Josef Marc of Archimedia Technology gave a presentation that resonates well with me – and perhaps with the audience. He espoused that the way we talk about image quality and control its attributes are not very intuitive for the consumer and is inconsistent. Plus, he asked if consumers want more control over the image or less, relying on trusted brands to deliver the best picture and audio quality.
The user interface on many TVs today is full of terms that can be confusing and don’t relate to the desires of the consumer. In his paper, he asked: “How do you make the picture look more appropriate to the kind of story the video is telling, or the event it’s portraying? Or look more like the period when the story or event is supposed to be occurring, or as the director intended, or even like your favorite celebrity or critic thinks it should look?”
Should consumers have complete control of the image, a limited set of parameters to adjust or should the brands determine the correct parameters for a given viewing environment? These are open questions.
Marc then suggested some options to consider that included definitions for complex modeling (profiles like “director’s look” or “cinema look”), spatial resolution (full screen or original), color gamut (SD, HD, UHD or standard, wide or expanded), Frame rate (smooth, original, optimized), Progressive/Interlaced (normal, original), Sound (profiles), Dynamic Range (HDR, branded HDR, simulated HDR, Off).
The notion of “Broadcast Quality” must be redefined in this new era, and developing a common language is a key part.
