"Reference Quality" question

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Danny_Tam, Jul 28, 2002.

  1. Danny_Tam

    Danny_Tam Agent

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    When I read a lot of DVD reviews, particularly the high caliber ones, the word "reference quality" gets thrown about a lot.
    I have yet to find the phrase on a DVD FAQ or Home Theater FAQ, and have come to interpret it to mean 'as good as what you saw in the theater'.
    What exactly is the definition of reference quality?
    Also, given that HD-DVD is on the horizon (and D-VHS already present), is the term reference quality a valid term to describe a DVD's transfer knowing the potential for quality (and accuracy) is much higher?
    I would most appreciate it if someone could clear this up for me. [​IMG]
    Dan
     
  2. Dustin B

    Dustin B Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2001
    Messages:
    3,126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I believe in this context reference quality means that the reviewer figures this particular DVD could be used to judge the quality of other DVDs.

    When HD-DVD is avialable, eventually certain HD-DVD discs will become the reference by which other HD-DVD discs are judged.

    And in the past there would have been reference quality laserdiscs and vhs tapes.
     
  3. ChrisMatson

    ChrisMatson Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,181
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    To my understanding, a "reference quality" DVD represents the best possible picture and/or sound based on the limitations of the format. Each format (including D-VHS and other future formats) will have its own "reference quality" software that should not be compared to other formats of lesser quality.
     
  4. Geoff S

    Geoff S Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The way I always understood it, was that reference quality meant the highest quality reproduction in re-creating audio/video in comparison to what it would sound/look like in controlled studio environments.
    Ex. Reference Quality speakers would be able to produce the closest matching reproduction quality as of that in sound editing studios speakers.
    Ex. Reference Quality DVDs would be, as Chris said, the highest quality picture and sound based on the formats limitations (ex. remastering techniques, hi-def transfered picture, anamorphic widescreen, high Video bitrate up to 10mbps and audio taken from master quality 20-bit studio tapes to use as Dolby or DTS tracks on the disc, etc. etc.)
    Of course also in other contexts, something reference quality can be a set standard. Either reference is set as the best there is, or it is simply "0" on a measurment scale of personal preceiveable quality. For instance, lets say that I use the picture quality on my TV to measure that of others... it is a real good set, but there are sets I see that look better, and some that look worse. I wouldn't buy one that looked worse, and when I got one that looked better, the bar for my own personal reference quality would be raised. Anybody elses' TVs that I talked about I would compare to my own.
    Most people would agree that reference quality as either comparison to studios equipment, or set high standards is correct. That last one is probably new to everyone, but hey, it works, and we may not know it, but it is that way we most often use the phrase without actually saying it is that phrase.
    Confused yet? [​IMG]
     

Share This Page