Pre-ordered!
Bob_S. said:I'll wait for reviews. If the picture quality gets a thumbs up, I'll definitely be getting this. I've wanted this on Blu for a loooong time.
t2smith said:I went ahead and put my pre-order in. Amazon has it for $34.99 and that's about the highest I want to pay for this, especially with no details on the specs available. The regular price of $64.98 has me nervous that the price might not stay that low. Sullivan's site has it listed for $29.99, but the shipping to my location pushes it to over $45.
So I have kept this title in my cart...waiting for a price drop.
It has finally happened. It is now $35.22 @ Amazon.
But no one has posted a review here? How does this look? It is definitely 16:9, right? Does it work? It's GOT to be a better image (outside of the composition maybe) than the old DVD?!?
Anything?
Some of those look pretty darn good, Toby. Much better than what I remember from the DVD.
Trigger pulled at that price.
It's been up in the $45-$55 range for months now.
Hi Glenn!Sorry, absolutely cropped. I was in the film industry back then and the editors we used, Mairin Wilkinson and James Lahti edited the series. It was shot on 16mm. I watched them edit it in their basement and would look at it as it progressed. No one, of course, knew what a colossal hit it would be. TV's were a whole other shape back then.
^
The above DVD/Blu-ray comparison screenshots do indeed, paint a rather different picture, than what is demonstrated in the Trailer! Perhaps the latter did involve some manipulation, then?
Considering the Blu-ray images do look noticeably sharper, it is in my opinion, a rather frustrating scenario!
CHEERS!
Hi Toby!They probably trimmed the top and bottom off the DVD video so it would be lined up with the 16x9 video when doing the comparisons. I wish they had done like Little House and gave us slightly more on the sides with a 1.36:1 aspect ratio without cropping the top and bottom. The Anne Blu-ray still looks good enough for me not to regret buying it.
I uploaded them to screenshot comparison so everybody could get a better look at the differences in full size.
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/160911
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/160910
Great work, Toby! Excellent job!
That is a radical difference, indeed, in resolution sharpness. In some shots, the re-compositions don't look bad at all, in others, it looks like a good bit of the top of the frame has been whacked. I'm sure it's simply a matter of being more noticeable on those shots which are framed rather tightly (like the top of Farnsworth's head/hat)!
Many of your particular examples seem to happily leave a lot of headroom which allows the re-composition not to cause too negative an impact.
The quality of the DVD is so bad that I think I will be pleased with this HD version. And I think the $35 price point makes it a good value.