| Author |
 Topic  |
|
benj clews 
"...."
|
 Posted - 02/19/2008 : 11:40:20
|
Well, I guess if you're used to watching 576 pixels stretched double or more, you'll come to accept it as perfectly reasonable. However if you put it alongside a true HD image, the difference would be noticeable- perhaps not tangibly explainable though, just one will appear more real somehow.
If you've gone from a CRT to standard HD, then yes the difference will be startlingly clear compared to what you're used to, but the extra clarity isn't really down to the increased resolution- it's the LCD/ Plasma screen essentially displaying what the CRT was incapable of displaying in a less precise way.
Certainly, it's a much harder sell converting someone from standard HD to true HD than from SD to HD and it's difficult to justify the further upgrade.
I suppose this is kinda' like the audiophile debate of MP3s versus CDs (or even CDs versus LPs) all over again. Maybe because of this, it'll just be the movie and gaming purists who take up true HD. |
 |
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 11:59:08
|
I just remember waaaaaaaaaaaay back in about 1993/4 we BBC drama execs were given a demo of HDTV, by some very excited tekkies. We all agreed the images were amazing, though, of course at the time we had only 675 lines to compare it with. We asked when the new technology would be released as standard. The first response was a snort. Then some suppressed giggles. Bottom line: a split debate about nothing market-ready until there was enough 'product' available. And not many if any tv producers were going to invest in and stockpile a bunch of shows if no one could see them. Etc. The debate then got highjacked into a pure versus applied research thing. Which is when, I guess, I 'tuned out.'
Yeah, I know advancements in technology precede application. But I think there's also a line over which only real tekkies dare go ... that is they're more interested in sfx and vis. quality than in content. It's evident with big cinema sfx films which spend more on a minute of screentime than the budget for the script.
Happy the day there's room for both, she sighed.
|
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 14:46:44
|
Right as rain, Baffy. I think this time the bigwigs decided the format war was hurting everyone, and they'd miss the chance to sell us STAR WARS DVDs one more time. |
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 21:43:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by dem08nic
Hyper sharp pictures is all well and good, but I was pretty content on the whole with home video. I can help feel that beyond the tech speak to a lowly film collector with finite funds I have another redundant system I've been throwing my money at for ten or so years. Gotta love the march of technology.
Well, it's not redundant, and everything you've got will still work, in the same way people can still play their LPs bought 40 years ago. You won't have to replace your DVDs if you don't want to. Although the day will come when DVDs won't be available to buy/rent and you'll have to have a Blu-Ray player. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 22:06:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Well, I guess if you're used to watching 576 pixels stretched double or more, you'll come to accept it as perfectly reasonable. However if you put it alongside a true HD image, the difference would be noticeable- perhaps not tangibly explainable though, just one will appear more real somehow.
Agreed, 1080p will just be that little bit better.quote:
If you've gone from a CRT to standard HD, then yes the difference will be startlingly clear compared to what you're used to, but the extra clarity isn't really down to the increased resolution- it's the LCD/ Plasma screen essentially displaying what the CRT was incapable of displaying in a less precise way.
For me, most of the improvement on watching DVDs was due to the major resolution increase. I had a pretty good CRT (only 3 years old), and now instead of someone's face being composed of little rectangular blocks, it now looks smooth. I.e, the pixellation is gone due to upscaling.quote:
Certainly, it's a much harder sell converting someone from standard HD to true HD than from SD to HD and it's difficult to justify the further upgrade.
Yep this is the way I see it. Going from SDTV with 576i DVD to 720p/1080i HDTV with upscaled 576p DVD (what I have now) is probably 3/4 of the move to Blu-Ray with 1080p HDTV in terms of picture quality.  quote:
I suppose this is kinda' like the audiophile debate of MP3s versus CDs
That was a little different as mp3s were a clear move backwards (for convenience) in terms of quality. I refuse to let mp3s into my house.  |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 22:10:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Randall
Right as rain, Baffy. I think this time the bigwigs decided the format war was hurting everyone...
I think it's caused a couple of years of stagnation. If I was buying a movie now, I'd probably buy it on Blu-Ray (depending on price), whereas last week I'd have bought the DVD as I wouldn't have known which HD version to buy. |
|
|
|
silly
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 22:26:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
If I was buying a movie now, I'd probably buy it on Blu-Ray (depending on price), whereas last week I'd have bought the DVD as I wouldn't have known which HD version to buy.
I rarely buy movies anymore, preferring to rent them. I have three young kids so about the only movies we own are Pixar or similar, because they can watch them over and over.
I own a copy of Crash, for example, that I've only watched twice. I could have saved $20 or more (don't remember the price) and just rented it.
I could understand, however, that in a forum full of movie buffs, I'm probably the exception to the rule. 
Furthermore, we're about to replace our TV since the picture tube on our current one is dying, and it will be an LCD/HD model of some kind, so my position on what kind of DVD I like to watch may change soon. |
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 23:09:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by Randall
Right as rain, Baffy. I think this time the bigwigs decided the format war was hurting everyone...
I think it's caused a couple of years of stagnation. If I was buying a movie now, I'd probably buy it on Blu-Ray (depending on price), whereas last week I'd have bought the DVD as I wouldn't have known which HD version to buy.
Exactly. |
|
|
|
benj clews
"...."
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 23:11:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
I suppose this is kinda' like the audiophile debate of MP3s versus CDs
That was a little different as mp3s were a clear move backwards (for convenience) in terms of quality.
I guess I could have explained that a little better- I meant that music purists defend LPs like I attempt to defend to 1080p. Granted, in chronological terms, it's the reverse but I was more about the difference in quality that only the discerning ear/ eye can appreciate.
But yep- you're right about the step backwards. However, I'm so MP3ed up the whazoo now (7,000 songs and counting) I really can't remember what I'm missing. Sadly, I suspect this is also the case with the large majority of the music buying public and we'll all end up killing off a greater format (either that or, with the large storage MP3 players we're getting now, we'll all move on to MP3s with completely uncompressed data, ala actual CD data). |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/20/2008 : 04:54:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
However, I'm so MP3ed up the whazoo now (7,000 songs and counting) I really can't remember what I'm missing.
I should have invited you around in August and showed you what you're missing. I've got an awesome stereo.  quote:
Sadly, I suspect this is also the case with the large majority of the music buying public...
My view is that most people either buy CDs (or in some cases LPs)... or they steal mp3s. Obviously there are some who buy mp3s though. quote:
...and we'll all end up killing off a greater format (either that or, with the large storage MP3 players we're getting now, we'll all move on to MP3s with completely uncompressed data, ala actual CD data).
I think there will always be a demand for a hard copy (pictures, lyrics etc, and the fact that you won't lose it when it 'crashes'). And I think there are enough fanatics who write and produce (and consume) music that they won't allow the complete removal of a high-quality option, particularly as that option is a cheap one (CDs). I got a package of 9 CDs in the post this morning, cost including first-class mail from Canada was US$8.50/CD. Cheaper than downloading mp3s in a lot of cases.  |
|
|
|
benj clews
"...."
|
Posted - 02/20/2008 : 09:04:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
My view is that most people either buy CDs (or in some cases LPs)... or they steal mp3s. Obviously there are some who buy mp3s though.
Actually, there's another group of people- those who buy CDs and then instantly rip them. With iTunes or even a games console it's a doddle. I guess these folks (me included) are supporting both camps
quote:
I think there will always be a demand for a hard copy (pictures, lyrics etc, and the fact that you won't lose it when it 'crashes'). And I think there are enough fanatics who write and produce (and consume) music that they won't allow the complete removal of a high-quality option, particularly as that option is a cheap one (CDs).
I'd tend to agree, but never discount the stupidity of people when offered a bargain. It mp3s were priced reasonably, I've every belief CDs would go the way of LPs. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady 
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 02/20/2008 : 10:29:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
However, I'm so MP3ed up the whazoo now (7,000 songs and counting) I really can't remember what I'm missing.
I should have invited you around in August and showed you what you're missing. I've got an awesome stereo.
In truth, while I'm slowly replacing most of my LPs with their CD equivalents, the sound from a CD (especially with classical music) just doesn't compare with vinyl, and mp3 truly don't sound as good as CDs (especially the downloaded ones which only after you've got them can you find out if they are complete or not), even if you have an amazing set of speakers attached to an original iPod. If you ask me, mp3s are assuring the future of the CD because of this, and the only reason why CDs replaced vinyl was due to wear and tear of playing records which eroded their sound quality over time. CDs wear far longer than vinyl, while mp3 files can easily get corrupted and don't always copy perfectly onto a CD.
The difference with video vs DVD vs the HD options is the opposite - we're going from good quality to better quality here. If Blu-Ray ends up being the newest be-all and end-all to home movie viewing, the question is, where does this put all us DVD collectors? Will we have to buy a new player? Will there be combo DVD/Blu-Ray player/recorders? Do we have to get new TVs to really appreciate them? And if Blu-Ray is really God's gift to home movie viewing, why the F*CK doesn't God provide me with the funds to upgrade my system?
|
Edited by - ChocolateLady on 02/20/2008 10:32:15 |
|
|
|
benj clews
"...."
|
Posted - 02/20/2008 : 11:21:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
In truth, while I'm slowly replacing most of my LPs with their CD equivalents, the sound from a CD (especially with classical music) just doesn't compare with vinyl, and mp3 truly don't sound as good as CDs (especially the downloaded ones which only after you've got them can you find out if they are complete or not), even if you have an amazing set of speakers attached to an original iPod. If you ask me, mp3s are assuring the future of the CD because of this, and the only reason why CDs replaced vinyl was due to wear and tear of playing records which eroded their sound quality over time. CDs wear far longer than vinyl, while mp3 files can easily get corrupted and don't always copy perfectly onto a CD.
I don't think the current quality of mp3s ensure the future of CDs, since mp3 players are getting capable of storing so much data they'll be able to store uncompressed audio data, i.e. CD quality. Assuming the music industry/ iTunes ever get their arses in gear and provide very high quality mp3s that can be redownloaded any number of times (thereby providing a perpetual backup in case of corruption), probably the only thing that can ensure the future of CDs is physical extras that you can't get from downloads. However, at this point CDs move into the specialist collector market.
No matter how much digital quality improves though, nothing will ever capture the non-digital subtleties of LP quality.
quote:
If Blu-Ray ends up being the newest be-all and end-all to home movie viewing, the question is, where does this put all us DVD collectors? Will we have to buy a new player? Will there be combo DVD/Blu-Ray player/recorders? Do we have to get new TVs to really appreciate them?
Obviously you'll have to buy a new player if you want to play Blu-Ray, but it would undoubtedly be backwards compatible for DVDs, VCDs and CDs too. We already have combo Blu-Ray/DVD/CD read/writers but they currently only seem to be in the realm of PC enthusiasts. Standalone players will follow though- they always do. And yeah- you'd have to get a new TV to really appreciate Blu-Ray, but you don't have to do that if you're happy with DVD quality. However, there are other pluses to Blu-Ray besides the video and audio quality: far more interactivity than DVD speeds could ever provide and so more storage capacity the extras could be through the roof (or, for those anti-MP3ers, entire back catalogues of your favourite music artist could be on the one disk). There's even internet-enabled functionality in the latest Blu-Ray specification although that sounds a bit too Big Brother to me. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 02/20/2008 : 11:27:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
In truth, while I'm slowly replacing most of my LPs with their CD equivalents, the sound from a CD (especially with classical music) just doesn't compare with vinyl
If you think vinyl is better than CD then my guess is you haven't spent anything like enough money on a CD player. It's easy to get a decent analog signal from your vinyl as the data is already analog, but getting a decent analog signal from a CD is a lot harder as the data begins it's life as digital. The quality of the circuitry that turns a laser pulse into an analog signal is paramount. You can get a decent turntable for $500 but that amount of money won't even begin to get you anything close to reasonable in a CD player.
It doesn't matter how good your amps and speakers are if you have a poor CD player (like most people have), as they can only process the signal they're given, and if it's been butchered at source on a cheap player then that's what you're going to hear.
Go into an audiophile shop, and test the difference between a $1000 CD player and a $4000 CD player (I'm simply talking about the player here, not the pre-amp, power-amp or speakers which will cost you thousands more). I ended up spending 10 times as much on a CD player than I was expecting as once I'd heard the 'real thing' I simply couldn't go backwards. And I haven't regretted it for a second. |
|
|
|
RockGolf
"1500+ reviews. 1 joke."
|
Posted - 02/20/2008 : 14:58:12
|
This thread has inspired a review from me for the Ray Charles bio-pic Ray: "Blue Ray discs superior." If there are any MERPs out there who'd like to approve it, I'd be grateful.
Oh, and at present, I'm at 15,300 mp3 files, the vast majority from my own collection of about 1500 CD's. And while most are encoded at 160kbps or higher, I just can't tell the difference once it goes over 128 kbps.
And, Sean, where do you get CD's from Canada shipped to the lands down under for less than $10US? |
Edited by - RockGolf on 02/20/2008 15:38:12 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
And the winner is..... Blu-Ray!
