PAL vs NTSC...please stop!!

[SithLordSi]

There seem to have been more and more threads recently featuring NTSC vs PAL debates, none of which ever get resolved and generally just divert attention from more important issues.

What people need to realise, I think, is that neither format is "the best". Both have their 'pros & cons' - I think Michael Brooke put it best with "it's all swings and roundabouts" (meaning, of course, that while one person might find one format agreeable, another might find certain things about it offputting, and vice-versa).

Sure, PAL can potentially deliver and better picture than NTSC, but it doesn't always work out like that for various reasons. Yes, the audio on NTSC movies plays at more or less the correct speed compared to PAL, but this is not always a factor worth considering. And for those with an average TV and who aren't too fussy about the sound, the whole debate of R1/R2 (and/or R4) is going to come down to other factors, like extras, packaging, price and whether the film is uncut or not.

Interestingly, it's the PAL defenders who seem to get the most defensive of their format. I'm always reading stuff like "NTSC is horrible" and "the VASTLY superior PAL picture" and "digustingly JERKY movement" (not actual quotes, before anyone questions them), and to be quite frank, remarks like this are absolute rubbish and totally misleading. NTSC is in no way "unwatchable", even on larger sets or projection based systems.

On the other hand, I have been unfair about PAL speed-up on occasion...a trend that is stopping right here. I reckon my own collection of DVDs is about 30% PAL, 70% NTSC, but that's more to do with the selection available overseas than the video format. Heck, I've swapped PAL versions for NTSC and vice-versa to try and get the version I'm happiest with, but this happens rarely and it's on a case-by-case basis only.

I don't want to stop anyone from learning about the different video standards, as it certainly is an interesting technical debate. But there are better ways of learning this than arguing about it. I mean, what a silly thing to argue about! What could it possibly hope to achieve? Try searching the web for technical explanations of the formats, because they're less likely to be biased. Or, better still, trust your own judgement. If you really can't watch NTSC (for some strange reason) and HAVE to buy PAL only, then fine. No-one's going to stop you, but don't think you have to crusade to convert others just because you think you've found the answer in the great debate.

And that's all I have to say about that. :D

[Blade Runner]

Well said. :cool:

[Bamse]

I agree, well said.
Although NTSC is better.
:D

[Kit_Taylor]

No PAL si bettar!!!1

If yu0 liek NTSC UR GAY so STFU!!1 kthnx

EDIT I MAYD A MISTAYK kthnx

[Bamse]

That’s what I meant, Pal is the best format.:D

Now there’s a man with integrity.

[Jimmyboy]

I don't see anyone arguing about PAL vs NTSC ???.

What you on about me old mucka !!!!

[Apex]

Hope you don't mean my thread http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30918

It isn't a PAL vs NTSC, more a question about the DVD transfer process related to NTSC and PAL.

[utero]

frankly I couldn't care less either way, as long as I can watch it and hear it

[GNJ1958]

Personally I think most of of the anti-ntsc stuff comes the anti-america brigade. They think that making PAL superior to NTSC puts one over on the "yanks". Of course they always fail to recognise or mention that the Japanese (yeah the one 's that virtually invented home cinema) use NTSC as well. Anyway HDTV will make the whole argument mute..eventually.
I don't really care if they don't like NTSC and choose not to buy them. Myself, I choose (like the majority on these forums) to buy the best version available whether it be PAL or NTSC. My collection is almost 50/50. Most of the R1 discs I've bought, i've bought because they were available earlier than the R2(ie the Alien trilogy I had a whole year before they were released over here and that was more important to me than having a PAL picture or an extra disc of extras I probably would'nt watch more than once).

[vila]

The 'anti American' brigade should **** off and stop watching movies. Whilst theoretically Hidef should put an end to this argument - the morons in charge of this type of stuff for Europe have stuck with the bloody Pal system. This is a shame because I wont get any HiDef tv but at the end of the day it one more reason for me to import instead of supporting this joke of an economy.

[Tony Keats]

Yes, it's probably silly to have a preference (hating a broadcast system?! tut). That said though, I think someone should explain that you live a longer life by watching PAL(!).

Okay.... If you viewed another 500 DVD's (seems a lot, but one or two of us here could do) and for arguments sake they're 2hrs long in NTSC. That adds up to 1000 hours of viewing (nearly 42 days).

If all of these movies were converted to PAL though (or as I like to call it "lovely lovely" PAL) it would only add up to 960 hours (a mere 40 days). In effect, preferring PAL would gain you almost two full days!.

Now, I expect some scepticism and nay-saying, but the fact is that the PAL clan are semi-immortal and superior to the NTSC bunch in every conceivable way. As demonstrated above, the much-maligned speed-up isn't a bad thing at all, it's just a genius-like method of extending life.

PAL- "The best".
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Probable reply:-This is exactly the kind of childish, nonsensical, insultingly stupid garbage I'm talking about. I mean for heavens sake! th.......... (etc)

[Hendrik]

.

. . . :D . . .


(signed) Sleepless in Switzerland - no longer the only rich, modern country in the West witout an airline

[Bamse]

Funny
The very thing this thread was started to stop, has become what it’s about.
:nuts:

[McD]

Aye, I can't remember seeing anyone start this debate for yonks other then our humble thread starter!

For the record, the non-anamorphic NTSC Titanic disc looks as good as ANY live action anamorphic R2 on a 32'' widescreen tv. Maybe that would change the closer you come to 50'', but hey, that's not bothering me at this point in time.

[Michael Mackenzie]

At the end of the day I prefer PAL, but NTSC is still perfectly acceptable. The only time I think the difference becomes really marked is if the disc in question in non-anamorphic. Then, the extra 100 PAL lines is a godsend.

[Xenole]

I prefer SECAM myself.

[Robbo]

I have watched both PAL and NTSC DVD's and can notice no difference what so ever.

If an NTSC R1 DVD comes out say 6 months before the PAL R2 DVD comes out then I will get the NTSC R1, only because I would sooner have the option of being able to purchase the DVD sooner as opposed to having to wait for ridiculous amounts of time for an R2 release of that same DVD.

For example Star Trek II Wrath of Khan released on R1 round about July Time, R2 version of that same DVD not being released until December so if it comes down to the question of which Region of DVD comes out first then I shall get the one that’s comes out first.

Of coarse there are several factors in regards to things such as features.

Now where as a NTSC DVD compared to a PAL DVD may have more features it really depends on the type of film that it is for example I will get say an NTSC R1 disc if the features on there contain more than say on a PAL R2 release (The Blackadder series being a prime example) or if say one region is Anamorphic or the other one is not then whatever one that has the Anamorphic picture then I shall go for that one.

If coarse regardless as to if a DVD has features or not for me as long as it has an Anamorphic transfer then I am happy.

Of coarse not all DVD's are in Anamorphic so for me that part of the criteria I am looking for in a DVD that being Anamorphic transfer comes in to play when deciding on a DVD purchase.

Of coarse if there is a film I am really interested in and the transfer on both said regions is non anamorphic then so be it unless of coarse they re-release that said film in an Anamorphic state.

Everyone that buys DVD's has theie own sets of criteria as to want they want out of a DVD and for me as long as the film regardless of region has enough features and preferably an Anamorphic transfer or even if it has no features then that’s fine by me.

Of coarse there are people on this forum that have been collecting DVD's for a long time (I started in May and have collected 180 DVD's) and may be very picky as to their Region of choice but as long as they are happy with how they collect their DVD's then fine there are entitled to make that choice.

So to Sum everything up at the end of the day we are all here because of our love for films and the medium that DVD offers and as long as DVD remains and the films keep coming so we keep collecting and enjoy in what we do.

[wide_inside]

SECAM is a bit too unversatile for me, You can't mix or fade while using it because of the way the signal is modulated. It's all done either component or PAL in house, and only changed to SECAM for transmission.

wide:D

[Jimmyboy]

I will nearly always chose PAL over NTSC if both are identical and released on the same date, but so what ?.
Its nice to have the option, and being able to chose either PAL or NTSC is what matters to me as it creates competition between the various regions.

I think the topic starter has alot to answer for.
Starting a thread like this claiming that its to put an end to PAL & NTSC debates seems daft, especially as there wasnt any PAL vs NTSC debates taking place to begin with.

[SithLordSi]

Why do I have "a lot to answer for"? I believe the only thing I have to answer for is starting this thread - it's not my fault that most people missed the point and started another debate. This is exactly what I was trying to avoid, but perhaps I did go about it the wrong way.

In response to a few people who feel that this post is unjustified: you are right in thinking that there hasn't recently been a thread about this topic, although there have been many in the past. I'm not going to go searching through the archives to prove it - I know there have been on more than a few occasions, as I nearly always get involved! However, I recently read a thread about NTSC -> PAL conversion, in which someone (yet again) used it as an excuse to start slagging off NTSC.

So I started this thread in order to make some people think before they post, because it's a complete waste of time...not least on their part! But, instead of most people taking my argument on board, the thread has been hijacked and the blame placed on me.

[cervaro]

I think some people spend more time bitching about PAL vs. NTSC and which format they think is better rather than watching the damn movies, which after all is why you bought the DVD player in the first place!

[SithLordSi]

I agree, hence why I think the NTSC/PAL debate should stop!

[Jimmyboy]

Originally posted by SithLordSi
I agree, hence why I think the NTSC/PAL debate should stop!
Shut up then !.




:D

[SithLordSi]

point taken

:D

[Philc]

Are we taking drop frame into account?

:D

[dms]

surely the whole argument is a waste of time ;-)

both ntsc and pal have shortcomings and both of these are noticable to just about anyone (be it "judder judder pan" or "squeaky 5%) anyone who claims they can't notice these needs to be sat down and shown a demo, and anyone who says they don't bother them is your typical consumer ;-)

personally we should bin them both ;-) and have a 24fps format on the dvd in the manner in which the film was meant to be shown!!! Now why is that so hard to achieve, and not have the sexy-format -> pal or ntsc done onboard the dvd player (afterall they seem to be able to cope with ntsc -> pal and vice versa)

(oh and anyone who says we shouldn't talk about ntsc vs pal or any other topic for that matter should be shot for being a fascist, people are entitled to their opinion even if it is a waste of bandwidth ;-)

(i didn't run this by my my "sense of humor failure detector" so try not to get wound up ;-)

[SithLordSi]

dms - OK, OK :D I only meant that we shouldn't argue about the issue, as that's what I've seen happen

Peace, everyone

[Michael Mackenzie]

Originally posted by dms
personally we should bin them both ;-) and have a 24fps format on the dvd in the manner in which the film was meant to be shown!!! Now why is that so hard to achieve, and not have the sexy-format -> pal or ntsc done onboard the dvd player (afterall they seem to be able to cope with ntsc -> pal and vice versa)Technically I'm all for that, but surely you've seen some of the awful conversions -- the judder is just horrible. I myself have output NTSC DVDs as 50 Hz PAL from a Creative DxR3 PC-DVD card, and the results are quite horrific.

[Jimmyboy]

FFS !.
Both PAL & NTSC are decent when done correctly.
Just be grateful we have the choice to chose, unlike the Americans.