>d_ruether@hotmail.com (Neuman - Ruether) wrote in message news:

<3e9190c5.429468@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>...

>> On 6 Apr 2003 19:29:31 -0700, cyberwebstuff@mail.com (Lee

>> Fentress) wrote:

>> >Ok, eeeeeverrybody back to

>> >http://www.livingwaterfellowshiptn.com/lee/new_page_2.htm

>> >

>> >Check it out and see if you can help me out here. :) I'm surprised no

>> >one else has ever had this same problem before.

>> These frame-grabs look normal to me for those from

>> low-end Mini-DV 1-CCD models... Unprocessed, this

>> is what minimal-pixel-count-for-the-format gets you.

>> The stills will be "unimpressive" from this level of

>> gear, but on a good TV, the video should look

>> pleasant and fairly good (in good light). Remember

>> that not only are computer displays different from

>> TV-display (and will look worse than TV for video),

>> but the display software is also not necessarily

>> showing the actual quality (resolution or frame-rate)

>> of the original stored on the computer. The test:

>> record some computer info back to a camcorder and

>> compare it with the original, played to a TV - you

>> should see no difference... For a comparison of the

>> unprocessed still tape images (frame-grabs) from

>> various model levels in the Sony line, go to:

>> www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder--comparison.htm.

>> David Ruether

I looked at more of the web images, and quote below

what "Fentress" says there...:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"here's a summary of my prob:

look at the pics above. :) (of course that explanation doesn't say anything to someone like my dad--he practically thinks it looks perfect)

basically what I'm getting is pixelation, blocking artifacts... and then you should see it when it actually plays-- all around the edges of anything like people's arms or chairs or whatever the pixels are fuzzy and jumpy, sort of. like, like the edges are pixelated fuzz that is constantly jittering about. And then someone in the distance will walk by, and they'll have this blurry grayish thing sticking out the side of their head, only it's just pixelated fuzz that is probably just a mixture of their hair with the car behind them -- that soft of thing. I don't know, but it's horrible. I expected to plug a digital camcorder (this one being a sony dcr trv19 I believe) and download crisp quality video into my computer which I could edit and the put on a DVD, but nooooo, I get this instead. ah well, maybe someone can help.

ok, new update guys. I figured most of you would be coming here anyway from my last post. I played back one of the avi's on my pc through the firewire through the camcorder and into my tv, and then I compared it with the video on the tape in the camcorder playing through my tv, and by looking really close like at the edges of houses and cars, I could see that same pixelation even on my tv (which is only like a 13-inch tv) so I'm wondering. is this a problem with camcorder resolution, CCDs or something? I'm recording in SP. so I don't get it. now of course there is the possibility that this is just my imagination, so please please come up with any other explanations you can think of. thanks! :)"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There is nothing unexpected in the stills - the

"stairstepping/jaggies" on edges are an artifact

of Yx480-line capture, and with greater motion

the alternating lines of the two fields shot at

different times but displayed at the same time

on computer will also show a "comb" effect on edges.

This is normal for a PS-mode display of interlaced

TV material. On a TV, the scan-line "jaggies"

may still show with motion, but the "comb" edges

will not, since the TV scan lines are properly timed

to avoid this. The original and output/input footage

should look the same on either the TV or the computer

(unless changes have been made during editing), but

not the same on both... BTW, this issue is in the

top three of ones we get a lot of questions on...;-)