Normal or Frame mode for PAL conversion? at DVinfo.net

Alfonso LeFeusch · June 28th, 2003, 06:30 PM

I'm shooting a project in NTSC that will eventually be transferred to PAL as well. Any problem with using frame mode for this? Is normal mode better?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Jeff Donald · June 29th, 2003, 01:05 AM

There is already a loss of resolution going from NTSC to PAL. I would do it in normal, interlaced mode. I suspect frame mode will cause an even greater loss or resolution.

Frank Granovski · June 29th, 2003, 01:53 AM

I would also not use frame mode for this. I did shoot some NTSC footage in progressive a while back, and converted it to PAL. I then viewed the progressive PAL footage, and it looked very jittery. I'd stick with interlaced for this or shoot in PAL.

Ned Cordery · June 29th, 2003, 08:45 AM

Why not shoot in PAL, camera rental would give better results than even the best transcode and most NLE systems will edit either way.

Ned Cordery

Christopher Hughes · June 29th, 2003, 05:07 PM

NTSC to PAL already looks like low res especial with lower end cameras. Just looking a Funniest Home Movies you can tell straight away which ones are the imported NTSC clips. So using frame mode would loss even more res that would need expanding to fit our PAL specs.

Why does it have to be PAL??? cos lots, if not all, VHS VCRs have NTSC playback and many DVD players are multi-regional with NTSC playback on PAL TVs. So DVD in NTSC format is dead easy, lots of people I know buy DVDs from the States, and u would even know it was an import. Playback of NTSC tapes is easier than you think. Even ASDA (walmart) Cheapo VCRs have NTSC playback. And TVs can have NTSC/PAL modes. And all miniDV video camcorders I have used, even Sony very low end consumer models i have used have NTSC playback in two forms. NTSC playback on PAL TV or NTSC playback on NTSC 4.1 (?) TV. So depending on why it must be PAL could save you all the hassle. If its just for a friend, he will most likely have NTSC playback facilities. But American machines don't go the other way and have PAL playback...maybe cos its easier to expand res and increase speed that chop off res and decrease speed.

So why do you need it in PAL format?

Takeshi Fukushima · July 3rd, 2003, 05:03 AM

Christopher,
I recently did a corporate video targetted for Japan and Europe. I just made the NTSC version DVD, and now thinking of making a PAL converted version.
However, from what you say, maybe I don't have to make a PAL DVD since they usually have playback? risking image loss?
Takeshi

Christopher Hughes · July 3rd, 2003, 10:43 AM

If you have NTSC DVD, then you could just state that its Region One (NTSC) playback, then they (clients/target group) will know that it will only work on Multi-regional DVD players. To let you know a little into the culture here, most people who never even set foot out of england, except to european spanish beach resorts, buy multi-regional DVD players, even though they are highly unlikely to buy DVD outside of Region Two (europe). Its like the culture is Multi-regional is better, and for "just in case", plus there are only like $10 USD more than the same non-multi-regional models. These machines will also allow NTSC playback on PAL TVs. So you could go to the expense of getting Region Conversion, which will carry some image loss, as PAL image has more lines, and sound also has to be converted to cover from 30fps to 25fps, so their maybe some loss in sound. But sound is not as noticeable as Picture, as majority use TV speakers - not the most hi-tech for sound monitoring.

The main problem with DVD, whether NTSC or PAL is compatibilty with the Players, ie, DVD-R, DVD+R, etc. But normally a good copy will work on majority of machines.

I would give it a try in NTSC format (Region ONE) and if it doesnt work or seem to get anywhere, then you could get conversion, but if it does work you could save a bit cash. Either way you go, there will be some loss of image from NTSC to PAL.

Christopher Hughes · July 3rd, 2003, 10:46 AM

If your in Japan, give the DVDs a try on your PAL machines over there, they are the same models as the ones we get. So if they playback good over there, they will playback good in Europe.

June 28th, 2003, 06:30 PM	#1
Alfonso LeFeusch New Boot Join Date: May 2003 Location: Los Angeles, Ca Posts: 5	Normal or Frame mode for PAL conversion? I'm shooting a project in NTSC that will eventually be transferred to PAL as well. Any problem with using frame mode for this? Is normal mode better? Any help is greatly appreciated.

June 29th, 2003, 01:05 AM	#2
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	There is already a loss of resolution going from NTSC to PAL. I would do it in normal, interlaced mode. I suspect frame mode will cause an even greater loss or resolution. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

July 3rd, 2003, 05:03 AM	#6
Takeshi Fukushima Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Tokyo, Japan Posts: 86	PAL DVD Christopher, I recently did a corporate video targetted for Japan and Europe. I just made the NTSC version DVD, and now thinking of making a PAL converted version. However, from what you say, maybe I don't have to make a PAL DVD since they usually have playback? risking image loss? Takeshi

June 29th, 2003, 01:53 AM	#3
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I would also not use frame mode for this. I did shoot some NTSC footage in progressive a while back, and converted it to PAL. I then viewed the progressive PAL footage, and it looked very jittery. I'd stick with interlaced for this or shoot in PAL.

June 29th, 2003, 08:45 AM	#4
Ned Cordery New Boot Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Dammeron Valley, UT Posts: 15	Why not shoot in PAL, camera rental would give better results than even the best transcode and most NLE systems will edit either way. Ned Cordery

June 29th, 2003, 05:07 PM	#5
Christopher Hughes Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Sunderland, England (y Merida, Mexico) Posts: 269	NTSC to PAL already looks like low res especial with lower end cameras. Just looking a Funniest Home Movies you can tell straight away which ones are the imported NTSC clips. So using frame mode would loss even more res that would need expanding to fit our PAL specs. Why does it have to be PAL??? cos lots, if not all, VHS VCRs have NTSC playback and many DVD players are multi-regional with NTSC playback on PAL TVs. So DVD in NTSC format is dead easy, lots of people I know buy DVDs from the States, and u would even know it was an import. Playback of NTSC tapes is easier than you think. Even ASDA (walmart) Cheapo VCRs have NTSC playback. And TVs can have NTSC/PAL modes. And all miniDV video camcorders I have used, even Sony very low end consumer models i have used have NTSC playback in two forms. NTSC playback on PAL TV or NTSC playback on NTSC 4.1 (?) TV. So depending on why it must be PAL could save you all the hassle. If its just for a friend, he will most likely have NTSC playback facilities. But American machines don't go the other way and have PAL playback...maybe cos its easier to expand res and increase speed that chop off res and decrease speed. So why do you need it in PAL format?

July 3rd, 2003, 10:43 AM	#7
Christopher Hughes Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Sunderland, England (y Merida, Mexico) Posts: 269	If you have NTSC DVD, then you could just state that its Region One (NTSC) playback, then they (clients/target group) will know that it will only work on Multi-regional DVD players. To let you know a little into the culture here, most people who never even set foot out of england, except to european spanish beach resorts, buy multi-regional DVD players, even though they are highly unlikely to buy DVD outside of Region Two (europe). Its like the culture is Multi-regional is better, and for "just in case", plus there are only like $10 USD more than the same non-multi-regional models. These machines will also allow NTSC playback on PAL TVs. So you could go to the expense of getting Region Conversion, which will carry some image loss, as PAL image has more lines, and sound also has to be converted to cover from 30fps to 25fps, so their maybe some loss in sound. But sound is not as noticeable as Picture, as majority use TV speakers - not the most hi-tech for sound monitoring. The main problem with DVD, whether NTSC or PAL is compatibilty with the Players, ie, DVD-R, DVD+R, etc. But normally a good copy will work on majority of machines. I would give it a try in NTSC format (Region ONE) and if it doesnt work or seem to get anywhere, then you could get conversion, but if it does work you could save a bit cash. Either way you go, there will be some loss of image from NTSC to PAL.

July 3rd, 2003, 10:46 AM	#8
Christopher Hughes Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Sunderland, England (y Merida, Mexico) Posts: 269	If your in Japan, give the DVDs a try on your PAL machines over there, they are the same models as the ones we get. So if they playback good over there, they will playback good in Europe.