New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ah! I knew Blu Ray was snake oil!

post #1 of 64
10/18/11 at 1:28pm
Thread Starter 
Well, it happened. The new, sexy Star Wars set was finally enough to make me break down and pick up a cheap blue ray player. I've never seen the need for upgrading and the demos at best buy were never enough to convince me that I needed new gear. But everyone I ever talked to said "Oh, you need to see it at home! That's the only way that you get the True and Awesome Effect!" Fine - so I set about pulling out the old DVD player, setting up in the new one and throwing the disc in, I'm poised to be blown away by this awesome new format. Sock it to me, New Technology!

. . . .um, it's not exactly knocking my socks off here.

Seriously, it looks just about the same as DVD boxed set from 2004 (simple basic fuckups like the Trench Run music and the lightsabers from RotJ in front of the Emperor not withstanding). If there's a Sexy New Increase in the visuals, I'm not seeing it. Same thing with the Twilight Zone discs that I picked up at the same time as I got the Star Wars discs - they looked just about as good as the older sets that I borrowed from a friend a couple of years ago.

Bottom line for me? Meh. No thanks, I'm sticking with the old format.
Reply
post #2 of 64
10/18/11 at 1:45pm
Are you sure your Blu-ray player is set up to output an HD picture? What kind of TV do you have? What is its resolution? What size is it? How is it calibrated? How is it connected to your Blu-ray player?
Reply
post #3 of 64
10/18/11 at 1:45pm

A) How big is your TV screen?

 

B) The source elements for a 1950's/1960's B&W TV show are not going to take advantage of HD resolution and color depth.

 

C) ....well, there is no C.  DVD and Blu-ray, as formats, aren't even close.

Reply
post #4 of 64
10/18/11 at 1:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert George View Post

A) How big is your TV screen?

 

B) The source elements for a 1950's/1960's B&W TV show are not going to take advantage of HD resolution and color depth.

 

C) ....well, there is no C.  DVD and Blu-ray, as formats, aren't even close.


Except for a handful of episodes, The Twilight Zone was shot on film, wasn't it? No argument about the color issue, but surely the negatives have more than the equivalent of 1080 lines of resolution. It should benefit as much as any film-sourced production, shouldn't it?
Reply
post #5 of 64
10/18/11 at 2:08pm
As for older TV shows actually shot on film and updated in HD from original film resolution, I just finished watching all the original Andy Griffith Show episodes (even the color ones - actually not as bad as I used to think they were) and there is definitely a marked improvement over the old "over the air" SD episodes. Granted this was through Netflix, but I have to say my wife and I were both impressed by the quality. This goes for Star Trek as well. If you were to do a side-by-side comparison of the SD Star Trek episodes to the new HD remasters you'll be blown away.

I tend to wonder what/how the OP has their system set up. Nowadays, there's a million things to look for to ensure you're getting the best picture, and they're not always easily explained in the manuals.smile.gif
Reply
post #6 of 64
10/18/11 at 2:21pm
Yeah, the first question that popped into my mind was, do you even have a high definition (1080p) display? It's surprising how many people think that buying a blu-ray player is going to transform their standard-definition TVs into high-def! Not to mention that some people don't realize that you can only get HD through HDMI or component cables.
Edited by Mark-P - 10/18/11 at 2:45pm
Reply
post #7 of 64
10/18/11 at 2:30pm
I think it's dubious as to whether there are actual true high-definition masters of The Andy Griffith Show. George Feltenstein of Warner Brothers said something interesting in a panel discussion at Comic Con. He said there is a lot of programming proclaimed to be "high-definition" from streaming and cable services that he knows for a fact has never been mastered in high-definition. It's possible that AGS has been redone in true high-definition, but I would not at all be surprised if it is simply up-converted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DellaStMedia View Post

As for older TV shows actually shot on film and updated in HD from original film resolution, I just finished watching all the original Andy Griffith Show episodes (even the color ones - actually not as bad as I used to think they were) and there is definitely a marked improvement over the old "over the air" SD episodes. Granted this was through Netflix, but I have to say my wife and I were both impressed by the quality. This goes for Star Trek as well. If you were to do a side-by-side comparison of the SD Star Trek episodes to the new HD remasters you'll be blown away.
I tend to wonder what/how the OP has their system set up. Nowadays, there's a million things to look for to ensure you're getting the best picture, and they're not always easily explained in the manuals.smile.gif
Reply
post #8 of 64
10/18/11 at 2:34pm

Wow.  Taking a very keen interest in this thread.

 

Anybody with a proper HD display should be seeing a difference.

 

Looking forward to hearing more about Tony's display.

 

 

Visit our 240DVD, 240BLU-RAY and 2403D REVIEW ARCHIVES

 

 

Reply
post #9 of 64
10/18/11 at 2:39pm

There are some BDs where the difference is not what it could be (in part because of source material) but there are others - and Star Wars is one of them - where either your eyesight is poor or your set is not 1080P.. or it's small.  Because when I look at some titles (Sin City is a great one) the difference in color and clarity is phenomenal.   I could never go back to SD.

Reply
post #10 of 64
10/18/11 at 2:43pm
Good point. I've noticed quite a few times that though it says "HD" it's just 408p instead of 480i. However, I believe I read elsewhere that AGS had been remastered, but there wasn't enough interest in the SD DVD sales to justify releasing it on BD. I don't know if I buy that, but I'm still impressed by the quality. Fortunately, our local NBC affiliate still broadcasts AGS, and I do notice a difference. Then again, maybe I'm seeing it through rose colored glasses, since I love the show so much! smiley_wink.gif

Star Trek on the other hand did get remastered from original film sources. I went to the theater to see The Menagerie, parts 1 and 2 in the theater when they did a road show of the remasters. It was crazy seeing an old 60's TV show on the big screen looking as if it had been shot yesterday!
Reply
post #11 of 64
10/18/11 at 3:41pm
I will say this....

On my ISF'd 60" SXRD sitting from 9 feet back there is not a *huge* difference between the DVD and BD of the original Star Wars trilogy. I A/B'd A New Hope recently and I was kind of shocked. There most certainly is an improvement with the BD, but it's not as large of a difference compared to other movies and for some people it may seem minor. (I also have an Oppo BDP-93 which does a great job of deinterlacing and scaling which helps). I think this is largely because its using an older film scan. Blu-rays handled well look strikingly better than the DVD version on my set-up. (I do plan on upgrading my display soon, so maybe Star Wars BD will look even better compared to the DVD).

So, I can see someone, for example, viewing on a small LCD from 10-12 feet back may not notice much of a difference at all with the original SW trilogy.
Reply
post #12 of 64
10/18/11 at 3:47pm
I have no problem watching movies on Blu-ray and DVD. I also have no problem seeing a difference between the two. I don't mean this to be insulting but anyone who can't see a difference has a problem with their monitor, player or eyesight. That's not to say that everyone has to care about the difference but, barring some outside problem, the difference is obvious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cafink View Post

Except for a handful of episodes, The Twilight Zone was shot on film, wasn't it?

Yeah, 6 episodes from the second season were shot on tape. The other 150 were shot on film. The Blu-rays have new transfers and are a big jump up from the DVDs (which had nice transfers but not as good as the new ones on the Blu-rays).
Reply
post #13 of 64
10/18/11 at 4:57pm
There was plenty of these types of posts five years ago but I'm surprised anyone who has been on this board for this long would still not know enough about the format.

This is as close to a troll topic as one can get without it being a troll topic.

It is shocking to me that at this point someone would even say it.
As others have mentioned the equipment needs to be listed.
Reply
post #14 of 64
10/18/11 at 5:03pm
You know, maybe this is a troll post. Starting a topic by calling the format snake oil, really?

Tony C. Have you read anything in the blu-ray section? You obviously have been in the Blu-ray area of HTF since you were able to find it to make this topic.
The hundreds of reviews that have information on the stellar pic and sound quality can't be all wrong.

Also there is a review of this set by HTF and other members.

One other thing, how did you know it was snake oil? Did someone else tell you or did you create an opinion that caused you to think snake oil from other means.
Reply
post #15 of 64
10/18/11 at 5:22pm

Seems unlikely that someone who's been here almost 10 years and posted more than 1400 times would troll.

 

But calling the format "snake oil" sure does sound troll-like, doesn't it?

Reply
post #16 of 64
10/18/11 at 5:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony J Case View Post

Well, it happened. The new, sexy Star Wars set was finally enough to make me break down and pick up a cheap blue ray player. I've never seen the need for upgrading and the demos at best buy were never enough to convince me that I needed new gear. But everyone I ever talked to said "Oh, you need to see it at home! That's the only way that you get the True and Awesome Effect!" Fine - so I set about pulling out the old DVD player, setting up in the new one and throwing the disc in, I'm poised to be blown away by this awesome new format. Sock it to me, New Technology!
. . . .um, it's not exactly knocking my socks off here.
Seriously, it looks just about the same as DVD boxed set from 2004 (simple basic fuckups like the Trench Run music and the lightsabers from RotJ in front of the Emperor not withstanding). If there's a Sexy New Increase in the visuals, I'm not seeing it. Same thing with the Twilight Zone discs that I picked up at the same time as I got the Star Wars discs - they looked just about as good as the older sets that I borrowed from a friend a couple of years ago.
Bottom line for me? Meh. No thanks, I'm sticking with the old format.
Reply
post #17 of 64
10/18/11 at 5:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisR View Post

I have no problem watching movies on Blu-ray and DVD. I also have no problem seeing a difference between the two. I don't mean this to be insulting but anyone who can't see a difference has a problem with their monitor, player or eyesight. That's not to say that everyone has to care about the difference but, barring some outside problem, the difference is obvious.

That doesn't mean the Blu-Ray will always look better than the DVD. Some Warner Blu-Rays, for example, are much darker than the original DVD releases - e.g., NORTH BY NORTHWEST - and I actually prefer the DVD in those cases as it reveals more shadow detail. While it's true that the Blu-Ray should always look better than the DVD, that may not be true if the Blu-Ray suffers from poor color timing and excessive DNR.
Reply
post #18 of 64
10/18/11 at 6:31pm
Thread Starter 
* Are you sure your Blu-ray player is set up to output an HD picture?

Pretty sure - I jumped through all the "So you're turning me on first time" hoops correctly, I think.

What kind of TV do you have? What is its resolution? What size is it?

Lets see, I've got a monster big screen 52" Mitsubishi HDTV. It's a touch old - about 6-ish years (give or take, I don't remember exactly when I got it). And it indeed is 1080 - at least according to the front. smile.gif. I can dig up the manual if you want the exact model number.

How is it calibrated?

I have no idea, because I didnt do the calibrating. It was the delivery men came by and lugged the thing into my house, they did all the setting up for me. They plugged a gizmo in and aligned the guns and did a whole bunch of red/green/blue tests.

How is it connected to your Blu-ray player?

With the - oh crap, I can never remember if it's component or composite. I've got the cables that break the signal into the red and green and blue, that if you plug them into the wrong sockets, the picture looks like a bad tye-dye job.

And I wasn't trying to be trollish. I guess I was caught up in the crushing disappointment of having what was being touted as The Next Big Thing look like. . . . well the exact same thing that I've had all along. That was not my intent.
Reply
post #19 of 64
10/18/11 at 6:59pm
Since it sounds like you've connected the player via component cables, could ICT be the culprit?

http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/10/analog-sunset-begins-all-the-new-blu-ray-players-will-only-outp/
Reply
post #20 of 64
10/18/11 at 6:59pm
Tony,

Do you know what type of display technology your TV is? Is it a CRT rear projection? LCD? DLP?
Reply
post #21 of 64
10/18/11 at 7:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave H View Post

Tony,
Do you know what type of display technology your TV is? Is it a CRT rear projection? LCD? DLP?


If he's talking about red, blue, and green guns that have to be aligned, it's a rear projection CRT. Its peak resolution is likely 1080i. My first HDTV was a Toshiba with "guns" that used a component cable hookup (there were no HDMI ports on it), and it maxed out at 1080i. I've had three other HDTVs since then, all 1080p models, and I still have that old Toshiba in my front bedroom (it still works). However, the picture can't compare to any of my subsequent TVs. It looks soft in comparison to the sets I have had since I used this one as my primary set.

Reply
post #22 of 64
10/18/11 at 10:57pm
So let's see....a moderately big rear projection TV with a six year old convergence (which could have easily become misconverged) set up by store employees with unknown sharpness and other settings instead of a reputable ISF professional and component cable connections is supposed to be "proof" that BR is overrated.
Reply
post #23 of 64
10/19/11 at 12:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd H View Post

Since it sounds like you've connected the player via component cables, could ICT be the culprit?

http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/10/analog-sunset-begins-all-the-new-blu-ray-players-will-only-outp/
 


Good call Todd.  What Blu-ray player (make/model) did you buy Tony?
 

 

Reply
post #24 of 64
10/19/11 at 5:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

So let's see....a moderately big rear projection TV with a six year old convergence (which could have easily become misconverged) set up by store employees with unknown sharpness and other settings instead of a reputable ISF professional and component cable connections is supposed to be "proof" that BR is overrated.


In the last year that I was using my projection set, I had to realign the guns every week (the set offered automatic and manual realignment in the set-up menu) because they would drift slightly out of convergence with the heavy use I was giving my set.
 

 

Reply
post #25 of 64
10/19/11 at 5:46am
To the original poster, do you see a difference between DVD and HD on any source? Because blu-ray should look better or at least as good as cable/satellite HD.

I have a 51" Hitachi rear-projection CRT that doesn't see much use these days, but I can still see a significant difference between DVD and blu-ray.
Reply
post #26 of 64
10/19/11 at 6:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattH. View Post

If he's talking about red, blue, and green guns that have to be aligned, it's a rear projection CRT. Its peak resolution is likely 1080i. My first HDTV was a Toshiba with "guns" that used a component cable hookup (there were no HDMI ports on it), and it maxed out at 1080i. I've had three other HDTVs since then, all 1080p models, and I still have that old Toshiba in my front bedroom (it still works). However, the picture can't compare to any of my subsequent TVs. It looks soft in comparison to the sets I have had since I used this one as my primary set.


Component cables (assuming that's what he's using) can be used with digital displays, as well. I am not aware of Mits making a 52" CRT RPTV....if Tony is correct about the size. I do recall a 51" and 55" CRT RPTV Mits used to make as I came very close to buying that back in 2004. Assuming he does in fact have a CRT RPTV, I can only imagine how poor the convergence and focus is on the set by now, not to mention the severe dust build up on the guns and mirror. I wouldn't expect anyone to be able to tell much of a difference from anything on something like that. Tony should consider one of the top traveling ISF calibrators to do his display if it is indeed a CRT RPV. He would be amazed at the difference.
Reply
post #27 of 64
10/19/11 at 6:28am
Sounds like a combination of older television and method of connecting BD player to TV. From my limited knowledge, as of right now the best way to carry the highest quality signal from player to television is via HDMI. Of course, that's the bare minimum in the litany of items that must be checked/calibrated to ensure high quality display of the image.

Obviously, this is not in everyone's budget, but most of the people I know and threads I've read, typically call for a television upgrade when going from standard def to high def, particularly in SD DVD to BD DVD. A 6 year old TV certainly sounds like a good candidate for an upgrade, or at least a professional service person to come in a check it out.
Reply
post #28 of 64
10/19/11 at 6:34am

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony J Case View Post

...pick up a cheap blue ray player.
I'm poised to be blown away by this awesome new format. Sock it to me, New Technology!
Meh. No thanks, I'm sticking with the old format.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony J Case View Post

I jumped through all the "So you're turning me on first time" hoops correctly, I think.
I have no idea, because I didnt do the calibrating. It was the delivery men came by and lugged the thing into my house, they did all the setting up for me. They plugged a gizmo in and aligned the guns and did a whole bunch of red/green/blue tests.
I was caught up in the crushing disappointment of having what was being touted as The Next Big Thing look like. . . . well the exact same thing that I've had all along. That was not my intent.


Tony, I'm disappointed that your experience with BR wasn't on par with what the rest of us have experienced, but from the tone and wording you used in your posts, I must say that it sounds like:

  • You aren't quite as much of a "hands on" type like many of the enthusiasts on this site, and unfortunately, setting up a BR player/system for the first time takes a bit more effort than simply "plugging it in".
  • You developed a bit of a disdain/resentment for the new technology (hence waiting so long to adopt) and perhaps a bit of you WANTED it to fail to live up to your expectations and you're not going to give it a chance to succeed for you.
  • You seem to have a disconnect between wanting to experience the best in picture/sound quality and providing yourself with the equipment necessary to realize such improvements (non-HDMI CRT display that could very well be out of alignment, possibly "cheap" player, you didn't mention what your sound system is, but you're missing out on 50% of the benefit of BR if you're still listening to lossy DD or worse).

 

I sincerely hope that we will be able to help talk you through the problems you're experiencing and can get you to see the benefit that we all see.  Hopefully you haven't already made up your mind to quit now.

 

Finally, many of the "issues" you described WRT the SW trilogy movies have nothing to do with the Blu-Ray technology - it's in the transfers themselves (there's, like, a BAZILLION posts about it peppered all over the forum...)

 

Reply
post #29 of 64
10/19/11 at 8:02am
Tony,

Have you visited an electronics store (Best Buy, etc.) to view BD demo material on a high-end display? Does it look different/better/the same as your display?

r
Reply
post #30 of 64
10/19/11 at 9:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by elementBike View Post

Tony,
Have you visited an electronics store (Best Buy, etc.) to view BD demo material on a high-end display? Does it look different/better/the same as your display?
r
This is the real question. If Tony can't see a difference on properly calibrated equipment, then there's no point in upgrading his equipment.

I will say that on our 42" Vizio (~$650 at the time of purchase a year or two ago, so far from high end) LCD TV connected to Blu-Ray via HDMI, I notice a difference. It's not as stark as going from 320 line VHS to 480 line anamorphic DVD, but it's a definite improvement. At 52 inches, the difference should be more noticable. Sounds like the BD player limiting the component output to 480p might be the culprit.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray