Talk:Digital video
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Digital video article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tuo98683 (article contribs).
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit] This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2021 and 2 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Templefrogs.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
A "fact" about PIXELs ?
[edit]I'd suggest it is untrue to state that pixels "have only one property - their colour". Surely, their shape is also a property - an important one in that non-square pixels are an essential determinant of the aspect ratio? Johncurrandavis (talk) 10:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have removed this unnecessary statement. ~Kvng (talk) 17:39, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Unit of W and H
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
In the section, "Overview of basic properties", it is stated that the units of W and H are pixels. Another statement that could be made is that W is in units of pixels/line and H is in units of lines/frame. If W is 480 pixels/line and H is 640 lines/frame it follows that
- .
On the other hand if you use pixels as units for W and H, you get the rather meaningless units of pixels square for pixels per frame. RHB100 (talk) 21:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Towards an amendment...
[edit]In order to amend the untrue "fact" I allude to above, perhaps something along the lines of the following will be considered acceptable?..
Digital video comprises a series of orthogonal bitmap digital images displayed in rapid succession at a constant rate. In the context of video, these images are called frames. The rate at which frames are displayed is enumerated in frames-per-second (FPS).
Since each frame is an orthogonal bitmap digital image, it comprises a raster of pixels (short for "picture elements"), areas of the image meant to be too small to be perceived individually, but which determine the colour and brightness information of the whole image. Pixels have two properties: colour and dimension. The colour of a pixel is represented by a fixed number of bits. The more bits defining each pixel, the more subtle the variations in colour that are reproduced; this is called the colour depth (CD) of the video. Pixels are rectangular in shape (possibly square), and the dimensions of the pixels comprising each frame are a determinant of the aspect ratio of the video. For example, the frames of a PAL video 720 pixels across and 576 pixels high will, if the video aspect ratio is 4x3, be composed of rectangular pixels with proportions of 1.0666 to 1; but if the video aspect ratio is 16x9, then the pixels will be rectangular with proportions of 1.4222 to 1. (In other words, "widescreen" is in this case achieved by altering the dimensions rather than the number of pixels.)
Johncurrandavis (talk) 17:10, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Sources Question
[edit]I notice the first source used on this list Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).https://mosdellmedia.blogspot.com/2013/12/understanding-video-technology.htmlCite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). is an unknown, unattributed blog. I feel as though this type of source needs to be removed from the article unless it can be traced back to the original owner of the information. Templefrogs (talk) 04:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- I have marked this with {{sps}}. ~Kvng (talk) 17:39, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Assignment
[edit]I have added a lot of edits to the page as an assignment for a college course. I am a student and am willing to discuss any of my changes, please let me know if there are any questions or concerns!
Templefrogs (talk) 11:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Templefrogs: thanks and welcome. A couple of comments: ~Kvng (talk) 14:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- The cultural and business implications you've added to the lead need to be supported in the body. We probably want to create a new section and move these paragraphs here and then write a shorter summary of these points for the lead.
- Your Digital video § Digital Video Broadcasting doesn't appear to align well with Digital Video Broadcasting. Are these referring to the same thing?
- @Kvng:
Thanks for the notes, I moved the cultural information section to the body of the article. I also updated the DVB section to be about Digital television, which is the term that more accurately fits the topic.
Templefrogs (talk) 04:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
This article starts by telling us what is digital video and where to was originated. It gives a well-written summary of digital media. All the major sessions in the article are previewed before the article starts. Everything section is mentioned and talked about in the article. I checked all the sources all the facts have hyperlinks backing up the information included. All the links I clicked on took me to the appropriate source. I believe that this article was well organized its headings kept it organized. Images were done well in each section. The talk page talks about the different areas that this article can be improved. I actually agree with some of the things pointed out such as the terminology used in the article. If someone was coming to learn more about digital videos they would be a little confused about the terms used through the article. Overall this is a good article that can be improved in a few areas. Its strength is its organization of information. Along with it being well written and having all the information needed to understand digitized video.VictorA2022 (talk) 04:26, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Technology
- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Technology
- C-Class vital articles in Technology
- C-Class film articles
- C-Class filmmaking articles
- Filmmaking task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- C-Class Media articles
- Mid-importance Media articles
- WikiProject Media articles
- C-Class television articles
- Mid-importance television articles
- C-Class Broadcast engineering and technology articles
- High-importance Broadcast engineering and technology articles
- Broadcast engineering and technology task force articles
- WikiProject Television articles