4:2:2 Chroma

[Cornhusker]

Last night was the first time I was able to view a 4:2:2 chroma broadcast with my GTMedia GT box.It wasn't perfect with 2/3 of the frame rate lagging.but none the less viewable.Needless to say,very refreshing to see this!

[stone1150]

The stop motion video has been like that since day one of this box. I too have one and would love to see that smoothed out. Hopefully they can fix what seems to be such a minor issue. Getting 4:2:2 to even play is a major issue so smoothing it out to me should be easier I would think. If they can get 4:2:2 to play reliably, this box would go up in sales. They have said that another update to this box would be "soon". Hopefully it will include the smoothing out of the 4:2:2 signal.

[Feralkiwi]

The issue with 4:2:2 has been with video at high bit rates.
15Mb/s is jumpy, 40Mb/s shows a few lines only.

Processing time?
other apps interrupting?

Owen

[Cornhusker]

Feralkiwi are saying the apps downloaded into the box are somehow interfering with the processing of the video?The video I was able to view was I think 50Mb/s and 1280x720P.Could suggest which apps maybe responsible for the interference?Thanks C.H.

[Feralkiwi]

Feralkiwi are saying the apps downloaded into the box are somehow interfering with the processing of the video?The video I was able to view was I think 50Mb/s and 1280x720P.Could suggest which apps maybe responsible for the interference?Thanks C.H.

Other apps running will use processor time and interrupt to check their stuff.
I have turned off as much as I can, but still can not "see" 40+Mb/s

Owen

[stone1150]

All I try to watch is the CBS and ABC feeds on G-19 here in the states. The video is stop motion. Like a claymation video.
Satellite info......

[stone1150]

I must add to the above post..... I do not use any apps on my box. I only use it as a satellite receiver.......

[Cornhusker]

Didn't the ABC feeds on G19 change to 16APSK 34286SR FEC 25/36? My GT Media box will scan them in,but won't save them in the list.

[Ivn101]

Try recording a segment of 4:2:2 video, then go into a file explorer and watch that video using different video players. Install VLC into your box then try watching that video with this player as well.

Any difference in smoothness?

[stone1150]

Try recording a segment of 4:2:2 video, then go into a file explorer and watch that video using different video players. Install VLC into your box then try watching that video with this player as well.

Any difference in smoothness?

Kinda defeats the purpose of having a satellite receiver don't it? The answer is to make a receiver do what it is advertised to do. I don't care for a product that is advertised to do something then does not deliver. They call that false advertising.....
And to answer your question about smoothness, recording it and playing it back on VLC does smooth things out. VLC has the proper codecs installed.

I do have VLC on the box, but can't seem to find the setting to make it the default player. The coders could replace the GT Player with VLC and make things a lot more user friendly. People simply want an advertised piece of equipment to function as advertised. Not jump through hoops everytime they want to watch something. xxxxxx had flawless 4:2:2 and so did Quali-TV.

[ZOO]

Years and years and still the same results.Hardware solution is the best way for this to be a reliable answer for 4:2:2 but is a pricey answer so we are here again dealing with a SW solution. Until GTMedia or any receiver manufacturer starts using a decent processor ( preferably a quad core ) then these will be the same results. This is nothing new and a known fact.

@Stone 1150 I myself had a few xxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxalong with a xxxxx.Bought the xxx new and they were over 200 usd and the xxxx I picked up used for 150 usd and I recall those being new for over 600 usd. Folks paid those prices for a 4:2:2 solution years ago so there is a market for them but who will step up and make it happen and quit playing around with low end processors in these modern stb`s.

[stone1150]

Years and years and still the same results.Hardware solution is the best way for this to be a reliable answer for 4:2:2 but is a pricey answer so we are here again dealing with a SW solution. Until GTMedia or any receiver manufacturer starts using a decent processor ( preferably a quad core ) then these will be the same results. This is nothing new and a known fact.

@Stone 1150 I myself had a few xxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxalong with a xxxxx.Bought the xxx new and they were over 200 usd and the xxxx I picked up used for 150 usd and I recall those being new for over 600 usd. Folks paid those prices for a 4:2:2 solution years ago so there is a market for them but who will step up and make it happen and quit playing around with low end processors in these modern stb`s.

And people will pay those prices again. I test equipment for a box producer that will go un-named. xxxxxxxxxxxxx. It will not have the capability for 4:2:2 because that is not a market the company cares to go into. However, it is still thought about and there is a chance that the 4:2:2 signal processing could happen if we can get the license to do it. It is more of a licensing issue than hardware. Certain royalties need to be paid. Like paying Google to have Google TV on your machine, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
There is a market for the 4:2:2 as more and more studios are using that. ABC and CBS are two examples. Canadian studios have been doing it for years also. CBS just started a little while back. They were 4:2:0. More are planning to follow suit.
I run a 10 foot C-Band dish. I also run a 36 inch dedicated Ku-Band dish. Both motorized with H-H mounts. Granted I am in a smaller group by comparison, but looking at the earth stations still out there, every one that is idle could be brought back to life with a 4:2:2 receiver. Those of us that are still using them would buy immediately. Others would jump on board as they saw what we could do. Many people do have the resources to invest in equipment and do so on a regular basis and do to this day. The 5G revolution for instance forced us all to upgrade our LNB to newer ones that eliminate the 5G interference.
To close I will simply say this. I am not trying to dictate to the company how to do their business. They have their own business model. But many of us do not like being lied to.xxxxxxxxxxxxx(content already stated on previous post. Do not duplicate)
My next receiver will be a 4:2:2 or I will simply not buy. I will just use the equipment I have, (A closet full), as there is no reason to waste any more money on any box that does not perform as advertised.

[Feralkiwi]

I see the use of 4:2:2 as a way for the TV companies to send video with out encryption and it not be seen by people, people like us.
Just like PowerVu went to PowerVu+, likely just PowerVu encryption twice.

If as you ask more set top box makers add 4:2:2 to their boxes, these TV companies will use another video codex that STB's do not get.
I would imagine that their equipment software gives them many options for video and sound codex.
They look through and use one that STB's do not get. Easy and no encryption, but as good as encrypted.

Here in New Zealand the race feeds scan in on all boxes as having no sound.
Sound is there!
They found that using 302M sound codex does this.
No box "sees" this as sound and does not load the APID.
Manual add of APID in the PC editor and select the alternate player on the GT Combo and I have sound.
The GT Combo or GTX reports channel has changed as I have an incorrect SID to stop auto channel correcting.

This shows what the TV providers will do, the ticks they will play.

Wish all you want for 4:2:2 in many boxes, but then for how long before the TV providers move to another codex.

Owen

[stone1150]

I see the use of 4:2:2 as a way for the TV companies to send video with out encryption and it not be seen by people, people like us.
Just like PowerVu went to PowerVu+, likely just PowerVu encryption twice.

If as you ask more set top box makers add 4:2:2 to their boxes, these TV companies will use another video codex that STB's do not get.
I would imagine that their equipment software gives them many options for video and sound codex.
They look through and use one that STB's do not get. Easy and no encryption, but as good as encrypted.

Here in New Zealand the race feeds scan in on all boxes as having no sound.
Sound is there!
They found that using 302M sound codex does this.
No box "sees" this as sound and does not load the APID.
Manual add of APID in the PC editor and select the alternate player on the GT Combo and I have sound.
The GT Combo or GTX reports channel has changed as I have an incorrect SID to stop auto channel correcting.

This shows what the TV providers will do, the ticks they will play.

Wish all you want for 4:2:2 in many boxes, but then for how long before the TV providers move to another codex.

Owen

I respectfully suggest you are way wrong. It has nothing to do with scrambling to prevent public viewing. It simply a way of transmitting a picture that is not as compressed as 4:2:0. It has absolutly nothing to do with scrambling like Powerview or any of the other systems. It is only used to get a better picture. Allow me to explain the technology involved here.

Chroma Subsampling Is a type of compression that reduces the color information in a signal in favor of luminance data. A video signal is split into two different aspects: luma information and color information. Luma defines most of the picture. Imagine if your image has no luma information, you will see nothing except black. In contrast, a black and white image will not look less detailed than a color picture. Color information is important as well but has less visual impact. What chroma sub sampling does is reduce the amount of color information in the signal to allow more luminance data instead.
What is the Difference Between 4:4:4/4:2:2/4:2:0 Chroma Subsampling?
Video is sampled and transmitted in the form of three components. Y, CB, and CR, where Y is the Luma, (brightness information), CB is the blue difference channel (color information), and CR is the red difference channel (color information). Each type of sub sampling is represented by three numbers, indicating how much of the sampled data passes to a small group of pixels consisting of two lines with 4 pixels each. The first number describes how many pixels on each line get a unique brightness level. The second number describes how many pixels on the upper line get unique color information. The 3rd number describes how many pixels on the lower line get unique color information. A signal with chroma 4:4:4 transports both luminescence and color data entirely. 4:2:2 has half the chroma of 4:4:4 and 4:2:0 has one quarter of the color information available.

So as you can see, it is another way to maintain picture quality and save some bandwidth. 4:4:4 would be in a perfect world however that is not very practical or economical. 4:2:0 is a very economical approach, but has a lot of picture degradation. So the producers opt for a midway approach and use 4:2:2 as it saves some bandwidth but keeps the picture clarity and color quality up. With TV today where 4K is the norm and even higher resolutions are on the horizon, the studios are moving more and more to 4:2:2 with CBS being the most recent. ABC used to use it on some transponders however today almost all of them are lit up using the 4:2:2 standard.

Stone

EDIT.... So again I stand by if the box does not do something, stop saying that it does. Since the 4:2:2 decoding is tunable but unwatchable in stand alone fashion with this receiver, then stop advertising it as able to decode 4:2:2. That is just a flat out lie as things stand now. Customers want honesty above all else.

[stone1150]

For what it is worth. The old A*****x used the SMP8436 processor. Today that processor can be had for as low as 7 dollars U.S. or as high as 21 dollars U.S. depending on where you shop. I have the data sheet for that processor as it is an old processor developed in the mid 2,000's. That said it has the capability to decode about any format out there. If anyone is interested I would be happy to share the data sheet. Point being that there is an equivalent if not better and cheaper option out there after over a decade of development. And yes, there is a market for the 4:2:2 market. That is the reason I acquired this combo box. But I will not waste another dime on any box that will not do as advertised. 4:2:2 or bust I say!
Regards
Stone

[stone1150]

Years and years and still the same results.Hardware solution is the best way for this to be a reliable answer for 4:2:2 but is a pricey answer so we are here again dealing with a SW solution. Until GTMedia or any receiver manufacturer starts using a decent processor ( preferably a quad core ) then these will be the same results. This is nothing new and a known fact.

@Stone 1150 I myself had a few xxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxalong with a xxxxx.Bought the xxx new and they were over 200 usd and the xxxx I picked up used for 150 usd and I recall those being new for over 600 usd. Folks paid those prices for a 4:2:2 solution years ago so there is a market for them but who will step up and make it happen and quit playing around with low end processors in these modern stb`s.

Wholeheartedly, Empathically, Tremendously, AGREE! Problem is that nobody is serious enough to build one. I will probably build my own out of an outdated computer and a receiver card. Might have a couple hundred into it but it will also be a media server along with a satellite receiver. I could cover maybe 4 tuners, recording capability, server capability, and regular old satellite receiver with all the bells and whistles. All that is well worth a couple hundred bucks and a few hours assembly. I have been waiting for the convenience of a simple box. But that seems to be out of reach as nobody cares to do it. Maybe I can mount a satellite receiver card for a computer in a simple box? The possibilities......

Stone

[stone1150]

Again for what it is worth... I just noticed something right under my nose.... Tuning a 4:2:2 channel then hitting info shows a frame rate of only 6-7 FPS... Why can't the frame rate be set higher? I mean if that is all that is needed........ Sometimes we as humans complicate things more than they really are. Just something to ponder. The heavy lifting has been done with getting a clear picture. Only the frame rate needs sped up to at least 25 FPS. How about it coders? Is that possible in a future update? You people get this thing to play smooth 4:2:2 and they will beat a path to your door with me leading the way.

[stone1150]

So I guess they are just going to ignore this topic now. People were talking... Shame because if they get this fixed many people will be interested in a GTX Combo including me.