The HDTV Review Volume I, Issue I Fall 1989 Table of Contents Welcome to the HDTV Review Dale E. Cripps and Sam Bush page 2 From the Editor Barbara J. Cannon page 3 Current HDTV Activity: Who is Moving Today, And Why Dale E. Cripps page 5 HDTV: It's Going To Be Great...Or Is It? Jeffrey Krauss page 15 HDTV: An Historical Perspective Corey P. Carbonara page 31 HDTV Transition Strategies: Three Scenarios Gregory L. DePriest page 44 The Simulcast Strategy for HDTV Howard N. Miller page 47 Issues in Planning for High-Definition Production James Hindman page 53 A New HDTV System for Transmitting Motion Pictures to Theaters by Satellite Richard M. Wolfe page 57 The HDTV Review is only the second publication in the world, after the HDTV Newsletter, to be solely devoted to advanced television technologies and issues. It is a second tier of information for all those interested in HDTV, presenting the major positions of leaders in various areas. As Executive Editors of this Review, we are devoted to bringing our readers a compendium from the many millions of words spoken and written about ATV, and to keeping our readers informed about the issues. The Review is intended to further research, to assist the understanding of a changing landscape and to support decision making. We see the Review, like all our work, as a tool to help advanced television have a positive impact on business, industry, theater and the home. The Review contains the reflections of key spokesmen, consultants, officials, executives, scientists, engineers, authors and others which give you the structure and substance of the issues in an accessible format. It allows companies and individuals to keep up-to-date with industry developments, and to determine accurately how to plot a course through the communications labyrinth. We hope the Review will be a powerful library reference that is examined frequently to follow this new technology. The Review is also intended to introduce HDTV to new faces. Whatever the final outcome of the movement toward advanced television, thousands--indeed millions--of people around the globe will be involved. Manufacturers and viewers in large numbers will play their parts in bringing to full fruition powerful sound and visual communication with all the immediacy of television and film. As always, we solicit your comments and suggestions to help us better serve your needs. Dale E. Cripps and Sam Bush Executive Editors From the Editor In this Fall, 1989 inaugural issue of the HDTV Review, we offer a range of views from HDTV participants. Herewith, a summary of articles: Current HDTV Activity: Who is Moving Today, and Why, by Dale E. Cripps This article, by the publisher of the HDTV Newsletter, describes the current state of HDTV. It offers commentary on advanced television’s development, and a summary of current events. In future issues of the Review, the lead article will present the hottest issue of each quarter. HDTV: It's Going To Be Great...Or Is It?, by Jeffrey Krauss Jeffrey Krauss offers an overview of critical factors influencing the success of advanced television. Key issues include market penetration, technology, standards, formats, testing, and government and regulatory issues. HDTV: An Historical Perspective, by Corey P. Carbonara This historical perspective puts HDTV in the context of television's overall development. The first in a series (to be continued in upcoming Reviews), it traces the advance of technology in the first three of six historical stages defined by the author. HDTV Transition Strategies: Three Scenarios, by Gregory DePriest Gregory DePriest here presents opening comments illustrating three transition strategies for broadcasters, from the recent conference of the Association of Maximum Services Telecasters of Washington, D.C. The U.S. broadcasting community was the first to realize the potential of a new generation of television, and the first to recognize the momentum of Japan's efforts. This article is evidence of the associations' efforts to establish a place for American broadcasters. The Simulcast Strategy for HDTV, by Howard N. Miller This article describes the simulcast strategy for HDTV. The non-NTSC compatible simulcast approach suggests a path by which today's stations could gradually be replaced with tomorrow's signals. Any system offering competitive performance is attention-catching; the author presents one such approach. Issues in Planning for High-Definition Production, by James Hindman In this article, James Hindman of the American Film Institute summarizes the second report of the FCC Subcommittee on Creative Issues--identifying the problems, offering some early conclusions and setting an official first stand for Hollywood. Advanced television systems have the capacity to produce a television signal that, as a production medium, rivals film. While HDTV will not eliminate film use, it will become a companion imaging system and in some instances replace film. HDTV Systems for Transmitting Motion Pictures to Theaters by Satellite, by Richard Wolfe Richard Wolfe's article introduces the Electronic Theater as part of the HDTV equation. HDTV transmission systems offer program delivery at the speed of light, and to many receiver sites simultaneously. This article addresses the view that the early economics of HDTV are best served by using the technology to ship film-produced product to multiple viewer venues. In upcoming issues, the Review will publish articles on new HDTV applications including defense, medicine, education, publishing, sports, retailing and many others. We invite your comments and submissions. Our goal is to provide the best possible coverage of HDTV issues, to help our readers keep abreast of this complex and fast-changing technology. Barbara J. Cannon Editor Current HDTV Activity: Who is Moving Today, And Why Dale E. Cripps Vast resources are being spent on three continents, preparing for the commercialization of HDTV. The forces that together will launch this new industry are moving at dizzying speeds. In this article, I will attempt to cover the highlights of events past and present and offer some predictions for the future. Of course, there are some difficult standards problems that keep brakes on the industry, and that will continue for some time to come. Standards committees have been set up around the world, and are hard at work. It is a big job with considerable technical and political challenges. By the time major plans and resources come together for commercialization of HDTV, one can trust that there will be adequately stable standards. High definition is not only consumer television. Because of its versatility, it is much more likely to find its way first into areas offering high returns such as medicine, education, printing, corporate communications, military and space, and even criminal control. HDTV is very likely to deliver movies and cultural events to theaters, and may also become the platform for a new generation of computers. Consumer Television The largest HDTV potential is, of course, consumer television. Japan’s NHK was the early pioneer in developing HDTV technology. The selection of a worldwide production standard sprang from their early work, and was proposed before international standards-setting bodies. Even though these organizations failed to reach an accord on that standard, and may not reach conclusions for several years, it was adopted in Japan and a non-compatible transmission system, MUSE E, was a derivative development. TV sets have been designed, tubes are being made, projection systems are on the market--both rear and front--and a massive program for developing LCD large HDTV screens is underway in Japan. VCR and videodisc machines are also past prototype stages. Niche market support systems have been produced in Japan for items like museum library management units. The film industry is accommodated with two tape-to-film transfer systems, one from Sony using electron beam technology, and one from NAC, using laser scanning. Europe has agreed that a MAC (Multiplex Analog Component) signal for satellite and cable delivery is a way out of the many European television standards. The MAC signals are required by an EC directive for TV signals from the high-powered direct broadcast satellites, but not for others such as Luxembourg’s ASTRA. The market is uncertain over MAC in some regions of Europe because of the promotion of lower-powered satellite services in PAL. Launch failures have added to the difficulties in some regions. Back-up transponders are carrying D2-MAC programs, desired to be exclusive in that format, in PAL using the same satellite. That reduces the requirement for a customer to buy D2-MAC equipment to see new programs. Longer-range views suggest that the early difficult start of MAC will eventually be overcome in the marketplace. High Definition MAC was conceived to be a compatible signal with the MAC. It was recognized early that the sale of the MAC system to European customers may require additional inducements besides new programming. The HDTV signal compatible with the MAC format would be just such an inducement. The HD-MAC development also served as the adequate response to Japanese HDTV initiatives and perceived economic threats resulting from it. An initiative by Philips, Bosch, Thomson, and Thorn EMI resulted in the Eureka 95 HD-MAC, a cost-sharing project with companies and their respective governments. The HD-MAC system is operational in limited quantities, including cameras, recording, special effects, encoding, decoding, sets and VCRs. To date, no tape-to-film recorder is produced in the 1250/50 system, but one is planned. It is thought that commercialization of European HDTV will begin in 1992 at the same time that regular HDTV broadcast begins, although it is not expected to be significantly underway until 1995. In the United States, the FCC issued a notice of inquiry nearly three years ago and formed a blue ribbon committee to advise it on broadcasting issues. About 20 proposals were made for various transmission approaches. That number has been pared down to five or six, and hardware testing of these systems will continue through 1991 at the Advanced Television Testing Center. At the end of testing, should one system gain wide respect, it is expected that the FCC will make a decision in much the same manner as was done for the NTSC color system. The major proponents for broadcast standards are NBC/David Sarnoff with ACTV I and ACTV II systems; NHK with Narrow MUSE, MUSE 6, and MUSE 9; Philips NA with HD S NA; Faroudja Laboratories with Super-NTSC; BTA with ClearVision I and II; and Zenith with their Spectrum Compatible system. Philips NA announced in early September they would also offer a ‘spectrum compatible’ system not compatible with existing sets. Initiatives in Washington to open up additional spectrum now held in reserve for military use prompted this recent move. For now, other proponents appear not to have the funding to reach hardware stages for testing. Estimates vary on when an advanced television service will appear in the U.S., but the end of 1992 is the earliest projection, and 1995 the latest. Two years ago a 14-hour, Canadian-financed miniseries, Chasing Rainbows, was produced in high definition and down-converted for conventional international release. High definition was chosen as an alternative to 16mm film, a common low-cost format in Canadian productions, because of superior quality for down-conversions and the cost savings in special effects using blue screen matting. On April 20, 1989, the 50th anniversary of General David Sarnoff’s 1939 World’s Fair announcement about commercial monochrome television being on the threshold, WNBC in New York broadcast a fully-compatible advanced television signal--a derivative of HDTV known more accurately as EDTV or Extended Definition. This particular signal was from the NBC/David Sarnoff Research Center-developed ACTV I system. Three nights later CBS aired a Movie of the Week called Littlest Victims. This movie was shot and post-produced on the 1125/60 standard HDTV equipment and then down-converted for broadcast in NTSC. Three major production houses in the United States are daily working on various productions in the 240M 1125/60 standard. Another is shooting low-cost movies in HDTV that are directly down-converted to NTSC or PAL without transfer to film. This apparantly unusual use was chosen to widen options. If the movie is popular enough in the video store release version to warrent general release, it then is transferred to film for theaters. The national broadcasting system of Japan, NHK, recently began a one-hour per day test transmission of HDTV MUSE E signals from a direct broadcast satellite, showing pictures on 200 large screen receivers strategically located in public places. In August, 1989 in Berlin the Eureka 95 Project 1250/50 HD-MAC pictures were satellite broadcast from the German Kopernikus satellite. Many HDTV productions are scheduled for international distribution, including the upcoming Olympics in 1992, which will employ Eureka 95. In Europe, productions with EU 95 1250/50 equipment are being produced by the BBC, RAI, ARD, SFP, and others. A European Economic Interest Group (EEIG) was created in July, 1989 to enable producers to make HDTV programs and to promote HDTV. Two motion pictures have been made using HDTV, and several others are scheduled for production. Later this year, RAI will begin shooting a feature movie using the 1125/60 standard. HDTV productions in the U.S., Japan and Europe can be measured in the hundreds of hours, and the number of such productions is growing daily. In Montreux, Switzerland earlier this year the Electronic Cinema Festival honored creative efforts in HDTV productions. Every major consumer electronics firm in the world from Matsushita to Philips and from Zenith to Thomson is engaged in research and development of some form of HDTV for a wide variety of markets. Thirty-three companies have joined together in the Eureka 95 HDTV project for Europe. Nearly forty companies from around the world have joined in the 1125/60 Group, a coalition of companies supporting the 1125/60 240M standard. In August, 1989 in Berlin, Thomson showed a 36" diagonal wide screen [16:9] ATV receiver capable of delivering 600 TV lines of resolution and accepting a wide variety of signal standards: 525/59.94, 625/50 interlace and progressive, and 1250/50 2:1. Japan has shown similar sets able to receive NTSC, EDTV and HDTV. The MUSE E HDTV decoder to receive the satellite broadcast from NHK will be in VLSI form in the Spring of 1990, and sets will come on the Japanese market by Summer, 1990. In the United States, Secretary of Commerce Robert Mosbacher said recently of HDTV "I give this [HDTV] the highest priority." Nine Congressional hearings have been held on HDTV, with more scheduled for Fall, 1989. A division of the Government defense system known as DARPA is spending $30 million on HDTV research and development for signal processing and displays, and more money is slated for next year. Dozens upon dozens of major meetings have taken place at the highest levels in Europe and Japan. Europe has already spent over $200 million on HDTV in the Eureka 95 Project and more money is forecast for a two-year extension. Laboratories of historical competitors Philips, Thomson, Bosch, and Thorn EMI have cooperated in an unprecedented fashion on HDTV development. Japan, coordinated by NHK, has spent some $800 million on HDTV with every major electronics firm taking on a special aspect of the overall project. Entire agencies within the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications and MITI have been set up to advance HDTV. The United States has three major laboratories working around the clock: the David Sarnoff Research Center in Princeton, New Jersey; Philips Laboratories in Briarcliff, New York; and Zenith laboratories in Glenview, Illinois. Thomson has research facilities in Marion, Indiana where it also will build wide-screen tubes. Korea has announced devoting over $200 million to HDTV research and development. The American Electronics Association has banded over 40 members together and created a $1 billion plan of action with the Boston Consulting Group, to reinvigorate the consumer electronics industry in the United States. Congress is evaluating this proposal for funding. Already Congressional bills exceeding $500 million are being carefully introduced in Congress to fund the commercialization of HDTV in the United States. The chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance is still writing a bill. It has been predicted that HDTV will be bigger than color by several magnitudes. First, its variety of uses exceeds by far the existing color standards. Second, emerging economic powers with vastly expanding populations have come on line. Color was introduced while nations East and West were still recovering from World War II. Those nations are now fully recovered and industrialized with far higher standards of living than when color was introduced. Non-industrialized regions that were not a factor at all during the color television introduction now have vast populations with rapidly rising standards of living. China was never counted a market at the time of color’s early days, but with further political and economic progress, it can become a market almost beyond imagination. Russia will not stay behind forever, and when the breakthrough comes we should not overlook any opportunities there. Russia has already shown strong initiative. The color systems of today cannot deliver TV pictures to the large screen. The breakthrough for large screen is being accomplished. Advanced technology in materials is so great today that former frustrating limitations have been replaced by combinations of new substances permitting that which was formerly impractical. Large screen displays with the quality for commercial applications such as motion picture delivery to theaters opens up potentials all over the world. Even in the poorest countries, one could imagine the value of programming being made available to groups of viewers using large displays in central gathering places. Schools around the world are just starting to get a handle on how to effectively use video, and HDTV adds significantly to solving one of the early problems: presence. With the large screen available within a decade come hundreds, if not thousands, of new commercial applications. The advertising and promotional industries should be taking notes. All this work is going on because the world recognizes, without even adequately testing the markets, without ever really asking anyone, that multi-billion dollar new markets are in the process of forming. This activity requires orchestration: gathering and distributing the information generated by the many segments of the industry. That task is aided by our conferences, the HDTV Newsletter and this quarterly journal. However, the cost of HDTV is still very high. For this reason, its introduction and use cause great anxiety within traditional television markets. It has been our view that "other" markets will develop far sooner than broadcasting, and that they in fact will contribute to lowering the introductory costs to the consumer broadcast market. First Markets How are the first markets to be identified, and how can one participate? If we keep our eyes on uses for HDTV which are not overcome by the current price of equipment, we see a path. Each step down the path leads to lower cost of the equipment and more branching of the path can occur. In the United States, we think the business community, manufacturing, retail and others will recognize the value of HDTV's supreme communications ability first. In the manufacturing segment alone there are seven to 10 times more tape hours [NTSC] produced annually than are produced for the entire entertainment industry. Experts say that business television is adolescent, though it is a multi-billion dollar business already. The business world is the only place where high resolution systems--workstations--are in wide use. There is growing awareness of this quality among managers, and conventional video is disappointing to those becoming accustomed to the higher standards. Rightly introduced, the corporate market can and will find long-lasting uses for HDTV. Business-to-business broadcasting, where products and services are part of the programming, is under development by our own company, The Trades Channel, in the United States. The National Arts Center in Ottawa, Canada, in association with Telesat Canada, is launching a program to extend Canada's cultural heritage to rural communities via HDTV satellite broadcast into theaters and chambers. Equipment has been ordered and productions are underway. Other uses for the same equipment are being requested from both government and industrial organizations wanting to get their message to these same theaters and chambers. Many underdeveloped nations rely upon central gathering places for television communications where the cost of the devices is communially shared. Larger screens and better pictures with audio will enhance these communications and contribute to the fuller development of those societies, and spawn new commercial services with the same formats. Alternatives to multi-media presentations are of increasing interest. The St. Louis Zoo has installed an HDTV videodisc and Sony projection system with programming running seven hours per day around the facility. People come into a theatrical setting during the session and get an overview and background of the zoo. Automobile agencies are placing orders for HDTV videodiscs and monitors to show their goods to prospective buyers. Fiat recently had a major HDTV production for the rollout presentation of a new car. Ford Motor Company is planning the purchase of HDTV equipment with the associated paint box graphics system. The idea is to reduce the labor of designing a car as much as possible. With the paint box and high definition monitors and projectors, the rendering of a car design is made both easy and flexible. But additional benefits accrue. With thermal printers, high quality design output can be made for distribution and review. The paint box, of course, can give users a new look, color, texture, or even change a coupe to a convertible in a matter of moments. The large monitors and projectors make showing the work easy. Feedback can be incorporated quickly, and further refining of the design is able to take place before clay models are made. Retailers today buy from suppliers who are showing their goods via private satellite networks with conventional TV. An HDTV network would make a considerable difference to the ability of buyer and seller alike in making decisions. Cost of the equipment and program material is less than that of other conventional means of selling when it is widely used. Shopping malls in the U.S. have shown interest in HDTV as an attraction and advertising vehicle. We have had talks with people who are designing a private network in the U.S. to distribute HDTV signals to receivers in all the shopping malls that have national stores. Again the aim is revenue from advertising. The requirements for large screens is the pacing element to that application. Military applications abound, from mapping to safety. Command posts already use high-grade imaging, and the introduction of affordable commercial HDTV means a proliferation of applications. NASA uses HDTV for observing lift-offs, to search for any defects that might affect the mission. Many uses in the space industry are emerging. Medical imaging is life-preserving but has been restricted to few locations because of cost. The commercialization of consumer HDTV provides affordable display and recording, making the proliferation of high-grade imaging all the more possible. Telepathology is seen as a critical new science with the benefit of vastly reducing travel time of pathologists and making multiple diagnosis and collaboration possible. Military medical installations are just now studying the uses for telemedicine and will employ it when the specifications are finalized and costs are calculated. Today’s theatrical distribution with film is cost-effective for the mainstream but poorly serves outlying theaters. In some countries prints are old, dirty and deeply scratched. Many moviegoers have abandoned theaters because films are out of date and the quality of presentation is poor. If those are significant problems, HDTV is an answer. The actual cost of prints on a per show basis does not immediately suggest HDTV. It is availability in quantity and quality that suggest HDTV. Satellite distribution of motion pictures is going on now in the south of France in small rebuilt or refurbished theaters. The picture quality is indistinguishable by the audiences from film and this is not a full HDTV system, but rather a Super-NTSC from Yves Faroudja. Film directors have approved the image as well as the audience. This was thought to be a critical factor, since some film contracts have a provision for distribution approval by the creators. In the United States, Excellence Theaters in Chicago has amassed the largest chain of theaters in the Midwest. The owner has long believed the video distribution system would hold much allure for the audience--not the least being live or tape presentation that could distinguish his theaters from all others using just film. The theater value is also expected to climb with corporate uses, special sporting events, etc. during off-theater hours. Club Theater Network in Boca Raton, Florida is delivering a Faroudja-type picture to several small Florida theaters. Each theater has interactive push button devices in the right chair arm. After patrons have dined in the restaurant, they proceed to the theater for entertainment. That is followed by events such as auctions, where the interactive function gives patrons bidding capabilities. Studios for HDTV production of all forms are sprouting, though their growth in numbers has been hindered by the standards divisions and corresponding uncertainties. Nonetheless, they are now in the most aggressive market development stages, providing not only programming but educational seminars on the applications of their technology to the potential markets mentioned above. In summary, it is safe to say that HDTV has not quite reached the fully catalyzed stage, but that activities are branching out all over the world in what at first appears to be a chaotic fashion. However, upon deeper investigation one sees that it is on its way to becoming a fully commercialized, widely used technology. Dale E. Cripps Dale Cripps, with Sam Bush and Robert Munoz, is a founder of Advanced Television Publishing. The company's principal publication is the HDTV Newsletter, begun in 1986. It also publishes specialized client reports on various topics within the field of advanced television. Mr. Cripps has written articles on the subject of HDTV for professional and consumer magazines. He is currently preparing a book on HDTV, scheduled for publication in late 1989. In addition, he is the organizer of HDTV conferences in the U.S. and Europe. In 1989, Mr. Cripps co-founded the non-profit First International Academy, Institute and Foundation for High Definition Television Arts and Sciences, to research and promote the value of HDTV; the group currently has over 300 members. He also is developer of The Trades Channel, a business-to-business direct satellite broadcast system scheduled to launch in the early 1990s using an advanced television format. Mr. Cripps studied business administration at Fullerton State College and Portland State University. He is a member of SMPTE, and participated in its committee for establishing the HDTV studio standard. HDTV: It's Going To Be Great...Or Is It? Jeffrey Krauss Over the past decade, a number of electronics products have migrated from the business environment to the consumer environment. Answering machines, large screen TVs and cellular phones are examples of products that gained acceptance in the consumer environment as their prices fell. In the U.S. today, almost everybody has an answering machine at home. The next product to migrate from office to home will be the fax machine. Fax machines have become popular in Japanese homes, but the price is still too high in the U.S. Now that cellular telephones cost less than $500, there are growing numbers of families that have cellular telephones in two cars. Five years ago, most 26" or 27" TV sets were used for the business or industrial environment. Today, most new TV set purchases are in the larger screen sizes, because the price of this item has fallen below $500. The market penetration of large screen TVs is one of the forces driving high definition television. With the big screen, the imperfections of our current TV format become more noticeable. For the first time since the introduction of color TV in 1953, consumers are demanding better picture quality. HDTV Critical Factors How successful will the next generation of television be? The answer is complicated and involves consumer, economic and technical considerations. Only one thing is clear. Whichever HDTV format is chosen for the U.S., it will be a system that is unique to the U.S. Other countries will be adopting advanced television formats for satellite broadcasting. Only the United States is planning to adopt the new format for terrestrial television broadcasting. Only the United States will have a television distribution system that can deliver advanced television by terrestrial broadcasting, cable TV, satellite TV and optical fiber. And only the United States will have a system that is backward-compatible, in the same way that color TV was backward-compatible with black-and-white, so that consumers can continue to use their current TV sets. For the consumer, there are two major questions during the first few years. Will the new format be good enough to justify the cost of a $3000 TV receiver? And how long will it take until there is enough programming produced in the new format to justify the cost? These are the same questions that were raised when color TV was introduced in the 1950s. Even though everyone agrees that HDTV is the most important advance in TV since color, some industry executives think the shift to HDTV will be far less significant than the shift from black-and-white to color. For the economists, estimating market penetration for HDTV receivers is important and has already begun. Most estimates assume a 1% penetration eight years after the 1993 or 1994 start of HDTV broadcasting. One group of economists think that HDTV will achieve market penetration far more slowly than color TV did. They estimate a 20% penetration 10 years after the 1% penetration. By contrast, VCRs had a 20% penetration eight years after reaching 1%, and color TV had a 20% penetration only six years after reaching 1%. Other economists are more optimistic, of course. It is clear, however, that market penetration rate depends strongly on the cost of the consumer TV receiver. On the technical side, there are many unresolved issues. One element of the debate centers around whether the new format will be "high definition television" or merely "advanced television." True high definition displays 1125 scan lines of video. In contrast, today's TV format displays only 525 lines. In addition, HDTV has a wider screen, so the display will be shaped more like the screen in a movie theater. The goal of HDTV is to have a TV format that is technically as good as 35mm movie film, with compact disk-quality audio. Advanced television (ATV) is anything that is better than our current TV system, but less than high definition. Today's TV format uses radio channels of six MHz bandwidth. HDTV would need about 30 MHz per channel, unless the signal is compressed. Each of the formats that has been proposed involves compression, squeezing information that comfortably fits a 30 MHz channel into a channel of 12 or nine or even six MHz. In achieving compression, some of the sharpness may be lost. All the proposed formats have more picture scan lines than our current 525-line standard, but they don't all have 1125 lines. Some argue that 787 lines is enough, others argue for 1050 lines. At least one proponent, Zenith, has said that the wider screen will make TV sets far more expensive than necessary, and the only goal should be improved sharpness. Others, however, say that consumers place a higher value on the wider screen than the improved sharpness. How much picture improvement is necessary to satisfy consumer demand? The technical experts can determine how much radio spectrum is needed to reach certain levels of improvement, but only the marketplace can determine whether the improvement is enough to justify the higher receiver costs. Road Map to a Decision How will we get to the next generation of TV? The FCC, which has the legal responsibility to make the decisions, has established an industry advisory committee to evaluate and test candidate HDTV formats and recommend which one should be chosen as the U.S. standard. The committee, with its various subcommittees and working parties, includes several hundred experts. There are numerous meetings every month. The FCC staff plays a minimal role in the activities of the advisory committee. Fifteen to 20 advanced television proposals were submitted to the advisory committee in September, 1988. The next important step is testing of hardware. The proponents will have to submit hardware to be tested. The tests will cover both the perceived quality of the picture and sound, and the effect of interference on quality. Eventually, when testing is completed, the advisory committee will evaluate the results. Then it will make a recommendation to the FCC on which format should be adopted. What the FCC does then depends on the degree of industry consensus that has been reached. The FCC could move quickly to adopt the recommended format, or it could hold hearings, or it could reject all the work and start the process all over again. I will return to this point, because it appears to me that the FCC is not prepared to deal with a process that does not reach a consensus. And, I believe the chance of reaching an industry consensus is quite small. Proposals I mentioned that there were 15 to 20 proposals submitted. Some, according to experts, submitted proposals that appear to violate the laws of physics. One of the working parties of the FCC advisory committee held a full week review of proposed ATV systems in mid-November, 1988, where 13 proponents made presentations. A follow-on session was held in May, 1989. About six to eight proposals are considered to be potentially viable, in the sense that they are likely to be presented in hardware form for testing. Of these, only Zenith, Philips, Sarnoff Labs and NHK expect to have hardware for testing by the end of 1989. Other proponents may have hardware available in 1990. But none of the systems has really stabilized, and all the proponents are continuing to refine their designs. Testing The FCC originally hoped that hardware testing could begin in late 1988. It now appears that testing will actually start in early 1990 and last one and one-half to two years. The testing of TV broadcasting formats will be done by an organization called the Advanced Television Test Center (ATTC), which is funded by the commercial TV networks and the broadcast trade associations. The cable TV industry has formed its own research organization, Cable TV Labs, which is expected to contribute financial support to the ATTC test program. The ATTC is now in the process of finding laboratory space and has begun ordering the specialized, and very expensive, test equipment that will be used. There remain, however, two controversies that need to be resolved before testing can begin. One deals with the format of input source material, and the other deals with audio. Input Source Material The input source material is defined as the programming that will be used for the testing and evaluation of each proposed format. In order that the tests be conducted fairly, the same test programming should be displayed in all the competing formats. However, the proposed formats are technically very different from one another. For example, the numbers of scan lines differ from one format to another, as do field and frame rates. This means that the test programming must either be produced in several distinct technical formats, or must be converted to different formats, in order to be tested and displayed on the competing systems. When programming is converted from one format to another--the technical term is "transcoded"--sometimes impairments are introduced. Of course, none of the proponents is willing to risk having a system downgraded in the testing because of impairments caused by transcoding. Audio Formats Another unresolved controversy deals with testing of audio formats. The goal is to achieve compact disk-quality sound by digital processing and transmission of the audio. Two companies, Dolby and Digideck, have proposed specific audio coding formats. In addition, some of the video proposals include specific audio coding proposals as well. However, several of the video format proponents have simply set aside data channel capacity within their formats for digital audio. They are indifferent as to which digital audio format is used. The unresolved questions are: 1) whether the testing of video should be done with audio signals present; 2) whether the video should be tested several times, in the presence several different audio signal formats; and 3) how to take into account the quality of the audio coding format when evaluating different video formats. Reaching a consensus on these questions may be difficult, because there is the feeling that some possible decisions could give big advantages to one format proponent over another. This will be a significant test. If the industry advisory committee cannot reach a consensus on these questions, the likelihood of reaching a consensus on which format to adopt will be very slim. FCC Decisions Even though this process seems to have years to go before it ends, the FCC has reached some tentative policy decisions. First, the FCC has decided that the consumer's investment in current model TV sets must be preserved. Today's TV sets must not be made obsolete. TV stations must not be allowed to abandon those consumers with current TV sets. This means either that any new format must be compatible with current TV sets, or that TV stations will have to simulcast programming in both formats on separate TV channels. Second, the FCC tentatively decided that TV stations could only have up to six MHz more, in addition to their current assignment of six MHz, for advanced TV broadcasting. Depending on the format that is eventually adopted, this additional six MHz might be used in two ways. For example, the TV stations might use it to augment the information that is being broadcast on their current TV channels. The augmentation channel would carry the increased resolution data, the side panels needed for the wider picture, and the digital audio. Next-generation TV receivers would receive two channels--the current TV channel plus the augmentation channel. The TV receivers would then combine them into a high definition picture. Meanwhile, the current TV channel would continue to be available for reception by old-format TV sets. Or, the second six MHz could be transmitted as a separate, standalone high definition channel. New TV sets would receive only the new channels. The old channels would continue to be used to broadcast programming to old-format TV sets, at least for some interim period of time. These two tentative decisions have eliminated from consideration the one system that is farthest along in development: the Japanese system known as MUSE E. This system will be used in Japan for satellite broadcasting, requires a nine MHz channel, and is incompatible with old-format TV sets. Because MUSE E has effectively been eliminated, scientists at NHK (the Japanese broadcasting administration) have had to go back to the drawing board. They have come up with designs that use less spectrum and are backward-compatible with today's TV sets. A third tentative decision by the FCC is that only the VHF and UHF spectrum now allocated for TV broadcasting will be used for HDTV broadcasting. The FCC will not take away any spectrum from land mobile or microwave or satellite services and give it TV stations. All other spectrum is either too heavily used already, or technically unsuitable for TV broadcasting. A final tentative decision made by the FCC deals with non-broadcast media. For satellite TV, cable TV and fiber optic distribution of video, the FCC has decided not to adopt a standard. The standard format that the FCC adopts will apply only to terrestrial TV broadcasting. Cable and satellite formats will still have to be compatible in some respects with the broadcast standard, in order for a consumer to be able to use the same TV receiver to display programming from all sources. But cable and satellite systems are not as spectrum-limited as terrestrial broadcasting, so they may be able to use different formats to take advantage of their available spectrum. The EIA is setting up a committee to develop a TV receiver architecture for HDTV that will be compatible both with terrestrial TV and non-broadcast media such as cable TV, satellite TV and fiber. This new receiver will probably be an evolution of today's TV receiver-monitors. It will be able to receive signals in TV broadcast format and also in what is known as baseband format from VCRs and other input sources. The EIA calls this a "multiport" receiver. This committee is controlled by the TV set manufacturers, and controversy could arise if it decides that functions now provided by cable TV converters and satellite TV receiver should be incorporated into future TV sets. Future FCC Decisions The FCC is expected to decide on a single format for terrestrial TV broadcasting. It is not expected to leave the decision to the marketplace, as it did with AM stereo. But the FCC is hoping for industry consensus. Without consensus, a decision will be difficult. I am concerned that the FCC will not be able to make the hard decisions in a timely fashion. First, FCC staffing has decreased over the last five years. Staffing levels have fallen from 2200 to 1800, and could go below 1650 in the next year. Second, the FCC's staffing level for HDTV is distressingly slim. Only three or four staffers seem to be spending a significant part of their time on HDTV. This may pose no problem if the industry can reach a consensus on the hard issues, but it could be a disaster if there is no consensus. Third, FCC has not committed the resources needed to make an independent decision. It does not have the test equipment or laboratory space to independently test the hardware. And, it is not prepared to independently analyze the test data that the advisory committee will produce. Finally, the FCC has no contingency plan. Suppose the advisory committee, at the end of several years of deliberations, reaches the following conclusions: "Of the twenty or so systems tested, there are four that are superior. The four are equally good. We cannot reach a consensus on which should be the U.S. standard." Maybe this won't happen. And, if it does, maybe the four leading proponents will get together and devise a new format that is a synthesis of the best elements of each. But if no consensus can be reached, there are no procedures for forcing a synthesis. In this scenario, the result could be years of delay, coming from a combination of administrative indecision and court appeals. Manufacturers would not commit to produce any TV sets in any new format while this uncertainty lasted. Even if this disaster does not come to pass, there is another serious problem lurking--limited spectrum. There might not be quite enough spectrum to satisfy all current TV stations in all markets. The kind of problem that might then face the FCC can be illustrated by the following scenario: Suppose the advisory committee comes up with two formats that could be adopted. One requires a modest amount of additional spectrum, and it can be implemented at every existing TV station throughout the country. The second format provides better quality and a sharper picture, but requires more spectrum. This format can be implemented at every existing TV station throughout the country except in New York, Los Angeles and Chicago. In these three markets, there is only enough spectrum so that 75% of the TV stations can implement the new format. Which format should the FCC choose? Should they pick the lower quality format, and penalize viewers throughout most of the country, for the sake of a few TV stations in three cities? Or should they pick the better quality format, and then decide which TV stations in the three big cities will be deprived of the opportunity to convert to the new format? It seems likely that this kind of issue will arise. Spectrum is very scarce around the top five or ten cities, but more available everywhere else. That is a hard decision, and the FCC is not known for making hard decisions like this. Once again, the result could be years of delays caused by court appeals, particularly by any TV stations that think they will get a less desirable allocation than their competitors. What the FCC won't decide is the question of standards for satellite TV, cable TV or fiber distribution of video. These industry segments will have the freedom and flexibility to choose other formats. This is really not much different than today, where satellite TV uses FM modulation rather than AM and uses digital sound in the horizontal blanking interval rather than analog sound as a subcarrier on the video. However, it is important that all these video distribution services are able to use the same display device. That means that whatever formats are eventually adopted by the cable TV and satellite TV industries need to be "friendly" and interoperable with the terrestrial standard. HDTV Timetable It appears that sometime in 1992 is the earliest date when the FCC could make a decision on a new TV standard. Hardware testing starts in early 1990, and could last up to two years. The advisory committee will make a recommendation to the FCC in late 1991 or early 1992; an FCC decision might appear six months later, sometime in 1992. The first HDTV transmitters and receivers might be available in 1994. The Role of Congress The Congress has grabbed onto HDTV because it is very sexy--it gets great press coverage. But Congressmen have only the faintest understanding of the technical issues in the debate. They understand what a TV display is, because they can touch it. They do not understand the problems of broadcast transmission. The issue that they can handle is "competitiveness." How will U.S. companies be able to compete against foreign companies? And what impact will this have on U.S. jobs? In several Congressional hearings, witnesses have testified that participation in HDTV is crucial for the U.S. semiconductor industry. The semiconductor content of TV receivers will be higher in the future than today. And there will be spinoff products for the military, medical applications, air traffic control, and other industrial uses for HDTV. The Congress wants to help U.S. companies avoid the fate of the VCR. That technology was invented in the U.S., but is now dominated by Japanese and other Pacific rim countries. There are Congressional proposals in the talking stage calling for Federal funding of research and development, for tax incentives, and for changes to antitrust laws that would allow competitors to join together to manufacture TV sets. This is not another case of the U.S. vs. Japan, however. The largest market share for color TVs belongs to Thomson, the French company that bought the General Electric and RCA brands; Thomson has 22% of the market. Zenith is second with 12%. Philips, the European company that owns the Magnavox and Sylvania brands, is third with 10%, and Sony is fourth with 6%. All these companies manufacture in the U.S. TV receivers are different than VCRs. Only about 10% of the cost of TV receivers today is in the semiconductor components. Cabinets and picture tubes make up a large part of the cost of color TV sets. Shipping costs are high for these components. So foreign-owned companies have established U.S. manufacturing plants. A study done for the EIA concludes that 13 million HDTV receivers will be purchased in the United States in the year 2003, and 92 percent of them will be made in the U.S. The Congress is now starting to wrestle with this question: Should federal funding, tax breaks and other benefits be available only to U.S.-owned companies, or also to foreign-owned companies that have U.S. manufacturing plants and U.S. employees? Congress depends upon a consensus to make decisions, even more than the FCC. It is possible that a consensus will emerge, but there is certainly no consensus yet on what action to take. Any Congressional action will be limited to the area of display technology, not the problems of setting a transmission standard. How HDTV Will Affect TIA Members The manufacturers that make up the membership of the Telecommunications Industry Association come from diverse parts of the telecommunications industry. As such, some will be affected by HDTV, some not. Some will have new business opportunities, some may see opportunities pass them by. Land Mobile One industry already affected is the land mobile industry. Land mobile was poised to get access to unused UHF television spectrum, when the FCC put a freeze on spectrum sharing. Now, that spectrum sharing possibility is dead. But, land mobile might eventually turn out to be a winner. This possibility might happen if, for example, the Zenith format is chosen as the standard. The Zenith format fits the compressed HDTV signal into a six MHz channel that is incompatible with today's TV sets. This means that TV stations would have to simultaneously broadcast the new signal, as well as the old signal that is compatible with today's TVs. This simulcasting would only be needed for some transition period, say 15 to 20 years. At the end of the transition period, the FCC could decide to take away some of the TV spectrum now being used by TV stations and give it to land mobile. But this is a scenario with a 20-year horizon, so it does little to solve today's shortage of land mobile spectrum. Fiber Optics Fiber manufacturers and telephone companies think they have a stake in HDTV. The telephone companies assume that they will be delivering video to the home over optical fiber. Telcos have asked the FCC to require that next-generation TV receivers have a connector port for a fiber optic link. That won't happen. First, the FCC probably doesn't have legal authority in this area. Second, the consumer electronics industry objects to anything that adds unnecessary costs to its products. But most importantly, the HDTV formats that have been proposed are analog formats. They could be converted to digital signals, but they would require huge data rates, 500 Mb/s or more. That would be too expensive. A compression format would be needed for digital HDTV, but nobody has yet proposed such a format. It is premature to talk seriously about a digital fiber optic connector on TV receivers, until the industry agrees to a digital HDTV compression format. Actually, compressed digital HDTV might not be needed. Analog rather than digital transmission of video over fiber seems to be coming along quickly. The cable television industry plans to aggressively install fiber as a replacement for coaxial cable over the next decade. Cable industry plans call for analog transmission of video over fiber, not digital. Video is inherently an analog signal, and digital coding is not yet at the point where it is equally efficient. Even with personal computers, the latest video interface standard, known as VGA, consists of analog signals. The earlier digital interface standards have been abandoned, because they cannot reproduce video with enough colors and enough resolution in the same bandwidth. In Washington, everyone has a hidden agenda. The telco agenda is not that well hidden. The Bell Operating Companies' primary goal is to use the HDTV issue to help get out from under the Line of Business restrictions from the antitrust decision. Their secondary goal is to buy up the local cable companies, and eliminate a potential future competitor for telephone service. Finally, a lower priority is to bring fiber to every home. This will happen eventually, but it will happen faster if they can use cable TV service to share the costs. This is a battle between telephone and cable TV giants. Manufacturers of fiber optic systems should not allow themselves to get caught in the middle in this battle between the telephone industry and the cable TV industry. Satellite and Cable TV The satellite and cable industries are potentially the big winners in HDTV. They have more technical freedom and flexibility than broadcast television. They will have programming available, since pay TV programmers like HBO are likely to be among the first HDTV programmers. They don't have to wait for an FCC standard if they can reach agreement on an industry standard. The major technical question mark for cable TV is the effect on HDTV of the echoes and signal reflections in the cable. Cable TV systems have "close-in" echoes that produce ghosts that are very slightly separated from the actual image on the screen. The result is a softening of the picture sharpness that is usually not objectionable. It remains to be seen whether these ghosts will be a problem with HDTV signals. Even though it will not be required, the cable TV industry will probably use the same HDTV format as terrestrial broadcasters, because it simplifies their technical system design. Initial demonstrations of some Japanese equipment seem to indicate that HDTV signals can pass down a cable system without impairment. But much more testing under controlled conditions will be needed. Meanwhile, some cable operators are delaying their rebuilds until they know what performance specifications will support HDTV. This slowdown has had some effect on cable TV equipment manufacturers. At the same time, the apparent cable industry enthusiasm for analog fiber optics has created some important new marketplace opportunities for fiber optic manufacturers. The satellite industry will almost certainly not use the same format as terrestrial broadcasting, because virtually all the proposed formats contain quadrature signal components that are incompatible with FM modulation. In Europe and Japan, satellite TV is the only way that HDTV will be distributed. Consequently, there are satellite formats available for use fairly quickly. But satellite is not totally free to choose any format it wants. Consumers will not be willing to buy two different TV receivers. The satellite HDTV format will have to be closely related to the terrestrial TV format, in terms of scan lines and other parameters. In addition, the satellite TV industry includes some uncertainties. The recent failure of the HBO-GE partnership known as Crimson reflects this. Perhaps Hughes will launch a high power DBS satellite in the early 1990s, or perhaps the launch will be postponed. For now, however, the only satellite TV industry is the home dish market of 1-2 million subscribers. This is simply not a big enough business to become a leader in HDTV. In my opinion, both cable TV and satellite TV will be followers, rather than leaders, in switching to HDTV. The leader will be either terrestrial TV, or possibly pre-recorded media such as laser disks. The role of pre-recorded media in HDTV remains to be seen. Microwave The microwave industry is also affected to some extent by HDTV. TV broadcast stations are major users of microwave, both for portable links used for live news coverage and fixed microwave links between the TV station studio and the transmitter tower. When they buy new HDTV transmitters, they will have to buy new microwave links. In the same way that broadcasters will need more TV spectrum for HDTV broadcasting, they will also need more microwave spectrum. Unfortunately, the microwave spectrum doesn't seem to be available in most cities. The FCC has given very little thought to this aspect of HDTV. Perhaps the FCC can go to the Federal government and "borrow" some lightly-used government microwave spectrum for 20 or 30 years. Or perhaps this becomes an important new opportunity for the fiber optics industry. But it is a matter of concern that has not been given much attention. Conclusion The broadcasting industry used to be a stodgy, dull, mature industry. HDTV has changed all that. It has created excitement. There have probably been more advances in video technology, at least on paper, in the last two years than in the previous twenty. But for now just about everything is still on paper. The next three years will be even more exciting, as theory is translated into hardware, hardware is tested, test results are evaluated, and decisions are made. My hope is that three years is the right timetable for a decision, not five years or ten years. My hope is that the decisions will be easy, not hard. My hope is that the industry will reach a consensus, in spite of all the forces lined up to make that difficult. My hope is that HDTV will create tremendous new opportunities for manufacturers and at the same time give consumers the improved quality they want. Jeffrey Krauss Jeffrey Krauss holds a BS from the Illinois Institute of Technology and a PhD from Case Western Reserve University, both in physics. He is currently an independent consultant helping clients understand the impact of government regulations on new technologies. Dr. Krauss has worked at Bell Laboratories as a technical staff member for network analysis and operations research. At American Satellite Corporation he was responsible for the economic modelling of satellite networks. He held the position of assistant chief at the FCC's Office of Plans and Policy, working on the policy impact of new technologies. He was vice president of corporate affairs at M/A-COM, Inc., a telecommunications equipment manufacturer, representing the company before the FCC, Congress, and other government agencies on telecommunications policy matters. Dr. Krauss is a member of the FCC's Advanced Television Advisory Committee. He also is a member of the National Cable Television Association's Engineering Committee, and the Satellite Broadcast and Communication Association's Technical Committee. In addition, he is a member of the EIA's HDTV Subcommittee. HDTV: An Historical Perspective Corey P. Carbonara This article is the first in a series that will trace the technological development of high definition television. It will cover the first three of the following six major stages in this development: Stage I (1884-1930): Development of low definition televisionStage II (1924-1934): Search for higher definitionStage III (1934-1940): Development of HDTVStage IV (1937-1947): Standardization of HDTVStage V (1940-1967): Development and standardization of color HDTVStage VI (1970-1987): Development of advanced color HDTV The global television industry is facing the most crucial and dynamic stage in its evolution. New television technologies are changing the stakes in each facet of the industry, both domestically and worldwide. Newer distribution technologies--such as direct broadcast satellites (DBS), video cassette recorders (VCRs) and cable--are in heavy competition with over-the-air broadcasting for audiences of over 600 million television viewers worldwide. In the United States, the political and economic stakes have changed since the beginning of the development of television. The standardization and commercialization of new television technologies affect culture through social, political, economic, institutional, industrial, and aesthetic factors that influence the strategies and policies of both industry and government. Technological developments in television have brought new products and processes for manufacturers, broadcasters, and regulatory agencies. For example, looking specifically at economics, new technological developments in reception will change the stakes of that market. Advanced forms of television receivers capable of displaying higher definition pictures will probably be available as early as 1990 (according to Tom Keller, formerly of the National Association of Broadcasters). This could mean purchases from $20 billion to $30 billion a year of HDTV consumer equipment by 1995, predicts Dr. Bill Glenn, formerly of the New York Institute of Technology. HDTV HDTV is defined as a television system that differs from current television systems--such as the North American and Japanese NTSC System--in the following ways: five times the increase in visual information detail, 10 times the color information, more than double the horizontal and vertical resolution, substantial improvement in picture brightness, over a one-third increase in aspect ratio (from 4:3 to 5.33:3), and sound quality equivalent to digital compact disc audio. Although the term HDTV is now used to refer to a new development in television technology, the term "high definition" has historically been used to define a number of advances in television picture quality. It was not unusual to read in 1934 that high definition television would do many things for the lives of its viewers; in 1987 we read similar statements about HDTV. RCA first used the term "high definition television" in its 1934 Annual Report, identifying the role HDTV would play in the commercialization of television. Also in 1934, Vladimir Zworykin--a leading pioneer in the development of electronic television--defined the parameters for HDTV "regarding 240 scanning lines as a minimum." Overseas, a British engineering report from the Royal Television Committee in London offered a similar technical definition for HDTV. In this article, Zworykin's HDTV definition of 240 lines or greater will be used. Stage I (1884-1930) The Development of Low Definition Mechanical Scanning Systems Stage I defines a period in which the first electronic picture reproduction and distribution systems were developed. Included here are mosaic facsimile devices and the evolution of sequentially scanned rotating disk mechanical systems. The latter was patented by Paul Nipkow in 1884. The Nipkow Disc produced a picture with a definition of 18 lines and was based on Roget's theory of the "persistence of vision"--the phenomenon which also makes motion pictures appear to move. These systems were the low definition predecessors of true HDTV systems. However, any system which produced pictures of higher quality than its predecessor was considered "higher definition." Rapid improvements in resolution became evident as the number of scan lines increased with each new development. For example, Nipkow's 18 to 24 scan lines in 1884 led to 80 scan lines by RCA in 1929. Many efforts by key inventors led to technical improvements in television during this period: Nipkow, Weiller, Jenkins, Braun, D'Able, Rosing, and Campbell-Swinton, to name a few--which enabled S.C. Gilfillan to write about the electronic "home theater" in 1912, and allowed him to make predictions with confidence. During the 1920s the development of mechanical television reached a level where demonstrations of silhouettes were shown commercially. Two pioneers in the mechanical era, John Logie Baird (England) and Charles Francis Jenkins (U.S.A.), worked on systems almost at the same time. Jenkins, who was the first president of the Society of Motion Picture Engineers (predecessor of the SMPTE), demonstrated his first television device (called Radio Vision) in 1923, and went on to demonstrate it to the U.S. Navy in 1925. In the meantime, Baird continued to develop his mechanical systems in England and became the first inventor to offer a regular television broadcast service for the BBC on September 30, 1929. The service used a Baird system of 30 lines, 12 1/2 frames/second, on a frequency of five to 10 KHz, and lasted until 1936. Despite the concerns of certain inventors and the press, most of the rhetoric regarding the predictions for television attempted to tie the technology to goals of the highest social order--a typical categorical framework of argument for technological innovation. David Sarnoff, president of RCA and a leading promoter of television as a positive social influence, offered these predictions about television in a 1926 Saturday Evening Post article (reminiscent of his predictions for a Radio Music Box in 1916): The whole country will join in every national procession. The backwoodsman will be able to follow the play of expression on the face of a leading artist. Mothers will attend child welfare classes in their own homes. Workers may go to night school in the same way. A  scientist can demonstrate his latest discoveries to those in his profession. However, Sarnoff had to reassure radio and other media that they need not feel threatened. In 1928, Christmas shoppers in New York City were promised that television would not make radio obsolete. Sarnoff was echoed by William Paley, president of CBS, who stressed the entertainment potential of television as early as 1929: [I] visualize world series baseball games, automobile and horse races, transmitted the instant that they occur on supersized, natural color, stereoscopic screens. Perhaps Paley's interest in "supersized, color stereoscopic screens" was stimulated by the new alliance between CBS and Paramount in 1929. Paramount acquired 49 percent of CBS's stock in 1929--partly in response to the recent involvement of RCA in talking motion pictures through the creation of RKO Pictures and the RCA Phonophone sound process--although by 1932 Paley and associates would buy back the stock, allowing CBS to operate as an independent broadcast network. Support for television went beyond broadcaster and advertising interests and included the motion picture industry. It should be noted here that the picture quality of 35mm motion picture film was used as a benchmark of comparison with television throughout each stage of HDTV's evolution. In 1984, television historian John Freeman gave an excellent table of pioneering efforts in the evolution of television technology to the SMPTE. Joseph Udelson, media scholar, suggests that the mechanical scanning period for television became the prospect of low definition and its attempt to fulfill public expectations for the medium. However, Udelson also illustrates that despite continued development of mechanical systems, they failed both financially and as an entertainment medium due to the fact that the profit potential of television depended on its ability to attract large audiences. Entertainment programming was essential in order to attract large audiences and this enormous expense could only be supported by revenues from manufacturers and radio broadcasting networks. By the end of Stage I, television had greatly improved resolution from the Nipkow disk of 1884. RCA had incorporated a prototype 80-line electronic receiver by 1929, and in effect, set the agenda for the improved electronic systems prominent during Stage II. Predictions of the social effects of television were both positive and cautionary, further illustrating the prospects of television and popularity it gained as it attempted to fulfill public expectations. Stage II (1924-1934) The Search for Higher Definition The period between 1924-1934 saw the refinement of mechanical scan systems and the introduction of electronic scanning in television. In the earlier years of Stage II, small firms and amateurs were making substantial contributions to television's technological evolution. By the end of the period, large corporate efforts and their professional research and development programs became dominant--signifying the huge stakes of the corporate battle for standardization and commercialization of HDTV. In 1924, Dr. Herbert Ives, a Bell Laboratories engineer, received $250,000 to develop a mechanical long distance television system--later to be known as Bell's Picturephone in 1964--capable of two-way transmission and reception. By 1929, Ives refined his mechanical system to transmit color images and in 1930 doubled the resolution of the original 1924 device. By 1926, Dr. Ernst Alexanderson at General Electric had demonstrated a mechanical projection television device in motion picture theaters and also presented this system as a marketing tool for department stores. The years 1928-1933 comprised a minor boom in the evolution of television--despite the limitations of the mechanical system--leading to the rapid advances in engineering and programming that would later be employed by electronic HDTV systems developed in the 1930's. For example, in 1928, Bell Labs developed a more sensitive photocell--thereby reducing the light requirements in telecasting a location scene. However, despite the evolution of mechanically-based systems throughout Stage II (1924-1934), rapid development had also occurred in electronic scanning. Two pioneers in this field, Dr. Vladimir Zworykin and Philo Farnsworth, directed the development of all electronic high definition television systems. Zworykin began his work on electronic scanning in America at Westinghouse in the early 1920s. In 1923 he patented an electron beam television pickup device called the "iconoscope." In 1929 Zworykin demonstrated an all-electronic television receiver which he called the "kinescope." Farnsworth patented his electronic camera tube, called the "Image Dissector," in 1927, and in 1931 he invented a television receiver approaching the high definition requirements of 1934--240 scan lines or greater. By the 1930s, a transition was evident from the low definition mechanical television systems of the 20s to high definition electronic television systems of the 30s and beyond. A series of contextual factors resulted in this movement to HDTV, beyond the technical evolution of the medium. The capital expenditures for the development of television required vast sums of money which could only be properly supported by an infrastructure with the capacity for such an investment, such as major corporate ventures with firms like RCA, GE, or Bell Laboratories. Beyond capital, inventors like Farnsworth and Du Mont provided a substantial contribution to the development of commercial television and established their own successful companies in the industry. A large corporate investment was an absolute necessity for commercialization of HDTV, especially after the stock market crash of 1929. Large corporations did benefit from associations with sole inventors who were also major public figures (Bell, Edison, etc.) as well as allowing professional inventors within the corporation to become public figures, which is shown by the examples of Zworykin at RCA, Ives at Bell Laboratories, and Alexanderson at General Electric. Udelson posits that the radio industry provided television with a series of key factors that contributed to its development: 1) Mature development of radio manufacturing corporations; 2) Mature development of broadcast facilities that already understood the economics of broadcasting; and 3) Establishment of federal agencies and government regulations specifically developing broadcast communication policy. The major factors contributing to the development of television--financial, technical, regulatory, and programming--constitute its very formation as a complex industry. The prospect of television allowed radio manufacturers to consider other forms of diversification as well. As a by-product of its interest in television, RCA moved into the motion picture industry, with the creation of RKO Pictures and the development of RCA Phonophone--and into the phonograph industry through the merger with the Victor Talking Machine Company in 1929. Sarnoff's plan for RCA in 1929 was to acquire the rights to manufacture radio equipment, phonographs, and motion pictures, acquiring full ownership of NBC, RCA Phonophone, RCA Victor and 49% of GM Radio Corporation, as well as real estate, machinery, plants, and the research facilities of GE and Westinghouse. The government challenged Sarnoff's plan, with RCA fearing antitrust action by the Justice Department. RCA offered a compromise that would greatly affect the development of television: the creation in 1929 of a single television research organization at the Victor Talking Machine Company plant in Camden, New Jersey, combining the engineering staff of RCA, GE, and Westinghouse. Sarnoff was very optimistic about the impact of television and identified the year 1928 as its arrival as a true mass medium--about the same time many historians posit radio became a true commercial medium. Sarnoff predicted in 1928 that television would be "as much a part of our lives" as radio had become while also promising that television would not make radio obsolete. Orrin Dunlap, manager of RCA's Department of Information, posits that 1931 was a key year for experimentation in higher definition television systems, listing some of the numerous technical advancements accomplished during this time: 1) Television transmissions across the Atlantic; 2) Color television experiments showing the colors of the U.S. flag on a screen the size of a postage stamp; and 3) Increased definition of both mechanical and electronic systems. A 1931 New York Times article offered a more conservative estimate in predicting the arrival of television's commercialization--even with the prospect of higher definition electronic systems: Radio retailers are expecting a rich harvest to grow from the seeds of television now being planted . . . however, . . . the reaping may not begin in earnest for a year or more. During this period, Zenith Radio Corporation did not believe that advertising revenue alone could support the vast amount of production and programming costs of television, and in 1931 began exploring ways of developing a system of subscription television. By the end of Stage II, television had been transformed from the low definition efforts of independent inventors and their mechanical devices to the electronic high definition accomplishments of corporate programs--RCA, Philco, and Farnsworth leading the efforts--with large capital budgets dedicated to the development of all electronic HDTV. For example, in 1929, the formation of the RCA joint television research facility at the Victor plant in Camden, NJ, signified the tremendous effort launched by many corporations in the battle for television's full commercialization. Technically, television had evolved by 1933 to the 240 scan lines or greater that would come to signify HDTV. Other technical achievements included development of color systems by Bell Labs as early as 1929, theater television demonstrations by Baird in 1930, and the commercialization of television apparatus for live remote pickups by Marconi in 1933. Predictions of applications for some of the developments outlined above included remote broadcasting of television in sports coverage and an optimistic view by both the press and the industry for both the programming possibilities and the size of the potential audiences for such programs. Concerns about the social effects of television echoed those of Stage I--especially regarding advertising--with the FRC having offered a cautionary note on the tremendous potential influence television could have on society. Stage III (1934-1940) The Development of HDTV The period between 1934-1940 signified the development of high definition electronic television systems--those with 240 scan lines or greater. The period also was characterized by the struggle between large corporations to satisfy the demands of both the public and the government, as represented by the FCC, in order to allow the standardization and commercialization of HDTV to take place. By 1934, RCA concentrated on an all-electronic high definition television system of 243 lines utilizing interlaced scanning, an effective method used to reduce bandwidth and eliminate flickering effects by doubling the apparent picture rate. From 1934-1940, technical improvements to the resolution of HDTV brought line resolution rates as high as 605 (Philco). During this period, two electronic HDTV systems were adopted as recommended standards: a 405 line interlaced system at 25/50 Hz by EMI/Marconi of Great Britain in 1937, and a standards recommendation of a 441 line interlaced system at 30/60 Hz by the Radio Manufacturers of America in 1938. This period was also known for other achievements such as the development of radar by the BBC; the improved color transmissions of Bell Labs, CBS, RCA, and GE; and the utilization of television in retailing, education, sports coverage, and aviation. This period was also known for its heightened concern about the economics of television. For example, in 1939, Fortune Magazine emphasized that only large companies could develop HDTV due to the enormous expenses inherent in its development. Fortune pointed out that 441 lines of resolution in 1939 was about 50 times as clear at the resolution available in 1931. However, the article went on to say that television was still in a period of public testing and that profits could only become available when it became a volume business. Fortune recommended that both broadcasters and manufacturers needed to support each other to attract desired advertisers. However, in order to attract advertisers, one needed to have audiences, and audiences needed a supply of television sets with quality programming offered as an incentive to purchase them. The motion picture industry could have offered a quick and ample supply of feature films as programming; but Hollywood, according to Fortune in 1939, wavered between seeing television either as a market for the distribution of cinematic program material or a threatening rival for its share of audiences. However, between 1938 and 1939, Paramount Pictures bought a 50% interest in the Allen B. Du Mont Laboratories, a television manufacturing firm. Paramount enabled Du Mont to expand its research and development to the point where Du Mont entered into television broadcasting as well. Paramount also became interested in television broadcasting and through its association with Balaban and Katz, a motion picture exhibition company, obtained an experimental license for station W9XBBK in Chicago--later to become commercial station WBKB TV. Fortune Magazine posed a series of key questions in the 1939 articles that related directly to the commercialization of HDTV: 1) When will there be enough sets to warrant advertising? 2) When will there be enough stations in a network to warrant adequate coverage? 3) When will the FCC authorize commercial licenses? In 1939, Fortune also contended that 441 line resolution may not have adequate definition to measure up to the entertainment quality of motion picture images; the May, 1939 article illustrated how 441 lines have only about one-fourth the resolution of 35mm film. It is important to point out that current 1125 HDTV is comparable to 35mm projected film and as such can benefit enormously by the vast amount of high definition masters already available as 35mm film. Kingdom Tyler, a television engineer with CBS during this period, equated 441 lines to the resolution of eight or 16mm home movies; however, he advocated even higher definition, actually identifying a 1000 line HDTV device that was experimentally available in 1946 and much closer to the 35mm benchmark. For the U.S., television, by 1940, did not enter into a major commercial stage because the industry needed standardization to occur first. Resolution was only one issue that the FCC faced when it discussed the standardization and commercialization of an HDTV service. Flexibility for future improvements to the standard was also essential while keeping the price of receivers within a range affordable by the average American citizen. By 1939, the FCC Television Committee concluded that television had not entered the stage of development where the public could purchase receivers with the knowledge of a stable television service of excellent technical quality without too rapid an obsolescence factor: It (television) is still in the "experimental operation phase." This Committee considers that from the broadcast standpoint television is now barely emerging from the first or technical research stage of development. Consequently, extensive developments are yet to be  accomplished before the public can be informed that  television broadcasting is a dependable service, and that television receivers can be bought with the same assurances that go with the sale of an ordinary receiving set. By the end of Stage III, television had moved predominately to electronic high definition systems capable of far more resolution than 240 lines. Two adopted standards occurred during this period, the EMI/Marconi 405 line system and the RMA recommended standard of 441 lines, indicating the desire of large corporate manufacturers to push for the standardization and subsequent commercialization of television. Corporate financial commitments to television's development were presented to the public. The press realized these financial estimates as far too conservative and expressed additional concerns about the economics of television, this time focusing on how advertisers could foot the bill. Predictions were also offered by both the press and industry on how motion pictures could be a source of television programming that also envisioned the future relationship between the various media; the need for quality entertainment became paramount to television's success. The FCC played a major role in protecting the public against premature standardization and obsolescence of consumer equipment. Editor's Note: In the next issue of the Review, look for the second article in this series. Corey P. Carbonara Corey Carbonara holds BA and MA degrees from the University of Iowa, and a PhD from the University of Texas. He received his EEC from the Omega School of Communications. He is currently professor of telecommunication and new video technologies project director at Baylor University in Texas. He has held positions at Sony Broadcast Products Company, Caterpillar Tractor Company (video producer), and Columbia Pictures in Chicago. In addition, he has worked as a television producer for a United Nations project, and as an account representative for Motorola Communications. Dr. Carbonara has numerous professional productions to his credit. He has represented the U.S. as a technical consultant on State Department and other committees. He is vice chairman of the Systems Subcommittee (of the Taskforce on Subjective Assessment of Advanced Television Systems) for the FCC Advisory Committee for Advanced Television. He is a member of the U.S. Advanced Television Systems Committee, and of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE). He served as an HDTV technical consultant to the National Association of Broadcasters for its 1987, 1988 and 1989 conventions. He is a member of the International Television Association, the Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers, the Society of Broadcast Engineers, the American Society of Lighting Designers, the National Association of Broadcasters, and other professional groups. Dr. Carbonara has published articles in the IC/2 Working Paper, the Business of Film, Religious Broadcasting and the HDTV Newsletter. In addition, he has been a speaker on the subject of HDTV and other issues at conferences and conventions around the country. HDTV Transition Strategies: Three Scenarios Gregory L. DePriest Arthur C. Clarke once observed that man should explore space because we owe such a debt to it. He reasoned that it was the moon which initially drew life from the oceans onto land, an act that ultimately resulted in the existence of man. From this he concluded that only by yielding to the pull of space, by exploring it, could mankind continue its growth and evolution. Broadcasters see high definition television in much the same light. Unless we follow its pull and continue to evolve, we face the potential of stagnation and decline. The only real questions concern the route and timing of our journey. In this regard, I see three possible scenarios: First, we have the one-step approach: the simplest, least complicated strategy to achieve high definition. Broadcasters simply buy the necessary equipment and begin broadcasting a high definition service. Its advocates might call it the Neil Armstrong approach--one small step for broadcasters and one giant leap for video quality. Second, there is the two-step approach. In this case, broadcasters sidle up to high definition. First they improve their existing service, then they reach for the high definition goal. You might think of the two-step strategy as a manned mission to Mars with an intermediate stop at an orbiting space station. Third, we have the leap-frog approach. This scenario argues that we stay with our existing NTSC service until such time as we may leap past our international competition. In the short term, we improve our earthbound telescopes but we devote our major resources to the construction of a starship that travels at the speed of light. In this fashion we rocket past our competition to far more distant worlds while they collect lunar dust or tentatively explore the red planet. Following are some thoughts about these three approaches. Some advocates of the first approach suggest the use of an augmentation HDTV system for US broadcasters, retaining our reliance on our current NTSC system while enhancing it through the use of extra spectrum. Others suggest the simulcast approach--concentrating on the establishment of a new transmission service, similar to the creation of FM when only AM existed. The questions that arise are: Do we have the technological tools for this approach to succeed? And what makes proponents of this course more ready to take action than others? Those who support the two-step strategy suggest improving NTSC as an intermediate step before proceeding to HDTV--first, to widen the picture, and second, to provide the extra detail necessary for HDTV. The key question here is: Why take two steps if one will suffice? The leap-frog approach advocates continuing improvements to existing service (though perhaps not widening the screen) before taking a giant step to something called a process-digital transmission system, a state-of-the-art high definition delivery system. This approach depends upon further technological breakthroughs which by their nature are impossible to schedule. Apart from the crucial timing question, and the very real possibility that the right time may never occur for broadcasters, the question is: If broadcasters don't take action soon, don't they risk being left behind? Which is the "right" choice? Consider these points about each of the three options. The fuel for broadcasters' transition to high definition is spectrum. And if all goes well with the FCC, we may have enough for the journey. Yet one large difference in each of the three approaches is when that spectrum is used. Our one-step advocates would use it immediately. The two-step and leap-frog advocates stretch its use over an extended period. But just as there is competition among countries in the exploration of space, so too there is competition for spectrum in the U.S. This raises the question of when broadcasters must blast off to dissuade their competitors from doing so first. The three strategies appear to have different goals. The one-step advocates have the clearest goal, the surest path and an easily understood strategy. The two-step advocates have a definite intermediate goal, a less well-defined path, and a clever strategy. The leap-frog proponents, on the other hand, have perhaps the sexiest strategy and the least-defined goal. Thus in evaluating the three transition strategies it's really a question of evaluating the ability of technology to reach quite different and in some cases undefined goals. That's a very difficult task. One problem with undefined goals is that if you don't know where you're going, any path will take you there. Consider the impact of the different strategies on the standards-setting process. The one-step approach requires setting one standard, the two-step approach may require two standards, and the leap-frog approach guarantees none. Normally, broadcasters and equipment manufacturers prefer one standard, or at most a family of related standards. The two-step and leap-frog strategies seem to be in conflict with this desire. Gregory L. DePriest Gregory DePriest is vice president of the Association of Maximum Service Telecasters, Inc. MST is an association of approximately 270 U.S. local television stations created to protect the quality of the over-the-air broadcast signal. He is also vice chairman of the Planning Subcommittee of the FCC's Advisory Committee on Advanced Television and a member of the Frequency Management Advisory Committee of the Department of Commerce. Prior to joining MST, Mr. DePriest was employed by the FCC for 14 years in various policy-making positions in the land mobile, broadcast and spectrum management areas. He is a member of the executive committee of the Advanced Television Systems Committee, and a corresponding member of the International Broadcasting Convention. The Simulcast Strategy for HDTV Howard N. Miller In order to determine the most appropriate approach for terrestrial and cable broadcast of high definition television, each of us must draw some conclusions about what we want to achieve in terms of quality, how we can make the transition, and how other media are most likely to respond to our actions. While actual overall quality comparisons of the various systems will not be completed until late 1990, we believe they will line up approximately as shown here. At PBS we concluded that we must aim for the highest possible quality high definition broadcast service in order to remain competitive with other media in the long term. This conclusion was based on the judgement that improvements within the current NTSC channel alone would not provide a competitive high definition service. We believe that the existing NTSC channel must be augmented either by a second channel or by a simulcast channel to achieve the highest HDTV broadcast quality. It is therefore necessary to decide whether the best overall approach would be an augmentation channel or a simulcast service. Our preliminary conclusion at PBS is that simulcast should be preferable to augmentation when all the various factors are considered. This does not mean that PBS opposes NTSC improvements. On the contrary, we wish to encourage continuing improvements to NTSC. However, we view this interest as being separate from our high definition interests. PBS therefore endorsed simulcast as a preferred method for the equipment industry to explore in our response to the FCC notice of inquiry in November, 1988. There are a number of reasons for our interest in simulcast as compared to the augmentation approach, the most significant being its capability to offer some production independence even when broadcasting the same program as the NTSC channel. All NTSC-compatible and augmentation systems must broadcast the exact same scenes over both channels. The only possible flexibility in NTSC-compatible approaches is a limited pan and scan capability. This places severe constraints on production crews. They must choose between scenes which look good on NTSC receivers and scenes which look good on HDTV receivers. The poor resolution of NTSC leads directors to use many closeups and frequent scene changes. These limitations are probably most recognizable during sporting event coverage. You can't follow the ball in many overall shots. Similarly you can't follow all the actions during a closeup. Conversely, HDTV often works best with long-range wide-angle shots. Closeups are another matter. Anyone with a reasonable amount of production experience with HDTV recognizes that it is very unforgiving during closeups. Even the slightest set imperfections, make-up problems or facial blemishes become very obvious. Such problems are bound to increase production costs and closeups are, therefore, not likely to be used as often. Simulcasting could avoid many of the scene selection problems through the use of a new type of advanced NTSC output pan and scan device. Such a device could incorporate both vertical and horizontal scanning and nearly four power zoom capabilities as well. The NTSC picture could be a full 4:3 aspect ratio or letterbox closeup from a wide-angle HDTV shot at the discretion of the director. Broadcasters especially should not be shackled to the production limitations imposed by NTSC receivers if we are to successfully compete with the other media. They are not required to serve both HDTV and NTSC viewers with the same scenes or even the same programs. They can serve the HDTV market with unique programming which employs HDTV production techniques distinctly different from those used for the NTSC market. If we in broadcasting select an approach which cannot be tailored to the interests of the HDTV viewers, as well as to the NTSC viewers, we can be certain other media will use this against us. Another unique characteristic of simulcast is the high picture quality made possible within a single six MHz channel by eliminating the NTSC artifacts. Simulcast not only eliminates the errors in the NTSC format but it is also less susceptible to ghosts and other types of transmission interference typically associated with NTSC. Simulcast also offers some interesting economics as compared to augmentation. Since simulcast uses a six MHz HDTV channel just as NTSC does, much of the existing television plant and microwave systems can be used to route the encoded HDTV network feeds through the plant. Even new equipment should be less expensive so long as the video and audio are handled in an encoded form. Augmentation approaches, on the other hand, will most likely require new wide-band equipment even to route network feeds because of their higher encoded bandwidth. The transition should, therefore, be easier for many broadcasting stations to implement if simulcast is chosen. The simulcast signal format should provide a better broadcast signal to the homes in fringe areas. This is true because of the balanced carrier quadrature modulation and elimination of high energy timing and blanking signals. The yearly transmitter power costs for HDTV broadcasts by a UHF station should be less than $300. The NTSC transmission power costs represent a major burden for smaller UHF stations. Eventually, high-power NTSC transmission can end as people finally shift to HDTV sets or purchase down-converters to receive better quality NTSC programs. The combination of digital and analog technology as proposed by Zenith and MIT should enable better than 99% of the existing stations to be assigned a second channel. The few remaining problem locations (if any remain) will not be in major urban areas but rather at the intersecting points between major metropolitan areas. Such problems would not affect large numbers of people or major stations. Ultimately we can anticipate a time when most NTSC channels will be discontinued. When this happens, both the simulcast quality and coverage areas can be further improved by making use of the abandoned NTSC channel taboo zones. Because 50% of the American public receives television from cable, it is very important that the chosen system be cable-friendly. Simulcast also has some significant advantages for cable. First, it is very easy to encrypt. Second, since some premium channel programs will be distributed only in high definition, these programs will require less channel space than they would with augmentation. Many of the cable taboo, and presumably unusable high-end channels, will be useable by a simulcast system. Some of the capabilities also apply to VCR and satellite delivery. A six MHz simulcast channel requires less FM spectrum than a nine or 12 MHz augmented channel. In addition, there is a very simple conversion between AM and FM formats with simulcast. The balanced signal improves the delivered picture for these media just as for terrestrial broadcast and cable. An encrypted signal does not have to be unencrypted in order to be recorded. The signal could be unencrypted at the time of playback if desired. PBS has begun working with some equipment manufacturers to establish a gradual transition plan in which all PBS stations can participate. Each station could choose a level which is most appropriate to meet its own local competitive and economic situation. Portions of this strategy may also be applicable to small- and intermediate-sized commercial stations. We envision an approach whereby PBS would deliver both a high definition signal and a standard NTSC signal through the satellite distribution system. At the minimum cost level a station could use either the standard NTSC feed or add a small amount of electronics to down-convert the HDTV signal to an NTSC signal at the receiving dish. The latter approach would deliver a slightly better picture quality which could be further improved at the local station through gradual upgrades of some of the NTSC equipment. The second level option would allow the local station to broadcast the high definition signal from the satellite without having to upgrade its facilities to full HDTV baseband capabilities. The HDTV signal could be retained in its compressed encoded form, routed directly to the transmitter and transmitted via a new low-power high definition transmitter and antenna system. The same high definition signal from the satellite could also be down-converted to a standard NTSC signal for the NTSC transmission as an option. A new type of relatively low-cost high definition VTR could be added to enable sequential splicing of network program material with externally produced pre-recorded and encoded local commercials. Such a scheme would not allow local editing of the network high definition program material but local audio could probably be dubbed. A station might eventually decide to add a limited HDTV production system which could then be encoded as a six MHz upstream input to its station facilities rather than to rebuild the complete plant to handle 30 MHz baseband HDTV. The third level option would consist of the addition of full 30 MHz high definition production, recording and editing prior to encoding for transmission. This option would initially apply only to stations which intend to produce a substantial amount of their own HDTV programming. Any chosen scenario must consider the public interest as an issue of paramount importance. We must be very sensitive to receiver costs. While most of the circuitry and display costs will be similar for all approaches, an augmentation system requires two tuners and special signal timing coordination circuitry. It is inconceivable to think that VCRs would utilize a two-tuner input. The VCR industry would most likely make use of their own HDTV baseband inputs to provide a very high quality VCR picture rather than to make use of an inferior augmented NTSC type input. This could put both the broadcast and the cable industries at a quality disadvantage. Similarly, the public would most likely be confused and angry if we proceed in a way which results in several generations of high definition systems with differing levels of quality. Future receivers may be capable of showing better pictures than the first early models, but this should not serve as an excuse for us to offer a lower quality interim service than we are capable of providing. As mentioned above, there is nothing wrong with continuing to improve NTSC so long as these improvements are clearly understood by the public as a continuation of industry efforts to provide the highest-possible quality NTSC programming. Our HDTV efforts should be focused on a single full-quality step to HDTV which all media could agree upon. Simulcast appears to be a very good way to accomplish this. Howard N. Miller Howard Miller serves on the ATSC and represents PBS at the NAB HDTV Committee. He also represents PBS on the FCC Advisory Committee and participates in several of its working groups, including vice chair of WP-7 on consumer issues. He is vice chairman of the Advanced Television Test Center and a member of the ATTC Technical Committee. He is a member of the CATS board of directors and of the recently-established Broadcasters Caucus on Advanced Television. He is vice chairman of the Technical Committee for the North American National Broadcasters Association (NANBA), and served on the DARPA Blue Ribbon Panel on HDTV. Mr. Miller represented Westinghouse Broadcasting and Cable as a member of the ATSC Executive Committee for three years and served as a member of the ATSC/European Broadcast Union Liaison Committee. He also represented the United States for four years on the CCIR interim Working Party 11/6 which is working to establish parameters for a single worldwide HDTV studio production standard. He spent four years in Japan as the technical representative for Westinghouse Electric Corporation, including Group W's interest in HDTV. Issues in Planning for High-Definition Production James Hindman The second meeting of the Advisory Group on Creative Issues, established under the auspices of the Planning Sub-Committee of the FCC Advisory Committee on Advanced Television Service, was convened by Chair James Hindman on December 13, 1988, at the American Film Institute campus in Los Angeles, California. The Advisory Group was established in 1987 to assess and report on the views of the creative community regarding the development of advanced television in the United States. The group's first meeting concluded with a report submitted to the Planning Sub-Committee on April 5, 1988, that reflected its concerns relating specifically to the terrestrial transmission and distribution of advanced television signals. Recommendations contained in that report pertained to acceptable levels of quality of picture and sound reproduction and transmission, aspect ratio and compatibility. A summary of these recommendations is included at the conclusion of this paper. The Advisory Group's mandate for its second meeting was to address the issue of production standards for the creation and/or distribution of programming using high definition television technology. The following report represents the views expressed by the majority of members of the Advisory Group. The United States is the world's preeminent producer of motion pictures and television programs. This preeminence is the result of continued leadership in the development of these forms both technically and creatively. To maintain its leadership, the U.S. program-producing community must continue to provide programs characterized by the highest possible image and sound quality and advocate advanced technology that best serves program production and delivery to the public. As the leading international exporter of film and television programs, the American film and television industry depends on world-wide distribution of its products for a significant portion of its revenues. International program exchange is currently hampered by the existence of multiple broadcast formats (NTSC, PAL and SECAM). It is estimated that conversion of filmed programs into these broadcast formats today costs the industry or its customers over $7,500,000 annually. Should advanced television systems be developed in multiple formats, serious consequences could result for both the economic and creative spheres. The inevitable high cost of high definition television conversions, and additional costs related to distribution of multiple standards, would limit international program exchange while severely reducing the potential revenues from international markets. In addition, standard conversions would reduce the image quality of the programs, compromising the artistic integrity of the work. Therefore, this Advisory Group on Creative Issues urges that every effort be made to encourage the adoption of a single worldwide production standard by industry and government alike. It is critical that the American television production community begin now to meet the upcoming demand for high definition television programming. The growth of such productions is limited, however, by the lack of an established production standard in the United States. This lack of a standard inhibits the economies of scale necessary to the increased utilization of the technology, and thereby is retarding the development of high definition television production. Moreover, television producers working in NTSC are working in a format that may soon be obsolete, decreasing the shelf-life and therefore the value of their programs. The sooner a high definition standard is adopted in the United States, the sooner the American production community can begin moving into the future. In recommending a high definition television production standard for the United States that would meet the needs of the creative community and might also be utilized worldwide, the Advisory Group identified two areas of concern. Picture and Sound Quality Based on the Advisory Group's initial deliberations, we believe it is essential that any standard adopted for use in the United States provide program producers with the highest possible picture and sound quality to offset quality degradation inherent in post production processing and-in down-conversion to TV transmission formats. Picture quality must provide true high definition images, i.e., at least 1000 active lines of resolution. Acceptable sound quality is defined as comparable to that available on compact disc audio. In addition, at least four channels of digital sound should be available. Convertibility It is important that the standard utilized in the United States lend itself easily to successful conversions to all existing formats including NTSC, PAL, SECAM and 35mm. The 1125/60 high definition television system currently in use in the United States and around the world has the attributes detailed above. No other system has yet been demonstrated which has the characteristics of image quality and convertibility necessary to the successful production and distribution of American high definition television tape programming. It is therefore recommended that the United States adopt the 1125/60 system as its sole advanced television production standard and that this standard be adopted as soon as possible. It is further recommended that all parties involved in the development of advanced television technology work toward establishing this standard as the single worldwide production standard. Summary of Recommendations The Advisory Group on Creative Issues submits that only by adopting the best in advanced television transmission systems can the United States maintain its prominence in television program production and distribution. That system should: l) Provide image quality equal to that of 35mm film (no fewer than 1,000 active line resolution). 2) Reproduce sound quality equal to that available on compact audio disc. 3) Provide for the automatic control of color characteristics (color and hue) and for expanded contrast range and grey scale throughout the distribution chain to the viewer. 4) Enable creators to preserve the artistic integrity of works originated in other formats. When it is not possible for the creators themselves to direct the transfer, programs should be transmitted in the aspect ratio in which they were originally produced. 5) Be backward-compatible so that existing NTSC sets can receive programs but also possess enough technical headroom to adapt readily to advancing technology. James Hindman James Hindman, Deputy Director of The American Film Institute, has had more than 20 years of experience in the media and performing arts, both in the broadcast and in the academic communities. He is now responsible for the management and coordination of all national and international AFI programs, and represents the institution to its constituencies throughout the country. Mr. Hindman joined AFI in 1980 in Washington, D.C., and subsequently developed the Institute's activities in the areas of television, telecommunications and new technologies. He designed and inaugurated the annual National Video Festival, established in 1981, which is now the major international showcase for innovative video and television programs and travels the United States in the form of touring programs of selected works; in addition, he has developed international film and television exhibitions in France, India, Japan, Italy and elsewhere. Prior to joining AFI, Mr. Hindman was head of graduate studies in Performing Arts at American University in Washington, D.C., and an independent producer for public and cable television. An active writer on media, his published works include TV Acting: Camera Performance; BBC Acting Style; and numerous articles on television and theater. He holds a Ph.D. in drama from the University of Georgia. A New HDTV System for Transmitting Motion Pictures to Theaters by Satellite Richard M. Wolfe During 1984, Satcorp, Inc., a New York high-technology development company also involved in the distribution of entertainment programming to college campuses, began the design and installation of a series of satellite-delivered video-theaters (called VideoCenters) on the campuses of a number of American colleges and universities. The programming and operation of this project was undertaken by the Satcorp subsidiary, Campus Network (CN). CN is also in the business of distributing advertiser-supported entertainment programming by satellite to cable systems that are programmed by many colleges and universities across America. At present, about 370 such schools carry this new service, called National College Television (NCTV). This makes NCTV available in about 5.8 million U.S. homes and dormitories, where it reaches a potential audience of about 3 million college students in the 18-to-24 age range. In addition to the present use of cable TV, American universities have for many years shown 16mm films for student entertainment, generally during evening hours, for which they pay a licence fee. These films are the same feature film titles shown in commercial cinemas worldwide, but are usually provided to the campuses many months after the end of the first theatrical run of such pictures. The campus delivery of these features in HDTV video form by satellite, rather than by film, has recently become of interest for the distribution cost saving it would offer, the picture and sound quality improvement that could be achieved and to enable an earlier release time for such pictures. The availability of a campus-located video theater facility also provides the opportunity to present many forms of non-film commercial video originated programming, such as live music events, sports, and special programming specifically designed for student audiences. Such a facility provides, as well, a high-quality display location for the schools to show educational and teaching material by satellite or videotape during regular class hours. One of the primary problems with motion picture delivery by video has been the low picture quality attainable with NTSC transmission and display. Satcorp and CN have been working on an equipment solution to this problem and a way to meet the many entertainment and display needs of the modern American university. This concept has been a partnership approach in which CN supplies the equipment and programming and the school supplies the facility and its local operation. The CN VideoCenters The CN VideoCenter equipment package includes a high-quality satellite earth station, using a 3.7 meter Ku band dish, a special high-quality video projector and screen (of five-meter horizontal dimension) and a very high-quality four-channel, Dolby™ type, theatrical "surround sound" audio system. These VideoCenters are installed in auditoriums or rooms provided by the schools, generally located in the student center building directly on the campus. The earth station is usually located on the roof, or on the ground just outside the building. The indoor electronic package, including satellite receivers, video and audio processing equipment, HDTV interface, NTSC video recorder and monitoring and switching equipment is housed in a standard rack unit located in a nearby projection room or control room area. As of this time, 22 such centers have been constructed and are operational. The entertainment-oriented programming, satellite-delivered to these VideoCenters, consists of movies, live popular music concerts, and sporting events and some specialty programming, such as debates on matters of national controversy and other educational events. The transmissions usually occur two to three evenings per week, primarily on Fridays and Saturdays. An admission fee is charged at the door, scaled to match the quality or attraction of the event. The school provides the staff to operate the equipment, advertise the events and to collect and account for the admission charges. For administering this service, the school receives a portion of the admission fees collected. Presently, the video delivery format is traditional NTSC, usually with stereo audio, using Ku band satellite transmission. This NTSC is of the highest quality we can deliver and includes the use of the Faroudja NTSC/RGB decoder system. But, while NTSC is adequate for certain types of events, such as major attraction live popular music, it has been clear from the start that even excellent NTSC would not be commercially adequate for movies on a continuing basis. This is especially true when one realizes that most campuses have a number of commercial 35mm and 70mm cinemas nearby that would compete with CN VideoCenter (movie) presentations. While live and taped music programming of high audience attraction does occasionally occur, movies, both new and old, are available in very large numbers and must form the basic source of any consistent long-term theatrical entertainment schedule. The economics of licensed motion pictures, as compared with the cost of production of live music events, also make the use of movies quite attractive for theatrical video programming. It was therefore an early Satcorp decision to seek an improved capture, transmission and display format specifically optimized for the electronic delivery of motion pictures to the CN VideoCenters. The basic objective was to be able to deliver an image quality competitive with typical 35mm film projection. We also wanted to make use of digital audio transmission techniques, in order to have our theatrical audio comparable with the quality of the compact disc, and better than the competing quality of the optical film soundtrack reproduction found in regular film theaters. This new commercial video and audio HDTV delivery system concept was given the name THEATERVIDEO™. THEATERVIDEO™ Design Philosophy From the beginning, the detailed system design objectives included a picture as free from cross color, cross luminance and other picture artifacts as possible. The signal had to be easily transmittable in the American domestic Ku band, (11.7-12.2 GHz) over existing satellite transponders, with adequate signal to noise ratio and fade margin using receive dishes not larger than five meters in diameter. A wide screen aspect ratio, comparable to the 1.85 ratio typically used in the U.S. cinemas and the 1.66 ratio used in Europe, also was a requirement. Projector availability was a further consideration, since for school audiences the economics will not support display units of very high cost. Fortunately, we found that an image size of five meters wide by 2.7 meters high of sufficient brightness could be obtained with a unit of reasonable cost and quality. This image size was also adequate for most of the available school auditoriums and an audience size of up to about 250 people. The projector selected would also have to operate both in the NTSC format and in the display format selected for the proposed HDTV format on which our new design was to be based. An important design factor was that we could begin without a requirement for compatibility with any existing world format. Since this would be a privately operated closed circuit system, we were not concerned with satisfying the establishment of the CCIR or bending to the embedded politics of the world's electronic community. The factors we did consider were primarily technical and economic: the limitations of American Ku band satellite transmission, the use of existing and proven telecine equipment, the use of existing projection and monitor hardware, and the ability to modify existing videotape recorders to operate within our new standard's parameters. An objective was to use existing technology as much as possible. It was clear from the beginning that a 24-frame (or multiple thereof) repetition rate was the optimum choice when originating video from the continually growing 50 year inventory of available 24-frame film product. It was also obvious that a huge supply of NTSC equipment was available that could be used off-the-shelf if we used the NTSC horizontal line rate of 15.750 KHz. We therefore selected a 655 line 24-frame combination using this same line rate. In order to get additional vertical resolution and, because the popular and well evolved RANK CINTEL telecine conveniently operates using progressive scan, we elected to use this progressive scan format. Using the shoot and protect philosophy of Kerns Powers of RCA, we further selected an aspect ratio of 1.77:1, a reasonable compromise considering projector efficiency and existing theatrical ratios. Looking at satellite path limitations it was also clear that we should use a non-subcarrier type of transmission format and that about 12 MHz of baseband was as much as we should expect, if the dish size were to be held to reasonable limits with present Ku band satellite EIRP levels. A 12 MHz bandwidth would also just fit what could be recorded on one-inch videotape using a modified B-format recorder equipped with a new 12 MHz digital time base corrector. The choice of a time multiplexed analog component transmission scheme, incorporating four pulse code modulated audio channels within the 12 MHz bandwidth, also appeared to be the best composite format solution. Using a time compression ratio of 2:1 for luminance and 3:1 for chrominance required that the baseband video signal be eight MHz. The RANK CINTEL flying spot scanner (without the use of a Digiscan Unit) can quite easily produce an eight MHz, 655 line RGB signal suitable for our application. In order to display a 24-frame, 655 line, eight MHz RGB, progressive scan signal with no more flicker than one would traditionally see in a film cinema, it is necessary to scan convert the received signal up to 1310 lines 48 field interlaced (16 MHz) signal for projection. Such an image would be similar to the typical two-bladed shutter produced by most 35mm film projectors. This signal, with a horizontal line frequency of 31.469 KHz, is easily displayed by many of the three CRT type projectors presently on the market, especially those that are designed for data presentation. If the screen brightness is then kept equal to or less than the SMPTE cinema standard of 16 ft. Lamberts, tests showed that flicker would not be a problem. The CAT System Work began with a design team to incorporate these ideas into a practical set of hardware in August, 1984. As work proceeded on the project, we gave this signal format the name CAT, for Component Analog Transmission. An initial production prototype encoder, producing a 12 MHz composite signal, has now been constructed. A similar matching decoder, which will produce a 1310 line, 48 field, 16 MHz RGB signal, has also been constructed. Both units are operational and have been tested from RANK to screen using a specially modified Barco Data projector unit, as are presently installed in all of the campus VideoCenters. The CAT signal, viewed on a modified Asaca Shibasoku 26" HDTV monitor (normally used to view the 1125 line NHK system signal) has shown excellent results as well. Tests are also planned using the General Electric PJ-5155 Talaria light valve projector. The oil film used in this type of projection device should further reduce flicker with brighter images. The projected image is about as expected from the design. The video quality is subjectively similar to that from a typical 35mm print projected from a typical 35mm projector in an average film theater. There are very few artifacts and, since no bandwidth compression scheme is used, the resolution in the moving areas is not degraded with respect to the non-moving areas of the picture. The direct video monitor display clearly reveals the film grain structure and an overall quality very similar to the 1125 line NHK system when viewing film from a laser transferred film source, although there are no motion artifacts introduced by the video system and flicker is similar to a PAL display of the same brightness. In addition to the transmission of video and audio, the system is designed to enable all decoders to be addressable from the uplink location and provision has also been made to transmit computer data for scheduling and operational information to each downlink location. The system's four PCM digital audio channels can be used in a variety of ways. Four monaural signals, such as four simultaneous languages can be delivered, or two sets of stereo channels for each of two languages may also be supplied. In Hollywood, the studios that release films in Dolby theatrical "surround" stereo, using a matrix-encoded two-channel optical soundtrack (that is then decoded into left, center, right and surround channels in the theater), also usually have available a four-track magnetic production soundtrack version with discrete left, center, right and surround tracks. While the CN VideoCenter theaters do have Dolby type matrix sound decoders installed, the digital transmission of four discrete magnetic channels will give sound quality far in excess of the present two-channel matrix optical sound usually heard in most stereo theaters. The four-channel CAT audio system provides this capability. In order to record the 12 MHz CAT composite video/audio signal, work started early on the development of a 12 MHz digital time base corrector and a set of signal system modifications to be incorporated into the basic BOSCH BCN-41 video tape recorder. The tape speed of this machine, whose segmented scan format lends itself well to increased writing speed, has been doubled (14 IPS) from the usual (7 IPS) speed used for NTSC, PAL and SECAM. A pair of these special CAT adapted VTRs have been completed and will record and playback the CAT signal with quality similar to one-inch NTSC performance. With large reels, a continuous record/play time of just over one hour is possible with these VTRs. The first set of satellite tests have also been completed. Using the GE/RCA K series satellites, which have 54 MHz bandwidth transponders and regional beams of about 50 dBW, video signal-to-noise will typically be in the range of about 46 db (unweighted) and provide a fade margin of about eight to 10 db using dishes in the 3.7-5 meter sizes, as are presently installed at the CN VideoCenter locations. The CAT decoder occupies 10 1/2" of 19" rack space and the equipment at each of the VideoCenter campus locations is designed to have the CAT decoder conveniently interfaced to the existing hardware package. The special projectors presently in use are also configured to accept either 525/30 RGB (from the installed Faroudja NTSC/RGB decoder) or 1310/48 RGB from the CAT decoder. These special projectors are equipped with proprietary liquid-coupled eight-element all-glass HDTV lenses to greatly increase contrast and resolution, and were designed and built specifically for Satcorp by NORlTA/Tokyo for this application. In addition to using the CAT system for motion picture transmission in the 655 progressive capture/1310 interlaced display mode, the system is also configured to transmit video originated in 525/30/2 form. If the CAT encoder is fed with 525 line RGB signals of up to eight MHz bandwidth, the system will pass this signal in component form through the VTR and satellite link and it will be output by the decoder at the receive location in 1050 line 60 field interlaced form for display by the projector. This enables the system to be transparent to either CAT or NTSC type signals and provide enhanced bandwidth (eight MHz instead of 4.2 MHz) for 525 line originated material. The same transparency can also be incorporated using the combination 625/25/2 to 1250/50/2 and 655/1310 for use of the system in PAL/SECAM countries. At present, approximately 300 schools have been targeted as potential CN VideoCenter locations and audience reaction to the NTSC programming supplied to date has been most gratifying. Additional production encoder and decoder units are under construction and the installation of a complete film-to-HDTV tape transfer laboratory has been almost completed at the Satcorp technical offices in Burbank, California. A CAT configured Ku band satellite uplink facility at this same location is also contemplated for the future. Richard M. Wolfe Richard Wolfe is president of Hi-Vision America, Inc., an HDTV consulting firm in Los Angeles. For the past four years he has been vice president of technology for the New York-based Satcorp, Inc. at their Burbank laboratory, where he has been responsible for the design and installation of satellite-delivered video theaters for college campuses. He has also headed a research and development team for Satcorp's Campus Network system. Mr. Wolfe was vice president of engineering and video technology for 20th Century Fox between 1981 and 1984. He was responsible for film-to-tape transfer of all Fox film products, and for all home video, pay-TV and satellite technical operations. In 1980-81 Mr. Wolfe was vice president of operations and engineering for Premiere, the national satellite delivered pay-TV service. From 1971 to 1979 he was president of two commercial VHF TV stations and two commercial radio stations. Mr. Wolfe holds a BSEE from Ohio State University and an MBA from the Harvard Business School. He also holds a first class operators licence from the FCC and is a member of the SMPTE HDTV working group, the ATSC, the IEEE and the AES. He is vice chairman of the Engineering Committee of the Association of Maximum Service Telecasters, and chairman of the Production Economics Task Force of the FCC Advisory Committee on Advanced Television Services.