question on effective video pixel rating at DVinfo.net

Don Barner · December 2nd, 2003, 01:32 PM

I know the real answer to my question is to take the following two cams and directly compare them - but I was hoping to at least tap the knowledge here and get some answers. Regarding the effective video pixels used by a camera - will anything greater than 720x480 - approx. 346 k pixels show up when burning footage to DVD ? take for example the canon Optura 20 - it is a 1+ megapixel still camera - with 690K effective video pixels - I am assuming this effective count has already subtracted the overhead of EIS which I don't know ?. Then take the PVDV-53 which has 680K pixels from what I can gather about 340K of effective pixels for video. The big question - will those extra pixels in the Canon really help the picture quality at all once you cut the footage to DVD - I am sure I would see a difference feeding the camcorder directly into the TV given the dv53 has about 400 lines af res versus the Canon 's 500+ lines - but my concern is when burning the footage to DVD - does the extra effective pixels really help the dvd footage since it is only able to display 720x480 ?

Frank Granovski · December 2nd, 2003, 01:39 PM

A high, CCD video effective pixel count will capture more information and will give you better looking video, even when you lose resolution say when you go to VHS tape.

Glenn Chan · December 2nd, 2003, 04:12 PM

A factor that can have a big impact on the quality is the low pass filter on the CCD. Cameras can't handle very fine detail well (fine detail can cause false colors) so there's a filter in place to blur things out a little. Ideally the low pass filter and the lens will blur very fine detail but leave other stuff alone.3CCD cameras don't have that problem.

Image comparisons at http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...8%2Findex.html and http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel....html&lp=ja_en (GREAT Japanese site translated with Babelfish) gives an idea of how cameras stack up. Unfortunately some of the images are resized down. If you compare the Sony TRV33 and the TRV22, the TRV22 is not as sharp and it has less pixels. (It's also significantly better in low light!)

In 1CCD cameras the extra pixels should help give you better detail.

December 2nd, 2003, 01:32 PM	#1
Don Barner New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 8	question on effective video pixel rating I know the real answer to my question is to take the following two cams and directly compare them - but I was hoping to at least tap the knowledge here and get some answers. Regarding the effective video pixels used by a camera - will anything greater than 720x480 - approx. 346 k pixels show up when burning footage to DVD ? take for example the canon Optura 20 - it is a 1+ megapixel still camera - with 690K effective video pixels - I am assuming this effective count has already subtracted the overhead of EIS which I don't know ?. Then take the PVDV-53 which has 680K pixels from what I can gather about 340K of effective pixels for video. The big question - will those extra pixels in the Canon really help the picture quality at all once you cut the footage to DVD - I am sure I would see a difference feeding the camcorder directly into the TV given the dv53 has about 400 lines af res versus the Canon 's 500+ lines - but my concern is when burning the footage to DVD - does the extra effective pixels really help the dvd footage since it is only able to display 720x480 ?

December 2nd, 2003, 01:39 PM	#2
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	A high, CCD video effective pixel count will capture more information and will give you better looking video, even when you lose resolution say when you go to VHS tape.

December 2nd, 2003, 04:12 PM	#3
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	A factor that can have a big impact on the quality is the low pass filter on the CCD. Cameras can't handle very fine detail well (fine detail can cause false colors) so there's a filter in place to blur things out a little. Ideally the low pass filter and the lens will blur very fine detail but leave other stuff alone.3CCD cameras don't have that problem. Image comparisons at http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel...8%2Findex.html and http://babelfish.altavista.com/babel....html&lp=ja_en (GREAT Japanese site translated with Babelfish) gives an idea of how cameras stack up. Unfortunately some of the images are resized down. If you compare the Sony TRV33 and the TRV22, the TRV22 is not as sharp and it has less pixels. (It's also significantly better in low light!) In 1CCD cameras the extra pixels should help give you better detail.