DVD vs. VHS

[whabang]

KennyR wrote:
Quick check, I would like opinions on:

a) What is better quality, DVD or VHS;

b) Whether the difference quality is visible straight away or not.

I know where I stand on this, I just want to guage other people's opinions on the matter.

DVD, if not presented in the worng way (lousy encoding) is far better. Period.

On the other hand, VHS is cheap, and better suited to record TV-shows. I mean, come on! Two hours of video on a disk?!?! :\

[whabang]

I meant a DVD-disk (or is that disc?).

BTW, the RSAF would be rather useless, if there only was one "Grip".

[whabang]

Indeed they have! The others have all crashed (Most swedes will get that joke). :lol:

[whabang]

>a) What is better quality, DVD or VHS;
LaserDisc

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~leopold/Ld/FAQ/Introduction.html#RivalsDVD

[whabang]

LaserDisc video is better than any MPEG compression out there.

No.
The lack of MPEG-compression is plus, but that's the only one. A properly encoded high bitrate MPEG2-stream is almost identical to the original.

[whabang]

Dan wrote:
I prefer to read the book!
Superior picture and sound quality :lol:

Aye!

I feel a bit sad. They're going to make movies about Clive Custler's books about Dirk Pitt. Apparently, they want to replace 007, with someone more adapted to the 21st century. :-(