Ah! I knew Blu Ray was snake oil! (1 Viewer)

[Tony J Case]

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.

 

[cafink]

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?

 

[Robert George]

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.

 

[cafink]

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?

 

[WinstonCely]

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.

 

[Mark-P]

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.

 

[Mark-P]

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.

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.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

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

DVD,

BLU-RAY and

3D REVIEW ARCHIVES

 

[mattCR]

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.

 

[WinstonCely]

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! 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!

 

[Dave H]

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.

 

[TravisR]

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.

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).

 

[TonyD]

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.

 

[TonyD]

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.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

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?

 

[TonyD]

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.

 

[MichaelEl]

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.

 

[Tony J Case]

* 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. . 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.

 

[Todd H]

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/

 

[Dave H]

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