Quote:
Originally Posted by Eidolon
As someone who still has two CRT sets in different rooms for different reasons, I can assure you there is a difference. dVDs are primarily aimed that that tech, even although it's defunct now.
The main difference will depend on how well the dvd has been encoded. Some will still look decent on a good set up (good upscaling player and a good TV), but others will look a lot worse.
I can give the Anchor Bay Sleepaway Camp box set as an example.
All three look fine on a CRT set, but put them on a flatscreen of any type, and the first one looks dreadful, whereas both the sequels seem to upscale fairly well. The difference? A different company encoded and authored the disc for the first film, and it made a hell of a difference when transferring it to even a good LED set.
One of the issues is that upscaling will also upscale and amplify any shortcomings in an encode, thereby making things look worse. Surprisingly, I've found that THX approved dvds are often amongst the ones that tend to upscale badly.
Last night was watching the dvd of Muppets Christmas Carol, and that upscaled well enough.
I have a machine that upscales VHS, which works surprisingly well, as long as it's set to 720p output. Any higher than that and it shows scanlines. This is a bit of a godsend as I still have an extensive VHS library.
|
You're talking about good vs bad encodes, which has nothing to do with where the content is displayed. Displaying a DVD in a CRT TV doesn't give you better quality. Where it's displayed might help mask certain faults/limitations or make them more glaring, but that's a problem of the source, not the output method. It would be like saying increasing your viewing distance gives it better picture quality.
A good DVD is a good DVD, and a bad DVD is a bad DVD. One's experience of viewing the former can be affected by screen size, resolution, upscaling method, viewing distance, etc, but it doesn't change the content (and respective quality) of the DVD.