s video

sadly, the only way i've seen this done is to get a vcr with svideo in and then connect the tv to the cable out connection. pretty expensive route. if your tv doesn't have anything other than a composit input and a cable input, you are kinda stuck. most of the adapters i've seen used to pump svideo into a composit connection have uttery sucked. -fisix

i'm ignorant in this area, as i always use composite (both tv-out and capture). however, did anyone actually NOTICED a quality improvement when using s-video vs composite, say on a 2m cable??? my hunch tells me that combining the chroma/luma into the same cable (as in composite) will not have such a visible quality degradation, or am i wrong? thanx avi.

i have to agree with fisix, you will definitley see a BIG difference even if your composite cable is as short as possible.

from a digital source like a DV camcorder, find a scene with a very clear blue sky (or something like that). Watch it with composite, then with S-Video connection. S-Video shows monochrome colored areas so much clearer, you'll notice it even on older tv screens (given the tv has been tv relatively good in the first place). You'll notice an even bigger difference if you are using a really good 100Hz tv as a monitor. With S-Video, you can suddenly read smaller fonts that had been unreadable with composite.

while looking through the web just now on this subject i found the following page which had some stuff that might be of help. not exactly sure how you would go about buying anything from this site, but here's the link anyway: by the way, does anyone know about quality differences when working with long cable lengths? i know it's not good, but with the way my room is laid out i have no choice really but to use a 25 ft. cable. i'm using composite right now because that's the only input our tv has, but want to switch to a tv with s-video as soon as possible, and i'm not sure what the quality difference will be.