Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watcgl!dmmartindale
From: dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale)
Newsgroups: net.video
Subject: Re: Re: Videophiles
Message-ID: <1795@watcgl.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 11-May-85 17:40:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: watcgl.1795
Posted: Sat May 11 17:40:02 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 12-May-85 05:49:27 EDT
References: <218@ihlpa.UUCP> <149@bocar.UUCP> <221@ihlpa.UUCP> <1491@orca.UUCP>
Reply-To: dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 17

In article <1491@orca.UUCP> andrew@orca.UUCP (Andrew Klossner) writes:
>
>I own both a laserdisk player and a VCR.  I used to buy movies on tape,
>but no more.  The sound on laserdisk is great, the picture is much
>better (laserdisk holds more scan lines per frame than does tape), and
>the movies are MUCH cheaper ... typically $30 versus $60.

A factual correction: The number of scan lines in a video frame is
determined solely by the ratio between horizontal and vertical sweep
frequencies and the length of the vertical blanking period, all of which
are fixed by the NTSC standard.  The only way to get poorer vertical
resolution than this is to use equipment that isn't working properly.

The place video equipment differs is in video bandwidth, which determines
the number of VERTICAL lines that can be displayed and still be seen
as lines.  Laser disks are presumably better here, and the end result
is a sharper picture.  But the number of scan lines is the same.