then basically this is any standard resolution that is higher than DVD resolution.

Then there is no such standard specifying High Definition?

And which organization should I search for standardizing definition ( like QCIF,CIF and so on) ?
SMPTE? ISO? ITU?

[Ghitulescu]

If you refer to high definition as what people commonly refer to as FullHD, then you may want to pay for the SMPTE 240M which defines the 1125 lines HDTV system.

[titlis]

I mean, standard which standardize definition itself only.
not a system using it.

[Guest]

What are you trying to accomplish, titlis? Your intent is unclear and your questions rather noobish.

[Groucho2004]

Literally


Is there any standard which standardize High Definition?
There is no such standard. Just as there is no "High Fidelity" standard for audio. They're just marketing phrases.

[Ghitulescu]

While as such high definition may look similar to high fidelity (BTW, there are standards defining High Fidelity, one of them is the German DIN 45500, google told me that EN 61305 replaced this standard meanwhile), HD is considered by most poeple to represent the definition around 2k. Resolutions above 2k, for instance 4k, are known as Ultra High Definition (UHD).

[Asmodian]

720p is commonly referred to as HD, so is 1080p. That is pretty much it.

[titlis]

Just cause I've heard from someone that there is a standard which standardize high definition.
And 'standard' definition should have standard right? or the term standard just mean that it was originated from television system standard?
Since I coudn't find it on google, I ask here

[Keiyakusha]

To be honest, your questions looks more like trolling than curiosity. Not to mention that the answer should be obvious if you'll actually think about it. I believe your question was answered several times already.

[titlis]

I'm just curious about is there any standard about high definition or definition itself.

[Blue_MiSfit]

In my mind, high definition (in the digital sense, for simplicity's sake) means a video with a at least 720 vertical pixels, up to 1080 vertical pixels. Anything less than this is standard definition or enhanced definition, and anything more than this is "ultra high definition" (the exact definition of which is debatable).

So, to me "definition" is the vertical resolution of a piece of video.

For the record, standard definition and enhanced definition are usually differentiated by the scanning mode - interlaced for the former, and progressive for the latter. EDTV services sometimes approach HDTV resolution.

So... a few examples:

1) Interlaced 480i/576i DVD - SD
2) Broadcast NTSC / PAL TV - SD

3) Progressive 480p24 DVD - ED (sometimes)
4) Most internet streaming - ED

5) BluRay - HD
6) Broadcast 1080i/720p ATSC TV - HD
7) Premium internet streaming - HD

[diogen]

I'm just curious about is there any standard about high definition or definition itself.The short answer is No.
It is the marketing term for high resolution video and devices capable of showing them.
And you can standardize only measurable units/values...

It is a bit similar to 3G/4G cell networks in North America: at one point in the past EDGE was 3G...:)

Diogen.

[minaust]

I'm just curious about is there any standard about high definition or definition itself.
Your question has been answered repeatedly. Here it is again: "HD" is a marketing term, not a technical one. There are so many standards that I doubt anyone here knows them all. For broadcast TV, go to the government agency regulating broadcasting where you live. For DVD, go to the DVD Forum. Blu-Ray, go to Sony (or whoever keeps the standard now). For streaming, go to whoever came out with the streaming software/hardware you use. But if you think there's a SMPTE, IEEE, or ISO standard for BR, think again.

The only official, formal standards are going to be for broadcast. No other.

[ramicio]

HD to me also means square pixels, not this 1440x1080i 16:9 old camera garbage. It also means transparent compression, so streaming services I don't consider to be HD. And lasty, lossless audio is what makes something HD or not, for me. The world is too fragmented anymore for there to be a standard for anything.

[Ghitulescu]

HD to me also means square pixels, not this 1440x1080i 16:9 old camera garbage. It also means transparent compression, so streaming services I don't consider to be HD. And lasty, lossless audio is what makes something HD or not, for me. The world is too fragmented anymore for there to be a standard for anything.

Professional HDV is still 1440x1080i :), the only exception to a PAR of 1:1.
Unfortunately there is no definition of quality in any HD standards I know and for a good reason: they provide the truck, how well does the driver fill it is beyond their scope ;)
Just because the quality of the continental DVB-T sucks doesn't mean that the standard sucks.

[ramicio]

USA digital TV sucks. They don't want to allow much bandwidth, and encoding stuff (to MPEG-2) to have minimal lag, on silicon, results in absolute crap of a picture. HDV anymore rings cheapness and not professional. If this was like 2005, maybe it would ring professional.

[Guest]

USA digital TV sucks. They don't want to allow much bandwidth, and encoding stuff (to MPEG-2) to have minimal lag, on silicon, results in absolute crap of a picture. HDV anymore rings cheapness and not professional. If this was like 2005, maybe it would ring professional. Are you talking about over the air ATSC? That's the one coded as MPEG2 and limited to ~18Mb/s. But it's crazy to say the picture looks like crap.

As for cable and satellite, AVC is now ubiquitous, undercutting your bandwidth argument. And my 1080i cable picture is stunningly good to me.

[ramicio]

Comcast is the biggest cable provider...MPEG-2. FIOS uses h.264, but only reaches rich cities because of Comcast's monopoly. Satellite is a joke. Even so, they aren't getting raw uncompressed signals from the networks. Stuff is being re-compressed. And all of the providers are skimpy on bandwidth. This isn't Euro-land where people tend to get what they want in infrastructure. In the USA, if you're not some hipster doofus yuppie living in a city, you have absolute crap for any kind of connectivity to the world. A TV rip looks like crap compared to what is released on disc.

[Guest]

if you're not some hipster doofus yuppie living in a city, you have absolute crap for any kind of connectivity to the world Your absurd over-the-top rhetoric alone is enough for people to discount what you say.

[ramicio]

If people want to discount what a genius has to day because of his opinions of unrelated things then they are the true bigots.

[diogen]

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
-----Albert Einstein.

Diogen.

[ramicio]

Well, he was talking about himself, too...so...?

[CWR03]

If people want to discount what a genius has to day because of his opinions of unrelated things then they are the true bigots.
For one thing, most of what you say is utter nonsense. For another, being so arrogant that you're certain you're right doesn't make it so.