|
Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
|
but when I sold HD sets, the first comment by most wives and SO's were that (insert your favorite female newscaster's name) had terrible make up or at least some other comment was made in regards to their complexion.
One girlfriend's comment made when her boyfriend purchased an HD set in the middle of the baseball playoff season was that a certain team didn't iron their uniforms. She also told me she knew the set was really good because she could tell if they were playing on AstroTurf simply by walking in front of the set without really looking at the screen (the boyfriend was an ISF certified tech, BTW).
Even with an older 768 line resolution screen (50 inch plasma) I could discern many camera issues. Watching the DVD of Field of Dreams you can clearly see the individual pieces of gravel around Costner's feet when he stands on the baseline but the gravel goes out of focus about 4 feet in front and behind him. In the the nude scene in Forrest Gump, it is clearly evident that the girl is wearing a body stocking as you can make out that her bikini marks are reversed: they are darker rather than lighter. In fact the scenes supposedly set in Viet Nam, you notice that while the soldier's faces are blackened and dirty, their uniforms and packs are immaculately clean: no sweat marks, no dirt....
For many familiar movies, watching them in HD meant that I spent the first times being enthralled by the background detail and the little glitches in continuity. Some may find it distracting, but I enjoy it as you get an idea of the detail and work it takes to set up the scenes. Some are funny as in the scene in Glory where the troops are entering the south and are welcomed by a gang of children you can see some one's hand with a wrist watch on it: a nice gold digital one too.... But most definitely you can tell the difference in a high budget film and one that was financially challenged.
Stu
|
