I’m new to this site, and I’ve already learned a lot from reading old posts. Thanks, everyone. I’m about to buy a DVX100B, and I’m wondering whether anyone has any advice regarding PAL vs. NTSC. I live and work in the US, but have been told PAL’s higher resolution can make a noticeable difference to the final product. I’m hoping to screen at festivals, would like to have the option of transferring to film, and I won’t be able to afford an anamorphic adaptor right away, so if PAL will give me noticeably better resolution I’d like to go with PAL. My concern is that converting PAL to NTSC may be expensive, difficult and/or cause degradation to the image, colors, etc. Does anyone have an opinion/experience/advice about this? Are there any other issues regarding PAL vs. NTSC and the DVX100 that I should be aware of? Also, I’d like to buy from an authorized dealer in the US, but the ones I have contacted seem to only have the NTSC version. Any advice on where to buy a PAL version, if that’s what you recommend? Thanks so much for your help!
PAL vs. NTSC
- Thread starter gonglillo
- Start date
HorseFilms
Look ma no hands
Since you live and work in the US, I'd recommend NTSC. It'll save you plenty of headaches down the road.
Baluardo
Well-known member
it may be that when transferring to film you get a bit more resolution with PAL, but on the other hand you will want to use your camera for tv work.
If you never owned a dvx you will want to test your work on tv. you will want to bring it to events and film it and not having to deal with the trouble of converting (also losing resolution and definition). Also, software conversions are not really satisfying and it takes time.
Also you can get a better deal buying ntsc in the states.
get NTSC. you'll avoid a lot of pain
Andrea
If you never owned a dvx you will want to test your work on tv. you will want to bring it to events and film it and not having to deal with the trouble of converting (also losing resolution and definition). Also, software conversions are not really satisfying and it takes time.
Also you can get a better deal buying ntsc in the states.
get NTSC. you'll avoid a lot of pain
Andrea
dakotapod
Veteran
Again, keep in mind even with the slight res increase with pal, the pal vs ntsc thing is an old hold out prior to the DVX. The attraction was less about the res and more about the 25 frames per second. It transfers to film better than 30. BUT... The DVX was born with glorious 24p - Just like film. So... If in NTSC land there is just no justification to use pal and add the grief that comes with it.
pal vs ntsc
pal vs ntsc
Thanks, everyone, for replying. And dakotapod, thanks for clarifying the issue of 25 p vs 24 p being more important than PAL vs NTSC. I've been reading a lot of conflicting stuff on the web, and it did seem to me that shooting in 24 p made more sense than shooting 25 p, regardless of slight higher res with PAL--especially given everything i've been reading about issues with transferring sound from PAL to NTSC. And while I want the camera mostly for personal projects, it will be great to have the option of doing TV work, and of distributing on tape and dvd without going to a lab for a decent transfer (I'm told the software still doesn't do as good a job as a lab).
Again, thanks so much for all the input, and I'm definitely going with NTSC! Can't wait to try out the camera....
pal vs ntsc
Thanks, everyone, for replying. And dakotapod, thanks for clarifying the issue of 25 p vs 24 p being more important than PAL vs NTSC. I've been reading a lot of conflicting stuff on the web, and it did seem to me that shooting in 24 p made more sense than shooting 25 p, regardless of slight higher res with PAL--especially given everything i've been reading about issues with transferring sound from PAL to NTSC. And while I want the camera mostly for personal projects, it will be great to have the option of doing TV work, and of distributing on tape and dvd without going to a lab for a decent transfer (I'm told the software still doesn't do as good a job as a lab).
Again, thanks so much for all the input, and I'm definitely going with NTSC! Can't wait to try out the camera....
cyclone
Well-known member
View some examples at the lab where you intend to do your film transfer. I have shot my own tests and viewed other's tests (including those of Barry Green, who was nice enough to loan them to me) projected as film-out on a 20 foot screen. PAL is absolutely sharper. Not necessary ("November" was shot NTSC without an anamorphic adapter), but definitely sharper.