NEWSGATHERING TRANSMISSION TECHNIQUES. Ennes Workshop Miami, FL March 8, 2013 Kevin Dennis Regional Sales Manager

Transcription

1

2 NEWSGATHERING TRANSMISSION TECHNIQUES Ennes Workshop Miami, FL March 8, 2013 Kevin Dennis Regional Sales Manager 2

3 Vislink is Built on a Firm Foundation 3

4 Presentation Outline Advancements in video encoding technology H.264 versus MPEG-2 Advancements in licensed microwave technology Implementing HD/SD H.264 encoding Modulation, FEC, high power Linear Amps Advancements in bandwidth capacity of public access networks (Cellular and Wi-Fi) 3G, 4G, LTE, WiMax HD/SD Bonded Cellular Video Transmission Comparison of strengths and weaknesses of licensed microwave transmission versus public network transmissions

5 Newsgathering Transmission Techniques Advancements in video encoding technology Advancements in licensed microwave technology Advancements in bandwidth capacity of public access networks (Cellular and Wi-Fi) Comparison of strengths and weaknesses of licensed microwave transmission versus public network transmissions

6 H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC / Part10) versus MPEG-2 H.264/MPEG-4 AVC is a block-oriented motion-compensation based codec standard First version of the standard was completed in 2003 H.264 video compression is significantly more efficient than MPEG-2 encoding providing two-fold improvement as compared to MPEG-2 H.264 HD encoding not excessively expensive to implement as compared to first MPEG-2 encoders

7 H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC) vs. MPEG-2 H.264 is approximately twice as efficient as MPEG-2 Video quality comparison of H.264 (solid blue line with squares) and MPEG-2 (dotted red line with circles) as a function of bit rate compared to 100 Mbps source material.

8 H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC) vs. MPEG-2 Low Motion Video -there is very little video quality difference between H.264 and MPEG-2 Video Images posted by Jan Ozer, Video Technology Instructor

9 H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC) vs. MPEG-2 High Motion Video -H.264 retains image continuity while MPEG-2 becomes blocky Video Images posted by Jan Ozer, Video Technology Instructor

10 H.264 AVC versus MPEG-2 HD Encoding Features MPEG Mbps Good HD picture quality from as little as 12Mbps (MPEG-2) Contribution quality at ~18Mbps Low Latency ~42mS (decoder dependent) H.264 (AVC) Good HD picture quality from as little as 5Mbps (H.264) Contribution quality at ~10Mbps Low Latency ~300mS (encoder and decoder dependent)

11 Newsgathering Transmission Techniques Advancements in video encoding technology Advancements in licensed microwave technology Advancements in bandwidth capacity of public access networks (Cellular and Wi-Fi) Comparison of strengths and weaknesses of licensed microwave transmission versus public network transmissions

12 Digital ENG Contribution Techniques Microwave Transmit Systems o Mobile (truck/van, SNG/ENG) o Portable (tripod or airborne) o Wireless Camera

13 High-Definition H.264 (AVC) H.264 (MPEG-4 Part 10) Video compression standard is a two-fold improvement in efficiency compared with MPEG-2 Able to transmit high-definition video at low bit rates using DVB-T (COFDM) with greater range and reliability than systems using HD MPEG-2 compression Video Quality H.264 is well suited for the real world of ENG Newsgathering from mobile platforms in multipath rich environments. Video quality comparison of H.264 (solid blue line with squares) and MPEG-2 (dotted red line with circles) as a function of bit rate compared to 100 Mbps source material.

14 DVB-T (COFDM) Bandwidth 1/4 Guard 1/8 Guard 1/16 Guard 1/32 Guard Code Rate QPSK 16 QAM 64 QAM QPSK 16 QAM 64 QAM QPSK 16 QAM 64 QAM QPSK 16 QAM 64 QAM 1/ / / / / Note: Payload data throughput is scaled down by 1/4 for 6 MHz bandwidth systems and by 7/8 for 7 MHz systems

15 COFDM System Numbers - 2 GHz Mode Pout LabThreshold QPSK 1/2 +38 dbm QPSK 3/4 +38 dbm dbm dbm 16 QAM 1/2 +36 dbm dbm 16 QAM 3/4 +36 dbm dbm 64 QAM 1/2 +33 dbm dbm 64 QAM 3/ dbm dbm

16 RF Advancements and Improvements Existing 5W Digital power amplifiers can be replaced with ultra-linear 10W Digital power amps Provides 3dB additional system gain Higher MER performance Pre-Distortion correction for wireless camera systems Internal feedback circuit to further linearize RF spectral mask

17 LMS-T Advanced Modulation Link Research designed modulation Derivative of DVB-T 9.4MHz spectrum (c.f. 7.61MHz of 8MHz DVB-T) LDPC error correction scheme Overall LMS-T has 65% more throughput than DVB-T (COFDM) and has more robust RF performance Ideal for HD Wireless Camera systems Ultra-Low Latency ~20mS

18 Newsgathering Transmission Techniques Advancements in video encoding technology Advancements in licensed microwave technology Advancements in bandwidth capacity of public access networks (Cellular and Wi-Fi) Comparison of strengths and weaknesses of licensed microwave transmission versus public network transmissions

19 Advancements in Public Access Networks 3G Third Generation Upload speeds ~ 500 Kbps 1.4 Mbps 4G Fourth Generation Upload speeds ~ 1-6 Mbps LTE Long Term Evolution Upload speeds ~ 5 7 Mbps WiFi wireless local area network Speeds ~ Kbps WiMAX - Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access Speeds ~ 1 4 Mbps

20 Advancements in Public Access Networks 3G Third Generation Upload speeds ~ Kbps 4G Fourth Generation Upload speeds ~ 1-5 Mbps LTE Long Term Evolution Upload speeds ~ 8 Mbps WiFi wireless local area network Speeds ~ Kbps WiMAX - Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access Speeds ~ 1 4 Mbps

21 Bonded Cellular Transmission Uses H.264 HD/SD Adaptive Bit Rate (ABR) Encoding to transmit live video via public access networks over the internet Simultaneously aggregates available bandwidth from multiple cellular network connections creates a single virtual high-speed bandwidth connection Multiple cellular providers bonded together improves network upload speeds improves network connection persistence Can be implemented with various service provider s modems 3G, 4G, LTE, WiFi ABR dynamically adjusts the encoder s video data rate (typ. Mbps) adapting to the fluctuations characteristic of cellular networks

22 Cellular Video Transmission Workflow Diagram

23 Live Portable Cellular Video Transmission Systems Live HD/SD almost anywhere, almost any time 3G/4G LTE Bonded Cellular Modems H.264 (AVC) HD/SD Encoding Dynamic Bandwidth Optimization WiFi Reception and Transmission Support for multiple camera interfaces Support for file transfer IFB comms Wireless Edge Device Remote Control IP Termination Receiver 23

24 Newsgathering Transmission Techniques Advancements in video encoding technology Advancements in licensed microwave technology Advancements in bandwidth capacity of public access networks (Cellular and Wi-Fi) Comparison of strengths and weaknesses of licensed microwave transmission versus public network transmissions

25 Advantages & Limitations of Legacy Newsgathering Terrestrial ENG Advantages High bandwidth (Fat Pipe) at minimal OPEX Rapid deployment Wide coverage area Dependable/Reliable Disadvantages Requires skilled operators Requires heavyweight vehicles Leased receive sites are expensive One-way transmissions Advantages Digital SNG Unlimited coverage area Worldwide spectrum access Single to multiple distribution points Disadvantages Requires very costly vehicles Must pay recurring satellite usage fees Requires skilled operators Advantages Diversity WCS Very rapid deployment No expensive vehicles Good coverage indoors and across densely populated city centers Best option for moving event coverage Disadvantages Limited coverage area Camera battery powered Must own or lease receive sites

26 HD/ SD Newsgathering via Bonded 3G / 4G Networks HD SDI NLE 3G/4G Bonded Ideal for spot story coverage and fill-in content Advantages Story acquisition without spectrum licenses, expensive vehicles or costly infrastructure One button operation Dispatch non-technical trained Journalists / Freelancers But No coverage guarantees 3G/4G bandwidth is limited and asymmetrical latency can be several seconds Civil authorities may override Cellular congestion

27 Cellular Video Transmission vs. Licensed Microwave CONS PROS Variable data rate availability vs. Fixed data throughput Unpredictable signal strength vs. Relatively stable receive carrier level (RSL) Unknown network availability vs. Pre-determined frequency coordination Eminent domain black-outs vs. Secure specific user spectrum allocation Limited to Network accessibility vs. Controlled portable deployment (ENG/SNG) PROS CONS Lower Capex/Opex vs. Higher Capex and complex/costly infrastructure support Immediate venue accessibility vs. Inexperienced technical operators vs. Scheduled venue event coordination Experienced ENG/SNG operators Portable system design (hand-carry) vs. Larger hardware infrastructure

28 Summary H.264 (AVC) HD/SD Encoding Very efficient encoding roughly half the bandwidth required for same picture quality as MPEG-2 Advancements in Licensed Microwave Use of H.264 encoding provides high quality, robust RF transmission/reception Strive for higher linearity RF components / higher system gain Advancements in Public Access Networks Bandwidth and speeds are ever increasing Bonded Cellular video transmission Another tool for ENG and OB applications Dependent upon cellular coverage and infrastructure utilization

29 Where can I see these new solutions in action? Please visit the VISLINK Booth at NAB 2013 to see the Broadcast Industries most versatile solutions to suit any application. We deliver HD quality video anytime, anywhere! Booth C

30 Questions? Thank You! Kevin Dennis Regional Sales Manager