Level 3 delivering end to end uncompressed video from Broncos home games
By Richard Lawler 
posted Oct 13th 2009 11:31AM
posted Oct 13th 2009 11:31AM
Possible more notable than the Broncos 5-0 start (okay, not really, did anyone see this coming after that seemingly terrible offseason?) is the announcement from Level 3 Communications that its home games at Invesco Field are the first to have their video sent back to the broadcaster completely uncompressed. Thanks to its fiber connection laid in preparation for the 2008 Democratic National Convention, the company sends a 1.5 Gbps stream directly to the broadcaster's home studio, as an alternative to the usual (and still in place while this new delivery is evaluated) method of compressing at the site on a production truck. VP Mark Taylor claims this allows them to get the absolute highest quality signal possible, but we'll wait until it's installed at more than one professional stadium to proclaim end to end uncompressed video delivery as the way of the future.
tv_thumbnail.jpg)
P Mark Taylor claims this allows "them" to get the absolute highest quality signal possible, but we'll wait until it's
cant wait for uncompression, 1080i will be what 1080i is supposed to be.
I love production trucks and broadcast news more than most, but this doesn't even make sense. The only way we can get a "better" quality is if their studio has newer, better and/or more sophisticated encoders, otherwise we're all still getting the same compressed signal.
-Brian
This will make a difference, though, since normally it's encoded at least three times normally, once at the stadium, once at the network, once at the affiliate, and possibly more times if you're not watching OTA. No matter how sophisticated the encoders, there's bandwidth limitations on the network->affiliate (via satellite) and affiliate->you (
Is this really necessary? My understanding is that the most egregious compression happens between the broadcasters and the viewers, especially cable and satellite (as opposed to OTA) because they're trying to squeeze more channels down a pipe that will only carry so many bits. The reason of course is that it's easier to sell more channel packages than "higher bitrate channels" to non-technical customers. I have a feeling that reducing compression from the source to the broadcaster won't really result in any perceivable quality bump, and definitely won't if the cable and satellite companies continue their current practice of compressing their channels into oblivion. What needs to happen is that cable and satellite companies either need to either:
1) Increase their bandwidth by using higher frequencies or alternate media in the case of cable.
2) Make better use of their existing bandwidth by switching to more efficient codecs and/or full SDV (both of which I realize would be a huge migration project due to hardware requirements on the end user's side)
3) Make sure to use the additional bandwidth achieved by either or both of the above methods to reduce the amount of compression on existing channels rather than offering a whole new set of channels also compressed into oblivion.
I also can't help but wonder if the money to install and maintain the infrastructure required to have a 1.5 Gbps connection would be better spent elsewhere, unless the DNC has some other need for that connection and Level 3 is just using it for this purpose in the meantime.
When you're applying compression to a signal, starting with something that is less compressed will end up looking better than something that started off more compressed. So if the network is compressing a 1.5Gbps signal for delivery to the affilitates, it's going to look better than if they're compressing the current 270Mbps signal, even though the final bitrate will be unchanged.
This is the single best thing that President Obama has ever done for me. /weeps/
I proclaim that this end to end uncompressed video delivery is the way of the future.
GO BRONCOS!!!
More end-to-middle than end-to-end.
It could look better with 3G HD-SDI (1080p60 4:4:4).