Quote:
Originally Posted by FredThompson
I think you mis-understood what I tryed to communicate.
Then again, maybe I misunderstand your misunderstanding
The phosphur on a TV has greater persistance than that of a monitor. This means the phosphur glows longer. Because of this, the display will tend to smooth the image temporaly. That is my understanding. Maybe it is incorrect. I meant DV played to a TV does not show as many problems as when it is played on a computer monitor because a TV screen is designed to blend different frames to hide interlace.
I did not mean phosphur is somehow divided into a grid pattern.
I still don't know if new_bee is using NTSC DV or PAL DV. The "problem" with NTSC DV is it uses 1 chroma value for four horizontal pixels. This chroma value is determined for each frame. If you have a static object which is in part of a 4-pixel block, the motion in the other pixels of that block will affect the choice of an "optimal" chroma value for all four pixels. This can result in a flickering effect of static objects as the edge chroma changes.
Also, with a camcorder or an analog capture, the source value of the analog portion which is sampled to a pixel changes slightly continuously. This also affects the choice of chroma and luma for any particular pixel.
|
FredThompson,
read this link please!
here, the things that i was trying to show are very clear.
see details and differences from tvs and monitors

and the reasons of my questions.
read the itens: Television and Resolution: Lines, Lines & Lines
see the diiferences between ntsc,pal, monitors
and what is telecide,interlace,etc,etc.
of course,this page explain better than my poor english but
it was my work for 30 years, but can't write it all in english.
is a great link:
http://nickyguides.digital-digest.com/interlace.htm

a few lines from the link posted:
"To cut a long story short a TV screen
is about twice as fuzzy as a PC screen,
this means when we capture a TV picture onto a PC screen
we only need half the resolution for the same quality!
So capturing a TV movie at a PC resolution of 640 x 480 is overkill.
If you are recording from VHS the same quality should easily fit
into a resolution as low as 384 x 288 or smaller! "

more:
"Resolutions are an important issue for amateur video
enthusiastswho want to capture their video at full TV quality.
Professional video editors are told to capture at 640 x 480 pixels
for highest quality. But a PAL TV resolution is 576 lines down.
Then we have the Mpeg group saying that 352 x 288 is the
full VHS video resolution! The problem seems to lie in the fact that
its hard to equate a TV resolution with a computer image.
The TV is built up of lines but the dot definition is rather "fuzzy" looking.
my hint:

have some mistakes here in thie link
is not the pal system that have 576 lines down
is the standard "G"....means pal -G.

the pal-M standard have everything like ntsc,
only changing the color system,
not the standard cos ntsc( USA) is standard

"M".
for more that you catch ,ever you got big mistakes,
like in this link that have great explanations.
thanks!