PICTURES AND VIDEO VIA VOICE BANDWIDTH RADIO - NBTV, ZL2AFP & EASYPAL.

Lecture delivered to the Eastern and Mountain Districts Amateur Radio Club, Melbourne, Australia, 7th August 2020. EXTRA ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, sincerely appreciated:
PETER WOLFENDEN VK3RV for background information on Erik Sundstrup VK4AES.
IAN FOSTER VK3ST for screen recordings recorded from the Easypal program.
HARRY MOORE for ongoing assistance with TV history research.
The late DOUG PITT for almost 40 years of friendship and collaboration.

[@frankhughes_vk6fh]

Hi Chris, great video well thought thru. BTW Dan VanElkan was my downstairs neighbour when living in St Kilda in 1974. As we were both radio hams, an association ensued. He took me to your place to see the SSTV setup which really did impress! I think you've been wanting to tell us about the mistreatment from the WIA orges for some time! We've all had such experiences, makes you wonder what they acheive by deriding you, and trying to kill your enthusiasm. You were quite advanced to design and handbuild SSTV equipment in the early 70's! I love the photo of the chipboard cased monitor in the video. Good luck for the future cheers Frank VK6FH (x VK3EE)

[@AusRadioHistorian]

Memories of Mozart Street. Are you the Frank that came out to my place and was impressed by the fact that I had an Edison disc player in my room? That must have been about 1973 - good Lord! 47 years. I think you also took part in our New Year's Eve field transmissions. Personally, I think the time for taking any notice of the WIA has passed. Their magazine is in the process of disintegration, their power base as supervisors of the only electronic social medium (ham radio in the 1970s) is gone. And yes, they left a very nasty taste for a very long time.

[@frankhughes_vk6fh]

@@AusRadioHistorian Hi Chris There were 3 of us, one night in '74 myself, Dan and a cherubic YL whose name escapes me? We had to be very quiet as your dad was somewhat ill at the time. I don't recall the Edison but there were a lot of old 78's records donated from a bcst station. I was at the 74 NYE event, we used my holden ute to shift the big transmitter and MG set. You were busy flying a box kite....ahhh memories p.s. Belford St B4 Mozart St Cheers Frank

[@simonwoolley592]

Fantastic work you have achieved, I’m inspired. Thanks

[@Paul_VK3HN]

Thanks for an excellent, entertaining and thoroughly well prepared presentation Chris. I have listened in from outside the 160 Xband group since I was a teenager in the 1970s, and I particularly appreciated you showing the early images of people and homemade equipment. Your explanation for delaying your amateur license filled in a gap for me. You were treated appallingly and I did get a sense of the overly officious men of the WIA in those days. You are a natural teacher and I hope you continue to inspire the next generation of experimenters, tinkerers and enthusiasts for decades to come.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

Ta. My dealings with P&T Regulatory and Licensing, later SMA or ACMA, were always cordial and businesslike. They are NOT against experimenters or experimentation, and they granted me a PERMIT (not a license) for high powered modulated light tests as far back as 1978. That's a permit for a specific equipment for a specific period, with circuit diagrams submitted and period of tests arranged. My ham radio licensing status was irrelevant to that permit, by the way. As for the WIA, I will say no more than I already have.

[@radioaustralia5070]

Fantastic presentation

[@eddyaudio]

A Wonderful Presentation Chris Top Marks I echo all comments below.

[@johnyoung1128]

A fascinating and informative video Chris. The behaviour shown to Dan and yourself by that group unfortunately is not uncommon and I’ve seen it displayed both within amateur radio and outside, it’s the reaction of those within a closed group who wish there to be no change to their comfortable little world. It probably would have seen me off as well. I think it’s a form of psychology for which there should be more public awareness as it can be very destructive. It may have kept you away from amateur radio for an extended period but I’m glad you’re here now.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

WIA (in 1972) was the Australian equivalent of a local state branch of the RSGB or the ARRL. I have not seen a great deal of evidence to convince me that the leopard's spots have changed in the last 48 years. Frustrations with them have led to the foundation of an alternative 'peak body' for ham radio in Australia, known as RASA. They have my best wishes for improving the situation. Meantime, if I want to try an unusual coding scheme or an unusual type of modulation, I check with the local ACMA radio inspectors, who are very approachable and as often as not interested in what we're doing.

[@Groatato]

I absolutely love the idea of NBTV. I have some of the ZL2APF software and it seems to work ok, but the output is too quiet to trigger my radio soundcard. A shame really, because it seems to be the perfect 'pick up and go'. (Yes I've dug pretty deep into my computer's settings, my volume is at max.) Looking forwards to more updates in the future though!

[@thanthanasiszamp4707]

Hi Chris. Thanks for explaining all these. I have a question for you. Why does ZL2AFP uses 3 separate colors for making full RGB video? Wouldn't be more efficient to use YUV with chroma reduce to 1/4, to increase framerate?

[@avidutubewatcher]

Very good video Chris

[@mylessmith8980]

There are now some new Narrow Band TV systems that can operate in a bandwidth even less than 1 kilohert.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

No. That's a common misconception. Those narrow band systems transmit a URL, commanding a distant computer to download the required picture FROM THE INTERNET, not by transmission of the picture itself over the air. EasyPal in "hybrid" mode does this also, transmitting only a URL. But neither the new narrow band systems (such as you suggest) or 'EasyPal hybrid' actually transmit pictures. They transmit ONLY an alphanumeric sequence constituting the URL. To transmit THE PICTURE INFORMATION you need far more bandwidth, or far more time. And that is what my presentation is about.

[@thanthanasiszamp4707]

Imagine trasmitting a DVD movie!

[@granttaylor3697]

Interesting, I have been working with Con ZL2AFP on ideas for a very new NBTV system for HF, using 24 QAM carries, for a base picture size of 120 x 96 x 12.5. I will be doing an article for CQTV on this subject, going over the software development and it will also need a dedicated modulator / demodulator to make of this transmission system.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

By my calculation that would be 120 pixels x 96 pixels = 11,520 pixels x 12.5 pics/sec = 144,000 pixels/sec or a video base bandwidth of 72 kHz. Digitised to 24 QAM carriers, even with a great deal of intelligent image redundancy elimination, that would be orders of magnitude beyond the 8 kHz bandwidth limitation legally allowed for HF operation in Australia. Or is there something I'm missing, here?

[@granttaylor3697]

@@AusRadioHistorian It would be close to what I am working with, there also video compression used, that is why the experiments are been done on 29 MHz so far.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

@@granttaylor3697 How do you get the analog video base bandwidth from 72kHz down to 8kHz (a complete order of magnitude), when digitisation to an OFDM stream should actually INCREASE the video signal bandwidth? Even with enormous amounts of intelligent interframe image redundancy - as with the old RealAudio/Video smear-and blur system of dialup days - you'll end up way beyond the legal bandwidth limit. Below 29MHz on 10 metres the legal bandwidth limit is 8kHz, above 29Mhz on 10 metres the legal bandwidth limit is still only 16kHz. I just can't see how you fit this to the fundamentals of information bandwidth theory. You may have the answer - but how?

[@granttaylor3697]

@@AusRadioHistorian It's been a project that I have been worked for the last 12 months, at this stage is software interface (GUI) and the video compression. The modulator and demodulator are next year project, as it takes time to get this all this to work, as I am limited on time availability. The hardware interface is the next part I am working on, which is the next few months taken up. So I plan do anther update on this project around this time next year, going into the hardware side. The version 1 PCB layout has a 150 kHz pass-band filter, so that is maximum I got work with, as there is a lot of issues I am still working through, it will keep me busy.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

@@granttaylor3697 For variable bandwidth, why not just use an SDR like the ANAN, the HackRF, the Lime, or the HermesLite? They all offer the resources that one needs in that area. But I remain unconvinced that you can transmit a picture 120 pixels by 96 pixels, refreshed 12.5 pics/second in the legal 8kHz bandwidth limit, unless you break some fundamental laws of information theory. You might get it to work legally on the 144 MHz (2 metre) band, where the legal bandwidth limit is 100kHz according to the Australian Radio Communications Act, but definitely not on HF.

[@debranchelowtone]

Hello, very interesting video here! I remind the first software but had not the chance to test it on air. I know someone who is into SSTV on PMR446, and i would like us to test NBTV aswell. Do you think those systems can be used there with standard transcievers ? Also, this gave me other ideas. I'm not a programmer, i don't know if it's doable, maybe it's stupid but here it is. When recieving NBTV signal, can we buffer frames for like 2 seconds, and treat them as they are Intra frames, and renconstruct, by guess work in the digital domain, the "missing" frames. This could give a more smooth motion. Other idea alongside this one, can we send fast black and white frames, like i don't know, 5 or 6 by second, and alongside of those, one coloured signal. Then the computer will reconstruct it, and the vectors be applied to it, like h264 vectors technology. The use of digital can be interesting there. Also, even with standard NBTV, is it possible to mulitplex the audio into the same channel ? Saw the bandwidth in half, and shift the frequencies to squeeze them in, audio and video, then after reception have high and low pass filters, then unsqueeze frequencies for decoding both. I know there is a lot, i asked those questions on the NBTVA forum and the sent me there.

[@debranchelowtone]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/bJaqoZKugNeBjZI&ab_channel=D%C3%A9branch%C3%A9Lowtone

[@039dalekmoore2007]

Wonderful Talk on this hobby ,and thanks for sharing the videos pictures ,as always there's one idiot giving this a thumbs down . Hope to see some more videos on the various narrow band Television systems ,any information to keep past and present systems alive and experimented on should be shown and Chris knows he's hobby ! unlike me i just try ; )

[@AusRadioHistorian]

Thanks. The reaction we had from the WIA in 1972 is paralleled in more recent times by the ARRL's ultra-conservative stance on suppressing E-SSB (hi-fi sideband or extended bandwidth sideband) in USA. They petitioned the FCC to set strict bandwidth laws banning E-SSB, but the USA FCC (IMHO, very correctly) refused on the basis that it would needlessly limit experimentation, especially at a time when HF communications were extending to frequency hopping and spread spectrum techniques. Among ham radio ranks, there is an extraordinary group of fuddy duddies who believe that the medium should strictly be for CW or telephonic (crap) audio. They still live, technically, in the first half of the twentieth century. I long for the day when that whole generation of conservatard pissants are dead and gone.

[@keithelster8858]

@@AusRadioHistorian -- Unfortunately, such "tolerance" from the American authorities doesn't include video. FCC rule 97.307(f)(2) says "No non-phone emission shall exceed the bandwidth of a communications quality phone emission of the same modulation type. The total bandwidth of an independent sideband emission (having B as the first symbol), or a multiplexed image and phone emission, shall not exceed that of a communications quality A3E emission. " This is for any ham band between 472 kHz and 225 MHz. Nowhere in the FCC regulations is "communications quality A3E emission" defined. It has been interpreted as being 300-3000 Hz (telephone quality) audio -- a 6 kHz total bandwidth on full-carrier AM or 2.7 kHz SSB, but never put in writing. The latter is OK for SSTV, but not for even limited-motion video unless the frame rate is very low. A 32x48 line picture (30x45 visible) at 3 fps has a bandwidth of 2.3 kHz. This might work with a commercial SSB or AM ham rig, using SSTV-type modulation, say, 300 Hz sync, 400 Hz black and 2700 Hz white. Because of the low frame rate, it would probably have to be done in software on a PC. But there are loopholes. Vestigal-sideband video is allowed, and is not frequency-restricted. FM above 29.0 MHz can be wider, and video at +/- 15 kHz deviation is not prohibited. I'm not aware of anyone who's tried narrow-band TV on the ham bands under US rules, other than the unsuccessful 1980-era Medium Scan TV experiments, and those used a 16 kHz video bandwidth, IIRC. The technology just wasn't there yet. I've seen your NBTV work and others' on KZbin, but the bandwidth for a standard NBTV signal is just too wide to be legal in the US below UHF, even when stretching those loopholes.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

@@keithelster8858 WRONG. YOU are part of the problem. From a country harping so constantly on "personal freedoms", and running kilowatts of power (which we can't), there are HUGE contradictions in your arguments, technical suggestions and quotations of "legalities". There is also THE LAW and THE APPLICATION OF THE LAW. If nobody complains, and nobody has cause to complain, no law is applied. This applies to recent (IMHO justifiable and praiseworthy) pushes for 'hi-fi' E-SSB, and for new modes such as frequency hopping and spread-spectrum. The danger of conflict is HUGELY from self-appointed "band policemen", hair splitters, navel-gazers, and egomaniacs who think they can define the limits of ham radio - generally to the compass their own personal hyper-narrow interests. Here in Australia, the law is that any signal between 1.8 Mhz and 29.5 MHz shall be no more than 8kHz wide, regardless of the modulation mode, and within our legal power limits (120W for AM or FM, 400W for sideband with special exemptions to 1kW). That IS in writing, in our Radio Communications Act. Content is not defined and MUSIC IS ALLOWED here, though the Comms Act specification is that ENTERTAINMENT is forbidden. The latter is very open to flexible interpretation. If the hobby itself was not entertaining, nobody would participate! Alternatively, in this country you can apply for an experimental license, or a permit to carry out transmissions outside the normal ham law parameters, if necessary by arrangement outside the normal ham bands, negotiating with the authorities on the nature, duration, and equipment used in the experiments. I have done this in the past for high power modulated optical DX transmissions, another ham (Dave VK3ASE) recently obtained a license here to operate a domestic shortwave broadcasting transmitter on 2310kHz and 4835kHz, AM, from a site North of Bendigo, Victoria. With so many guys in California in particular, though it happens elsewhere in USA - on 75 metres playing music, every night, running A.M. ex-broadcast transmitters with 15kHz or more of bandwidth, and E-SSB of 6kHz or 8kHz bandwidth being frequently transmitted, others conducting ultra-right-wing Trump-supporting nets jamming or excluding any "liberal" (refer recent activity on 3840 and 3845kHz), and international tensions leading to high OTH-radar interference on ham bands, I think the FCC has FAR bigger fish to fry than attending to the minutiae of bandwidths and modes that you suggest. Google "W6WBJ" if you want a prime example of a miscreant who has been a thorn in their side for a decade or more. As for the rules you state, they'll put you well and truly behind the eight-ball against other countries of the world where real experimentation at the cutting edge of ham radio in this field is concerned - as is the case here and elsewhere with digital or analogue transmission, video, pictures, quality audio, OFDM or otherwise - if you obsess on such legalistic trifles and draconic personal interpretations of 'communications quality'. You just aren't in touch with the realities of ham radio practice today. If the laws are unjust, or limit experimentation inappropriately (note especially re spread-spectrum, frequency hopping, NBTV, new digital modes, E-SSB, video, quality audio or OFDM), you can apply individually to the FCC or via the ARRL to have them appropriately modified, or waived for specific experiments. By the way, your calculations of bandwidth for a 32 X 48 pixel image are incorrect, as is your limiting definition of a "communications quality" channel, especially where digital modes are concerned. With regard to analog NBTV, contrary to your suggestion, the video bandwidth must extend down, with minimal phase shift, down to the picture repetition rate (less than 10Hz) and up to half of the pixel repetition rate. It cannot by transmitted via SSB with a fully suppressed carrier - a vestigial carrier at the very least is required as a phase reference for the correct reproduction of the video signal shape. You can afford to shave a little off that half pixel repetition rate at the high end if a little image degradation is tolerated. Your suggestion of "using a frequency shift system" (FM) for the video is very nearly the most bandwidth-hungry system imaginable - take the video bandwidth, double it, then extend it again for higher order sidebands. I have been transmitting NBTV material at moderately high picture repetition rates with direct carrier modulation on HF for 51 years here, via AM transmitters, on 160 metres in particular. Sound on a separate transmitter. Nobody has ever complained, and an R.I. told me "off the record" that "so long as your transmission does not exceed the ham band edge limits and bothers nobody, we'd be foolish to do anything about it, regardless of any law". So I do it at hours to suit. There are plenty of hours when the upper part of 160 metres is all but unused I really suggest that you revise your unnecessarily narrow "communications" definitions, the narrow interpretations of communications law (including a very questionable interpretation of "communications quality"), and your knowledge of communications laws in other lands. Above all, you should revise your concepts of what ham radio, as an experimental service, should encompass. Just as a final observation, whenever young Skype-conditioned or VOIP-conditioned people listen to ham radio, their most frequent comment I hear is "why should I bother with a medium offering such bad sound quality" - that is, 300Hz to 3kHz with ample distortion and noise. And they're right. With the high investment involved in buying HF rigs, we have the right to expect better audio quality than something that even my 1909-vintage Edison cylinder phonograph can beat. This is especially the case with D-Star, Fusion, and similar high compression telephone codecs - frankly too awful for my ears to contemplate. Ham radio is not just a telephone. It has the potential to be much more. Those now using full SDR's like the ANAN, or FLEXRADIO with completely variable bandwidth on transmit and receive, as well as near-distortionless modulation, are investigating those potentials. I suggest that you read this paper for a reflection on what a modern "communications" channel, even for speech, should encompass: www.nu9n.com/images/Sound.pdf I applaud E-SSB, people with aspirations to high audio quality, new methods of narrow band picture or video transmission. That is what my clip is about. That is what my version of the hobby is about. And in the case of NBTV, I have shown that it can be done in LESS bandwidth than current AM phone signals. If laws are silly and inappropriate to the context of modern technology, especially in the context of the experimental research that ham radio is supposed to encourage, CHANGE THEM.

[@NA5AA]

Is there anyone using a Flex radio 6000 who has managed to get EasyPal and the Flex radio to work together? I used to use EasyPal and Flex 3000 and it worked perfectly. Since upgrading to a Flex 6400 I am unable to get EasyPal to work because it fails to enumerate all of the Flex radio audio channels. It only enumerates channels 3 thru 8 and I need it to enumerate channels 1 and 2.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

Interesting problem, I'll be interested to see what answers you get. I think I'd be tempted to run Easypal on a separate laptop or tablet in your case.

[@NA5AA]

@@AusRadioHistorian Flex Support said the problem is with EasyPal and there was nothing they could do. I am running EasyPal on a Lenovo Yoga 910. Apps like WSJT-X and Fldigi show all the audio devices including DAX audio RX1 and DAV Audio RX 2 but not EasyPal. So far I'm stumped and it's looking like no EasyPal for me unless somebody takes over EasyPal and updates it to see all the new Flex Radio audio devices. BTW, I should have told you in enjoyed your presentation. It was good to hear the EasyPal tones again.

[@AusRadioHistorian]

@@NA5AA Just use the audio output on a separate machine loaded with Easypal. There is also an Easypal decoder for Apple, whose name I've forgotten. Can find out for you, if you like.

[@NA5AA]

@@AusRadioHistorian I am installing SmartSDR on another Windows 10 machine and will install EasyPay on that same computer to see if EasyPal can see all the Flex Radio audio devices. Will let you know what happens

[@AusRadioHistorian]

@@NA5AA Thanks. I'd appreciate the feedback. May be worthwhile my following up this basic Easypal demo with a video covering finer points.

[@INTHEMIX74]

interesting

[@1known2]

To many people are under estimated these days.

[@Kianarevision]

Lovely video! I hope you'd like my videos too. Keep up with the great work! 💜❤️

[@1known2]

54:30 rofl

[@AusRadioHistorian]

So was I. Spike always cracks me up.

[@1known2]

AusRadioHistorian laugh a minute kinda guy huh