i have a sony wega tv with component video in, and my dvd player has the component video out... is the picture that much different than regular RCA video in?

 

I'd like to know this as well. h:

 

Ooooooh yeah, I use it whenever I can. PS2 looks much cleaner with it.

 

Yes. I heart component video on my parents' Grand Wega.

 

i think if you have a high quality tv (at least a flat tube) it would make a noticeable difference. but on an older standard tube tv probably not so much.

 

it makes a difference with my 61" Projection

 

Since you are going from RCA to component, then yes, there will be a big difference. Going from s-video to component is not as big of a jump.

 

which one exactly is component if someone will show me/explain to me

 

On regular TV's, the luminance channel (brightness basically... if you were to plug just a certain one of the component inputs in, you would get just a B&W picture) is sent separately from two different color difference channels. Thus, compared to a normal composite (where all 3 channels are mixed and compressed, leaving the TV to decode this) and S-video (where just the luminance is separate from one mixed color channel, basically better than composite), the composite allows for higher picture fidelity because it can offer 3 times the bandwith of composite, and without channel cross-interference... thus, superior picture.

You can get even higher picture quality (in terms of picture resolution) over component if your display systems support it. For example, the only way to display EDTV (480p) and HDTV (720p and 1080i) is over these cables. But that's another discussion altogether

 

I've tried it both ways. Component video (three video paths) definitely looks better than composite (one video path).