Not seeing much difference between DVD and blu-ray

[Spicedaddy]

10ft viewing distance, you should've gotten a 50" 720p plasma. And Vizio isn't known for having the best colors/contrast...

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Spicedaddy
10ft viewing distance, you should've gotten a 50" 720p plasma. And Vizio isn't known for having the best colors/contrast...

i'm sorry i don't have 1000s of dollars to spend on a top of the line tv...

 

[pontifex]

and when i sit the specified 6 feet away and still don't notice a difference, then what?

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: YOyoYOhowsDAjello

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: YOyoYOhowsDAjello
The only hoop you have to jump through is sit close enough for your given screen size and resolution.

The point of the distance comment on the PC games is that setting graphics options to high only makes it look better if you're close up. (Options meaning resolution and possibly Anti-aliasing relating directly to the blu-ray issue you're talking about).

The same issues come into play here that you don't seem to be buying into.

I don't know what kind of monitor you have, but say for example it's 1280x1024.

If you set the resolution to 1280x1024 and 8xAA, it will look great when you're 1-2 feet from the monitor. 800x600 and 0xAA would look really bad.

If you stand at a greater distance away from the monitor (like the 10 feet suggested), you will notice much less of a difference between the 1280x1024 8xAA screen compared to the 800x600 screen since everything is going to look rather blurry from either monitor. You won't be able to see all the details that the 1280x1024 resolution made sharper because you just can't see things that small from farther away.

Did you try the two pictures I hosted for you to try out? I can't tell if you're honestly still confused by this or not.

yes, i looked at the pics. isn't the closer i am to the display, the worse it will be because i'll see the pixels?? i wouldn't see the pixels further away?

if i watch a tv show in ym monitor and sit up close, its not very clear. if i step back it looks clearer.

There's a balance between sitting close enough to see all the detail vs. sitting so close that artifacts and pixel structure become distractions.

With HD, the main appeal is that you're essentially getting 1920x1080 images to display and play back at native resolution. With an upconverted DVD, you basically get a 720x480 source that you then convert to 1920x1080 either by the player or by the TV.

Going back to my island view example that doesn't seem to be helping, I've zoomed in a little to make detail more specific.

Looking at the house in the middle...
1600x1200 image (zoomed in and resized to show detail)
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/spmclaughlin/web/Random/House1600.jpg">https://mywebspace.wisc.edu......ndom/House1600.jpg</a>

The 640x480 image (same process used as above)
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/spmclaughlin/web/Random/House640.jpg">https://mywebspace.wisc.edu......andom/House640.jpg</a>

With the higher resolution image, you get to see that the house has siding on it, that the bush in front has individual leaves, that the house roof is made up of several panels, etc.

These kind of details are what you're paying for by getting a 1080p TV and a 1080p source.

You have to sit close enough to the TV so that you can see these details.

You're right that you can't sit too close though since everything just looks like a pixelated jumple if you get too close, regardless of the starting resolution

1600x1200 too close
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/spmclaughlin/web/Random/Junk1600.jpg">https://mywebspace.wisc.edu......andom/Junk1600.jpg</a>

640x480 too close
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/spmclaughlin/web/Random/Junk640.jpg">https://mywebspace.wisc.edu......Random/Junk640.jpg</a>

Detail is made up of pixels... so you have to sit close enough so you can see changes between the pixels, but not too close so that the structure of individual pixels becomes obvious or distracting.

Nobody is suggesting that you sit 3 feet away from a 42" TV. You'll be be distracted by the pixels and you'll probably end up straining your eyes / neck from the "first row in the movie theater" effect.

Having more pixels in your HDTV allows you to sit closer without seeing pixel structure and there's more detail there since there are more pixels to work with. Right now, you're too far away to see the details that higher resolution is able to display.

those are huge differences in picture quality though. as i said, i'm not see any difference. if the difference was that pronounced, shouldn't i still see it no matter the difference?

 

[nakedfrog]

I guess then the suggestion would be to try a calibration DVD to tune your set, or pay a pro.

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

Originally posted by: pontifex

those are huge differences in picture quality though. as i said, i'm not see any difference. if the difference was that pronounced, shouldn't i still see it no matter the difference?

Go find some comparison pictures of Blu-ray (or HD-DVD) vs. SD-DVD.

Here's some random thread that came up in a google search
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=617171

In all the cases of these screen shot comparisons, make sure you're viewing the images full size and not shrunk down since you miss the whole point if they're not full size.
(As in make sure you hit zoom in the links that "Silver Spork" posted in that thread)

If you view those correctly, it should be obvious that DVD looks like a blurry mess compared to Blu-ray or HD-DVD.

If you can see the difference in those screenshots using your computer monitor and not with your new TV, then you at least have to sit closer and possibly even more in terms of tweaking / calibrating the set.

If you can't see the difference in those screenshots, then you're either not viewing them correctly or for some reason, the difference just isn't apparent for you. If the difference doesn't seem significant to you, then I guess HD is wasted on you.

 

[Spicedaddy]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Spicedaddy
10ft viewing distance, you should've gotten a 50" 720p plasma. And Vizio isn't known for having the best colors/contrast...

i'm sorry i don't have 1000s of dollars to spend on a top of the line tv...

50" 720p Plasma = under 1000$



You know what else costs the same, a 720p projector and a pair of binoculars.

 

[bigdog1218]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Spicedaddy
10ft viewing distance, you should've gotten a 50" 720p plasma. And Vizio isn't known for having the best colors/contrast...

i'm sorry i don't have 1000s of dollars to spend on a top of the line tv...

You can get one of the new 50" 720p pannys for ~750 if you shop around. I don't know where you live but PC Richards in NY has them for that price. Great TV's.

 

[sdifox]

Pontifex, it is all about viewing distance/screen size. I am about 10' away from my screen and my screen is 8' diagonal.


See if you can find one of the Sony SXRD RPTVs off some shop that sell discontinued items. That is a great RPTV based on LCos and should be really cheap now. Hell, my sister in law got a 50" for under C$1000 1.x years ago.

 

[pontifex]

i started watching black hawk down today (BD). the picture seems better in this movie at 10' than transformers did. i moved to 6 feet andit looks grainier than at 10'. i don't have a dvd of this so i can't compare dvd vs. bd

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: pontifex
i started watching black hawk down today (BD). the picture seems better in this movie at 10' than transformers did. i moved to 6 feet andit looks grainier than at 10'. i don't have a dvd of this so i can't compare dvd vs. bd

That's good. You're starting to see the detail if it looks grainy. That movie is purposefully grainy.

 

[Chapbass]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: pontifex
i started watching black hawk down today (BD). the picture seems better in this movie at 10' than transformers did. i moved to 6 feet andit looks grainier than at 10'. i don't have a dvd of this so i can't compare dvd vs. bd

That's good. You're starting to see the detail if it looks grainy. That movie is purposefully grainy.

Yep, pont I bet if you were to pop in 300 youd say it looks grainy too (how the director wanted it).


As far as you saying you just want it "to look good". Remember, it DOES look good, and the extra pixels ARE there, but your (and by your I mean humans, not you specifically) eyes aren't good enough to see the extra detail.

By making the screen size bigger (or by sitting closer up), your eyes start to see the imperfections that DVDs have because the same amount of pixels are stretched over a larger area. This is when having BluRay really shows, because those imperfections wont be there.


For example, my projector has around a 113" screen size. I sit about the same distance as you, 10-10.5 feet. I can DEFINITELY tell between dvds and bd, quite easily. This is because those same 720x480 pixels (on a dvd) are stretched over a larger area. BD can make up for that in spades.


Thats not even taking into account the better sound and colors that bd has.

 

[s44]

Originally posted by: YOyoYOhowsDAjello

Go find some comparison pictures of Blu-ray (or HD-DVD) vs. SD-DVD.

Another random example (with side-by-side pix): Enchanted

Of course, the *real* "if you can't see it there's something wrong with you" test material is any Pixar movie. Ratatouille on Blu = insane

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: s44
Those of us who have adjusted to sitting at HD-quality distances laugh at the "DVD looks just as good" argument. It's nonsense.

No, it's "DVD is good enough." I know there's a difference. HD looks awesome too me, even the compressed crap. I just refuse to pay for it right now =)

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: pontifex

sorry, but i don't see how sitting X feet from the TV, when it is X size, while standing on your head, reciting the Koran backwards, and farting amazing grace at the same time to get a good picture quality is research. it's a fucking tv and video player, not rocket science. it should look good at any distance.

i did enough research on actually choosing a tv that fit my budget and had the features i wanted. i shouldn't have to worry about distance and picture quality. its just retarded that it doesn't work at normal viewing distances.

they tout hdtv and blu-ray as so great, but no one tells you anything else. you shouldn't have to go to forums and learn formulas just to watch fucking tv.

[/]facepalm[/f]

This should really be common sense. Or are you telling me that not once in your life noticed that standard def looks horrible if you're a couple feet from the tv but looks fine at normal viewing distances? Use your head man.

And if you can't see a difference you're really just not paying attention. The difference in color alone between Blu-Ray and DVD is enormous if nothing else.

 

[Tiamat]

You dont have to follow some stupid chart to get good picture quality. You just have to have better than 20:20 eyesight. The idea is that the average 20:20 eyesight can resolve the individual pixels on a screen of a certain size at a certain resolution. Just like being able to read the small letters off of your doctor's eye-sight reading chart.

The inverse is like how you can get screendoor effect when sitting too close to a screen that is too large for the resolution.

For 10', 50" TV @ 1080P barely resolves for a person with 20:20 vision.

If you can read only line 3 of your doctor's eye-sight chart, what difference does it make that there are 3 lines below that? You cannot resolve them unless you are closer. Same concept.

If your vision is 20:40, that chart might not even apply. If your vision is 20:10, that chart might not even apply. At the very least, the lines would be shifted.

One test that I have done to make my own "chart" is to place a background with a solid color on the screen where there is 1 pixel of a different color to simulate a stuck subpixel. I start at 3' away from the screen and I can easily see the dot. As I move back beyond 8' the dot becomes harder to see. Beyond 12' the dot is not visible.

You can do this on any size screen with any resolution and extrapolate to larger screens just to understand the effect of a future TV purchase and how large of the TV you need for your viewing distance. Thereby bypassing the chart as cited by Yoyo and tuning your decision based on your needs if your vision is not 20:20.

As an example, I had a 37" 1080P Westinghouse LCD that had a dead green subpixel. On putting on a green background, I could see the black dot up to 8' away, beyond which I could not resolve that dead subpixel. I found that as long as I am within the upper boundary of the chart that Yoyo linked to, it applies to me. The lower boundary of the chart for the respective resolution does not apply to me as I see Screendoor effect.

 

[aphex]

On a side note, anyone care to teach me how to fart amazing grace?

 

[hans030390]

I think some of this distance/screen size stuff is BS. Yeah, it's true that you can be too far and too close, but I think specific distances for specific screen sizes at specific resolutions is just...BS, like I said. What about eyesight? How good the TV is? Source material?

Personally, I can be quite a bit aways from a TV set to notice a difference between DVD and Blu-Ray. By quite a bit, I mean > than what the chart says.

Also, some DVD players are just very, very good at upscaling DVDs. Generally, though, you should be able to notice the difference. And, no offense to the OP, but it might be an issue with eyesight or the television itself.

I'd recommend calibrating your TV. This can range from costing less than $10 to...a lot (professionally done). Now, if you're lucky, you may be able to find some good settings online somewhere (AVS forums, maybe?) where people have gone really in-depth with it. Generally, though, this isn't the case. For the average user, I'd recommend the THX optimizer (found on a lot of Pixar movies, and can be downloaded from torrent websites). You will need a pair of the optimizing/filter glasses...but those can be bought from THX for a few dollars.

Even without the glasses, you can still set up your contrast, brightness, and sharpness (you only need it up high enough to see these black lines on a specific chart they give. Once you start getting a "halo" or "ghost" around the lines, or see other weird things, such as them bending towards each other or flickering in between each other, you know you've gone too far. Once they look fuzzy on the edges, you don't have enough. Most TVs overdo their sharpness settings). With the glasses, you can adjust your color and tint.

Also, when calibrating, it is generally best to leave any "special" video options off (black enhancement, noise reducer [which can really soften images too much], etc.), as they make the image appear as it's not truly intended to. Keep those options off, too, unless you research and find that they actually help reach better video quality (for example, my Hitachi LCD projection TV benefits from a special high-contrast mode...I also have the sharpness at 0, as otherwise it introduces sharpening artifacts).

Sometimes you can also pick the color temperature (cool, warm, etc). Generally, I pick "cool", as it makes the whites look white. "Warm" makes them too red, for my TV. Some TVs are the opposite (cool makes them too blue). That will be up to you to pick, if you can so change that setting.

So, give the THX optimizer/calibration a try. Calibration, and many video settings (especially the "special" ones) can really make a difference in the video quality. Once you've researched up on calibration and do that, you MAY notice the difference. If not...well, see if sitting close DOES help...and if not that, either get your eyes checked...or make sure the PS3 is outputting in 1080p (silly as that sounds, check the TV for that, too). If all else fails, then don't waste money on something you can't see the difference in. Simple as that.

Speaking of the PS3, it does have A/V settings (such as noise reduction) for at LEAST DVDs (maybe even Blu-Ray...I don't know). I'd turn all that off, too. It only make things worse, IMO.

 

[pontifex]

compared shoot em up DVD. vs BD and i do see some difference, sharper image (less jaggies), but i was expecting a night and day difference between BD and DVD but it's only a slight difference.

 

[SithSolo1]

Some people just can't tell the difference.

Take my father for example. I've got a 58" tv and every sitting potion in the room is between 7 and 9'. If I were to show him a scene from Transfomers on DVD and then immediately one from Blu-Ray, he'd say they were the same.

I on the other hand can spot a "night and day difference" as you put it. The colors pop and the image is much more crisp.

 

[biggestmuff]

Originally posted by: pontifex
compared shoot em up DVD. vs BD and i do see some difference, sharper image (less jaggies), but i was expecting a night and day difference between BD and DVD but it's only a slight difference.

And once again...you're sitting too far away from a 42" average/below-average tv to see much difference.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: biggestmuff

Originally posted by: pontifex
compared shoot em up DVD. vs BD and i do see some difference, sharper image (less jaggies), but i was expecting a night and day difference between BD and DVD but it's only a slight difference.

And once again...you're sitting too far away from a 42" average/below-average tv to see much difference.

this was at the 6' that is "required". so don't give me that bs again.

 

[buck]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: biggestmuff

Originally posted by: pontifex
compared shoot em up DVD. vs BD and i do see some difference, sharper image (less jaggies), but i was expecting a night and day difference between BD and DVD but it's only a slight difference.

And once again...you're sitting too far away from a 42" average/below-average tv to see much difference.

this was at the 6' that is "required". so don't give me that bs again.

If you cant tell the difference 6' away, either your eyes are bad or you did not set everything up correctly. End of story.

 

[pontifex]

Just watched Role Models one BD and that definitely looked better than DVD quality. It was really sharp and clear. I guess it depends on the movies too.

 

[buck]

Originally posted by: pontifex
Just watched Role Models one BD and that definitely looked better than DVD quality. It was really sharp and clear. I guess it depends on the movies too.

So you see a big difference in role models but not transformers?