>In article <3e63d55e.4216691@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, Neuman -

>Ruether <d_ruether@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 14:34:00 GMT, "W. Keith McManus"

>> <k_mcmanus@rochester.invalid> wrote:

>> >A camera that has higher horizontal resolution will produce a smoother

>> >image then one with less.

>> This can true for analogue gear, but as I pointed out

>> earlier, we are comparing one DV camera that is very

>> near the format limit in resolution with other DV cameras

>> that also are (the format resolution limit of DV is

>> defined, unlike for some parts of analogue video). Or,

>> if "X" is the absolute resolution limit, ALL camera systems

>> using this format will show no more than X -(small-quantity)

>> resolution, no matter how good their "front ends" are - so,

>> at best, at optimum stops of the lenses, the on-tape

>> resolution of gear *cannot* vary by very much, given all

>> good gear. With inferior gear, the resolution can sag

>> considerably below the limit - but that is not what we

>> were talking about; we were comparing a 520-530 line

>> capable camcorder with one claiming "800 lines", which

>> works out to *less* than 540 TV lines in reality - so I

>> correctly call this "hype", since it is misleading and

>> since to do 520 TV lines, a camcorder would also need to

>> have fairly close to "800-line" capability...

>> As I also pointed out, there may still be obvious quality

>> differences due to other causes (just not this one...;-).

>> David Ruether

On Thu, 27 Feb 2003 03:46:41 GMT, "W. Keith McManus" <k_mcmanus@rochester.invalid> wrote:

>

>David,

>

>I'm not speaking about analog gear, other than the fact that the CCDs

>are analog devices.

>I can tell you one thing there is a great deal of difference between

>the image my camera with broadcast FIT chips produces and DV cameras

>such as SONY VX2000/PDF150 or other comparable manufacturers cameras.

>The 800 lines of resolution is horizontal resolution, not vertical. Of

>all people I am surprised that you, David, have this confused and after

>all the intelligent posts you have made here.

????????????

I have repeatedly said, "horizontal resolution", not

"vertical resolution" - though the horizontal resolution

is checked, of course, with vertical lines...;-) I have

also tried to point out that in DV, you ***CANNOT***

exceed (or even equal...) the theoretical (and FIRM)

horizontal resolution limit of about 540 TV lines

(horizontal, not the 480-486 of NTSC vertical...)

***REGARDLESS*** of the "front-end" resolution, no

matter how high it is! And that 800 lines *is* roughly

540 TV lines, due to the odd way of measuring these,

so anything that approaches 540 TV lines must have

close to the touted "800 lines" to do that... And,

picture characteristics are not about resolution only,

so equal-resolution images CAN look quite different,

with one preferable to another for various reasons

(but we were talking about resolution only, long

ago...;-). I thought I had been clear about all of

this, but mebbe not...;-)