[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: lurkers
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: lurkers
- From: "Phil Harris" <phillip.harris1@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 11:42:18 +0100
- Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Going Composite to S-Video basically doesn't drop the signal quality
noticeably below that of composite ... it's just far worse than s-Video (as
you'd expect).
The fact that VHS is almost the worst video format that ever was invented
and its only reason for survival was that JVC got their advertising right
and Sony got theirs (for Betamax - a far better format technically) so
wrong
is usefull here as no matter what conversion you do to composite from VHS
the limiting factor will always be the source (i.e. VHS tape).
Phil
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark McCall [mailto:mark@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 10 June 2001 11:35
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ukha_d] lurkers
>
>
> > If it is for use with your projector Mark you will notice a
slight
> > degradation when going from RGB to S, and a huge degradation
> when going to
> > composite.
>
> It is for the projector Tim.
>
> Looks like RGB to S converted need then - plus the Composite to S for
VCR.
> Does it look MUCH WORSE that the composite input?
>
> M.
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________
> Automated Home UK
> http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
> ____________________________________
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
____________________________________
Automated Home UK
http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
____________________________________
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|