Topic: HD Video Card and PC Blu-Ray player.

[Touti]

I'd be interested to know if it's ok on yours though. Different equipment, region 1, etc.

Sure, I'll check it out and let you know later.

[Touti]

I'd be interested to know if it's ok on yours though. Different equipment, region 1, etc.

It looks "grainy" to me.  Like an old photo that was scanned at high-res and then badly cleaned (or not cleaned at all).  I find it very pixelated (is that a word ?  If not I am officially inventing it and will expect royalties on it being used for 25 years). 

And I agree the background in the woods at the beginning looks very bad, everything that is not on focus has a very low quality.  I guess upscaling can enhance but not rewrite.....

[Najemikon]

Thanks, Eric. Glad to see it wasn't just me! I felt so let down though when I proved that other discs looked so much better. A film like that deserves better treatment.

And I used "pixellated" in the previous post. You misspelled it, but you still owe me a penny for its use...

[Touti]

And I used "pixellated" in the previous post. You misspelled it, but you still owe me a penny for its use...

I guess that's where I got it then 

[Achim]

I didn't log in for two days and you went from asking how to set up BD in your computer to buying a Blu-ray player already

That was it anyway for BR movies.....then this morning I woke up early and decided to watch Jurassic Park III which I rewatched last week.  Since it was fresh in memory I thought it would be perfect to compare with BR upscaling.  I must admit I was a bit disappointed.  It is extremely good and much better than the 720p upscaling of my regular DVD player but I expected more....maybe my expectations were too high after reading here and there how good it was.

The power of upscaling/upconverting becomes most clear in a direct comparison! My setup allowed me to test that, using the same movies in different players and then just switch channels on the TV to see the difference.

First I tested regular DVD (my previous machine was an older one and I had bought a 1080p DVD Player when I bought my 46" TV) against upscaling. I put a copy of Raging Bull in each machine and just comparing the menu (red text over black & white film clips as background) was a revelation. I was very happy with the result. While regular displayed very "fuzzy" text the upscaled version looked much more stable.

Then I compared upscaled against Blu-ray, using my DVD and Blu-ray versions of Blade Runner: The Final Cut. Here the jaw dropped even lower. The increased amount of detail was immense and Blu-ray really made sense!

Needless to say I only watch TV rarely these days, as it just looks terrible. Even 480p footage used on some Blu-rays looks better.

Also, be aware that there is horrible Blu-ray transfers out there, that may indeed look worse than an upscaled excellent DVD transfer. Mileage varies.

[Touti]

I have a dumb question.

I see that Future Shop currently has a sale on BR titles at 2 for 22$.  I checked the titles and they're mostly old movies like Rambo, Young Guns etc.  I don't plan on buying any but I'm curious, is there really an increase in quality on BR versions of 20 years old movies ?

Wouldn't it be just the same as playing the regular version upscaled to 1080p ?  Can a movie be made to HD when it wasn't shot with HD cameras ?

[Najemikon]

I haven't tried any yet, but only because I think you have to be careful. The absolute best quality available will be the studios master and whenever they transfer it to any home format, it's going to degrade like any form of compression. So by that very simplified rationale, old movies should look better then they ever have before when transferred to Blu-Ray. In fact, photography was of such a high standard in the old days, simply because it had to be, that they are arguably worth seeing more than the average modern movie. However, how do you know that the manufacturer bothered to go back to the source?  You have to rely on reviews I think. I've heard for instance that Dirty Harry is a fantastic release. And Criterion offer a trade-in; send 'em your DVD (just the disc) and they'll swap it for a Blu-Ray version (only not in Europe. Bastards.)  

[Touti]

I did a bit of research after posting my question and found a post on another forum (forgot the name) saying that film actually has much higher quality (resolution, definition....whatever one wants to call it) than 1080p digital cameras.

I was surprised to read that (don't if it's true) but the guy said that they are still using film cameras to shoot movies, not HD digital cams.

If that's the case then yes, it's only a matter of how good or bad the transfer is and whether they went back to the original format or if they made the HD version from an already digital version of lower quality.

Bottom line Jon, what you said is exactly what was posted by people on this other forum, best (if not only) way to know is to check reviews and try to find if the HD version comes from a restored original or not.

[Najemikon]

I did a bit of research after posting my question and found a post on another forum (forgot the name) saying that film actually has much higher quality (resolution, definition....whatever one wants to call it) than 1080p digital cameras.

I was surprised to read that (don't if it's true) but the guy said that they are still using film cameras to shoot movies, not HD digital cams.

If that's the case then yes, it's only a matter of how good or bad the transfer is and whether they went back to the original format or if they made the HD version from an already digital version of lower quality.

Bottom line Jon, what you said is exactly what was posted by people on this other forum, best (if not only) way to know is to check reviews and try to find if the HD version comes from a restored original or not.

Yes, a pure negative is still much higher quality which is how I've always understood it anyway. Especially on black reproduction. You'll have seen in reviews of hi-def equipment, they always go on about the black quality, but really, that's going to be dictated by the source and even BR isn't there yet. It took me a long while to get a digital SLR camera because although I wanted to resurrect an old hobby, it's only the last couple of years I felt digital is comparable to film, but even then, night photography is still far better using a traditional camera.

I'm glad that video will always be pushing against this ceiling though, because people will always chase the best. They can see the difference and want to always improve. While with music, the average listener is quite happy with shit reproduction (CDs over vinyl and even MP3s over CD), so instead of seeing tech advances for the home, it's going backwards! DVD-Audio is fantastic but no-one will buy it.

[Touti]

I think  audio is a different issue.  HD Video is affordable, almost anyone can buy an HDTV with a BR player and a reasonable sound system.

The problems with DVD audio are;

1: Even with the best quality available in the world most people wouldn't hear the difference.
2: For those who can hear it, it's very complicated and expensive to have the setup and equipment to really benefit from the extra quality.

Image doesn't bounce off walls, it doesn't make anything viibrate in the room, the only thing that affects the quality of your tv in your environment is light and that's pretty easy to controler.  Sound however is a completely different story because it's not concentrated in a small 2 dimensions plane.

I think we don't buy DVD music because it would be too expensive for most of us to have a room and a sound system where it would make a difference.

[Najemikon]

I do agree, but that's not quite what I meant. It's only relatively recently that watching films at home is taken for granted, but music has been in the living room for decades. When the only format was vinyl, there was a huge cross-section of equipment and how much you spent was reflected directly in the sound, but the record was the same for everyone. Whether it be played on tinny speakers in a bedroom, or a properly configured system powerful amps.

Everyone had a record player. But then came CD, which was more convenient of course and far better than tape, so music on the move became more popular. However, quality took a dip and it's never got better. There are still those who want full on systems and it should be easier now, because a home cinema setup is fantastic quality for music as well, but there's no decent format anymore. It's CD or nothing and CD has limits, easily hit by a mid-range system. You can still buy vinyl but its overpriced. Enthusiasts are being shut out a little.

The majority don't care about quality though, that's true. And it's the major stumbling block for Blu-Ray. I think, like CD, film will become stagnant as people start to want downloads more. I hate the idea of downloading my movies, but that seems to be the ambition of the industry as a whole, not quality.

[Touti]

Jon I don't know if you're referring to buying a movie that you download and burn on a disc or paying online for streaming but in both cases I don't see it coming anytime soon.

I don't think this will happen unless ISP's become the distributors, or at least have their fair share of the profits, and the bandwidth they take isn't counted in your monthly allowance.  What would be the size of the download if you were to watch and HD movie with a DD5.1 or DTS Sound track ?  I don't know the answer but I reckon it can't be less than 7.5-8 Gigabytes.

Here in Canada the ISP's recently stopped giving unlimited downloads on their fastest and most expensive plans (Ultimate High Speed, Extreme High Speed and those that have speeds of more than 50mpbs).  With the most popular packages the limits are usually 20 Gigs download and 10 Gigs upload.

With my 20 Gigs I could only watch two Blu-Ray movies a month, that's not enough for most people.  On the other hand, ISP's aren't gonna give us unlimited bandwidth (or very high limits like hundreds of gigs or even TB's) for 35$/month.  If they increase their download limits to support HD streaming/download then the cost of internet will probably be too high and people will keep renting.

Whether it's download or stream, the internet cost of buying movies online would be prohibitive unless, as I stated above, the ISP's have a share of the pot.  For this to work they would have to get money from the studio, not only be providers of bandwidth which would limit the market as not everybody can pay over a 100$ a month for a plan that allows (somewhat) unlimited transfer.

If however I buy it from my ISP then he doesn't have to count the download/streaming in my monthly allowance because he's already being paid with the purchase/rental.  The question is whether or not this can be a good business model and if it could be done while keeping the prices reasonable.

[Najemikon]

Well on one hand you demonstrate my point. If ISPs started pushing movie download services but at a more manageable DVD quality, I think people are more likely to go with that rather than Blu-Ray discs. Just as CD was more convenient, so to will downloading be. Plus I doubt you'd expect to keep the downloaded file. The BBC have an on-demand service you can run on your desktop and watch programs you might have missed, but it each download has an expiry date.

On the other hand, both satellite and cable services here in the UK at least offer HD broadcasting and on-demand services. Virgin are moving up to fibre-optic networks which is a step closer to making it even more viable. You just choose what you want to see from a menu. I do think over the next decade we'll see more and more content delivery options, rather than going to a shop and buying a packaged item. And I think it's a shame.

[Touti]

Who knows how fast internet will be in 10 years, what will be the cost of it how much monthly traffic people will have.  I do agree with you than things will be very different in 10 years, after all we, the collectors (or should I now exclude my self  ) don't represent the majority.  Most people I know don't buy DVD's so obviously we won't count for much in the model.

...rather than going to a shop and buying a packaged item. And I think it's a shame.

I'm not sure I can agree with you on this.  There's environmental issues to consider as well, how long can we keep on producing things made of plastic ?  Movie downloads/streaming may not be our preferred method of distribution but at least it's better for the environment........I think......I'm not sure because apparently internet isn't "green" either.

Now not being able to buy a packaged item doesn't mean you won't be able to buy a movie anyway.  With the internet getting faster almost every day it is conceivable that in 10 years (or more or less) you will buy your movie online and it will be yours to watch as many times as you want......it just won't be on a plastic media in a plastic container in plastic shelve.

I had that same discussion with a friend not long ago but it started as we were talking about HTPC's and having a computer in the living.  What I told him at the time which I still believe is that it's not gonna happen until you have some kind of set top box connected to the internet and a remote to control it.  No matter how it's done, it's gonna have to be simple, people will want to sit with their remote, hit a few buttons and watch their movie the same way they always have but if, on top of that, they don't have to manipulate a physical media they'll be happier.

If movies on internet remain a computer thing with downloads, streaming, computer in the living room, HD graphics cards and every complication and problem that comes with it then I don't think you have much to worry about losing your packaged item

[Najemikon]

How popular are PVRs in Canada and US? Essentially hard drive based recorders that became the next logical step for Sky+. It's those things that have a chance of killing the PC based entertainment when coupled with a delivery service.

My main worry is technology cheapens art. I've never been a huge music fan, but since downloading became easier, I barely take notice of what I do listen to! I don't ever want to feel like that with movies. A bit of effort makes you appreciate the result more.