FreakyMac Posted June 3, 2007 Share Posted June 3, 2007 Ok, i been wondering this for a very long time, What is Better? NTSC (North,Central, Some parts of South America, Japan, and other places in the world) PAL (Europe, Asia, Austrailia And other parts of the world) SECAM (Russia, France, Africa and other places) What is better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreakyMac Posted June 3, 2007 Author Share Posted June 3, 2007 People, What do YOU think is better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zarac Posted June 3, 2007 Share Posted June 3, 2007 well, i'd always prefere more lines to the refresh rate, so i'll have to say: PAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackandblue Posted June 3, 2007 Share Posted June 3, 2007 voted pal, australian! ftw! But i think secam is much the same as pal anywho?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cringemaster Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 this isnt really the best question because not many people have experienced anything but what their home country uses (For me, its NTSC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OryHara Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Right now I would have to say NTSC because of the 29fps framerate with PAL only being 25fps. Not sure about the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhai Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 This is stupid poll. And there exists also PAL-M/PAL-N, SECAM in different flavors etc... There are pro and cons, not just by fields and refresh rate, but also bandwidth, what kind of modulation used for color and sound and if you only want to watch or also edit in the format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solaar Posted June 6, 2007 Share Posted June 6, 2007 The PAL colour system is 'objectively' the best, technically speaking. It's actually in order to compensate the systematic flaws in NTSC that it needs to run at a higher frame rate. When I do my yearly visit in the US it always strikes me how the colours in NTSC seem washed out, not as vibrant. NTSC tellies also have this manual colour correction (hue) which PAL doesn't need. Another minor advantage is that the 25 frames in PAL are closer to the 24 frames in film which everybody is more or less most used to. Subjectively speaking though, NTSC seems less fatiguing to the eyes as the 30 frames produce less flicker than PAL. But once again, this is only perceivable in direct comparison. SECAM is in fact very close to PAL except that SECAM-L (France) is completely incompatible to all the other systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreakyMac Posted June 6, 2007 Author Share Posted June 6, 2007 SO Overall, PAL is better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyarea Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Technically, Pal is superior. I don't know much about Secam - never had to deal with it much. NTSC in the industry was laughingly thought to mean Never The Same Colour Twice, but all that's from the old analog tape days. It has less colour range and fewer lines of resolution. BTW, why ask? I thought those standards had gone the way of the dinosaur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreakyMac Posted June 18, 2007 Author Share Posted June 18, 2007 Im just a stupid 15 year old Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts