 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.17.197.207
Pearson in the latest Perfect Vision commented that most Blueray discs are soft and no better then the better DVDs for video quality. My experience exactly especially when the DVDs are upscaled. Compared to HD on TV (over the air with antenna) they are still inferior to what the TV is capable of reproducing.
...the media from best to worst like this:
1) OTA HD;
2) upscaled DVD or Blu-ray (tie)?
If so, I think he's way off on all points. In my experience, Blu-ray is better than OTA, followed by upscaled DVD. OTA HD in my area (Washington, DC) is certainly better than SD, but is compressed so much by some channels that the artifacts are distracting. Blu-ray is much better.
Doug
Sure seems to me these issues fall by the wayside regarding the differences between SD & high def. It always appears to me that all that is ever brought up is the picture quality when comparisons are made.
What is your experiences with both the color and sound quality for high def?????
The early Blu-ray movies were atrocious. Now, the releases are consistently good and far superior to their DVD counterparts, upsampled or not. I've already retired my DVD collection in favor of Blu-ray discs.
...it isn't ALL about picture and sound quality, IMO. It's also about what is available and the intellectual or entertainment value of the content reproduced. Certainly sound & picture quality are important, but rarity and desirability are also factors. Picture quality, while important, shouldn't be critical to the appreciation and enjoyment of the content.Of course one always wants the BEST duplication available, especially where current movies are concerned, but it isn't always possible to achieve high resolution presentation with older collectible TV programs, films and concert footage, especially when the original negatives or videotape masters no longer exist. Now if new movies are ALL that the enthusiast finds interesting then I suppose you have a point, but limiting ones viewing based solely upon picture quality sounds a little like folks who buy books by the pound because they place greater value on a book's page count than it's content.
AuPh
Even the restored color print is far from videophile quality!
I get distracted by other "stuff". e.g. Pointyball, real Futbol, SACD, more Pointyball (how 'bout dem Boys !), plenty of satellite HD channels to watch, though could use Sci-FI HD, BBC HD, etc....
The doubledip urge is about to hit as the holiday software rush cranks up... "Blade Runner" in HD is definitely on the list.
I skimmed through the Sept issue of TPV and I didn't feel it was anti Blu-Ray, but I did note that HP's "disks to die for" are skewed towards the look of heavy CGI, not straight film. And I expect 35mm color film to have a certain look: Certainly not as crispy as you can achieve with computer graphics.
Especially younger watchers. Many also complain about seeing grain.
Jack
That has not been my experience. It depends on the material. If all you are looking at are closeups, then I *might* agree that upscaled DVD's are up to the task. However, the moment you have a long shot, or a picture of a landscape, Blu-Ray destroys upsampled DVD's.
On something like "Planet Earth", the difference between upscaled DVD's and Blu-Ray is so big, that it is not even funny.
Not irrelevant or nasty questions.
There's a thread below where I comment about my experience with standard DVD vs the same films in theatres. Because of 2 eye problems, one age related, standard DVD at home looks superior to me than the film does in a theatre. Does that mean that DVD is actually better than seeing the actual film? I somehow think not.
If I had to compare standard DVD to HD 720p and 1080i off air broadcast TV in my system with a Denon 2907 DVD player and a Loewe 32" 1366 x 768 screen and Topfield set-top box for digital TV reception, I'd probably say that standard DVD goes reasonably close to the hi-def TV broadcasts at my 2 metre viewing distance. Viewing distance will make a difference to such comparisons as well.
One should always beware of making judgements based on one or two reports like Pearsons, even when they coincide with one's own experiences. There's an awful lot of BD disc reviews out there commenting on the superiority of the BD picture quality over the standard DVD, and there's a wide range of variables that could interfere to change that assessment. On balance, from what I've seen in shop demos without the luxury of being able to do an A/B comparison, my feeling is that BD is sharper and more detailed than standard DVD. At this stage, however, I'm still holding off buying a machine and I don't know anyone with one so I haven't been able to have a really good go at seeing what I think of the new formats.
David Aiken
the magazine's founder must be least in his 60's.
I don't know about his eyes, and I don't about his ears, bit I do know he plays things very loud, and has a set up man to do most if not all the grunt work of hooking up and such. As to how qualified his tech man is, again, no one is quite sure as to the man's capabilities.
I had been using a 50 inch plasma with 768 resolution for three years. The difference between a 1080p source and an upsampled 480P signal is quite obvious and apparent. It may vary from machine to machine (I use a Marantz universal player, modified) and a second production run Sam Sung BDP-1000, but the differences are apparent the larger the set you use.
Stu
I wish at times there was a particular punctuation mark that could be used to signify a rhetorical question. I knew Harry Pearson was older than I am, and I'm 60; and as I said in a thread below, standard def 576p upscaled to 768p on my 32" LCD screen actually looks better to me than the same film does in a theatre. That is most definitely *MY* eyes because friends present at the same screening don't report the problems I do with the picture quality in the theatre.
I can definitely see a difference, and an improvement, swapping from the standard def transmission of a program available in high def here in Australia to the separate high def transmission from the same station. I think standard def DVDs look a little better than standard def digital TV transmissions to me, but not as good as high def picture quality, but that is making judgements based on different source programs since I haven't had a chance to compare any program with something I own on standard def DVD.
My holdout on BD has basically been the fact that I'm waiting for a machine which handles all the high def audio formats. I personally haven't been in doubt about superior picture quality based on what I've seen of a couple of films playing in shop demos.
David Aiken
it is an interesting question. I believe what I wrote basically agrees with what you said originally and agrees with the follow up. All this does not particularly agree with HP's comments, so the original question you posed is of interest: how relevant are HP's observations for many of us with real world experience?
Now that's a rhetorical question.
Stu
NT
David Aiken
Again HD via over the air broadcast as on NBC almost always has a superior picture compared to standard DVD even with upscaling. The problem in my opinion ( and I suspect Pearsons) is that the average Blueray disc is not superior to a well produced DVD with upscaling. My player is a Samsung 1200 and the TV is a Sony KDS70XBR2. Certain scenes on the Planet Earth series are up to what I suspect is the potential of Blueray but the average Blueray disc is not.
I have the Sammy 1200, and a Sony XBR1. On my system, the Average BD is better than an upscaled DVD, and a good BD *kills* DVDs, better than OTA HD too.
JackEDIT: How large is your set, and how far is your viewing distance. I've found many who cannot see a difference tend to sit too far away.
And I agree with you: HD broadcasts are better than upscaling DVD.
Blu-ray absolutely kills upscaled DVD in all visible criteria.
And while we're on the subject, what about the audio? Or is upsampling DD better than LPCM?
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
We didn't know how good we had it.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
My OPPO upscaled to 1080i/60 Super Bit DVD's look great when displaed at 1080p/60 on my Sony 60 inch HDTV. Can't say there is a huge improvement with many of the HD TV programs or disks I have sampled.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]