The In's and Out's of Hi-Def

[BRO!]

As per my new membership, I feel an introduction is needed. So hey.

But anyway, I have a Blu-addiction. It gets me some arched eyebrows at other sites because for the most part I won't watch a DVD if it's been released on Blu-Ray or has a release date announced, but I cannot help my need to watch films in their best format (besides the original of course).
With this comes my want to know more about, well, basically everything relating to a restoration/transfer/whatever.
Basically I want to be able to readily and easily discern the difference between a good and bad copy.

Can someone lend me some good links, or just unload their knowledge into a post?

[RiseDarthVader]

Welcome to the forum!
Some basics:
1.Film grain is a good thing IF it is the original source material or added by the Director in post.

2.DNR (Digital Noise Reduction) is a bad thing unless the intention of the Director. It tries to remove film grain to please film grain haters but also removes detail in the image.

3. EE (Edge Enhancement) is a bad thing. It is usually done in the encoding of a movie to artificially sharpen and image. It makes the image appear sharper but it isn't actually sharper and leaves halo rings around objects.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BRO!

As per my new membership, I feel an introduction is needed. So hey.

But anyway, I have a Blu-addiction. It gets me some arched eyebrows at other sites because for the most part I won't watch a DVD if it's been released on Blu-Ray or has a release date announced, but I cannot help my need to watch films in their best format (besides the original of course).
With this comes my want to know more about, well, basically everything relating to a restoration/transfer/whatever.
Basically I want to be able to readily and easily discern the difference between a good and bad copy.

Can someone lend me some good links, or just unload their knowledge into a post?

it is almost impossible to tell the difference between a good copy or a bad one in any intelligent way. The issue is (using RDVs post, which I agree with)
If you see FG (or something similar) in a film should be good, but a bad over compressed transfer could make it more prominent, a higher quality film with bigger size negative should have less, a digital film should have none. How do you know exactly how much FG should be there? you can't because you don't have the original source.

DNR, should be bad, but DNR is used all the time, it is used to get rid of FG but it also gets rid of wrinkles and other small unwanted detail, and some times to make it easier to do digital effects so it can be used in the production of the film and not just the transfer for digital. So how do you know if it was applied during the DI or the transfer? And if it was there but is no longer does that show quality or lack there of?

A good transfer is one that looks as the movie was made to look a bad one will have artefacts that happen after the fact, during the transfer, but unless you know what the film should look like (because you have access to the original) it is impossible (especially for modern films) to differentiate between a good and bad transfer.

[Rob J in WNY]

Welcome to the forums, Bro.

Just in cast you didn't know, Blu-ray movies come with the ability to hear uncompressed multichannel audio in up to 7.1 channels. You've been listening to lossy forms of compressed audio for years with DVD, and now it's time to enjoy sound which is free of the artifacting and loss of quality induced by lossy compression.

Get to know three terms for this amazing, unrestrained audio.

1. Dolby TrueHD (lossless multichannel audio data compression codec)

2. DTS-HD Master Audio (lossless multichannel audio data compression codec)

3. Uncompressed PCM (bit-for-bit multichannel audio without data compresssion at all)

At least one of the three of these are what you will find on most Blu-ray discs as an option for audio. Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio apply compression, but it is "lossless," meaning the uncompressed result is bit-for-bit exact as the original master, without loss of quality. It's basically like a "Zip File" in that no original digital data is lost, but the audio takes up less physical space on the disc. Uncompressed PCM is simply bit-for-bit audio the same as the master. Many Blu-rays have this as an audio option.

If you are not set up for decoding and playback of lossless/uncompressed multichannel audio, then it is something to consider, given your excitement over Blu-ray. The open, more natural and true sound (even on older movies with dated recording techniques and aged masters) has a clarity, detail and quality to it that standard Dolby Digital or DTS can't quite hold up to - in some cases by a long shot.

If you are not set up for decoding and playing back lossless or uncompressed audio, your system will "fall back" to standard lossy Dolby Digital or DTS multichannel audio. It's part of the "backward compatability" of the Blu-ray Disc movie format for use on older systems. Fortunately, the Dolby Digital an DTS tracks on Blu-ray Disc movies is generally encoded at a higher bitrate than their DVD counterparts, and can exhibit superior reproduction over the same DVD title. But make no mistake, lossless/uncompressed audio is worth listening to for enthusiasts such as yourself.

Unfortunately, some Blu-ray movies do not include a lossless or uncompressed audio track at all. One of the most profound in this case is that of "Speed Racer" - a movie with absolutely stunning visual quality, but produced with a rather boring, lossy Dolby Digital 5.1 channel soundtrack the BD release.

[BRO!]

Awesome replies guys; I appreciate it.

And with that being said about determining a good transfer from a bad, I guess it should be in relation to a DVD. I don't have a 35mm, so that's basically my reference material.