Talk:SMPTE color bars

message: When was introduced the SMPTE color-bar test pattern?
The original color test pattern generator was developed by RCA circa 1951.
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/2f/b4/90/ed6fcccbba109f/US2742525.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.91.176.10 (talk) 00:05, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Developed by Al Goldberg of CBS Laboratories. Adopted by SMPTE in 1978.
*Well, the article says the color bars started in the 1980's. But, I had never seen a TV station sign-off with color bars where I lived, but this happens on occassion from some Indianapolis TV stations in the overnight hours for no reason. 
Why are the color bars apparently so restrictively licensed? Even if I made a piece of art using it, released under GNU licensing, it'd be illegal from what I can tell. Thats messed up. Bars of color on a site that uses the word free alot, near-totally unusable. Where is this world going to?
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.81.58.56 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 12 December 2005  (UTC)
* Where did you get that idea?  While the SMPTE document itself is copyrighted (you can buy it from the  SMPTE website), and SMPTE might impose restrictions on the use of their name; I'm not aware of any patents one must license--from SMPTE or anyone else--to implement SMPTE bars.  Certainly, color bars are not copyrightable subject matter (as the colors used are determined entirely by technical considerations, and are not the expression of an author, they fall under the scenes a faire exception to copyright law).  I work in the video industry, and I've never heard of any restrictive licensinc on SMPTE colorbars.  And my employer produces several products which generate them.  --EngineerScotty 03:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: When

message: While the SMPTE bars are interesting and useful; especially in NTSC land; there are other color bars signals that are useful:
* Plain old 100% and 75% bars
* The newer colorbar standard from SMPTE (can't remember the number) intended for high definition television systems
Perhaps the article should be renamed color bars, and its scope expanded.  Thoughts? --EngineerScotty 03:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other color bars 

message: These bars are widely used, not just for NTSC signals. On shoots, whether PAL or Digital (SD or HD), they are used to calibrate the monitors. I would suggest removing the references to NTSC in the article, which suggest that these bars are somehow specific to NTSC while they are not. Reading the article, I had the impression these bars would not be useful for PAL, which is obviously wrong.
Were they originally designed with NTSC in mind? If so, a mention of that fact near the end of the article would be enough.
I will come back later to see if someone has commented on this. If not, I will try to edit the article by removing the NTSC references.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Milivoj (talk • contribs) 15:36, 25 March 2006
:This is about SMPTE color bars, which includes tests that are NTSC-specific.  The NTSC references should remain in this article.  Denelson83  22:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the focus on NTSC? 

message: The sound clip's format should be changed into a more user feiendly version like mp3 or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.149.149.200 (talk • contribs) 19:54, 18 November 2006
The sound clips on Wikipedia are in Ogg Vorbis format.  This is an open source format similar to MP3. To play an Ogg Vorbis file, a suitable media player will be needed, see .  Winamp is the best known freeware player for.ogg files. --Ianmacm 11:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 1000 Hz. --  Denelson83  05:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 1000 Hz Sound clip 

message: to better illustrate "this sequence of bars thus appears on a waveform monitor in luminance mode as a downward staircase from left to right." in the Useage section. --Thomprod (talk) 01:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this (figure 2) the sort of thing that you had in mind?--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:01, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that would do nicely.  Can you please upload it and add it to the article? --Thomprod (talk) 01:25, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: He can't, because it would be a copyvio. --  Denelson83  03:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since an image here would need to comply with WP:NFCC, as the saying goes, here is one I made earlier. This shows color bars in a software oscilloscope.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 20:37, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  It would be nice to have the luminance value of each of the bars (gray is 77 IRE -- I have to get out Ennes to look up the rest).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.12.176.20 (talk) 17:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

text:  I have added the luminance values obtained directly from Ennes, as well as a link to the Tektronix pdf on NTSC video measurements where there are plenty of scope shots. Some web sites give erroneous luminance values for color bars. Ennes and Textronix are in agreement (yellow = 69 IRE, etc.) and I consider them authoritative. Chris319 (talk) 20:55, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Waveform monitor picture requested 

message: Confining the color-bar values to the studio swing range of 16 to 235, we get (0.75 x (235-16)) + 16, or 180. The magenta bar, for example, consists of R = 180, G = 16, B = 180. 100% white is thus equal to 235.
The pluge values would then be:
+2 * ((235-16)/100)+16 = 20 (R = 20, G = 20, B = 20) for +2%.
+4 * ((235-16)/100)+16 = 25 (R = 25, G = 25, B = 25) for +4%. (SD)
-2 * ((235-16)/100)+16 = 12 (R = 12, G = 12, B = 12) for -2%. (HD)
See SMPTE RP 219 Fig. 3-9 and paragraphs 4.3, 4.31 and 4.32.
Chris319 (talk) 06:01, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This is called superblack or toeroom or blacker than black. 2A00:1370:812D:F205:C0A5:95D7:D09C:EE8C (talk) 14:34, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  HD Bars and Studio Swing 

message: The article says that SMPTE owns copyright on at least some of the color bar images, but that seems to be quite a stretch:
* Images must meet the threshold of originality to become subject to US copyright law. See the Commons guidance on this for examples. It is pretty certain that the color bars aren't creative enough to qualify.
* In fact by definition, images that are created by exactly following a technical standard demonstrate no creativity at all, and are not considered "works of authorship"
* US copyright law does not apply at all to  "business operations or procedures; mathematical principles; formulas or algorithms; or any other concept, process, or method of operation.". The color bar images are the result of following such a procedure, algorithm, process etc.
* The original standards documents defining these images (not created by SMPTE) are explicitly in the public domain (as noted in our own article).
* You can't take something out of the public domain once it's out there.
* Regardless of the copyright status of the standards documents, the images that result from following the standard aren't owned by whoever owns the standard.
* Our own use of the older version images is from Commons where the license statements is "This simple sign is ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain, because it contains no original authorship." Anyone familiar with Commons knows they are VERY strict about these things, and yet this has never been considered remotely controversial.
* The newer versions (that the article claims SMPTE own copyright on) are visually just small tweaks to the previous ones... certainly not enough to create a new copyright.
Of course I'm just some guy on the Internet, and this is definitely original research... but the only source we have is someone alleging to represent the SMPTE claiming that the SMPTE owns the copyright (not independent), posted as a reply to a discussion on a public message board (not reliable). Given that the copyright claim is prima facie blatantly false, I don't believe it should be in the article. Accordingly I'm about to remove it.
If anyone disagrees and wants to put it back, that's fine, but perhaps at least it should say "The SMPTE claims that..." rather than just baldly state the copyright claim as if it was a plain fact.
Thparkth (talk) 14:27, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I contacted SMPTE when I originally reverted this. We can leave it out for now because you've made good points and I was not able to find a reliable source. I'll post here again if/when I hear back from them. ~Kvng (talk) 15:15, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think SMPTE are themselves a reliable source for whether they own copyright on these images; at most they are reliable for saying they *claim* copyright ownership. But many organizations claim copyright on things they don't own because there are no consequences and so no downside for them. Thparkth (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

text: A cursory search at copyright.gov does not turn up any copyright claim by SMPTE for color bars. As I understand it, they were originally patented by RCA and modified by CBS Labs circa 1978. I don't see how SMPTE can legitimately claim a copyright.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.247.128 (talk) 11:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color bar copyright 

message: Please give Pluge color bars its own Paragraph. I had a video editing studio for 10 years and without Pluge I would have been flying blind on the optimal brightness and contrast my monitors were set to. 2605:E000:2FC0:21:282B:78CA:1FFA:71BB (talk) 01:05, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pluge color bars