Talk:Component video

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Media  
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


Why was 1080p removed from compatible video resolutions? Component cables support 1080p, some HDTVs allow 1080p over component, but some do not. ~Michael

Are you sure? The only thing you can get true (native) 1080p output from is Blueray and HDDVD and both of those players require HDMI cables to take advantage of the 1080p resolution. Perhaps there are some dated DVD players that upscale and output in 1080p over composite, but I wouldn't believe that until I see it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).
XBox 360 can do 1080p over component —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Popcorn Hour and clones also support 1080p over component (not composite!). From what I've read the reason blu-ray players do not support 1080p over component is that the blu-ray standard prohibits that (most likely due to lack of content protection). Linky: —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I have re-removed 1080p from the component list. The official specification does not offer 1080p over component. Some devices may be able to do this, but this article is causing confusion as people are reading it and assuming that most component devices support 1080p - if they strictly adhere to the component specification (which most devices do) they do not. (talk) 15:31, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

quick question[edit]

Can one use regular composite audio/video RCA cables (yellow/red/white) to carry the RGB component video stream, or are the special RGB RCA cables required? Emfraser 17:20, 6 September 2005 (UTC)Stuff

I think this question should be answered in the article. It would be useful to compare the resistance and other properties in the cables with S-video, etc. Wnissen 14:04, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Yes, you can.
Though strictly true, the signas will in fact 'drag' in the cables due to the high shunt capacitance and (to a lesser extent) higher series inductance. For the best video quality, you should use only high quality cables with a decent cross sectional area.
I just did and then after the fact went searching and arrived at this page. Hackwrench 06:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Would this "drag" and "inductance" result in the generation of heat inside the cables? SharkD  Talk  02:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
No. Inductance generates no heat. (talk) 18:06, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


This page states that SCART uses RGB component signal, while the SCART page says that component is not supported. What's correct? Mcpusc 09:31, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The SCART page uses the term "component video" in the sense of the third paragraph in this article.
Very cheap SCART leads usually don't support component RGB, the same with cheap devices, but it does support it. I'm watching component RGB off an extremely cheap Comag satellite box with a good SCART lead. --Kiand 18:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

RGB is in the SCART standard, YPrPb is not, but some devices support the non-standard sending of YPrPb down scart cables. Generally, RGB is called "RGB", and YPrPb is called "component". 17:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

As there are many unanswered questions everywhere in regards to Component to SCART can a pinout of a working version mentioned above please be included.

Also if there is a solution for .. Component OUT ---> SCART IN please include. MrCyberdude (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC).


"it is more usual to embed the sync signal in the green or Y component. The latter is known as sync-on-green."

Dit it mean "the former"? --Hsugawar 16:33, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you for pointing that out. --Heron 19:37, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Most video systems with a Y (luminance) channel, such as YPbPr and S-Video, put their sync signals on this channel. This is very common. Systems which use RGB color channels usually have one (such as in SCART) or two (such as in VGA) channels dedicated to sync alone. Embedding the sync signals in the green channel (Sync-on-Green) is far less common. --AtomicLiberator 18:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

what is HD/CS and VD?[edit]

I'm in the process of wiring a system to convert a video signal from VGA (from a PC) to component using a single VGA-to-component cable (such as this one), and I've found that the process requires five different signals: the normal R, G, and B cables that I've always used when working with component, and also two that are marked "HD/CS" and "VD." Without those cables plugged into the monitor, I lose sync. I assume that they both are carrying two different and necessary components of the sync, but I don't know what exactly they are, or why the sync isn't being transmitted on a single channel. Is anyone familiar with this technology? What do HD/CS and VD do, exactly? I assume the H and V stand for horizontal and vertical (and the D for Delay?), but beyond that I'm unable to figure out what they are.

Progressive output and component video outputs[edit]

"The settings on many DVD players and TVs may require that you designate the type of input/output being used, or the image may not be properly displayed. Progressive output will not be properly displayed through component video outputs."

Why not? Isn´t component video the only "mainstream" way to have Progressive output? JeffersonRyan 06:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

VGA-BNC to Component[edit]

For any consumer video equipment which has VGA out (d-sub 15pin), and with a VGA-BNC cable, can I simply use the RGB from BNC to act as the RGB in component? Of course adaptors are used for BNC plug to RCA plug. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .

Two problems: If you're referring to that flavor of "Component Video" that comes out of, say, a DVD player, then the components aren't Red, Blue, and Green (which are used by the VGA signals). Instead, two are "difference" signals (see YPbPr). Second problem: The VGA video may not include the sync (synchronization) signals in the video because VGA has completely separate wires for horizontal sync and vertical sync.
Atlant 12:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Most European DVD video players output RGB component video (from the SCART connector) as well as YPrPb component from the RCA connectors. Contrary to poular belief, for practical purposes neither has any advantage over the other. YPrPb is what comes off the disk, but the display device requires RGB. The former has to be converted to the latter somewhere, and it doesn't really matter where. To be strictly accurate, if the signal has to be transmitted over very long distances, then YPrPb will suffer propagation problems because the Y component has a higher bandwidth and will therefore propagate more slowly. 10:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Cable confusion[edit]

Can somebody please offer me some advice regarding the best cable-type use? I have a projector (Toshiba tlp-s70) which is now a couple of years old. It has available inputs of monitor - computer(y/pB/pR) - video and S-video - control. Im just about to buy a new DVD player to use with the projector but Im confused which is the best type of video input to use. It would be great to know before I spend out on new cables.

YPrPb offers a far greater bandwidth (and hence resolution) than either video (CVBS) or S-video. 10:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Dave.

RGB to the VGA/computer input would be the absolute best, but no standalone DVD player I know of outputs RGB. Where people confuse Component with RGB is because of electronics companies using red, green and blue RCA jacks for component video.
DVD players and many other devices output RGB over SCART cables, at least in Europe. 17:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there a 'standard' color scheme for component video connections? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).

EIA/TIA-343 vs. SMPTE-170M[edit]

I cannot find anything on EIA-TIA-343. I have SMPTE-170M however. Is there really an EIA/TIA-343?



B-Y R-Y Y[edit]

That's the markings on the component in/out BNC plugs on the breakout box for a Media 100 Macintosh video editing system I have. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 07:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

British or American English?[edit]

This article uses both British and American English spellings, it should only use one method of spelling based on the background of the article in question. Which spelling method is to be used? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Damuna (talkcontribs) 19:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC).


Shouldn't the article say something about the audio cables used with component cables? -IG-64 08:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


This section seems suspect:

RGB has been largely ignored, despite its quality and suitability, as it cannot easily be burdened with Digital Rights Management. RGB was never popular in North America for consumer electronics, as S-video was considered 'good enough'.

Lack of references aside, the language seems slanted with words like "burdened", "ignored", and "good enough". Factually, I believe RGB is falling out of favor because chroma+luma systems deliver the same information with less bandwidth and less formats store RGB natively (because of the "compression" factor), requiring an inefficient format conversion upon display. I don't think DRM has anything to do with RGB's decreased use; RGB appears to be an obsolete encoding. Finally, while the article expresses disdain toward S-Video's comparative adoption, S-Video was never accepted by more than a fringe in the general consumer market. Most jumped from composite to component or HDMI.

Whelkman 16:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Chroma + luma systems do not "deliver the same information with less bandwidth" compared to RGB. Any bandwidth savings are the result of using less chroma resolution than luma resolution, which means that some chroma information is lost. The eye may not be able to see any difference at the recommended viewing distance, but it is there and can be seen up close. (talk) 16:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe what he is trying to say is that DMI can not be suffeciently enforced on RGB. Also, I think S-video was popular in Canada, ATI favored it and it was kind of a cheap selling point for consumer electronics, but was not very popular in the U.S. or, to my Knowledge Mexico, probably due to increase in the cost to manifacture, consumers to convert, and margianal increases in quality over the video, audio L and R already established in these regions.

Insulus 19:31,7 January 2008

Better clarity with DVI?[edit]

Why is this true:

"Analog RGB is slowly falling out of favour as computers obtain better clarity using Digital (DVI) video"

It previously said that component (vga?) had no compression. Doesn't this mean the image is perfect? How can you have better clarity than a perfect image?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding.

Thanks. 21:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Jonathan

Even if it's not compressed, analog video can still suffer degradation. For example, analog video tends to lose high frequencies as it is transmitted over the coaxial cables. Electronic noise can be induced. Any impedance mismatch causes reflections which show up as ghosts on the images. Digital doesn't suffer from any of these defects.
Atlant 00:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


One confusion I've had when setting up for HD has been that the capacity of an interface is not necessarily what that interface provides. HDCP doesn't "like" Component Video, but that HDCP-enabled devices will still output to them, albeit at a lower resolution. I'm not sure how this would fit into an article on Component Video, but it does affect the interface's capabilities, in practice. Stevarooni 15:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Component video *cables* and what they do[edit]

"Component video cables do not carry audio."

Isn't it more accurate to say that a component video signal does not carry audio? Component video cables are just RCA connected-cables, aren't they? Mike (talk) 19:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Digital component viedeo[edit]

There really should be a page for Digital component video. There is a notice at the top of the page that references digital video, Chroma subsampling and YCbCr, but these are colorspace encoding schemes or other things tangentially related to digital component video.

--Tmetro (talk) 01:46, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Component cable inputs on SDTVs.[edit]

Why do some SDTVs feature Component video input if they can only display a maximium screen resolution over 480i which can already be acheived by standard Composite cables? Can SDTVs display 480p? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Composite gives lower quality than component or RGB even at SD resoloutions for a number of reasons. As for whether the TV can do 480p i'd imagine that varies between individual TVs, best to either read the manual or try it (note i'm in europe where we used RGB scart rather than component for high quality SD so i've only personally seen component on HDTVs). Plugwash (talk) 00:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge to YPbPr?[edit]

In December, someone suggested that this article be merged with YPbPr. This topic recieved no discussion, and seems like it would do nothing more than provide confusion. Unless anyone would still propose merging these two articles, I will remove the merger tag within the next couple months. --Zach425 talk/contribs 20:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I notice it's gone now, but it was a stupid idea anyway. What about RGB component video which is fairly common via SCART in Europe? (talk) 23:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

YPbPr vs. RGB[edit]

One thing confuses me that the article doesn't really explain. What is the point of YPbPr (rather than "pure" RGB) in component video? I can understand its use in composite and multiplexed signals where it makes sense to compress the two colour signals more than luma. However, surely in component form all three are allocated the same bandwidth- which I assume is the same bandwidth as R, G and B signals.

So why bother using component YPbPr over RGB at all- let alone the fact that it's apparently more popular? (talk) 23:48, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

One advantage is maybe that you could feasibly produce an image on a black-and-white monitor using the luma channel alone. A second maybe is that post-processing (i.e. adjusting lightness/contrast/saturation) is easier when the luma, chroma, etc. channels are already split ahead of time, as opposed to having to isolate (or convert to) these components after the fact (and most likely lossily) from the RGB signal. I'm just guessing though. SharkD  Talk  01:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
As far as connecting a DVD video player to a TV is concerned, one offers no advantage over the other. YPbPr seems to have been adopted as the de facto standard in the United States (they could have easily adopted RGB instead). Thus YPbPr is present on almost all consumer equipment. European equipment also features an RGB connection (by virtue of the presence of SCART connectors). SCART doesn't have to carry RGB, but most DVD players are capable of outputting it, and European TVs will generally accept it (automagically recognising it). (talk) 17:18, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Enormous Confusion over Component Video[edit]

There is enormous confusion on this article about component video. People are commenting on this page who are mixing up the ideas of colour space and signal separation. If we accept the idea that colour space makes component video, well that makes all colour video signals component (even the ones which are also composite) as all colour video signals require colour space in some fashion or another. Nowhere is this confusion best illustrated than in the idea of digital component video. MatthewFP (talk) 01:18, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Component (Red, Green, Blue) cable used for a composite video connection[edit]

Can any of the three colored connections (either the red, green, or blue cable) be used in place of a single "composite" (yellow video) cable? I realize that Audio will still need to be connected and that the user should just use a composite single strand(yellow cable) instead of using a 3 strand component (red, green, blue) cable and only using one of these colors but I'm curious if this will work and if it matters which colored cable of the component cable I used for this connection.

This is not a forum where you can ask technical questions or get tech support, it is a page for discussing discrepancies or (potential) changes to the article (see WP:NOTAFORUM). In future please refrain from asking such questions on talk pages.
That said, the question is fairly trivial, so here goes. The colour is irrelevant - any RCA-to-RCA connector will work when connecting any RCA-type output/input, be it composite video, analogue audio, component video, digital coax audio or any other connection that uses RCAs. All an RCA cable is is a coaxial cable with an RCA connector on either end. The colour-coding is only there so that it's more obvious to the user which cable connects to which port (if you connect an RCA into a composite connector but also have several other RCA cables connected to other ports (say audio and component), it's very easy to muddle them up and not know which was connected to composite without colour-coding).
Alphathon /'æɫfə.θɒn/ (talk) 03:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

RCA and Component[edit]

Could somebody clarify whether or not the RCA cables can be used inter-changeably between composite and component?

It would be nice to specifically mention that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:24, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

RGBHV coloring[edit]

I have Yellow for VSYNC and black for HSYNC on my current RGBHV BNC cable. According to the article, it should be the other way around. --MrBurns (talk) 22:04, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Types of sync[edit]

The section about sync signals says the following (in other words):

  • "Sync on composite" should not be confused with "composite sync."
  • "Sync on luma" is pure sync signals transmitted over a wire otherwise used for luminance signals.

As far as I know, "sync on composite" and "composite sync" are not mutually exclusive - for instance, a SCART device switched to RGB usage will take the necessary sync from a pin otherwise used for composite video in. I am unsure whether it separates the sync from composite video transmitted alongside RGB or uses pure composite sync. The point is, especially if the latter is true, that there is "composite sync on composite" - it is composite sync and it is transmitted over a wire also used for full composite video.

Similarly: "Sync on luma" can refer to two ways of sending sync, in both cases it is composite sync. The first - a wire marked "luma" is used for transmitting composite sync to complement RGB. That makes no sense at all. And the second - S-Video or YPbPr use composite synchronisation combined with the luminance signal, and that is always true.

To prevent confusion, the information in the section - and also some "Composite sync" article I found lying around - should be clarified. Yet in what way, I am unsure.

If I am mistaken in my knowledge and opinions, feel free to correct me. Skloo (talk) 15:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Having read the article more carefully, I found out that "sync on composite" actually means sync extracted from full composite video that is transmitted alongside RGB, and "composite sync" is the pure sync signal with nothing else.
  • I don't know if I should change the section when the information actually is correct. It is still said in a confusing way. I'll try to think of something, unless anyone disagrees. Skloo (talk) 18:19, 4 November 2018 (UTC)