On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 22:06:48 +0100, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Bill Taylor
writes
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:43:16 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Take 2:

Look and listen closely - digital stuff all suffers from the loss of
that final sharpness, be it sound or images....

Alas, no matter how many 'takes' you make, your theory disagrees with my
experience. :-)



Word Insertion Technique noted - 'theory'...??

My *experience* disagrees with yours and my opinion is shared here.

Anybody care to claim 'digital radio' or 'digital TV' is sharper than
analogue?

That rather depends on what variety of TV your talking about and where
in the distribution chain your viewing it, but at the point of origin
professional digital 625/50 production equipment is better in all
respects than the analogue version.

Interesting point... where exactly is it digitised?.

Well the CCU output is available as SDI but I don't know enough about
modern cameras to say where in the camera the digitisation takes
place, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was fairly early in the
signal chain and some of the processing was done digitally.

And remind us of the bitrates used

About 270Mbps for standard def.

Although I know you don't like transmitted digital TV (and I wish the
bitrates were higher), it is an impressive feat to achieve a nearly
100:1 compression ratio and still get pretty good pictures most of the
time.

Bill