NTSC and PAL at DVinfo.net

Ricky Serret · September 21st, 2004, 03:58 AM

can someone please explain this for me?

Rob Lohman · September 21st, 2004, 04:09 AM

Well what would you like to know?

Jesse Bekas · September 21st, 2004, 09:28 AM

We could all start talking about the history, places these are used, specifications of the signal, etc...but there are PLENTY of articles online and discussion here about it already. Please do a search here or at Google.com first. Thx

Ricky Serret · September 21st, 2004, 11:18 PM

i tried searching here but i couldn't limit the search enough to find out the difference and i didn't wanna have to look through every thread that says NTSC or PAL in them. i was just curious as to what the difference between the 2 was.

Jesse Bekas · September 21st, 2004, 11:32 PM

The basics are...
NTSC consists of a 720X480 pixels space being refrshed at 60Hz, or shown at 60 interlaced fields (29.97 frames) per second. It is used mostly in N.A. and Japan.

PAL is 720X576 pixels being refreshed at 50 fps. It is used mostly in some parts of Europe.

The two specs are incompatible due to actual picture size and frame rates (NTSC won't play on a PAL only system, and vice versa without some conversion). If you multiply all the numbers inside each spec they equal eachother. It was just 2 ways of getting the same amount of picture info out. NTSC looks smoother due to the higher frame refresh rate, but PAL has better color space.

Rob Lohman · September 22nd, 2004, 02:55 AM

To sum it up in a little table form:

NTSC:
- resolution: 720 x 480 (DV)
- framerate: 29.97 frames per second (fps) / 59.94 fields per second, also known as 30 fps and 60 fields per second

PAL:
- resolution: 720 x 576 (DV)
- framerate: 25 fps / 50 fields per second

For more technical information (including analog frequencies)
on PAL, SECAM & NTSC and the where it is used in the world
check out the following link:

http://www.high-techproductions.com/pal,ntsc.htm

For more information on frames, progressive and interlacing
see the following thread:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=21130

Ricky Serret · September 22nd, 2004, 12:20 PM

ok, thanks alot for the help. it's much apprcieated.

Michael Hamilton · September 23rd, 2004, 03:13 PM

Anyone,

I produce video in the U.S. but want to get an XL2 pal because:
1. Higher gross pixel count / higher vertical resolution
2. 4:2:1 color space
3. Converts to DVD cleaner than ntsc.
4. Most projectors and dvd players have pal/ntsc option.

Are my facts right?
Do any other ntsc country people here work with pal?
And how do you manage it?

Thanks
Michael Hamilton

Michael Hamilton · September 23rd, 2004, 03:22 PM

I forgot to ask if all things considered, is it a very practical idea to work with pal in the U.S. considering that most everybody else here is using ntsc ( you know swapping files and tapes etc. ).

Double thanks in advance
Michael Hamilton

Giroud Francois · September 23rd, 2004, 03:55 PM

As european i got the same reaction but from PAL to NTSC.
Here in europe , everybody is able to read NTSC, because the large amount of zone 1 DVD, so here in europe nobody would buy a DVD player that is not multi-zone. So there is no problem to use a NTSC camera (as long the final output is on DVD).
For the screens, most of the projectors and screens have now a RGB, or Y, Pb,PR output and are compatible with both standards.
I am not interested by NTSC or 30fps, but in my case the only way to go HDV was to take the JVC in US format as the european model has no HDV feature. It is a different story with the new sony, but that is another story.
I think the reverse is not true.
America is living on his own, and always had ignored PAL.
the result is i doubt the DVD player found in your supermarket are multi-zone or your screens are multi-standard.
So you could end up with a nice video that you can only display on very specific equipment in your country.
The only advantage to go to PAL for you would be to use progressive pictures knowing that 25fps is not so far from the 24fps of film, but for video frankly it is more a conversion nightmare than a good deal.

Jesse Bekas · September 23rd, 2004, 08:49 PM

You could certainly work with a PAL camera if its for your own purposes, but swapping and mixing work with others and their NTSC workflows could be a hassle as you'll most likely have to convert all your footage. You could not, say for instance, plug your cam into a friends TV and expect to watch video off of it, as a European might be able to do with NTSC.

Michael Hamilton · September 24th, 2004, 08:04 AM

Thanks. I really appreciate your input.
Looks like we are stuck with lower resolution SD here in the U.S.
I guess I'll get ntsc cam then.
Michael Hamilton

Michael Hamilton · September 24th, 2004, 08:16 AM

Jesse,

"If you multiply all the numbers inside each spec they equal eachother. It was just 2 ways of getting the same amount of picture info out. NTSC looks smoother due to the higher frame refresh rate, but PAL has better color space."

So pal essentially has no more overall resolution than ntsc?
And the only difference in picture quality is 4:1:1 vs 4:2:1?

Michael

Jesse Bekas · September 24th, 2004, 08:25 AM

PAL does have more resolution in a single frame, but spaced over a single second, they are equivalent in picture information becuase NTSC shows more frames...

PAL 720 horizontal X 576 Vertical X 50Hz = 20736000
NTSC 720 horizontal X 480 Vertical X 60Hz = 20736000

Same amount of picture info, over time (and besides color space). I don't actually know why we don't use the same color space, though. Anybody?

Rob Lohman · September 24th, 2004, 08:26 AM

PAL (DV) is actually 4:2:0, not 4:2:1. NTSC (DV) is 4:1:1. I can't
attest to quality, but I read some places it is supposed to be a
bit better indeed.

September 21st, 2004, 03:58 AM	#1
Ricky Serret Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 30	NTSC and PAL can someone please explain this for me?

September 21st, 2004, 04:09 AM	#2
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	Well what would you like to know? __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

September 22nd, 2004, 02:55 AM	#6
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	To sum it up in a little table form: NTSC: - resolution: 720 x 480 (DV) - framerate: 29.97 frames per second (fps) / 59.94 fields per second, also known as 30 fps and 60 fields per second PAL: - resolution: 720 x 576 (DV) - framerate: 25 fps / 50 fields per second For more technical information (including analog frequencies) on PAL, SECAM & NTSC and the where it is used in the world check out the following link: http://www.high-techproductions.com/pal,ntsc.htm For more information on frames, progressive and interlacing see the following thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=21130 __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors Last edited by Rob Lohman; January 12th, 2006 at 07:32 AM.

September 24th, 2004, 08:26 AM	#15
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	PAL (DV) is actually 4:2:0, not 4:2:1. NTSC (DV) is 4:1:1. I can't attest to quality, but I read some places it is supposed to be a bit better indeed. __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

September 21st, 2004, 09:28 AM	#3
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	We could all start talking about the history, places these are used, specifications of the signal, etc...but there are PLENTY of articles online and discussion here about it already. Please do a search here or at Google.com first. Thx

September 21st, 2004, 11:18 PM	#4
Ricky Serret Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 30	i tried searching here but i couldn't limit the search enough to find out the difference and i didn't wanna have to look through every thread that says NTSC or PAL in them. i was just curious as to what the difference between the 2 was.

September 21st, 2004, 11:32 PM	#5
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	The basics are... NTSC consists of a 720X480 pixels space being refrshed at 60Hz, or shown at 60 interlaced fields (29.97 frames) per second. It is used mostly in N.A. and Japan. PAL is 720X576 pixels being refreshed at 50 fps. It is used mostly in some parts of Europe. The two specs are incompatible due to actual picture size and frame rates (NTSC won't play on a PAL only system, and vice versa without some conversion). If you multiply all the numbers inside each spec they equal eachother. It was just 2 ways of getting the same amount of picture info out. NTSC looks smoother due to the higher frame refresh rate, but PAL has better color space.

September 22nd, 2004, 12:20 PM	#7
Ricky Serret Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 30	ok, thanks alot for the help. it's much apprcieated.

September 23rd, 2004, 03:13 PM	#8
Michael Hamilton Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Falls Church Virginia Posts: 61	Anyone, I produce video in the U.S. but want to get an XL2 pal because: 1. Higher gross pixel count / higher vertical resolution 2. 4:2:1 color space 3. Converts to DVD cleaner than ntsc. 4. Most projectors and dvd players have pal/ntsc option. Are my facts right? Do any other ntsc country people here work with pal? And how do you manage it? Thanks Michael Hamilton

September 23rd, 2004, 03:22 PM	#9
Michael Hamilton Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Falls Church Virginia Posts: 61	I forgot to ask if all things considered, is it a very practical idea to work with pal in the U.S. considering that most everybody else here is using ntsc ( you know swapping files and tapes etc. ). Double thanks in advance Michael Hamilton

September 23rd, 2004, 03:55 PM	#10
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	As european i got the same reaction but from PAL to NTSC. Here in europe , everybody is able to read NTSC, because the large amount of zone 1 DVD, so here in europe nobody would buy a DVD player that is not multi-zone. So there is no problem to use a NTSC camera (as long the final output is on DVD). For the screens, most of the projectors and screens have now a RGB, or Y, Pb,PR output and are compatible with both standards. I am not interested by NTSC or 30fps, but in my case the only way to go HDV was to take the JVC in US format as the european model has no HDV feature. It is a different story with the new sony, but that is another story. I think the reverse is not true. America is living on his own, and always had ignored PAL. the result is i doubt the DVD player found in your supermarket are multi-zone or your screens are multi-standard. So you could end up with a nice video that you can only display on very specific equipment in your country. The only advantage to go to PAL for you would be to use progressive pictures knowing that 25fps is not so far from the 24fps of film, but for video frankly it is more a conversion nightmare than a good deal.

September 23rd, 2004, 08:49 PM	#11
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	You could certainly work with a PAL camera if its for your own purposes, but swapping and mixing work with others and their NTSC workflows could be a hassle as you'll most likely have to convert all your footage. You could not, say for instance, plug your cam into a friends TV and expect to watch video off of it, as a European might be able to do with NTSC.

September 24th, 2004, 08:04 AM	#12
Michael Hamilton Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Falls Church Virginia Posts: 61	Thanks. I really appreciate your input. Looks like we are stuck with lower resolution SD here in the U.S. I guess I'll get ntsc cam then. Michael Hamilton

September 24th, 2004, 08:16 AM	#13
Michael Hamilton Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Falls Church Virginia Posts: 61	Jesse, "If you multiply all the numbers inside each spec they equal eachother. It was just 2 ways of getting the same amount of picture info out. NTSC looks smoother due to the higher frame refresh rate, but PAL has better color space." So pal essentially has no more overall resolution than ntsc? And the only difference in picture quality is 4:1:1 vs 4:2:1? Michael

September 24th, 2004, 08:25 AM	#14
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	PAL does have more resolution in a single frame, but spaced over a single second, they are equivalent in picture information becuase NTSC shows more frames... PAL 720 horizontal X 576 Vertical X 50Hz = 20736000 NTSC 720 horizontal X 480 Vertical X 60Hz = 20736000 Same amount of picture info, over time (and besides color space). I don't actually know why we don't use the same color space, though. Anybody?