Best View at DVinfo.net

Dennis Hull · October 30th, 2002, 05:55 PM

Once I upgrade my Sony TRV 9 DV camcorder to VX2000 or PDX10 how do I best take full advantage of higher quality image by displaying it on high quality "TV" using best output mode? From reading I have been doing I understand using composite output to standard TV does not utilize full capability of captured image. Next step up would be S-VHS output to S-VHS equipped standard TV. Then get into areas foreign to me like component output (understand theory only) to projection TV's advertised as HDTV. I can understand where luminance, chrominance and all that plus number of lines scanned can all enter into component output and HDTV TV (I refer to ones costing about $1700 for 47 inch 16X9 display). On top of that interlace (standard NTSC output from camcorder) vs progressive scan capability these "HDTV" advertise such as 1080 p.

Now, component output sounds like way to go to get best picture from HDTV. But, I don't know of camcorder in price range of VX2000 with component output. However, in Videoguys website I see the Datavideo DAC-2 which seems to take DV input and convert to component output (price about $650).

So, questions I have (sorry for long note) are: (1) based on limited reading and experience, is my logic generally correct about displaying best quality picture once I have captured "best" quality video; and (2) anyone have experience with DAC-2 and would that be a good way to convert DV to component output to view higher quality image on component input equipped TV??(actually I have a cheap JVC "regular" TV with component input).

This is part of a lenses (start with high quality lense to get good image onto CCD's) to output --view on TV-- approach. Once you have the best DV camcorder you can afford --VX2000, GL2 price point-- how do you take full advantage of quality of image when you view on "TV?" Mostly to be sure I don't miss out on a feature -- like "true 16X9 on PDX10-- in a camcorder that I would later wish I had when displaying on "TV."

Adrian Douglas · October 30th, 2002, 06:00 PM

Is this for general viewing or for editing work?

Jeff Donald · October 30th, 2002, 06:47 PM

You are correct in most of your reasoning. Component output generally provides the best quality signal for input into a monitor. However, I would not choose the least expensive FireWire to component convertor sight unseen. These type of components (devices) almost always need auditioning. This is very subjective work. Have you ever walked into a person home and wanted to adjust the color, saturation, contrast, black level etc. on their TV set? Same kinda thing.

Viewing distance also plays a major role in evaluating monitors and display devices. In most cases people get way too close and are disappointed by the apparent lack of sharpness. Maintain a proper and consistent distance when viewing your display devices.

Jeff

Dennis Hull · October 30th, 2002, 08:09 PM

Adrian, Viewing would be just general viewing for my enjoyment and friends and family but making sure the viewing medium takes full advantage (within price of normal "consumer" quality equipment) of all the camcorder is capable of. I am just learning hobbyist and you have valid point on "just shoot"--how will I learn if I don't shoot-- but need to spend time aiming to come close to target when I spend the money on camcorder.

Dennis Hull · October 30th, 2002, 08:21 PM

Jeff, good advice. At my current level of hobbyist knowledge I was not aware of Firewire to Component converters so didn't know if they really could improve quality of output beyond S-Video out on camcorder or not. My phase one is buy a 3 CCD camcorder that will not be limiting factor in eventual phase two purchase of HDTV. If $650 is in the "least expensive" category of DV to component device I would really want to be sure a device like this would be worth the money and would really improve quality of what would be displayed on HDTV from camcorder.

Adrian Douglas · October 30th, 2002, 08:42 PM

Dennis for general viewing I would suggest just sticking to a standard TV with s-video. With the limited resolution of DV it probably won't look any better on a HTDV anyway. If you cab get a 16x9 Widescreen TV then that's a bonus but unless you are monitoring video for adjustment and calibration to NTSC safe colours then the expense of using component isnn't necessary. You'd be better off putting the money towards something more useful like filters, tripods, sound gear, lighting, the list goes on, and on, and on and...

Dennis Hull · October 30th, 2002, 08:59 PM

Thanks Adrian, just the sort of help I need. I am always looking for the "magic bullet" (in line with "just shoot") that for just a little more money will give a much bigger improvement in quality. But, I also use the limiting factor approach which in this case as you point out, DV resolution is limiting factor and won't benefit much beyond S-VHS level.

Zac Stein · October 30th, 2002, 10:15 PM

I dunno if this will help everybody here.

When dvd started back in 1997, i used to review them professionally for a few australian websites and magazines.

We did a big study of composite/s-video/rgb/component and the results wer very suprising.

S-video(s-vhs) techincally gives around a %30 better signal to the tv, which results visually into around a %100 improvement percieved.

Then the difference becomes compounded, component/rgb only showed a %5 increase in visual quality over s-vhs. This could be streched to %10 on a purely subjective opinion by some viewers.

Around %70 preferred s-video! Because it yields sharper images and more defined edges.

DVD is mastered in YUV which is what component video actually outputs, so you are watching a pure signal comming off the dvd, well not pure but the least tinkered with. You will not have any colour control on your tv, what is mastered is what you will get.

RGB is the european standard, has a slightly higher bandwidth, but offers no advantage as the source YUV is the limiting factor. RGB gives an ever so slightly different looking image, colours are a little bit more uniform, this is not a better image, just slightly differently displayed. (no this is not a PAL NTSC thing)

A lot of people feel component image is a little soft, but really it is just not giving super defined blacks (read: unrealistic tweeked digitally) that s-video inherently gives just from the nature of its output.

I personally use rgb because my tv can take it. But i have no problem with s-video in the slighest, and use it for my computer output, that %5 difference is so hardly noticable it is pointless.

Also i think that a firewire - component converter is most likely a waste of money, and i wouldn't really want something that is playing with the signal like that. I would rather a good breakout box that took a nice clean s-video signal, and stick to component on something native to it, like DVD.

kermie

Jeff Donald · October 31st, 2002, 12:18 AM

Dennis,

If you've won the lottery in the last couple of hours you might want to purchase one of these Faroudja video processors.

http://www.lightav.com/home/faroudja/faroudja.html

No prices listed, but I know his line tripler and quadupler run around $25,000. Though I sure has something for a little less.

Jeff

Dennis Hull · November 4th, 2002, 08:02 PM

Very interesting and helpful input and thank you Kermie. Jeff, I looked up the website and may buy a lottery ticket.

October 30th, 2002, 05:55 PM	#1
Dennis Hull Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN USA Posts: 151	Best View Once I upgrade my Sony TRV 9 DV camcorder to VX2000 or PDX10 how do I best take full advantage of higher quality image by displaying it on high quality "TV" using best output mode? From reading I have been doing I understand using composite output to standard TV does not utilize full capability of captured image. Next step up would be S-VHS output to S-VHS equipped standard TV. Then get into areas foreign to me like component output (understand theory only) to projection TV's advertised as HDTV. I can understand where luminance, chrominance and all that plus number of lines scanned can all enter into component output and HDTV TV (I refer to ones costing about $1700 for 47 inch 16X9 display). On top of that interlace (standard NTSC output from camcorder) vs progressive scan capability these "HDTV" advertise such as 1080 p. Now, component output sounds like way to go to get best picture from HDTV. But, I don't know of camcorder in price range of VX2000 with component output. However, in Videoguys website I see the Datavideo DAC-2 which seems to take DV input and convert to component output (price about $650). So, questions I have (sorry for long note) are: (1) based on limited reading and experience, is my logic generally correct about displaying best quality picture once I have captured "best" quality video; and (2) anyone have experience with DAC-2 and would that be a good way to convert DV to component output to view higher quality image on component input equipped TV??(actually I have a cheap JVC "regular" TV with component input). This is part of a lenses (start with high quality lense to get good image onto CCD's) to output --view on TV-- approach. Once you have the best DV camcorder you can afford --VX2000, GL2 price point-- how do you take full advantage of quality of image when you view on "TV?" Mostly to be sure I don't miss out on a feature -- like "true 16X9 on PDX10-- in a camcorder that I would later wish I had when displaying on "TV."

October 30th, 2002, 06:00 PM	#2
Adrian Douglas Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Chigasaki, Japan. Posts: 1,660	Is this for general viewing or for editing work? __________________ Adrian DVInfo.net Search for quick answers Where to buy? From the best in the business...DVInfo.net sponsors

October 30th, 2002, 08:09 PM	#4
Dennis Hull Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN USA Posts: 151	Just Shoot Adrian, Viewing would be just general viewing for my enjoyment and friends and family but making sure the viewing medium takes full advantage (within price of normal "consumer" quality equipment) of all the camcorder is capable of. I am just learning hobbyist and you have valid point on "just shoot"--how will I learn if I don't shoot-- but need to spend time aiming to come close to target when I spend the money on camcorder.

October 30th, 2002, 08:21 PM	#5
Dennis Hull Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN USA Posts: 151	DV to Component Converter Jeff, good advice. At my current level of hobbyist knowledge I was not aware of Firewire to Component converters so didn't know if they really could improve quality of output beyond S-Video out on camcorder or not. My phase one is buy a 3 CCD camcorder that will not be limiting factor in eventual phase two purchase of HDTV. If $650 is in the "least expensive" category of DV to component device I would really want to be sure a device like this would be worth the money and would really improve quality of what would be displayed on HDTV from camcorder.

October 30th, 2002, 08:42 PM	#6
Adrian Douglas Trustee Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Chigasaki, Japan. Posts: 1,660	Dennis for general viewing I would suggest just sticking to a standard TV with s-video. With the limited resolution of DV it probably won't look any better on a HTDV anyway. If you cab get a 16x9 Widescreen TV then that's a bonus but unless you are monitoring video for adjustment and calibration to NTSC safe colours then the expense of using component isnn't necessary. You'd be better off putting the money towards something more useful like filters, tripods, sound gear, lighting, the list goes on, and on, and on and... __________________ Adrian DVInfo.net Search for quick answers Where to buy? From the best in the business...DVInfo.net sponsors

October 30th, 2002, 06:47 PM	#3
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	You are correct in most of your reasoning. Component output generally provides the best quality signal for input into a monitor. However, I would not choose the least expensive FireWire to component convertor sight unseen. These type of components (devices) almost always need auditioning. This is very subjective work. Have you ever walked into a person home and wanted to adjust the color, saturation, contrast, black level etc. on their TV set? Same kinda thing. Viewing distance also plays a major role in evaluating monitors and display devices. In most cases people get way too close and are disappointed by the apparent lack of sharpness. Maintain a proper and consistent distance when viewing your display devices. Jeff

October 30th, 2002, 08:59 PM	#7
Dennis Hull Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN USA Posts: 151	S VHS Thanks Adrian, just the sort of help I need. I am always looking for the "magic bullet" (in line with "just shoot") that for just a little more money will give a much bigger improvement in quality. But, I also use the limiting factor approach which in this case as you point out, DV resolution is limiting factor and won't benefit much beyond S-VHS level.

October 30th, 2002, 10:15 PM	#8
Zac Stein Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 730	I dunno if this will help everybody here. When dvd started back in 1997, i used to review them professionally for a few australian websites and magazines. We did a big study of composite/s-video/rgb/component and the results wer very suprising. S-video(s-vhs) techincally gives around a %30 better signal to the tv, which results visually into around a %100 improvement percieved. Then the difference becomes compounded, component/rgb only showed a %5 increase in visual quality over s-vhs. This could be streched to %10 on a purely subjective opinion by some viewers. Around %70 preferred s-video! Because it yields sharper images and more defined edges. DVD is mastered in YUV which is what component video actually outputs, so you are watching a pure signal comming off the dvd, well not pure but the least tinkered with. You will not have any colour control on your tv, what is mastered is what you will get. RGB is the european standard, has a slightly higher bandwidth, but offers no advantage as the source YUV is the limiting factor. RGB gives an ever so slightly different looking image, colours are a little bit more uniform, this is not a better image, just slightly differently displayed. (no this is not a PAL NTSC thing) A lot of people feel component image is a little soft, but really it is just not giving super defined blacks (read: unrealistic tweeked digitally) that s-video inherently gives just from the nature of its output. I personally use rgb because my tv can take it. But i have no problem with s-video in the slighest, and use it for my computer output, that %5 difference is so hardly noticable it is pointless. Also i think that a firewire - component converter is most likely a waste of money, and i wouldn't really want something that is playing with the signal like that. I would rather a good breakout box that took a nice clean s-video signal, and stick to component on something native to it, like DVD. kermie

October 31st, 2002, 12:18 AM	#9
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Dennis, If you've won the lottery in the last couple of hours you might want to purchase one of these Faroudja video processors. http://www.lightav.com/home/faroudja/faroudja.html No prices listed, but I know his line tripler and quadupler run around $25,000. Though I sure has something for a little less. Jeff

November 4th, 2002, 08:02 PM	#10
Dennis Hull Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: St. Paul, MN USA Posts: 151	Kermie and Jeff Very interesting and helpful input and thank you Kermie. Jeff, I looked up the website and may buy a lottery ticket.