On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 01:15:08 -0500, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Meat Plow wrote:

On Sun, 09 Jan 2011 14:21:01 +1100, Phil Allison wrote:

"Geoffrey S. Mendelson"


NTSC stands for National Television Standrds Comittee, PAL for Phase
Alternating
Line, and SECAM is a French acronym for what could be loosely
translated as
system of transmitting color TV.


** Everyone knows that NTSC stands for:

" Never Twice the Same Color"

and SECAM =

" Something Essentially Contrary to the American Method "



.... Phil

And PHIL = PLEASE HELP I'M LOST!!


Pathetic Halfwit Infecting Lambs.

LOL



--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse

Phil Allison wrote:

"Jeff Liebermann is a Jerk Off "

I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted the Hue
control
on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.

True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on line
20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both static
and differential phase errors. I think this started in about 1980.

** So ****ing what ??????????????????

NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.


No, jackass. The 'National Television Standards Committe' was
created for monochrome TV, long before any color televison was
developed.


The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.


As well as color TV, sheep shagger.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

William Sommerwerck wrote:

I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted
the Hue control on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.

True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on line
20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both static
and differential phase errors. I think this started in about 1980.

??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase error?


PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.


** So ****ing what ??????????????????
NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.
The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.
You stupid, ****ing ****head.

The point being that the problems with NTSC had nothing to do with the
design of the system, but the failure of the networks to establish high
standards of image and signal quality. As these were gradually put into
place, the supposed "inherent problems" with NTSC gradually disappeared.
This WAS NOT due to the use of VIR on consumer receivers. VIR was primarily
to catch and correct problems along the signal chain.

The lie that PAL is somehow inherently superior to NTSC refuses to die. NTSC
is the "better" system. Period.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
So the US is in a bit of a mess? ;-)

Why? Dish or Direct supply all the equipment and install it, just
like the various CATV companies.

They all use some sort of MPEG TS transmission, but the streams can
not be read with the other company's devices.

That's business politics for you.

So, you think someone should be able to us one company's equipment to
steal service from another?

It's what the OP apparently wants. A universal TV.


He'll have to look in another universe, then.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Early TVs often had a faint hum bar in the vertical. By being locked
to the line frequency, it was fixed to one location, and most people
never saw it.

I'm not sure when the UK came off mains lock - somewhere like the late
'50s. And there must have been older TVs still in use when this happened,
as even some very early single channel ones were converted when ITV
started in the mid '50s. And I can't remember rolling hum bars being
common.


The US TVs had sync, that matched the line frequency. Some early
sync generators simply multiplied the line frequency by 525 then divided
by 2 for the horizontal frequency.

Even when they built crystal controlled generators, the line
frequency remained close enough that it would take minutes or hours to
roll though a frame. Also, by the '50s the power supplies were better
filtered. The hum bars were faint, but visible on older TVs, and one of
the first signs of trouble when they became more pronounced. A lot of
US monochrome TVs were transformerless, and used a voltage doubler in
the power supply. pairs of 300 uF 160 volt electrolytics, where some
early TVs had 8 or 16 uF filtering.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
So, you think someone should be able to us one company's equipment to
steal service from another?

Is that a serious question or just a troll?

I never said anything about stealing. There are economies of scale in
service, support and repair realized by using the same equipment with the
same standards.


Sigh. Economy of scale would make it insane to build the equipment to
process the competitor's signals.


As for preventing theft or signal piracy, there are standards in place for
external decryption add ons for satellite and cable TV receivers. They
range from a simple memory chip with encryption keys on it, to custom
decryption hardware.

The form factor is a credit card sized smart card, like the one used for
GSM SIMs (subscriber ID modules) in the early phones.

Using standard hardware and transmission methods allows a customer to buy
the exact receiver they want, have it installed in the location and setup
they want and get the support options they want.


Buy what? the signal provider provideds the hardware. The only
thing you buy is the service. Is that so hard to understand? I can
call brighthouse, and they will turn on the existing drop, and connect
their hardware. I can call Dish or Direct. They will install their
antenna and reciever.



The program provider sends them a decryption card which they insert in the
receiver and then watch the programs they pay for. Since the interface
standard is an open one, anyone can build receivers and program providers
are free to choose the encryption method they want without being wedded to
a particular receiver.

These devices exist not only as parts of a receiver, but as an add on for
home theater PCs. I have seen them sold for Windows and Mac computers.


Maybe where you live. You can buy a TV tuner card here, and connect
it in place of the TV from any of the other services availible in the
US. This isn't Israel.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
WHO CARES? Analog is thankfully gone.

And digitial TV is a waste of time.

Certainly in the UK the ability to cram in more 'choice' at the expense of
technical quality is very noticeable.

So 'digital' gets the blame rather than those who control it.


It dosen't matter who controls it whan there is no longer an OTA
signal availible. I lost all OTA service after the change.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:
I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted
the Hue control on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.
True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on line
20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both static
and differential phase errors. I think this started in about 1980.
??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase error?


PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.


** So ****ing what ??????????????????
NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.
The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.
You stupid, ****ing ****head.
The point being that the problems with NTSC had nothing to do with the
design of the system, but the failure of the networks to establish high
standards of image and signal quality. As these were gradually put into
place, the supposed "inherent problems" with NTSC gradually disappeared.
This WAS NOT due to the use of VIR on consumer receivers. VIR was primarily
to catch and correct problems along the signal chain.

The lie that PAL is somehow inherently superior to NTSC refuses to die. NTSC
is the "better" system. Period.


NTSC--Never The Same Color?????????
People with green faces, and mangenta sky's?
Any time we saw a news item with a bit of American tv in it,
it looked like ****.

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase
error?
PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.

Things will remain in sync but that does NOT fix a differential
phase error in the transmission path. The VIR would adjust the
phase at a mid luminance point, but the differential error still
existed above and below that level.

Even when they built crystal controlled generators, the line
frequency remained close enough that it would take minutes or
hours to
roll though a frame. Also, by the '50s the power supplies were
better
filtered. The hum bars were faint, but visible on older TVs,
and one of
the first signs of trouble when they became more pronounced. A
lot of
US monochrome TVs were transformerless, and used a voltage
doubler in
the power supply. pairs of 300 uF 160 volt electrolytics, where
some
early TVs had 8 or 16 uF filtering.

Color TV changed the field rate to 59.94 Hz and a 120 Hz hum bar
would roll through the picture in under 15 seconds. Even
monochrome broadcasts adhered to the new frame rate.

David

On Jan 10, 3:40*pm, "David" wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" *wrote in messagenews:laidnQF74PTlE7bQnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@earth link.com...

??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase
error?

* PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.

Things will remain in sync but that does NOT fix a differential
phase error in the transmission path. The VIR would adjust the
phase at a mid luminance point, but the differential error still
existed above and below that level.

Even when they built crystal controlled generators, the line
frequency remained close enough that it would take minutes or
hours to
roll though a frame. *Also, by the '50s the power supplies were
better
filtered. *The hum bars were faint, but visible on older TVs,
and one of
the first signs of trouble when they became more pronounced. *A
lot of
US monochrome TVs were transformerless, and used a voltage
doubler in
the power supply. pairs of 300 uF 160 volt electrolytics, where
some
early TVs had 8 or 16 uF filtering.

Color TV changed the field rate to 59.94 Hz and a 120 Hz hum bar
would roll through the picture in under 15 seconds. Even
monochrome broadcasts adhered to the new frame rate.

David

I started working in broadcast TV in '76 at the CBS affiliate in
Madison WI WISC-TV. The incoming signal was a terrestrial microwave
link. There was no differential gain or phase errors on that signal.
When they put up test signals during non-network times they looked
like the signals from the local test generators. SN 60dB and flat
within a fraction of a dB. At the time Madison was market 103 or so so
it wasn't because we were the 'big boys'. The signals in the mid-west
were generally excellent - at least for CBS.

G²

Sjouke Burry wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:
I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted
the Hue control on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.
True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on line
20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both static
and differential phase errors. I think this started in about 1980.
??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase error?


PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.


** So ****ing what ??????????????????
NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.
The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.
You stupid, ****ing ****head.
The point being that the problems with NTSC had nothing to do with the
design of the system, but the failure of the networks to establish high
standards of image and signal quality. As these were gradually put into
place, the supposed "inherent problems" with NTSC gradually disappeared.
This WAS NOT due to the use of VIR on consumer receivers. VIR was primarily
to catch and correct problems along the signal chain.

The lie that PAL is somehow inherently superior to NTSC refuses to die. NTSC
is the "better" system. Period.


NTSC--Never The Same Color?????????
People with green faces, and mangenta sky's?
Any time we saw a news item with a bit of American tv in it,
it looked like ****.


So it's our fault that your network wasn't capable of doing proper
video conversion? Did you ever stop to think that they just didn't give
a damn, and making it look bad made their other crap look better?


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

David wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase
error?
PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.

Things will remain in sync but that does NOT fix a differential
phase error in the transmission path. The VIR would adjust the
phase at a mid luminance point, but the differential error still
existed above and below that level.


Sigh. It wasn't a couple components. A video proc amp that used VIR
weighed 30 pounds and filled at least seven inches of rack space. The
entire signal was analyzed and corrections were made. Try a cross fade
with signals from two cites with no visible artifacts. It took some
time to match a pair of framestore & proc amps, but done properly no one
noticed.


Even when they built crystal controlled generators, the line
frequency remained close enough that it would take minutes or
hours to
roll though a frame. Also, by the '50s the power supplies were
better
filtered. The hum bars were faint, but visible on older TVs,
and one of
the first signs of trouble when they became more pronounced. A
lot of
US monochrome TVs were transformerless, and used a voltage
doubler in
the power supply. pairs of 300 uF 160 volt electrolytics, where
some
early TVs had 8 or 16 uF filtering.

Color TV changed the field rate to 59.94 Hz and a 120 Hz hum bar
would roll through the picture in under 15 seconds. Even
monochrome broadcasts adhered to the new frame rate.


DUH! I was a TV broadcast engineer at three US TV stations. By the
time NTSC was modified for color compatibility the TVs were better
designed.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

wrote:

On Jan 10, 3:40 pm, "David" wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in messagenews:laidnQF74PTlE7bQnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@earth link.com...

??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase
error?

PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.

Things will remain in sync but that does NOT fix a differential
phase error in the transmission path. The VIR would adjust the
phase at a mid luminance point, but the differential error still
existed above and below that level.

Even when they built crystal controlled generators, the line
frequency remained close enough that it would take minutes or
hours to
roll though a frame. Also, by the '50s the power supplies were
better
filtered. The hum bars were faint, but visible on older TVs,
and one of
the first signs of trouble when they became more pronounced. A
lot of
US monochrome TVs were transformerless, and used a voltage
doubler in
the power supply. pairs of 300 uF 160 volt electrolytics, where
some
early TVs had 8 or 16 uF filtering.

Color TV changed the field rate to 59.94 Hz and a 120 Hz hum bar
would roll through the picture in under 15 seconds. Even
monochrome broadcasts adhered to the new frame rate.

David

I started working in broadcast TV in '76 at the CBS affiliate in
Madison WI WISC-TV. The incoming signal was a terrestrial microwave
link. There was no differential gain or phase errors on that signal.
When they put up test signals during non-network times they looked
like the signals from the local test generators. SN 60dB and flat
within a fraction of a dB. At the time Madison was market 103 or so so
it wasn't because we were the 'big boys'. The signals in the mid-west
were generally excellent - at least for CBS.


People who never worked in the industry have no clue. They generally
used the cheapest imported TV they could find, then bitched about it.
If they ever saw the video from a TK-46 with a set of new Plumbicons on
a $7,000 studio monitor, they would shoot their digital TVs.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:52:24 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.

Monochrome compatible NTSC color was proposed in 1950 and approved in
1953. That was the 2nd attempt as the first NTSC comittee conjured an
incompatible system in 1941 that was generally rejected as most of the
manufacturers decided to delay introduction of consumer TV sets until
after the war was over. There was a also an attempt at standarization
in the 1930's. Light reading:
http://www.ntsc-tv.com

The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.

You might want to read what I scribbled. VIR hue correction started
in about 1980.

You stupid, ****ing ****head.

"Obscenity is the currency of a bankrupt vocabulary"



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann = Radio Ham Jerk Off "


I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted the Hue
control
on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.

True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on line
20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both static
and differential phase errors. I think this started in about 1980.


** So ****ing what ??????????????????

NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.

The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.


You stupid, ILLITERATE, ASD ****ed ****head.





..... Phil

On Jan 10, 10:18*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:52:24 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

*NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.

Monochrome compatible NTSC color was proposed in 1950 and approved in
1953. *That was the 2nd attempt as the first NTSC comittee conjured an
incompatible system in 1941 that was generally rejected as most of the
manufacturers decided to delay introduction of consumer TV sets until
after the war was over. *There was a also an attempt at standarization
in the 1930's. *Light reading:
http://www.ntsc-tv.com

*The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.

You might want to read what I scribbled. *VIR hue correction started
in about 1980.

* You stupid, ****ing ****head.

"Obscenity is the currency of a bankrupt vocabulary"

--
Jeff Liebermann * *
150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558

I have enjoyed the Sommerwork, Lieberman, Mendelsohhn, Terrell
discussions. I started working on color tv's in 1955 when I was in
college. Vacuum tubes galore and two console cabinets just to put a
color picture on a 10" tube. But it was color and the amount of power
was not a major consideration. I bought my first color tv in 1958, a
1957 set on sale with a 21" round picture tube set that drew about 375
watts. The vertical scan was 59.9 hz, as I recall and when the power
supply caps started failing you got a slow-moving hum bar moving up
the screen. The color variations were due to various network sources
having slightly different phases for the color subcarrier and sets
that had very pure theoretical demodulators. Then sometime in the
early 1960's someone had the idea of having any signals close in phase
to the phase of "ideal" skin tones of WASPs move closer to the "ideal"
skin tone, making it less necessary to constantly adjust the "hue"
control. It distorted colors, of course, but people looked more
"Normal" and it was agood selling point for a number of years.

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Sjouke Burry wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:
I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted
the Hue control on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.
True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on line
20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both static
and differential phase errors. I think this started in about 1980.
??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase error?

PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.


** So ****ing what ??????????????????
NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.
The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.
You stupid, ****ing ****head.
The point being that the problems with NTSC had nothing to do with the
design of the system, but the failure of the networks to establish high
standards of image and signal quality. As these were gradually put into
place, the supposed "inherent problems" with NTSC gradually disappeared.
This WAS NOT due to the use of VIR on consumer receivers. VIR was primarily
to catch and correct problems along the signal chain.

The lie that PAL is somehow inherently superior to NTSC refuses to die. NTSC
is the "better" system. Period.

NTSC--Never The Same Color?????????
People with green faces, and mangenta sky's?
Any time we saw a news item with a bit of American tv in it,
it looked like ****.


So it's our fault that your network wasn't capable of doing proper
video conversion? Did you ever stop to think that they just didn't give
a damn, and making it look bad made their other crap look better?


PAL never looked like crap, your NTSC has the monopoly.

Sjouke Burry wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Sjouke Burry wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:
I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted
the Hue control on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.
True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on line
20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both static
and differential phase errors. I think this started in about 1980.
??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase error?

PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.


** So ****ing what ??????????????????
NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.
The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.
You stupid, ****ing ****head.
The point being that the problems with NTSC had nothing to do with the
design of the system, but the failure of the networks to establish high
standards of image and signal quality. As these were gradually put into
place, the supposed "inherent problems" with NTSC gradually disappeared.
This WAS NOT due to the use of VIR on consumer receivers. VIR was primarily
to catch and correct problems along the signal chain.

The lie that PAL is somehow inherently superior to NTSC refuses to die. NTSC
is the "better" system. Period.

NTSC--Never The Same Color?????????
People with green faces, and mangenta sky's?
Any time we saw a news item with a bit of American tv in it,
it looked like ****.


So it's our fault that your network wasn't capable of doing proper
video conversion? Did you ever stop to think that they just didn't give
a damn, and making it look bad made their other crap look better?


PAL never looked like crap, your NTSC has the monopoly.


Want to bet? What I've seen of PAL on multi standard TVs & VCRs was
a sick joke. A man who owned a bunch of Greek restaurants in lake
County, Fl. imported the pair, and his relatives sent him a steady
stream of PAL tapes. They all looked like ****. They were commercial
tapes, not recorded OTA.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

" wrote:

On Jan 10, 10:18 pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:52:24 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

NTSC color started in the USA in the early 1950s.

Monochrome compatible NTSC color was proposed in 1950 and approved in
1953. That was the 2nd attempt as the first NTSC comittee conjured an
incompatible system in 1941 that was generally rejected as most of the
manufacturers decided to delay introduction of consumer TV sets until
after the war was over. There was a also an attempt at standarization
in the 1930's. Light reading:
http://www.ntsc-tv.com

The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980.

You might want to read what I scribbled. VIR hue correction started
in about 1980.

You stupid, ****ing ****head.

"Obscenity is the currency of a bankrupt vocabulary"

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

I have enjoyed the Sommerwork, Lieberman, Mendelsohhn, Terrell
discussions. I started working on color tv's in 1955 when I was in
college. Vacuum tubes galore and two console cabinets just to put a
color picture on a 10" tube. But it was color and the amount of power
was not a major consideration. I bought my first color tv in 1958, a
1957 set on sale with a 21" round picture tube set that drew about 375
watts. The vertical scan was 59.9 hz, as I recall and when the power
supply caps started failing you got a slow-moving hum bar moving up
the screen. The color variations were due to various network sources
having slightly different phases for the color subcarrier and sets
that had very pure theoretical demodulators. Then sometime in the
early 1960's someone had the idea of having any signals close in phase
to the phase of "ideal" skin tones of WASPs move closer to the "ideal"
skin tone, making it less necessary to constantly adjust the "hue"
control. It distorted colors, of course, but people looked more
"Normal" and it was agood selling point for a number of years.


Also, they developed better chroma demodulator circuits in the '60s.
Each one could be identified by the overal image. Sylvania was the
easiest. It had a faint blue tinge.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 11:14:03 +0000 (UTC), "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
wrote:

The reason that everyone did not have a universal TV set was because the price
was kept lower with single system sets and countries like the UK, which made
a substansial income from the TV license did not want you watching tv from
France or the Republic of Ireland for free.

I ran into something like that when I "visited" Israel in the early
1970's. There were literally dozens of TV antennas on every apartment
rooftop. Few wanted to watch the official Israeli TV channels. What
they wanted was TV from Jordan, Syria, and Egypt, which required much
larger yagi antennas. Incidentally, much of the Arab broadcasting was
with either in English, or with Hebrew subtitles or Hebrew
overdubbing.

In my innocence, I went to the Ministry of the Post to inquire about
setting up a cable TV system that would hopefully get rid of the
antenna clutter. I was detained for questioning as some manner of
spy, saboteur, or total idiot. I should have guessed that there was a
reason that Israel didn't have a cable TV system. The government
certainly wasn't interested in an improved method of watching Arab
broadcasting.

A short while later, I repeated the mistake by attempting to establish
a land mobile radio business. At the time, private radio
communications was not exactly appreciated in an essentially war time
economy just after the 1972 Yom Kippur War.

Politics always trumps technology.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

People who never worked in the industry have no clue. They generally
used the cheapest imported TV they could find, then bitched about it.
If they ever saw the video from a TK-46 with a set of new Plumbicons on
a $7,000 studio monitor, they would shoot their digital TVs.

Well, yes. But take that same camera outdoors where you haven't got full
control over the lighting... Oh - and what were the pictures like at
switch on, before an hours worth of line-up?

Luckily, modern cameras are far more suited to use outside of a studio.

Other thing is control room monitors (Grade 1) are designed for close
viewing, so generally in the smaller sizes. Nor have I ever seen a
widescreen CRT with decent geometry and registration. Control room CRTs
even for widescreen were still 4:3, but underscanned, making the small
size even more of an issue.

--
*A plateau is a high form of flattery*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Want to bet? What I've seen of PAL on multi standard TVs & VCRs was
a sick joke. A man who owned a bunch of Greek restaurants in lake
County, Fl. imported the pair, and his relatives sent him a steady
stream of PAL tapes. They all looked like ****. They were commercial
tapes, not recorded OTA.

You judge a system off domestic tapes? I've also no idea of the technical
standards of such Greek produced stuff. Did you do the same with UK or
German?

The BBC did extensive testing before introducing colour. In the first
instance with NTSC RCA cameras. Huge things with 3" IO tubes. Had a
modification of NTSC to say 625 50 Hz been the way forward, they'd not
have adopted (and been part of the design) of PAL.

--
*I used to have an open mind but my brains kept falling out *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
The reason that everyone did not have a universal TV set was because
the price was kept lower with single system sets and countries like the
UK, which made a substansial income from the TV license did not want
you watching tv from France or the Republic of Ireland for free.

I ran into something like that when I "visited" Israel in the early
1970's.

The UK isn't Israel.

--
*You sound reasonable......time to up my medication

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Brenda Ann wrote:
During my visits there, I watched a good deal of TV, and the thing I
noticed most was that the lower framerate didn't play well with
fluorescent lighting. There always seemed to be an easily perceptible
flicker to the picture. Brand of set or signal source (OTA, CATV,
Satellite, tape or VCD) didn't seem to make any difference.

If you have any form of strobe lighting - like fluorescent - you can get
such effects. Regardless of a frame rate of 25 or 30 Hz. But few in the US
would use fluorescent lighting in the same room as their TV.

--
*Why is a boxing ring square?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The BBC did extensive testing before introducing colour.
In the first instance with NTSC RCA cameras. Huge things
with 3" IO tubes. Had a modification of NTSC to say 625
lines, 50 Hz been the way forward, they'd not have adopted
(and been part of the design) of PAL.

The BBC had little or no hand in "designing" PAL. The original NTSC proposal
/was/ PAL. Want proof?

In article ,
William Sommerwerck wrote:
The BBC did extensive testing before introducing colour.
In the first instance with NTSC RCA cameras. Huge things
with 3" IO tubes. Had a modification of NTSC to say 625
lines, 50 Hz been the way forward, they'd not have adopted
(and been part of the design) of PAL.

The BBC had little or no hand in "designing" PAL. The original NTSC
proposal /was/ PAL. Want proof?

So the PAL patent is owned by a US company?

--
*Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The BBC had little or no hand in "designing" PAL.
The original NTSC proposal /was/ PAL. Want proof?

So the PAL patent is owned by a US company?

You mean "was". And there would have been multiple patents.

The PAL system was publically described in an "Electronics" article circa
1951, which I have in the garage. It was given as the NTSC proposal. It used
phase alternation, and equal-bandwidth R-Yand B-Y primaries.

It was presumably patented, so I assume someone would have had to pay
royalties at least through the mid-60s.

I well-remember reading -- many years ago -- that European TV-distribution
systems suffered from significant non-linear phase errors (while American
systems did not), and this was the principal reason for adopting phase
alternation. I have no source, though.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
The reason that everyone did not have a universal TV set was because
the price was kept lower with single system sets and countries like the
UK, which made a substansial income from the TV license did not want
you watching tv from France or the Republic of Ireland for free.

I ran into something like that when I "visited" Israel in the early
1970's.

The UK isn't Israel.

Actually compared to the 1970s Israel is nothing like it was in the 1970s,
although it looks like the current UK government is trying to recreate
them.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to misquote it.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Brenda Ann wrote:
During my visits there, I watched a good deal of TV, and the thing I
noticed most was that the lower framerate didn't play well with
fluorescent lighting. There always seemed to be an easily perceptible
flicker to the picture. Brand of set or signal source (OTA, CATV,
Satellite, tape or VCD) didn't seem to make any difference.

If you have any form of strobe lighting - like fluorescent - you can get
such effects. Regardless of a frame rate of 25 or 30 Hz. But few in the US
would use fluorescent lighting in the same room as their TV.


Really? Then all those fluorescent lamps were fakes? I statrted
using them over 40 years ago.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Want to bet? What I've seen of PAL on multi standard TVs & VCRs was
a sick joke. A man who owned a bunch of Greek restaurants in lake
County, Fl. imported the pair, and his relatives sent him a steady
stream of PAL tapes. They all looked like ****. They were commercial
tapes, not recorded OTA.

You judge a system off domestic tapes? I've also no idea of the technical
standards of such Greek produced stuff. Did you do the same with UK or
German?


The tapes were fropm all over Europe.


The BBC did extensive testing before introducing colour. In the first
instance with NTSC RCA cameras. Huge things with 3" IO tubes. Had a
modification of NTSC to say 625 50 Hz been the way forward, they'd not
have adopted (and been part of the design) of PAL.


Image Orthicons? That figures.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

People who never worked in the industry have no clue. They generally
used the cheapest imported TV they could find, then bitched about it.
If they ever saw the video from a TK-46 with a set of new Plumbicons on
a $7,000 studio monitor, they would shoot their digital TVs.

Well, yes. But take that same camera outdoors where you haven't got full
control over the lighting... Oh - and what were the pictures like at
switch on, before an hours worth of line-up?


It took about six minutes to set up the camera for the ambient
lighting. The rest of the mechanical and electrical setup was very
stable, usually only requiring annual touchup, or a full setup when
installing new Plumbicons.


Luckily, modern cameras are far more suited to use outside of a studio.


Sure, but they are designed to be used by total idiots. They don't
have the contrast ratio, or other positive characteristics of Plumbicon
cameras. What killed Plumbicons was their size of the camera, and the
$14,000+ price tag on a new set of matched tubes. Use a set of $50,000
lenses on a TK 46 and you'll know what I'm talking about.


Other thing is control room monitors (Grade 1) are designed for close
viewing, so generally in the smaller sizes. Nor have I ever seen a
widescreen CRT with decent geometry and registration. Control room CRTs
even for widescreen were still 4:3, but underscanned, making the small
size even more of an issue.


Our control room used 25 to 30 inch monitors. Underscan was
switchable. A mask was used with lines to show the hot area for cheap,
overscanned TV sets. Tell us, how many US TV stations did you work at
as an engineer? How many state of the art NTSC studios have you built?
How many years of maintaining a commercial US TV station?



--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
If you have any form of strobe lighting - like fluorescent - you can
get such effects. Regardless of a frame rate of 25 or 30 Hz. But few
in the US would use fluorescent lighting in the same room as their TV.


Really? Then all those fluorescent lamps were fakes? I statrted
using them over 40 years ago.

Ah - sorry. I just assumed the majority in the US had taste.

--
*It ain't the size, it's... er... no, it IS ..the size.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article , Michael
A. Terrell wrote:
Want to bet? What I've seen of PAL on multi standard TVs & VCRs
was a sick joke. A man who owned a bunch of Greek restaurants in
lake County, Fl. imported the pair, and his relatives sent him a
steady stream of PAL tapes. They all looked like ****. They were
commercial tapes, not recorded OTA.

You judge a system off domestic tapes? I've also no idea of the
technical standards of such Greek produced stuff. Did you do the same
with UK or German?


The tapes were fropm all over Europe.

Don't care where they were from - you can't judge any system using
domestic tapes of those days. I'm beginning to wonder about your personal
standards if you think you can.


The BBC did extensive testing before introducing colour. In the first
instance with NTSC RCA cameras. Huge things with 3" IO tubes. Had a
modification of NTSC to say 625 50 Hz been the way forward, they'd not
have adopted (and been part of the design) of PAL.


Image Orthicons? That figures.

Just when do you think colour cameras stopped using them? The plumbicon
wasn't invented until '60.

--
*Dance like nobody's watching.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 10:46:36 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
The reason that everyone did not have a universal TV set was because
the price was kept lower with single system sets and countries like the
UK, which made a substansial income from the TV license did not want
you watching tv from France or the Republic of Ireland for free.

I ran into something like that when I "visited" Israel in the early
1970's.

The UK isn't Israel.

I know. I just wanted to highlight the political aspects of video
compatibility. If I had time, I would have ranted a bit about the FCC
decision to go with 8VSB instead of COFDM. The short version is that
the FCC would accept anything that was NOT compatible with whetever
Europe (or Japan) was deploying.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
If you have any form of strobe lighting - like fluorescent - you can
get such effects. Regardless of a frame rate of 25 or 30 Hz. But few
in the US would use fluorescent lighting in the same room as their TV.

Really? Then all those fluorescent lamps were fakes? I statrted
using them over 40 years ago.

Ah - sorry. I just assumed the majority in the US had taste.


Am I to assume that no one in the UK has any taste? Or teeth?


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article , Michael
A. Terrell wrote:
Want to bet? What I've seen of PAL on multi standard TVs & VCRs
was a sick joke. A man who owned a bunch of Greek restaurants in
lake County, Fl. imported the pair, and his relatives sent him a
steady stream of PAL tapes. They all looked like ****. They were
commercial tapes, not recorded OTA.

You judge a system off domestic tapes? I've also no idea of the
technical standards of such Greek produced stuff. Did you do the same
with UK or German?

The tapes were fropm all over Europe.

Don't care where they were from - you can't judge any system using
domestic tapes of those days. I'm beginning to wonder about your personal
standards if you think you can.


Yawn. More America bashing. Commercially produced European tapes on
European VCR & TV.


The BBC did extensive testing before introducing colour. In the first
instance with NTSC RCA cameras. Huge things with 3" IO tubes. Had a
modification of NTSC to say 625 50 Hz been the way forward, they'd not
have adopted (and been part of the design) of PAL.

Image Orthicons? That figures.

Just when do you think colour cameras stopped using them? The plumbicon
wasn't invented until '60.


I have no idea when the BBC quit using them, but Image Orthicons were
short lived in the US. The RCA TK-44 was a vidicon color camera. The
TK 46 was the same camera, but using Plumbicons. Image Orthicons
required a lot more light, and didn't provide as clean of an image as
the Vidicons. A Plumbicon is a Vidicon with a lead oxide faceplate.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 22:57:53 -0500, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Sjouke Burry wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:
I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted the
Hue control on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.
True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on
line 20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both
static and differential phase errors. I think this started in
about 1980.
??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase error?


PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.


** So ****ing what ?????????????????? NTSC color started in the
USA in the early 1950s.
The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980. You stupid,
****ing ****head.
The point being that the problems with NTSC had nothing to do with
the design of the system, but the failure of the networks to
establish high standards of image and signal quality. As these were
gradually put into place, the supposed "inherent problems" with NTSC
gradually disappeared. This WAS NOT due to the use of VIR on
consumer receivers. VIR was primarily to catch and correct problems
along the signal chain.

The lie that PAL is somehow inherently superior to NTSC refuses to
die. NTSC is the "better" system. Period.


NTSC--Never The Same Color?????????
People with green faces, and mangenta sky's? Any time we saw a news
item with a bit of American tv in it, it looked like ****.


So it's our fault that your network wasn't capable of doing proper
video conversion? Did you ever stop to think that they just didn't give
a damn, and making it look bad made their other crap look better?

How did this devolve into a PAL/NTSC ****ing match? From what little TV I
watch in the evening, HD channels on TWC, I think the color rendering is
perfect. And NTSC DVD video is the same. So what's the problem here? A
lack of real things to argue about?



--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse

Meat Plow wrote:
How did this devolve into a PAL/NTSC ****ing match? From what little TV I
watch in the evening, HD channels on TWC, I think the color rendering is
perfect. And NTSC DVD video is the same. So what's the problem here? A
lack of real things to argue about?

It got there because there had to be some justification over which system
was chosen other than the country next door did something else. Then it
devoloved from ignorance of existance of multisystem TVs and VCRs into
justification why they could not exist.

To summarize, by 1985 I had bought, in Philadelphia (USA) the following:
TV set, 19 inch, 25 inch and 14 inch and VHS and BETA VCRS which would play
and record NTSC/60 3.57, NTSC/60 4.43, PAL/50, PAL/60 (TV only) and
SECAM/50 video. Tuners for NTSC, European PAL, UK PAL and non French SECAM
(aka Middle East SECAM).

In 1987 I added a VCR that would record and play PAL/60 and French SECAM.

In 1992 I added a VCR that would do digital conversions between any of the
above.

Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to misquote it.

Meat Plow wrote:

On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 22:57:53 -0500, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Sjouke Burry wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:
I doubt that any American member of this group has adjusted the
Hue control on their NTSC set for at least 30 years.
True. US receivers use the VIR (Vertical Interval Reference) on
line 20 for chroma phase correction to automagically correct both
static and differential phase errors. I think this started in
about 1980.
??? How can the reference signal correct a differential phase error?


PLL circuits allowed the signals to remain in sync.


** So ****ing what ?????????????????? NTSC color started in the
USA in the early 1950s.
The famous irreverent NTSC acronym way predates 1980. You stupid,
****ing ****head.
The point being that the problems with NTSC had nothing to do with
the design of the system, but the failure of the networks to
establish high standards of image and signal quality. As these were
gradually put into place, the supposed "inherent problems" with NTSC
gradually disappeared. This WAS NOT due to the use of VIR on
consumer receivers. VIR was primarily to catch and correct problems
along the signal chain.

The lie that PAL is somehow inherently superior to NTSC refuses to
die. NTSC is the "better" system. Period.


NTSC--Never The Same Color?????????
People with green faces, and mangenta sky's? Any time we saw a news
item with a bit of American tv in it, it looked like ****.


So it's our fault that your network wasn't capable of doing proper
video conversion? Did you ever stop to think that they just didn't give
a damn, and making it look bad made their other crap look better?

How did this devolve into a PAL/NTSC ****ing match? From what little TV I
watch in the evening, HD channels on TWC, I think the color rendering is
perfect. And NTSC DVD video is the same. So what's the problem here? A
lack of real things to argue about?


It starts every time PAL is mentioned.


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.

In article ,
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Other thing is control room monitors (Grade 1) are designed for close
viewing, so generally in the smaller sizes. Nor have I ever seen a
widescreen CRT with decent geometry and registration. Control room CRTs
even for widescreen were still 4:3, but underscanned, making the small
size even more of an issue.


Our control room used 25 to 30 inch monitors.

4:3. So as I said a small size when showing 16:9. If indeed you ever saw
16:9 pictures in the studio.

Underscan was
switchable. A mask was used with lines to show the hot area for cheap,
overscanned TV sets.

You think all 'cheap overscanned TV sets' had the same 'hot' area?

And why would the engineer in charge of the actual pictures care about
home overscan? That would be left to the production side.

Tell us, how many US TV stations did you work at
as an engineer? How many state of the art NTSC studios have you built?
How many years of maintaining a commercial US TV station?

I'm beginning to wonder how well you've kept up with things. Not much by
the sound of it.

--
*Why do overlook and oversee mean opposite things?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.