View Single Post
  #41  
Old 02-25-2018, 03:48 AM
ppppenguin's Avatar
ppppenguin ppppenguin is offline
VideoKarma Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 445
Brazil certainly decided to play "odd man out" with PAL M. I can't see any real reason why they shouldn't have used NTSC. They were the only 525/60 country that didn't use NTSC.

PAL N is another matter. Argentina had the unfortunate combination of 625/50 monochrome TV with US channel spacing. So they couldn't use standard NTSC or standard PAL. Something had to give and the result was that ugly kludge of PAL N.

The arguments for PAL vs NTSC have been gone over many times. When Europe was looking at colour systems they could have adopted NTSC, suitably adapted to 625/50. The BBC and others experimented with 625 line NTSC (and 405 line NTSC) in the 1950s. Rightly or wrongly, at the time, the colour phase accuracy problems in NTSC were seen as severe. Hence both PAL and SECAM. In the later days of NTSC improved technology meant that NTSC could overcome the phase and differential phase problems.

Later still it was found that PAL was harder than NTSC to accurately convert to colour components for the digital world. Again advances in technology have made this unimportant.
__________________
www.borinsky.co.uk Jeffrey Borinsky www.becg.tv
Reply With Quote