Isn't this standard conversion a hardware process? For example, you have long been able to buy analog standard converters from RadioShack, and you have certainly been able to purchase digital standard convertser which frame grab in one standard, and clock out in another - these are used by tv stations and tape conversion houses. However, many "book pc's" - these small footprint PC's, usually a i810 chipset, have both VGA and composite/s-video output as well. In the bios setting for these, you have the option of selecting the TV video mode to PAL/NTSC/SECAM. Even if you are running Linux and set X to 640x480, it looks great on the TV out. Even the Sigma Designs NS8400 mpeg-2/dvd decoder chip can do standard conversion in hardware (ie., the Sigma ns2000 pci dvd decoder with Linux driver). On Monday 31 December 2001 03:36 pm, you wrote: > Alan Cox (alan@xxxxxxxxxx): > > Converting NTSC/PAL is hard. Some of the DVD players do a good job and > > they don't get jerking on a slow pan. I'm not sure how they do it, but > > I'd guess someone is interpolating the mpeg motion vectors ? > > I fear MPEG's motion vectors since they aren't necessarily based on > actual motion, but I know there has been some research into using them > for deinterlacing and rate conversion. How expensive are these > NTSC-to-PAL converting players? :) > > > PAL recorded CNN (not that anyone actually cares about CNN in PAL land) > > doesn't jump at 25fps 8) > > You mean a PAL feed of CNN? How are you deinterlacing? Are you only > capturing single fields (like 720x288 or even 352x288)? It may be that > 25 fields evenly spaced over the 59.94 fields in an NTSC-second doesn't > screw the text scroll that much, but I'd be surprised. > > An awesome article on rate conversion: > http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/archive/TVBROADCAST/TempRate.asp > > My page on rate conversion and sync issues: > http://www.dumbterm.net/graphics/refresh/
