Well the new 3 Chippers are out...

Justin Boyle · April 7th, 2004, 02:07 AM

I should have read a little more. camcorderinfo says that the 16:9 mode is digitally altered so thats that. it is an utter waste of the extra resolution on the ccd's. Effectively you could say that because the are used on the ccd's is less then the effective, then they may as well be smaller than 1/6 inch.

Justin

Peter Jefferson · April 7th, 2004, 03:13 AM

in response t Pal vs NTSC resolution

one thing to note is that PAL is generally a higer res with a higher peaking colour than NTSC... res is anythign between 20k to 40k pixels and our legal broadcast colours are slight more "flexible" so contrasts are a lil deeper (generally speaking)

Frank Granovski · April 7th, 2004, 03:18 AM

PAL - Perfection At Last. :-))

Tommy Haupfear · April 7th, 2004, 07:26 AM

Quote:

I should have read a little more. camcorderinfo says that the 16:9 mode is digitally altered so thats that. it is an utter waste of the extra resolution on the ccd's.

The GS120 and GS200 lack optical image stabilization and use pixels on the CCD for its digital image stabilization. That pretty much rules out a HQ widescreen mode. Some cams disable image stabilizatoin altogether while in 16:9 mode since they are both vying for the same CCD pixels.

Justin Boyle · April 8th, 2004, 03:21 AM

thanks for that tommy. it only takes a little common sense to nut that one out doesn't it. does this mean though that the image stabilizer on these cams are going to be much better then before. wouldn't that be great. that was always the biggest thing against the gs-70 separating it from the 500. apart from 16:9 of course.

Justin

Chris Szypulski · April 16th, 2004, 08:44 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Peter Jefferson : in response t Pal vs NTSC resolution

one thing to note is that PAL is generally a higer res with a higher peaking colour than NTSC... res is anythign between 20k to 40k pixels and our legal broadcast colours are slight more "flexible" so contrasts are a lil deeper (generally speaking) -->>>

NTSC can actually produce better colors than PAL. The problem of shifting color was only in analog broadcasting. If video cable was used there was no problem and today with digital recording and broadcasting the problem is all gone.

Contrast is the same as DV always records at 0 ire. It depends on how the display is calibrated.
Many people do not realize this but you get exactly the same pixel count per each frame both in PAL and NTSC. PAL has higher horizontal resolution but NTSC has higher temporal resolution.

Here are the numbers:

NTSC 720x480x30=10368000 pixels
PAL 720x576x25=10368000 pixels

Frank Granovski · April 18th, 2004, 04:54 AM

Thanks, Chris.

Quote:

NTSC can actually produce better colors than PAL.

But why do people say, "NTSC, never the same color." :-))

Graham Bernard · April 18th, 2004, 06:18 AM

Frank, that'll be the "Rose Tinted Glasses!"

Grazie

Chris Szypulski · April 19th, 2004, 05:44 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Thanks, Chris.But why do people say, "NTSC, never the same color." :-)) -->>>

As I mentioned this was only a problem during early days of analog color RF broadcasting. Basically color subcarrier would shift in phase so when you went from channel to channel you would have to adjust hue. This was mostly eliminated when manufacturers started using transistors and IC's in TV sets.

If you went baseband video directly into monitor this problem never existed as there was no RF subcarrier. Nowadays with digital broadcasting this does not exist as there is no subcariers just data bits.

April 7th, 2004, 02:07 AM	#16
Justin Boyle Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 207	I should have read a little more. camcorderinfo says that the 16:9 mode is digitally altered so thats that. it is an utter waste of the extra resolution on the ccd's. Effectively you could say that because the are used on the ccd's is less then the effective, then they may as well be smaller than 1/6 inch. Justin __________________ jlboyle

April 8th, 2004, 03:21 AM	#20
Justin Boyle Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 207	thanks for that tommy. it only takes a little common sense to nut that one out doesn't it. does this mean though that the image stabilizer on these cams are going to be much better then before. wouldn't that be great. that was always the biggest thing against the gs-70 separating it from the 500. apart from 16:9 of course. Justin __________________ jlboyle

April 7th, 2004, 03:13 AM	#17
Peter Jefferson Inner Circle Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Aus Posts: 3,884	in response t Pal vs NTSC resolution one thing to note is that PAL is generally a higer res with a higher peaking colour than NTSC... res is anythign between 20k to 40k pixels and our legal broadcast colours are slight more "flexible" so contrasts are a lil deeper (generally speaking)

April 7th, 2004, 03:18 AM	#18
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	PAL - Perfection At Last. :-))

April 16th, 2004, 08:44 AM	#21
Chris Szypulski New Boot Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 8	<<<-- Originally posted by Peter Jefferson : in response t Pal vs NTSC resolution one thing to note is that PAL is generally a higer res with a higher peaking colour than NTSC... res is anythign between 20k to 40k pixels and our legal broadcast colours are slight more "flexible" so contrasts are a lil deeper (generally speaking) -->>> NTSC can actually produce better colors than PAL. The problem of shifting color was only in analog broadcasting. If video cable was used there was no problem and today with digital recording and broadcasting the problem is all gone. Contrast is the same as DV always records at 0 ire. It depends on how the display is calibrated. Many people do not realize this but you get exactly the same pixel count per each frame both in PAL and NTSC. PAL has higher horizontal resolution but NTSC has higher temporal resolution. Here are the numbers: NTSC 720x480x30=10368000 pixels PAL 720x576x25=10368000 pixels

April 18th, 2004, 06:18 AM	#23
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	Frank, that'll be the "Rose Tinted Glasses!" Grazie

April 19th, 2004, 05:44 AM	#24
Chris Szypulski New Boot Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 8	<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Granovski : Thanks, Chris.But why do people say, "NTSC, never the same color." :-)) -->>> As I mentioned this was only a problem during early days of analog color RF broadcasting. Basically color subcarrier would shift in phase so when you went from channel to channel you would have to adjust hue. This was mostly eliminated when manufacturers started using transistors and IC's in TV sets. If you went baseband video directly into monitor this problem never existed as there was no RF subcarrier. Nowadays with digital broadcasting this does not exist as there is no subcariers just data bits.