Old movies: BD vs DVD

[bigbuzz666]

I was wondering, is there a big difference between a blu-ray and a DVD for a movie made, lets say, 10-15 years ago? I mean, is it worhtless for me to buy the blu-ray if i already have the dvd version?

Do the picture and audio are really better on the blu-ray version or do they just put it on a new type of disc?

[thelastz28]

It's a night and day difference.

[Q?]

It's complicated, but older movies can and DO look much better than dvd's.
Read the review for Blade Runner for example, the best example.
Looks fantastic for a movie that was relased in 1982.
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Blade...ay-Review/545/
Some can look like crap given the nature of the filmstock.
Like Robocop looks like crap, but I'm not sure if it is because it did not get a proper transfer, but I don't think it will ever look good.
Just read the reviews for movies you're interested in.
Blu-ray.com gives excellent reviews.

[Anthony P]

it depends more on what a studio does then age. In the end film be it today or 50 years ago has more resolution then even BD can show.

[crazyBLUE]

The sound track on A DVD cannot come close to being as good as A sound track on A Blu .

[JBL4645]

Originally Posted by Q!

It's complicated, but older movies can and DO look much better than dvd's.
Read the review for Blade Runner for example, the best example.
Looks fantastic for a movie that was relased in 1982.
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Blade...ay-Review/545/
Some can look like crap given the nature of the filmstock.
Like Robocop looks like crap, but I'm not sure if it is because it did not get a proper transfer, but I don't think it will never look good.
Just read the reviews for movies you're interested in.
Blu-ray.com gives excellent reviews.

Robocop will only look as good as what the 35mm print is. Nothing more nothing less. Messing around with the video manipulation thingy tweaking colour and brightness can only make things worse.

Why don’t they just mirror the film to digital master the way it looks and just get it over and done with.

Originally Posted by crazyBLUE

The sound track on A DVD cannot come close to being as good as A sound track on A Blu .

The sound is big deal here because of the region 2 PAL speed up it tends to make the lows less, lower and highs a bit toppy shrilly sounding.

I prefer the 24fps rate as it should be as it should have been in the first place for region 2 DVD, just a sheer f$$%^king waste of money!

[U4K61]

Originally Posted by bigbuzz666

I was wondering, is there a big difference between a blu-ray and a DVD for a movie made, lets say, 10-15 years ago? I mean, is it worhtless for me to buy the blu-ray if i already have the dvd version?

Do the picture and audio are really better on the blu-ray version or do they just put it on a new type of disc?

35mm film has 20,000,000 'quality pixels' from the camera negative under ideal conditions. So there is plenty to go around for 1080p Blu-ray which has only 2,000,000. So yes, Blu can be a lot better then the DVD version, even if the movie is 20+ years old. There will be improvements in PQ over 1080p with higher resolution formats such as 4K and 8K. All this, of course, depends on the quality of the transfer.

Got a good post, 35mm/70mm with lots of technical info and links. Watch the old movie trailers.

Originally Posted by thelastz28

It's a night and day difference.

[OrlandoEastwood]

I think it honestly depends on how the studio takes care of the prints over the years. Some can look awesome and some can look like crap.

[KingBing]

^ I agree but they still look better

[Blu_Ray_UK2007]

I think it all depends on the movie, but I have been very happy with 95% of my older movies.

[Steve]

I think there is an improvement with most older titles released on blu. Even a movie like Predator, which was filmed to be very grainy, still looks better on blu than DVD. Granted it doesn't look like Iron Man or Transformers, but there is an improvement. Also, as mentioned, it's often worth the upgrade IMO just for the improvement in audio on blu over the DVD.

[Polygon]

There are a few movies I've seen on BD that look no better than the upconverted DVD. This is usually the fault of the studio and a bad transfer. Also, they are few and far between. Just look at the reviews on this site. If you still have doubts, rent them and see for yourself. nine times out of ten the difference will be very noticeable.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Polygon

There are a few movies I've seen on BD that look no better than the upconverted DVD. This is usually the fault of the studio and a bad transfer. Also, they are few and far between. Just look at the reviews on this site. If you still have doubts, rent them and see for yourself. nine times out of ten the difference will be very noticeable.

Also some films are shot in SD (eg: 28 days later), or aren't shot to be sharp (eg:The Da Vinci Code).

[Nocturnaloner]

Screen size is also a big factor here. I have a projector and a 106" diagonal screen, so even on the older films, the difference in resolution is noticeable, given any kind of decent transfer.

[whingebag]

Hi, I now own a PS3 and use it to watch Bluray discs. I also have set the upscaling settings to the highest quality.

My question is this, is there any point in buying a bluray version of a disc that i already have on SD DVD? Would i benefit from the BD version?
Obviously the sound would be better but i only have a old Yamaha 5.1 amp with only a optical input. And yes you could say about the possibility of more extras than the SD DVD but i don't hardley watch them anyway. So far the upscaled SD DVD films I've watched on the PS3 have looked fantastic and likewise the BD films I've seen on my 1080p TV have also looked fantastic.....

Regards
Whingebag

[ryoohki]

Originally Posted by whingebag

Hi, I now own a PS3 and use it to watch Bluray discs. I also have set the upscaling settings to the highest quality.

My question is this, is there any point in buying a bluray version of a disc that i already have on SD DVD? Would i benefit from the BD version?
Obviously the sound would be better but i only have a old Yamaha 5.1 amp with only a optical input. And yes you could say about the possibility of more extras than the SD DVD but i don't hardley watch them anyway. So far the upscaled SD DVD films I've watched on the PS3 have looked fantastic and likewise the BD films I've seen on my 1080p TV have also looked fantastic.....

Regards
Whingebag

Bluray is not the only factor. Film Scanners are too. Back before bluray studio's (most of them) scanned for DVD and lot's of them added EE and different 'enhancing filters' that look like crap on a big screen.

When they rescan them 'with new hardware this is better than the old one' for Blu-ray it immensily better than the dvd was. Off course a similar DVD is released with the Bluray but you'll still gain here.

A very good example are the old James Bond...

[Sussudio]

bigbuzz - this is a wonderful thread that helps explain all there is to know about blu-ray, including (and what would benefit you the most) how blu-ray makes older movies look their finest

https://forum.blu-ray.com/newbie-dis...myths-etc.html

[Taat]

Personally the Blu Ray has a much better picture quality to a normal DVD and the sound quality is just immense on some blu ray discs. However, some movies can be a bit grainy, it is usually to do with the studio that creates the blu ray. Buzz in my opinion, you should move on to blu ray because you will get the best out of your TV and player.

[FendersRule]

Older movies that I own that are phenomenal on Blu:
Big Trouble in Little China
2001: Space Odyssey
A Nightmare On Elm Street (Canadian)
Easy Rider
Creepshow
Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)
Halloween
Blade Runner
Full Metal Jacket

Older movies that I own that are great on Blu:
A Clockwork Orange
Hellraiserr
Assault on Precinct 13
Batman (1989)
Die Hard
Under Siege
Roadhouse
Friday the 13th Part 1 Uncut
Friday the 13th Part 2
Friday the 13th Part 3 3D
Beetlejuice
Above the Law
Total Recall (UK)
Superman
First Blood

Older movies that I own that are non-exciting, but sufficient on Blu:
The Running Man
T2: Skynet
Rambo (FB pt 2)
Rambo 3
Commando
Predator

Older movies that I own that are disgusting on Blu:
Evil Dead 2
American Psycho

Conclusion: Age makes no difference. This list isn't even close to exhaustive either.

Why people even question older films strikes me as completely odd. It all depends on the quality of the individual transfer, period.

[FendersRule]

Originally Posted by Sussudio

bigbuzz - this is a wonderful thread that helps explain all there is to know about blu-ray, including (and what would benefit you the most) how blu-ray makes older movies look their finest

https://forum.blu-ray.com/newbie-dis...myths-etc.html

So I watched this movie for the second time, and I still think it's pretty snazzy.

[Show spoiler] I've pretty much came to the conclusion that Patrick uses the end of horror VHS tapes, and transfers his recorded killings onto them, then returns them

[Show spoiler]I still conclude that Patrick is just an alias, and everything was in his mind. "What happens inside stays"