From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Newsgroups: rec.video
Subject: Re: is laserdisc _really_ rob
Date: 31 Dec 92 16:23:48 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL

In article <1992Dec31.4246.20919@dosgate> "tony camara" <tony.camara@canrem.com> writes:
>This laserdisc talk alway's maeke's me wonder . Correct me if i'm wrong
>someone but is laser not only roughly 300 lines of res . How about s-vhs
>with 400 lines since s-vhs is better quality then why would anyonw buy
>laser ? Is it because of durability ? It's the only one i can think of

Laser is more than 300 lines resolution.   My unit displays 385 on a
test disk, and some of the newer units go to 425.

Chroma noise is much worse on S-VHS than laser.

Besides durabilty, the disc format (in all media) has been prefered for
it's quick access to any portion of the material recorded.

>Besides for sound quality . There is no no no real software around so
>far for laser . They tried about ten year's ago to push laser and it
>died a quick death so anyone planning on buying laser forget it . Once
>we are able to record on laserdisk then this will definitly dominate the
>market . The technology is already available we just have to wait for
>prices to come down to earth .

Hm - what do you mean 'no real software'.  Sure there's not as much as
on tape, but currently the latest Starship catalog has over 8000
titles.

Laser never died - it just took a long time being established.

Why should you have to be able to record on disc?   What's wrong with a
VCR for time shifting, and LD for serious quality collecting, and using
the VCR for cheap rentals.


>   I also keep hearing about the life of video tape . Why is everyone
>so worried about it ? The video tape will definitly outlive two or three
>vcr's . Mind you ofcourse this is under normal use . If you negelct
>anything no matter what it is you cann't not expect anything but a sure
>death .

It won't neccesarily outlive 2 or 3 vcrs.  The tape may be there, but
the oxides might not.   

I have had experiences with some video tapes that I have that are now
17 years old - Beta I - that are still fine.   But experience with some
later tapes that were unplayable a year or so later.    Something
happens to the binder, and you get instant head-clog.    Clean - get
maybe 5 to 10 seconds of video, and clog again.

Some tapes can be pampered and still die - I know this from problems in
the audio tape industry - where 2" masters became uplayable after a few
years of storage because of chemical composition change in the binders
that did not show up until way too late to do anything about it.

Some tape may last 20 years, other may not.   Projected expectancy is
about 10.

>  I work in a video store we will be making our tenth aniversary in 1993
>. We stock just over 10,000 titles in a 2500 square foot space . Let me
>tell you NO ONE'S TAPES ARE GOING TO TAKE MORE ABUSE THAN OUR'S . If the
>machine's are working properly no problems. The tapes we bought ten
>year's ago wich got alot alot alot of playing still look very good and
>again this is under the worst of conditions  .

On tapes that are that old, the frequent playing has probably helped
more than it has hurt.

-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill@bilver.uucp
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
Newsgroups: rec.video