Log in

View Full Version : NTSC to Pal, what is considered broadcast quality tapes, etc, etc..


Swan
16th October 2002, 15:34
Today I called SVT, Sweden's National Television (http://www.svt.se/inenglish/index.html), to clear up some questions I've had about things we discuss here. I got to talk to a very nice guy who gladly answered all my questions, although he thought they were odd to come from an ordinary citizen. :D
The answers were (at least to me) highly interesting and I thought I'd share.

Question 1: In what format does SVT get sitcoms, movies, music videos etc? Is tape still a standard or is material delivered on DVD? Is Betacam the format used?
Answer 1: No material is delivered to us on DVD. Tapes are still used, and there are various standards. Sony Digital Beta and Panasonic DVC Pro are two common formats. SVT has equipment for all sorts of tape standards. Betacam gives lesser quality than Digital Beta and DVC Pro, but we have machines to deal with that standard too.

Q2: How many lines must a a video tape standard carry for it to be considered broadcast quality? I am aware that there are 625 lines in the PAL standard, but not all are used for the actual video. Some lines are for Text-TV (teletext) etc, right?
A2: Correct. In my opinion a format that carries fewer than 625 lines is not of broadcast quality. Some tape (video) formats have many more than 625 lines, but we of course only transmit 625, and of those, only about 580 contain the video (the image you see on the TV). The remaining lines are used for Text-TV, time codes, etc.

Q3: So, you would not agree that SVHS is broadcast quality (I've seen some people suggest this)?
A3: Absolutely not!

Q4: Is it true that most American Tv-series, music videos, sitcoms and so on are still being produced on film, not filmed with modern digital video cameras, but progressive film cameras?
A4: This varies a lot. Some is shot on high-quality digital NTSC video, others on progressive film. Since it's easier to sell a production to Europe (PAL countries) if the source material is film (because transfer from film to PAL is a lot easier than transfer from NTSC to PAL and also the quality is kept), big, costly productions like "the Sopranos" for example, is shot on film. A mass produced, cheaper, "soap" series like "the Bold and the Beautiful" is more likely to be shot directly, in NTSC, with a video camera.

But a lot of music videos today are shot on digital video (using HD cameras which have approx 1080 lines). It's common today to shot music videos against a single colored background, so called blue screen. The big stars' videos are less likely to be shot on film.

Q5: Is this the same technique that was known as "chroma key" in the 70's?
A5: Yes, same thing. The video is then brought into the computer and digital effects, new backgrounds, etc is added to it. Then it can be exported to NTSC for example. If film or digital video is used depends on the cost a lot. How big the production is.

Q6: So, a big name, like Madonna.. Are her videos filmed with an analogue, progressive film camera or with a HD camera?
A6: HD for sure. But there is a lot of variation here. It is not a general rule that all US material is shot with (analogue, progressive) film cameras.

Q7: When you buy a series from the US, do you (SVT) take care of the NTSC to PAL conversion or the Film to PAL conversion?
A7: No, this is not done by us, but by the company we order the production from. But we have the equipment to do it.

Hope anyone else found this interesting. If you have any further questions, I'll be glad to call the guy up again and pester him some more. He didn't seem to mind. :-)

/Swan

wotef
16th October 2002, 16:14
that is very interesting!

i want to know why it is that certain broadcast picture and sound quality can vary so much (for the same material) from some crummy satellite stations - like, i was capturing some 5 year old vhs tapes i made from BBC2, and then just last week i captured the same show from the sci fi channel directly to the pc

well, there was a lot of analogue noise (from the vhs) tape, but OMG, it was obvious that the baseline broadcast quality from BBC2 was miles better than the digital source!! the satellite had macroblocks, cruddy saturation, and the buggers had horizontally cropped the frame (WHY??!)!!!! also, the sound was very compressed from satellite when compared to the BBC transmission - WTF is up with that?!

LOL, I got to start my complaint letter wizard in word

Swan
16th October 2002, 16:24
I don't think I need to call the poor guy up to answer that. Besides, he should not be held responsible for the Sci-Fi channel's mistakes. :-)
Why don't you e-mail Sci-Fi. Or better yet, e-mail the BBC and ask!
It's also a public service company, like SVT, so you pay both license and other taxes for just owning a TV. Exercise your right as a tax and licernse payer, call 'em! That's what I did! :D

Your first capture of the series was from an analogue source?
You captured it from 5 year old vhs tapes, so presumably the material was recorded from an analogue satellite receiver or terrestial TV (antenna on the roof or analogue cable TV), right?
And the (bad) second one was from a digital satellite reciever?

The reason for the blocks is 100% that the broadcast you captured from the sat. receiver was Mpeg-2 encoded. And why the quality was overall bad (had macroblocks, cruddy saturation) could be due to either a poor Mpeg-2 decoder in the sat receiver (which I believe I have in my old Nokia) or that the channel you captured it from had problems with their Mpeg-2 encoder. Or that they have a too low bitrate on their broadcasts. But I doubt that, on the Sci-fi channel. is that Discovery Sci-Fi (Europe)?

/Swan

PS Thanks for the thumbs up on this thread.

wotef
16th October 2002, 16:40
no, go on, ask the guy! j/k :D

heck, this is the shiznit, when the commercials come on (on sci fi), picture quality is great, so there's nothing wrong with the digibox and sci fi ARE capable of broadcasting a nice signal, no it's just when the show is on, it looks like they don't have the original tape, it looks like they a playing a divx 5 copy ripped by flask :scared:

Swan
16th October 2002, 17:38
Well, then Sci-Fi is doing something wrong!
And why should a technical expert on Sweden's National Television guess what they do? :D
Nah. Not fair. BBC has someting to do with Discovery Europe, don't they? I think I've seen that "part of the BBC network" or something like that at the end of some programs. BBC or the Sci-Fi should be asked (read confronted) about the poor quality directly!
What is the name of the show? Send them an e-mail if you're annoyed. I would! :D

/Swan

wotef
16th October 2002, 20:07
i did the mature thing and made a website to bitch about it :D

http://sir_integral.tripod.com/

er discovery channel, what's that, pandas and stuff? can't say i cap that! :p

Swan
16th October 2002, 20:15
Sorry, I confused it with Discovery Sci-Trek.

Good page you made. Let's hope Sci-Fi takes notice.

/Swan

^^-+I4004+-^^
16th October 2002, 23:39
@Swan

GOOD IDEA(!) & "REALIZATION"!
nice one!

[ suddenly tv is interesting stuff...again...hehehe ]


btw.,wotef.....
mpeg2 /dvb-s (satellite version of mpeg2) can be transmitted
in many ways-->you can have fewer channels per transponder
and better bandwidth

or you can have MANY channels and poorer bandwidth....
obviously if you wan't transmit news channel and sports one you dont use the same mpeg2 bandwidth (ie. bitrate.)

can you imagine "eurosport's" motor-racing on such mpeg2 stream that was used on your program?
huh that would be something NOT to see!

(you have a case of over-saving the bitrate...)

cheers

Ivo

wotef
17th October 2002, 16:35
can you imagine "eurosport's" motor-racing on such mpeg2 stream that was used on your program?

that would be a hypothetical question, cause nobody watches eurosport, lol - hmm, let me check the programme guide, let me guess, dodge car rally racing from belgium, er, thanks but no thanks!