Upconverting v. Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Gary Seven]

I'm not seeing any signals that tell me an announcement for The Andy Griffith Show on Blu-ray is forthcoming soon.

Netflix streaming has A.G. available in HD as well as other classic shows such as Mission Impossible so the HD source is apparently there. Perhaps just a matter of time.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Originally Posted by Chuck B

As someone who works in the field, I can tell you that there is a huge difference between the job an up-converting DVD or Blu-ray player does, compared to a Blu-ray disc. That said, the difference can be more or less pronounced depending on the Blu-ray.

I'd say there's no harm in investing in a Blu-ray player. All your old DVDs will look great and if you stumble upon a series you'd like to buy in HD, you have that option as well.

If you're television is full 1080p, then 32" or not, the image will be better. The simple fact is that all 2 073 600 pixels have distinct image information assigned to them, while an unconverted signal is using an algorithm to guess what each pixel should be fed. With a 32" TV the pixels are just clustered closer together and the assumption is that you'll be sitting closer to it then say a 50" TV.

As for content, you can just email or call the distributor of your favorite shows. If enough requests come in they'll certainly investigate the option.

Chuck,


Thanks for the info. I guess I'm wondering how the upconversion compares between a std upconvert player and a BR player that's also upconverting a std DVD. I haven't yet compared them.


I'd assume, with a HD TV that's 1080p, via HDMI cable for both players, that there should be no difference but I'm not sure about it.

 

[smithb]

 

Chuck,

 

Thanks for the info.  I guess I'm wondering how the upconversion compares between a std upconvert player and a BR player that's also upconverting a std DVD.  I haven't yet compared them.

 

I'd assume, with a HD TV that's 1080p, via HDMI cable for both players, that there should be no difference but I'm not sure about it.
 

Hey Jeff, I would say that is a correct assumption with all things being equal. It just depends on which chip set a player is using and how they have incorporated it. Some bluray player focus on the whole while others may short-cut in certain areas. And upconversion could be an area of short-cutting since the primary purpose can be how they handle HD, not SD content. Generally speaking, a low-end bluray player would most likely not compete (upconversion-wise) with the better upconverting DVD players. So one has to read the reviews and balance the pro's and con's when making a purchasing decision. I took the easy way out and just picked up the original Oppo BD83 knowing they focus SD content as well as BD content. But i know you want a region-free player so that may limit some of your options.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Originally Posted by smithb


Hey Jeff, I would say that is a correct assumption with all things being equal. It just depends on which chip set a player is using and how they have incorporated it. Some bluray player focus on the whole while others may short-cut in certain areas. And upconversion could be an area of short-cutting since the primary purpose can be how they handle HD, not SD content. Generally speaking, a low-end bluray player would most likely not compete (upconversion-wise) with the better upconverting DVD players. So one has to read the reviews and balance the pro's and con's when making a purchasing decision.
I took the easy way out and just picked up the original Oppo BD83 knowing they focus SD content as well as BD content. But i know you want a region-free player so that may limit some of your options.

Brad,


Thanks for the info . I did check into the chipset reviews before I bought my std R-free upconvert player a few years ago but I was focusing on how the PAL-to-NTSC conversion was rated. I have done some upconvert comparisons by memory when my nephew's friend loaned his PS3 player to my nephew but it wasn't set up at my house for a side-by-side comparison.


I imagine the difference as perceived by eyesight would be very small in the comparison but that's only my guess as I haven't done it yet.


You're right, R-free capability is a requirement for me in a BR player although I could just find room for a 2nd (BR) player on the rack if needed. They're available and are now coming equipped with internal PAL-NTSC converters (most of the early BR modified players weren't so equipped). As with most home ent electronics, they've become more widespread and are becoming more economic in pricepoints.


I hope Chuck's right, as well as some others that have predicted increased BR releases for the older TV shows but I haven't seen it yet. That's the main reason I've not yet bought that BR player. I don't have the need for it at this point.


If that new "Star Wars" BR release had included the original theatrical versions remastered in anamorphic format, that would have done it for me.


Otherwise I just don't have enough "grail" shows on my list that I'd double-dip for BR, with most of what I've wanted to collect already on the shelf in std dvd.

 

[Professor Echo]

To me everything looks better when played through my Blu player and that's saying something given that my standard player is an Oppo. I won't speak for everyone, but I personally do see a difference in the upconversion on the Blu and play mostly everything on that now, reserving the Oppo for my other region titles. I own enough catalog titles in Blu now to have more than justified upgrading . With Blu player prices getting lower and lower these days, it's worth having one even if there are no more than five Blu titles you are interested in. It's not a question of will Blu supplant DVD, but of which will continue once the format has been relegated in favor of streaming or whatever process the future holds. Blu is the new high standard for physical media and it will be the one that sticks around for those who prefer such formats. To use a tired, but apt analogy, Blu will most likely be coveted by physical media collectors the same way LPs are today which may render standard DVD as the next 8 Track.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Glen,


Thanks for the info on the comparison . I'm interested in your kind of feedback on comparing BR player upconversion.


I agree with you about the overall format picture. If we had seen some significant movement with BR TV/DVD (older shows) releases, I'd have bought the player before now.


I'm watching the online R-Free BR stores every couple of months for pricing though.

 

[Professor Echo]

Jeff, please keep me posted if you decide on a Region Free Blu Player as I have been in the market for one as well, though haven't been investigating as diligently as you have since my funds are currently low. But there are great films coming out on Region locked Blus all the time that I would love to have. EUREKA in the UK had two great sales for their Blus this past year, heavily discounted and free overseas shipping, but not all of their titles are region free.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Professor Echo /t/314724/upconverting-v-blu-ray#post_3855356

No problem . I'll be getting one of these players sooner or later. I've also been watching the BR movie releases over at the "Digital Bits" daily column news posts. So far, not enough for me to get that player.

 

[Chuck B]

I agree with those who posted that the chip handling the up-conversion is the main determining factor in up-scaling quality. If your local retailer has no objection I'd find a DVD with lots of detail, as this would be the biggest challenge to up-convert (less pixel information to work with). Content seems to be the real issue. It's a simple matter of justifying the numbers for any distributor. If they hear enough people clamoring for a certain title they usually respond positively. I posted elsewhere that VEI is thinking of bringing Mcmillan & Wife to Blu-ray, but aren't sure how people would respond. In this particular case I know they would move it into production if they hear positive feedback. As a matter of fact, I'm sure that's the case for any of the titles in their catalog. Our company is putting the finishing touches on The Invisible Man series from the 70's and it's going to look great. The DVDs are nice, but the Blu-ray is quite a step up when viewed side-by-side. So to reiterate, call up or email your favorite distributor, you may be surprised how attentive they could be.

 

[LeoA]

Is there a good database somewhere for a list of Blu-Ray releases, both North American and European, by decade so I can easily sort out stuff past 1970 (Which generally wouldn't be of interest to me)?

 

[Gary OS]

I have no doubt that Blu-ray machines do a great job on standard dvds. I'd be surprised if they didn't do a little bit better than upconverting dvd players. Therefore, I'm not against owning one at all. For me it's that I've already invested in a very nice, region-free upconverting dvd player and up to now there's just not been anything released on Blu that has enticed me to make the jump. I'm not really interested in double-dipping and buying a Blu-ray release of, lets say, The Twilight Zone, just to say I've got it on BR. I've already bought the wonderful dvd set and don't have any desire to double-dip on that release. Like Jeff said earlier, if Blu comes out with some classics that were never released on standard dvd then I'd jump in quickly. If a miracle happened tomorrow and we were told the entire run of The Wonder Years was coming next year on Blu only, with all the music intact, then I'd have a player by Christmas. No doubt about it. But unless something big like that happens I just don't see myself investing. My upconverting player suits me just fine, but more power to those of you that are getting good bang for your buck by going Blu. I know there's some great stuff out there - just not anything really up my alley.



Gary "still waiting for a nice side by side comparison of an older b/w show - maybe one of the Perry Mason releases" O.

 

[Professor Echo]

Is there a good database somewhere for a list of Blu-Ray releases, both North American and European, by decade so I can easily sort out stuff past 1970 (Which generally wouldn't be of interest to me)?

Leo, it looks like HTF and the just released Firefox update are not playing nice with each other and won't allow me to post a link, but go to the HTF BLU RAY Forum and click on the thread entitled: Pre-90s catalog on Blu - A comprehensive list This goes up to 1990 and only includes releases from the U.S.., but it's a good place to start and will give you an idea of how many catalog titles have come out and are scheduled to come out, all sorted by decade.

 

[AndyMcKinney]

 

Brad,

 

Thanks for the info .  I did check into the chipset reviews before I bought my std R-free upconvert player a few years ago but I was focusing on how the PAL-to-NTSC conversion was rated.  ...

 

You're right, R-free capability is a requirement for me in a BR player although I could just find room for a 2nd (BR) player on the rack if needed.  They're available and are now coming equipped with internal PAL-NTSC converters (most of the early BR modified players weren't so equipped).  As with most home ent electronics, they've become more widespread and are becoming more economic in pricepoints.>

Just out of curiosity, Jeff, are you using an HDTV or a CRT? The reason I ask is that several HDTVs (with some notable exceptions, such as Panasonic and Toshiba) will output a pure, native PAL signal over the component or HDMI inputs. It's usually an unadvertised feature. If you have the ability to feed your TV an unconverted signal from your player (i.e. if the player will allow you to switch the output from NTSC to either PAL or MULTI), it's worth investigating. For PAL discs, the difference in watching an unconverted PAL picture and a converted one (even with what one would think is a decent converter) is AMAZING! I can't praise the Oppo BDP-83 enough. I've not done side-by-side tests myself, but from everything I've read, the chipset of any given player's upscaler is what will determine how good DVD playback is upscaled. The scaler in the BDP-83 is the same one that's used in the stand-alone DVDOEdge scaler (that sold for about the same price as the BDP-83!). From what I understand, the 83's replacement uses perhaps an even more advanced scaler. Plus, the Oppos can be made region-free with a simple hardware modification. I do understand, though, if price is a consideration. I'd resisted Oppo products for years, but finally caved as it met all my criteria: 1). must support all DVD and Blu-Ray regions, 2). must be NTSC/PAL/MULTI switchable for signal output, 3). must have an excellent upscaler inside, and 4). must be fully compatible with 1080i/50hz Blu-Rays.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyMcKinney

Just out of curiosity, Jeff, are you using an HDTV or a CRT? The reason I ask is that several HDTVs (with some notable exceptions, such as Panasonic and Toshiba) will output a pure, native PAL signal over the component or HDMI inputs. It's usually an unadvertised feature. If you have the ability to feed your TV an unconverted signal from your player (i.e. if the player will allow you to switch the output from NTSC to either PAL or MULTI), it's worth investigating. For PAL discs, the difference in watching an unconverted PAL picture and a converted one (even with what one would think is a decent converter) is AMAZING!
I can't praise the Oppo BDP-83 enough. I've not done side-by-side tests myself, but from everything I've read, the chipset of any given player's upscaler is what will determine how good DVD playback is upscaled. The scaler in the BDP-83 is the same one that's used in the stand-alone DVDOEdge scaler (that sold for about the same price as the BDP-83!). From what I understand, the 83's replacement uses perhaps an even more advanced scaler. Plus, the Oppos can be made region-free with a simple hardware modification.
I do understand, though, if price is a consideration. I'd resisted Oppo products for years, but finally caved as it met all my criteria: 1). must support all DVD and Blu-Ray regions, 2). must be NTSC/PAL/MULTI switchable for signal output, 3). must have an excellent upscaler inside, and 4). must be fully compatible with 1080i/50hz Blu-Rays.

Andy,


Thanks for the post! Great info here.


I did research my TV info about a year ago and it was just as you said, I had to dig a while to find my TV's specs regarding capability for 24 fps display. According to what I located on the 'net, my Panasonic 50" Plasma ('08 model, TH50PZ85U) should be capable of 24 fps viewing. I haven't tried it yet though.


From my understanding of the HDMI format, the old std PAL/NTSC issue is moot as from what I think I gather about it, the issue that matters is the TV's ability to interpret and display the 24 fps format.


I know that's also true about the difference too, watching a PAL sig vs the converted sig to NTSC. My std upconvert Pioneer dvd player doesn't have the option (not that I've found) to manually switch the internal converter though. There's no menu parameter available to tell the player if the TV is NTSC or PAL.


I considered getting an Oppo player as well but decided on the Pioneer player years ago. I do know about the Oppo's rep and they're good players.


Your criteria is spot on as well.


Thanks again for the info. I found your Oppo model at a R-free store where I bought my Pioneer player years ago. The price is high but it's like anything else, you get what you pay for and I knew after reading your post that you have a top-tier player.


I'm reading the specs now....this is the player that I'd like to get once I make the BR upgrade decision.

 

[LeoA]

Thanks Professor Echo, that list is just what I was looking for (Other than not including European exclusives). Andy, HDTV's have a native resolution that all material is processed to match before being displayed if it's not already recieving it as such. What's gained sending a HDTV a native PAL signal? The HDTV's still going to have to process the image to match its native resolution (1080p, for instance). And it's pretty typical for television's to have weaker scaling chips than something like a Blu-Ray player or upconverting DVD player. So I'd imagine leaving the processing for the tv to do would typically be inferior to letting the player itself do it.

 

[smithb]

Thanks Professor Echo, that list is just what I was looking for (Other than not including European exclusives). Andy, HDTV's have a native resolution that all material is processed to match before being displayed if it's not already recieving it as such. What's gained sending a HDTV a native PAL signal? The HDTV's still going to have to process the image to match it's native resolution (1080p, for instance). And it's pretty typical for television's to have weaker scaling chips than something like a Blu-Ray player or upconverting DVD player. So I'd imagine leaving the processing for the tv to do would typically be inferior to letting the player itself do it.

I believe what Glen was getting to (if i phrase this correctly) is that when dealing with an NTSC signal (regardless of whether the player or TV is handling the upconversion) is that you are starting from 480 resolution upconverted to 1080. While a PAL signal is starting from a resolution of 576 before being converted to 1080. So if you play a PAL disk and your TV only supports NTSC the player must convert the PAL to NTSC (meaning to downconvert 576 to 480) before upconverting to 1080, which can cause various issues depending on how well it downconverts. But if your TV supports PAL your player or TV can upconvert from the 576 to 1080 directly. That (as i understand it) is the benefit if your TV supports PAL. Now as a question, I've seen you state that TV scalers are weaker then that of upconverting players, as a blanket statement. I'm curious as to the basis for this conclusion. Logically, I would think that TV's follow the same model as players. Inexpensive player and TV's use less effective scalers, while the more expensive of both use higher quality scalers. Now I'm not comparing TV's to specialized outboard scalers, but it would just seem odd to me if a TV in the $2K+ or $4K+ range wouldn't use a better then average scaler. From what I have seen TV's generally do not list specs on what they use for a scaler so it is hard to know for sure. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just curious where these facts came from because it just seems like too strong a generalization.

 

[LeoA]

That makes perfect sense, thanks Brad. As for the rest of it, keep in mind that HDTV manufacturers are largely concerned with how good their set looks on the show room floor and in someone's living room with HD material. That's where the effort and money goes towards with compatibility with other resolutions just being an after thought. Little effort is expended in getting non HD material looking attractive, with most HDTV manufacturers just settling for just being able to display it at all and not going any further than that. Scaling chips are an easy way to skimp out and save a small amount in production cost. So if your set isn't a top of the line model, it's very likely it won't have the best of scaling chips installed. Think of the very existence of upconverting DVD players. If most HDTV's had decent scaling chips, there wouldn't be such a market for DVD players designed to improve DVD picture quality on people's new HDTV's. If HDTV's tended to have good scaling capabilities, all we'd still need is a progressive scan DVD player. So the very existence of such devices and their widespread availability is anecdotal evidence for my statement. Or think about why s-video ports have disappeared from HDTV's over the past couple of years. For many standard definition devices, s-video was the best connection available (Although component started to become fairly commonplace late in the 480i era when we started to transition to HD). Yet they care so little about non HD content and getting it to look as nice as possible these days that they've eliminated s-video ports. If HDTV's tended to have better scaling hardware and could do the job just as well or better, there just wouldn't be any point to producing an upscaling DVD player (Or providing upscaling capabilities on something like a Playstation 3 or Blu-Ray players). Yet they do and that's because the scaling chips installed on many televisions are poor and selected due to their low cost, not because of their capability. There's a demand for a reason.

 

[AndyMcKinney]

I believe what Glen was getting to (if i phrase this correctly) is that when dealing with an NTSC signal (regardless of whether the player or TV is handling the upconversion) is that you are starting from 480 resolution upconverted to 1080. While a PAL signal is starting from a resolution of 576 before being converted to 1080. So if you play a PAL disk and your TV only supports NTSC the player must convert the PAL to NTSC (meaning to downconvert 576 to 480) before upconverting to 1080, which can cause various issues depending on how well it downconverts. But if your TV supports PAL your player or TV can upconvert from the 576 to 1080 directly. That (as i understand it) is the benefit if your TV supports PAL.

Correct. A lot of people incorrectly thought that HDTVs would make the whole NTSC/PAL thing moot, but unless your TV supports the PAL framerates (all of them are technically capable, but some manufacturers--such as Panasonic and Toshiba--use software to limit their US models to NTSC compatibility only, for among other reasons, to keep people from taking cheaper US television sets abroad). If your TV isn't compatible, you still have to rely on a DVD player's internal converter (or an external digital converter) or you'll end up with a black-and-white--or no--picture, just like in CRT days). Thankfully, there are some US brands--notably Sharp and Vizio, but I've also seen offerings from LG and Sony--that accept PAL signals through the component and HDMI inputs (though some brands, like Sharp, also accept PAL on the composite inputs). The only troubles are 1). finding playback equipment that allows the TV system to be switched to PAL or MULTI and 2), the fact that TV makers usually don't document their PAL (and 1080i/50hz) compatibility, as that is pretty much a minority interest over here. About the only way to guarantee the proper results, if you're wanting them, is to be lucky enough to find the info online or do as I did and take your equipment to a store where the salespeople will allow you to do your own testing. At least as of this writing, Sharp and Vizio HDTVs are PAL-friendly, Toshiba and Panasonic are NOT compatible, and the others are "try it and see."

 

[Professor Echo]

I believe what Glen was getting to

Brad, I would love to take credit for it, but it was actually Andy who posted all the useful information you are referencing, not me. I only wish I was as knowledgeable as Andy and Jeff and everyone else about player and TV specs, but some of it just sails over my head.

 

[smithb]

Brad, I would love to take credit for it, but it was actually Andy who posted all the useful information you are referencing, not me. I only wish I was as knowledgeable as Andy and Jeff and everyone else about player and TV specs, but some of it just sails over my head.

Oops, I should look at what I quote more closely. Sorry about that Andy.