We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Dave saying something like:
I find LP is every bit as good as VHS LP was, which is perfectly fine for simply time-shifting stuff. If I want to archive programmes do DVD I use SP, but if I only want to reduce the output to .avi for net distribution LP is a good enough starting point.
Why bother though? If you are only going to be doing time shifting then unless you are running short of hard disk space why not do everything in SD?
Andrew
Not a good starting point - VHS is horrible and LP VHS even worse. Perhaps OK when there was no option - but DVD is capable of giving near broadcast quality results whereas even the best S-VHS wasn't.
The only real reason to use LP was cost of tapes. That doesn't really apply to DVDs. Or to store more than 3 hours. If longer storage is needed get an HD recorder and you can store over 100 hours of stuff at full quality.
In article , Dave Plowman (News) scribeth thus
Broadcast --quality--?....
How long was -that- bit of string again?...
All the DVDs I have give better quality than the majority of Freeview channels, some of which are well down to VHS standard. My wife was watching something on UK History recently, it seemed to have been sponsored by "CompressionArtifacts-R-Us".
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.