NTSC and PAL at DVinfo.net

Alex Taylor · June 17th, 2003, 12:53 PM

There seems to be a lot of headaches around converting from one format to the other. I know it would take years to make a complete changeover, but would it not be much simpler to make an international standard? What was the original motivation behind creating NTSC, PAL, SECAM, etc..

Frank Granovski · June 17th, 2003, 02:22 PM

PAL, SECAM & MESECAM are based on a 50 cycle electrical system (so 50 fields per second), NTSC is based on a 60 cycle electrical system (60 fields per second). (But in Brazil they use a 60 cycle PAL system, so their cams are NTSC---the only exception I know of.) If you do a google search, put in the words, "world broadcast systems." You'll come up with some good links explaining which/where, and why.

Bottom line: to switch to a 50 field PAL stystem, we'd first have to change our electical system. (If you shoot with a PAL cam in North America, you'll notice big time flickering. Not so, when using a NTSC cam.)

Ken Tanaka · June 17th, 2003, 02:23 PM

The story of the rationale between the two incompatible video standards varies with each teller and telling. Some versions relate to the fundamental differences in power standards (120v -vs- 240v, etc.). All seem to be rooted in engineering rather than aesthestics. All are irrelevant; the standards are what they are.

Ultimately I believe that high-definition will be the worldwide standard although pehaps not in our lifetimes.

Nigel Moore · June 17th, 2003, 02:30 PM

Quote:

would it not be much simpler to make an international standard?

So, add a fourth standard as a common global one? Nice idea! Ever heard of Esperanto? ;-)

If not a new standard, then one of the available ones would have to be accepted as overriding. This would mean the US giving up NTSC, or the whole of Europe (except France & Hungary), the whole of Africa (except Algeria), the whole of the middle and far east (except Japan) and the whole of Australasia giving up PAL.

Hmmm...come to think of it, I'd rather not downgrade to NTSC, thanks all the same! :-/

Frank Granovski · June 17th, 2003, 08:38 PM

Here's a link to see which country has what, in way of broadcast systems:

http://www.alkenmrs.com/video/wwstandards1.html#TOP

Julian Luttrell · June 18th, 2003, 02:41 AM

You should be careful when thinking of HDTV as a one-size-fits-all solution to this standards conversion problem.

HDTV may offer a standard frame size and pixel aspect ratio (well, a small number of these), but it still suffers from the same number of different frame rates as is seen today - 24, 25, 29.97/30 I and P. So the main conversion problem (adjusting frame rate) will likely still remain.

Regards,

Julian

June 17th, 2003, 12:53 PM	#1
Alex Taylor Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 390	NTSC and PAL There seems to be a lot of headaches around converting from one format to the other. I know it would take years to make a complete changeover, but would it not be much simpler to make an international standard? What was the original motivation behind creating NTSC, PAL, SECAM, etc.. __________________ alextaylor.org

June 17th, 2003, 02:23 PM	#3
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	The story of the rationale between the two incompatible video standards varies with each teller and telling. Some versions relate to the fundamental differences in power standards (120v -vs- 240v, etc.). All seem to be rooted in engineering rather than aesthestics. All are irrelevant; the standards are what they are. Ultimately I believe that high-definition will be the worldwide standard although pehaps not in our lifetimes. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

June 18th, 2003, 02:41 AM	#6
Julian Luttrell Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Cambridge, UK Posts: 164	HDTV not one-size-fits-all You should be careful when thinking of HDTV as a one-size-fits-all solution to this standards conversion problem. HDTV may offer a standard frame size and pixel aspect ratio (well, a small number of these), but it still suffers from the same number of different frame rates as is seen today - 24, 25, 29.97/30 I and P. So the main conversion problem (adjusting frame rate) will likely still remain. Regards, Julian

June 17th, 2003, 02:22 PM	#2
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	PAL, SECAM & MESECAM are based on a 50 cycle electrical system (so 50 fields per second), NTSC is based on a 60 cycle electrical system (60 fields per second). (But in Brazil they use a 60 cycle PAL system, so their cams are NTSC---the only exception I know of.) If you do a google search, put in the words, "world broadcast systems." You'll come up with some good links explaining which/where, and why. Bottom line: to switch to a 50 field PAL stystem, we'd first have to change our electical system. (If you shoot with a PAL cam in North America, you'll notice big time flickering. Not so, when using a NTSC cam.)

June 17th, 2003, 08:38 PM	#5
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Here's a link to see which country has what, in way of broadcast systems: http://www.alkenmrs.com/video/wwstandards1.html#TOP