Blu-Ray quality disappointing

[StoogeFan3301]

I have a tv that does not support 1080P so I use the 1080i setting and the picture is still alot beter than SD DVD. My TV does not support HDMI so I have HD component cables for my PS3 my first BD viewed was underworld 2 and it was alot more detailed and vibrant than the SD dvd. It took a while for my parents to see the difference between the two. Blu-ray quality definatley depends on which movie you are watching. For example House of Flying Daggers and Talledega nights look like absolute crap while movies like Tomb Raider, sleepy hollow, and employee of the month are good but not great and then you have your truly amazing pictures like Crank, Ice Age 2, UltraViolet, and the Descent. IMHO picture quality is subjective to each individual person some think the Descent looks amazing while others thinkit looks like crap so its up to you. Overall I am impressed with blu-ray movie jsut not all blu-rays

[WilliamC]

Originally Posted by tulegit

according to avsforum, they list Crank as the 2nd best movie in tier 0. So sorry, not just average joes think that all movies should be at that quality.

No offense, but avsforum has gone down hill over the past few years, even more so now with this format war. To me Crank is not Tier 0, to you it may be and thats ok. We are both entitled to our opinions. Its just a matter of prefence.

[JTK]

I can't believe this worthless troll thread is still here.

Vizio is trash. Beyond that, consider a trip to the eye doctor ASAP.

End of story.

[DavePS3]

I have a Kiss dp-600 which upconverts into my Loewe CRT at 1080i. When I compared Fifth Element Superbit on the KiSS (HDMI) to the PS3 running 1080i also through HDMI (both HDMI's passing through a PureLink HDMI switcher, the upconverted Superbit was damn sweet but the BD is simply more kike a photograph. My sister counldn't see the difference until I pointed out certain things. For instance, the absence of fluttering edges, ringing, etc. and the colors seemed truer. Was there a massive difference? No but remember that film is film and whether it's Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, both are re-mastered and upconverted to 1080i/p but it's still film. As a result of my test, will I replace all 1400 DVD titles I have with Blu-Ray? Not at 40 bucks a pop I aint! But new stuff as it comes out, Hell yes.

[Chris Beveridge]

Originally Posted by JTK

I can't believe this worthless troll thread is still here.

Vizio is trash. Beyond that, consider a trip to the eye doctor ASAP.

End of story.

While I personally don't believe every "can't see the quality" thread is a troll, I think it's important to let the responses play out to some extent. For one thing, it encourages members to present multiple ideas of why the original poster may be having a problem. This lets those who are reading but not posting/not registered keep this in mind for when they acquire a BD playback device. "Ah, I need to make sure I set X in my PS3 to get it right!"

It also, again in my opinion only, lets the membership cover their thoughts in a generally civil manner. As long as it remains civil and doesn't devolve, it can bring about some good responses that help to portray this forum in a positive light.

"You're a troll!" to a casual reader looking for information paints a negative. "Have you tried X or Y" paints a helpful forum.

If we had a ton of these or they were showing up on a daily basis it'd be different of course.

[JBlacklow]

Direct proof here and here that the OP either has a poor display setup, or is otherwise having problems others are not. Note that the linked poster isn't even using 1080p, in which case the BD image would probably show further improvement.

[DavePS3]

Well said, Chris. Sometimes people are truly expecting a huge difference and there is, if you know what to look for. Otherwise, if you're expecting a night and day difference between BD and SD, you'd be a bit dissapointed. Because I've worked with Faroudja equipment, I know how hard it is to do good video processing and how expensive it is. Also, if the 24 frames per second film material was bumped up to 30 or 32 like video, people would really dig it. All in all, we really need to be nice to everyone even if we think the person is a dolt. Everyone has to start somewhere and ripping someone a new a'hole doesn't help. I checked out the HD-DVD forum yesterday and everyone there seemed helpful. I think some people here need to taks a stress pill and realize not everyone is as fantastically gifted in the knowledge dept. as they may be - real or imagined.

[Knight-Errant]

I think what muddies the waters a little is that we've had upscaled DVDs to get used to.

Going from SD to HD is a shock, whatever the source, but going from upscaled DVD to HD is a lesser shock I think.

[DavePS3]

Totally agree, Knight. A good upconverting player is worth it's weight in gold.

[tulegit]

Originally Posted by JTK

I can't believe this worthless troll thread is still here.

Vizio is trash. Beyond that, consider a trip to the eye doctor ASAP.

End of story.

I was wondering when this response would show up. You really can't do any kind of constructive critism without being called a troll....

After reading through all these post. A lot of people have made my point. It takes a while to notice the difference or they have to point out the details to others. That just goes to show that the improvement of Blu-Ray (or HD-DVD) is not much. Sure there are more details and it's sharper. But for me, it was little let down after waiting years for the format to come out.

Just not worth double dipping for me. I'll stick with my dvd and buy BD's that I don't have. You can bash my equipment or me personally, but I think everyone agrees that not ALL BD's are the same quality. Some are better than others. I just won't accept anything other than top tier quality for a Hi-Def format.

Regarding film vs Video. I guess that's just personal preference. But I'm willing to bet that when Star Wars Episode II and III (shot in all digital) comes out, it will be everyone's "reference" disc.

And for all the people who assume that just because I criticized your OUR format I am clueless, I have more background in electronics and computers than you would think. So using that arguement to defend you views really doesn't hold ground. BD is still in its infancy and to think that its perfect right out of the gate, well then you are clueless.

[Chris Beveridge]

Originally Posted by tulegit

Just not worth double dipping for me. I'll stick with my dvd and buy BD's that I don't have. You can bash my equipment or me personally, but I think everyone agrees that not ALL BD's are the same quality. Some are better than others. I just won't accept anything other than top tier quality for a Hi-Def format.

Just like not all DVDs are the same nor HD DVDs. Just the way it is for many reasons.

But I agree completely about the double dipping. Well, not completely. There are select titles I will double dip on that I want to get the better eye-candy on as well as better audio. But my collection of DVDs is bordering on 5000 now so it will be very select for upgrading. My advantage comes in that I stopped buying DVDs back in January of 2005 and have only rented a bit since then. I also started watching a lot of flicks via Cinemax and HBO HD channels. Not quite the same but it was better than DVD most times.

So I get to play catch-up a bit. In fact, I stopped right before Aliens Vs Predator came out and wanted to get that. Now I have it and feel like my buying can continue again.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by tulegit

I was wondering when this response would show up.

I wasn't the first one to post it. In fact, didn't it show up a handful of posts into the very first page?

You really can't do any kind of constructive critism without being called a troll....

Not true.

Some of the defensive responses you posted earlier for yourself made it look suspicious. Sorry 'bout that.

Chalk it up to miscommunication on the Internet, I guess.

After reading through all these post. A lot of people have made my point. It takes a while to notice the difference or they have to point out the details to others. That just goes to show that the improvement of Blu-Ray (or HD-DVD) is not much. Sure there are more details and it's sharper. But for me, it was little let down after waiting years for the format to come out.

You and some others did make one good, albeit obvious point: Some discs are better than others, regardless of format.

Just not worth double dipping for me. I'll stick with my dvd and buy BD's that I don't have.

Prudent enough, but you'll be missing out in some cases.

You can bash my equipment ...

It's nothing personal, but you can look up for yourself plenty of reviews about the Vizio brand and their products.

...or me personally,

Hasn't happened, at least by me. It shouldn't be happening from anyone.

... but I think everyone agrees that not ALL BD's are the same quality.

Certainly!

Some are better than others. I just won't accept anything other than top tier quality for a Hi-Def format.

And as well you should.

I still think you need to think about a display upgrade down the road, though.

Regarding film vs Video. I guess that's just personal preference. But I'm willing to bet that when Star Wars Episode II and III (shot in all digital) comes out, it will be everyone's "reference" disc.

Heh, probably.

Originally Posted by Chris Beveridge

While I personally don't believe every "can't see the quality" thread is a troll, I think it's important to let the responses play out to some extent. For one thing, it encourages members to present multiple ideas of why the original poster may be having a problem. This lets those who are reading but not posting/not registered keep this in mind for when they acquire a BD playback device. "Ah, I need to make sure I set X in my PS3 to get it right!"

It also, again in my opinion only, lets the membership cover their thoughts in a generally civil manner. As long as it remains civil and doesn't devolve, it can bring about some good responses that help to portray this forum in a positive light.

"You're a troll!" to a casual reader looking for information paints a negative. "Have you tried X or Y" paints a helpful forum.

If we had a ton of these or they were showing up on a daily basis it'd be different of course.

Fair enough, although there were some posts from a handful of individuals in this thread that really made it start to get kind of questionable, but I guess it's all good.

[tulegit]

Originally Posted by DavePS3

Otherwise, if you're expecting a night and day difference between BD and SD, you'd be a bit dissapointed.

That's all I'm saying.

[JBlacklow]

Originally Posted by tulegit

Just not worth double dipping for me. I'll stick with my dvd and buy BD's that I don't have. You can bash my equipment or me personally, but I think everyone agrees that not ALL BD's are the same quality. Some are better than others. I just won't accept anything other than top tier quality for a Hi-Def format.

To each his own.

Regarding film vs Video. I guess that's just personal preference. But I'm willing to bet that when Star Wars Episode II and III (shot in all digital) comes out, it will be everyone's "reference" disc.

There have been several films released on both formats that use similar 1080p24 cameras that were used on AOTC and ROTS. Here's a rough list:

Click (BD)
Crank (BD)
Flyboys (BD)
Miami Vice (HD)
Scary Movie 4 (HD)
Superman Returns (Both)

There's also several animation titles that are directly ported from renders to digital transfers.

[DaveFi]

I only have a 720p display and can see a huge difference over broadcast on some titles. As others have already mentioned you probably just haven't gotten the titles that are best for you.

Try some animated titles. So far, Ice Age 2, Monster House, and Corpse Bride are among my favorites. Kung-Fu Hustle is my favorite live action title.

All look better than broadcast/cable HD.

[WilliamC]

Originally Posted by tulegit

Regarding film vs Video. I guess that's just personal preference. But I'm willing to bet that when Star Wars Episode II and III (shot in all digital) comes out, it will be everyone's "reference" disc.

Not for me, but you are correct for some it will be. Also ep2 is not 1920x1080, the camera they used was but becuase of the tape the actual rez is 1440x1080 or something close to that, can't remember the correct figure.

[Casey]

gotta remember that by double dipping with blurays you're also getting upgraded sound as well. while we may not have the receivers to play the lossless audio yet, i plan on getting one down the road.

plus since blurays are still new, you can still get 5-10 bucks for your used dvds which makes double dipping into bluray a little more affordable.

[dobyblue]

Episode II = 1440 x 1080 (HDW-F900)
Episode III = 1920 x 1080 (HDW950)

[JTK]

Again, maybe I'm misreading a few people in this thread, but I'm going to post something that I feel is an outright given:

Reference high defintion material, whether it be OTA, BD, HD-DVD or DVHS IS a night and day difference over ANY SD in any way, shape or form thereof.

Something is terribly wrong somewhere if you really don't see, think, or believe otherwise. I feel like I'm seeing that from a handful of people in this thread.

If that's truly the case, and I'm not misreadnig these people, then we're back to either some piece of equipment needing an upgrade and/or a trip to your friendly neighborhood optometrist.

[shamus]

Originally Posted by shamus

I totally agree. When I first got into this I did comparisons with Underworld. I could tell a slight difference but was afraid the average guy wouldnt. As time went on I continued to just watch BD movies. One day I popped in a standard DVD and I couldnt believe how bad it looked....

I should add to this that my first viewings were with the Sammy and the noise chip engaged....

And to the OP.... Underworld and Xmen are considered reference standard DVD's. Remember DVD has 15 years of experience vs the infant BD. Try comparing MI3 on both versions.