Jump to content

st still analogue???


bones2097
 Share

Recommended Posts

jus watching an ep of tng (best of both world pt2)

 

and noticed that when commuications became noisy (interfreace/weak)... you get snow...

much like analogue TV...

 

as see all should know digital video when courrupt gets blocky/freezes/ get wired shadows....

 

so just wondering how some they use still anaglogue???

 

did they fix this in voy (can't rem i only watched it when it first aired....)

 

 

nit picking? yes well jus wanted to piont it out if anyone hasen't... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the only time ive seen a true digital signal on star trek was in IV the voyage home when the distress call comes in from the president of the federation, the rest look like crumpled video tapes, even in voyager (i am talking about video communications here not audio)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hug us or die!!

 

lol

 

i was thinking that if there could be any advantage in going back to an old analogue signal...

but than i thought wait a min.... even now we use digital communication when they were sending

pics back from jupiter.....

(and our tech is considerd caveman grade compared to ST)....

so how come voy or ent didn't go with the flow???

 

i'd love to blame the ferengi...

but instead i'll blame the props ppl....

 

buggers couldn't be arsed to emulate digital noise... no no they'ed rather have some kid fiddle about with the arieal of the video feed instead!!

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Digital noise just isn't visually 'cool', it looks sh|tty and usually messes up the video a lot more than analog noise (with the same comparative level of degradation), people start having serious difficulties in recognising what is supposed to be shown, while analog noise can be pumped up pretty high before people no longer recognise what the message is about.

 

People see the world in an analog way, not digitally. In fact the whole universe is analog, digital is just a cheap fake duplicate with serious flaws, always. Unfortunately we can't build analog equipment as easy/good/cheap/... as we can build digital stuff and if done right, people won't see/hear the difference, but compared to the original image/sound, the digitalised version is always lower in quality. Of course you'll want to say: not true, but remember that when 'old' analog images are digitalised, that they are 'cleaned up', they could theoretically do the same thing with the analog images, but that isn't economically feasible and in any case, given a high enough 'resolution/sample rate' the digitalised version starts to 'resemble' the analog/'real world' version to such a degree that enough information about a real event can be extracted from it. But ultimately analog is way superior to digital, since it holds the potential to represent nature the way it 'really' is, a digital version can never even hope to aspire that...

 

Another thing, you have no idea what a 'noisy signal' from a 'quad' looks like, in fact you have no idea whether it is based on a binary or a 'quadrary' or whatever number system. The 'digital noise' we know is a direct result from the binary system and compression techniques. If they use something else (most likely since they use 'quads'), there is no way to predict what 'noise' will look like...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...