HD-DVD/ Blu-Ray content to be degraded for analog displays

[waheed]

HD DVD and Blu-ray content to be degraded for analog displays

1/22/2006 3:40:41 PM, by Eric Bangeman

Confirming our earlier reports, some owners of HD television sets will not be able to see HD DVD and Blu-ray programming in its full glory, as the Advanced Access Content System (AACS) used by both next-gen formats has been modified to require picture degredation over analog connections. As a result, the signal sent through analog connections will be constrained to 960x540, rather than the 1920x1080 that both Blu-ray and HD DVD are capable of.

According to the consortium backing AACS, the change is necessary because of—you guessed it—piracy. The fear is that hordes of otherwise law-abiding citizens will take advange of analog video connections to record full-resolution copies of movies from HD DVD and Blu-ray discs and subsequently distribute them via peer-to-peer networks and other nefarious means. To keep that from happening, any video signal that doesn't travel over a protected input (such as HDMI) will be degraded.

The AACS specification will now contain a new digital flag called the Image Constraint Token. At the discretion of the content producer, the ICT can be set to require next-gen optical players to degrade the video over analog connections. If ICT is turned off, then no downsampling will occur.

At 960x540, degraded video will still look better than standard DVDs, which generally are encoded at 720x480. However, owners of analog 720p HD sets (and they are out there) will be getting short shrift, as their TVs are capable of 1280x720 display. AACS is attempting to throw them a bone, as the degraded signal will then be "up converted" to 1280x720. The ultimate result will be a picture that fills the screen, but doesn't give the consumer what he or she paid for in terms of the quality.

Unlike Managed Copy, which is a mandatory part of AACS for both platforms, ICT usage will be left up to the choice of the individual studios. So far, none of them have said they will be requiring its use for their discs. However, Disney, Warner Home Video, Paramount, and NBC Universal are considered likely candidates to require ICT. Consumer electronics manufacturers have been unenthusiastic about supporting ITC, but will have to incorporate it into their players if they want them certified to play next-generation optical disc content.

As Ken wrote last summer, "the revolution will be televised, only it won't be in HD unless your pockets have paid for recent display technology designed with the future in mind." That future, in case you've forgotten, involves the motion picture and music industries being able to exercise maximum control over what you watch, how you watch, and when you watch it. In the past couple of months we've seen legislation introduced to close the so-called "analog hole," resurrect the broadcast flag for television and HD radio, and ultimately limit the functionality of consumer electronics to "customary historic uses." All this is in the guise of fighting piracy and keeping artists from starving. But the truth of the matter is that our "friends" at the RIAA and MPAA want to keep themselves at the helm of the USS Content at all costs, even if it means trampling their customers.

Source

The article makes me laugh. The reasoning for degrading the resolution seems like they want to reduce piracy. Pirates dont really care about HD quality, all they care about is a reasonably good quality movie at the min size possible for distribution over P2P. 960 X 540 pixel resolution is more than enough for them, which is better than DVD.

This is all about controlling the market than reducing piracy and forcing consumers to upgrade their equipment. This is BS

As least, its is possible to output next gen DVD via analog rather than restrict it to HDMI. But it does seem pointless as its no longer in High Definition resolution.

[rr6966]

I have to admit that I am surprised that the didn't limit the output to 480i.

[ROF]

This is nothing new. We've been discussing this for at least a year now around this place.

[dphirschler]

This is nothing new. We've been discussing this for at least a year now around this place.

Except now it's official, instead of speculation.


Darryl

[smearbrick1]

This whole ICT sounds like a firmware option that can be turned on or off. I give it about 3 months or less until someone hacks a piece of firmware or gets their hands on a service remote and disables this.

[EAO]

Ditto - I agree with all the posts above

So how much is that reasonably priced HD media going for?

[dvd3500]

Considering I bought a brand new CRT TV (100 Hz) less than 2 years ago they can reduce it all they want!

[whitejremiah]

smart move of them, throw out a TON of potential customers...would you want to buy something if you knew up front that it could only live up to half of what it was advertised to do, just because your missing a (rather expensive) chunk of equipment? You won't catch me buying one of these things till they figure out that they are losing money hand over fist because they want to throw in some copy protection that someone's gonna break through within six months anyhow.....

[edDV]

I have to admit that I am surprised that the didn't limit the output to 480i.

Same here. They somewhat responded to pressure. 960x540 is quarter 1080p in size. Framerate will still be 23.976 on the disc and output at 59.94 progressive by 3:2 frame repeats. It won't look too bad.

The problem is many sets won't accept 540p directly over YPbPr so the player will create a bastardized 1080i with telecine from the 960x540 pseudoframes. Then the TV will need to IVTC back to a progressive display.

I wonder if Hollywood will accept 960x540 in their Broadcast Flag proposal? That is far more important to me since I'm in no hurry to buy a BluRay player.

[cpotoso]

Completely ridiculous and a sure way to kill HD media... Come on, 540 lines and 480 lines surely look quite similar (in fact on 720 p monitors the latter will look better as the interpolation necessary from 480 is a simpler 3:2 vs. 4:3).

[LloydAZ]

Unless someone makes a box that will convert HDMI to Component and Fiber Optic.

If there is one available, I'd like to find it as I have an older HD set that only has component inputs.

[hrlslcbr]

Hello. Does anyone know what will happen with the PC drives?
Will I be able to watch a blu-ray or hd-dvd disc at 1920x1080 on my crt monitor, or only downsampled at 960x540?

[painkiller]

Okay.

So - what's my incentive to buy into HDTV at all then?

All the big hoopla on the part of sales folk and magazines hyping the forthcoming 1080p - and constant comparing of current 1080i models - what's the point if I only retain an older model 36" SD television that I would require a set top converter box to receive/decode the new broadcasts?

Even if I did change out all of my television(s) throughout the house to hdtv models - I wouldn't have any money left to buy such recorders.

Who are these groups building this stuff for anyway?

It isn't the working folk. At least, IMO.

[edDV]

Unless someone makes a box that will convert HDMI to Component and Fiber Optic.

If there is one available, I'd like to find it as I have an older HD set that only has component inputs.

Even if there were such a device, it wouldn't get any output from these players. Google HDCP encryption.

Hello. Does anyone know what will happen with the PC drives?
Will I be able to watch a blu-ray or hd-dvd disc at 1920x1080 on my crt monitor, or only downsampled at 960x540?

Probably neither. Special BluRay or HDDVD drives will be needed., these will only output HDDVD to an encrypted active HDCP device. No current computer monitor (even the fancy Apple Cinema HDTV displays) is capable of HDCP decryption.

The path will be internal HD DVD drive to special display adapter to DVI/HDMI to HDTV HDMI (with HDCP). None are yet available although some ATI and NVidia cards are supposed to be upgradable to HDCP over DVI.

[LloydAZ]

Unless someone makes a box that will convert HDMI to Component and Fiber Optic.

If there is one available, I'd like to find it as I have an older HD set that only has component inputs.

Even if there were such a device, it wouldn't get any output from these players. Google HDCP encryption.

Couldn't a box like this act as the interface for the encryption scheme, decrypt the data, and convert it to the analog outputs that could be sent to an older set that only has componenet video?

It seems to me that something like this could be built, but I know nothing about electronics.

I understand the reasoning behind HDCP encryption, and I agree with it to some extent. I just feel that it is unfair to those of us who were early adopters of the HDTV format to leave us out in the cold.

My questions are: Would it be illegal to create, produce, and sell a convertor box that does this? Would it ethically be any different than the boxes available that remove the macrovision signal that affect some older televisions? Is HDCP really going to stop piracy?

I guess it's just a case of sour grapes for me. I can't afford a new television that has an HDMI input. It seems that even the DVD players that upconvert to 1080i use either HDMI or DVI (the ones I've seen anyway.)

Oh well, I guess I'll just have to wait and see what happens in the future.

[edDV]

Unless someone makes a box that will convert HDMI to Component and Fiber Optic.

If there is one available, I'd like to find it as I have an older HD set that only has component inputs.

Even if there were such a device, it wouldn't get any output from these players. Google HDCP encryption.

Couldn't a box like this act as the interface for the encryption scheme, decrypt the data, and convert it to the analog outputs that could be sent to an older set that only has componenet video?

It seems to me that something like this could be built, but I know nothing about electronics.

I understand the reasoning behind HDCP encryption, and I agree with it to some extent. I just feel that it is unfair to those of us who were early adopters of the HDTV format to leave us out in the cold.

My questions are: Would it be illegal to create, produce, and sell a convertor box that does this? Would it ethically be any different than the boxes available that remove the macrovision signal that affect some older televisions? Is HDCP really going to stop piracy?

I guess it's just a case of sour grapes for me. I can't afford a new television that has an HDMI input. It seems that even the DVD players that upconvert to 1080i use either HDMI or DVI (the ones I've seen anyway.)

Oh well, I guess I'll just have to wait and see what happens in the future.

I'm in the same HDTV boat with a TV that was too early to support HDCP.

There were several past discussions on this. Here is one.
https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=281031&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=h...yption&start=0

Unfortunately there is no way to add HDCP to an existing HDTV other than by the manufacturer that has been licensed to a specific key. See this description and I'll quote the last two paragraphs here.

http://www.sigmadesigns.com/support/DVI_HDMI.htm

"In addition to the encryption and decryption functions, HDCP implements authentication to verify that the receiving device (such as a display or television) is licensed to receive encrypted content. Re-authentication occurs approximately every two seconds to continuously confirm the security of the DVI or HDMI interface. If, at any time, re-authentication does not occur, for example by disconnecting a device and/or connecting an illegal recording device, the source device (such as a DVD player or set-top box) ends transmission of encrypted content.

If a device's encryption/decryption keys have been compromised, the HDCP licensing administrator places the compromised device on a revocation list carried by System Renewability Messages (SRMs). SRMs are passed on to devices via prerecorded or broadcasted content, or received from another compliant device. Thus, once a device has been compromised, it will eventually no longer be able to send or receive encrypted content."

[DRP]

The new HD disc formats won't take off anyway. They will be as popular as SACD has been. ie. not at all. Yes there will be a few early adopters who need to have the latest and greatest thing to show the neighbours but for the other 98% of us standard DVD is more good enough and most probably indistinguishable visually from HD-DVD anyway.

People will baulk at having to buy a whole new player and probably screen again as well just to watch exactly the same thing as they have been for the last 5 years in what appears to be exactly the same quality as well.

The bottom line is that people by and large don't care about quality. That's why everything these days is built down to a price. They care about quantity for the cheapest price. That's why iPods took off massively and SACD didn't. The same will happen with video. The only way they'll get HD-DVD to take off is to kill standard DVD off entirely which will take some time.

[edDV]

The new HD disc formats won't take off anyway. They will be as popular as SACD has been. ie. not at all. Yes there will be a few early adopters who need to have the latest and greatest thing to show the neighbours but for the other 98% of us standard DVD is more good enough and most probably indistinguishable visually from HD-DVD anyway.

People will baulk at having to buy a whole new player and probably screen again as well just to watch exactly the same thing as they have been for the last 5 years in what appears to be exactly the same quality as well.

The bottom line is that people by and large don't care about quality. That's why everything these days is built down to a price. They care about quantity for the cheapest price. That's why iPods took off massively and SACD didn't. The same will happen with video. The only way they'll get HD-DVD to take off is to kill standard DVD off entirely which will take some time.

Add to that BD/HD DVDs don't solve any of the networked home models for future media distribution. The disc is tied to a specific player connected to a specific HDTV unless the DVD is unloaded and physically carried to another player. This is an old concept going back to the 78 RPM record.

Networked video distribution is the model that makes sense. Viewers should be able to download content with various playback licenses independent of physical media. Instead of HBO, envision a Netflix type arrangemet where you can download content and build your own viewing schedule for the evening. The "player" would be a home network file server, a HTPC, an IPod type mobile device or a networked HD DVR.

This model needs no DVD retailers, no cable company, no dbs, no DTV broadcaster. Distribution could be provided from any wideband source to the home.

[CaptainVideo]

I think I found the achilles heal to HDCP.

"Re-authentication occurs approximately every two seconds to continuously confirm the security of the DVI or HDMI interface. If, at any time, re-authentication does not occur, for example by disconnecting a device and/or connecting an illegal recording device, the source device (such as a DVD player or set-top box) ends transmission of encrypted content.

Why do I not see this working very smoothly. I can totally see devices, either through bugs or whatever failing to authenticate and grandma is in the middle of Driving Miss Daisy in full glory of HDTV and then it cuts out with a warning message telling granny she's a pirate because her Toshiba player and Sony TV can't authenticate. Oh I can't wait. I already think the format won't take off for a decade, but if it doesn't work out of the box it will fail immediately.

Let's hope the tech doesn't work under real world conditions. Consumers want their electronics to work. If it acts like a PC, game over.

[DRP]

The retailers are gonna love it. They don't only get to flog you a new DVD player, they have to sell you a new screen to be able to see the improvement and a whole new breed of aftermarket "video stabilizers" and other black-box trickery that will inevitably spring up onto the market to filter out all the copy-protection just so you can watch your videos the way you want to.

Not to mention they'll probably have their thumb in a business that can "chip" your brand new BR/HD-DVD player straight out of the box before it'll play your non-studio bought discs.

[Wile_E]

I have to admit that I am surprised that the didn't limit the output to 480i.

Same here. They somewhat responded to pressure. 960x540 is quarter 1080p in size. Framerate will still be 23.976 on the disc and output at 59.94 progressive by 3:2 frame repeats. It won't look too bad.

The problem is many sets won't accept 540p directly over YPbPr so the player will create a bastardized 1080i with telecine from the 960x540 pseudoframes. Then the TV will need to IVTC back to a progressive display.

I wonder if Hollywood will accept 960x540 in their Broadcast Flag proposal? That is far more important to me since I'm in no hurry to buy a BluRay player.

Why will framerate be some odd number of 23.976 and not even 24fps? 24fps is too damn slow to begin with! 24fps was merely the slowest and worst possible frame rate that could reproduce acceptable audio in 1927. Frame repeats won't do anything to smooth out motion. It is just repeating frames. This is like trying to get better quality out of MPEG2, by converting it to AVI. You can't. Why doesn't the movie industry WAKE UP and start filming in 48fps? I'm tired of watching flickering 24fps crap movies in the theater. Even in the BEST movie theaters, that framerate bothers me to no end when the camera pans! It is too slow! They up the resolution of TV to 1920x1080, but do nothing to film movies at faster framerates!

Click here to read about Maxivision 48 FPS Technology

[somebodeez]

This stuff is too much.
I think I'll just stick with what I have now.

[hrlslcbr]

I have to admit that I am surprised that the didn't limit the output to 480i.

Same here. They somewhat responded to pressure. 960x540 is quarter 1080p in size. Framerate will still be 23.976 on the disc and output at 59.94 progressive by 3:2 frame repeats. It won't look too bad.

The problem is many sets won't accept 540p directly over YPbPr so the player will create a bastardized 1080i with telecine from the 960x540 pseudoframes. Then the TV will need to IVTC back to a progressive display.

I wonder if Hollywood will accept 960x540 in their Broadcast Flag proposal? That is far more important to me since I'm in no hurry to buy a BluRay player.

Why will framerate be some odd number of 23.976 and not even 24fps? 24fps is too damn slow to begin with! 24fps was merely the slowest and worst possible frame rate that could reproduce acceptable audio in 1927. Frame repeats won't do anything to smooth out motion. It is just repeating frames. This is like trying to get better quality out of MPEG2, by converting it to AVI. You can't. Why doesn't the movie industry WAKE UP and start filming in 48fps? I'm tired of watching flickering 24fps crap movies in the theater. Even in the BEST movie theaters, that framerate bothers me to no end when the camera pans! It is too slow! They up the resolution of TV to 1920x1080, but do nothing to film movies at faster framerates!

Click here to read about Maxivision 48 FPS Technology

My thought exactly
Maybe after no one buys blu-ray or HD-DVD's they'll wake up...

[paulw]

Unless someone makes a box that will convert HDMI to Component and Fiber Optic.

If there is one available, I'd like to find it as I have an older HD set that only has component inputs.

Maybe. But it's bound to be band under the DMCA or some new law that gets passed at the behest of Hollywood.

[painkiller]

Somebodeez,

I don't think that "staying with what I've got now" will help overall.
Maybe you will be satisfied with lower resolution displayed content, but what of the rest of us that have been slowly working towards getting to be "hdtv" ready?

In my case, I replaced my stereo with a surround sound system.
But it is currently limited in its video output to component video and/or composite only.
Not DVI, nor HDMI connections.

So what happens to folk (like me) that now (soon) have to replace all of the equipment just because the video monitors will likely drop most connections in favor of just HDMI or DVI (for the sake of the copy protection)?

That's going to be a lot of money wasted, at the personal level.
Not to mention the electronics that will be useless and consigned to (recycled, hopefully) trash.

I feel a class action forming. I wonder if anyone else does.

[jagabo]

Encrypted HDCP to unencrypted DVI?

http://www.engadget.com/2005/07/21/the-clicker-hdcps-shiny-red-button/

[somebodeez]

Somebodeez,

I don't think that "staying with what I've got now" will help overall.
Maybe you will be satisfied with lower resolution displayed content, but what of the rest of us that have been slowly working towards getting to be "hdtv" ready?

"lower resolution displayed content" is what I've had all my life.
So anything hd that gets down res-ed should (in theory anyway) still look better than what I am use to, yes?

Naturally, what might be best for me (for the time being) may not be best for someone else.
From what I've seen, HDTV displays still aren't all that tempting to me. I don't feel the need to go out and drop a few $1000 to "upgrade" to something that is (or will be):

A - Less functional than what I have now
B - Can't display anything without making it look like very bad quality DivX 3 LM rips
C- Have to worry about burn-in
D- Has screen door, sun spots and rainbow effects
E- Can only watch in a dimmed room (or only watch in a bright room)
F - Can't see the display from the side
G - Will need a $400 bulb replaced every couple of years
H - Will require me to pay someone to calibrate it
I - Has squiggly lines up and down the whole picture

That's an "upgrade" ?!
Oh yea- really looking forward to that. (NOT!)
Nope - they are going to really have to be an upgrade to what I have now first. When/if they get their act together, then I'll consider it IF it meets MY requirements.

And that, my friend is the attitude that customers need to go back to.
We need to get "Them" back into realizing that "the customer is king" like the way it use to be.
But that is just not going to happen if we allow ourselves become a slave to this stuff instead.

In my case, I replaced my stereo with a surround sound system.
But it is currently limited in its video output to component video and/or composite only.
Not DVI, nor HDMI connections.

Same here but it still works with my current TV.

So what happens to folk (like me) that now (soon) have to replace all of the equipment just because the video monitors will likely drop most connections in favor of just HDMI or DVI (for the sake of the copy protection)?

Who says you "have to" ?
While my standard TVs certainly can't dispay high def, are they going to completely stop working?

That's going to be a lot of money wasted, at the personal level.
Not to mention the electronics that will be useless and consigned to (recycled, hopefully) trash.

I feel a class action forming. I wonder if anyone else does.

I'd love to see that but class action suits, as we all know don't really benefit the consumer however, they do at least allow us to be a hemmy to them for awhile. :P

What I would love to see even more is this junk not moving off of the store shelves because of nobody buying it. Then maybe we could really get some where.

[edDV]

That's going to be a lot of money wasted, at the personal level.
Not to mention the electronics that will be useless and consigned to (recycled, hopefully) trash.

I feel a class action forming. I wonder if anyone else does.

I'd love to see that but class action suits, as we all know don't really benefit the consumer however, they do at least allow us to be a hemmy to them for awhile. :P

Who are you planning to sue? The TV manufacturers aren't pushing this. They have the most to loose from all these restrictions.

Blame the MPAA and their members. How would you sue them? on what grounds?

[edDV]

Encrypted HDCP to unencrypted DVI?

http://www.engadget.com/2005/07/21/the-clicker-hdcps-shiny-red-button/

Waste of money. That would get you the same 720x480/576 you would get if the box wasn't in the line. Why do that?

HDCP requires a continuous handshaked connection with proper keys before the HD player sends more than 720x480/576. Analog component connection would at least get you 960x540p (quarter 1080p).

They haven't yet said whether they would offer 960x540 on non-HDCP DVI connections.

[CaptainVideo]

Who are you planning to sue?

Well you could attempt to make an argument of collusion between industries that constrain innovation and hurt consumers and sue under anti-trust grounds. You'd sue the MPAA/RIAA/CEA. I have no idea if that would have merit or would be appropriate but that's the first thing that comes to mind.