>> Due a smaler coulour band signal. The slow colour change
>> is a real pain for movies but the 50 vs 60 Hz isn't
>> visible, althrugh when used with computers, both are
>> just bad.
> I definitely notice the 50Hz vs 60Hz difference on my computer.
It is visible when using a still picture like a computer
output. 60 Hz gives a more stable view, but on the other
hand, the poor NTSC coulour signal just damages the view
again, so again the result is bas - taking this and the
lower resolution (less horizontal and vertical lines in NTSC)
I'll prefer the flicker. THe best was still using PAL with
60 Hz - some homecomputers of the 80s could be programmed
for that - less flicker and high resolution and biliant
(or at least as briliant as a narow band colour signal
can be) colours.
> I might
> not notice it with a TV signal, though - I've never watched PAL
> television. (But I've watched 50Hz 'EuroDemos' on the TV.)
EuroDemos ? Whats that ?
>> This might not be true for the low price TV sets, but
>> any TV I (or friends of mine) had within the last
>> 10 years could syncronize 60 Hz b&w and all (but one
>> tested in 1984) could also display NTSC signals.
> Our current television (JVC model no. AV-27965, manufactured in 1995) will
> definitely _not_ synch to 50Hz. This annoyed me. All of our old
> tube-based monstrosities are perfectly happy with 50Hz.
> But north American televisions are primitive relative to European ones. I
> would _really_ like it if they'd put SCART connectors on the sets over
> here!
The funny thing is that Japaneese companies have also
stron sales in Europe - and use the same designs in
Europe and the US ... But as always, they add only as
many features as the 'local' companies offer.
Gruss
Hans
I used an SONY TV for the ATARI ST, 10 years ago.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
Received on Sat Nov 07 1998 - 11:26:33 GMT