Lines of Resolution Question
Shane Helsby
Can someone set me straight on the number of lines of resolution various
video formats and sources have. Here is what I currently understand
some of them to be:
VHS - 250 lines
CABLE - 330 lines
SVHS - 400 lines
LD - 450 lines
DVD - 480 lines
What about things like DSS, 8mm, Hi8, BETA SP, D1...D3 etc. And does DSS
have more lines then standard C-band and Ku-band sats?
And finally, I have a 3 month old Sony KV-27V35 television that I just
love(of course my previous set was a 20" '87 GE model). Anyhow, the specs
in the manual do not state this sets maximum lines of resolution. Does
anyone know what it might be?
Most higher-end 27" sets I researched when shopping-around seem to be
capable of anywhere from 500 to nearly 800 lines of resolution. However,
all Sony literature I have read(including the top-of-the-line XBR and
XBR^2 series) do not mention anything about lines of resolution. Is this
a major secret Sony keeps about their sets?
Thanks for any help...
STH
XAD
Shane Helsby wrote:
>
> Can someone set me straight on the number of lines of resolution various
> video formats and sources have. Here is what I currently understand
> some of them to be:
>
> VHS - 250 lines
> CABLE - 330 lines
> SVHS - 400 lines
> LD - 450 lines
> DVD - 480 lines
>
LD has 425 lines. DVD will only deliver 480 lines only when mated with a
television that supports component inputs, and these currently do not
exist(neither do DVD players for that matter!). Otherwise DVD will only
deliver 425.
;(
Herranen Henrik
In article <56rqla$4...@knet2.knet.flemingc.on.ca> she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca (Shane Helsby) writes:
VHS - 250 lines
CABLE - 330 lines
SVHS - 400 lines
LD - 450 lines
DVD - 480 lines
Quite close, only slight errors not worth mentioning. For more
video systems have a look at one of the links given at my
signature. And if anyone can give me information on some new current
systems, I'd appreciate it.
- Leopold
--
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~leopold/Ld/FAQ/index.html -> alt.video.laserdisc FAQ
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~leopold/Ld/VideoFormats.html -> comparison of video fmts
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~leopold/Ld/FilmToVideo/index.html -> for info about
aspect ratios, video transfers, anamorphic, etc...
Herranen Henrik
In article <3291E5...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> XAD <cboo...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> writes:
LD has 425 lines. DVD will only deliver 480 lines only when mated with a
television that supports component inputs, and these currently do not
exist(neither do DVD players for that matter!). Otherwise DVD will only
deliver 425.
Is this an invention of yours? Y/C and even composite can easily go
beyond 500 lines; although with composite it doesn't matter much,
because cross-chrominance and -luminance will destroy ourfiner picture
elements. But, with Y/C, I don't see any reason why the luminance
resolution of DVD would suffer.
David E. Vangerov
XAD wrote:
>
> Shane Helsby wrote:
> >
> > Can someone set me straight on the number of lines of resolution various
> > video formats and sources have. Here is what I currently understand
> > some of them to be:
> >
> > CABLE - 330 lines
> > SVHS - 400 lines
> > LD - 450 lines
> > DVD - 480 lines
> >
>
> television that supports component inputs, and these currently do not
> exist(neither do DVD players for that matter!). Otherwise DVD will only
> deliver 425.
i was under the impression that the Y/C (S-video) input on the back
of some TV's is a component input. or do you mean a R-G-B type input?
Jeff Williams
On 19 Nov 1996 08:20:58 GMT, she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca (Shane
Helsby) wrote:
>And finally, I have a 3 month old Sony KV-27V35 television that I just
>love(of course my previous set was a 20" '87 GE model). Anyhow, the specs
>in the manual do not state this sets maximum lines of resolution. Does
>anyone know what it might be?
>
>Most higher-end 27" sets I researched when shopping-around seem to be
>capable of anywhere from 500 to nearly 800 lines of resolution. However,
>all Sony literature I have read(including the top-of-the-line XBR and
>XBR^2 series) do not mention anything about lines of resolution. Is this
>a major secret Sony keeps about their sets?
I don't know that it's a secret, but they definitely make a concerted
effort not to publicize it. In the new edition of Sony Style, there's
even a letter re-printed from a reader asking about resolution; the
Sony answer is "all of our televisions easily surpass the resolution
of any of today's video sources." I suspect it's because lines of
resolution is partly a marketing thing that Sony doesn't think is
signifying of much; saying a TV has 500 lines of resolution is like
saying a receiver puts out 100 watts per channel. There are other
variables that will affect the actual picture quality, and many TV's
that are listed as having 500 lines of res. will actually test out to
about 300 lines of viewable resolution (check out the latest edition
of Home Theater magazine and you'll see a few examples reviewed). So
most likely Sony is just more confident it can compete on the general
quality of the picture and on their tube design than on lines of
resolution, and in that they're probably right. Although I'm sure all
of their TV's are as capable of displaying 500 lines as any other
manufacturer's TV's that claim the same thing.
// Jeff Williams
// va...@worldnet.att.net
// http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/2024
XAD
the Y/C is not a component input because the Chrominance signals are
mixed. High-end DVD players will sport a Y,B-Y, R-Y component output and
televisions are now being manufactured with matching inputs(see the new
issue of Video magazine for a review of the new Toshiba DVD prototype and
their component input television).
;)
Lance Hartmann
In article <329269...@us.oracle.com>,
David E. Vangerov <dvan...@us.oracle.com> wrote:
>XAD wrote:
>>
>> Shane Helsby wrote:
>> >
>> > Can someone set me straight on the number of lines of resolution various
>> > video formats and sources have. Here is what I currently understand
>> > some of them to be:
>> >
>> > VHS - 250 lines
>> > CABLE - 330 lines
>> > SVHS - 400 lines
>> > LD - 450 lines
>> > DVD - 480 lines
>> >
>>
>> LD has 425 lines. DVD will only deliver 480 lines only when mated with a
>> television that supports component inputs, and these currently do not
>> exist(neither do DVD players for that matter!). Otherwise DVD will only
>> deliver 425.
>
>i was under the impression that the Y/C (S-video) input on the back
>of some TV's is a component input. or do you mean a R-G-B type input?
RGB is a type of "component input", but that's not the same as the
component video input described for DVD. The new Sony LCD projector
which is now shipping (model VPL-W400Q) does have DVD compatible
component inputs, so at least ONE monitor does presently exist.
--
Lance Hartmann (la...@io.com)
Ned Snell
> I don't know that it's a secret, but they definitely make a concerted
> effort not to publicize it. In the new edition of Sony Style, there's
> even a letter re-printed from a reader asking about resolution; the
> Sony answer is "all of our televisions easily surpass the resolution
> of any of today's video sources." I suspect it's because lines of
> resolution is partly a marketing thing that Sony doesn't think is
> signifying of much; saying a TV has 500 lines of resolution is like
> saying a receiver puts out 100 watts per channel. There are other
> variables that will affect the actual picture quality, and many TV's
> that are listed as having 500 lines of res. will actually test out to
> about 300 lines of viewable resolution (check out the latest edition
> of Home Theater magazine and you'll see a few examples reviewed). So
> most likely Sony is just more confident it can compete on the general
> quality of the picture and on their tube design than on lines of
> resolution, and in that they're probably right. Although I'm sure all
> of their TV's are as capable of displaying 500 lines as any other
> manufacturer's TV's that claim the same thing.
At the store (this was a few years ago), my 27" Sony set was tagged with a
store spec sheet that touted something like "330 lines TV... 700 lines
through video input." Some time after buying it, I wanted to know whether
the "700 lines" was also through the S-Video input (in addition to the
video input). But there was not a word in the manual regarding resolution.
So I called Sony customer service, who simply said they had no idea what
the resolution was under any circumstances, but took my number and said
they'd get back to me (they never did).
Ever since, I've wondered: If Sony (apparently) does not report resolution
specs on its products, where did the store get its info (or did they, as I
suspect, just make it up)?
Stargazer
In article 1D...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu, XAD <cboo...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> () writes:
>
>the Y/C is not a component input because the Chrominance signals are
>mixed. High-end DVD players will sport a Y,B-Y, R-Y component output and
>televisions are now being manufactured with matching inputs(see the new
>issue of Video magazine for a review of the new Toshiba DVD prototype and
>their component input television).
>;)
Well, I think the terms need to be clarified a bit. Compared to an RCA composite
a S-Video is "component" to the extent that chrominance and luminance are separated.
True composite of course also separates the chrominance signals for each primary colour.
(See the 3-CCD analog and digital cameras. BTW, the reason Hi-8 is of higher quality
than VHS or regular 8mm is because like S-VHS it does split the characteristics into
separate signals.)
I do agree though, you HAVE to process R, G, and B separately to obtain true component
signals.
--Stargazer
Ivar Vikøren
Herranen Henrik wrote:
>
> In article <56rqla$4...@knet2.knet.flemingc.on.ca> she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca (Shane Helsby) writes:
> CABLE - 330 lines
> SVHS - 400 lines
> LD - 450 lines
> DVD - 480 lines
You will get 480 horizontal lines, but not unique information in all of
them. Because the first casualty in MPEG-2 encoding are the high
frequency components. You will only get real 480 resolution when there
is so little information in the encoded field/frame that all the
discrete cosine components can be encoded in the data stream.
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren,
Herranen Henrik
In article <5703nn$r...@talos4.risc.sps.mot.com> star...@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Stargazer) writes:
Well, I think the terms need to be clarified a bit. Compared to an RCA composite
a S-Video is "component" to the extent that chrominance and luminance are separated.
True composite of course also separates the chrominance signals for each primary colour.
You mean, of course,
"True component of course also separates the chrominance signals for each primary colour."
Please, please, please, when you people try to explain something,
try to be _extremely_ careful to get it right.
(See the 3-CCD analog and digital cameras. BTW, the reason Hi-8 is of higher quality
than VHS or regular 8mm is because like S-VHS it does split the characteristics into
separate signals.)
No, the reason Hi-8 and S-VHS are of higher quality than VHS and 8mm is
that they have a higher luminance bandwidth. As I just esterday and
the day before that and the day before that explained, also VHS and 8mm
store luminance and chrominance signals separately.
Merritt Mullen
Ivar Vikøren wrote:
>
> Herranen Henrik wrote:
> >
> > In article <56rqla$4...@knet2.knet.flemingc.on.ca> she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca (Shane Helsby) writes:
> > VHS - 250 lines
> > CABLE - 330 lines
> > SVHS - 400 lines
> > LD - 450 lines
> > DVD - 480 lines
>
> You will get 480 horizontal lines, but not unique information in all of
> them.
Just to be exact, that should be 480 VERTICAL lines of horizontal
resolution. People are always confusing the number of scan lines with
lines of resolution.
Merritt
Chris Pal
Shane Helsby (she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca) wrote:
> Can someone set me straight on the number of lines of resolution various
> video formats and sources have. Here is what I currently understand
> some of them to be:
> VHS - 250 lines
> CABLE - 330 lines
> SVHS - 400 lines
> LD - 450 lines
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Funny, every time I look at the specs for a laserdisc player, they say
425 lines.
Is it true for some and not for others?
*********************************************************************
Chris Pal (cp...@chat.carleton.ca)
The people who dub in dialogue for swearing on T.V. are a bunch of
Mickey Fickeys!!
*********************************************************************
Herranen Henrik
In article <32946B...@online.no> Ivar Vikøren <av...@online.no> writes:
You will get 480 horizontal lines, but not unique information in all of
frequency components. You will only get real 480 resolution when there
is so little information in the encoded field/frame that all the
discrete cosine components can be encoded in the data stream.
No, no, no, no, and once again no.
You get a _vertical_ resolution of 480 __horizontal__ lines out of _any_
NTSC video source, with the exception of CD-I.
Horizontal resolution, which is measured as vertical lines for
3/4 of the width of the screen, is the one that is mentioned when
people talk about "lines of resolution" of video media. (Please
don't contradict this. I _know_ what I'm talking about.)
Because DVD has some 720 horizontal pixels, its theoretical maximum
video resolution is 540 video lines. How much MPEG encoding will
lower this, is yet to be seen.
More about resolution in the video comparison document mentioned below.
Herranen Henrik
In article <572k8r$9...@bertrand.ccs.carleton.ca> cp...@chat.carleton.ca (Chris Pal) writes:
> LD - 450 lines
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Funny, every time I look at the specs for a laserdisc player, they say
425 lines.
As I wrote earlier, the difference isn't big enough to be mentioned.
However, now that it has been mentioned, NTSC LD is approximately
420 vertical lines, and PAL LD is approx. 450 lines. So, 450 is
true for PAL LD ;-) .
Dwayne Fujima
>RGB is a type of "component input", but that's not the same as the
>component video input described for DVD. The new Sony LCD projector
>which is now shipping (model VPL-W400Q) does have DVD compatible
>component inputs, so at least ONE monitor does presently exist.
Is the VPL-W400Q the export model of the Japanese model VPL-400QJ? The
QJ will also handle HiVision signals. ie up to 31kHz from Input A (which
can be configured in several configurations: YPbPr, RGB, amongst others)
Has anyone hooked up a line doubler to this projector and what are the
results?
I'm still trying to decipher the user manual to see whether it will accept
the new DVD YCbCr inputs.
Imo I'm not too impressed with the QJ. I got it when my new LPH520J2
blew it's LCD panel. The J2 was much clearer and had less noise. The
QJ is much brighter though.
Dwayne Fujima tot...@gol.com
Dwayne Fujima
In article <329333...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
>High-end DVD players will sport a Y,B-Y, R-Y component output and
>televisions are now being manufactured with matching inputs(see the new
>issue of Video magazine for a review of the new Toshiba DVD prototype and
>their component input television).
Actually the Toshiba sports YCbCr outputs...
Dwayne Fujima tot...@gol.com
Ivar Vikøren
Herranen Henrik wrote:
>
> In article <32946B...@online.no> Ivar Vikøren <av...@online.no> writes:
> You will get 480 horizontal lines, but not unique information in all of
> them. Because the first casualty in MPEG-2 encoding are the high
> frequency components. You will only get real 480 resolution when there
> is so little information in the encoded field/frame that all the
> discrete cosine components can be encoded in the data stream.
>
> No, no, no, no, and once again no.
>
> You get a _vertical_ resolution of 480 __horizontal__ lines out of _any_
> NTSC video source, with the exception of CD-I.
>
> Horizontal resolution, which is measured as vertical lines for
> 3/4 of the width of the screen, is the one that is mentioned when
> people talk about "lines of resolution" of video media. (Please
> don't contradict this. I _know_ what I'm talking about.)
>
> Because DVD has some 720 horizontal pixels, its theoretical maximum
> video resolution is 540 video lines. How much MPEG encoding will
> lower this, is yet to be seen.
>
You are quite right, I got my keyboard and my brain mixed up :-), I
should have clarified a bit. You always get 480 lines ( NTSC ) ALSO
with CD-I ( it is just that only 240 of them contains unique information
), if not you can not display it on a TV ( it will not sync ). The real
resolution on the horizontal AXIS ( x axis just, so nobody can not miss
understand ) is dependent on the encoding, see my first posting.
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
John Doe
>i was under the impression that the Y/C (S-video) input on the back
>of some TV's is a component input. or do you mean a R-G-B type input?
S-video is not considered component even though the luminance and
chrominance are separated. SVHS (and Hi8) record and playback are listed
as 400 lines. The SVHS (or S-Video) inputs on a receiver monitor are
another thing. I haven't seen specifications for the maximum performance
of the entire signal path (i.e. input amplifiers, decoding logic, and CRT
drivers. Anyone have REAL information on that?
Ivar Vikøren
Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> On 19 Nov 1996 08:20:58 GMT, she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca (Shane
> Helsby) wrote:
>
> >And finally, I have a 3 month old Sony KV-27V35 television that I just
> >love(of course my previous set was a 20" '87 GE model). Anyhow, the specs
> >in the manual do not state this sets maximum lines of resolution. Does
> >anyone know what it might be?
> >
> >Most higher-end 27" sets I researched when shopping-around seem to be
> >capable of anywhere from 500 to nearly 800 lines of resolution. However,
> >all Sony literature I have read(including the top-of-the-line XBR and
> >XBR^2 series) do not mention anything about lines of resolution. Is this
> >a major secret Sony keeps about their sets?
>
> effort not to publicize it. In the new edition of Sony Style, there's
> even a letter re-printed from a reader asking about resolution; the
> Sony answer is "all of our televisions easily surpass the resolution
> of any of today's video sources." I suspect it's because lines of
> resolution is partly a marketing thing that Sony doesn't think is
> signifying of much; saying a TV has 500 lines of resolution is like
> saying a receiver puts out 100 watts per channel. There are other
> variables that will affect the actual picture quality, and many TV's
> that are listed as having 500 lines of res. will actually test out to
> about 300 lines of viewable resolution (check out the latest edition
> of Home Theater magazine and you'll see a few examples reviewed). So
> most likely Sony is just more confident it can compete on the general
> quality of the picture and on their tube design than on lines of
> resolution, and in that they're probably right. Although I'm sure all
> of their TV's are as capable of displaying 500 lines as any other
> manufacturer's TV's that claim the same thing.
>
A TVs resolution ( horizontal resolution and sometimes also the vertical
resolution ) is limited by the dot pitch of the CRT. Normally you will
not get more than 400 lines on a standard CRT used in a TV set, because
the dot pitch is too large. All manufactures like to use large dots,
because that makes the picture brighter ( larger emission surface pr.
dot ). They do not want to loose the brightness game. Most consumer
buys the TV with the highest light output, that is why the factory
setting are way into overdrive ( of the CRT ). This is one of the
reasons I think HDTV has to be an educated sell. Because of the much
finer dot pitch of the CRTs necessary for HDTV ( less than a fourth of
the dot area of a conventional TV CRT ) they will have less than a
quarter of the light output of a conventional TV. People will have to
watch it in a darken room.
The 600-800 lines of resolution often calmed by the TV manufactures are
resolution measured before the CRT, so you will never see it. Unless
you put in another CRT, or couple the grid control voltages directly to
your head ( use crocodile clips ) :-). For the uninformed the last
sentence was a joke, children do not try do to this in your homes ;-).
The only way to get more than 400 line pairs horizontal resolution from
something you can buy in a store, is to get a projection TV or a
projector. In a three tube CRT based projection system, the CRTs does
not have a raster, so the dot size is dependent of the electronics, the
focus and speed of the tubes. Not all projection system will give you
more than 400 line pairs. If you want to be completely sure you will
have to use a generator capable of more than 400 line pairs. Normally
you can also watch how the dots look like using a high quality LD player
and a good disc. Do dots look distinct and sharply focus or blurry?
Unfortunatly his technique is not always easy to apply, because some
systems use scan line dithering.
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Ivar Vikøren
Herranen Henrik wrote:
>
> In article <572k8r$9...@bertrand.ccs.carleton.ca> cp...@chat.carleton.ca (Chris Pal) writes:
> > LD - 450 lines
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Funny, every time I look at the specs for a laserdisc player, they say
> 425 lines.
>
> As I wrote earlier, the difference isn't big enough to be mentioned.
> However, now that it has been mentioned, NTSC LD is approximately
> 420 vertical lines, and PAL LD is approx. 450 lines. So, 450 is
> true for PAL LD ;-) .
>
I am also amazed about this, because it is very dependent on the
player. In my experience a NTSC LD player is capable of displaying
somewhere between 300 - 450 line pairs. My Runco LJR II and my Pioneer
CLD-97 is capable of about 450 lines using my copy of AVS, displayed on
my Barco CVS. The Barco has a high res. CRT capable of about 900 line
pairs horizontal resolution. But because the Y/C separation circuitry
is using four times color carrier sampling, the resolution through the
composite inputs are about 540 lines. My Pioneer LD-V8000 is capable of
about 410 horizontal line pairs. Some PAL/NTSC players I have tested is
just capable of 300 - 350 horizontal line pairs. I have not tested the
PAL section of these players since I do not have a PAL decoder in my
monitor nor do I have a good PAL test disc.
By the way, if you have a LD player with sharpness control, you normally
will want to set it at normal. If you set it at soft, the resolution
often drops below 300 horizontal line pairs. Some times it can be some
improvement turning it a little past normal towards sharp. But only if
your TV has badly designed video amps ( high freq. roll off ). I almost
all chases it is best left at normal.
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Ivar Vikøren
Let us clear this up once and for all. Our previous postings can be
misunderstood.
>
> Herranen Henrik wrote:
> >
> > In article <32946B...@online.no> Ivar Vikøren <av...@online.no> writes:
> > You will get 480 horizontal lines, but not unique information in all of
> > them. Because the first casualty in MPEG-2 encoding are the high
> > frequency components. You will only get real 480 resolution when there
> > is so little information in the encoded field/frame that all the
> > discrete cosine components can be encoded in the data stream.
> >
> > No, no, no, no, and once again no.
> >
> > You get a _vertical_ resolution of 480 __horizontal__ lines out of _any_
> > NTSC video source, with the exception of CD-I.
You are quite right the VERTICAL resolution is dependent of the number
of usable scan lines in the TV system. In NTSC this is normally 483
scanning lines.
I was commenting on HORIZONTAL resolution, or how many line pairs
horizontally you can expect from a DVD player. I guess our esteemed
Finish friend ( I am not sarcastic, Leopold is doing a great job with
the LD faq ) triggered on the 480 number, with is close to the usable
scanning lines in NTSC. I got the DVD 480 horizontal res. number (
horizontal line pairs ) from a previous poster, but as Leopold points
out it is not correct ( I should have checked ), it is 540. But the
point of my posting remains, the real resolution of MPEG-2 depends on
the content of the compressed frame/field. Only in frames/fields with
very little information is it possible to get 540 real horizontal line
pairs from DVD, because the high frequency ( small details ) are the
first thing which get dropped in MPEG-2 encoding
> >
> > Horizontal resolution, which is measured as vertical lines for
> > 3/4 of the width of the screen, is the one that is mentioned when
> > people talk about "lines of resolution" of video media. (Please
> > don't contradict this. I _know_ what I'm talking about.)
> >
> > Because DVD has some 720 horizontal pixels, its theoretical maximum
> > video resolution is 540 video lines. How much MPEG encoding will
> > lower this, is yet to be seen.
> >
>
> You are quite right, I got my keyboard and my brain mixed up :-), I
> should have clarified a bit. You always get 480 lines ( NTSC ) ALSO
> with CD-I ( it is just that only 240 of them contains unique information
> ), if not you can not display it on a TV ( it will not sync ). The real
> resolution on the horizontal AXIS ( x axis just, so nobody can not miss
> understand ) is dependent on the encoding, see my first posting.
To see all 483 scanning lines you display device also has to be
perfectly adjusted, no overscanning. 5% overscanning is not uncommon.
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Ivar Vikøren
In my experience, normally it is the CRT itself which is the limiting
factor. It is very hard to design amps and decoders which does not have
sufficient amount of bandwidth, that does not mean it can not be done
:-). If you have digital processing in your TV, that might impose some
other problems, like the real resolution of the DSP circuits it to low (
to few bit ) and does not have suffisient processing power.
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Shane Helsby
Herranen Henrik (leo...@isosotka.cs.tut.fi) wrote:
: In article <56rqla$4...@knet2.knet.flemingc.on.ca> she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca (Shane Helsby) writes:
: CABLE - 330 lines
: SVHS - 400 lines
: LD - 450 lines
Following up my own question, I was also under the impression that a
strong TV signal from a regular set of "bunny ears" antenna would yield
more resolution then that of the same TV station from cable.
However, after putting this theory to test, the cable signal still had a
a sharper picture although more interference was noticable(wavy lines etc.).
Any idea why this might be or was my original understanding of this wrong?
I figured the off-air picture would be better because less processing was
done to the signal. But maybe not.
Incidently, I happened to find this quote in the Canadian publication
"Sound & Vision" magazine in their Audio/Video Preview issue:
"...the maximum resolution possible with a transmitted TV signal, whether
off-air or cable, is 330 lines."
They go on to note that TVs without a comb filter will only display about
270 lines while those with a comb filter can deliver the full 330.
And reading further ahead, for those in the market for TVs, the following
is written:
"...the picture from a 700-line resolution monitor will not appear
sharper than that from a monitor that delivers an honest 400 lines."
So...despite specs from such manufacturers as Panasonic & ProScan who
have monitors(27" and up) capable of 700 lines or more, this does not
necessarily mean the picture will be sharper then that of similar 600
line or 650 line monitors which are more common.
Good advice from a good publication I suppose.
--
S.T. Helsby
-----------------
100% All Canadian
Herranen Henrik
In article <3296CC...@online.no> Ivar Vikøren <av...@online.no> writes:
By the way, if you have a LD player with sharpness control, you normally
will want to set it at normal. If you set it at soft, the resolution
often drops below 300 horizontal line pairs. Some times it can be some
improvement turning it a little past normal towards sharp. But only if
your TV has badly designed video amps ( high freq. roll off ). I almost
all chases it is best left at normal.
Sigh. What does "horizontal line pairs" mean? Does it mean two
horizontal lines, one black, one white? If so, you have it
all wrong. I've explained this four times last week, and I'll
do it again. Let's see how many times this has to be explained
before no-one tries to reinvent how video resolution is
measured.
The vertical resolution of all NTSC video sources (except CD-I)
is 480 horizontal lines. Usually when measuring resolution, half
of them (240) are white, and half of them (240) are black.
The horizontal resolution of a video source is the number that is
different for each and every video system. It is measured in the
amount of vertical lines (half black, half white) that can be
shown in 3/4 of the screen width. The horizontal resolution if
NTSC LD is approx. 420 lines when this measuring method is used.
Herranen Henrik
In article <3296D4...@online.no> Ivar Vikøren <av...@online.no> writes:
I was commenting on HORIZONTAL resolution, or how many line pairs
horizontally you can expect from a DVD player. I guess our esteemed
Finish friend ( I am not sarcastic, Leopold is doing a great job with
the LD faq ) triggered on the 480 number, with is close to the usable
scanning lines in NTSC. I got the DVD 480 horizontal res. number (
horizontal line pairs ) from a previous poster, but as Leopold points
out it is not correct ( I should have checked ), it is 540.
First: I'm "Finnish". "Finish" is a place where you get after you
have run 100 meters.
Second: what is a "horizontal line pair"?
Ivar Vikøren
Herranen Henrik wrote:
Snipp
>
> First: I'm "Finnish". "Finish" is a place where you get after you
> have run 100 meters.
>
Sorry, but sometimes I get completly finish by all this keyboard
punching.
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Ivar Vikøren
Herranen Henrik wrote:
>
> In article <3296CC...@online.no> Ivar Vikøren <av...@online.no> writes:
> By the way, if you have a LD player with sharpness control, you normally
> will want to set it at normal. If you set it at soft, the resolution
> often drops below 300 horizontal line pairs. Some times it can be some
> improvement turning it a little past normal towards sharp. But only if
> your TV has badly designed video amps ( high freq. roll off ). I almost
> all chases it is best left at normal.
>
> Sigh. What does "horizontal line pairs" mean? Does it mean two
> horizontal lines, one black, one white? If so, you have it
> all wrong. I've explained this four times last week, and I'll
> do it again. Let's see how many times this has to be explained
> before no-one tries to reinvent how video resolution is
> measured.
>
> The vertical resolution of all NTSC video sources (except CD-I)
> is 480 horizontal lines. Usually when measuring resolution, half
> of them (240) are white, and half of them (240) are black.
>
> The horizontal resolution of a video source is the number that is
> different for each and every video system. It is measured in the
> amount of vertical lines (half black, half white) that can be
> shown in 3/4 of the screen width. The horizontal resolution if
> NTSC LD is approx. 420 lines when this measuring method is used.
I agree, that is what I call a line pair ( one black and one white )
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Merritt Mullen
>
> Second: what is a "horizontal line pair"?
That's for people who, when they draw two black parallel lines on a
piece of paper, will tell you that they have actually drawn THREE lines,
two black and one white (between the two black lines) <g>
On a TV, the screen is black in the absence of a signal. Resolution is
the ability to discern to adjacent (but separate) white lines. How you
count those lines (do you count the black spaces in between?) is a
matter of convention. From what I see on this group, you apparently
count both the signal lines and the black space in between. I don't
think an optical physicist would do it that way.
Merritt
Paul Dossett
Ivar Vikøren (av...@online.no) said:
<snip snip>
>The 600-800 lines of resolution often calmed by the TV manufactures are
>resolution measured before the CRT, so you will never see it. Unless
I don't know about other sets, but I've hooked up my CD32 through s-video to my
Mitsubishi DiVA, and got a clear 700-pixel wide display of my Workbench.
Perfectly clear and readable text - I could (and do) use this as a monitor when
I use the machine (much nicer than a 14-17" screen!).
Of course, this TV was quite expensive. Maybe what you say is true for cheaper
sets.
--
Paul Dossett | Sony STR-665 receiver, Pioneer CLD-D925 laserdisc,
-------------| Sony SLV-X822 VCR, Mitsubishi DiVA 33" TV, Rambler
Melbourne OZ | L/R crapboxes, Richter Hydra surrounds, Monster i/c.
Amiga 2000/40| ObWebSite : http://netspace.net.au/~astroboy/
Ryan McGinnis
On 24 Nov 1996 19:43:43 GMT, she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca (Shane
Helsby) wrote:
>"...the maximum resolution possible with a transmitted TV signal, whether
>off-air or cable, is 330 lines."
I wonder; what is the resolution of services such as DSS?
+-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
Ryan McGinnis ()_() TLKiaWoL
mcg...@iastate.edu (_) Jay's Mosh
http://www.pionet.net/~mcginnr (The Lion King)
Sarafina: "What do you th think, Suh Suh Suhrab
Suhrab Suh-- dear?"
(Why Sarafina only got one line)
+-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
Ivar Vikøren
I think I found the definition among other places in "Basic Television
and Video Systems", which I think is written by someone called Grob ( I
am not quite sure if I remember the name correctly ). I will see if I
excavate the book, I know I got it somewhere, if you are interested.
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Ivar Vikøren
Paul Dossett wrote:
>
> Ivar Vikøren (av...@online.no) said:
>
> <snip snip>
>
> >The 600-800 lines of resolution often calmed by the TV manufactures are
> >resolution measured before the CRT, so you will never see it. Unless
>
> I don't know about other sets, but I've hooked up my CD32 through s-video to my
> Mitsubishi DiVA, and got a clear 700-pixel wide display of my Workbench.
> Perfectly clear and readable text - I could (and do) use this as a monitor when
> I use the machine (much nicer than a 14-17" screen!).
>
> Of course, this TV was quite expensive. Maybe what you say is true for cheaper
> sets.
Let us do some calculations. If you TV is has a true 33" diagonal, (
Normally it will be a little bit lower, an inch or two, because how the
CRT manufactures measure the diagonal. ) the length of the CRT will be
approximately 26" i.e. 66cm ( if the aspect ration of the CRT is 3:4 ).
The dot pitch including the space between the dots need to be ( for 700
lines resolution ) 66cm/700 = 0.95mm. You can easily check this, is the
distance between the center of one pixel to the center of the
neighboring pixel more or less then 1mm?
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Ivar Vikøren
Ouch, sorry my calculations where not quite right, we have to convert it
to "square picture". Here we go again:
((66cm/700)/4)x3 = 0.7mm, distance between neighboring dot centers, not
so easy to measure with common tools ( ruler ).
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Merritt Mullen
Ivar Vikøren wrote:
>
> Ivar Vikøren wrote:
> >
> > Paul Dossett wrote:
> > >
> > > Ivar Vikøren (av...@online.no) said:
> > >
> > > <snip snip>
> > >
> > > Mitsubishi DiVA, and got a clear 700-pixel wide display of my Workbench.
> > The dot pitch including the space between the dots need to be ( for 700
> > lines resolution ) 66cm/700 = 0.95mm. You can easily check this, is the
> > distance between the center of one pixel to the center of the
> > neighboring pixel more or less then 1mm?
I'm confused. What is a "pixel" (picture element) on an analog TV? I
don't see how it can refer to the signal. Are you talking about the
shadow mask or the phospher dots?
Merritt
Alexander the Great jr.
Suddenly, the article I posted here last week has become relevant again.
Please allow me to repost it as it might help you find the answers to
some of your questions. My apologies for wasting bandwidth by reposting
but in the long run it may save bandwidth by putting this subject to rest.
Note: The 330 lines NTSC resolution limit that I prove here is only
applicable for broadcast signals. You -MAY- exceed this limit when you
use Y/C or composite video inputs on a high quality television.
==========================================================================
BEGIN INCLUDED MESSAGE
==========================================================================
In article <l4iv71s...@congo.llnl.gov>,
Kevin Oberman <obe...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Also note that lines of horizontal resolution are in PAIRS of lines,
>so you would get twice as many pixels in the digital world. 800 pixels
>is close to 400 lines. But the measurement method makes this
>incorrect, too, as picture height is also folded into the
>calculation. And almost everyone lies about it (in the analog world).
>
In fact you are WRONG because 400 lines is equivalent to 400 pixels!
I will let you take the problem for homework to give you a chance
to think about it. Let me first give you the fundamentals:
A TV line, PAL or NTSC, is 64 usec (microseconds) duration.
This includes about 18% of blanking, that leaves 82% of the line time
to be the active line time. This is equal to 52.5 usec
A 1MHz signal has a period of 1 usec.
Instead of hints I will provide the correct answer to each question.
All you have to do is use your calculator to verify the results.
Homework question 1:
How many periods of a 1MHz sinewave you can transmit during the active
portion of a TV line?
Answer: 52.5 periods.
Homework question 2:
If you want to normalize the resolution rating so that it refers
to a picture width equal to the picture height, (knowing that the
aspect ratio is 4:3) how many periods of 1 MHz do you have
in a picture width equal to the height?
Answer: 39.375 periods
Homework question 3:
If the positive peak of the sinewave represents a bright spot (pixel)
and the negative peak of the sinewave represents a dark spot (pixel)
how many pixels can you display during one period of your signal?
Answer: 2 pixels.
Homework question 4:
How many pixels do you have in a picture width equal to the picture
height?
Answer: 78.75
Homework question 5:
If you used the same signal in every line of your display, obviously
the pixels would line up and you would see vertical lines.
5a) How many white lines?
5b) How many black lines?
5c) How many TOTAL lines?
Answer 5a: 39.375
Answer 5b: 39.375
Answer 5c: 78.75
Homework question 6:
If your sinewave was not 1MHz but 4.2MHz, which happens to be the
maximum allowed frequency for broadcast video, because if it was
any higher it would interfere with the audio broadcast for the
same channel (4.5MHz above the video carrier in NTSC), how many
TOTAL lines would you have?
Answer: 78.75 * 4.2 i.e. 330.75
<<alex kanaris>>
==============================================================================
Alexander Kanaris ___ ___ kan...@bode.usc.edu
Electrical Engineering --- Systems / / /__ / kan...@thales.usc.edu
University of Southern California /__/ ___/ /__ kan...@girtab.usc.edu
Los Angeles, California 90089-2562 kan...@alumni.caltech.edu
==============================================================================
--
->
Faith, n:
That quality which enables us to believe what we know to be untrue.
Ivar Vikøren
A pixel normally consist of one red, one green and one blue phosphor
dots ( it is more like an oval on most CRTs used in TVs ) on a standard
CRT. As long as we are talking about tri color CRT's
Best regards,
Ivar Vikøren.
Espen Braathen
Alexander the Great jr. (kan...@bode.usc.edu) wrote:
Wrong again!
A horizontal tv resolution of 400 TVL equals 400*4/3=533 pixels.
To make it easy to compare the vertical vs horizontal resolution,
the TVL was invented so you could list the horisontal resolution of
a imaginary picture tube with an 1:1 aspect ratio.
EspenB
: I will let you take the problem for homework to give you a chance
: Answer: 52.5 periods.
: Answer: 39.375 periods
: Answer: 2 pixels.
: Answer: 78.75
You get 78,75 TVLs and not pixels for each MHz of bandwith.
: <<alex kanaris>>
Bob Nixon
They advertise 480 lines on the PPV channels. I posted an excerpt
from a Stereophile Magazine article in this NG awhile back where
DTV was pitted against LD and deemed better in some respects by
the reviewer. However DSS or Direct TV does use MPEG level-2
compression like DVD but the reviewer said this was not a real
factor on the Direct Ticket (PPV) channels. BTW most of the other
DSS signal sources come from C-band and as such are limited to
the inherent resolution and S/N ratio of their source.
mcg...@iastate.edu (Ryan McGinnis) wrote:
Big...@Primenet.com
(Bob Nixon)
Alexander the Great jr.
In article <57kcd1$r...@troll.powertech.no>,
Espen Braathen <esp...@knott.login.powertech.no> wrote:
>
>: In fact you are WRONG because 400 lines is equivalent to 400 pixels!
>
>Wrong again!
>A horizontal tv resolution of 400 TVL equals 400*4/3=533 pixels.
Please lookup the meaning of the words "equal" and "equivalent"
in the dictionary.
>a imaginary picture tube with an 1:1 aspect ratio.
Please do not contradict yourself.
>
>EspenB
>
.......................................
>
>You get 78,75 TVLs and not pixels for each MHz of bandwith.
Please read my recent postings once again (required reading)
and then do the homework problems :-)
Herranen Henrik
In article <3299CC...@ridgecrest.ca.us> Merritt Mullen <mmu...@ridgecrest.ca.us> writes:
> Second: what is a "horizontal line pair"?
That's for people who, when they draw two black parallel lines on a
piece of paper, will tell you that they have actually drawn THREE lines,
two black and one white (between the two black lines) <g>
On a TV, the screen is black in the absence of a signal. Resolution is
the ability to discern to adjacent (but separate) white lines. How you
count those lines (do you count the black spaces in between?) is a
matter of convention. From what I see on this group, you apparently
count both the signal lines and the black space in between. I don't
think an optical physicist would do it that way.
I don't care what optical physicist do, but video lines of resolution
are calculated in lines, not line pairs. If we calculated in line-pairs
NTSC would have a vertical resolution of 240 line-pairs and NTSC LD would
have a horizontal resolution of some 200 line-pairs.
I have not invented how video lines are measured, there are standards
for doing that. Thus, vertical resolution are measured in lines, black
and white, and the vert.res. of NTSC is 480 lines. Horiz. res. is
measured in vertical lines per 3/4 of the screen width, thus giving
LD a resolution of some 420 lines.
I Mac
>On 24 Nov 1996 19:43:43 GMT, she...@knet.flemingc.on.ca (Shane
> >Helsby) wrote:
> >
> >>"...the maximum resolution possible with a transmitted TV signal, whether
> >>off-air or cable, is 330 lines."
> >
Last time I looked the resolution of the NTSC system as broadcast
was 400 lines and most stations would get a rocket if they didn't
meet that.
The resolution is the same for PAL incidentally.
The DSS MPEG services have to be coded to feed
into a normal TV so they don't do any better unless
you use a professional decoder with component output with
a component monitor....VERY expensive for not much extra
resolution.
The resolution of the MPEG2 encoders used is only just better than
400 lines anyway.
At least its a lot better than the 260 lines or so from VHS....
Paul Dossett
Ivar Vikøren (av...@online.no) said:
>Paul Dossett wrote:
>> I don't know about other sets, but I've hooked up my CD32 through s-video
>> to my Mitsubishi DiVA, and got a clear 700-pixel wide display of my
>> Workbench. Perfectly clear and readable text - I could (and do) use this as
>> a monitor when I use the machine (much nicer than a 14-17" screen!).
>>
>> Of course, this TV was quite expensive. Maybe what you say is true for
>> cheaper sets.
>Let us do some calculations. If you TV is has a true 33" diagonal, (
>Normally it will be a little bit lower, an inch or two, because how the
>CRT manufactures measure the diagonal. ) the length of the CRT will be
>approximately 26" i.e. 66cm ( if the aspect ration of the CRT is 3:4 ).
It's a 78cm visible picture, with a 33" tube, I believe.
>The dot pitch including the space between the dots need to be ( for 700
>lines resolution ) 66cm/700 = 0.95mm. You can easily check this, is the
>distance between the center of one pixel to the center of the
>neighboring pixel more or less then 1mm?
Do you realise how hard it is to line up a steel ruler against a screen and
squint with one eye shut at a phosphor mask and tiny markings in the ruler???!
Oh, it's slightly less than 1mm.. :)
The brochure for the set claims over 800 horizontal lines, and I see no reason
to doubt it.
Herranen Henrik
In article <32A3B9...@compuserve.com> I Mac <"100246,2055"@compuserve.com> writes:
Last time I looked the resolution of the NTSC system as broadcast
was 400 lines and most stations would get a rocket if they didn't
meet that.
The resolution is the same for PAL incidentally.
All wrong. You should have looked closer. The 4.2 MHz video bandwidth
of NTSC broadcast video doesn't allow for more than 330 lines.
The 5 MHz video bandwidth of a normal PAL channel in Europe gives you
400 lines. In UK you get even more (5.5 MHz video bandwidth).
John Dulaney
For more info:
* VIDEO (PAL-SECAM-NTSC) Multistandard VCRs, TVs, camcorders & Converters.
* Free FAQ on Video Standards - Links to even more tech PAGES.
* Colorful Giant Web Page: http://www.best.com/~jdulaney/faq.html
* Or: E-Mail jdul...@best.com