Picture Quality. Can someone explaine? - Blu-ray Forum

[DWG] Jambi · 10-17-2007, 10:59 PM

I don't understand picture quality. I have about 20 BLU-RAYs and most of them the picture quality is fantastic. I have a few that I think are bad. For example..
300, Parts of Planet Earth and The Reaping. With The Reaping I feel I got screwed over on the movie. I chose to buy the BLU version (more expensive) over the regular version because of pq and aq. There were a handfull of parts in the movie that reminded me of VHS. This should not be. Picture Quality and Audio Quality should not even be brought up if it is on BLU-RAY. It's BLU for god sakes. I am debating about buying anymore BLU-Rays at this point unless I see them first. Sorry for the depressing post.

Lsalas76 · 10-17-2007, 11:07 PM

IMO Robocop on blu was just horrible for me. In fact I am unimpressed with most blu-ray titles I own and I do own plenty. I thought POTC 2 looked great as did TMNT and Happy Feet. I have a feeling that it may be my TV or my ps3. I agree pq should not even be brought up. I did compare some blurays to sd dvds and again IMO I didn't see a big difference. I will continue to support blu tho.

Proteus · 10-17-2007, 11:13 PM

Don't be sorry.

It's true some encodes aren't the best, but often it is also a not-so-fantastic master to begin with.

Lower budget films in particular aren't shot in such a way to make them conducive to good HighDef representation.

If you want to be more certain of the PQ/AQ, simply look on the back of the box. Look for things like AVC 1080p video encoding and Lossless PCM or TrueHD audio. It sounds like PQ has been your problem so I'd be sure to watch for AVC and if it is VC-1 (most Warner titles ported from HDDVD) then wait and watch for some reviews that _include bitrate information_.

300 is kind of an anomaly in that the director's decided style was grainy and 'raw'. The films colors are very rich and deep in HighDef but many people weren't expecting the grainy feel of the film to still be present. The grain is actually an _intended effect_ to make the film feel more like the graphic novel by the director of the film in this case (and many others). It does look much better in HighDef than SD (the sound was TONS better); however, I can see how many people would mistake the intentional grain as a fault (frankly, I think only film students think this is 'good' in a film anymore... albeit its artsy in it's own way and does add graphic novel feel well).

Edit: Wanted to add that in order to notice many of the differences between HighDef and SD you need to watch them on identical screens side by side or via a properly set up demo disc (like the ones at Blu-ray displays in B&M stores). It's absolutely impossible for the human mind to remember all the tiny details that pop out with HighDef, only that their were more details.

Robmx · 10-17-2007, 11:17 PM

I always read the back on the case and check sound and picture specs.... My bud always reads the back and doesn't buy if it says MPEG 2 for video as he has many Paramount Blus like Italian job and thinks they are crap....

ryoohki · 10-17-2007, 11:20 PM

Happy Feet is crappy at best... Lot's of Banding and even Macroblocking in MANY scenes. Compared to Disney and Sony effort, Happy Feet is a Huge letdown..

The dvd Edition of 300 is BAD... Really BAD, it have HUGE Macroblock in battle, and it have the worst enemies of all time EDGE ENHANCEMENT. Most Warner Brother DVD are crappy with added EE and Macroblocks, even Blood Diamond is rampant with them on DVD...

Planet Earth use different type of Camera it's even Written on the back the some part are not really good..

I mean.. who are you to say that it should not be. I mean should i be pissed at 28 days later because it look worst than a DVD? I mean it was filmed in MINI DV at 576i, won't look any better than it's source. Who know's if the Reaping wasn't filmed with those camera. I mean i suggest you research before you buy a movie.....

You should always know problems too... Most DVD have EE, Warner and Fox are notably bad at this, but seems to be very nice on BluRay...

Kruzifixxion · 10-17-2007, 11:28 PM

I don't know,i guess your all too picky,blu rays look way better than regular dvd's,in fact.maybe you just want evrything perfect? Not evrything is perfect man.I'm still proud or blu ray and i will keep buying blu rays and stop complaing about pq and grain.The grain is there on some or most movie and maybe is your tv as well that makes the grain more visiable?If you don't like how they look just simply stay with sd dvd's.

martinstraka8282 · 10-17-2007, 11:39 PM

There is no way around the fact that some Blu Ray transfers just suck, and some blow your mind. I always research and buy the ones that get really good pq ratings. You have to be careful thats for sure. Hopefully j6p's first exposure to Blu isn't something like The Marine, HOFD or the original 5th Element, cuz that might turn them off for good. I recently convinced my local elctronics store to stop using the original 5th Element as their demo disc, cuz it looks like CRAP.

WickyWoo · 10-17-2007, 11:45 PM

Quote:

IMO Robocop on blu was just horrible for me. In fact I am unimpressed with most blu-ray titles I own and I do own plenty

Welcome to the world of low-budget filmmaking circa 1987. Its budget was only $13 million. To give you a point of comparison, Star Wars cost about $20 million a decade earlier.

It's never going to look that great, because the negative the day it was processed didn't look that great, and it's quite possible that the Blu looks better than the negative does thanks to processing and cleanup.

HeartOFHatred · 10-17-2007, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsalas76

IMO Robocop on blu was just horrible for me. In fact I am unimpressed with most blu-ray titles I own and I do own plenty. I thought POTC 2 looked great as did TMNT and Happy Feet. I have a feeling that it may be my TV or my ps3. I agree pq should not even be brought up. I did compare some blurays to sd dvds and again IMO I didn't see a big difference. I will continue to support blu tho.

are you kidding me? Robocop looks AMAZING!!! given how old the film is. I was blown away. I understand everyone has the right to an opinion but come on... what do u expect from a movie made in the 80's?

[DWG] Jambi · 10-17-2007, 11:55 PM

Thank you all for your honest answers. I think in the future I will research the movies first before I buy them. I wish there could be a standard on how movie companys transfer their movies to Blu-Ray. I think I am pretty tech savy and IMO on paper Blu-Ray is the better format. I just think that for an average consumer. There is so many different HD options it can be confusing. ex...
HD vs Full HD, 720p, 1080i, 1080p, DLP vs. LCD vs Plasma, HDDVD vs Blu-Ray,
mpeg 2 vs mpeg 4 vs VC-1 vs AVC, PCM vs. Bitstream vs True HD. I think I understand all of the options for the most part but I could see how an average consumer would see all of this and just say screw it I am buying regular DVD's and play them on whatever T.V. I have. I think thats why it will be awhile before people really start buying HD products. Just my 2 cents.
Thank you all again for the great info this site has.

bluseminole · 10-18-2007, 12:04 AM

Well, in the case of 300, the directors intentionally "degraded" the film--added grain, desaturated colors, and made it very artificial--because they actually wanted it to look like a graphic novel. This fact was well documented in at least the few "professional" reviews I read online before buying. Keep in mind--the older the movie, the older the original master, which could mean more dirt and unwanted degradation.

The point of BLU is not to be perfect video quality, though we like it to be--it is merely to offer the MOST FAITHFUL REPRODUCTION OF THE STUDIO MASTER. If the movie is poorly shot, Blu should expose all of those mistakes in all their depressing detail.

Rup_Muk · 10-18-2007, 12:24 AM

^^ Well put, Bluseminole.

There are titles on Blu-Ray that do not look as pristine as one would expect. Nevertheless, even most of those "disappointments" are far better than SD DVD. Can't comment on HD-DVD because I've never seen one - and will most likely never will.

Most posts here have covered the issues... Yes, there is a lot of confusing jargon out there. However, I don't see that being much of an issue in the future when most everybody will "know" something about HD. For crying out loud, think about all the stuff there is out there with respect to computers... ROM, RAM, DDR RAM, P4, P4133, Core Duo, Quad Core.... people still somehow seem to buy the computer most appropriate to their usage!

My $0.02.

Rup.

ryoohki · 10-18-2007, 12:55 AM

Verhoven always used Crappy Film Stock until just recently. Total Recall is the same, Starship Trooper too, they look great for what they are but there not reference..

All the budget of his scifi films goes into the CGI or Stop Motion Animation (Robocop)

If you look at the stage, Robocop, Total Recall and Starship use almost the same type of design ... LOL it's funny to watch back to back, they look like the same time period..

10-17-2007, 10:59 PM	#1
[DWG] Jambi Member Member since:Oct 2007	Picture Quality. Can someone explaine? I don't understand picture quality. I have about 20 BLU-RAYs and most of them the picture quality is fantastic. I have a few that I think are bad. For example.. 300, Parts of Planet Earth and The Reaping. With The Reaping I feel I got screwed over on the movie. I chose to buy the BLU version (more expensive) over the regular version because of pq and aq. There were a handfull of parts in the movie that reminded me of VHS. This should not be. Picture Quality and Audio Quality should not even be brought up if it is on BLU-RAY. It's BLU for god sakes. I am debating about buying anymore BLU-Rays at this point unless I see them first. Sorry for the depressing post.

10-17-2007, 11:07 PM	#2
Lsalas76 Blu-ray Guru Top contributor Member since:Mar 2007 Location:USA 4K collection:392 Blu-ray collection:832 DVD collection:29 Blu-ray reviews:1 Trading Score:225	IMO Robocop on blu was just horrible for me. In fact I am unimpressed with most blu-ray titles I own and I do own plenty. I thought POTC 2 looked great as did TMNT and Happy Feet. I have a feeling that it may be my TV or my ps3. I agree pq should not even be brought up. I did compare some blurays to sd dvds and again IMO I didn't see a big difference. I will continue to support blu tho. Last edited by Lsalas76; 10-17-2007 at 11:10 PM.

10-17-2007, 11:13 PM	#3
Proteus Power Member Member since:Apr 2007 Location:SoCal PSN:CaptBurn	Don't be sorry. It's true some encodes aren't the best, but often it is also a not-so-fantastic master to begin with. Lower budget films in particular aren't shot in such a way to make them conducive to good HighDef representation. If you want to be more certain of the PQ/AQ, simply look on the back of the box. Look for things like AVC 1080p video encoding and Lossless PCM or TrueHD audio. It sounds like PQ has been your problem so I'd be sure to watch for AVC and if it is VC-1 (most Warner titles ported from HDDVD) then wait and watch for some reviews that _include bitrate information_. 300 is kind of an anomaly in that the director's decided style was grainy and 'raw'. The films colors are very rich and deep in HighDef but many people weren't expecting the grainy feel of the film to still be present. The grain is actually an _intended effect_ to make the film feel more like the graphic novel by the director of the film in this case (and many others). It does look much better in HighDef than SD (the sound was TONS better); however, I can see how many people would mistake the intentional grain as a fault (frankly, I think only film students think this is 'good' in a film anymore... albeit its artsy in it's own way and does add graphic novel feel well). Edit: Wanted to add that in order to notice many of the differences between HighDef and SD you need to watch them on identical screens side by side or via a properly set up demo disc (like the ones at Blu-ray displays in B&M stores). It's absolutely impossible for the human mind to remember all the tiny details that pop out with HighDef, only that their were more details. Last edited by Proteus; 10-17-2007 at 11:15 PM.

10-17-2007, 11:20 PM	#5
ryoohki Blu-ray Samurai Member since:May 2007 Home Theater Gallery:6 Blu-ray collection:6 Blu-ray reviews:8 Trading Score:5	Happy Feet is crappy at best... Lot's of Banding and even Macroblocking in MANY scenes. Compared to Disney and Sony effort, Happy Feet is a Huge letdown.. The dvd Edition of 300 is BAD... Really BAD, it have HUGE Macroblock in battle, and it have the worst enemies of all time EDGE ENHANCEMENT. Most Warner Brother DVD are crappy with added EE and Macroblocks, even Blood Diamond is rampant with them on DVD... Planet Earth use different type of Camera it's even Written on the back the some part are not really good.. I mean.. who are you to say that it should not be. I mean should i be pissed at 28 days later because it look worst than a DVD? I mean it was filmed in MINI DV at 576i, won't look any better than it's source. Who know's if the Reaping wasn't filmed with those camera. I mean i suggest you research before you buy a movie..... You should always know problems too... Most DVD have EE, Warner and Fox are notably bad at this, but seems to be very nice on BluRay... Last edited by ryoohki; 10-17-2007 at 11:25 PM.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Another picture quality question	Newbie Discussion	bmwone	18	03-05-2010 02:09 PM
Picture Quality...	Newbie Discussion	ronisandy	2	10-02-2009 02:02 PM
In terms of picture quality what's your best Blu-ray movie picture for picture	Blu-ray Movies - North America	Stiny-Ray2	2	03-11-2008 04:38 PM
Picture quality	Newbie Discussion	Forgot_Username	23	11-14-2007 10:01 AM
Picture Quality.	Blu-ray Movies - North America	dipset420	51	07-18-2007 11:40 PM

10-17-2007, 11:17 PM	#4
Robmx Active Member Member since:Aug 2007 Location:Niagara, Ontario, Canada	I always read the back on the case and check sound and picture specs.... My bud always reads the back and doesn't buy if it says MPEG 2 for video as he has many Paramount Blus like Italian job and thinks they are crap....

10-17-2007, 11:28 PM	#6
Kruzifixxion Active Member Member since:Aug 2007 Location:South Central Los Angeles California Blu-ray reviews:1	I don't know,i guess your all too picky,blu rays look way better than regular dvd's,in fact.maybe you just want evrything perfect? Not evrything is perfect man.I'm still proud or blu ray and i will keep buying blu rays and stop complaing about pq and grain.The grain is there on some or most movie and maybe is your tv as well that makes the grain more visiable?If you don't like how they look just simply stay with sd dvd's.

10-17-2007, 11:39 PM	#7
martinstraka8282 Expert Member Member since:Jul 2007 4K collection:401 Blu-ray collection:1466 DVD collection:1 Trading Score:1	There is no way around the fact that some Blu Ray transfers just suck, and some blow your mind. I always research and buy the ones that get really good pq ratings. You have to be careful thats for sure. Hopefully j6p's first exposure to Blu isn't something like The Marine, HOFD or the original 5th Element, cuz that might turn them off for good. I recently convinced my local elctronics store to stop using the original 5th Element as their demo disc, cuz it looks like CRAP.

10-17-2007, 11:55 PM	#10
[DWG] Jambi Member Member since:Oct 2007	Thank you all for your honest answers. I think in the future I will research the movies first before I buy them. I wish there could be a standard on how movie companys transfer their movies to Blu-Ray. I think I am pretty tech savy and IMO on paper Blu-Ray is the better format. I just think that for an average consumer. There is so many different HD options it can be confusing. ex... HD vs Full HD, 720p, 1080i, 1080p, DLP vs. LCD vs Plasma, HDDVD vs Blu-Ray, mpeg 2 vs mpeg 4 vs VC-1 vs AVC, PCM vs. Bitstream vs True HD. I think I understand all of the options for the most part but I could see how an average consumer would see all of this and just say screw it I am buying regular DVD's and play them on whatever T.V. I have. I think thats why it will be awhile before people really start buying HD products. Just my 2 cents. Thank you all again for the great info this site has.

10-18-2007, 12:04 AM	#11
bluseminole Senior Member Member since:Oct 2007 Location:Lynchburg, VA Home Theater Gallery:17 Blu-ray collection:177 Blu-ray reviews: 1 Trading Score:6	Well, in the case of 300, the directors intentionally "degraded" the film--added grain, desaturated colors, and made it very artificial--because they actually wanted it to look like a graphic novel. This fact was well documented in at least the few "professional" reviews I read online before buying. Keep in mind--the older the movie, the older the original master, which could mean more dirt and unwanted degradation. The point of BLU is not to be perfect video quality, though we like it to be--it is merely to offer the MOST FAITHFUL REPRODUCTION OF THE STUDIO MASTER. If the movie is poorly shot, Blu should expose all of those mistakes in all their depressing detail.

10-18-2007, 12:24 AM	#12
Rup_Muk Expert Member Member since:Jan 2007 Blu-ray collection:136 Blu-ray reviews:24 Trading Score:8	^^ Well put, Bluseminole. There are titles on Blu-Ray that do not look as pristine as one would expect. Nevertheless, even most of those "disappointments" are far better than SD DVD. Can't comment on HD-DVD because I've never seen one - and will most likely never will. Most posts here have covered the issues... Yes, there is a lot of confusing jargon out there. However, I don't see that being much of an issue in the future when most everybody will "know" something about HD. For crying out loud, think about all the stuff there is out there with respect to computers... ROM, RAM, DDR RAM, P4, P4133, Core Duo, Quad Core.... people still somehow seem to buy the computer most appropriate to their usage! My $0.02. Rup.

10-18-2007, 12:55 AM	#13
ryoohki Blu-ray Samurai Member since:May 2007 Home Theater Gallery:6 Blu-ray collection:6 Blu-ray reviews:8 Trading Score:5	Verhoven always used Crappy Film Stock until just recently. Total Recall is the same, Starship Trooper too, they look great for what they are but there not reference.. All the budget of his scifi films goes into the CGI or Stop Motion Animation (Robocop) If you look at the stage, Robocop, Total Recall and Starship use almost the same type of design ... LOL it's funny to watch back to back, they look like the same time period..

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals