Ntsc to pal

Discussion in 'Blu-ray & DVD Players & Recorders' started by doncorleone, May 28, 2003.

  1. doncorleone

    doncorleone
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi i dont think that when my sony dvp ns300 dvd player becomes region one modified, that my panasonic tv can accept ntsc pictures.

    The review of my player says 'Pure NTSC/NTSC to PAL conversion: Yes - via the RGB connection)'

    so does this mean that the dvd player can change the ntsc region 1 dvds to pal to work properly on my tv?

    cheers dudes :smoke:
     
  2. TommyVecetti

    TommyVecetti
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2003
    Messages:
    1,763
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    uk
    Ratings:
    +93
    Sounds like it, but remember that DVD players that convert NTSC into pure PAL do so in a rather cruddy way in that you get a very stuttery image because frames are being dropped, as it cannot keep up.

    My advice would be to get a TV that can take NTSC, most half decent ones do.
     
  3. shoestring25

    shoestring25
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    3,720
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    essex
    Ratings:
    +361
    a sony dvd player cannot convert an ntsc into a pal picture (called pal 60) only certain brands panasonic and pioneer to name twocan do this

    pal is always better than ntsc

    cheers
     
  4. nathan_silly

    nathan_silly
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Only for our terrestrial TV.

    Not for american sourced DVD's. Try comparing Fifth Element on R1 and R2.

    I've used PAL & NTSC DVD's on a 8 foot screen. I settled for Region 1's.
     
  5. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    nathan_silly, nathan_silly, nathan_silly. What a generalisation, and not true either! "Better" varies between R1 and R2 (and even R4) on a disc by disc basis -- and depends what you mean by "better".

    PAL = better resolution, less edge enhancement halos, smooth scroll / pan, 4% speed up (of 24fps film) means audio pitch is wrong and too high (if not adjusted).

    NTSC = 20% lower resolution, more edge enhancement, "3:2 pulldown" judder means jerky pans/scrolls, correct speed of audio in 24fps films.

    25fps films are the other way round -- PAL is correct audio and NTSC is 4% slow down mean audio pitch is too low (if not adjusted). Likewise NTSC television shows are 4% faster on PAL, and PAL shows are 4% slower on NTSC.

    Typically both DVD formats are mastered at the same time, movie or television, using the same process. Space restraints / specs (more extras = less space) means that bit-rates and thus quality can vary between R1 and R2 -- but saying one region is intrinsically better than another only justifies your collection not the fact of the matter.

    Although to some, "better" means more extras. To others it may means more DTS soundtracks, or your favourite movie on one disc and not too.

    StooMonster
     
  6. NicolasB

    NicolasB
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2002
    Messages:
    6,367
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Emily's Shop
    Ratings:
    +844
    Nathan, are you maybe using a DVD player that can do NTSC progressive scan but not PAL progressive scan?
     
  7. nathan_silly

    nathan_silly
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    errr where did I say "better"? I didn't.

    I prefer R1 NTSC, and that's that.

    No amount of PAL propaganda from anybody will get me collecting PAL DVD's.
     
  8. RAMiAM

    RAMiAM
    Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    481
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    UK, Kent (nr Ashford)
    Ratings:
    +9
    3:2 judder depending on the quality of your display and processor.

    25fps FILMS - now how many 25fps films have you seen :D

    RAMiAM.
     
  9. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    Plain as day on your kit mate. ;) Or at least it was comparing my R1 Matrix vs your R2 disc. :blush:

    [​IMG]
    INTERLACED: not only does 3:2 pulldown judder motion, but it makes interlace artefacts too.

    [​IMG]
    PROGRESSIVE: no more interlace artefacts, but 3:2 pulldown judder motion is still clearly visible.

    3:2 pulldown "judder" on motion will always be visible on 60Hz displays because of frame order 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,5,5,5,6,6,7,7,7,8,8,9,9,9,etc.,etc.. Only way to remove 3:2 judder is to have 72Hz display and a 3:3 pulldown player/scaler/video processor/HTPC.

    More film is shot at 25fps than you think. :smoke:

    StooMonster (still saying one can't generalise that any DVD Region is always better than another)

    PS: Images from Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity = DVD Benchmark - Part 5 - Progressive Scan DVD. This article gives plenty of easy to follow explanations of why it's so. :cool: Old favourite. :smashin:
     
  10. nathan_silly

    nathan_silly
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I wish they don't exaggerate them animated gif's. They're well OTT. Actual jaggies are about 1mm or 2mm in height

    Unless you're close to the screen you don't see the jaggies.
     
  11. one_jedi

    one_jedi
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    As somoen else said it depends on the DVD itslef wether the NTSC or PAl version is better. As for the NTSC Vs PAL systems i'm sure everyone has there own opinions but from what I have read and know Pal is the better system, partly because it was developed after NTSC so they got rid of some of the problems but both systems have thier pro's and cons.

    As somone said earlier : PAL = better resolution, less edge enhancement halos, smooth scroll / pan, 4% speed up (of 24fps film) means audio pitch is wrong and too high (if not adjusted).

    NTSC = 20% lower resolution, more edge enhancement, "3:2 pulldown" judder means jerky pans/scrolls, correct speed of audio in 24fps films.

    however is dhould be added that motion is rendered better in NTSC video than it is in PAL video becuase the scree updated more screen updates more frequently.

    However when the quality of a DVD comes to when it is encoded. A Pal version done perfectly should be better than the a perfect NTSC version apart from maybe the sound. Althought even tho Pal has a better resoloution often this is unnoticable.

    However when discs are endoded this rarely happens as there are lot's of things to consider. Firstly Pal has about 20% more lines/resoloution which mean this takes up more memory and more work when it's encoded. Dual layer discs ussually solve this problems but if you have a dvd full of special features then it can be a problem.

    Sometimes a Us company might just take more time and do a better encoding, this use to happen a lot earlier on apparently but now the Pal versions ussually get equally good conversions.

    To be honest it depends on the person, some people cant stand the 4% speed-up, some people don't like the slightly jerky NTSC picture. Personally I buy both, I don't notice the PAl spped up at all and althougth I do notice the NTSC jerkyness it only bothers me if I think about it. I wacthed my region 1 X-men the other day and I forget it was NTSC and when I was watching it I didn't notice the jerkiness at all.

    Progressive scan will obviously make both formats better but I have also read that progressive scan in the US reduces the jerkiness even more, don't know if it does it tottaly.

    For a good explanation of PAL Vs NTSC go here http://www.michaeldvd.com.au/Articles/PALvsNTSC/PALvsNTSC.asp it really is very good, you can also link to articles on things like artefacts etc.

    Also i said thins in another psot but it comes back to one of the original points about Pal 60. Pal 60 is superior to NTSC just for the fact that PAl has a superior colour system. The only thing different between PAL 60 and NTSC is the colour system used, the amounts of lines and resoloution remain exactly the same. Also note there is no 'conversion' when you output Pal 60 as some may think, the dvd layer just outputs it as you tell it to and doesn't perform any type of conversion. (if you readt the page I linked to earlier then it mentions how flims are stored on DVD) Most people probably wouldn't notice the difference anyway but Pal 60 is superior, even tho I have never noticed the difference either.

    Aslo all this is only to do with how a DVD looks and sounds, when considering what a 'better' dvd is there are things like cuts (hello mr BBFC) to consider, special features etc.

    Also sometimes certain types of programmes are better than one fomat than another. Take anime series, i'm not going to go into detal but ussually anime seris are much better in NTSC because when it comes to doing a Pal conversion the companines only have an NTSC master about 99% of the time. This creates some problems as any conversion process would especially since when it comes to anime the conversion is ussually done the cheap way making it even worse.

    Thats it from me.
     
  12. calscot

    calscot
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2002
    Messages:
    659
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Milton Keynes
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm just back from a holiday in the states and after watching a couple of large 4:3 tellies I now know how bad NTSC is. I get a tad pixelisation on my pj but that is nothing compared to the scanlines on the TV's which were clearly and annoyingly visible from about 4-5 times screen width.

    I don't think the large tellies produced wide enough scanlines to fill the screen with 480 lines.

    On tv programmes the NTSC tellies (about 29 inch diagonal) had 5 or 6 millimeters of jaggies and that includes slow movements. Some one would move their head and half their head would be feathered.

    Resolution also appeared to be too low as to be noticable and line twitter and moire were all over the place.

    I never knew we had it so good.

    Back here I'm looking out for a progressive scan DVD player as although my pj deinterlaces it doesn't do a great job - but I do notice that the worst jaggies come from my R1 Lexx DVD's.

    Cheers,
    Cal.
     
  13. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    I think that you'll find that PAL60 is actually PAL's resolution (576 lines), but NTSC's refresh rate (60Hz).

    Both Region1 and Region2 DVDs use MPEG2 encoding, which is component video (YUV) based therefore colour system is the same for both. Interestingly YUV is the broadcast PAL colour system, some say invented by the BBC and other by the Germans.

    Most modern PAL DVD players can output NTSC as either NTSC, PAL60 or regular PAL. The "convertion" people refer to is where players can not output PAL60, or screen can not display 60Hz signal (either NTSC or PAL60), then NTSC is converted to PAL50 (regular PAL) in realtime by dropping frames. *Typically one in five, thus converting 30fps to 25fps.

    StooMonster
     
  14. one_jedi

    one_jedi
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm pretty sure it's not the resoloution that is changed, just the colour system Pal Colour signal (MHz) is 4.43, NTSC is 3.58 . In fact it should be impossible to increse the line resoloution as there is only a certain amount of line encoded onto a DVD, you can't increse the resoloution as there is nothing there to increse. Wehn people try playing an NTSC dvd on an incompatible TV they get a pictue that is balck and white because the of the different NTSC colour system, hence Pal 60 uses the Pal colour system but keeps everything else the same.
     
  15. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    Not raster-line structure is it? Thinking about bandwidth, it's colour model only. :zonked: It's like PAL-M in Brazil.

    But PAL's YUV or NTSC's YIQ colour model only affects composite and s-video, not component or RGB; perhaps PAL60 should be relabed "NTSC" on these outputs settings?

    StooMonster
     
  16. one_jedi

    one_jedi
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    arghhh! getting to technical to me. All I know is from what I read is that the only thing that is diiferent is the colour system! This is backed up by when I watch a dvd on Pal 60 or NTSC the only difference is the colour (as when my TV goes to NTSC the colour setting goes really high) everything else is EXACTLY the same!
     
  17. nathan_silly

    nathan_silly
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Your TV needs calibrating to NTSC then. You could also say PAL is is wrong because when changing over to PAL the colour goes really low.
     
  18. one_jedi

    one_jedi
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think it just a problem with the TV. It's a phillips widescreen and I know some other people have had the same problem. The Pal picture is fine, in fact the colour is slightly down then when i first got it as it was to bright. When it goes to NTSC tho the colour is really bright, it's about the same if i increased the colour by 20-30 notches on the colour settings.
     
  19. RAMiAM

    RAMiAM
    Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    481
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    UK, Kent (nr Ashford)
    Ratings:
    +9
    I don't remember reading anywhere in my message that I said my system wasn't effected. I actually said "quality of processor", i.e., scaler or such, that could specify refresh rates. Something that wasn't in the loop when we compared R1&R2 Matrix :confused:
    Actually sometimes 48Hz looks better than 72Hz as your only doubling up on frames rather than trippling :lesson:

    Google at the ready Mr. Stoomonster ;) What films, other than maybe small house UK productions, have you seen on DVD shot at 25fps :confused: Seriously I would be interested.

    You really should have "www.hometheaterhifi.com" as your signature, better than that clever fluff you've currently got :D

    RAMiAM - slightly confused
     
  20. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    RAMiAM mate, only yanking your chain. :) Your kit is lovely. I think you read that the wrong way, or it doesn't read how I meant it.

    I've yet to see 3:3 pulldown in action and therefore elimination of j-u-d-d-e-r which I can find more annoying than any audio issue. Perhaps I should set it up on my HTPC/plasma and give it a go.

    I'd have though 48Hz was a bit flickery -- but that's what's used in cinema, each frame is played twice.

    It's not a law of physics that all movies are shot at 24fps, shot not played. Starter for one, and most recent movie I watched, "48 days later".

    Perhaps my ironic signature needs an update already. :clown:

    StooMonster
     
  21. Nic Rhodes

    Nic Rhodes
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    17,133
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Cumbria
    Ratings:
    +1,276
    One Jedi

    this was for our other thread but seemed more appropriate here:

    There are pros and cons to all these transmission system and whether one is better than another is the matter of much discussion and I don't really think there is one answer but a few comments (c/o my S and W book!) which teaches me everything

    PAL and NTSC use the amplitude and phase modulation of the two colour difference signals. [SECAM use frequency modulation] You could argue that SECAM has advantage here as the chroma portion of the composite signal is virtually immune to noise and phase shifts but.......

    The FM-modulated subcarriers preclude use of effective comb filtering in decoding, SECAM composite transmission causes interfence with the luminance. So, while it's true that SECAM is very robust against the sort of problems with differential gain and phase in transmisison channels that were important in the 1960s (but not now), PAL and NTSC both permit much cleaner decoding of the composite by using modern sophisticated comb filtering. Moreover, the differential gain / phase problems (Never The Same
    Colour) have vanished with modern transmission equipment and receivers. Modern equipment has gotten so stable to rendering NTSC (the simplest of the encoding systems), it migth be preferable in practice even to PAL because of PAL's more complex decoding requirements and more complex frame and field sequences.

    The component domain is much more interesting however where PAL / NTSC have no place here. SECAM even realised this years ago and most SECAM production / post used to be done in PAL before component! This is why the the euorpean lead the way with digital component video systems (SDI) going back almost 15 years now. Component video just defines chroma combining and NTSC / PAL terms are irrelevant.

    Having said all that SDI R2 DVD is the way to go! I still believe PAL 60 was just to get around a limitation of older tv systems (philips in aprticular see sticky by me on this) but most of these now do the processing in the component domain from what I can work ot now (or SVideo little brother).
     
  22. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    RAMiAM, how it was meant to sound was: you have state-of-the-art kit :) and we can still see it :eek:, how much better "quality of your display and processor" do you have to go? ;) Is there anything better? :clown:

    The Beekeeper, that's all true but aren't all the snippets you've posted in regard to broadcast transmissions?

    Except "The component domain is much more interesting however where PAL / NTSC have no place here" which is true, if your DVD player is outputting a component or RGB video signal then there is no PAL/NTSC colourspace distinction; the diffence is it's either 480 lines @ 50Hz ot 576 lines @ 60 Hz.

    StooMonster
     
  23. RAMiAM

    RAMiAM
    Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    481
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    UK, Kent (nr Ashford)
    Ratings:
    +9
    Not all movies are shot at 24fps - shock, horror, you are wise oh Yoda.
    "48 Days Later", is that the sequel, or maybe even the prequel ;)

    RAMiAM, IamRAM
     
  24. RAMiAM

    RAMiAM
    Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Messages:
    481
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    UK, Kent (nr Ashford)
    Ratings:
    +9
    Now your just being patronising and a little sad :D

    RAMiAM, IamRAM
     
  25. Nic Rhodes

    Nic Rhodes
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    17,133
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Cumbria
    Ratings:
    +1,276
    StooMonster

    This is exactly the point, there are comments criticising NTSC when people are dealing with component based DVD. There are comments on the colour issues re NTSC and composite processing re PAL / NTSC. The whole debate is mixed up, I put the snippets in re broadcast as I have already covered the domestic stuff re tv internals in a sticky thread I wrote years ago now. It is a matter of seeing what is relevant for each situation.

    I still think it best shown in component r2 DVD output from DVD working in a Tv but not working with R1 (B and W)!
     
  26. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    :hiya: Was trying to use every single icon. :devil:

    StooMonster :D
     
  27. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    You said name one ... I named the bastard cross between "48 hours" and "28 days later" where Nick Nolte and Eddie Murphy battle murderous raging zombies in England. :D Always with the typos. :rolleyes:

    Hrm... [YODA]"28 days later" it was. Laugh we must, young RAMiAM.[/YODA]

    StooMonster

    Edited for yet more typos! Can't spell Yoda!
     
  28. StooMonster

    StooMonster
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    4,971
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +314
    Mainstream Hollywood is mostly 24fps indeed, and non-pitch-adjusted PAL can be annoying I guess but 3:2 jjudddderr can do my eyes in. I buy which is cheaper. :D

    Very wise with the television series or you get your 4% speedup of PAL conversion of NTSC television's filmed dramas, just like British television broadcasts do; and 4% slowdown of NTSC conversion of PAL television material, as well as loss of 20% of picture resolution ... double nasty. Only downside I guess is some US shows being 4:3 in R1 and 16:9 in R2.

    I think that it's funny that some people are so mad for R1 that they even buy PAL tv shows in this format, ironically often the same people who say the can't stand audio distortion of unadjusted PAL -- but 4% slow down is okay apparently!

    StooMonster
     

Share This Page

Loading...