NTSC or PAL
NTSC or PAL
Hi. Can anybody tell which system is better? PAL or NTSC? I heard that the picture quality in PAL is much mor better.
-
Cressida
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:19 am
- Location: Tampere, Finland
- Contact:
Re: NTSC or PAL
Well, I would say PAL but I can't be completely sure as I have only watched NTSC videos with my PAL vcr.vojna wrote:Hi. Can anybody tell which system is better? PAL or NTSC? I heard that the picture quality in PAL is much mor better.
Oh dear, you've opened a can of worms. The short answer is no system is better - both have their pros and cons:
PAL
Pros
[1] Increase resolution. PAL has approximately 20% more resolution than the same image in NTSC. Of course, HD-TV is starting to take off in America now, and PAL is vastly inferior to a HD-TV image.
[2] Better colours. This applies more to transmission than DVDs (and I think, in theory both PAL and NTSC should give the same colour values as long as you have an RGB connection).
[3] Smooth images. Because no extra frames are created when transferring film to PAL, rapid horizontal pans and other movement doesn't jerk.
Cons
[1] Films are transferred approximately 4% faster. This means a 100 minute film would be 97minutes when converted to PAL. This has little effect on the visuals or the pacing of the film. However...
[2] The soundtrack is also speeded up appromimately 4%. This means music is noticably different, and all sound is also played back at a higher pitch. This is something most PAL viewers don't notice, but a person who is not used to PAL transfers, or has musical awareness can notice. Some people who do notice the soundtrack differences say it spoils the experience for them.
NTSC
Pros
[1] All American TV shows are shot at 30fps. This means TV based DVDs of American shows are transferred in their native format. Converting NTSC to PAL can cause artifacts.
[2] Films playback at the correct speed, meaning soundtracks are the correct tempo and pitch.
Cons
[1] NTSC has lower resolution. Typically I don't notice this often will live-action films, but the difference does appear to be more pronounced on hand drawn animation based films, with PAL often looking vastly superior.
[2] When transferring a film to NTSC, the 24fps of the film has to be extended to 30fps for NTSC. This means every third frame is repeated (sometimes merged with the next frame). While this is to quick for people to notice 99% of the time, rapid pans can appear jerky, as can zooms and other large areas of rapid movement.
----
It really depends what you think is more important. If picture is important to you, then PAL is often better (but remember, a PAL transfer can be taken from an NTSC master, which will negate all of the PAL advantages).
If sound is more important, than NTSC is better.
Of course, NTSC is often better as R1 discs are cheaper and available quicker!
PAL
Pros
[1] Increase resolution. PAL has approximately 20% more resolution than the same image in NTSC. Of course, HD-TV is starting to take off in America now, and PAL is vastly inferior to a HD-TV image.
[2] Better colours. This applies more to transmission than DVDs (and I think, in theory both PAL and NTSC should give the same colour values as long as you have an RGB connection).
[3] Smooth images. Because no extra frames are created when transferring film to PAL, rapid horizontal pans and other movement doesn't jerk.
Cons
[1] Films are transferred approximately 4% faster. This means a 100 minute film would be 97minutes when converted to PAL. This has little effect on the visuals or the pacing of the film. However...
[2] The soundtrack is also speeded up appromimately 4%. This means music is noticably different, and all sound is also played back at a higher pitch. This is something most PAL viewers don't notice, but a person who is not used to PAL transfers, or has musical awareness can notice. Some people who do notice the soundtrack differences say it spoils the experience for them.
NTSC
Pros
[1] All American TV shows are shot at 30fps. This means TV based DVDs of American shows are transferred in their native format. Converting NTSC to PAL can cause artifacts.
[2] Films playback at the correct speed, meaning soundtracks are the correct tempo and pitch.
Cons
[1] NTSC has lower resolution. Typically I don't notice this often will live-action films, but the difference does appear to be more pronounced on hand drawn animation based films, with PAL often looking vastly superior.
[2] When transferring a film to NTSC, the 24fps of the film has to be extended to 30fps for NTSC. This means every third frame is repeated (sometimes merged with the next frame). While this is to quick for people to notice 99% of the time, rapid pans can appear jerky, as can zooms and other large areas of rapid movement.
----
It really depends what you think is more important. If picture is important to you, then PAL is often better (but remember, a PAL transfer can be taken from an NTSC master, which will negate all of the PAL advantages).
If sound is more important, than NTSC is better.
Of course, NTSC is often better as R1 discs are cheaper and available quicker!
Most of my Blu-ray collection some of my UK discs aren't on their database
-
deathie mouse
- Ultraviolet Edition
- Posts: 1391
- Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 1:12 am
- Location: Alea jacta est
If after reading 2099net's throurough explanation you are still undecided I suggest a little experiment. Try to procure one of the latest Disney releases in both systems (in your case you'll probably have to import the NTSC one and borrow or rent the PAL one) and watch both of them (on a PAL capable display of course) and see if you have a preference or if one looks or sounds superior to the other enough to make a difference, from then on you'll know what's better, no?
To what 2099net said when he wrote:
"NTSC Pros:
[1] All American TV shows are shot at 30fps. This means TV based DVDs of American shows are transferred in their native format. Converting NTSC to PAL can cause artifacts."
I would like to add that this is true for programs shot on film and transfered to video tape for editing and sfx work (usually done starting around the mid to late 80's), or shot directly on video tape.
But there are programs/series that were (or are) done/edited solely on film (Star Trek the original 60's series, for example) so if the PAL transfer is done from the film element they don't have artifacts and get the full PAL advantages.
Also since I'm here
I might add (I don't remember if i've never mentioned this before ) that unless you have a fixed pixel display (like an LCD for example), for technical reasons of the way CRT's are made the vertical resolution is usually displayed sharper than the horizontal one so the extra vertical PAL resolution has more weight than numbers alone might seem to have, specially since on top of that the human eye also tends to give more weight to vertical resolution than horizontal even when both are equal
(For example Scope prints have twice the vertical resolution than horizontal, in actuallity they have less horizontal resolution than standart flat prints, but they look sharper)
So vertical resolution is more important that what it seems
That's one reason the dethi always specifies the vertical vs the horizontal first: it's the most important part. 576 x 720 vs 480 x 720.
or 1000 pixel HDTV or 2000 pixel 70mm etc.
To what 2099net said when he wrote:
"NTSC Pros:
[1] All American TV shows are shot at 30fps. This means TV based DVDs of American shows are transferred in their native format. Converting NTSC to PAL can cause artifacts."
I would like to add that this is true for programs shot on film and transfered to video tape for editing and sfx work (usually done starting around the mid to late 80's), or shot directly on video tape.
But there are programs/series that were (or are) done/edited solely on film (Star Trek the original 60's series, for example) so if the PAL transfer is done from the film element they don't have artifacts and get the full PAL advantages.
Also since I'm here
I might add (I don't remember if i've never mentioned this before ) that unless you have a fixed pixel display (like an LCD for example), for technical reasons of the way CRT's are made the vertical resolution is usually displayed sharper than the horizontal one so the extra vertical PAL resolution has more weight than numbers alone might seem to have, specially since on top of that the human eye also tends to give more weight to vertical resolution than horizontal even when both are equal(For example Scope prints have twice the vertical resolution than horizontal, in actuallity they have less horizontal resolution than standart flat prints, but they look sharper)
So vertical resolution is more important that what it seems
That's one reason the dethi always specifies the vertical vs the horizontal first: it's the most important part. 576 x 720 vs 480 x 720.
or 1000 pixel HDTV or 2000 pixel 70mm etc.
