Video & Audio ProductsUninterruptible Power Supplies How Much Audio Can You Burn On A CD-R. > Tutorials page > Opinions page STANDARD DEFINITION VS HIGH DEFINITION: The world is in the middle of converting over from the "Standard Definition" television (SDTV) first used in 1952, to "High Definition" television (HDTV), so carefully consider just how much you are willing to pay for SDTV equipment that will start to become obsolete in just a few years time. SDTV equipment will not become obsolete overnight, but it will gradually be replaced with HDTV which can have up to six times more resolution. Broadcasters will probably transmit in both during the crossover period, but after 2007 some broadcasters will only transmit in HDTV. So far, the introduction of HDTV in Canada has been slower than the USA. As of 2004, I would be reluctant to buy top of the line, high priced SDTV equipment & would opt for less expensive SDTV equipment, or when the price is right, go straight to HDTV equipment which can also display an SDTV signal. DOES A HIGH DEFINITION TV, MAKE STANDARD DEFINITION TV SIGNAL LOOK BETTER?: The short answer is NO it usually looks worse. Many people assume that a High Definition TV (HDTV) will make a Standard Definition TV (SDTV) signal look a bit better, or at least as good as a SDTV signal on an SDTV monitor. The truth is that in almost all cases (based on 2004 consumer models), a SDTV signal looks worse on a HDTV monitor because the upconversion adds artifacts to the picture. Currently most if not all manufacturers of consumer HDTV monitors use a cheap simple upscale chip which actually adds aliasing artifacts to the picture. SDTV is 486 interlaced lines (often referred to as 480i) & most HDTVs use 1080 interlaced lines (1080i). Notice that 1080 isn't divisible by 486 to give whole numbers (it's 2.22). When an SDTV signal is fed to a HDTV monitor, the cheap chip upconverts by taking every field (every other line) & scaling it up from 243 lines to 540 lines, likewise with the adjacent field & then reinterlaces them in between each other again so that the 486 lines can display at 1080 lines. Any graphic artist familiar with PhotoShop can tell you that if you scale every other line of a picture, you'll get artifacts. The scaling chip can't scale all lines as though they were a progressive signal (no interlacing) because it would destroy the motion between the two fields (temporal resolution) which are 1/60 of a second apart. The only solution for good upscaling is for manufacturers to use sophisticated upscaling chips that scale individual lines of fields together when there is no motion & separately when there is motion (intelligent upscaling), but this cost more money for the scaling chips & right now even in consumer HDTV monitors that cost in excess of $4000. they don't want to put these better scaling chips in because it would take a couple hundred dollars off their profit margin. As consumers become better aware of this problem, they will start demanding better upscaling chips in HDTV monitors. Right now most HDTVs native resolution is 1080i at 60 fields, it will not play a 480i at 60 fields signal at it's native resolution unfortunately. In the future, HDTV monitors will probably become multi sync monitors much like today's computer monitors. A multi sync monitor doesn't do any conversion of a signal, hence no chance to add artifacts. Instead, a multi sync monitor adapts itself to the signal & plays at whatever native resolution & refresh rate it was designed for (a much simpler & higher quality solution, that eliminates format conversions). HORIZONTAL RESOLUTION OF TV SDTV MONITORS: Did
you know that most manufacturers of consumer standard definition
TV monitors usually deceive purchasers into thinking they are getting
higher "horizontal resolution" than they really are? They
do this by stating the "TOTAL resolvable lines horizontally",
instead of stating it as "horizontal resolution". Sometimes
they mix up the two definitions, always to their benefit. The proper
industry definition of "Horizontal Resolution" is three
quarters of the total resolvable lines horizontally, as measured
using the vertical converging lines of the resolution
chart MACKIE
1402-VLZ PRO MIXER
Older Articles:Star Choice satellite television. Televisions reviewed. DVD set top player (stand alone DVD player) reviews. DVD set top player (stand alone DVD player) purchasing tips. DVD set top player (stand alone DVD player) compatibility list. Beware of buying Toshiba products. Canadian blank audio recording Media Levy updated April 2002. Old Video Magazine Articles & Reviews written by Doug Hembruff.
In-sync BLADE EDITING SOFTWARE: At this point
in time, I would recommend against buying BLADE DV video/audio editing
software unless this is all you can afford. At about $500. U.S.
it seems to me to be priced at an entry level video editors budget.
Many systems integrators I have talked to refuse to use this software
& I wish I had refused to install this software in a high end
editing computer I built last fall (2002) which has two 2.4 GHz
Pentiums & a Gig of ram. The software at this point in time
(based on versions up to 2.1) in my opinion is simply too buggy
for heavy duty professional users who use all the features. In-sync
seems not to have changed much from 1995 when I first beta tested
their Speed Razor editing software, which barely worked at first
& took at least two years before many of the bugs were worked
out. In-sync is still finger pointing at computer components or
systems configuration, rather than taking responsibility for fixing
their buggy software. Blade has been out for a year now, but it
could be some time yet before in-sync gets all the bugs worked out
& if they follow their pattern of the past, they will be introducing
lots of new bugs with new versions. If you are a professional editor,
earning a living editing corporate or television video, stick to
an editing program that has a reputation for working properly most
of the time like Avid DV Xpress (about $1500. U.S. for base package).
You only get what you pay for. June 20/2003 Update March
2005, I learned that In-sync went out of business in October of
2004, which didn't surprise me at all. Another professional editing
software in the same price range that I have heard good things about
is Video
Vegas by Sony JVC OF CANADA: Since 1988 I have experienced many instances of poor quality service & customer support for Professional & Consumer grade video equipment at the Canadian head office of JVC in Toronto (Scarboro). I've also heard many other Canadians voice the same sentiment. I know of several consumers who refuse to buy another JVC product. Currently I've been waiting over 6 weeks to get a return call about a question I have on one of my commercial graded JVC editing VCRs, despite several calls placed by me. Finally, on a recent trip to Toronto I stopped at JVC in person & was very rudely treated by a service technician when I inquired about the best way to determine what was wrong with my professional deck. I was also informed that it would be at least 2 - 3 weeks before they could look at my unit (unacceptable for a professional piece of equipment worth in the $6000. - $9000. range). JVC Canada treats their industrial/professional clients no better than the shabby way they treat their retail consumer clients. I would advise Canadians to avoid buying JVC products if they anticipate the need to have it serviced by JVC. Last updated March 3/2001 By Doug Hembruff. |
Home Page & Power Products | Tutorials | Opinions | Legacy Video Production | Contact Info