← Back to context Comment by mgaunard 12 hours ago Why so much love for NTSC and so little for PAL and SECAM? 4 comments mgaunard Reply grishka 4 hours ago Well I made this: https://github.com/grishka/miscellaneous/tree/master/AVDecod... emayljames 12 hours ago Interlacing is synonymous with 80's/90's video mgaunard 9 hours ago PAL and SECAM are also interlaced.Except PAL/SECAM don't have any of the color issues of NTSC. cf100clunk 3 hours ago PAL's lower frame rate made for visible flicker, which viewers conditioned to NTSC could wearily detect.
grishka 4 hours ago Well I made this: https://github.com/grishka/miscellaneous/tree/master/AVDecod...
emayljames 12 hours ago Interlacing is synonymous with 80's/90's video mgaunard 9 hours ago PAL and SECAM are also interlaced.Except PAL/SECAM don't have any of the color issues of NTSC. cf100clunk 3 hours ago PAL's lower frame rate made for visible flicker, which viewers conditioned to NTSC could wearily detect.
mgaunard 9 hours ago PAL and SECAM are also interlaced.Except PAL/SECAM don't have any of the color issues of NTSC. cf100clunk 3 hours ago PAL's lower frame rate made for visible flicker, which viewers conditioned to NTSC could wearily detect.
cf100clunk 3 hours ago PAL's lower frame rate made for visible flicker, which viewers conditioned to NTSC could wearily detect.
Well I made this: https://github.com/grishka/miscellaneous/tree/master/AVDecod...
Interlacing is synonymous with 80's/90's video
PAL and SECAM are also interlaced.
Except PAL/SECAM don't have any of the color issues of NTSC.
PAL's lower frame rate made for visible flicker, which viewers conditioned to NTSC could wearily detect.