Search results

I hadn't considered that possibility - letterboxed within a 4:3 window within the 16:9 frame - mostly because I haven't had the misfortune yet to watch a title on TCM HD that did that! That really sucks because some (many?) TVs won't be able to resize it to fill the width of the screen. Mine...

Is it just me or is anyone else annoyed at the practice of not identiying on-screen talking heads until midway in, after we've seen them a few (sometimes many) times? In this one Janet Wilson, colorist at Warner, is identified roughly 1/4 of the way in, after we've seen her talking twice before...

As I watched it, and knowing that the vast majority of what TCM HD shows is upconverts, I would have called the broadcast an upconvert. But after looking at the the captures at dvdbeaver comparing the 2000 DVD to new BD, there isn't a _huge_ amount of difference in resolution between them (but...

If by windowboxing you mean black space or bars on all four sides of the picture, that doesn't match what I've seen. I watch TV broadcasts on a 42" LCD (but BD normally on a projector), which has a couple of percent overscan in its normal mode (but can be quickly set to 0%). Viewing in the...

Mr. Erickson's review says "On my 67" Samsung rear-projection DLP LED (I think I got that description right) I noticed no halo-ing as described by Mr. Harris." So, yes, he uses a consumer television, and one based on a display technology that I know from direct experience to be fairly...

Maybe Mr. Harris is having a second look at the BD. It's possible they are identical and he was simply less critical back when the HD DVD was released. On the other hand, perhaps you need a larger screen to see any differences. What kind and size of display are you using?

Perhaps "investing" isn't quite the right word, since we don't purchase these discs hoping for an increase in their monetary value. But the point you are making for what I would call "future-proofing" is a good one. I made similar arguments a long time ago (when Usenet newsgroups were hot-beds...

Good points all, IMO. With a fairly extensive DVD collection, like many here I'll bet, I choose very carefully which titles I upgrade to HD. I've already "double-dipped" on DVD far too many times in the past (in some cases triple-dipped). Being a bit better than the DVD I already own usually...

Quote: Since Fox and other studios do this all the time, they must have gargantuan cojones.

I'm not sure that's always a safe assumption. You would think it would be, but a stellar DVD transfer could easily beat a shoddy HD one. Resolution is not the only measure of image quality, nor would I rate it the most important. And for that matter pixel count, which is what we're really...

We're not nuts. Storaro is. Of course I don't mean that literally, but his nearly-all-caps, rambling justification for an arbitary 2:1 aspect ratio was annoying. What about those of us with large screen projection systems? Looks like Storaro doesn't think we will get the cinematic experience...

I had hoped that HD meant an end to excessive DNR and edge enhancement. This is yet another in a long line of examples that destroys that hope. It also shows why "upgrading" a DVD collection to HD can be more difficult than it should be. Sometimes the move is merely sideways; sometimes it is...