iTunes re-encodings

I just installed the new iTunes version and with great satisfaction I saw that all episodes of newer TV series are now in 720 format: 1280×720 at 24fps (I won’t say 720p, because “progressive” correlates to 60 fps). Anyways, so far, so good.

But while I was browsing the catalog, I saw that the older TV series, like ‘Star Trek: Voyager’, have been resized too, but in an unfortunate way. Now, all 4:3 shows are 1280×960 instead of a more standard definition resolution. This is a waste of cpu cycles (my 3 GHz PC struggles with it), a waste of bandwidth, and a waste of screen space for no good reason. I would have much preferred the older 4:3 videos to be something more normal, like 640×480 or something, or 800×600 if AppleTV can upscale them. But 1280×960 for some shows that were even shot on video instead of film? This resolution brings nothing, it requires more cpu speed than a real widescreen video, and given that these are 10-year old shows, it amounts to ridiculous requirements! I have a 1680×1050 monitor, and I still find these videos ridiculously big.

9 Comments »

mikesum32 wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 2:08 AM PST:

Progressive means “not interlaced.” It can be progressive at any frames per second, or interlaced at any frames per second.


This is the admin speaking...
Eugenia wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 2:12 AM PST:

Regardless, true 720p is supposed to be 60fps, so for lack of better word, I just call it 720. Or I should call it 720p-24.


mikesum32 wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 3:03 AM PST:

In NTSC it’s 60 interlaced fields per second, or 30 progressive fps. Film is historically 24 fps, if it was more than that it would take up much more room. So I’m right and you’re wrong. :-P


This is the admin speaking...
Eugenia wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 3:17 AM PST:

Mike, I gave you the URLs the other day on the other thread. Progressive in HD is 60fps, deal with it. It has nothing to do with NTSC or PAL. I am astonished that you still write the same thing.


mikesum32 wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 4:00 AM PST:

No, it isn’t and you sound like a brain-washed zombie repeating the same thing over and over again. “The Earth is flat !” Is it that had to admit your wrong ? Everyone else is wrong at times. I’m wrong, you’re wrong, so what ? No one is perfect.

Check wikipedia

“Both Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD allow coded video framerates of 24p and 50i/60i. HD DVD additionally allows framerates of 25p and 30p.”

Film is 24p and progressive ntsc video is about 30p. So a camera can record 60p, so what ? Nothing is broadcast or sold that way. So unless you record it yourself, or get a copy of the master tapes, you don’t need to worry about 60p.

720p can also be recorded at 24p fps and 30p fps.

So tv is 30p, film is 24p, and HD-DVD and Blu-ray are 24p, 25p or 30p.

Granted, 60p is probably better, but the infrastructure isn’t there.


This is the admin speaking...
Eugenia wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 5:21 AM PST:

According to this, 720p can be 60 fps. The fact that Bluray/HDDVD might not do it just because of legacy reasons doesn’t mean that the spec does not say so or that the TV can’t do it. All it’s needed is a TV channel with 60fps footage (and depending how broadcasting is done, maybe a 60fps-capable cable box too). HDTVs *can* do it.

So, let’s agree to disagree — you don’t have to call me names. My blog post was about the 4:3 videos on iTunes anyway.


mikesum32 wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 6:02 AM PST:

In fact I compared you to a zombie, I didn’t actually call you one.

Looks like I win again. :-p


This is the admin speaking...
Eugenia wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 11:40 AM PST:

I asked JBQ (who has worked with video), and he says 24fps is 720-24p, but he also maintains that “true” 720p is 60fps.


Gianluca wrote on June 2nd, 2007 at 9:09 AM PST:

720p can be 60 fps, but using 24 frames do not make the format a ‘non-720p’. The 720p standard support 24, 25, 30, 50, 60 fps.


Comments are closed as this blog post is now archived.

Lines, paragraphs break automatically. HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

The URI to TrackBack this blog entry is this. And here is the RSS 2.0 for comments on this post.