Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Just as a side-note, I have Quadrant Concerto card, which has the Phillips/Zoran combination. It was a decent card with coax in/out, s-video and rca video-out. The only drivers I could find weren't specifically for the card, so it is just sitting on the shelf. Let me know if you want it, Grant M. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark J. Dulcey [mailto:mark at buttery.org] > Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 9:28 PM > To: dsr at tao.merseine.nu > Cc: discuss at blu.org > Subject: Re: TVs as monitors > > > dsr at tao.merseine.nu wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 10, 2004 at 05:05:40PM -0400, Bill Horne wrote: > > > >>I think the S-video inputs are capable of much higher resolutions than > >>NTSC (known in the trade as "Never Twice the Same Color"). The first > >>step is to visit your local video store and talk about capabilities with > >>the eager salesmen: if it can be done, they'll want to sell it to you. > > > > > > Nope, sorry. All S-Video does is send the same NTSC signal with the > > chrominance and luminance signals on different wires, giving better > > crosstalk rejection, but no improvement in resolution. > > The effective horizontal resolution is significantly better, because the > luminance is no longer messed up by the comb filter. (You don't even > want to think about what happens on a set that has a low-pass filter > instead of a comb filter, but such sets probably don't have S-video > inputs anyway.) The vertical resolution is still limited by the number > of scan lines, however. The signal format doesn't actually impose any > theoretical limit on the bandwidth of the luminance signal (over cables; > the broadcast bandwidth is limited), but the dot pitch of a TV tube will > impose an upper bound of 800 pixels or thereabouts (lower for a small or > cheap set). > > If you are feeding video from a non-composite source (S-VHS VCR, 8mm or > digital camcorder, DVD player, satellite or digital cable set-top box, > or computer) into a TV set, an S-Video connection will usually give you > a visibly better result. Component video will usually be better still, > as it eliminates the bandwidth limits of the encoded chroma signal. > > None of these things are a substitute for a real high-resolution signal > from a computer, HDTV set-top box, D-VHS VCR. high-resolution camcorder, > or upcoming HD DVD. Any of those will be dramatically better than > anything you can feed through an S-video connection. > > To return to a point from my previous message, TV-out is widely > available on modern video cards, and just about free once you get past > the really low-end cards. (You'd be hard pressed to find an over-$100 > card that DOESN'T have TV out, other than a specialized workstation > video card.) There is no good reason not to include it in a new > mid-range or higher PC; it is handy on occasion, especially if you like > to do group computer gaming. > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss at blu.org > http://www.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |