PAL pitch correction - how often? (1 Viewer)

[Steve Christou]

I'm also about to snag the R2 Batman flicks and SW. ROTS for the better PQ.

Dave, watch out though if you're getting the UK R2 Batmans, a couple of them have been cut.
I'll be getting the R2 Batman Begins this friday and ordering the R1 Batman Anthology because of the damn BBFC censorship, great having multiregion players eh.

 

[Cees Alons]

Yes - it's noticable irrespective of the playback system.

Not necessarily.
If the PAL --> NTSC conversion is performed by forceably applying the 3:2 pull down, the DVD can be played at the normal speed.
(I don't know if such a machine exists - or if perhaps they're all doing it, on the contrary. )


Cees

 

[ChristopherDAC]

Let it not be forgotten that a 24fps film to 25 fps video conversion can be done without altering the running time, by the expedient of doubling every twelfth field -- I do not recall any practical instances, but it is technically possible. The slight degree of "judder" or "hesitation" thus developed should be almost unnoticable.

As video formats, 525/60 and 625/50 were designed to be close to identical [are identical in the CCIR 601 digital domain, with the same number of pixels per second], and there is little enough to choose between them: the tradeoff is simply between static and motion resolution, with the reservation that a 50 Hz system will have a higher level of visible flicker. Contrary to popular belief, there is no need to match the vertical frequency to the power mains frequency [in fact it creates some difficulties], as can be seen from the fact that all of Japan uses 60 Hz TV while half of the country is on 50 Hz power.

Neither system is ideally suited to reproducing film material, since the straightforward relation between 24 and 60 permits running films in the normal way but can induce an annoying "judder" during camera pans, and the similarity of 24 and 25 encourages running film at an incorrect speed but in correct cadence. Unfortunately, the only compromise so far advanced has been the decidedly impracticable idea [advanced by the American Society of Cinematographers, whose members sometimes seem to pride themselves on their ignorance of video and associated technologies] of standardising the field rate at 72 Hz worldwide. The action of the European Broadcasting Union in requiring all television recievers to accept 60 Hz input while continuing to promote 50 Hz broadcasting is only liable to engender more confusion.

 

[Cees Alons]

The simple and perfectly feasible solution would be to abandon a fixed "frame rate per country" and let TV-sets, monitors and projectors adapt to various frame rates as dictated by a frame rate byte from the medium (i.e. at least 24, 25 and 30; perhaps even 16 fps). Of course the real refresh rate of the screen could be at least twice or four times as high, to avoid visible flicker.


Cees

 

[george kaplan]

I think the accurate thing to say is that the 4% speedup definitely exists. Whether it is noticeable is an individual thing - many people are apparently forunate enough to not notice it, others can definitely hear and/or see the speedup.

 

[Michael Elliott]

Seeing/hearing would also depend on what equipment is being used. The majority of the players I've owned makes it to where you can't hear or see it. In fact, I'd give a Pepsi Challenge and say I could show a PAL disc with a NTSC and no one would notice which is which.

 

[george kaplan]

I'll bet that after watching a 2 hour movie for 1 hour 55 minutes, I could tell whether it was a pal disc no matter how bad your system is. On the other hand, a system which was so bad that you couldn't hear or see the pal speedup, isn't a system I'd ever want to watch a dvd on anyway.

 

[Dave Mack]

Hey Cees! Que pasa, amigo!

Yeah it might not be exactly a 1/2 step but it's pretty close as I could play along without much out of tunage happening. Would have been acceptable for a rock and roll jam!

And speaking of pitch transposing, my fiancee and I are going to see Queen and Paul Rodgers live at the Hollywood Bowl next saturday and from listening to the audio samples from the live album on amazon, it seems like they lowered the key on a few tunes for ol' Paul. U2 has been subtly lowering the keys on some of their tunes live for years now.
Ah, age....

d

 

[Michael Elliott]

On the other hand, a system which was so bad that you couldn't hear or see the pal speedup, isn't a system I'd ever want to watch a dvd on anyway.

George, which disc did you have so much trouble with re: PAL? I should have made myself a bit more clear earlier and added that there are some PAL discs that are poorly mastered and I can see the difference here. These have been mostly public domain releases from overseas though.

As for the 2hr. in 1:55 thing, I can never tell "by watching" a film how long it's running. I've seen 20 minute shorts that feel like two hours and I've seen four hour films that seem like twenty minutes.

 

[Mark Lucas]

I think just the thought of a film running shorter and the soundtrack being faster is enough to scare the majority of film fanatics.

 

[Cees Alons]

Yes.
They are haunted by thoughts.


Cees

 

[george kaplan]

Michael,

I think the only PAL discs I have are the Chaplin MK2 versions, which I can definitely see and hear the difference compared to the Image originals (which I've kept thank God).

 

[Marko Berg]

According to this source the newer MK2-sourced release of Gold Rush at least has been speed corrected for the PAL -- but not the NTSC -- video release. If true, that release would probably be the best available as far as image quality is concerned, assuming one can display native PAL without conversion.

 

[Cees Alons]

assuming one can display native PAL without conversion.

That's the key sentence. George would have to convert it to NTSC first, wich is not the same.


Cees