Home Entertainment & Technology Resource

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

PAL vs. SECAM vs. NTSC

Discussion in 'TVs' started by myself, Nov 10, 2002.

  1. myself

    myself Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi all,

    I have a question if anyone can help me. It might look a bit silly but I am a newbie :)

    Is PAL better than SECAM? What about NTSC? What advantages and disadvantages do they have?
    I know they are video standards, are they also television standards?

    Many thanks for any help.

    :confused:
  2. Rob.Screene

    Rob.Screene Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2001
    Messages:
    1,027
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +32
    From an old Laserdisc FAQ:

    Pictures per second
    PAL:50 (requires 4.16% speed-up for 24fps film)
    NTSC:59.94 (requires 2-3 pulldown duplication for 24fps film)

    Total number of scanlines
    PAL:625
    NTSC:525

    Number of lines visible (full field)
    PAL:575
    NTSC:485

    Video bandwidth
    PAL:5MHz{Note that the _broadcast_ video bandwidth is 5.5MHz in UK/Eire}
    NTSC:4.2MHz

    Effect of "diff gain" problem.
    PAL: Immune
    NTSC: Produces color errors, e.g. green faces
  3. jim.rae

    jim.rae Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm not really sure why you are asking the question...

    At last we have now got away from international TV standards, and PAL and SECAM are now becoming increasingly isolated as we receive more and more digital pictures...

    On balance, PAL and SECAM pictures are much better than NTSC.

    However Digital pictures are the way forward...
  4. mandlebrot

    mandlebrot Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2001
    Messages:
    427
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    Well digital is the way to go but only if the digital providers i.e Sky and NTL etc sort out the bit rate and give us a constant higher rate to stop these awful blocky pictures we get on some channels. In the present climate this is unlikely IMO due to the greed of said providers so a good strong anologue signal wins the day.
  5. myself

    myself Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Many thanks for all your help.
    Really appreciated.
  6. tazpc

    tazpc Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2002
    Messages:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Ratings:
    +4
    Whether a picture is digital or not the same question of broadcast standard arises.

    PAL digital
    NTSC digital

    this is the age old DVD debate.

    There are pros and cons to both

    Lots of issues complicate this debate.

    Numbers of lines used to make up a picture

    Progressive scan or not.

    Pitch alteration for PAL.

    Smoothness vs detail

    Quality of transfer ( or in the case of broadcast digital, bitrate)

    TV calibration.


    and above all personal preference.
  7. Rob.Screene

    Rob.Screene Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2001
    Messages:
    1,027
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +32
    I agree that DVD's and digital tv transmissions mean the material will only have to go down to component and not actually the NTSC or PAL colour systems, but they still have to fit the existing display rates for backwards compatibility.

    I hate the judder on NTSC films (DVD's or Laserdiscs), I now know it's because of the 2-3 pulldown duplicating fields to make the 23.976fps match the 59.94 fields per second NTSC.

    However with progressive scan players or any TV that can do NTSC 2-3 pulldown removal this becomes irrelevant.

    PAL discs don't need this, but do need a speed-up which can make audio annoying, especially if you know the proper pitch for the film too (Star Wars theme!).

    I don't think the benefits of PAL progressive scan are as great as for NTSC because there were no juddering duplicated fields to remove. Don't get me wrong, the benefits of both are huge on a large projection screen.

    With video scalers/htpc's the vertical resultion differences of 480 v.s. 576 becomes surprisingly close for 16:9 anamorphic wide material.
    i.e.
    Have NTSC progressive scan+scaler+hd display(plasma/projector, etc) = Usually get NTSC version.
    Have NTSC progressive scan capability=Usually get NTSC version
    NTSC/PAL standard definition=Get the PAL version, unless cuts offend you or it's a particularly bad transfer video or audio.

    Since this is the TV forum, has anyone compared an NTSC progressive scan v.s. the equivalent PAL interlaced disc on a telly?

    Rob.

Share This Page