ViviTheMage
Lifer
same thing happened when I went from 480i TV to 1080p......wow, HD is oh so much better looking...
Originally posted by: Regs
Originally posted by: zinfamous
because no one believes this anyway. you're making up a baseless accusation to support a worthless argument.
The real quality in HD media, your HD TV really isn't the resolution, but the color depth and contrast. Resolution is ~4th on the scale of what determines PQ.
If you're going to go after something, learn what the real argument is. Frankly, I'm not sure what you're attempting to prove here, though.
honestly, all you have to do is compare the DVD of Ratatoullie with the BD. If you don't see the real difference in PQ, then you must have 1" cataracts on your eyes.
also, grain exists in film, that's a natural quality of the medium. Grain adds detail; that is completely lost in digital processing, which you see more often in overwrought, poorly-transferred DVDs. there are some BDs of course, that are also guilty of this travesty: Patton is probably the biggest example.
The best possible transfers, representing the highest PQ, preserve the natural grain of film.
I think he's expressing your idea but in different wording. Like me, I see a huge difference between Pirates of the Car. or Black Hawk down, compared to any new Batman movie which I think were disappointing transfers.
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: Duddy
CRT and... Blu-Ray?
...
CRT?
No thanks, happy with my overpriced 52" 1080p Bravia.
Yes, CRT.
While they don't make CRT's as big as your 52" LCD TV, the picture quality on the XBR CRT is probably better.
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: Regs
Originally posted by: zinfamous
because no one believes this anyway. you're making up a baseless accusation to support a worthless argument.
The real quality in HD media, your HD TV really isn't the resolution, but the color depth and contrast. Resolution is ~4th on the scale of what determines PQ.
If you're going to go after something, learn what the real argument is. Frankly, I'm not sure what you're attempting to prove here, though.
honestly, all you have to do is compare the DVD of Ratatoullie with the BD. If you don't see the real difference in PQ, then you must have 1" cataracts on your eyes.
also, grain exists in film, that's a natural quality of the medium. Grain adds detail; that is completely lost in digital processing, which you see more often in overwrought, poorly-transferred DVDs. there are some BDs of course, that are also guilty of this travesty: Patton is probably the biggest example.
The best possible transfers, representing the highest PQ, preserve the natural grain of film.
I think he's expressing your idea but in different wording. Like me, I see a huge difference between Pirates of the Car. or Black Hawk down, compared to any new Batman movie which I think were disappointing transfers.
but the Batman BD are still superior to the DVD, despite how disappointing they may be. It's not some ridiculous conspiracy, either--TDK print is flawed due to the scaling used to compensate for the switch from 35mm to 70mm and back, so there's no getting around it.
He argued that grain = bad, which is far from the truth, and the exact opposite of my point....
he also seems to claim that DVDs released years before BD hit the market were deliberately borked to make the BD look better....WTF? that doesn't happen in current releases either. some DVDs have always been terrible, some are actually incredibly good.
Originally posted by: SlitheryDee
I'm sure it is. Still, I'm in no hurry to get it. Movies watch pretty good in SD.
Originally posted by: shortylickens
I got it last week for 85 bucks.
Am totally unimpressed. But I knew I would be. Already saw it in Best Buy and some other places. I knew it would only make a difference if they deliberately put extra effort into the Blu-Ray version and gimped the DVD version.
They did exactly that with King Kong, so they could use it as a demo to push blu-ray.
I've already made this rant before and it pisses off the fanboys, so I'll keep it simple:
Resolution is NOT the same thing as image quality, and most people dont know the difference. When they see a movie specially designed for blu-ray they think its the higher resolution that makes it look better. They dont know that the image quality of the DVD version was deliberately lowered just to make the blu-ray seem better.
Blu-ray only guarantees higher resolution, NOT image quality. Image quality is pretty much hit or miss with most movies. They want you to assume you will get both and thats why you should buy all Blu-ray stuff.
I bought Princess Bride and Resovior Dogs (both the super-duper special Blu-ray editions) from walmart for dirt cheap. They are not superior quality and the higher resolution is pretty much wasted. Also, you can see an aweful lot of grain & speckles that dont exist on DVD movies. I was able to compare both to the DVD versions at the exact same time and its really nothing special, even with HDMI.
For reference, my DVD is connected by component, running at 480p.
/rant
Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
Originally posted by: AndroidVageta
Just got me a LG BD-ROM/HD-DVD drive for my PC today...and my breathe is being taken away.
Just got done watching Jet-Li's FEARLESS...and it almost made me piss my pants. I know a lot here probably own Blu-ray and have gotten over the "wow" factor...but I had no idea it was THIS good.
Watching these movies on my Sony 34XBR960 (flagship CRT...best in the business) is just jaw dropping.
For those who care I got some pretty good movies that are favorites and I think are good choices for Blu-ray experience:
FEARLESS
300
The Matrix
The Chronicles of Riddick
Serenity
Anyone have any other good Blu-ray movie recommendations?
You're blown away by some movies that are a Tier 1/2. Get some top tier ones:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=858316
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
While they don't make CRT's as big as your 52" LCD TV, the picture quality on the XBR CRT is probably better.
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: shortylickens
I got it last week for 85 bucks.
Am totally unimpressed. But I knew I would be. Already saw it in Best Buy and some other places. I knew it would only make a difference if they deliberately put extra effort into the Blu-Ray version and gimped the DVD version.
They did exactly that with King Kong, so they could use it as a demo to push blu-ray.
I've already made this rant before and it pisses off the fanboys, so I'll keep it simple:
Resolution is NOT the same thing as image quality, and most people dont know the difference. When they see a movie specially designed for blu-ray they think its the higher resolution that makes it look better. They dont know that the image quality of the DVD version was deliberately lowered just to make the blu-ray seem better.
Blu-ray only guarantees higher resolution, NOT image quality. Image quality is pretty much hit or miss with most movies. They want you to assume you will get both and thats why you should buy all Blu-ray stuff.
I bought Princess Bride and Resovior Dogs (both the super-duper special Blu-ray editions) from walmart for dirt cheap. They are not superior quality and the higher resolution is pretty much wasted. Also, you can see an aweful lot of grain & speckles that dont exist on DVD movies. I was able to compare both to the DVD versions at the exact same time and its really nothing special, even with HDMI.
For reference, my DVD is connected by component, running at 480p.
/rant
because no one believes this anyway. you're making up a baseless accusation to support a worthless argument.
The real quality in HD media, your HD TV really isn't the resolution, but the color depth and contrast. Resolution is ~4th on the scale of what determines PQ.
If you're going to go after something, learn what the real argument is. Frankly, I'm not sure what you're attempting to prove here, though.
honestly, all you have to do is compare the DVD of Ratatoullie with the BD. If you don't see the real difference in PQ, then you must have 1" cataracts on your eyes.
also, grain exists in film, that's a natural quality of the medium. Grain adds detail; that is completely lost in digital processing, which you see more often in overwrought, poorly-transferred DVDs. there are some BDs of course, that are also guilty of this travesty: Patton is probably the biggest example.
The best possible transfers, representing the highest PQ, preserve the natural grain of film.
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: Duddy
CRT and... Blu-Ray?
...
CRT?
No thanks, happy with my overpriced 52" 1080p Bravia.
Yes, CRT.
While they don't make CRT's as big as your 52" LCD TV, the picture quality on the XBR CRT is probably better.
Originally posted by: Duddy
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: Duddy
CRT and... Blu-Ray?
...
CRT?
No thanks, happy with my overpriced 52" 1080p Bravia.
Yes, CRT.
While they don't make CRT's as big as your 52" LCD TV, the picture quality on the XBR CRT is probably better.
I have crap eyes. CRT's cause way too much strain on mine and it's probably the reason I'm wearing glasses today.
Got my 1st computer, and a year later I had to get glasses.
Originally posted by: Chris
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
While they don't make CRT's as big as your 52" LCD TV, the picture quality on the XBR CRT is probably better.
The PQ of XBR CRT kills even Pioneer Kuros. If only they didn't weigh 1000lbs and were size limited. :heart: CRT.
Originally posted by: tk149
Some will disagree with me, but there are some scenes in Planet Earth which are just jaw-droppingly amazing.
Curse of the Golden Flower is on AVS's Tier 1.75 - Zhang Yimou (the director) loves using colors, and this flick is no exception.
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: tk149
Some will disagree with me, but there are some scenes in Planet Earth which are just jaw-droppingly amazing.
Curse of the Golden Flower is on AVS's Tier 1.75 - Zhang Yimou (the director) loves using colors, and this flick is no exception.
This is the first BD I saw--picked it up blind with 300 the day I bought my PS3. First impressions are always big, of course, but it's still a good impression. the colors are ridiculous.
Originally posted by: DVad3r
I've been considering getting one for my PC too. I used to be up to date with PC hardware and stuff but now I must admit I'm a bit of a noob, so my question is:
Do I need a monitor that supports BLU-RAY to get the full experience and video card? Right now I've got a 4870 Radeon and a 20 inch Dell widescreen LCD, forget which one it is but it was one of the "bad ass" ones that everyone wanted when it came out.
Originally posted by: Number1
Originally posted by: DVad3r
I've been considering getting one for my PC too. I used to be up to date with PC hardware and stuff but now I must admit I'm a bit of a noob, so my question is:
Do I need a monitor that supports BLU-RAY to get the full experience and video card? Right now I've got a 4870 Radeon and a 20 inch Dell widescreen LCD, forget which one it is but it was one of the "bad ass" ones that everyone wanted when it came out.
Download cyberlink blue ray advisor and it will tell you if your PC/Monitor combination is HD capable. If that fails, buy Any DVD HD from slysoft.
Originally posted by: DVad3r
Originally posted by: Number1
Originally posted by: DVad3r
I've been considering getting one for my PC too. I used to be up to date with PC hardware and stuff but now I must admit I'm a bit of a noob, so my question is:
Do I need a monitor that supports BLU-RAY to get the full experience and video card? Right now I've got a 4870 Radeon and a 20 inch Dell widescreen LCD, forget which one it is but it was one of the "bad ass" ones that everyone wanted when it came out.
Download cyberlink blue ray advisor and it will tell you if your PC/Monitor combination is HD capable. If that fails, buy Any DVD HD from slysoft.
This is what I got, good?
Check Item BD Ready? Info
CPU : AMD Phenom(tm) 8400 Triple-Core Processor Yes
__dwItemID=1001__ : szLibCPUName = AMD Phenom(tm) 8400 Triple-Core Processor
__dwItemID=1002__ : dwLibClockRate = 2109
__dwItemID=1003__ : dwLibFamily = 15, dwLibModel=2, dwLibStepping=2
__dwItemID=1004__ : dwLibNumPhysicalProc = 3, dwLibNumCorePerPackage=1, dwLibNumLogicalPerCore=1
__dwItemID=1005__ : dwLibCorePerPackage = 3, dwLibTotalLogicals=3
__dwItemID=1006__ : szWMIName=AMD Phenom(tm) 8400 Triple-Core Processor
__dwItemID=1007__ : szWMIManufacturer=AuthenticAMD
__dwItemID=1008__ : dwWMIMaxClockSpeed=2109
__dwItemID=1009__ : bBatteryExist=0
__dwItemID=1010__ : szGuess=
CPU (Hardware acceleration) : ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series Yes
System Memory : 3072 MB Yes
Operating System : Windows Vista Service Pack 1 Yes
Graphics Card : ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series Yes
__dwItemID=1301__ : Adapter Compatibility: ATI Technologies Inc.
__dwItemID=1302__ : VideoProcessor: ATI Radeon Graphics Processor (0x9440)
Graphics card video memory : 512 MB
Graphics Card Driver : 8.541.0.0 Yes
__dwItemID=1501__ : 2D Driver=7.01.01.830
__dwItemID=1502__ : COPP=Yes
__dwItemID=1503__ : RGBOverlay=Yes
__dwItemID=1504__ : DEVICE=N/A
__dwItemID=1601__ : Driver 0:
__dwItemID=1602__ : [E:] Optiarc DVD RW AD-7203A
__dwItemID=1603__ : eHCMDrvType=0x00006fc7
__dwItemID=1604__ : CDRom=1 DVDRom=1 BDRom=0 HDDVDRom=0
Blu-ray Disc Drive : Not found No More Info
Software Player : Not found No More Info
Video Connection Type : Digital (without HDCP) No More Info
Program version : 2.0.1001.0
System language : 0409 ENU English English
Time : Sun Apr 19 22:05:50 2009
Computer : Desktop
System Name : ADMIRAL-PC
My monitor is DVI, but what is HDCP? I guess I need a new monitor?
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: So
I'm waiting for blu-ray movies to retail at $10 or less before I even consider a blu-ray.
considering that really hasn't even happened with DVD, unless you only buy shitty Full screen transfers at Wally World, you'll be waiting a long time. sales are consistent enough, and several can indeed be had below 10 bucks.
the ave. price I've paid is ~$17 per disc
here, check this out
how do those prices compare to general new releases on DVD over the previous 10 years? and just so you know, amazon's reported 30% savings on the standard price is bunk. Just shop around and you'll see that everything you've ever believed about BD pricing has been FUD.
Then you were a late adopter of DVD too. Even though DVD was technically "available" since '96, I paid damn-near $40 after tax for The Prince of Egypt and A Bug's Life back in '99. At least The Matrix was cheaper, but it was an exception to the $35 "rule" back then. FWIW, all three were AMAZING experiences on DVD (I had a kick-ass Sigma Designs RealMagic Hollywood+ decoder card outputting to VGA/TV).Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: So
I'm waiting for blu-ray movies to retail at $10 or less before I even consider a blu-ray.
considering that really hasn't even happened with DVD, unless you only buy shitty Full screen transfers at Wally World, you'll be waiting a long time. sales are consistent enough, and several can indeed be had below 10 bucks.
the ave. price I've paid is ~$17 per disc
here, check this out
how do those prices compare to general new releases on DVD over the previous 10 years? and just so you know, amazon's reported 30% savings on the standard price is bunk. Just shop around and you'll see that everything you've ever believed about BD pricing has been FUD.
The only movies I've paid $17 for this decade have been the Futurama movies, and that was release week.