NTSC versus PAL

[Phil Allison]

<stratus46@yahoo.com>

** More fuckwit, OFF TOPIC CRAPOLOGY !!

See the words " broadcast signal " - fuckhead ???

Even know what it means ???

They still do some composite D-2 editing at CBS network. Or don't they
count as broadcast?


** Hey fuckwit.

In relation to television transmission - where does one find the "
broadcast signal " ???

Don't strain you tiny brain thinking too hard.




...... Phil

 

[isw]

In article <0095e510$0$2343$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>,
Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

On 2/04/2010 9:50 PM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
I think you'll find that was the intent. However, if the phase error is
too great, the eye averaging doesn't work so well, hence the
introduction of the delay line.

At which point you wonder why bother sending two colour signals in
quadrature if you're just going to average them with the next scan line
anyway.

But you don't have to average them. NTSC doesn't. And the delay line can be
used for comb filtering.


SECAM avoids that complexity by just going straight to the delay
line. I lived in Paris for 18 months. If there's a quality difference
between a SECAM and PAL picture, it was far from obvious.

The problem is, SECAM /requires/ the delay line because the system transmits
only the red or blue color-difference signal at any time. This is what I was
talking about -- it keeps the transmission side cheap, while making the user
pay more for their TV.

For most images, you won't see a difference. But in an image with strong
vertical color transitions, you'll see aliasing, especially when the image
moves vertically.



If we were building an analogue colour TV transmission infrastructure
now, then maybe we'd go the NTSC route, since it eliminates the delay
line. But it's undoubtedly true that, for whatever reasons, in earlier
times, NTSC didn't perform that well, whereas those whose systems were
PAL or SECAM got good colour pictures from day one.

And had high-brightness flicker for just as long...

Isaac

 

On Apr 1, 10:08 pm, "Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

stratu...@yahoo.com

In * REALITY * the NTSC broadcast signal is massively compromised in
comparison to a PAL signal.

PAL has plenty wrong with it and is 'massively compromised' the same
ways as NTSC.

**  More  INSANE  CRAPOLOGY  !!!!!!!!!!

Editing in composite PAL .....

** More fuckwit,  OFF  TOPIC  CRAPOLOGY  !!

See the words  " broadcast signal  "  -   fuckhead ???

Even know what it means  ???

.....   Phil

They still do some composite D-2 editing at CBS network. Or don't they
count as broadcast?

G˛

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 2/04/2010 12:13 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:

If the transmission network has constant group delay, the hue setting should
be set 'n forget, and never need to be changed.

It's not clear to me why that wasn't the case anyway. Whatever phase
error was introduced to the colour signal by the transmission system
would also affect the colour burst. If the problem could be addressed by
means of a tint control with a setting that remained stable even over
the duration of a program, it rather seems to imply that a phase error
between the colour burst and the colour subcarrier was built into the
signal at the studio.

Sylvia.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

isw wrote:

Sylvia Else wrote:

If we were building an analogue colour TV transmission infrastructure
now, then maybe we'd go the NTSC route, since it eliminates the delay
line.

NTSC? No delay line? Moron. The luminance data had to be delayed to
allow time to process the Chroma data. An open delay line in a NTSC
video display caused a very dark image with moving blotches of color. I
found and replaced several, in NTSC TVs and Video Monitors.


--
Lead free solder is Belgium's version of 'Hold my beer and watch this!'

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 3/04/2010 10:04 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

isw wrote:

Sylvia Else wrote:

If we were building an analogue colour TV transmission infrastructure
now, then maybe we'd go the NTSC route, since it eliminates the delay
line.


NTSC? No delay line? Moron. The luminance data had to be delayed to
allow time to process the Chroma data. An open delay line in a NTSC
video display caused a very dark image with moving blotches of color. I
found and replaced several, in NTSC TVs and Video Monitors.

In which case you'd know that a PAL TV contains two delay lines. One
provides a short delay and addresses the difference in delay between the
chroma path and the luminance path. The other provides a full scan line
delay to allow averaging of the chrominance signal.

It should be obvious from context that "the" delay line that I was
referring to was the latter.

But I suppose calling people morons is easier than doing your own thinking.

Sylvia.

 

[David]

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:4bb6f524$0$1483$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...

On 2/04/2010 12:13 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:

If the transmission network has constant group delay, the
hue setting should
be set 'n forget, and never need to be changed.

It's not clear to me why that wasn't the case anyway.
Whatever phase error was introduced to the colour signal
by the transmission system would also affect the colour
burst. If the problem could be addressed by means of a
tint control with a setting that remained stable even over
the duration of a program, it rather seems to imply that a
phase error between the colour burst and the colour
subcarrier was built into the signal at the studio.

Sylvia

One big problem was differential phase and gain in the
transmission path. In this case both the amplitude and phase
of the color information was influenced by the total
amplitude of the signal including the luminance. Since the
burst was at IRE 0 and the average picture content was IRE
50 or so, differential phase shifted the color hue.

David

 

[William Sommerwerck]

If we were building an analogue colour TV transmission
infrastructure now, then maybe we'd go the NTSC route,
since it eliminates the delay line.

PAL doesn't /require/ a delay line.

But it's undoubtedly true that, for whatever reasons, in earlier
times, NTSC didn't perform that well, whereas those whose
systems were PAL or SECAM got good colour pictures from
day one.

NTSC has always "performed well". Poor NTSC image quality was always due to
bad studio practice.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

** The laws of nature have not changed since 1953
- you tenth witted, know-nothing, bullshitting pommy bitch !!!

That's really going too far. Is there any way to permanently block Mr.
Allison?

By the way, it's pome, an acronym of "prisoner of mother England".

 

[William Sommerwerck]

If we were building an analogue colour TV transmission infrastructure
now, then maybe we'd go the NTSC route, since it eliminates the delay
line.

NTSC? No delay line? Moron. The luminance data had to be delayed to
allow time to process the Chroma data. An open delay line in a NTSC
video display caused a very dark image with moving blotches of color. I
found and replaced several, in NTSC TVs and Video Monitors.

She's talking about phase averaging (or whatever it's called -- I don't know
the term).

The delay line /you're/ talking about is required in NTSC and PAL receivers,
because the narrower-band color signal(s) have greater group delay, and the
luminance has to be "slowed down" to match.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

If the transmission network has constant group delay,
the hue setting should be set 'n forget, and never need
to be changed.

It's not clear to me why that wasn't the case anyway. Whatever
phase error was introduced to the colour signal by the transmission
system would also affect the colour burst. If the problem could be
addressed by means of a tint control with a setting that remained
stable even over the duration of a program, it rather seems to imply
that a phase error between the colour burst and the colour subcarrier
was built into the signal at the studio.

We're talking about non-linear group delay. This is not a simple phase error
in the burst, but a non-time-constant delay across the bandwidth of the
chroma signal. Any such non-linear delay will introduce varying color errors
that cannot be corrected with a single hue setting.

 

[Phil Allison]

"William Sommerwanker FUCKING TROLL "

Phil Allison

** The laws of nature have not changed since 1953

That's really going too far.

** Really ??????????????

Which laws of nature have changed since 1953 ?

Please give all relevant details.


Or I will FUCK you right off usenet for ever -

you vile, stinking, pile of sub human autistic SHIT !!






...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"William Sommerwanker LYING TROLL "

NTSC has always "performed well".

** MASSIVE LIE .

Poor NTSC image quality was always due to
bad studio practice.

** Another MASSIVE LIE.



..... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"William Sommerwanker LYING FUCKWIT TROLL "

NTSC has always "performed well".

** MASSIVE LIE .

Poor NTSC image quality was always due to
bad studio practice.

** Another MASSIVE LIE.

FOAD you stupid old CUNT !!



..... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"William Sommerwanker LYING TROLL "

NTSC has always "performed well".

** MASSIVE LIE .

Poor NTSC image quality was always due to
bad studio practice.

** Another MASSIVE LIE.

FOAD you stupid old AUTISTIC CUNT !!



..... Phil

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 4/04/2010 12:03 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:

If the transmission network has constant group delay,
the hue setting should be set 'n forget, and never need
to be changed.

It's not clear to me why that wasn't the case anyway. Whatever
phase error was introduced to the colour signal by the transmission
system would also affect the colour burst. If the problem could be
addressed by means of a tint control with a setting that remained
stable even over the duration of a program, it rather seems to imply
that a phase error between the colour burst and the colour subcarrier
was built into the signal at the studio.

We're talking about non-linear group delay. This is not a simple phase error
in the burst, but a non-time-constant delay across the bandwidth of the
chroma signal. Any such non-linear delay will introduce varying color errors
that cannot be corrected with a single hue setting.

But, as you say, that kind of problem cannot be corrected with a single
hue setting, so no amount of fiddling with the tint control would have
produced an acceptable picture, even over a short timescale.

I understand that prior to the expiry of the Telefunken PAL patent, Sony
Trinitron sets for the PAL market actually threw away the chrominance
signal on alternate scan lines, thus landing themselves back in NTSC
territory. Those sets had a tint control, and I know from personal
experience that they produced a perfectly satisfactory result (I only
learnt the other day why they had a tint control).

So even if non-linear delay was a theoretical problem, it appears not to
have been one in practice. At least, not in the UK.

Sylvia.

 

[David Nebenzahl]

On 4/3/2010 4:55 AM William Sommerwerck spake thus:

** The laws of nature have not changed since 1953
- you tenth witted, know-nothing, bullshitting pommy bitch !!!

That's really going too far. Is there any way to permanently block Mr.
Allison?

You're not serious, are you? I mean, I'm sure you already know the
answer to that question.

My suggestion: enjoy the Phil Allison Ride while it's running. Wheee!


--
You were wrong, and I'm man enough to admit it.

- a Usenet "apology"

 

[Phil Allison]

<stratus46@yahoo.com>
"Phil Allison"

** More fuckwit, OFF TOPIC CRAPOLOGY !!

See the words " broadcast signal " - fuckhead ???

Even know what it means ???

They still do some composite D-2 editing at CBS network. Or don't they
count as broadcast?

** Hey fuckwit.

In relation to television transmission - where does one find the "
broadcast signal " ???

Don't strain you tiny brain thinking too hard.

What the heck has the transmitter got to do with it?


** I made no mention of any " transmitter"

- you FUCKING ILLITERATE MORON !!!


The fuckwit still no idea where a " broadcast signal" is to be found.

Cos obviously, this asinine cunthead has no clue why engineers were
motivated to develop PAL in the first place.




...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

<stratus46@yahoo.com = EXCREMENT


** More fuckwit, OFF TOPIC CRAPOLOGY !!

See the words " broadcast signal " - fuckhead ???

Even know what it means ???

They still do some composite D-2 editing at CBS network. Or don't they
count as broadcast?

** Hey fuckwit.

In relation to television transmission - where does one find the "
broadcast signal " ???

Don't strain you tiny brain thinking too hard.

What the heck has the transmitter got to do with it?


** I made no mention of any " transmitter"

- you FUCKING ILLITERATE MORON !!!


This fuckwit still no idea where a " broadcast signal" is to be found !!

What a FUCKING MORON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obviously, this asinine ASD fucked cunt has no clue why engineers were
motivated to develop PAL in the first place.





...... Phil

 

On Apr 2, 9:40 pm, "Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote:

stratu...@yahoo.com

** More fuckwit, OFF TOPIC CRAPOLOGY !!

See the words " broadcast signal " - fuckhead ???

Even know what it means ???

They still do some composite D-2 editing at CBS network. Or don't they
count as broadcast?

** Hey fuckwit.

In relation to television transmission  -  where does one find the  "
broadcast signal "  ???

Don't strain you tiny brain thinking too hard.

.....   Phil

What the heck has the transmitter got to do with it? Anything that is
right or wrong with an NTSC signal is equally right or wrong BEFORE
the transmitter. The transmitter is just a way to get the signal to
lots of folks at once. Or does that confuse YOU?

G˛