Page 1 of Region 1 Picture Quality better than Region 2???

Hi everyone,
now I know PAL has more horizontal lines of resolution that NTSC and therefore should be better. But from watching the few Region 1 discs I have (and on my laptop no less) it kinda seems that Region 1 transfers seem to keep more of that celluloid "glow" and character of Film than Region 2/PAL. So is it all just in my head because the discs are from the US or could there be any technical validity to this??

Many thanks.

Maybe it`s because NTSC artificially maintains the correct speed of film, where PAL runs about 4% faster.

Generally speaking, I find that there is not much difference in picture quality between the vast majority of releases. The last film I did notice it was The Matrix Reloaded NTSC R1, where the picture wasn`t as impressive as that of the PAL R2.

Its funny you should say that, because I`ve always thought my R1 films looked better than their R2 counterparts. There`s just something that makes them kind of `raw`. I actually find R2 too lush and fake...weird :/

I only have a 32" and I can`t say that I notice any difference.....give me a plasma though - or a pro and I`ll tell you what I think. (Of course, I`ll have to keep them both ;-))



Rob

You`re nuts!?! You may like the slight blurring that you get from poorer resolution, but this argumant is entirely tiresome. PAL Region 2 is simply a better resolution than Region 1. Any fanciful ruminations about film speed etc are all in the mind.... :( :(

ok. Based upon my Home Theatre Forum experience, this argument runs and runs.

In the beginning I was under the impression that PAL was superior in every way. Picture and sound.

NOW the impression is blurred ..

One thing is FACT: PAL has speeded up sound.

.. So slight, you won`t notice with speech.. but ..If you have a favourite film soundtrack that say..you listen to a lot. And then you see that movie on a PAL DVD. The music will be faster. Trust me. Get a Film Score you know really. really well. Play the CD a couple of times and then watch the R2 DVD. You`ll laugh out loud. :-)

Predator is a perfect example.

Quote:
The three differences between NTSC discs and PAL discs are: 1) Picture size and pixel aspect ratio (720x480 vs 720x576), 2) Display frame rate (29.97 vs 25), 3) Video from film is usually encoded at 24 frames/sec. but is preformatted for one of the two display rates. Movies formatted for PAL display are usually sped up by 4% at playback, so the audio must be adjusted accordingly before being encoded.


The R1 transfers are so good now.. SO Good, I was watching "Open range" at my Dad`s (on his 32" Panasonic Widescreen) and I thought it was a R2 release (not knowing that it isn`t even out theatrically here yet.)

So, TECHNICALLY, PAL has a better resolution and more lines..and speeded up sound.

In the past the difference in image quality was blatent.

But you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between R1 and R2 these days.


My DVD Collection

This item was edited on Thursday, 11th March 2004, 16:27

hmmm - and I thought the question was about picture quality? :/

yes it is..? :/ I state that Pal is a better picture resolution. Doesn`t mean it`s better looking. And I pointed out the catch. better resolution, worse sound.

My DVD Collection

This item was edited on Thursday, 11th March 2004, 20:49

Better resolution does mean (everything else being equal) that it`s better looking.
We`ve been round and round this one....!? ;)

ah! My statement means that even if it`s PAL, the Transfer could be bad. And R1 and R2 Transfers do sometimes differ. :-) Muchos apologios. case closed.

(Pal sound is faster)

My DVD Collection

This item was edited on Friday, 12th March 2004, 09:02