Newsgroups: rec.video

In rec.video, steelie@csa.bu.edu (James Howard) writes:

> Given ideal reception conditions, if I were to watch a non letter boxed
> version of Star Trek II on broadcast TV, and it somehow had no commercials
> and was not edited for TV, and I watched the same movie in non-letter
> boxed format with a good TV and a good LD player..  Which would have more
> lines of resolution?  TV or LD?

It's not just "lines of resolution" that matter.  There also are issues
of signal/noise ratio, color abberations, ghosting, ringing and other stuff.  

> I know the LD has digital sound, so don't even bring that into
> the picture.  I want to know image quality only.

An ironic statement, because the (surround) sound is the thing thats gets
trashed most often on ST-TNG broadcasts, snapping from front to back and
wandering around the room as links in the distribution chain wrench the
phase and generally confuse decoders with compression and NR games.

Anyway - the bottom line:

1. The reality is that station-to-station, feed-to-feed, disc-to-disc and
   home-to-home variations are greater than the average difference between
   LD and top-quality broadcast.

2. However, if you had a dish and a top-line IRD, and could reliably get the
   first downlink of the initial broadcasts (sans commercial intervals), it
   would be a toss-up against LD.  If you are time-shifting on an consumer
   format VCR, LD wins.  If you are watching locally-re-recorded affiliate
   broadcasts, LD usually wins.

3. For RF or cable viewers, the LDs of ST-TNG will outperform a broadcast,
   both visually and audibly.  And of course, the convenience features of
   local random-access media can't be directly compared to broadcast.
   Individual ST-TNG LDs have been reported to look slightly worse than the
   viewers recall seeing on air.

3a. LD theoretically goes to "425 lines", and broadcast to 330.  However,
   most LDs are rolled-off above 350 to prevent older players from running
   into audio subcarrier problems in their RF modulators, and, ST-TNG is
   post-produced on video, so the extra video generations may make the
   original signal less than pristine compared to a film transfer.

> And PLEASE don't try to explain some technicalities of the
> NTSC format, as that has been hased and rehashed endlessly before.

Since the show originates in NTSC, the limitation of the standard have no
bearing on broadcast vs LD.

> In short, which delivers a sharper/better defined picture?

As in most of life, there are no short answers.

Well, maybe one...

Around here (Ft.Collins CO), even the worst (non-defective) LDs I ever seen
are miles ahead of what ST-TNG looks like on the local cable company.

Regards,                                              Hewlett-Packard
Bob Niland      Internet: rjn@FC.HP.COM               3404 East Harmony Road
                CompuServe:  71044,2124               Ft Collins CO 80525-9599

This article represents only the opinion[s] of its author, and is not an
official or unofficial position of, or statement by, the Hewlett-Packard
Company.  The text is provided for informational purposes only.  It is
supplied without warranty of any kind.
From: teoallan@hpsgm2.sgp.hp.com (Allan TEO)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 05:32:45 GMT
Subject: Re: Pioneer CLD-D701 Novice Review
Organization: HP Singapore Notes-Server