Christian Link
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Nov 08, 2004 8:42 am Post subject:
Re: ntsc |
|
|
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 22:16:32 +0100, "john" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Kan je van een ntsc divx ook een pal divx maken?
Zo ja met welk programma.
|
From an encoder's standpoint, the difference between PAL and NTSC is
just resolution and frame rate (plus, if you want to encode NTSC-FILM
material, i. e. 23.976 fps, the pulldown while playback, which isn't
explicitly supported in DivX, however). This being said, there's no
other way but to reencode your video after doing the resolution and
frame rate changes.
However, the way I see it you don't have to bother about PAL versus
NTSC anyway, if you want to stay in DivX format (converting DivX to
DVD etc. or vice-versa is another story, of course). In fact, this has
always made me wonder, so maybe hijacking this thread may give some
new insights ...? Here's my understanding of the matter as of today:
As far as I know, there are no "fixed" rules as of how to encode a
DivX video and still adhere to the profiles. Even the suggested
maximum resolutions / frame rates are only that: suggestions, and
probably merely reflect the data rate.
I remember that I've written an email to KISS back then when they had
just announced their first standalone player, and asked what the
suggested size and frame rate *really* was, but only got an answer
that showed nothing but the utter ignorance of that helpdesk person (I
doubt if he/she actually understood what I meant?!?). As far as I
remember, they said that you had to encode in 720 x 576 (i. e.
PAL-CCIR) to get a full 4:3 picture. If you chose a lower resolution,
the picture would have been displayed as a smaller area, and you had
to zoom in. Mind you, all you you KISS users out there - I did not
believe it, but that's what they told me.
Later, I've bought a Hiteker 940 player and made some experiments. And
indeed, it just behaved as you'd expect it to: It seems to _always_
use square pixels (i. e. like a PC in one of the standard
resolutions), and it _always_ scaled the picture up to use the screen
completely (while retaining the correct display aspect ratio, of
course). Further, so far it handled *all* frame rates I've thrown at
it, e. g. 2 fps, 7 fps, etc.
Conclusion: If it would be fair to assume most newer players behave
just the same way (I've read about older ones where you had to adjust
the aspect ratio by manually shrinking/expanding?!?), there should be
no concern whatsoever regarding the PAL/NTSC problem, right?
(And yes, I am aware of the fact that _internally_ the player would
still have to adjust the frame rate by doubling/skipping frames so as
to meet your TV standard's requirements - but that's of no concern for
the people who do the encodings ...)
Anybody have a different opinion or different experiences? Or is in
possession of one of those "older" players allegedly not using square
pixels? I'd be very interested to hear about that.
Greetings,
Chris. |
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in