http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AkgBucrRPMYO5X24mcw_YXpJBgx.;_ylv=3?qid=20061223012355AAGxMXd
I've seen this question before asking...if progressive scan is better (although) only slightly then why do so many TV channels use interlaced scans rather than progressive scans, there must be some advantage for them...isn't there?
2007-11-01 08:09:54 · 4 answers · asked by tsunamishadow 2 in Consumer Electronics ➔ TVs
For a TV system using modern digital technology, interlacing is inferior to progressive scans. There is no advantage to interlacing.
However when analog TV was developed in the 1930's, making a progressive scan TV system would have required more expensive & less reliable TV's and reduced the number of channels that were available because a progressive system would have required a wider frequency band per channel.
2007-11-01 19:04:05 · answer #1 · answered by Stephen P 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well you know that interlaced scan twice (odd and even line) to make the whole picture while progresive do only once, they both take the same time to do this. The advantage is the upper part of TV which get scan first won't be darker do to long time scaning from above to bottom in progressive.
2007-11-01 21:06:27 · answer #2 · answered by YKW 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Interlaced pictures handle action a bit better...plus they transmit easier due to lower bandwidth
2007-11-01 21:50:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
sophisticated situation. query at yahoo. it will help!
2014-11-14 23:29:57 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋