Re: re Digital TV !!!OFF TOPIC!!!

["Simon Coates" <ecolume@xxxxxxx>]

Phil,

I've been looking for a DVD multiplayer and found a very nice 403 disk
changer from Kenwood.  Kenwood are using Faroudja circuitry in some of
their
DVD players, and they're not too expensive.
http://www.kenwoodusa.com/product/product.jsp?productTypeId=25&productId=782

I can't find the above player in the UK but Techronics do the slightly
lesser spec model but with multi-region.
http://www.techtronics.com/uk/shop/50-kenwood-dvf-j6050-multi-region-dvd-pla
yer.html


I agree with your points regarding picture quality.  I've been watching a
lot of DVDs recently and thought that the picture was about as good as it
could get.  That was until I found an old VHS-C tape I recorded on a
Panasonic palmcorder which I hadn't played for about 10 years.  The picture
quality looked great!  The colours were really vivid and vibrant - although
the sound was crappy!
Recently I've been thinking that DVDs concentrate on the soundtrack and
sound format and forgetting how important the quality of the picture
information is.  I'm not complaining about soundtracks mind!  But many DVDs
are marketed on the fact that the soundtrack is DTS.  Why don't the
manufacturers list the compression ratio (or compression quality) alongside
all the other info on the back of the DVD cover?

Also, what you mentioned regarding 100Hz sets - I once saw a DVD playing on
a 100Hz Toshiba rear projector with a very strange screen flicker, a bit
like a beat frequency.

Regards


Simon


----- Original Message -----
From: Phil Harris <phillip.harris1@xxxxxxx>
To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
Sent: 19 January 2002 00:32
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] re Digital TV !!!OFF TOPIC!!!


>
> > Why should that be, I wonder?  Sony seem to have acknowledged
> > the fact that there can be problems with 100Hz pictures,
> > because they're producing 50/100 switchable models now, but I
> > don't understand what the issue is in the first place.
>
> The problem is basically along the lines of that which you get if you
> take a JPEG image load it and then resave it *AT THE SAME QUALITY
FACTOR
> AS IT WAS PREVIOUSLY SAVED* you will get a further decrease in
quality.
>
> All of these real time digital processes are inherently flawed and
have
> to be so in order to be affordable (Faroudja make some wonderful video
> scalers but they cost more than half as much as my house for the
better
> ones in their range!) any processing that takes place anywhere which
> tries to recreate information or "improve" things is
introducing further
> flaws ... It's just that the manufacturers try to make the
"flawed"
> result of the process closer to what the original was than the input
> signal to the process.
>
> Phil
>
>
> For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
> Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
> List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>