2 ms·
Yes, but LD was nearly twice the resolution: > LaserDisc had several advantages over VHS. It featured a far sharper picture with a horizontal resolution of 425
by metadat 3y ago
Yes, but LD was nearly twice the resolution:
> LaserDisc had several advantages over VHS. It featured a far sharper picture with a horizontal resolution of 425 television lines (TVL) for NTSC and 440 TVL for PAL discs, while VHS featured only 240 TVL with NTSC.
Even still, there is no arguing that Laser Discs looked comically large and are an awkward dimension compared to VHS tapes.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQs29ra5NKbqlF5vTsGP6BMwypmhHWL19708Q&s https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQs29ra...
- stavros 3y agoThat's four times the resolution, no?
- metadat 3y agoI meant twice the vertical resolution :) you're correct.
- pezezin 3y agoNo, the vertical resolution was fixed and imposed by the TV standard: 525 lines for NTSC, 625 lines for PAL and SECAM, interlaced of course. All the analog video recording systems like LaserDisc, VHS or Beta have exactly the same vertical resolution. What changes from system to system is the horizontal resolution, but as they are analog and use composite encoding, it is difficult to give an exact number.
- babypuncher 3y agoAnalog video resolution is only measured vertically, as lines. Measuring horizontal resolution gets fuzzy (literally), though it's not hard to believe that the LaserDisc's extra bandwidth gave it more horizontal resolving power than VHS.