episode

Episode 4: Never Twice the Same Color - The Secret Standards Behind Every Screen | Dormant Knowledge Sleep Podcast

Whether you drift off while learning about phosphor chemistry and color encoding, or stay awake through the digital television revolution, you'll never look at your screen quite the same way again.

Ken

— 26 min read
Episode 4: Never Twice the Same Color - The Secret Standards Behind Every Screen | Dormant Knowledge Sleep Podcast

Dormant Knowledge Sleep Podcast

Host: Deb
Duration: ~52minutes
Release Date: September 1, 2025
Episode Topics: Television broadcast standards, NTSC/PAL/SECAM systems, Cold War technology politics

Episode Summary

Why does your television screen have those exact proportions? Why do old movies sometimes look slightly "off" when you're streaming them? The answer lies in a fascinating world of invisible technical infrastructure that shapes every single thing you see on any screen—the secret realm of television broadcast standards.

In this episode of Dormant Knowledge, the educational sleep podcast for curious minds, Deb uncovers the surprising political drama and engineering compromises behind the three major television systems that divided the world: NTSC, PAL, and SECAM. Discover why American engineers joked that NTSC stood for "Never Twice the Same Color" due to its notorious color accuracy problems, how France developed its own television standard partly out of national pride, and why the Soviet Union chose an inferior system specifically because it was incompatible with Western broadcasts.

From the mechanical spinning disks of John Logie Baird's 1920s experiments to today's 4K streaming services, this episode explores how technical decisions made by small committees of engineers ended up shaping global culture in profound and lasting ways. Learn why that tiny shift from 30 to 29.97 frames per second still affects your Netflix viewing experience, how the transition from 4:3 to 16:9 aspect ratios changed the visual language of television, and why some of these decades-old standards persist even in our digital age.

Whether you drift off while learning about phosphor chemistry and color encoding, or stay awake through the digital television revolution, you'll never look at your screen quite the same way again. This is the hidden history of the technical choices that affect billions of viewers every day—choices made by people who had no idea their engineering solutions would become the foundation for an entire art form.

What You'll Learn

  • Discover the origins of mechanical television and John Logie Baird's ingenious but impractical Nipkow disk system that used spinning disks with holes to create the first television images
  • Explore the great television standards war that divided the world into three incompatible zones: NTSC in the Americas, PAL in most of Europe, and SECAM in France and Soviet territories
  • Learn why NTSC earned the nickname "Never Twice the Same Color" and how early color TVs needed manual "tint" controls that families constantly adjusted to get natural-looking flesh tones
  • Understand the political motivations behind standard adoption, including how the Soviet Union chose SECAM specifically because it was incompatible with Western broadcasts, creating a technological "iron curtain"
  • Uncover the technical compromises of adding color to black-and-white TV, including why American television shifted from exactly 30 fps to 29.97 fps and how this tiny difference still causes timing issues today
  • Explore the complex world of film-to-television conversion, from PAL's simple 4% speed-up to NTSC's intricate "3:2 pulldown" process that creates subtle motion artifacts
  • Discover how phosphor limitations shaped color reproduction and why different television standards could display slightly different ranges of colors using YIQ, YUV, and sequential color encoding
  • Trace the digital television revolution and learn how modern ATSC, DVB, and ISDB standards maintained regional divisions despite being more technically compatible than their analog predecessors

Episode Transcript

Dormant Knowledge Episode 4: Television Broadcast Standards
[Soft ambient music fades in]
Deb:Welcome to Dormant Knowledge. I'm your host, Deb, and this is the podcast where you'll learn something fascinating while gently drifting off to sleep. Our goal is simple: to share interesting stories and ideas in a way that's engaging enough to capture your attention, but delivered at a pace that helps your mind relax and unwind. Whether you make it to the end or drift away somewhere in the middle, you'll hopefully absorb some knowledge along the way.
Before we get into the episode proper, we hope you will consider supporting us so that we can keep this fun experiment going. You can find us at dormantknowledge.com or follow us on social media @dormantknowledge on Instagram and Facebook, or @drmnt_knowledge—that's d-r-m-n-t-underscore-knowledge—on X.
Tonight, we're exploring the fascinating world of television broadcast standards. So settle in, get comfortable, and let's begin our journey into the invisible technical infrastructure that shapes how you see every single thing on your screen.
[Music fades out]
[Sound of papers shuffling]
Deb:You know, I was watching something on Netflix the other night, and I started thinking about... well, actually, let me back up a bit. Have you ever wondered why your television screen has the exact proportions it does? Or why, when you're watching an old movie, sometimes it looks a little... off? Maybe the motion seems slightly jerky, or the colors don't quite match what you'd expect?
[Yawns softly]
Well, it turns out that every single thing you see on any screen—your TV, your computer monitor, your phone when you're watching videos—is shaped by decisions that were made decades ago by engineers and bureaucrats in rooms most of us will never see. Tonight, we're going to explore these television broadcast standards, which are honestly some of the most influential technical decisions ever made, even though hardly anyone outside of, um, older audiovisual engineers and some folks in the film industry really knows about them anymore.
But here's the thing—and this is what I find so fascinating about this topic—these standards affect literally everyone who watches television, which is... well, pretty much everyone. Every time you turn on your TV, you're experiencing the end result of what was essentially a massive international technical and political negotiation that played out over decades.
[Sound of chair shifting]
So let's start at the beginning, shall we? Back when television was just an idea that seemed almost impossibly futuristic.
The Early Days: When Television Was Mechanical
Now, when we think about early television, most of us probably imagine something like those old TV sets from the 1950s with the tiny screens and the rabbit ear antennas. But actually, the very first television systems were... well, they were completely mechanical. No electronics involved at all, really.
There was this inventor named John Logie Baird—B-A-I-R-D—who in the 1920s created a television system using something called a Nipkow disk. Now, a Nipkow disk, named after Paul Nipkow who invented it in 1884, was essentially a spinning disk with holes arranged in a spiral pattern. As the disk spun, light would shine through these holes and create a scanning pattern that could, theoretically, transmit an image.
[Pauses]
It was... well, it was ingenious, actually, but also completely impractical. The images were tiny, maybe about the size of a postcard, and incredibly dim. You had to watch in a completely dark room, and even then, you could barely make out what you were looking at. But it worked! Sort of.
The problem with mechanical television—well, one of many problems—was that there was no real standardization. Baird's system used 30 lines of resolution, which meant the picture was made up of just 30 horizontal lines. Other inventors were experimenting with different numbers of lines. Some tried 60, some tried 120. It was chaos, really.
And here's where the first glimpse of our main story emerges. As these early television experiments started to show promise, it became clear that if television was going to be more than just a laboratory curiosity, everyone would need to agree on some basic technical specifications. You couldn't have one broadcaster using 30 lines and another using 60 lines and expect viewers to be able to watch both.
[Sound of papers rustling]
The transition to electronic television happened remarkably quickly, actually. By the early 1930s, it was becoming clear that electronic systems—using cathode ray tubes instead of spinning disks—could produce much better images. But this is where things get really interesting, because now you had different countries and different companies all developing their own electronic television systems, and they were all... well, they were all incompatible with each other.
The Great Standards War
[Yawns]
So imagine you're an engineer in, say, 1936, and you're tasked with figuring out how television is going to work in your country. You have to make some fundamental decisions. How many lines of resolution will you use? How many times per second will you refresh the image? How will you encode the signal so that it can be transmitted over radio waves?
These might seem like purely technical decisions, but they ended up having enormous political and economic implications. Because once you choose a standard, you're essentially locked into it for decades. Every television manufacturer, every broadcaster, every piece of equipment has to conform to that standard.
The three major standards that emerged were NTSC, PAL, and SECAM. Now, NTSC stands for National Television System Committee—this was the American standard. PAL stands for Phase Alternating Line, which was developed in Germany and adopted by most of Europe. And SECAM—S-E-C-A-M—stands for Séquentiel Couleur À Mémoire, which is French for "Sequential Color with Memory," and this was developed in France and adopted by France and, interestingly, the Soviet Union and most of its allies.
[Pause]
Now, you might think that these standards were chosen purely based on technical merit, but... well, that's not quite the whole story. The adoption patterns tell a fascinating tale of Cold War politics, economic nationalism, and good old-fashioned technical stubbornness.
Let's start with NTSC, the American standard. The United States was really the first country to develop a commercially viable television system, so in many ways, NTSC became the default simply because America got there first. NTSC uses 525 lines of resolution and a refresh rate of approximately 30 frames per second. I say approximately because, well, we'll get into the details of why it's not exactly 30 in a bit.
The thing about NTSC is that it was designed in the era of black and white television, and then later, they had to figure out how to add color without making all the existing black and white TVs obsolete. This led to some... compromises. Engineers in the industry used to joke that NTSC actually stood for "Never Twice the Same Color" because of its notorious problems with color accuracy.
[Chuckles softly]
Meanwhile, in Europe, they had the advantage of starting their television systems later, so they could learn from America's mistakes. PAL, developed in the early 1960s, uses 625 lines of resolution and a refresh rate of 25 frames per second. The extra lines meant better picture quality, and the PAL color encoding system was much more stable than NTSC.
But here's where politics comes in. When France was developing its television system, they could have adopted PAL—it was technically superior to NTSC and was being adopted by most of their European neighbors. But France has always had a... let's call it a independent streak when it comes to technology standards. They developed their own system, SECAM, which was also 625 lines and 25 frames per second, but used a completely different method for encoding color information.
[Sound of drinking water]
Now, you might ask, why would France go to all the trouble of developing their own system when PAL was right there? Well, partly it was national pride, but there was also a very practical consideration. The French government realized that controlling television standards meant controlling the television industry. If you developed your own standard, then every piece of television equipment sold in your country would need to license your technology.
But the most interesting adoption story involves SECAM and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union adopted SECAM not because it was technically superior—in fact, it was arguably the worst of the three major standards in terms of color quality—but because it was politically advantageous. You see, adopting SECAM meant that Soviet television equipment wouldn't be compatible with Western broadcasts, which made it much harder for Soviet citizens to receive Western television signals.
[Pause]
This wasn't an accident. The incompatibility was a feature, not a bug. It was a form of technological iron curtain.
And so, by the 1970s, you had this fascinating situation where the world was divided into three incompatible television zones. The Americas, Japan, and a few other countries used NTSC. Most of Western Europe, Australia, and many former British colonies used PAL. And France, the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, and most of the former French colonies used SECAM.
This division had profound effects that most people never think about. If you were a filmmaker and you wanted your movie to be shown worldwide, you had to create different versions for different regions. If you were a television manufacturer, you couldn't just make one universal TV set. The world was effectively divided into three separate television universes.
NTSC: The American Pioneer
[Soft ambient music begins to fade in]
Deb:I'm going to take a quick break here. When we come back, we'll dive deeper into the technical details of these standards, starting with NTSC and why American television works the way it does.
[Music plays for transition]
Deb:Welcome back to Dormant Knowledge...
[Music fades out]
Let's talk about NTSC in more detail, because the story of how American television standards were developed really illustrates the kinds of compromises and unexpected consequences that shaped the medium we know today.
[Sound of papers shuffling]
NTSC was originally developed in the early 1940s for black and white television. The engineers chose 525 lines of resolution, which was a compromise between picture quality and bandwidth efficiency. More lines would mean better picture quality, but it would also require more radio spectrum, which was a limited and valuable resource.
They also chose a refresh rate of 30 frames per second, which seemed logical because the American electrical power grid runs at 60 Hz, and 30 is half of 60. This meant that television equipment could sync with the power grid, which helped reduce interference.
But then came color television, and this is where things get really interesting. By the early 1950s, it was clear that color TV was going to be the future, but there was a massive installed base of black and white television sets. Any color system would need to be backward compatible—color broadcasts would need to be receivable on black and white TVs, and black and white broadcasts would need to work on color TVs.
[Yawns softly]
The solution that the NTSC engineers came up with was ingenious but also incredibly complex. They decided to encode color information by adding a color signal, called a chrominance signal, on top of the existing black and white signal, called the luminance signal.
But here's where it gets tricky. Adding this color signal slightly interfered with the original black and white signal. To minimize this interference, they had to shift the frame rate slightly. Instead of exactly 30 frames per second, NTSC color television actually runs at 29.97 frames per second.
Now, 29.97 might not seem very different from 30, but this tiny difference has caused headaches for video professionals for decades. When you're editing video, that 0.03 frame difference per second adds up. Over the course of an hour, you're off by more than 3 seconds. This is why, when you're watching live television, you sometimes see those little time code corrections where the picture briefly freezes or jumps.
[Pause]
And remember that joke I mentioned earlier about NTSC standing for "Never Twice the Same Color"? This was a real problem. The NTSC color encoding system was very sensitive to signal distortions. A weak broadcast signal, interference from other electronics, or even atmospheric conditions could cause colors to shift dramatically. You'd be watching a show, and someone's face might be slightly green, or the blue sky might look purple.
This was such a well-known problem that early color TVs had a "tint" control that let viewers manually adjust the color balance. Families would constantly fiddle with this control, trying to get the colors to look right. It became a kind of ritual—you'd turn on the TV, and then spend a few minutes adjusting the tint until flesh tones looked natural.
[Chuckles]
But despite its problems, NTSC worked. It was the first widely adopted color television standard, and that first-mover advantage was enormous. By the time better standards like PAL came along, America already had millions of NTSC televisions in homes, and the broadcast infrastructure was completely built around NTSC. Switching would have required replacing every television and every piece of broadcast equipment in the country. It was economically impossible.
Resolution, Refresh Rates, and the Film Connection
Now, let's talk about something that affects how every movie looks on your television: the relationship between film and television frame rates.
[Sound of chair shifting]
Traditional film runs at 24 frames per second. This frame rate was chosen back in the 1920s as a compromise between smooth motion and film cost. Fewer frames per second would make motion look choppy, but more frames per second would use more film, which was expensive.
But television runs at different frame rates depending on the standard. NTSC runs at 29.97 fps, PAL and SECAM run at 25 fps. So when you want to show a 24 fps film on television, you have a problem: the frame rates don't match.
For PAL and SECAM, the solution is relatively simple. You just speed up the film slightly, from 24 fps to 25 fps. The difference is only about 4%, so most people don't notice. The pitch of the audio goes up slightly, but it's usually not enough to be distracting.
But for NTSC, the math doesn't work out so neatly. You can't just speed up or slow down 24 fps to get 29.97 fps. Instead, NTSC uses a process called "3:2 pulldown" or "telecine." This is where things get... well, a bit technical, but bear with me because it's actually quite clever.
[Pause]
In 3:2 pulldown, the film frames are distributed unevenly across the television frames. Some film frames are shown for 3 television fields, others for 2 television fields. Remember, NTSC is an interlaced format, which means each frame is actually made up of two fields—one containing the odd-numbered lines, one containing the even-numbered lines.
So you might have film frame A shown for 3 fields, then film frame B shown for 2 fields, then film frame C shown for 3 fields, then film frame D shown for 2 fields, and so on. This pattern repeats every 5 film frames and 12 television fields.
The result is that motion isn't quite as smooth as it would be with native 24 fps or 30 fps. If you're sensitive to this kind of thing, you might notice a slight stuttering in panning shots or fast motion when watching films on NTSC television.
[Yawns]
This is also why, when high-definition television was being developed, there was a big push to include 24 fps as a native frame rate. Modern HDTVs and Blu-ray players can actually display 24 fps content at its original frame rate, which produces much smoother motion for films.
But here's something interesting: some people actually prefer the look of film-to-video conversion. That slightly stuttery, slightly artificial look became associated with "television quality" for decades. When filmmakers started shooting directly on video in the 1980s and 1990s, they often tried to replicate this look because audiences expected it.
Color Science and Phosphor Dreams
[Sound of papers rustling]
Let's talk about color for a bit, because the way television reproduces color is actually quite fascinating and a bit more limited than you might think.
Television screens—at least traditional CRT screens—create colors using phosphors. These are chemical compounds that glow when struck by an electron beam. Early color TVs used three different phosphors: one that glowed red, one that glowed green, and one that glowed blue.
Now, here's the thing about phosphors: they can only produce very specific colors. The red phosphor can only produce one very particular shade of red, the green phosphor one particular shade of green, and so on. All other colors are created by mixing these three primary colors in different proportions.
But the colors that phosphors can produce are actually a fairly small subset of all the colors that human eyes can see. If you imagine all possible colors as a sort of map—which color scientists actually do, it's called a color space—then the colors that a television can display form a triangle within that larger map.
[Pause]
This triangle is defined by the three phosphor colors, and it doesn't cover the entire range of colors that we can see. There are some very saturated blues and greens, and some deep reds, that simply cannot be displayed on a traditional television screen.
The different television standards actually use slightly different phosphor formulations, which means they can display slightly different ranges of colors. NTSC uses one set of phosphor colors, PAL uses another, and SECAM uses yet another. This is one reason why the same program can look slightly different when viewed on different systems.
[Sound of drinking water]
But it gets more complicated than that. Not only do different standards use different phosphor colors, they also use different methods for encoding color information in the broadcast signal.
NTSC encodes color using something called the YIQ color space. Y represents luminance—basically, the brightness information that would be used for black and white television. I and Q represent two color difference signals that, when combined with the luminance signal, can recreate color images.
PAL uses a similar but more sophisticated system called YUV. The key innovation of PAL is that it alternates the phase of the color signal on every line. This helps cancel out certain types of distortion, making PAL much more resistant to color shifts than NTSC.
SECAM takes a completely different approach. Instead of transmitting both color signals simultaneously, SECAM transmits them sequentially—red difference on one line, blue difference on the next line, and so on. This makes SECAM very robust against signal distortion, but it also makes it more complex to decode.
[Yawns softly]
These differences in color encoding meant that not only were the standards incompatible in terms of resolution and frame rate, they were also incompatible in terms of color. A PAL television simply couldn't decode an NTSC color signal, and vice versa.
This created some interesting challenges for international broadcasters. The BBC, for example, had to maintain separate PAL and NTSC transmission facilities to serve different parts of the world. News footage shot in NTSC countries had to be converted to PAL before it could be broadcast in Europe, and this conversion process often introduced color errors and quality degradation.
The Digital Revolution
[Soft ambient music begins to fade in]
Deb:I'm going to take another quick break here. When we come back, we'll explore how the digital revolution changed everything—and how some of these old analog decisions still affect your viewing experience today.
[Music plays for transition]
Deb:Welcome back to Dormant Knowledge...
[Music fades out]
[Sound of chair shifting]
So by the 1990s, it was becoming clear that analog television had reached its limits. The picture quality was... well, it was acceptable, but it wasn't great. And more importantly, analog television was inefficient in its use of radio spectrum. Each analog television channel required a large chunk of bandwidth, and with the explosion of new communication technologies—cell phones, wireless internet, digital radio—that spectrum was becoming increasingly valuable.
Digital television promised to solve many problems. Better picture quality, more efficient use of spectrum, and the possibility of transmitting multiple programs on a single channel. But it also meant that the world would need to develop new standards, and this time, hopefully, avoid some of the mistakes of the analog era.
The transition to digital television happened at different times in different parts of the world, but the general timeline was remarkably similar everywhere. Most countries set deadlines sometime between 2010 and 2015 for shutting off analog broadcasts entirely.
[Pause]
In the United States, the transition happened on June 12, 2009. On that date, all full-power analog television broadcasts were shut off, and viewers who hadn't already switched to digital reception found themselves staring at blank screens.
Now, you might think that digital television would be an opportunity to finally unify the world under a single standard. After all, digital systems are much more flexible than analog systems. A digital television can, in theory, be programmed to receive any digital format.
But... well, that's not quite what happened. Instead, the world ended up with several different digital television standards, largely based on the same geographic divisions as the old analog standards.
The United States developed ATSC—Advanced Television Systems Committee. Europe developed DVB—Digital Video Broadcasting. And Japan developed ISDB—Integrated Services Digital Broadcasting. Brazil, interestingly, developed a variant of the Japanese system called ISDB-T, while China developed its own system called DTMB.
[Sound of papers shuffling]
But here's what's interesting about the digital transition: unlike the analog standards, which were truly incompatible, the digital standards are much more similar to each other. They all use similar video compression techniques—mostly variants of MPEG-2 and later MPEG-4. They all support multiple resolution formats, from standard definition up to high definition and beyond.
The main differences are in the transmission methods—how the digital signal is modulated and error-corrected for broadcast. But the underlying video and audio formats are largely the same.
This means that while you still can't receive, say, European DVB broadcasts on an American ATSC television, content can be much more easily converted between formats. A movie produced in one digital format can be relatively easily converted to another digital format without the quality loss that was common with analog conversions.
The digital transition also finally broke the tyranny of interlaced video. Remember how I mentioned that analog television used interlaced scanning, where each frame was split into two fields? Digital television supports both interlaced and progressive scanning, and most modern content is produced in progressive format.
Progressive scanning means that each frame is displayed all at once, rather than being split into fields. This produces much smoother motion and eliminates many of the artifacts that were common with interlaced video.
[Yawns]
But probably the most dramatic change that came with digital television was the move to high definition. Analog television, even in the best PAL format, provided only about 400 lines of effective resolution. High definition digital television provides either 720 or 1080 lines of resolution, more than doubling the picture quality.
The transition to HD also finally gave the world a common aspect ratio. Analog television used a 4:3 aspect ratio—the screen was 4 units wide for every 3 units tall. But HD television uses a 16:9 aspect ratio, which is much closer to the aspect ratio used by most movies.
This might seem like a small change, but it had enormous implications for content production. Suddenly, television producers could frame their shots more like filmmakers. Wide establishing shots became much more effective. The composition of every shot had to be reconsidered.
Modern Implications and the Persistence of History
[Sound of drinking water]
Now, you might think that with digital television and streaming services, all of these old analog standards are just historical curiosities. But actually, many of these decisions from decades ago still affect how you watch television and movies today.
For example, most content is still produced at either 24, 25, or 30 frames per second, even though modern digital systems could theoretically support any frame rate. This is partly because of the enormous installed base of existing content, and partly because audiences have become accustomed to these frame rates.
When Peter Jackson filmed The Hobbit trilogy at 48 frames per second instead of the traditional 24 fps, many viewers complained that it looked "too real" or "like a soap opera." The higher frame rate eliminated the slight motion blur that audiences had come to associate with cinematic quality.
[Pause]
Similarly, the old NTSC and PAL frame rates still persist in digital formats. Most American digital television content is still produced at 29.97 fps, even though there's no technical reason for this anymore. It's purely a matter of backwards compatibility and industry inertia.
Regional differences also persist in streaming services. Netflix, Amazon Prime, and other streaming platforms often have different catalogs in different parts of the world, partly because of licensing restrictions, but also partly because content was originally produced for different broadcast standards.
A British television series produced for PAL at 25 fps might need to be converted to 29.97 fps for American distribution, and this conversion can still introduce subtle quality issues.
[Yawns softly]
The resolution standards that we use today—720p, 1080i, 1080p, 4K—are also largely derived from the old broadcast television standards. 1080 lines was chosen because it's almost exactly double the 525 lines of NTSC, making conversion between HD and standard definition relatively straightforward.
Even the aspect ratios we use today reflect these old decisions. The 16:9 aspect ratio that's now standard for almost all video content was chosen as a compromise between the 4:3 aspect ratio of television and the various widescreen ratios used by movies.
But perhaps most importantly, the infrastructure decisions made during the analog era still shape the economics of television and film production. The fact that different parts of the world used different standards for decades meant that media companies had to think globally from very early on. They couldn't just produce content for their local market and ignore the rest of the world.
This is one reason why American television and movies became so dominant globally. The United States had the largest single market using a single standard, which gave American producers economies of scale that smaller markets couldn't match.
Cultural and Economic Echoes
[Sound of papers rustling]
The legacy of broadcast standards extends far beyond just technical specifications. These standards shaped entire industries and influenced global culture in ways that most people never consider.
Take the VCR format wars of the 1970s and 1980s, for example. The battle between VHS and Betamax wasn't just about which format was technically superior—it was also about which format could best accommodate the different broadcast standards around the world.
VHS had better compatibility with NTSC, while Betamax had some advantages with PAL. This geographic factor played a role in determining which format succeeded in which markets.
[Pause]
The regional coding system used by DVDs is another direct descendant of broadcast standards. DVDs are encoded with region codes that prevent discs from one part of the world from playing on players from another part of the world. These regions correspond roughly to the old broadcast standard territories.
Region 1 covers the United States and Canada—the old NTSC territory. Region 2 covers Europe and Japan—mostly PAL territory, plus Japan which used NTSC but was considered a separate market. Region 3 covers Southeast Asia, and so on.
This system was ostensibly about preventing piracy and controlling distribution windows, but it was also about maintaining the same kind of market segmentation that had existed since the early days of television.
[Sound of chair shifting]
Even today, in the age of streaming and digital distribution, content creators have to think about how their work will appear in different parts of the world. Color grading—the process of adjusting the colors in a film or television show—often has to account for the fact that the same content might be viewed on displays with different color characteristics.
Professional colorists still sometimes create separate versions of their work for different markets, just as they did in the analog era.
The frame rate differences also persist in subtle ways. European audiences, raised on 25 fps television, sometimes perceive 24 fps cinema content as slightly slow, while American audiences, raised on 29.97 fps television, sometimes perceive 25 fps content as slightly sluggish.
[Yawns]
These perceptual differences are largely unconscious, but they can affect how audiences respond to content. A comedy's timing might feel slightly off when shown at a different frame rate than it was designed for. A dramatic scene might lose some of its impact if the motion doesn't feel quite right.
This is why, even in our globalized digital world, many filmmakers still consider the geographic distribution of their work when making creative decisions. They might adjust the pacing of a scene slightly, or choose different shot compositions, depending on where they expect their work to be seen.
The Future of Standards
[Sound of drinking water]
As we look toward the future, it's interesting to consider whether we're moving toward true global standardization, or whether we'll continue to see regional differences in how moving images are captured and displayed.
On one hand, digital technology has made it much easier to convert between different formats, and streaming services are creating pressure for global compatibility. When Netflix produces a series, they want it to be viewable on every device in every country with minimal conversion.
On the other hand, some of the newest display technologies are creating new opportunities for regional variation. High dynamic range video, for example, requires new standards for how brightness and color are encoded, and different regions are again developing slightly different approaches.
[Pause]
The move to higher frame rates is also creating new divisions. Some content creators are experimenting with 60 fps or even 120 fps video, while others are sticking with traditional frame rates. Virtual reality and augmented reality applications often require even higher frame rates to prevent motion sickness.
It's possible that we'll end up with a new form of fragmentation, where different types of content use completely different technical specifications depending on how they're intended to be consumed.
[Yawns softly]
But what's fascinating to me is how these technical decisions, made by small groups of engineers and standards committees, end up shaping the creative work that billions of people experience. The next time you're watching something—anything—on a screen, you're seeing the end result of thousands of technical compromises and political negotiations that most viewers never think about.
The flicker rate of your screen, the way colors are reproduced, the smoothness of motion, the shape of the image—all of these things were decided by people who were trying to solve very practical problems with the technology available at the time. But their solutions became the foundation for an entire art form.
[Sound of papers shuffling]
And in many cases, these technical constraints actually drove creative innovation. The 4:3 aspect ratio of early television led to a very different visual language than widescreen cinema. The limited resolution of analog television meant that filmmakers had to think carefully about how much visual detail they could include in a shot.
The transition to digital and high definition changed all of these constraints, but by then, decades of creative work had been built around the limitations of the older systems. Some of those creative approaches persisted even after the technical limitations were removed, simply because audiences had come to expect them.
[Soft ambient music begins to fade in]
I think there's something quite beautiful about this—the way that technical limitations can become creative opportunities, and how solutions to engineering problems can end up shaping human culture in profound and unexpected ways.
Every television broadcast standard represents a moment when engineers had to make the best decisions they could with imperfect information and limited technology. They couldn't know how their choices would affect filmmakers decades later, or how audiences would respond to different frame rates, or how their work would influence the development of entirely new technologies.
But their decisions created the framework within which generations of artists and storytellers have worked. In a very real sense, every movie you've ever watched, every television show you've ever enjoyed, has been shaped by the technical constraints and possibilities that these early television engineers created.
[Pause]
So the next time you're watching something and you notice that the motion looks a little different, or the colors seem slightly off, or the image proportions don't quite match what you expect, you might be experiencing the echoes of decisions made decades ago by people trying to solve the seemingly simple problem of how to transmit moving pictures through the air.
It's a reminder that technology isn't neutral—every technical choice has consequences, and those consequences ripple outward in ways that are often impossible to predict. The engineers who developed NTSC in the 1940s had no idea that their decisions about frame rates would still be affecting how movies look on Netflix in 2025.
But they are. And probably will be for decades to come.
Thank you for listening to Dormant Knowledge. If you're still awake and hearing my voice, I appreciate your attention. But if you've drifted off to sleep somewhere along the way—which was partly the goal—then you won't hear me say this anyway. Either way, I hope some knowledge about television broadcast standards has made its way into your consciousness or perhaps your dreams.
Until next time, this is Deb wishing you restful nights and curious days.
[Music fades out]
END OF EPISODE

Show Notes & Resources

Key Historical Figures Mentioned

John Logie Baird (1888-1946) Scottish inventor who created the first working television system using mechanical scanning. His system used Nipkow disks—spinning disks with spiral-arranged holes—to create images with just 30 lines of resolution. While innovative for its time, mechanical television proved completely impractical for commercial use, requiring viewers to watch in complete darkness to see incredibly dim, postcard-sized images.

Paul Nipkow (1860-1940) German inventor who created the Nipkow disk in 1884, decades before television became practical. His spinning disk with strategically placed holes became the foundation for early mechanical television systems, though Nipkow himself never successfully demonstrated a complete television system.

Important Technical Concepts

NTSC (National Television System Committee) The American television standard developed in the early 1940s for black-and-white TV, then modified in the 1950s for color. Uses 525 lines of resolution and 29.97 frames per second. Known for color instability issues that led to the industry joke "Never Twice the Same Color." Still influences digital video standards today.

PAL (Phase Alternating Line) European television standard developed in the early 1960s in Germany. Uses 625 lines of resolution and 25 frames per second. Features improved color stability through phase alternation on every line, making it much more resistant to color distortion than NTSC.

SECAM (Séquentiel Couleur À Mémoire) French television standard that transmits color information sequentially rather than simultaneously. While robust against signal distortion, it produced the worst color quality of the three major standards. Adopted by France, the Soviet Union, and their respective spheres of influence for political rather than technical reasons.

3:2 Pulldown (Telecine) The complex process used to convert 24 fps film to 29.97 fps NTSC television. Distributes film frames unevenly across television fields in a repeating 3:2:3:2 pattern, creating subtle motion artifacts that became associated with the "television look" for decades.

Interlaced vs. Progressive Scanning Interlaced scanning (used by analog TV) displays each frame as two separate fields—one with odd-numbered lines, one with even-numbered lines. Progressive scanning (used by modern digital formats) displays all lines of each frame simultaneously, producing smoother motion.

Modern Applications and Connections

Streaming Service Compatibility Modern streaming platforms like Netflix still deal with frame rate conversion issues when distributing content globally. A British series produced at 25 fps may need conversion to 29.97 fps for American viewers, potentially introducing quality issues that trace back to decisions made decades ago.

Regional Content Differences The different catalogs available on streaming services in different countries reflect both licensing restrictions and technical legacy issues from the broadcast standard era. Content originally produced for different standards may require conversion or may be distributed in different versions.

High Dynamic Range (HDR) Standards New display technologies are creating fresh opportunities for regional variation, with different approaches to HDR video encoding emerging in different markets—showing that the tendency toward regional technical standards persists even in the digital age.

Virtual Reality Frame Rate Requirements VR and AR applications often require 90-120 fps to prevent motion sickness, representing a dramatic departure from traditional broadcast frame rates and potentially creating new technical divisions in content production.

Further Learning

Books:

  • "Television: Technology and Cultural Form" by Raymond Williams - Classic analysis of how television technology shaped social and cultural patterns
    https://amzn.to/3JxvAVt (paid link)
  • "The Television Will Be Revolutionized" by Amanda Lotz - Comprehensive look at how digital technology transformed television from broadcast to streaming
    https://amzn.to/3JFp5zR (paid link)
  • "Tube of Plenty" by Erik Barnouw - Definitive history of American television broadcasting and its technical development
    https://amzn.to/47YOePU (paid link)

Documentaries:

Online Resources:

  • Museum of Broadcast Communications (museum.tv) - Extensive archives on television history and technology
  • IEEE History Center - Technical details on television standards development and the engineers who created them (https://history.ieee.org/)

Academic Sources:

Episode Tags

#TelevisionHistory #BroadcastStandards #NTSC #PAL #SECAM #TechnologyHistory #ColdWarTechnology #DigitalTelevision #VideoEngineering #MediaHistory #TechnicalStandards #ColorTelevision #FrameRates #SleepPodcast #EducationalContent #TechExplained #EngineeringHistory #GlobalStandards #AnalogToDigital

Read more