lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) (01/19/86)
As long as we're on this topic, I'm going to put in a comment about NTSC vs. PAL that I've been wanting to say for a long time. It is popular to call NTSC "never twice same color" and demean it in comparison to PAL. Frankly, I consider this sort of treatment to no longer be accurate. In the mid-60's when NTSC color was becoming popularized here in the U.S., there were indeed serious color control problems. The need to adjust the flesh tones away from purple or green using the "tint" and "color" knobs was frequent and delicate. HOWEVER, the main reason for this problem was lack of accurate color references and stability in the broadcast and transmission systems used at that time. As the years went on, color stability improved massively, until now, as far as I'm concerned, ongoing manual color adjustments are no longer required on modern NTSC receivers. For example, I have a five year old SONY NTSC set. It does not have special VIR reading adjustments or anything of that nature. Still, I set the color controls once five years ago and have NEVER had to change them since then. And we're not talking about just a few channels, but seven VHF, many UHF, and incredibly many midband and superband cable channels. The color is rock solid and always correct. So much for "never twice same color." Secondly, while PAL color looks fine, I find the flicker rate on 625/25 sets to be rather distracting. Frankly, I notice the flicker on a 625/25 set MUCH more than I notice the 625 vs. 525 PAL vs. NTSC line density difference. In fact, I'm hard-pressed to notice the density difference at ALL at normal viewing distances. But 625/25 sets flicker quite noticeably even on relatively small areas of solid color. The difference between 25 frames and 30 frames IS significant to the human eye. Frankly, a 625/30 system would be nice, but as far as I'm concerned, I would not want to trade NTSC's 30 frame rate for a 25 frame rate, and NTSC's color control these days is just fine. --Lauren--
farren@well.UUCP (01/24/86)
In article <873@vortex.UUCP>, lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) writes: > But 625/25 sets flicker quite noticeably even on relatively small > areas of solid color. The difference between 25 frames and 30 frames IS > significant to the human eye. Were you looking at one of these TV's in Europe, where the line freq. is 50Hz, or here? I had occasion to do some work with a Thompson CSF home computer, rigging up a 110 to 220 converter for it, and found that if I tried to watch the PAL screen with ANY 60Hz lighting source nearby, the 10Hz "beat" between the 60Hz lights and the 50Hz screen killed me. when I turned off ALL of the lights in the office, the flicker disappeared, and the display was quite nice. -- Mike Farren uucp: {your favorite backbone site}!hplabs!well!farren Fido: Sci-Fido, Fidonode 125/84, (415)655-0667
lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) (01/24/86)
Nope, I was in Europe when I observed the flickering, though I'll admit it is even WORSE if you try to view 625/25 under 60 Hz illumination. But that wasn't the case in Europe--everything there was 50 Hz and the flicker was awful. In fact, I've been getting a number of messages from people that strongly agree with me regarding 625/25 flicker, so it seems I'm not alone with this opinion. --Lauren--
kds@intelca.UUCP (Ken Shoemaker) (01/28/86)
> In article <873@vortex.UUCP>, lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) writes: > > But 625/25 sets flicker quite noticeably even on relatively small > > areas of solid color. The difference between 25 frames and 30 frames IS > > significant to the human eye. > > Were you looking at one of these TV's in Europe, where the line freq. > is 50Hz, or here? I had occasion to do some work with a Thompson CSF home I've had occasion to view European TV in Europe, and I, too, can attest that the 50 Hz frame frequency makes for some very noticable flicker. I think, however, that some TV makers to Europe are now putting frame buffers in their sets and scanning at double frequency to try to make the flicker go away. -- If you don't like the answer, then ask another question! Everything is the answer to something... Ken Shoemaker, Microprocessor Design, Intel Corp., Santa Clara, Ca. {pur-ee,hplabs,amd,scgvaxd,dual,qantel}!intelca!kds ---the above views are personal.
doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee) (01/28/86)
> In the mid-60's when NTSC color was becoming popularized here in the > U.S., there were indeed serious color control problems. The need to > adjust the flesh tones away from purple or green using the "tint" and > "color" knobs was frequent and delicate. HOWEVER, the main reason > for this problem was lack of accurate color references and stability > in the broadcast and transmission systems used at that time. As the > years went on, color stability improved massively, until now, as far > as I'm concerned, ongoing manual color adjustments are no longer required > on modern NTSC receivers. This is due to improvements in the "modern NTSC receivers". The designers of these marvels have found some clever ways to deliver a satisfactory color image from wildly varying inputs. I had to search for quite a while to find a set which didn't have a full-time color-correction circuit (I mainly wanted to display computer- generated images, and I didn't want them "fixed up"). Finally found one made by RCA. If I use it to watch broadcast TV, I have to keep my fingers on the saturation and tint knobs. The tint and saturation excursions aren't quite as extreme as I recall from the late '60s, but they're still well beyond "acceptable". -- Doug Pardee -- CalComp -- {hardy,savax,seismo,decvax,ihnp4}!terak!doug