frank manrique
Supporting Actor
- Joined
- Sep 15, 1999
- Messages
- 798
I, Robot: HD & DVD formats comparisons
______________________________________
I am sure that by now most of you have seen I, Robot either at the cinema or at home. I bet that in the latter case the vast majority of people have seen this flick on DVD, except where VHS tapes were used instead. However, since this is a HT Forum where image quality is supposed to be valued above all else, Ill only concentrate on the video formats that offer the highest possible PQ extant: DVD and high-definition tape (JVCs D-Theater in this instance).
Ill forgo commenting about the movies plot line as it really doesnt make any difference what I might say about it, other than to state that I enjoyed it quite a bit, since minds are already made up one way or another (besides, is not really pertinent to the purpose of my posting this essay in any case).
Also, is worth mentioning that I attempted to procure at least one odd reel from a 35mm theatrical release print for direct film-to-video comparison purposes but failed to secure any as I wasnt able to find anyone who might have had one handy (and I decry not having this absolute frame of reference available for the task at hand, believe me you!), thus direct comparisons were only performed between a copy of the commercial DVD release and a more recently acquired D-Theater HD tape.
Resolution
As should be expected, overall resolution is far, far greater with the D-Theater HD tape version, something that is easily ascertained by simply viewing it.
Yet the DVD is no slouch in this area (at least when seen via a DVI digital path via a stand alone DVD player with 12 bit processing and with a calibrated CRT-based display device); the net illusion is that with an upconverted signal (1080i) one is almost fooled into believing HD signals are being seen instead of standard resolution video.
No matter what, the high-definition tape version is the hand-down winner as details that can easily be seen in this format are otherwise blurred, smeared, obscured, or none existing on the DVD version.
What amounts to in the final analysis is that as with infrabass audio reproduction, where there is just no replacement for displacement, so it is with moving images (on film and otherwise) as there simply is no substitution for higher resolution!
The greater resolution possessed by the HD tape also lends this fabulously-shot flick an image that is sharply focused without looking video-ish, lustrous and brilliant, with an overall sheen that exudes sheer luxury, something that Fox is well known for with its bigger budget films.
Although not being the only factor that is totally responsible for it, having greater resolution does give this version an extreme film-like quality that is just not present with the DVD as the latter still looks more like video rather than real film spite of its other arguable visual assets.
Edge Enhancement
I find it unbelievable that HD signals are still been given this undesirable band-aid treatment, but it is true since I did see a certain degree of EE content at various points of the movie.
Now, if I can see EE on a 40 CRT display at a distance of 10-12 feet then is got to be far more visibly evident when enlarged and projected to sizes of greater dimensions than what I am currently using to view and evaluate high-definition and standard resolution video contents!
As expected since it seems to be its natural nemesis, the DVD exhibits a far greater degree of visible EE throughout the movie than does the HD tape. It isnt of such horrible quantities as I have seen in many other previous cases, but personally desire to see EE disappear from video signals altogether. EE lessens and cheapens the HT viewing experience!
Colorimetry
Not having a film source from which I can derive an a more accurate opinion regarding the color timings between it and its video format counterparts, am still willing to bet that the D-Theater tape version has the more accurate colorimetry; is got to be closer to 35mm theatrical release prints!
Starting with the human skin, the HD tape version clearly exhibits tones that are far more congruous with real life. I ascertained this factor by simply comparing the widely different shades of skin tonal hues possessed by people of African and European descent as seen present on this movie; the contrast is startling and is a task thats made far easier on the HD tape than it is with the DVD as the latter lends human skins a yellowish sheen or cast, more so with people of African descent, that is just not present in the former version.
Overall, colorimetry seems to be truer to film on HD tape than it is with the DVD. In this regard the HD tape is definitely the preferable version
Contrast Dynamics
The HD tape has a contrast range that is widely dynamic, an asset of great merit for it yields superb shadow detailing and a fabulous black level something that is also aided by the greater resolution afforded by this video format.
This factor also lends an extremely film-like quality to the D-Theater version (remember that contrast dynamic range is not limited with film at all as it is the case with video since a light sourcea powerful lamp or light bulb of some kind, usually of the xenon gas arc type--pushes or projects the moving image printed on the emulsion contained within the film stock through and onto a suitably receptive material, usually film screens).
Needless to say, the DVD contains far less contrast dynamics, although the excellent standard resolution video transfer shows such dynamics to be above average at any rate.
The Soundtracks
I found it extremely disappointing that both DD and DTS soundtracks on the D-Theater tape not only audibly exhibit lower sound pressure levels, but are also dreadfully lacking in dynamics and low end extension; they sound highly compressed! Both areas lack testicular fortitude
I found it necessary to increase the volume to -10 db from my customary -15 db setting on the Pioneer receiver just to come closer to that of the DVDs soundtracks levels. Thats a substantial increase in sound pressure level, no two ways about it!
By contrast, both DD and DTS soundtracks are of reference quality with the DVD version since there is plenty of audible low end extension, a much more defined and dimensionally enveloping surround sound-field, as well as a greater slam factor since dynamic range is much wider. There is far more powerful sound with this version than there is on the HD tape, which is awfully distressing given that were talking about the same movie, a flick of very recent vintage, for crying at loud!
This begs the question: JVC, why such audibly vast discrepancy?
Problems and more problems
Although the image is to die for, I was taken aback by the number of artifacts and glitches, both of the visual and sound varieties, that mess things up and which are present on my D-Theater copy. This aspect, coupled to the lack-of-balls soundtracks, makes for a very uncomfortably distracting, tiresome, irritating, and less than stellar viewing experience. Argh!
By contrast, the DVD version fares much better both in terms of visual and sound quality; visually because there are no irritating, pesky digitally-originated artifacts and similar glitches (dropouts, etc.) to mar viewing enjoyment, excepting EE, of course; and sound wise because, as I noted above, the DTS and DD soundtracks are simply audibly superior.
What to do what to do thats the question!
I absolutely love the looks of, and prefer the PQ offered by the D-Theater tape. However, the artifact and glitch problems found on my copy, coupled to the lousy sounding track, renders this version far less desirable than what should have been otherwise; it isnt reference quality, unfortunately.
As for the DVD version, given that its colorimetry is skewed and has lower resolution to boot and spite of its superior sounding tracks, also makes it less than a reference viewing experience.
Had no HD tape been available the DVD would definitely be of reference caliber, but that is not the case since an HD version does exist, one that gives a far more accurate visual account of the movies film origins.
A most frustrating experience. Rats!...
-THTS
______________________________________
I am sure that by now most of you have seen I, Robot either at the cinema or at home. I bet that in the latter case the vast majority of people have seen this flick on DVD, except where VHS tapes were used instead. However, since this is a HT Forum where image quality is supposed to be valued above all else, Ill only concentrate on the video formats that offer the highest possible PQ extant: DVD and high-definition tape (JVCs D-Theater in this instance).
Ill forgo commenting about the movies plot line as it really doesnt make any difference what I might say about it, other than to state that I enjoyed it quite a bit, since minds are already made up one way or another (besides, is not really pertinent to the purpose of my posting this essay in any case).
Also, is worth mentioning that I attempted to procure at least one odd reel from a 35mm theatrical release print for direct film-to-video comparison purposes but failed to secure any as I wasnt able to find anyone who might have had one handy (and I decry not having this absolute frame of reference available for the task at hand, believe me you!), thus direct comparisons were only performed between a copy of the commercial DVD release and a more recently acquired D-Theater HD tape.
Resolution
As should be expected, overall resolution is far, far greater with the D-Theater HD tape version, something that is easily ascertained by simply viewing it.
Yet the DVD is no slouch in this area (at least when seen via a DVI digital path via a stand alone DVD player with 12 bit processing and with a calibrated CRT-based display device); the net illusion is that with an upconverted signal (1080i) one is almost fooled into believing HD signals are being seen instead of standard resolution video.
No matter what, the high-definition tape version is the hand-down winner as details that can easily be seen in this format are otherwise blurred, smeared, obscured, or none existing on the DVD version.
What amounts to in the final analysis is that as with infrabass audio reproduction, where there is just no replacement for displacement, so it is with moving images (on film and otherwise) as there simply is no substitution for higher resolution!
The greater resolution possessed by the HD tape also lends this fabulously-shot flick an image that is sharply focused without looking video-ish, lustrous and brilliant, with an overall sheen that exudes sheer luxury, something that Fox is well known for with its bigger budget films.
Although not being the only factor that is totally responsible for it, having greater resolution does give this version an extreme film-like quality that is just not present with the DVD as the latter still looks more like video rather than real film spite of its other arguable visual assets.
Edge Enhancement
I find it unbelievable that HD signals are still been given this undesirable band-aid treatment, but it is true since I did see a certain degree of EE content at various points of the movie.
Now, if I can see EE on a 40 CRT display at a distance of 10-12 feet then is got to be far more visibly evident when enlarged and projected to sizes of greater dimensions than what I am currently using to view and evaluate high-definition and standard resolution video contents!
As expected since it seems to be its natural nemesis, the DVD exhibits a far greater degree of visible EE throughout the movie than does the HD tape. It isnt of such horrible quantities as I have seen in many other previous cases, but personally desire to see EE disappear from video signals altogether. EE lessens and cheapens the HT viewing experience!
Colorimetry
Not having a film source from which I can derive an a more accurate opinion regarding the color timings between it and its video format counterparts, am still willing to bet that the D-Theater tape version has the more accurate colorimetry; is got to be closer to 35mm theatrical release prints!
Starting with the human skin, the HD tape version clearly exhibits tones that are far more congruous with real life. I ascertained this factor by simply comparing the widely different shades of skin tonal hues possessed by people of African and European descent as seen present on this movie; the contrast is startling and is a task thats made far easier on the HD tape than it is with the DVD as the latter lends human skins a yellowish sheen or cast, more so with people of African descent, that is just not present in the former version.
Overall, colorimetry seems to be truer to film on HD tape than it is with the DVD. In this regard the HD tape is definitely the preferable version
Contrast Dynamics
The HD tape has a contrast range that is widely dynamic, an asset of great merit for it yields superb shadow detailing and a fabulous black level something that is also aided by the greater resolution afforded by this video format.
This factor also lends an extremely film-like quality to the D-Theater version (remember that contrast dynamic range is not limited with film at all as it is the case with video since a light sourcea powerful lamp or light bulb of some kind, usually of the xenon gas arc type--pushes or projects the moving image printed on the emulsion contained within the film stock through and onto a suitably receptive material, usually film screens).
Needless to say, the DVD contains far less contrast dynamics, although the excellent standard resolution video transfer shows such dynamics to be above average at any rate.
The Soundtracks
I found it extremely disappointing that both DD and DTS soundtracks on the D-Theater tape not only audibly exhibit lower sound pressure levels, but are also dreadfully lacking in dynamics and low end extension; they sound highly compressed! Both areas lack testicular fortitude
I found it necessary to increase the volume to -10 db from my customary -15 db setting on the Pioneer receiver just to come closer to that of the DVDs soundtracks levels. Thats a substantial increase in sound pressure level, no two ways about it!
By contrast, both DD and DTS soundtracks are of reference quality with the DVD version since there is plenty of audible low end extension, a much more defined and dimensionally enveloping surround sound-field, as well as a greater slam factor since dynamic range is much wider. There is far more powerful sound with this version than there is on the HD tape, which is awfully distressing given that were talking about the same movie, a flick of very recent vintage, for crying at loud!
This begs the question: JVC, why such audibly vast discrepancy?
Problems and more problems
Although the image is to die for, I was taken aback by the number of artifacts and glitches, both of the visual and sound varieties, that mess things up and which are present on my D-Theater copy. This aspect, coupled to the lack-of-balls soundtracks, makes for a very uncomfortably distracting, tiresome, irritating, and less than stellar viewing experience. Argh!
By contrast, the DVD version fares much better both in terms of visual and sound quality; visually because there are no irritating, pesky digitally-originated artifacts and similar glitches (dropouts, etc.) to mar viewing enjoyment, excepting EE, of course; and sound wise because, as I noted above, the DTS and DD soundtracks are simply audibly superior.
What to do what to do thats the question!
I absolutely love the looks of, and prefer the PQ offered by the D-Theater tape. However, the artifact and glitch problems found on my copy, coupled to the lousy sounding track, renders this version far less desirable than what should have been otherwise; it isnt reference quality, unfortunately.
As for the DVD version, given that its colorimetry is skewed and has lower resolution to boot and spite of its superior sounding tracks, also makes it less than a reference viewing experience.
Had no HD tape been available the DVD would definitely be of reference caliber, but that is not the case since an HD version does exist, one that gives a far more accurate visual account of the movies film origins.
A most frustrating experience. Rats!...
-THTS
