Honored Contributor
Honored ContributorI was referring to cameras. A camera is a video capture device.
Early equipment could not transmit 60 frames per second. However, they could have chosen to transmit 30 frames per second rather than 60 fields per second and still used the same amount of bandwidth. With interlaced video, each line still only updates 30 times per second but your brain gets new video data 60 times per second. This results in a better perception of motion by the viewer. You gain better resolution in the time domain but sacrifice resolution in the image quality. For instance, supposing you are watching NASCAR and the cars are running at 180mph (290kph) which translates to 264 feet per second (80 meters per second). So if you were watching progressive video at 30fps, you would see the car move 8.8 feet (2.7 meters) between each frame. With interlaced video at 60 fields per second, you see the car move 4.4 feet (1.35 meters) between fields. The motion appears smoother and less jerky. The tradeoff however is the quality of the image degrades because you're only getting half the picture each time. However, your brain tends to notice motion problems more than quality problems. Jake
