SKY 3D and HDMI 1.4

[admin_exported]

I`m trying to make sense of the following:

SKY has supplied me with an Amstrad DRX890 HD+ box which has a HDMI specification of HDMI 1.1 Type A (this I know from the spec in the supplied manual) and they have also confirmed these latest boxes will be suitable for their 3D broadcast content.

3D broadcast transmissions from SKY will be in 1080i format, so HDMI 1.1 Type A is presumably ok for that format.

A few days ago I came across this article:

BSkyB 3D technical specification | Sky 3D - a new dimenstion in Sky+HD | Sky

Scroll down the webpage to where it says, "Stereoscopic Image Encoding (Image Multiplexing)" and the third item reads:

•As detailed in HDMI 1.4 Annex H – 3D Video Format Extensions (3D_structure = 1000, 3D_Ext_data = 0000)

I may be missing something here, but it seems to me, that SKY are informing broadcasters of proposals in relation to technical requirements for 3D, while at the same time producing equipment that doesn`t have the hardware to support it.

I appreciate these are guidelines only, but isn`t it best to practice what you preach?

http://i798.photobucket.com/albums/y.../SKY/HDMI2.png

 

[Andrew Everard]

Yes, Sky will be using the side-by-side technology, which can be handled as a standard 1080i frame, and delivered by existing Sky+HD boxes to suitable TV/glasses combinations.

Beyond that, not terribly sure what point you're trying to make...

 

[Anonymous]

I guess I just find it incredibly hard to believe that Sky are still using HDMI 1.1 that evolved back in 2004 and with 6 years having passed, there is no sign of change from that.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Why not? The formats it broadcasts don't require any more, and keeping the HDMI spec low on the upgrade foodchain gives the greatest possible compatibility

 

[Anonymous]

Andrew Everard:Why not? The formats it broadcasts don't require any more, and keeping the HDMI spec low on the upgrade foodchain gives the greatest possible compatibility

Personally, I would rather have the option of outputting DD 5.1 over HDMI than either an opttical or coax link, especially when coupling up to an HDMI AV amp.

Perhaps I am in a minority group, but as another 6 years passes by, and we reach 2016, would you still be asking, "why not?"

 

[Anonymous]

Alavana:I guess I just find it incredibly hard to believe that Sky are still using HDMI 1.1 that evolved back in 2004 and with 6 years having passed, there is no sign of change from that.thats a strange signiture you have there

 

[daveh75]

Inaccurate too!

 

[Anonymous]

 

[Andrew Everard]

Alavana:Personally, I would rather have the option of outputting DD 5.1 over HDMI than either an opttical or coax link, especially when coupling up to an HDMI AV amp.
As would we all, but that has nothing to do with the HDMI version the company's hardware uses.

 

[Anonymous]

maxflinn:Alavana:I guess I just find it incredibly hard to believe that Sky are still using HDMI 1.1 that evolved back in 2004 and with 6 years having passed, there is no sign of change from that.thats a strange signiture you have there

Sky doesn`t publish this information and I didn`t discover it until I made a phone call to the technical department.
I couldn`t find out why it wasn`t giving me Dolby digital 5.1 via HDMI, not even in the troubleshooting section of the manual for the Amstrad DRX890.

It may be obvious to some and not so obvious to others.

It`s freedom of information.

 

[Andrew Everard]

You mean you didn't discover what is common knowledge, and mentioned in these forums almost daily, until you called the technical department?

 

[Anonymous]

Andrew Everard:

You mean you didn't discover what is common knowledge, and mentioned in these forums almost daily, until you called the technical department?

To be fair, I do tend to consult the manual, especially as it is written for that purpose.

 

[daveh75]

Alavana:
maxflinn:Alavana:I guess I just find it incredibly hard to believe that Sky are still using HDMI 1.1 that evolved back in 2004 and with 6 years having passed, there is no sign of change from that.thats a strange signiture you have there

Sky doesn`t publish this information and I didn`t discover it until I made a phone call to the technical department.
I couldn`t find out why it wasn`t giving me Dolby digital 5.1 via HDMI, not even in the troubleshooting section of the manual for the Amstrad DRX890.

It may be obvious to some and not so obvious to others.

It`s freedom of information.

And still inaccurate...

 

[Anonymous]

daveh75:Alavana:

maxflinn:Alavana:I guess I just find it incredibly hard to believe that Sky are still using HDMI 1.1 that evolved back in 2004 and with 6 years having passed, there is no sign of change from that.thats a strange signiture you have there

Sky doesn`t publish this information and I didn`t discover it until I made a phone call to the technical department.
I couldn`t find out why it wasn`t giving me Dolby digital 5.1 via HDMI, not even in the troubleshooting section of the manual for the Amstrad DRX890.

It may be obvious to some and not so obvious to others.

It`s freedom of information.

And still inaccurate...

Can you please provide proof when HDMI 1.1 Type A was established.
My research has taken me to MAY 2004. This is the format that SKY is using!

It`s all well and good to say it`s inaccurate, but please, at least give me some information to support your claim.

 

[daveh75]

I'm not disputing when the HDMI 1.1 spec was established!

But given SkyHD didn't officially launch till may 06, i personnally think your signature misleading...

 

[Anonymous]

daveh75:

I'm not disputing when the HDMI 1.1 spec was established!

But given SkyHD didn't officially launch till may 06, i personnally think your signature misleading...

It`s deliberately open to misinterpretation. It`s one of those comments that can be read and taken how "you" see it to be.

However, the fact remains, and as you say, HD kicked in, in 2006 and SKY chooses to go with 2004 version.

 

[Andrew Everard]

I was confused at the beginning of this thread as to what its purpose was, and I fear I am none the wiser now...

 

[Anonymous]

I am confused over the details surrounding Sky`s technical proposals to broadcasters (3D) that relates to the HDMI 1.4 spec when Sky only support HDMI 1.1.

I fail to understand the link between the two.

 

[Anonymous]

I think the assumption you're making here is that 1.1 was not capable of 3D. This is not necessarily true.

1.4a only "mandates the support of 'top-and-bottom' and 'side-by-side' modes for broadcasting the picture data that will be present to each eye, thus creating the illusion of 3D" and doesn't actually say this is a new feature to the cable or connector, more an introduction of a specification to ensure it works.

As many people have said before, just because a cable was made 6 years ago 1.1 standards does not mean it didn't exceed those standards and hence is actually already capable of 1.3b standards. Indeed the only significant change in 1.4a is that there are additional cables for audio return and ethernet. These are obviously things that the 1.1 cable will never be able to achieve, but the speed of carrying the signal is all down to the quality of the cable and if the cable design exceeded the minimum specs of 1.1 then it would feasibly already support a 1.4a connection with 3D, albeit without the audio return and ethernet functions.

All that said, there is feasibly no reason why Sky can't upgrade the firmware on you're Sky+HD box, converting you're so called 1.1 connector into a 1.3 or 1.4 connector as long as it supports the speeds and connections required. It's a specification and the actual connector does not largely vary in design.

 

[Anonymous]

Excellent, very informative. Hadn`t realised that HDMI could be advanced by a firmware upgrade.

That`s very interesting, thanks.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't see why not, the shape of the connector hasn't changed over the years, neither has the number of connected pins until 1.4.

The main variance on HDMI ability is the speed, hence why from 1.4 they're stipulating Standard Speed, High Speed etc etc.

Think of it more like USB really and is generally all down to the firmware on how that connection is used.