Why don't studios clean up transfer first

[KenThompson]

'Under Siege' is the latest catalog title from Warner to hit Blu-ray and HD DVD simultaneously, and both come to high-def in 1.85:1 widescreen, 1080p/VC-1-encoded transfers. 'Under Siege' does not appear to have gotten particularly grand attention from Warner, with a master that looks a bit dirty, grainy, dated, and lacking in depthWhile there are no major problems with the source material, such as huge blemishes, dropouts and the like, there are bits of dirt and it can be quite grainy at times. This is particularly noticeable in darker scenes, which sometimes are so veiled by grain that fine details are lost. Video noise also rears its ugly head, with splotches of various sizes breaking up the picture in large areas of similar color and texture (note that this is a problem not just affecting the Blu-ray but also the HD DVD version).

This is a title that I wanted to pick up but whats the point if the difference is hardly noticeable. The whole point of having a high def player is to be wowed by the sights and sounds while enjoying your fav movies.

[Josh]

The costs versus the potential profit. I have seen some of the greatest restoration jobs available, but the costs are astronomical. Even then, the picture isn't going to be perfect. Even if the BD is taken from the same master as the DVD, it will always look better than the DVD upconverted. So unless they made the BD from a subpar master, its the best you're going to get.

[theknub]

i think BR and hd-dvd are bringing a lot of flaws that were in the original or master that just weren't noticed because of the resolution. now we see them and complain.

[JTK]

Agreed with the last two posts.

That being said, we all know that we're going to see double dipping (and more) on some of these discs in a year or two for just these sorts of reasons, among other things.