Can Blu-ray PQ be better than best TV image

[bobcarla]

Before I got my Panasonic DMP BD10AK Blu-ray player, I had heard that the best 1080P disk image would be superior to the best broadcast TV image. I have not found this to be the case.

I have a Sony Bravia XBR 52" LCD television with good quality HDMI cable which provides a stunning image on shows often aired on the Discovery Channel.

I have now played a number of discs like "Deja Vu" which are touted as having high quality PQ and did not find any part of the movie which matched some of the shows like "Planet Earth".

Has anyone had a different experience. If so, do you have any suggestions how I can get my player to match or exceed high quality broadcast?

Bobcarla

[weezlewozzle]

Sounds like you're comparing programs shot on film on blu vs programs shot digitally on broadcast. Not a fair comparison. Blu has both 1080p and the higher bit rate when the discs are authored to take advantage of it.

[Sporty]

Grab Planet Earth on BD then watch it on Discovery if you want to have a real comparison. Then you will see what the real difference is.

But to answer your title, no I've not see that problem, my BD discs blow my HD from Comcast out of the water. Considering broadcasts are lower resolution and higher compression rates then a Disc, it's not surprising.

[milou6]

hey BC,

I have your same set (52" XBR4). The difference is film vs. HD video -- most of the great Discovery Channel etc shows look amazing and very 3 dimensional because they are shot natively in HD using HD video. Movies are shot on film and as such don't have that 3D "pop". However, BD is the best that film can possibly look -- better than broadcast HD movies (1080p vs. broadcast 1080i and with less compression and better audio options etc).

Lastly, I recommend you set your xbr to cinema or use custom settings (if you aren't already) to watch film. If you crank CineMotion to "high" (120hz) that will give you more of the 3D "pop", but it will be less film-like so as a purist I have it set to "standard". And if your player can output at 24 frames (1080/24p) then try that as well.

[rkish]

Originally Posted by bobcarla

Before I got my Panasonic DMP BD10AK Blu-ray player, I had heard that the best 1080P disk image would be superior to the best broadcast TV image. I have not found this to be the case.

I have a Sony Bravia XBR 52" LCD television with good quality HDMI cable which provides a stunning image on shows often aired on the Discovery Channel.

I have now played a number of discs like "Deja Vu" which are touted as having high quality PQ and did not find any part of the movie which matched some of the shows like "Planet Earth".

Has anyone had a different experience. If so, do you have any suggestions how I can get my player to match or exceed high quality broadcast?

Bobcarla

Granted...the SD version of PE is pretty impressive...but I've got to believe that the Blu-Ray version would be superior. I just ordered my copy from DeepDiscount today for $54.95 and will keep my SD copy for the bonus material lacking from the BD copy.

PE is on my "MUST HAVE" list, along with most/all of the Kubrick Collection and Blade Runner. I also have a Panasonic DMP BD10AK Blu-Ray player, which I recently purchased "used" from EBay for $245.00. I'm very impressed with it so far and it compliments my Panny TH-50PZ85U very nicely

[DavePS3]

Most are pumping Blu' at 1080p. There are absolutely no broadcasts in North America at 1080p. It's all 1080i. At least that's what the cable and satellite dudes are saying.

[scook]

I thought that this thread was going to question if Blu ray will be able to hold the data for the Next Generation of HD

"The next thing already has a name, Ultra High Defintion (yes, that is the official name). I'm not sure exactly what resolutions that entails, but there already are cameras out there today shooting in 4-5k resolution, such as the RED camera. This resolution is roughly 4x the resolution of 1080p".

I know its a little soon to start talking about what will come out next, especially when Blu hasnt fully taken over consumers but thats what I was wondering

Could the Future Blus 100GB contain the Next Red Camera encodes?

[CptGreedle]

Ultra HD is nothing new. It is just a new name for an old technology.
Ultra HD is what you see in a movie theater. Anything from 2k-4k. Bl-ray is 1920, just shy of 2k. So an Ultra HD film is shot on 4k, but there are many things to take into account.
The size of the screen is important. A theater has huge screens that can take advantage of the 4k resolution. A home theater is usually between 42"-65", too small to take advantage of it.
Blu-ray is so close to 2k that it is good enough to show in theaters, and it has been done as a comparison. People had a very hard time seeing the difference.
But the real problem is market. There is no market for Ultra HD, not yet anyways, and probably not for more than a decade if ever. HD is so high quality now on a home HDTV that anything better will not be worth the price difference. In fact there are very few Ultra HD screens and they are very expensive and tend to be designed for film making in particular.
So when you hear anyone list Ultra HD to take over HD/BD, just ignore them. It is pure FUD. There is no way Ultra HD will make its way main stream anytime soon. In fact, I would be very surprised to see it enter the home in the next 20 years.

No 100GB Blu-ray can not hold Ultra HD images, it is not part of the specs. it might be possible to fit the image, but the bandwidth is lacking and no players would support it, let alone TVs.

[LynxFX]

Watch anything with fast motion or quick cuts. Then you will see how quickly broadcast HD falls apart.

[WickyWoo]

I have your same set (52" XBR4). The difference is film vs. HD video -- most of the great Discovery Channel etc shows look amazing and very 3 dimensional because they are shot natively in HD using HD video. Movies are shot on film and as such don't have that 3D "pop". However, BD is the best that film can possibly look -- better than broadcast HD movies (1080p vs. broadcast 1080i and with less compression and better audio options etc).

You're seeing artistic/creating a mood lighting vs flat/broad daylight. Especially cable HD is MPEG-2 at sub 15mbps bitrate, usually encoded on the fly, while a blu-ray is hand tweaked MPEG-4 at typically half again that. No comparison

[SquidPuppet]

Your/my TV has a slew of adjustments. I'm not sure how yours is set up, but my settings for broadcast are quite a bit different than those for viewing BD.

[Mr. Hanky]

Even considering the film vs. video effect, I'm still not sure how it is even possible for anything digital broadcast to look better than premium br material (let alone Discovery channel). Hd broadcasting has been a mess, lately, on various providers who are toying with various multicasting schemes and various degrees of compression tweaking in mpeg4 which inevitably result in fubarring pq. If bitrate starving wasn't already an issue when a single channel got a "full" allotment on bandwidth, it's definitely got to be a problem now.

Br is "real HD", for the time being. Everything else is simply flirting with various facets of "HD-lite" in order to squeeze into a limited bandwidth.

[john_1958]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

Ultra HD is nothing new. It is just a new name for an old technology.
Ultra HD is what you see in a movie theater. Anything from 2k-4k. Bl-ray is 1920, just shy of 2k. So an Ultra HD film is shot on 4k, but there are many things to take into account.
The size of the screen is important. A theater has huge screens that can take advantage of the 4k resolution. A home theater is usually between 42"-65", too small to take advantage of it.
Blu-ray is so close to 2k that it is good enough to show in theaters, and it has been done as a comparison. People had a very hard time seeing the difference.
But the real problem is market. There is no market for Ultra HD, not yet anyways, and probably not for more than a decade if ever. HD is so high quality now on a home HDTV that anything better will not be worth the price difference. In fact there are very few Ultra HD screens and they are very expensive and tend to be designed for film making in particular.
So when you hear anyone list Ultra HD to take over HD/BD, just ignore them. It is pure FUD. There is no way Ultra HD will make its way main stream anytime soon. In fact, I would be very surprised to see it enter the home in the next 20 years.

No 100GB Blu-ray can not hold Ultra HD images, it is not part of the specs. it might be possible to fit the image, but the bandwidth is lacking and no players would support it, let alone TVs.

movie theatre screens i find boring(
i find Hd should have 3d pop off any home theatre screen if it doesn't its a waste of time

broadcast resolutions arehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television#High-Definition_Display_Resolutions

[john_1958]

Originally Posted by bobcarla

Before I got my Panasonic DMP BD10AK Blu-ray player, I had heard that the best 1080P disk image would be superior to the best broadcast TV image. I have not found this to be the case.

I have a Sony Bravia XBR 52" LCD television with good quality HDMI cable which provides a stunning image on shows often aired on the Discovery Channel.

I have now played a number of discs like "Deja Vu" which are touted as having high quality PQ and did not find any part of the movie which matched some of the shows like "Planet Earth".

Has anyone had a different experience. If so, do you have any suggestions how I can get my player to match or exceed high quality broadcast?

Bobcarla

what settings are you using for video that makes a difference

and bit rate processor