Why Blu-ray for SD quality shows/movies

[SteelPen]

Originally Posted by thdeanmachine

first of all its BD. second of all if you cant see the difference between 480i and 1080p than yeah keep buying DVDs but don't continue to post on a site called "blu-ray.com" to just keeping arguing your point that the format will fail

Thank you! I was waiting on someone to correct Mr.DVD!

[Alkaline]

Originally Posted by snipemonkey

First off, we need to clear up a common (it seems to me the MOST common) misunderstanding about film resolution:

A lot of people seem to be under the odd misapprehension that just because we've all gotten used to seeing older films/TV shows in low definition (480 or below) there is simply nothing more to see. As if somehow, at some ambiguously-defined magic moment in the past, camera film suddenly started absorbing more resolution and -- voila! -- high-def was born. Kind of like saying that anything pre-Star Wars (or pre-whatever) isn't capable of showing more image detail.

Not so. Older movies, when projected from a good print and on decent equipment, are capable of just as much image detail and resolution as anything filmed today. It's only because we've all grown up with (if not 'used to') shitty transfers of Taxi Driver and Bullitt that we think it'll never look better. Given a good print (hopefully one struck directly from the original camera negative, if possible) and a competent telecine artist, any older film will "pop" in high-def.

Whether you CARE about the added clarity is another question entirely. Most people, given an good, properly calibrated A-to-B comparison between standard DVD and Blu-ray, would be forced to concede that Blu-ray is clearly superior. Here's the rub, though -- the bee in the bonnet of all us cinema nerds: For most people, DVD is "good enough."

I might not get it, but it's pretty clear that, in general, the vast majority of the viewing public are just fine with Youtube as their entertainment-delivery vehicle of choice. High definition doesn't mean anything to the general public except "more expensive."

Se la vie.

Beautifully put

[6thDeadlyVenom]

Originally Posted by Monkey

"But with upconverting DVDs how would a movie, like Taxi Driver or Bullitt be any better with Blu-ray than a DVD?"

Upconverting doesn't magically bring back resolution to above 480p. Movies like Taxi Driver inherently have lost tons of resolution when captured to DVD. Even Blu-ray doesn't retain all the resolution from the original source for Taxi Driver but is insanely better than DVD.

but many movies like terminator 1 only have a 480p source they release as blue ray as well.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by 6thDeadlyVenom

but many movies like terminator 1 only have a 480p source they release as blue ray as well.

ummmmmmmmmm, no..... Terminator 1 was NOT a 480 source. It was sourced from a true Hi-Def master, it just wasn't a brand new master with the newest tech to "clean" it up.

[My_Two_Cents]

Originally Posted by 6thDeadlyVenom

but many movies like terminator 1 only have a 480p source they release as blue ray as well.

I love how newbies come in here spreading BS all over the place...

And "blue" ray? Seriously? That, alone, kills any credibility you think you may have.

[RiseDarthVader]

Originally Posted by BJMRamage

I did spend some time on the DVDBeaver.com (I think that was the name something Beaver-I know that can lead elsewhere if wrong) and some of the DVD->BluRay was really good. Others ehh and some looked very grainy/film-like

Would be interested in seeing the POTC image stated above.

Remember that is the point of Blu-ray. To give us a direct transfer of the 2K Digital Intermediate.

[blu_sharpy]

Originally Posted by Ricshoe

I love how newbies come in here spreading BS all over the place...

And "blue" ray? Seriously? That, alone, kills any credibility you think you may have.

I think it should be a rule that on these forums blu is spelt without the 'e'

[jjocsak]

Good Idea...

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Well you can get an idea by looking at screencaptures in our BD reviews and comparing them to your DVDs paused in your computer.

[jerwin]

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

Remember that is the point of Blu-ray. To give us a direct transfer of the 2K Digital Intermediate.

A lot of good classic films don't have digital intermediates. They still look better on bluray that they do on dvd. Perhaps some of them need a larger screen to look their best.

[RiseDarthVader]

Well then you go back and scan the older films and create a DI for them. Better to do older films in 4K just to make them a bit more future proof though.

[jerwin]

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

Well then you go back and scan the older films and create a DI for them. Better to do older films in 4K just to make them a bit more future proof though.

It's not future proofing. It's oversampling. Some of the best dvds were downsampled from 2K sources.

[jaycee21]

I dunno if this has been asked yet but is there a site that compares the dvd vs the blu-ray? If so, can you please send me the link?

Thanks in advance

[Sussudio]

dvdbeaver.com

[skatalite]

Originally Posted by jaycee21

I dunno if this has been asked yet but is there a site that compares the dvd vs the blu-ray? If so, can you please send me the link?

Thanks in advance

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/ does a good job, in my opinion. Even though the site can be a pain to navigate.

[jaycee21]

Great!

Thanks

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by jerwin

It's not future proofing. It's oversampling. Some of the best dvds were downsampled from 2K sources.

Well actually is for future proofing, and archiving, and down sampling, and 4K projection too.

I saw How the West Was Won and North by Nothwest in 2160p x 4K

[jerwin]

2K is the movie equivalent of 1080p. A little, wider though, to handle the academy flat ratio.
4K is twice the resolution in each direction.

If a film is scanned at 1080p and then down sampled for DVD, it'll have fewer aliasing artifacts. Similarly, a film can be scanned at 4K, and then downsampled for the bluray release.

[Deciazulado]

Thanks for the info

[jerwin]

Originally Posted by Josh

. NTSC is 525i and DVD is 480p. If you de-interlace NTSC to 525p and put that raw on a Blu-ray, you would get 45 extra lines of data.

Like the mysterious line 21? I've always wanted to see that in raw form.

[Deciazulado]

Actually NTSC is 486i of active picture lines of content x 710.85 pixels when digitized. The rest of the 525i is blanking info. Likewise PAL is 576i active picture lines x 702 pixels when digitized, inside the 625i system.
If you watch on an analog underscanned TV set you can see the blanking (black) and those other lines like CC info and sometimes a color bar one line tall, etc.

DVD is 480i x 720