Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Graphics Networking Media The Internet IT Technology Linux

Trans-Atlantic 8K/UHDTV Streaming With UltraGrid and Commodity PCs 58

Posted by timothy
from the now-that's-push-media dept.
An anonymous reader writes "During the 12th Annual Global LambdaGrid Workshop in Chicago, researchers have demonstrated interactive multi-point streaming of 8K/UHDTV (i.e., 16x Full HD resolution) using commodity PC hardware running Linux and open-source UltraGrid software. The transmissions featured GPU-accelerated JPEG and DXT compressions implemented using the NVIDIA CUDA platform, which are also available as open-source software. The streams were distributed from the source to one location in the USA and to another location in the Czech Republic over 10Gbps GLIF network infrastructure."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Trans-Atlantic 8K/UHDTV Streaming With UltraGrid and Commodity PCs

Comments Filter:
  • by rmstar (114746)

    Uhuh. So... what?

    16 times Full HD sounds like 16 channels on TV.

    Perhaps the submitter should have spent a word or two explaining why this was interesting/important/whatever.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      I do not know about satellite TV, but cable tv compresses the source so bad, that 720p TV looks blocky on a 1080p TV with little movement. Cable TV providers, like comcast are ruining HD TV by the crappy quality because they only care about money, not about quality. If they ever got on this bandwagon, they would fuck it up.

      • by citizenr (871508)

        I do not know about satellite TV, but cable tv compresses the source so bad, that 720p TV looks blocky on a 1080p TV with little movement. Cable TV providers, like comcast are ruining HD TV by the crappy quality because they only care about money, not about quality. If they ever got on this bandwagon, they would fuck it up.

        This is because US is retarded and uses MPEG-2 while rest of the world swims in sweet h.264.

        • by Gr8Apes (679165)

          I know that satellite uses H.264, or was, a while ago. AT&T Uverse and FIOS both use MP4 I'm pretty sure. Cable - no idea - their picture quality sucked so badly I dropped them years ago and every time I see them again, even on small screens, I cringe at the artifacts. I'd have to check my OTA feeds, but I do recall at least a few being MPEG2 last time around, and one was broadcasting in 720p while another multiplexed 5 channels and compressed their main HD channel severely as a result, giving distinct

      • Blame the market. When choosing among two or three TV providers, consumers tend to favor quantity of HD channels over quality of picture.This may be because you don't get to see the picture before you subscribe, or it may be that most people wouldn't know quality if it bit them. Just the same, the market rewards carriers who cram lots of 10-15Mb/s streams down their pipes, so they do.

    • Re:So? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Gr8Apes (679165) on Thursday October 18, 2012 @10:58AM (#41693687)

      Yeah, a click on TFA indicates this was streaming 8K video, which is roughly 16 times the resolution of 1080 (whether that's 1080i or 1080P is ambiguous).

      The real story is that there's now a significantly large 10G internet connection. A side note - they're streaming 16X HD content, which is generally about 8GB for 2 hours compressed, or 4GB per hour, which is about (consults anachronistic pocket calculator) 9 Mbps for the HD stream or roughly 144Mbps for 16X that assuming the same compression efficiency and/or loss acceptance.

      Not sure why 10G was needed, other than as a POC for the technology. 1Gbps should have been plenty.

      • by 54mc (897170)
        This is exactly what I was confused about. If something can run on commodity PCs but requires a 10Gbps connection, it's not something that's going to be ready for prime time for quite a while.
        • by Gr8Apes (679165)
          10G isn't all that expensive, but it's not commodity by any means at this time. The prices are in the range of 100Mbps ethernet gear in the earlier part of the 90s, but honestly, other than geeks, I don't see most people needing it any time within the next 5 years. Note that's just about when 10G should hit upper end commodity prices, and be usable by the upper end of the masses if it maps to past trends.
      • Re:So? (Score:4, Informative)

        by TheSync (5291) on Thursday October 18, 2012 @01:57PM (#41696795) Journal

        Note that this experiment was specifically not on commodity Internet, but on the Global Lambda Integrated Facility [www.glif.is].

        10 Gbps is usually delivered on OC-192 / STM-64 / 10G SONET.

        8K UHDTV (4320p) has been defined by SMPTE as a resolution of 7680x4320 (33.2 megapixels).

        JPEG 2000 for 2K Digital Cinema Packages are 250 Mbps, a rate determined to be adequate by the industry. This group used 2 Gbps for 8K, which is reasonable considering it is ~16 times the resolution of 2K.

        • How come resolution isn't still measured by vertical resolution? 4320P is 4K to me. And 8K should be HD x 64

          • by TheSync (5291)

            how come resolution isn't still measured by vertical resolution?

            Because back in the analog day, broadcast engineers cared about vertical lines of resolution. The horizontal resolution was just a factor of bandwidth.

    • by PPH (736903)

      Uhuh. So... what?

      16 times Full HD sounds like 16 channels on TV.

      Maybe if the broadcasters get enough extra channels, they'll re-run 'My Mother the Car' on one of them. I can't wait!

  • by sycodon (149926)

    I bet the config file (Which one? I don't know) is about 100 pages long.

  • by afidel (530433)

    Ewww, MJPEG looks like crap compared to just about any other video format at the same bandwidth. It's computationally easy, but it's certainly not what you'd hope for in a production standard.

    • by TheSync (5291)

      I suspect this was JPEG 2000, not just "MJPEG". CESNET has previously done 4K [cesnet.cz] IP streaming with JPEG 2000.

      JPEG 2000 is the standard for digital cinema, and has the advantage of having limited loss in multi-generations of decode/recode.

      Many TV networks use JPEG 2000 at 100-150 Mbps for IP transmission contribution to the network centers from major sports stadiums.

      Cisco has a device to do up to 12 channels of HD video over IP [cisco.com] as uncompressed (1.5 Gbps) or JPEG 2000.

  • sofware? Also that link has an extra . on the end, break it
  • by NinjaTekNeeks (817385) on Thursday October 18, 2012 @10:47AM (#41693549)
    Didn't know what GLIF was so I looked it up : http://www.glif.is/ [www.glif.is]

    And here is a map of the infrastructure: http://www.glif.is/publications/maps/GLIF_5-11_World_4k.jpg [www.glif.is] (6Mb)
  • doesn't matter. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nyder (754090) on Thursday October 18, 2012 @10:49AM (#41693585) Journal

    I do not know about satellite TV, but cable tv compresses the source so bad, that 720p TV looks blocky on a 1080p TV with little movement. Cable TV providers, like comcast are ruining HD TV by the crappy quality because they only care about money, not about quality. If they ever got on this bandwagon, they would fuck it up.

     

    • Our Freeview digital broadcast service has "HD" channels, but they're only HD so long as nothing moves, whereupon the picture dissolves into nasty motion blur and thats using H264. Still, the SD channels are even worse - the mpeg2 blocking effects makes some of the more compressed ones unwatchable.

  • by fredrated (639554) on Thursday October 18, 2012 @10:52AM (#41693617) Journal

    Now we just need content worth watching...

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Porn industry has that part "handled."

  • ... Well, we know it wasn't Comcast.

  • Streaming, for me, generally equals lousy playback. Stuttering, taking lots of time to resynchronize when you skip back or (worse) forward. Usability is sacrificed in an effort by the broadcaster to retain control.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Piratebay until they get their act together

  • Bookmarked for when i get 10Gbps internet service...

  • by Anonymous Coward

    So there is currently no 8k display available, unless it's in a lab somewhere. Heck, a 70mm IMAX film print is estimated to only be the equivalent of a little above 6k. Combined with no display now or even in the very near future being able to show this, and no readily commercially available camera able to capture at this resolution, my question is why they're doing this and yet sticking with 30 frames a second when humans are readily shown to be able to differences until somewhere above a hundred frames a

  • by strack (1051390)
    yawn. i want my 2160p 36 inch 120hz monitor already.
  • by PPH (736903)

    Y'all let me know when I kin stop smackin' the TV whenever the vertical hold gets wonky.

Loan-department manager: "There isn't any fine print. At these interest rates, we don't need it."

Working...