G
Guests
Guest
[ukvac] OT: Component Video (was Re: gorf amp)
At 13:03 14/11/03 -0000, Paul Maddern wrote:
> They said that 'component' was the very best way to connect my
> xbox to my tv, better than scart, better than svhs/svideo thingy.
> So does that mean that component video has been about since 1980?
Component video has been around for a lot longer than that. It is an
essential process used in converting an RGB signal from a camera source to
the PAL (or NTSC) broadcast signal, so it's been around since the first
colour transmission fourty odd years ago.
Technically RGB is better quality than component, as the colour difference
signals in component video are _usually_ bandwidth limited. But in
practical terms it makes no difference, seeing as your eyes are more
limited in colour perception than they are in luminance perception, and
most video sources are also bandwidth limited like this (with the obvious
exception of most video games, to try and get this back on topic!).
Without this bandwidth limitation, there is absolutely no difference in
quality between the two systems.
But of course, seeing as component is what the yanks use for their tellys,
it has to be better than the scart system, especially seeing as scart
sockets were developed by the French ;-)
Also, as MPEG video is stored on the media as component video, there is no
benefit in converting it to RGB in the player, especially as it is likely
to be converted back to component in most modern TV sets.
BTW You can check your own set to see if it does this, by using an RGB
source and trying to adjust the colour control down to a black and white
picture. If it fades to grey, then your set converts the signal to
component video for signal processing. If the picture remains the same,
then the signal will be RGB all the way to the tube.
Cheers,
Dave.
DATA Imported from archives: originally posted by Dave Roberts (daverob@cwcom.net)
At 13:03 14/11/03 -0000, Paul Maddern wrote:
> They said that 'component' was the very best way to connect my
> xbox to my tv, better than scart, better than svhs/svideo thingy.
> So does that mean that component video has been about since 1980?
Component video has been around for a lot longer than that. It is an
essential process used in converting an RGB signal from a camera source to
the PAL (or NTSC) broadcast signal, so it's been around since the first
colour transmission fourty odd years ago.
Technically RGB is better quality than component, as the colour difference
signals in component video are _usually_ bandwidth limited. But in
practical terms it makes no difference, seeing as your eyes are more
limited in colour perception than they are in luminance perception, and
most video sources are also bandwidth limited like this (with the obvious
exception of most video games, to try and get this back on topic!).
Without this bandwidth limitation, there is absolutely no difference in
quality between the two systems.
But of course, seeing as component is what the yanks use for their tellys,
it has to be better than the scart system, especially seeing as scart
sockets were developed by the French ;-)
Also, as MPEG video is stored on the media as component video, there is no
benefit in converting it to RGB in the player, especially as it is likely
to be converted back to component in most modern TV sets.
BTW You can check your own set to see if it does this, by using an RGB
source and trying to adjust the colour control down to a black and white
picture. If it fades to grey, then your set converts the signal to
component video for signal processing. If the picture remains the same,
then the signal will be RGB all the way to the tube.
Cheers,
Dave.
DATA Imported from archives: originally posted by Dave Roberts (daverob@cwcom.net)
