«

In article <. com>,
"Goro" <> wrote:

> Eric wrote:
> > hi,
> > Can anyone please help with how to convert ipod movies to dvd?
> > I have downloaded some videos in ipod format but I want to burn them to dvd.
> > I have googled, but all I can find is loads of information on converting to
> > ipod format but not the other way. Any pointers to software that somone has
> > found will be greatly appreciated.
> > Regards
>
> do you really want to convert 320x240 quicktime into a 480p video? I
> donut think that's a good idea.
>
> -goro-

yeah, but, the 320x240 is approximately what VHS offers, and VHS was
reasonable quality for years.

dick
-- or at least good enough to watch tv shows that you weren't home to
see or forgot to record

Dick Sidbury wrote:

> > do you really want to convert 320x240 quicktime into a 480p video? I
> > donut think that's a good idea.
\
>
> yeah, but, the 320x240 is approximately what VHS offers, and VHS was
> reasonable quality for years.
>

I think VHS is more like 320 x 480. Plus the 320 is sampled rather
than continuous, and that little picture has undergone considerable
compression. Expand it to full screen and I think you will see
someething a lot worse than VHS.

Dave

<> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
> Dick Sidbury wrote:
>
> > > do you really want to convert 320x240 quicktime into a 480p video? I
> > > donut think that's a good idea.
> \
> >
> > yeah, but, the 320x240 is approximately what VHS offers, and VHS was
> > reasonable quality for years.
> >
>
> I think VHS is more like 320 x 480.

Nope, its more like 320x240 just like he posted.....

Biz wrote:

> > I think VHS is more like 320 x 480.

> Nope, its more like 320x240 just like he posted.....

Assuming you are talking about NTSC video, it all has 480 horizontal
lines. This is true if it is broadcast, VHS, Betacam, DV or any other
way of presenting the signal. So, the vertical resolution is always 480
for NTSC, the 320 frequenttly listed is the approximate number of
vertical ;ines that can be resolved, some give a higher number, but
some give lower.

I don't know where that sometimes quoted 320 x 240 comes from, but the
correct answer is somewhere in the range of 300 x 480 to 320 x 480.

Dave

Sorry, you are correct, brainfart here, but isnt VHS closer to 200 lines of
resolution whereas S-VHS is around 300 or so lines of resolution making the
numbers like 200x480, and 300x480?


<> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
> Biz wrote:
>
> > > I think VHS is more like 320 x 480.
>
> > Nope, its more like 320x240 just like he posted.....
>
> Assuming you are talking about NTSC video, it all has 480 horizontal
> lines. This is true if it is broadcast, VHS, Betacam, DV or any other
> way of presenting the signal. So, the vertical resolution is always 480
> for NTSC, the 320 frequenttly listed is the approximate number of
> vertical ;ines that can be resolved, some give a higher number, but
> some give lower.
>
> I don't know where that sometimes quoted 320 x 240 comes from, but the
> correct answer is somewhere in the range of 300 x 480 to 320 x 480.
>
> Dave
>

Biz wrote:
> Sorry, you are correct, brainfart here, but isnt VHS closer to 200 lines of
> resolution whereas S-VHS is around 300 or so lines of resolution making the
> numbers like 200x480, and 300x480?

Those measurements were always somewhat subjective, so you often saw
a range of about 250 to 300+ for VHS. S-VHS was usually listed in the
400s range and though I never worked with BetaCam, I believe they
claimed 500 or greater.

Dave

Biz wrote:
> Sorry, you are correct, brainfart here, but isnt VHS closer to 200 lines of
> resolution whereas S-VHS is around 300 or so lines of resolution making the
> numbers like 200x480, and 300x480?

Those measurements were always somewhat subjective, so you often saw
a range of about 250 to 300+ for VHS. S-VHS was usually listed in the
400s range and though I never worked with BetaCam, I believe they
claimed 500 or greater.

Dave

<> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
> Biz wrote:
> > Sorry, you are correct, brainfart here, but isnt VHS closer to 200 lines
of
> > resolution whereas S-VHS is around 300 or so lines of resolution making
the
> > numbers like 200x480, and 300x480?
>
> Those measurements were always somewhat subjective, so you often saw
> a range of about 250 to 300+ for VHS. S-VHS was usually listed in the
> 400s range and though I never worked with BetaCam, I believe they
> claimed 500 or greater.
>
> Dave
>

Higher than I thought...I thought LDs were supposed to be about 400 lines,
so I assumed that S-VHS was lower....my LD player claims about 425 lines of
resolution...

Biz wrote:

> Higher than I thought...I thought LDs were supposed to be about 400 lines,
> so I assumed that S-VHS was lower....my LD player claims about 425 lines of
> resolution...

The LD player may be better than S-VHS. The measurements were highly
subjective and the manufacturers claims always inflated. Also varries
from machine to machine and tape quality.

My take on it is:
VHS and 8mm 250 - 300
S-VHS & Hi-8 370 - 400+
LD (never had one, but they claim about 425)
BataCam 500

Digital video is standard ay 720 x 480, usually associated with a
camcorder however and limited by the camera on the front end.

Dave

Biz wrote:

> Higher than I thought...I thought LDs were supposed to be about 400 lines,
> so I assumed that S-VHS was lower....my LD player claims about 425 lines of
> resolution...

The LD player may be better than S-VHS. The measurements were highly
subjective and the manufacturers claims always inflated. Also varries
from machine to machine and tape quality.

My take on it is:
VHS and 8mm 250 - 300
S-VHS & Hi-8 370 - 400+
LD (never had one, but they claim about 425)
BataCam 500

Digital video is standard ay 720 x 480, usually associated with a
camcorder however and limited by the camera on the front end.

Dave