[mobily]

Hey all,

What are peoples thoughts on whether an ntsc progressive scan image is better than an ordinary pal image?

Cheers

[chedmaster]

far better. my tv only does progressive in ntsc, not pal, so i have the ultimate choice of watching things pal or converting them, by my dvd player, to ntsc then progressive (with no judder i might add). ntsc progressive is in a different league imo, wish it did pal progressive!

[bonzobanana]

Well in theory PAL progressive should be better but a) dvds can only store so much data and so the bit rate can be reduced for pal dvds and also sometimes they simply do a better job on the ntsc versions of dvds.

Add to that many plasmas and some LCD based displays/projectors have a resolution like 858x484 which does ntsc progressive perfectly with a 1:1 pixel map but has to downscale pal progressive images so pal detail is lost anyway.

End result for me is NTSC is generally superior because of my setup but that doesn't stop me buying PAL dvds though but I generally try to buy ntsc in preference and certain blockbusters with epic locations and amazing effects I'll always buy as NTSC versions.

[Mr.D]

Originally Posted by mobily

Hey all,

What are peoples thoughts on whether an ntsc progressive scan image is better than an ordinary pal image?

Cheers

Apples and oranges and it all depends on how good the deinterlacing is in the player vs the display. If the display is inherently progressive it will deinterlace any interlaced inputs anway

[chedmaster]

Originally Posted by bonzobanana

Well in theory PAL progressive should be better

mobily asked ntsc progressive v interlaced pal. im sure pal progressive is far superior if displayed natively.

[David Mackenzie]

Although I've heard PAL Progressive flickers like crazy on some CRTs?

The progressive image should always be better than the interlaced one. Unless nothing's moving...

[Nick_UK]

It really all depends on the source material. Movies should look better in PAL progressive, because PAL is 25fps, and movies are 24 fps so all that really needs to be done is to run the movie at 25fps, which gives good results. The situation is different for NTSC, because NTSC is 30 fps, and movies are 24 fps, which means that fields have to be dropped.

However, many PAL movies are converted from the NTSC versions, and not the movie stock itself, which is the worst possible scenario.

This site is the best I've come across for this sort of stuff. Some wonderful explanations there.

[pjclark1]

apparently alien Quadrilogy NTSC has wierd smear effects when compared to the PAL version. Summit to do with the processing to change the movie for NTSC.

[David Mackenzie]

Originally Posted by Nick_UK

However, many PAL movies are converted from the NTSC versions, and not the movie stock itself, which is the worst possible scenario.

I'd have thought that'd be really uncommon nowadays - only for lower budget stuff, or material that's heavily music based (to keep the pitch correct).