IMHO, Digital SECAM video is better than Analog NTSC video

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4249212.html

Quotes:

1. "In the following description of the invention, input signals are
assumed to be 8-bit pulse-code-modulated (PCM) video signals which have
been produced by sampling and quantizing NTSC analogue composite video
signals in response to sampling pulses having a sampling frequency of
10.74 MHz."

2. "Referring to FIG. 1, the PCM video signal fed from an input
terminal IN is supplied directly and through a chroma-inverter 11 to a
first switch 12. In the NTSC color television signal, the subcarrier
phases between adjacent frames are different from each other by
180.degree.. In order to provide a frame-phase-compensated video signal
having the subcarrier in phase for every frame, a switching signal
generator 10, the chroma inverter 11 and the first switch 12 are
employed. The switching signal generator 10, which is supplied with the
vertical synchronizing signal SYNC separated from the NTSC analogue
composite video signal, generates a switching signal SW having a
repetition period equal to two frames (1/15 second) and having a pulse
width of one frame (1/30 second). The first switch 12 is driven by the
switching signal SW, thereby to provide the frame-phase-compensated
video signal a at its output. The frame-phase-compensated video signal
a is supplied through a second switch 13 to a picture memory 14 for
storage therein, which has a capacity of one frame of the 8-bit PCM
video signal, i.e., about 2.86 mega-bits, and then stored therein."

3. "The slicer circuit 16 provides a one-bit pulse c of logic "1" for
each sample of the PCM video signal when the absolute value."

4. "The chroma inverter 22 and the third switch 23 are identical to the
chroma inverter 11 and the first switch 12, respectively, and perform
the reverse phase-compensation to the latter to provide the NTSC PCM
video signal at a terminal 24."

http://www.talkaboutsatellitetv.com/group/rec.video.satellite.dbs/messages/176380.html
quote:

"There is uncompressed PCM for video. The data rate is 270 Mbit/sec for
standard definition, 525 line, 60 field interlaced. The computer folks
refer to this as 480i. For Hi def, the data rate bumps up to 1.5
Gbit/sec for 1920x1080 interlaced. This stuff is only seen in studios
and post production facilities."

Hmm. Well I would like to see some 2000 X 2000 X 2000 voxels
progressive [non-interlaced] 32-bit PCM video signals which have been
produced by sampling and quantizing SECAM analogue video signals in
response to sampling pulses having a sampling frequency of 1 Hz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voxel

VERY IMPORTANT NOTE: While NTSC and PAL use an amplitude-modulated
carrier for video, SECAM uses FM video.

I really like FM video. Don't know why ;-)

Bob Eld wrote in
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.basics/msg/1fe38e9f4f89aa01?hl=en&
:

What if the WMV [Windows Media Video] digital compression is used and
the color resolution is decrease sufficiently? Its possible to have a
supreme quality in terms of number of pixels and frame rate. All you
have to do is compress the WMV's color resolution and you can get a
bit-rate that is low enough not to hog bandwidth and at the same time,
the image resolution and frame rate will be that of a first-class video
signal.


Regards,

Radium

 

Perhaps, but sometimes don't you suspect that all this is a giant
struggle to buff the moldy cheese?

Well, in my opinion, Lemon pie is better than Pecan. Usually. Unless the
Pecan Pie is cooked by someone excellent and the Lemon pie is cooked by
someone lame. Maybe.

And while we're at it, Does it matter which one is "better" if they're
both being watched on a Video iPod while on a crowded train?

What about on a LCD laptop on a transatlantic flight?

A 1999 Barco projector in a 350 seat hall?


Its NICE when something is measurably better.

It's even NICER when that difference is noticible.

And it's REALLY Nice when someone (anyone) actually notices the
difference.

But none of those things are typical.

Usually the ONLY place where the quality is seen and appreciated is in
the properly lit studio, seen by people with educated eyes, on
calibrated monitors.

Then it goes out in the world and you're lucky if anyone watches at all.

Strive for quality, in what you can control, by all means.

Even better - strive for quality from everyone associated with the work.

But understand that no matter how much you strive, there WILL be
compromises to quality.

Learn what it makes sense to struggle for. Learn what you can "live
with" and what you simply can't.

Learn what to let go of. And when to hold on to the highest possible
standards.

And do your best.

The rest is out of our hands.

(Sorry, I'm rambling, but it's been a long production chain of one
project after another and there's still no end in sight - sigh!)

 

And digital NTSC is better than analog SECAM.
So what?

 

Fucking snip already!

Who watches NTSC anymore? Bwuahahahahahah!

Also, look at the difference in the creation dates for the two
standards, Mr. Techno Wiz.

I think they call it a no brainer.

Both are STILL low res compared to HD, digital or analog.

 

As of today, I believe that Windows Vista is better than any
previous version, even though both are made by a bad chef.

 

Stupid Americans and Japs do. They are behind the rest of the world.

 

Yeah, but those other slow countries have to wait around for a 25th of a
second
to see a full frame, we can see it in a mere 30th of a second
with smoother motion as an extra benifit.

David

 

I live in a slow country, but to beat you I go to the cinema and
see a new picture every 0,013888888888888888888888888888889 sec.
Beat that, buster! )

cheers

-martin-
--

 

No it isn't

 

Thank you for your opinion.
I will repeat the part you snipped: "So what?"
And I'll raise you a "Who Cares?"

 

Repeating frames makes smoother motion, hahahahah!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ntsc#Framerate_conversion

 

At least NTSC plays back at the proper speed.

 

Is that why Europeans returning home from NTSC-land
get headaches from their PAL/SECAM 25Hz framerate
flicker? Or perhaps from that primitive 2 vertical line
resolution color subcarrier?

(OTOH, this entire discussion is juvenile and pointless
and I don't really give a fat flying burrito, I am only toying
with you-all.

 

You're a goddamned retard.

Actually, poor Americans do.

I do not.

No, we are not behind the rest of the world, dumbass. The wide form
factor CRAP that was in the UK was far INFERIOR to even our first
generation of HDTV supplied by General Instrument.

Even compared to my first analog CRT HD set, ANY of that old WS CRAP
made here there or anywhere else comes nowhere close. You are
clueless.

 

You got the math 100% ass backwards, dumbass. Cinemas are at 24fps,
which is SLOWER, not faster.

 

Do you know that cinema's project at 48fps and even 72fps (with double or
triple shutter), to avoid image-flicker? I don't think you do, or else you
wouldn't call me dumbass

cheers

-martin-
--

 

Wrong, retard.

Time to go back to school.

 

You don't get a new picture every 1/48 or 1/72 of a second though, it
just repeats the same picture two or three times.

Rod.

 

On what planet would this be happening on then?

 

< major snippage>

Umm...since analog PAL and SECAM are better than analog NTSC and
digital NTSC is better than analog NTSC to start with I don't know that
this is a revelation.

Craig

http://www.pro-tape.com