|
|
Posted by David McCall on 10/05/26 11:46
"Specs" <No.Spam@Thanks.com> wrote in message
news:44576aeb$0$33925$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...
>
> "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message
> news:125eqa51mrqg765@corp.supernews.com...
>> "Rick Merrill" wrote ...
>> > And you can't make bacon out of a silk purse! The amount of quality
>> > that
>> > is useful over NTSC is highly limited by the transmission and TV
>> > characteristics regardless of their precision (a.k.a. quality). So
>> > while
>> > you may be right that 25Mbps is > say 9Mbps, if the user is going to
>> > put
>> > it on an NTSC TV it will make no difference.
>>
>> You have apparently never seen a pristine NTSC image from
>> high end equipment back in the originating studio. My condolences.
>>
> I never thought I'd ever see pristine and NTSC in the same sentence...
> Hey,
> Richard you truly are king of the oxymoron.
>
What Richard says is true, at least for us older guys.
I am assuming that you are talking about composite.
Really good video form a good camera with big tubes
or large CCDs (we are talking cameras in the $80,000
and up kind of range), using quad or 1" in a studio with
a decent engineer. Other than being a little soft, the
images can be quite stunning.
Is it as good as HD cam? No, but it can certainly look
as good as anything you have seen as S video. Of course
S is better than composite, but $100,000 cameras aren't
available in S, and 1" machines don't have a hole to plug
it in anyway.
Now, if you were talking a component or digital NTSC,
then it can even be even reasonably sharp. Not as good
as HD, but decent.
NTSC got it's bad rep back when the whole chain was
tubes. Everything drifted, a lot. Now that we have chips
and transistors NTSC TV is much more stable.
David
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|