can someone please explain this for me?

Well what would you like to know?

We could all start talking about the history, places these are used, specifications of the signal, etc...but there are PLENTY of articles online and discussion here about it already. Please do a search here or at Google.com first. Thx

i tried searching here but i couldn't limit the search enough to find out the difference and i didn't wanna have to look through every thread that says NTSC or PAL in them. i was just curious as to what the difference between the 2 was.

The basics are...
NTSC consists of a 720X480 pixels space being refrshed at 60Hz, or shown at 60 interlaced fields (29.97 frames) per second. It is used mostly in N.A. and Japan.

PAL is 720X576 pixels being refreshed at 50 fps. It is used mostly in some parts of Europe.

The two specs are incompatible due to actual picture size and frame rates (NTSC won't play on a PAL only system, and vice versa without some conversion). If you multiply all the numbers inside each spec they equal eachother. It was just 2 ways of getting the same amount of picture info out. NTSC looks smoother due to the higher frame refresh rate, but PAL has better color space.

To sum it up in a little table form:

NTSC:
- resolution: 720 x 480 (DV)
- framerate: 29.97 frames per second (fps) / 59.94 fields per second, also known as 30 fps and 60 fields per second

PAL:
- resolution: 720 x 576 (DV)
- framerate: 25 fps / 50 fields per second

For more technical information (including analog frequencies)
on PAL, SECAM & NTSC and the where it is used in the world
check out the following link:

http://www.high-techproductions.com/pal,ntsc.htm

For more information on frames, progressive and interlacing
see the following thread:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21130

ok, thanks alot for the help. it's much apprcieated.

Anyone,

I produce video in the U.S. but want to get an XL2 pal because:
1. Higher gross pixel count / higher vertical resolution
2. 4:2:1 color space
3. Converts to DVD cleaner than ntsc.
4. Most projectors and dvd players have pal/ntsc option.

Are my facts right?
Do any other ntsc country people here work with pal?
And how do you manage it?

Thanks
Michael Hamilton

I forgot to ask if all things considered, is it a very practical idea to work with pal in the U.S. considering that most everybody else here is using ntsc ( you know swapping files and tapes etc. ).

Double thanks in advance
Michael Hamilton

As european i got the same reaction but from PAL to NTSC.
Here in europe , everybody is able to read NTSC, because the large amount of zone 1 DVD, so here in europe nobody would buy a DVD player that is not multi-zone. So there is no problem to use a NTSC camera (as long the final output is on DVD).
For the screens, most of the projectors and screens have now a RGB, or Y, Pb,PR output and are compatible with both standards.
I am not interested by NTSC or 30fps, but in my case the only way to go HDV was to take the JVC in US format as the european model has no HDV feature. It is a different story with the new sony, but that is another story.
I think the reverse is not true.
America is living on his own, and always had ignored PAL.
the result is i doubt the DVD player found in your supermarket are multi-zone or your screens are multi-standard.
So you could end up with a nice video that you can only display on very specific equipment in your country.
The only advantage to go to PAL for you would be to use progressive pictures knowing that 25fps is not so far from the 24fps of film, but for video frankly it is more a conversion nightmare than a good deal.

You could certainly work with a PAL camera if its for your own purposes, but swapping and mixing work with others and their NTSC workflows could be a hassle as you'll most likely have to convert all your footage. You could not, say for instance, plug your cam into a friends TV and expect to watch video off of it, as a European might be able to do with NTSC.

Thanks. I really appreciate your input.
Looks like we are stuck with lower resolution SD here in the U.S.
I guess I'll get ntsc cam then.
Michael Hamilton

Jesse,

"If you multiply all the numbers inside each spec they equal eachother. It was just 2 ways of getting the same amount of picture info out. NTSC looks smoother due to the higher frame refresh rate, but PAL has better color space."

So pal essentially has no more overall resolution than ntsc?
And the only difference in picture quality is 4:1:1 vs 4:2:1?

Michael

PAL does have more resolution in a single frame, but spaced over a single second, they are equivalent in picture information becuase NTSC shows more frames...

PAL 720 horizontal X 576 Vertical X 50Hz = 20736000
NTSC 720 horizontal X 480 Vertical X 60Hz = 20736000

Same amount of picture info, over time (and besides color space). I don't actually know why we don't use the same color space, though. Anybody?

PAL (DV) is actually 4:2:0, not 4:2:1. NTSC (DV) is 4:1:1. I can't
attest to quality, but I read some places it is supposed to be a
bit better indeed.

For the technically minded out there wondering about color space...

http://www.cs.sfu.ca/CourseCentral/365/li/material/notes/Chap3/Chap3.3/Chap3.3.html

PAL is 25 fps.

To sum it up in a little table form:

PAL:
- resolution: 720 x 576 (DV)
- framerate: 30 fps / 50 fields per second

Y (luminance) is the CIE Y primary.
That statement in the website is incorrect.

see http://www.poynton.com/papers/YUV_and_luminance_harmful.html

Abstract

The notation YUV, and the term luminance, are widespread in digital video. However, digital video almost never uses Y'UV color difference components, and never directly represents the luminance of color science. The common terms are almost always wrong. This note explains why. I urge video engineers and computer graphics specialists to use the correct terms, almost always Y'CBCR and luma.

Victor: of course it is. I must have typed that too fast. I edited my original
post to reflect the correct number of 25. Thanks for spotting that!

p.s. the fields number of 50 was correct

Before you run out and buy a PAL camera, be aware of some of the drawbacks. To go to DVD you need to deinterlace the footage and slow it down 4% so in essense you're shooting at 25p. 25p or 24p cannot handle the quick handheld jerkyness that most of us get when we grab a camera and start shooting. If you are not tripod, dolly tracking or steadycam shooting your footage it's going to look unsteady. Also, there is a lot of 60 hertz flickering in US lighting, especially when there is flourescent lighting. Many people are now using daylight temperature screw in flourescent lights in place of old fashioned power hungry bulbs. Shooting NTSC you'll never notice this because the 60i frame rate matches but shoot PAL and you'll see lights flickering everywhere. Shooting PAL makes a lot of sense if you're in a PAL country or if you're shooting a lit movie with compatible lighting and your final output is 100% going to be film, but I wouldn't do it otherwise unless I lived in a PAL area.