I know you all were looking forward to seeing some pics from my RS1x, but unfortunately my crappy little S100 just can't cut it for motion video. Even when I picked scenes where there's no movement for a second or so, the exposure times are ridiculously long and they're blurry as hell cause some movement eventually occurs during it. There's no freeze mode on the RS1 and pausing the picture noticeably reduces the rez. So its gonna have to just be pics of the Sharpness pattern from the Avia DVD.

I took all three pics from exactly the same location using my tripod. I put the player in 1080p/60 mode since this is a video mode program. I disabled DNR and set sharpness in the RS1x to 0, except for the last shot where I set it back to a value of -3 (you can see this in the shot) which I found took the "edge" off the XDE in normal program material while still maintaining most of the enhancement. For me, I'd rather deal with a little ringing than have the picture be significantly blurrier which it is when sharp mode isn't in use at this size.

You can see there's some small ringing even on the first photo where sharpness is turned off. This is more visible in the second pic and then ever so subtly reduced in the last. I think the snapshots are fairly representative of what I see.

Again, sorry I can't get any shots of actual video, I'm disappointed by that as well. Too bad the player loses res when in pause mode!

First shot, sharp mode off, default settings on RS1x:

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g286/dougandvikki/sharpness_disabled.jpg

Second shot, sharp mode on, default settings on RS1x:

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g286/dougandvikki/sharpness_on.jpg

Third shot, sharp mode on, sharpness control on RS1x set to -3:

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g286/dougandvikki/sharp_on_N3.jpg

If you get closer to the screen with the camera, the brightness will go up, and shutter times will be reduced. Try taking a picture that only has a fourth of the screen filling the shot. You could also try the slowmotion feature. I've not tried it yet, but just now looked on the remote, and there are some buttons for it.

Is this player better than the ps3 for upconverting standard dvds ?

You can see there's some small ringing even on the first photo where sharpness is turned off. This is more visible in the second pic and then ever so subtly reduced in the last. I think the snapshots are fairly representative of what I see.

[/IMG]
Personally, I wouldn't call that some "small ringing". I'd call that a boatload of it. I have to wonder about the calibration of the monitor here, cause if the player is producing that much artifact then it's not worth much. The effects of this much EE or HF boost will vary a lot based on program material, and of course on the viewer's perception. But the end result is still a loss of a fair amount of actual detail. Perceptions are odd, and many folks will look at such an image and say: "Wow, that looks sharper". But it's not. It depends on the viewer's frame of reference. But the fact remains that if you were calibrating a monitor, those results would be considered a failed test. I'd take an Oppo 980 over those results in a heartbeat.

Doug G.... How does the test pattern look when you switch the output of the XDE to 480p? I'm going to speculate and predict that it looks a lot better.

...monomer, what you've just told us is that you don't care about the difference between good picture quality and bad picture quality...
Rather than debate the semantics of the meaning of the term "picture quality" and the role sharpness can play in that definition, which will just go on to further derail this thread, instead I think I prefer to just let the actual pictures taken from owners of XDEs do all the talking for now. You do realize those actual pictures that have been posted here have effectively neutralize all your hysterical arguments filled with hyperbole and your photoshopped photos are making you appear a bit foolish now that people can judge for themselves the degree of distortion these artifacts actually bring to the picture?




So as not to derail this thread the rest of this is for Josh to read.

The problem with taking such an 'in your face' elitist stance is that instead of getting more people to look up to you as an expert (as is your intended goal whether you choose to admit to it or not), rather you end up pushing away these very people as you 'dis' their points of view and effectively are trashing them by basically stating something is wrong with them cause they don't measure up to your personal level of high standards... now how smart is that, really? How is anyone suppose to tell your expertise apart from that of any other run-of-the-mill ego-maniac?... (BTW, that then puts your editor's judgement into question just by mere association.) The more you rail against these people, the further into a hole you will find yourself. The truly smart elitist is clever enough to know how to bring others around to their level of standards and also is sensible enough to know when to just shut up... you appear to be somewhat lacking in both those abilities. I believe there are an infinite number of ways to disagree with someone... you need to seek another way as the one you've been using so far ain't really been working out all that well for you.

My sense of you so far is that you are neither clever nor flexible enough in your thinking and attitude to turn this all around... though I'm really hoping you can prove me wrong.

Is this player better than the ps3 for upconverting standard dvds ?

Can someone who has the two answer me this question ??? Please?

Can someone who has the two answer me this question ??? Please?

I own the E500 and a PS3. The E500 produces far superior upscaled PQ than the PS3.

What I stand for is reproducing great picture quality on a large HD screen.

Which players do you like in the $200 and under range?

Here's one from my dvd recorder. I love Pepsi:)
PHOTO 8
http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/508/Untitled-31.jpg

Pepsi, hmmm... I like your taste in pop. ;)

Can someone who has the two answer me this question ??? Please?


I guess the answer to that depends on how you define superior. :) I'd lookout for objective test material that shows how the players perform with different material.

D

Apparently Josh thinks differently than likely 95%+ of the people who would think the post processing looks better.

I would refrain from using basely statistical analysis to support your opinion or to derail the opposing view point since you really have no evidence to support your claims.

As far as pictures go, Doug G's latest contribution is very telling to me about the impact of the added sharpness by the XDE. Now it could be that if intelligent processing is going on that the XDE can't make any additional distinction of how much to add in a straight black and white image as portrayed in the test. However, it does seem to indicate that a fair amount of ringing can appear at times.

IMO, it appears to depend on the content of the image being enhanced, how large of a screen or how close you sit, and what other artifacts your display device adds or is already in the image itself that determines if you like this player or not. Also, as to whether you are so inclined as to tweak your settings or which player you might use for each movie so as to maximize the appearance.

There are too many positive endorsements to ignore even if the implementation concept may be against the standard viewpoint. Especially, since edge enhancement has had a negative connotation for a while now. The lack of 4:3 support is a killer for me personally.

As some have said the thread has become more of entertainment value then support for owners. So maybe some of the useless attacks could be removed so another thread does not have to be started.

I love my PS3 SD upconversion as it allows mosquito noise reduction that's ADJUSTBLE to individual preferences. It does not add edge-enhancement (as obvious on the XDE500 as shown on numerous screenshots and PROFESSIONAL reviews), and can hide flaws on poorer transfer DVDs.

PS3 also plays DivX, Xvid, DivX-HD, streaming from network drive (or USB hard drive--even 2TB ones), and of course some pretty cool BD and games to boot :D

If you like added sharpness, go buy the Philips 5990; it has sharpness that's crankable up to 7 and can give plenty of Edge-Enhancement and perceived sharpness from afar. It's only $40-60. It also does 1080p60, USB 2.0 for hard drive/flash drive, DivX, region free, plays most recordable DVD media, and pillarboxes 4:3 content. Plus, it uses Mediatek chipset which means excellent MPEG2 decoding, lightning fast layer changes, decent deinterlacing without droping frames (XDE500 uses Zoran which is the worst of all the cheap chipsets for DVD players--JVC, Tosh, and Samsung use Zoran usually). Oppo 983 uses Mediatek chipset for MPEG decoding also with super-duper scaling and deinterlacing chips from Anchor Bay.

I feel this player is overpriced at $150. May be at $100 or less it may be more popular. My Circuit City (Best Buy does not carry these) has about 20 of them sitting on the shelves (Clarksville, IN).

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/508/ENLARGEMENT1.jpg

The "halo" Josh sees in this photo is visible in normal viewing if you are looking for it. I also see it with the sharpness turned off, and on two other dvd players as well. (An LG 3510a and a Toshiba SD-3800) It's also there using the XDE 480i component output, where my projector would be doing the deinterlacing. It is the same on all of these, so it's not being added by the sharpness setting, and it most likely is on the dvd. I haven't noticed this effect anywhere else in the movie.

kbgl - In 480p mode the PJ will still have to upconvert to 1080p, so that's not a much more representative test, IMO, especially if the ringing remains. Besides, I will only use the player in 1080p mode so that's all that matters for me.

Last night when posting the photos I admit I didn't spent all that much time looking at them. After doing a bit more critical viewing and reading some of the comments, particularly about the non sharpened image, I wonder if the JPEG compression and/or camera processing might have contributed here. I do see some minor halos, but I'm not sure I'd characterize this as a "boatload" as one previous comment did. Please remember this is a test pattern and they are designed to show things like this which ordinarily can't be detected.

That said, with barely over 50hrs on my RS1 I fully admit I haven't done any kind of serious calibration on it yet. I realize lamp stability has no effect on sharpness, but what it means is I've barely had the Avia disc in there at this point. I've just wanted to enjoy it for a while until the lamps settles in, then I can sit down and do a more comprehensive calibration including the grayscale, but I'll probably wait until I hit about 100hrs before doing that. I'll probably turn it on again this afternoon for the Pats game and once that's over I plan to go back and do a more critical sharpness setting, being sure to detect if any of the small ringing that seems to appear in the sharp mode off photo above is really there or not.

For me, even at the current sharpness settings, sharp mode simply looks better and much clearer when viewing normal content so I'm still happy with the player overall.

I did run into the freeze problem again towards the end of Superman Returns last night, at around the 2hr4min mark (scene where Richard and Lois pull up to the hospital and are talking in the car just before she goes inside.) I replayed it about 10 times and every time it happened in the exact same spot. Video froze, no audio, then after a second or two it resumed from where it would have been had the freeze never occurred. Doesn't look like the typical damage/scratch m.o. to me which is usually a broken up or pixelated picture. I fully stopped the movie (cancel resume by hitting stop twice) and when I navigated to the same scene, the problem remained. I turned off the player and left the disc in overnight. This morning I was about to take the disc out, and when I opened the drawer I figured I'd give it one more shot so I left the disc in the drawer and closed it, and went to that scene. Just as I suspected, the problem was now gone! This is definitely some kind of software problem, IMO. If if had been a problem with the disc, it would still have happened. The fact that it takes about 2hrs for it to happen each time is also suspicious. BTW, that Superman Returns disc was brand new, first time I ever played it since receiving it as a gift, and I did check it prior to inserting it and it was entirely clean as you'd expect. I filed another problem report with Toshiba's customer service through the web site and encourage any other owners who are having this problem to do the same.

kbgl - In 480p mode the PJ will still have to upconvert to 1080p, so that's not a much more representative test, IMO, especially if the ringing remains. Besides, I will only use the player in 1080p mode so that's all that matters for me.



Checking could be usefull to determine where the ringing is being generated in the player. Your test patterns look just like the ones I deleted that were from my "questionably rigged" experiment. When I switched back to 480p the ringing, with the sharpness turned off, was completely gone. That's why I deleted all the pictures, because I figured it was the unconventional way I was playing the pattern. You will not be able to use the sharpness in 480p since it will not be selected by auto. I'm suspecting that a small amout of ringing is caused by the upconversion, and then the sharpness adds to it. No need to take pictures, but it would be interesting to know when you get time.

How do you tell if a 4:3 movie will or will not play properly. My 4:3 Fifth Element plays fine. Someone mentioned it depends on if it's anamorphic or nonanamorphic.

My understanding is that the XDE will always stretch 4:3 material when upconverting. This isn't related to widescreen material that is either anamorphic or non-anamorphic. It is related to OAR's of 4:3 material, such as most TV shows and many older movies.

Deleted to avoid confusion about 4:3 playback.

BTW, Josh Z., you to me seem like a person on a mission to discredit this product at all costs. Whatever you think you are, whatever your credentials, this is how you CLEARLY appear in this thread to me.
+1

Josh, just a friendly suggestion. You should probably drop this thread while you're, errr, ahead... :) You seem far to emotionally involved in the E500, going so far as to produce material that exaggerates what the player is actually doing.

To everyone else. Believe your eye's, not a test pattern. Unless, of course, you watch test patterns all the time.

John

My FE disk is 4:3 and displays perfectly at 1080p without stretching on my 16:9 projector.

I'm just going by what has been reported about the player by a few different sources. Are you outputting from the player at 480 and letting your projector upconvert, or are you upconverting through the player and outputting 1080?

In my case, if I use component inputs to my projector (480) I can control the upconvert through the projector and maintain OAR. However, if I use the digital input (dvi, 720) I lose this ability and can only output what the player sends.

kbgl - I'll try later to set the player to 480p mode and check the ringing in the sharpness pattern to see how it compares.

I agree the lack of proper 4:3 handling in the player is very frustrating. I mean how hard would it be to just pillar-box the content before upscaling it? They include some completely useless Zoom feature in here and leave out that? Weak. Well, at least I only own a few titles that are 4:3 (Casablanca and a few older Disney animated features.) Luckily my RS1x has several aspect ratios that can be used with 480 signals and one of those allows me to pillar-box the signal for proper OAR display of non-anamorphic 4:3 content. However, Ron indicated over in the RS1 thread that the upconversion isn't good, and that his iScan (which I was using with my RP91 before I got the XDE) did a better job. Will have to give that a look tonight using Casablanca to see for myself, I guess.

If a player increases picture artifacts to an original movie then I would argue that it wasnt what the producer and studio intended for you to see.

Some of you spend a nice amount on sound systems and even popcorn machines to make the viewing experience more authentic, much like in a theatre.

Why would having increased artifacts in the picture be acceptable to most of you?

Deleted post to avoid confusion about 4:3

If a player increases picture artifacts to an original movie then I would argue that it wasnt what the producer and studio intended for you to see.

Some of you spend a nice amount on sound systems and even popcorn machines to make the viewing experience more authentic, much like in a theatre.

Why would having increased artifacts in the picture be acceptable to most of you?
No DVD is ever going to look like a movie in a movie theatre. If anything, the sharpness of the XDE is closer to what the image will look like in a theatre. While, the artifacts (if your display shows it) is the trade off. Movie threatres don't look as soft as DVD. That is what people are interested in treating here.

So, the basic flaw with people like Josh is that the only factor that counts is artifacts. And more importantly, anyone who disagrees with his point of view is not worthy of his esteem. Well, me at least will avoid paying for the publications he is associated with, since such arrogance is something I do like. But to each his own :)

If a player increases picture artifacts to an original movie then I would argue that it wasnt what the producer and studio intended for you to see...
I truly get tired of hearing this same argument over and over... its been the elitist's argument for probably 50 years. I hope whenever your tires need replacement you only get OEMs because you wouldn't want it to drive or handle any differently from what the vehicle's designer and engineers and manufacturer ever intended you to experience... Besides the fact that any movies are already a compromise by a large team of individuals and tampered with with each new release so its hard to say exactly what is meant by "the original" intent of the creator anymore. You buy a car and then do whatever pleases you with it... I believe that same thing about DVDs purchased by any individual, view it in whatever way pleases you. There is no right or wrong way to enjoy a movie... there are only opinionated people who try endlessly to convince others that their's is the only acceptable way. Now how bogus is that view point?

People need to just describe the XDE's performance objectively and leave all the proselytizing about the way others "should be wanting to see it" out of it.

My projector....480p 16:9 native.

XDE output of FE disc at 1080p, or 480p on hdmi...perfect 4:3 aspect.

I prefer 480p with less scaling. I tried both.

My stretched FE picture a few pages back was taken with the projector set to native with a 480p input from XDE. With the projector on native, the projector does not scale it again to make it look like 4:3 is supposed to look. Since reader here were concerned about edge issues, and excessive detail like in the Diaz photos, I posted that one picture with the native setting. The native setting theoretically would be altered less by the projector. I don't watch it that way. I will swap the picture if it's confusing people. I reduced the size and resolution on this shot. This one was 4:3. The other shot was a better photograph.

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/508/FESMALL.jpg

My projector is almost 6 years old at this point which makes it fairly old based on how technology has been changing in the projector world. However, I think a fair number of output devices have the same limitation (although I could be wrong). If I send it a 480p signal it can do all kinds of aspect ratio changes during its upconversion to 720p. However, if it gets a 720p signal it just displays it how it comes in. Since the XDE automatically stretches the content there is nothing else that can be done to correct it.

Obviously, it appears some devices can work around this (your situation). However, for the many that can't and if they have a large amount of content structured for 4:3 we are out of luck. It does seem like a strange feature to leave out. But hey, Resume means nothing to me but to others it is the deal breaker.

This whole Josh against the world thing is getting old. He has the player. He tested it and sees ringing beyond what is acceptable to him and so he doesn't like it. His opinion whether he is a reviewer or not is a justifiable and a welcome stance (imo) and he is not the only one that has taken it.

The fact that others disagree and either don't see the ringing or find it minimal is their opinion. Just as justifiable and a welcome addition to the thread.

However, this back and forth between Josh and the others arguing against him is getting old and has not offerred anything new to the discussion in quite a while. Josh is called arrogant and elitist for his views. To tell you the truth both sides come across the same to me at this point. Anyone reading this thread has a good handle on what each side thinks, so how about we just get back to discussing new topics about the player instead of rehashing old stances or wait for new owners to offer their opinions.

This whole Josh against the world thing is getting old. He has the player. He tested it and sees ringing beyond what is acceptable to him and so he doesn't like it. His opinion whether he is a reviewer or not is a justifiable and a welcome stance (imo) and he is not the only one that has taken it.

The fact that others disagree and either don't see the ringing or find it minimal is their opinion. Just as justifiable and a welcome addition to the thread.

However, this back and forth between Josh and the others arguing against him is getting old and has not offerred anything new to the discussion in quite a while. Josh is called arrogant and elitist for his views. To tell you the truth both sides come across the same to me at this point. Anyone reading this thread has a good handle on what each side thinks, so how about we just get back to discussing new topics about the player instead of rehashing old stances or wait for new owners to offer their opinions.

The problem is that Josh is taking an extreme position and others have taken an extreme position also. Maybe they do it to counteract his position maybe they just don't get what he is saying as another reason.

I fall into the later reason. I thanked him for providing that ALL2HD example he used because a picture is worth a thousand words as they say. He of course is entitled to HIS opinion, but has basically stated that anyone who disagrees with him is wrong. Sure if you put a 480i source image on a big projection screen the flaws WILL be more noticeable. I doubt anyone could argue with that, but he is making a statement about ALL displays but most people do not have big FP screens, so what they see will be different than what he sees.

By showing that ALL2HD example of what looks bad, I was able to completely discount his opinion because it looks better to MY eyes. He gave a frame of reference of what he calls bad, and everyone else can make their own determination based on that example. If you also think that ALL2HD example looks bad this player is not for you plain and simple IMO. If you think that post processed image example looks good then you MAY be a candidate to appreciate what the player can do. Neither is right or wrong.

I think the problem people are having with Josh's opinion is that he is saying we don't know what we should like. At least that is how I took all he has said. It seems that this player has sparked the format war all over again and it shouldn't IMO. This player will never look as good as true HD, because it is NOT a HD source. This player tries to improve the PQ of a SD source through trickery just like every other upscaling player. It is just a question of whether a person likes the trickery or not. That is up to each individual to make their own determination.

The problem is that Josh is taking an extreme position and others have taken an extreme position also. Maybe they do it to counteract his position maybe they just don't get what he is saying as another reason.

I fall into the later reason. I thanked him for providing that ALL2HD example he used because a picture is worth a thousand words as they say. He of course is entitled to HIS opinion, but has basically stated that anyone who disagrees with him is wrong. Sure if you put a 480i source image on a big projection screen the flaws WILL be more noticeable. I doubt anyone could argue with that, but he is making a statement about ALL displays but most people do not have big FP screens, so what they see will be different than what he sees.

By showing that ALL2HD example of what looks bad, I was able to completely discount his opinion because it looks better to MY eyes. He gave a frame of reference of what he calls bad, and everyone else can make their own determination based on that example. If you also think that ALL2HD example looks bad this player is not for you plain and simple IMO. If you think that post processed image example looks good then you MAY be a candidate to appreciate what the player can do. Neither is right or wrong.

I think the problem people are having with Josh's opinion is that he is saying we don't know what we should like. At least that is how I took all he has said. It seems that this player has sparked the format war all over again and it shouldn't IMO. This player will never look as good as true HD, because it is NOT a HD source. This player tries to improve the PQ of a SD source through trickery just like every other upscaling player. It is just a question of whether a person likes the trickery or not. That is up to each individual to make their own determination.

I just think all points have been made at this time. There is no more need for endless repeating of the same viewpoints is all. If one side stops the other will most likely follow suit and the thread can move on. Otherwise, it just continues until it gets closed instead of providing further value down the road.

If a player increases picture artifacts to an original movie then I would argue that it wasnt what the producer and studio intended for you to see.

Do you really think they care.:confused:

This whole Josh against the world thing is getting old. He has the player. He tested it and sees ringing beyond what is acceptable to him and so he doesn't like it. His opinion whether he is a reviewer or not is a justifiable and a welcome stance (imo) and he is not the only one that has taken it.

The fact that others disagree and either don't see the ringing or find it minimal is their opinion. Just as justifiable and a welcome addition to the thread.

However, this back and forth between Josh and the others arguing against him is getting old and has not offerred anything new to the discussion in quite a while. Josh is called arrogant and elitist for his views. To tell you the truth both sides come across the same to me at this point. Anyone reading this thread has a good handle on what each side thinks, so how about we just get back to discussing new topics about the player instead of rehashing old stances or wait for new owners to offer their opinions. The thread is mainly the "subjectivists" vs the "objectivists". The former outnumbering the latter, just like in the real world. A big part of the problem was/is the preceding hype of the player. Other than that it seems be just another Toshiba SD-DVD player. The one cool thing about the player is the 1080p24 output.

larry

Working with the Avia sharpness pattern more closely last night, I didn't find that straight 1080p (sharpness off) mode added any appreciable amount of ringing compared with just the straight 480p mode. Maybe an ever so slight bit, but you really had to look for it. I did spend quite a while determining where the proper sharpness setting for my RS1x was, and using both resolutions (480p and 1080p) I arrived at the same value, -6. This was the point just before any ringing began to be detectable on the thinner lines, particularly the leftmost vertical one running down the center of the pattern. At lower sharpness values the picture became noticeably blurry. So the pictures I took above at the default sharpness setting of "0" on the projector show some ringing which may be due to it and not necessarily the player itself.

Enabling the sharpness mode does add ringing that's noticeable on a test pattern like this, however, I still find that I prefer the perceived added sharpness it offers. Having the sharpness set at the proper level is key to getting reasonable PQ with this player and avoid it being overdone in sharpness mode.

I did verify that while in 480p mode I was able to use the aspect control on the RS1x to view the disc in its OAR of 4:3 so this may be a workaround for some.

Yesterday, out of curiosity, I bought a cheap player that it has a Mediatek chip. On the sharpness pattern, it showed the same ringing and looked like your pictures. I had to reduce the projector setting to it's minimum to eliminate the extra lines in the pattern. It's interesting that different players need such different calibrations. The color decoder of that cheap player had me pulling my hair out. Adjust for blue bars, and red and green are way off. Adjust for red bars, and blue and green are way off. I got red green and blue very close on the XDE without a lot of fuss.

The thread is mainly the "subjectivists" vs the "objectivists". The former outnumbering the latter, just like in the real world.
larry

That's the way it looks to me as well. There is a bullying aspect that is kind of ugly though. Too bad.

The thread is mainly the "subjectivists" vs the "objectivists". The former outnumbering the latter, just like in the real world. A big part of the problem was/is the preceding hype of the player. Other than that it seems be just another Toshiba SD-DVD player. The one cool thing about the player is the 1080p24 output.

larry

You put it in an interesting manner. Subjectives v. Objectives. However, an objectivist has to consider the following:

1. That DVD is a low resolution format. It does not matter how much you spend in your source component. Reproducing even 'exactly' what is on a DVD disk will not look like what the movie looked like in a theater. For starters, it will look much softer (hazier as I like to call it). So to pretend that artifacts like ringing is what ruins the experience is basically admitting that one has grown used to looking at a fuzzy screen from very close distance. In no way does a blown up DVD resemble a movie experience.

2. DVD was created to serve a small screen. To me at least it is strange when I see people with 100+ inch screens claiming to be authorities on what the Director intended their movie to look like, when DVD as a format was created with small screen viewing in mind. In fact, I doubt large screens are even part of the QA process. Hence, it follows, that what people are experiencing on 50 inch a below screens is what the studio and director intended for this format. IF you are watching on a big screen, that is fine. But that does not change the fact that DVD was designed for a small screen and when you try to admonish others for having a small screen, you lose your objectivist credibility.

3. Bigger is not better. A bigger screen is not better. The reason is because the source resolution is limited. There is not one pixel more on a 150 inch 1080p screen v. a 60 inch 1080p plasma. Not one. So, as you get larger, what you are essentially getting is a loss of definition. Not an increase in definition. A large screen would look better IF the movie resolution also went up. It does not. What you are seeing as you go bigger is more space between each pixel. Again, this is not making the picture more accurate. Unless the movie was shot in 1080p, you are seeing flaws in the compression that was not intended for you to see. Again, just because you can see the flaws does not make it a better system. Do a simple experiment. Take a jpeg picture with a 2MP camera (same resolution as 1080p). Then see it on a 22 inch monitor, then on a 40 inch, then on a 50 inch and then on a 60 inch. The same picture will get progressively softer.

In the end, all the above points are related to a common theme. Home video resolutions are limited. As you go from smaller to larger screens you are not adding any pixels. So the image MUST get softer. So, is the softening 'also' an artifact of going to a bigger screen? Why not? Did the director intend you to watch a soft image?

In essence this is not an objectivist v. subjectivist debate. But really one about whether one has grown accustomed to a softer image on a large projection screen. Personally, I was at a demo recently of an 80 inch plasma. I was surprised how soft the image looked (they were playing Rush Hour 3 Blu Ray) compared to their 50 inch plasma that was right across it. The 80 inch plasma apparently had better specs than the 50 inch in all departments - better video processing (13 bits v. 10 bits if I recall correctly), higher contrast ratio, more colors but same resolution. I got a headache looking at the soft image from around 1.5 viewing distance. The 2.0 viewing distance from the 50 inch plasma was much more pleasurable. Both displays had the same feed playing (actually they have many displays, only these were next to each other. It was a light controlled environment where each area was made up as a mini living area) Hint: It isn't a big box retailer. In fact you can't buy any product at this showroom. :)

av.pallino... interesting reading and very insightful however I wish to insert the importance of viewing distance relative to screen size. If the ratio (screen width to viewing distance) is kept a constant then many of your points are moot... conversely if each increase in screen size is viewed from exactly the same distance then all you've said becomes quite true. It seems everyone gets the idea that if you have more pixels you must sit closer 'viewing ratio-wise' to perceive the difference more pixels can make (provided the source also has more pixels to match)... however it becomes a hinderance to enjoying a movie at such close ratios because the eyes have to move much more and a lot faster and if you are close enough then the head necessarily needs to be angled back an may even begin to twitch and turn as well in order to follow the action of images on the screen... yes, this does lead to eye strain, stiff necks and headaches after a while. Younger viewers seem better able to deal with these stresses and so you'll see the front rows in many theaters preferred and dominated by the kiddies... adults tend to choose the middle rows (and lovers and the druggies seem to like the back row but for reasons entirely apart from enjoyment of the movie ;)). Typical viewing ratios for most adult movie goers are typically greater than 1.5X and much greater for home TV viewing... often 3.0X or more is not at all unusual. I have an 96" screen (84" wide) in our basement theater with the first row at ~9-10feet back (1.3X) and the second row is ~16-17feet (2.4X) back. All the adults fight like children to get second row seats... the LOSERS get stuck in the front row. Years ago I use to like sitting in the front row until eventually I began noticing eye strain and how tired I became after watching just one movie plus the action was often far more blurring and difficult to follow when sitting that close. It truly is more comfortable sitting at a viewing distance ratio of at least 2.0X or further back but with the advent of 1080P and hi-def formats to take advantage of the higher resolutions I think many videophiles feel they must sit extra close (ratio-wise) to get the most out of that often termed 'immersive' experience. For me, I can both see the action clearer and view movies tirelessly and without undue eye fatigue by sitting further back and thus truly enjoy watching the movie. And if others feel a ratio of 2.5X or greater is also in their comfort movie viewing zone then the XDE is a wonderful addition to their theaters because of the added apparent sharpness it can provide without the intrusion of visible artifacts... that is the best of both worlds and it seems that is an improvement in picture quality. I will go back to the one thing I've been continuously harping on since my first review of the XDE player... viewing ratio has to be a part of the discussion when it comes to evaluating the 'worth' of this player and yet very little has been discussed about picture quality using viewing distance as a qualifying criteria... and some have even dismissed viewing distance altogether as not being of any significance in their evaluation of this player.

av.pallino... interesting reading and very insightful however I wish to insert the importance of viewing distance relative to screen size. If the ratio (screen width to viewing distance) is kept a constant then many of your points are moot... conversely if each increase in screen size is viewed from exactly the same distance then all you've said becomes quite true. It seems everyone gets the idea that if you have more pixels you must sit closer 'viewing ratio-wise' to perceive the difference more pixels can make (provided the source also has more pixels to match)... however it becomes a hinderance to enjoying a movie at such close ratios because the eyes have to move much more and a lot faster and if you are close enough then the head necessarily needs to be angled back an may even begin to twitch and turn as well in order to follow the action of images on the screen... yes, this does lead to eye strain, stiff necks and headaches after a while. Younger viewers seem better able to deal with these stresses and so you'll see the front rows in many theaters preferred and dominated by the kiddies... adults tend to choose the middle rows (and lovers and the druggies seem to like the back row but for reasons entirely apart from enjoyment of the movie ;)). Typical viewing ratios for most adult movie goers are typically greater than 1.5X and much greater for home TV viewing... often 3.0X or more is not at all unusual. I have an 96" screen (84" wide) in our basement theater with the first row at ~9-10feet back (1.3X) and the second row is ~16-17feet (2.4X) back. All the adults fight like children to get second row seats... the LOSERS get stuck in the front row. Years ago I use to like sitting in the front row until eventually I began noticing eye strain and how tired I became after watching just one movie plus the action was often far more blurring and difficult to follow when sitting that close. It truly is more comfortable sitting at a viewing distance ratio of at least 2.0X or further back but with the advent of 1080P and hi-def formats to take advantage of the higher resolutions I think many videophiles feel they must sit extra close (ratio-wise) to get the most out of that often termed 'immersive' experience. For me, I can both see the action clearer and view movies tirelessly and without undue eye fatigue by sitting further back and thus truly enjoy watching the movie. And if others feel a ratio of 2.5X or greater is also in their comfort movie viewing zone then the XDE is a wonderful addition to their theaters because of the added apparent sharpness it can provide without the intrusion of visible artifacts... that is the best of both worlds and it seems that is an improvement in picture quality. I will go back to the one thing I've been continuously harping on since my first review of the XDE player... viewing ratio has to be a part of the discussion when it comes to evaluating the 'worth' of this player and yet very little has been discussed about picture quality using viewing distance as a qualifying criteria... and some have even dismissed viewing distance altogether as not being of any significance in their evaluation of this player.

I wholly agree. I was trying to point out the fallacy that some so called experts tend to forget and that is - when you increase screen size you are NOT increasing the number of pixels. So, as you have pointed out correctly, one needs to factor in viewing distance. IF anything, as you go larger, your optimal viewing distance actually needs to go further back relatively because your screen has fewer relative pixels.

So what we have here is a TOTAL dichotomy where people are increasing screen size AND sitting closer. It's the SAME as reducing your resolution and sitting closer to the same display.

The fact that so called experts will discount viewing distance as a factor makes me even more skeptical of their so called expertise in this area.

Here are the 2 LAWS of AV (let's see if someone with a scientific mind challenges it with something better) :)

1. As the pixels get distributed over an increasing surface area, the image becomes softer.

2. As you increase the viewing surface area, the required distance to achieve the same picture characteristics must also increase.

Some people also tend to forget, that even 1080p is a relatively low resolution image - 2MP. We have to understand that a 2MP still image even at 8X11 inches starts showing deficiencies when compared to a 10MP image! So as you go from 50 inches to 110 inches diagonal width, the degradation is going to be quite severe. So, if we talk about DVD which is much more compressed, the results on a 100+ inch screen is going to be dubious unless you adjust your viewing distance.

I am not bickering here, but trying to move this discussion to the realm of science. We are talking about people like Josh Z who are evaluating a product (it seems) in a way it is not intended to be. More importantly, while he is quick to criticize others equipment and set up. His own, seems to violate every principle of AV. He may have a bigger screen and he may be sitting closer, but that is NOT HOW reasonable people watch DVD. That is NOT HOW these products are tested, even by the studios.

I think the problem people are having with Josh's opinion is that he is saying we don't know what we should like.

I'm not trying to tell you what you should like. I'm telling you what the facts are. There's a difference.

There is a right way to upconvert DVD content and there is a wrong way. This is the AV Science forum we're posting in. There are objective measurements to rate these sort of things.

The way the XD-E500 upconverts DVD content is objectively wrong. It adds artifacts that a good upconverter should not add.

Now, maybe you like the "wrong" method of upconversion, and prefer the edgier picture regardless of the artifacts. That is your subjective prerogative. I'm not going to challenge you on your personal tastes, so long as you are willing to acknowledge the facts of the matter.

However, what I do take issue with is the constant arguing that the upconversion of the player is not wrong, that it's perfectly fine for any "normal" people, and that anyone who would dare try to bring objective facts into the discussion must be an arrogant elitist.

Personally, I like to eat junk food even though I know it's unhealthy. When someone points out to me that it's unhealthy, I would agree, but I'm still going to eat it. What we have in this thread is a group of people insisting that because they like junk food, therefore junk food must be perfectly healthy, perhaps even the healthiest possible food they could ever eat. When confronted with the objective facts, they immediately shout down the opposition which they decry as "elitist".

I'm not trying to tell you what you should like. I'm telling you what the facts are. There's a difference.

There is a right way to upconvert DVD content and there is a wrong way. This is the AV Science forum we're posting in. There are objective measurements to rate these sort of things.

The way the XD-E500 upconverts DVD content is objectively wrong. It adds artifacts that a good upconverter should not add.

Now, maybe you like the "wrong" method of upconversion, and prefer the edgier picture regardless of the artifacts. That is your subjective prerogative. I'm not going to challenge you on your personal tastes, so long as you are willing to acknowledge the facts of the matter.

However, what I do take issue with is the constant arguing that the upconversion of the player is not wrong, that it's perfectly fine for any "normal" people, and that anyone who would dare try to bring objective facts into the discussion must be an arrogant elitist.

Personally, I like to eat junk food even though I know it's unhealthy. When someone points out to me that it's unhealthy, I would agree, but I'm still going to eat it. What we have in this thread is a group of people insisting that because they like junk food, therefore junk food must be perfectly healthy, perhaps even the healthiest possible food they could ever eat. When confronted with the objective facts, they immediately shout down the opposition which they decry as "elitist".

1. Are these artifacts viewable at any screen size? or are they more likely beyond a certain size? Are these effected by your viewing distance?

2. Are you saying, softening is OK, but other artifacts are not? If yes, then what is the science behind that?

3. What if I consider all meat to be junk food? I guess most people will not agree with my definition of junk food.

4. Do you have a measure that tells me what impact of surface area on definition? How do your measures account for screen size and viewing distance? Just because there is a measure, does not mean it is the correct measure. You need to come up with a composite score on picture quality. Does any of your measures have a way to compute a composite image quality objectively? IF yes, how does it do with without accounting for the screen size and viewing distance. If no, then isn't that what we really care about? The overall image score?

I am trying hard to understand your science. Science is essentially about challenging your ideas and examining your results. If you're OK doing it, then that is creditable. IF not. Then don't preach to us about science :)

Now, maybe you like the "wrong" method of upconversion, and prefer the edgier picture regardless of the artifacts. That is your subjective prerogative. I'm not going to challenge you on your personal tastes, so long as you are willing to acknowledge the facts of the matter.

wow.

Are these artifacts viewable at any screen size? or are they more likely beyond a certain size? Are these effected by your viewing distance?

The artifacts are perfectly visible on any screen size at a distance of up to at least 3 screen widths away, which is well within recommended seating distance.

If you're an uncritical viewer, you will probably not see or be bothered by them. But again, that tells us more about you than it does about the objective upconversion quality of the DVD player.

Are you saying, softening is OK, but other artifacts are not? If yes, then what is the science behind that?

Define "softening". Presenting an inherently soft picture as it was encoded is not the same thing as "softening".

What if I consider all meat to be junk food? I guess most people will not agree with my definition of junk food.

Now you're attempting to sidetrack the discussion with semantics. Substitute "chocolate chip cookies" for "junk food" if that helps.

I am trying hard to understand your science. Science is essentially about challenging your ideas and examining your results. If you're OK doing it, then that is creditable. IF not. Then don't preach to us about science :)

Funny how I don't don't see challenging your ideas or examining your results.

I'm not trying to tell you what you should like. I'm telling you what the facts are. There's a difference.


Josh, I respect your views but feel that there may be a 'validity' error (and a logical fallacy) creeping in in some of the 'objective' tests that are used in testing. To wit, do they measure what they are intended to measure, i.e. real life experience of viewing a DVD. For instance, can the AVIA disc pattern data that measures the effect of increasing or decreasing 'sharpness', accurately reflect moving picture experience.

Let me illustrate by an example from my own field. Psychologists have devised tests that test ' motor co-ordination' in an objective and reliable manner. These tests include, say, ability to react to a visual stimulus by tapping on keys on a key board. But the problem comes when people start applying these 'factual' and objective' and 'reliable' (i.e.they will give the same results more or less, no matter who conducts the tests or how many times on the same subject) tests to real life situation, e.g., driving a car. So an excellent driver, who will repeatedly pass a real life driving test, can in theory keep failing these 'coordination' tests. Real life expertise of driving a car is no different amongst people who pass or fail these tests and, in theory again, the failed testees may in fact be better drivers than those that pass.

I give only one example but there are a number of such tests that are 'objective', 'scientific', 'factual' and 'reliable', that are touted as having the ability to measure driving skills but in real life and as a matter of fact, don't.

So the question is, 'reliable' 'factual' and 'objective' as your tests are, are they valid? Do they effectively measure what they are intended to measure, i.e. DVD viewing experience of a a moving picture?

Thanks for your indulgence.

The artifacts are perfectly visible on any screen size at a distance of up to at least 3 screen widths away, which is well within recommended seating distance.

If you're an uncritical viewer, you will probably not see or be bothered by them. But again, that tells us more about you than it does about the objective upconversion quality of the DVD player.



Define "softening". Presenting an inherently soft picture as it was encoded is not the same thing as "softening".



Now you're attempting to sidetrack the discussion with semantics. Substitute "chocolate chip cookies" for "junk food" if that helps.



Funny how I don't don't see challenging your ideas or examining your results.

1. 3 screen widths from what size screen? On a 50 inch screen the viewing distance will have a different result than on a 110 inch screen. You ask why?

2. Again. I need to point out to you, it's because of fixed number of pixels in the source system. When you spread out the pixels, the larger the surface area the softer the image will be. Perhaps I should use the word hazy. The pixels are spread farther apart. When pixels are further apart the image will be softer. This is basic info that even a 6 year old would figure out :rolleyes:

3. I wasn't playing with symantics. When you use a word like 'junk food' it is a loaded word. What can be considered junk food in one context may not be so in another. So, it is YOU who is trying to play with words.

It appears to me that your arguments are mostly emotional. That you are trying to pass off as objective. I have tried hard to present simple logical facts. But you are not interested in examining them in any form.

As for me. Your brush off again reflects more about YOU. I have said several times here that the XDE is not a perfect product. One of the side effects of the post processing that it does is to introduce artifacts. One has to be aware of that and weigh the pros and cons. Please point me to where I have said otherwise.

Anyone who cannot fathom simple facts like projecting a DVD onto a 100 inch screen makes the image softer or that when you increase your screen size, you do not increase the number of pixels displayed (and hence why the image gets softer) is not someone who understands a whole lot about the science of AV. Sorry to put it that way. But after your response, this is the most direct way to put it.

The artifacts are perfectly visible on any screen size at a distance of up to at least 3 screen widths away, which is well within recommended seating distance.

If you're an uncritical viewer, you will probably not see or be bothered by them. But again, that tells us more about you than it does about the objective upconversion quality of the DVD player.



Define "softening". Presenting an inherently soft picture as it was encoded is not the same thing as "softening".



Now you're attempting to sidetrack the discussion with semantics. Substitute "chocolate chip cookies" for "junk food" if that helps.



Funny how I don't don't see challenging your ideas or examining your results.

How about taking a crack at #4?


4. Do you have a measure that tells me what impact of surface area on definition? How do your measures account for screen size and viewing distance? Just because there is a measure, does not mean it is the correct measure. You need to come up with a composite score on picture quality. Does any of your measures have a way to compute a composite image quality objectively? IF yes, how does it do with without accounting for the screen size and viewing distance. If no, then isn't that what we really care about? The overall image score?

Looking forward to your response.:)

I'm not trying to tell you what you should like. I'm telling you what the facts are. There's a difference.

There is a right way to upconvert DVD content and there is a wrong way. This is the AV Science forum we're posting in. There are objective measurements to rate these sort of things.

The way the XD-E500 upconverts DVD content is objectively wrong. It adds artifacts that a good upconverter should not add.

Now, maybe you like the "wrong" method of upconversion, and prefer the edgier picture regardless of the artifacts. That is your subjective prerogative. I'm not going to challenge you on your personal tastes, so long as you are willing to acknowledge the facts of the matter.

However, what I do take issue with is the constant arguing that the upconversion of the player is not wrong, that it's perfectly fine for any "normal" people, and that anyone who would dare try to bring objective facts into the discussion must be an arrogant elitist.

Personally, I like to eat junk food even though I know it's unhealthy. When someone points out to me that it's unhealthy, I would agree, but I'm still going to eat it. What we have in this thread is a group of people insisting that because they like junk food, therefore junk food must be perfectly healthy, perhaps even the healthiest possible food they could ever eat. When confronted with the objective facts, they immediately shout down the opposition which they decry as "elitist".

It sure sounds like you are trying to tell people what they SHOULD like. I think that IS the point for many here. ;)

SD DVDs are inherently poor compared to BD resolutions, so doing what most reviewers do is always going to come up short for a upscaling player. It seems everyone including yourself is harping on the media created term "Blu-ray killer" and it is being reviewed in that false light.

SD DVD has artifacts on virtually all the discs for all titles. It is the nature of the format, and ANY upscaling WILL increase the visible artifacts if you look close enough. Many of the good players manipulate the artifacts by softening them to some degree while sharpening other areas. How could they not, so trying to get "what the director intended", or "what is on the disc" will not look as good once you increase the screen size in proportion to the viewing distance.

I asked before and would like you to answer this next question if you do not mind. What about 3D movies? Who will these current "objective" tests work with such material? Why wil they look good but look horrible with testing equipment?

3D can look very good because it tricks the eyes but those "objective" tests were never designed to objectively measure 3 material. I think to a lesser extent the same would be true for this type of post processing in this XDE player also.

Many of the good players manipulate the artifacts by softening them to some degree while sharpening other areas. Please give examples. I can think of one case where some players will fix/filter an issue inherent in just about all MPEG decoders to some extent. The result is a small loss of chroma resolution but it eliminates jagged edges in some objects.

larry

Josh, I respect your views but feel that there may be a 'validity' error (and a logical fallacy) creeping in in some of the 'objective' tests that are used in testing. To wit, do they measure what they are intended to measure, i.e. real life experience of viewing a DVD. For instance, can the AVIA disc pattern data that measures the effect of increasing or decreasing 'sharpness', accurately reflect moving picture experience.

In addition to test patterns, I watched several "real world" DVDs. I tried to pick discs with little to no inherent edge enhancement or compression artifacts in their video transfers. The Hellboy Director's Cut is a very clean disc. With the XDE sharpness filter engaged, distracting edge ringing was added to every scene.

1. 3 screen widths from what size screen? On a 50 inch screen the viewing distance will have a different result than on a 110 inch screen.

Whether you sit 150" away from a 50" screen or 330" away from a 110" screen, the image will take up the same amount of your field of vision. Assuming that the displays are of the same native resolution, pixel density will appear the same to your eye. Your conclusions are false.

Anyone who cannot fathom simple facts like projecting a DVD onto a 100 inch screen makes the image softer or that when you increase your screen size, you do not increase the number of pixels displayed (and hence why the image gets softer) is not someone who understands a whole lot about the science of AV. Sorry to put it that way. But after your response, this is the most direct way to put it.

You're setting up a straw man. Please point to the post where I denied that projecting a DVD onto a 100 inch screen makes the image softer.

There is a right way to upconvert DVD content and there is a wrong way. This is the AV Science forum we're posting in. There are objective measurements to rate these sort of things.

Please explain the right way, in scientific terms and measurement since you keep touting that part of AVS, to up convert a 480p signal to 1080p. What is the "proper" way to add information that doesn't exist? Should any anti-aliasing be used? Smoothing? Sharping? Nearest neighbor? Bio-cubic? To what degree should these be applied and who gets to decide?

You seem to be under the assumption that there is only one way up convert an image. This is incorrect. In fact, there are many "right" ways to do it.

A/V is many times a balancing act of compromises. Whether you do the sharping while upconverting or do it after the fact, it will be needed to bring the image in line with how it should look (subjective, of course). The act of sharping WILL introduce artifacts by it's very nature. So then it becomes a balancing act.

Leaving the up converted image alone and allowing it to be blurry is certainly not how the director intended it to be viewed (in most cases). So you use algorithms to enhance the image. You try to balance the gain from the enhancements to the artifacts it introduces.

When you show someone a Blu-ray for the first time, what are their first comments? "Wow, look how clear and sharp that picture is. Look at those colors!". Shouldn't you try to mimic that look when trying to enhance a DVD?

John

Please explain the right way, in scientific terms and measurement since you keep touting that part of AVS, to up convert a 480p signal to 1080p. What is the "proper" way to add information that doesn't exist? Should any anti-aliasing be used? Smoothing? Sharping? Nearest neighbor? Bio-cubic? To what degree should these be applied and who gets to decide?

You seem to be under the assumption that there is only one way up convert an image. This is incorrect. In fact, there are many "right" ways to do it.

Any process that adds as much edge ringing as the XD-E500 cannot be called a "right" way.

A/V is many times a balancing act of compromises. Whether you do the sharping while upconverting or do it after the fact, it will be needed to bring the image in line with how it should look (subjective, of course). The act of sharping WILL introduce artifacts by it's very nature. So then it becomes a balancing act.

Leaving the up converted image alone and allowing it to be blurry is certainly not how the director intended it to be viewed (in most cases). So you use algorithms to enhance the image. You try to balance the gain from the enhancements to the artifacts it introduces.

I agree entirely. Unfortunately, the XD-E500 does a very poor job of that balancing act. Its scales are tipped too far to the "distracting artifacts" side, and not enough toward the "subjective improvement" side.

So lets see if we can cut to the chase. Josh doesn't like it and av.pallino does. Everyone else needs to make up their own mind. Shouldn't any other general video processing talk be moved to another thread, say the "Video Processing" thread, for example.

Now that its resolved. Does anyone have anything NEW to share in the OWNERS thread of the XDE that hasn't already been stated?

So lets see if we can cut to the chase. Josh doesn't like it and av.pallino does. Everyone else needs to make up their own mind. Shouldn't any other general video processing talk be moved to another thread, say the "Video Processing" thread, for example.

Now that its resolved. Does anyone have anything NEW to share in the OWNERS thread of the XDE that hasn't already been stated?

Not exactly. I said there are pros and cons and you'll have to make the call. For me, the pros are not sufficient to overcome the negatives. But the potential for XDE type post processing is certainly there and the ALL2HD image was posted by me to illustrate the case that some will prefer the pre and some the post.

I have said this again and again and again....

Not exactly. I said there are pros and cons and you'll have to make the call. For me, the pros are not sufficient to overcome the negatives. But the potential for XDE type post processing is certainly there and the ALL2HD image was posted by me to illustrate the case that some will prefer the pre and some the post.

I stand corrected.

I have said this again and again and again....

So maybe now it has been said enough. If we can stop with the repitition (not just you) maybe we can learn something new or wait until there is something new to report. Some people come back to the thread seeing new posts hoping for new information, not just the same old discussion that doesn't want to end. Just an opinion though. Some might be coming back purely for the entertaining value of watching it deteriorate.

Whether you sit 150" away from a 50" screen or 330" away from a 110" screen, the image will take up the same amount of your field of vision. Assuming that the displays are of the same native resolution, pixel density will appear the same to your eye. Your conclusions are false.



You're setting up a straw man. Please point to the post where I denied that projecting a DVD onto a 100 inch screen makes the image softer.

I am glad you admit that projecting a DVD onto a 100 inch screen makes it softer. So, what we are differing on really is the value or need to correct that softness and the XDE approach. Fair enough.

You're right adjusting for distance will create the same visual field of view and same image resolution.

Some might be coming back purely for the entertaining value of watching it deteriorate.

Well, not deteriorate. It's similar to Bose threads in the Speakers forum. Those do tend to get removed.

Watching the spin doctoring here is of some entertainment value, I admit. And I do enjoy reading good uses of logic.

AND - I do want a DVD player to tide me over until I get a BD player. (I don't like what is said about the various BD models yet.) I had hoped this model would offer a visual improvement for me.

Sorry for the interruption - :)

Well, I just picked up the XD-E500 late last week and have watched a couple of movies with it so far. One was a forgettable movie called 'Bad Girls' but was mostly shot outdoors and was a good test in my opinion for what this DVD player can do with skies, grass etc...

The other movie was 'Marty', a black and white 4:3 AR film. I really liked what this player did while watching both films. I have a 106" Da-Lite High Power screen and a BenQ w5000 1080p DLP projector. I also have a Samsung BDP-1000 first generation Blu Ray player and a Toshiba HD-A2 HD DVD player. I also am currently demoing a Sony BDP-301 Blu Ray player. Oh, and I have an Oppo player as well, one of the first models produced.

I have been watching HD via satellite and/or cable now for about 6 years now and I think I know what HD should look like even with cable/satellite company compression. I absolutely love HD videos whether they're HD DVD or Blu Ray.

On 'Bad Girls', I determined that using the 'contrast' feature wouldn't be suitable as it tended to open up the shadows too much so that the blacks were affected negatively so I left that alone but was impressed that it really works. I decided to go with the 'color' enhancement along with the sharpening of course which you can't get away from even if you want to when you select either 'color' or 'contrast'. This is not to say that I don't like the sharpening effect of this player. I do. :) I really liked what the 'color' feature did to the blue skies in this film and to the many shots of fields of grass. I won't say that it didn't affect facial tones but the result was a very minor and I do mean minor deepening of the flesh tone that was already there without the 'color' enhancement turned on. I don't like sunburned faces and I was pleasantly surprised to notice that this feature did just what Toshiba says it does. It deepened the blues and greens and left everything else pretty much alone. I am used to calibrated displays as I have the Spyder2 Pro software and also the EyeOne colorimeter which I use with HCFR software.

'Marty' was an interesting test as well given that it's an older black and white film. Naturally I was curious to try the 'color' enhancement just to see what it might do to a black and white film and I was surprised to see that it didn't seem to have any adverse affect whatsoever but I still left it off for obvious reasons. I once again tried the 'contrast' setting and again found it to work a little too well and preferred to leave it off. As far as the sharpening goes, I tried it off and the image appeared to look like every other DVD that I see here on my 106" screen. It was soft and film-like. It was watchable for sure but when I turned on the sharpening, the result was very pleasing and I elected to view the entire film with the sharpening on and the other two controls off. I also liked the sharpening on the other film.

Again, being curious, I thought I'd wander up to the screen and check for edge enhancement or ringing. I was astonished to find that whenever there was anything like this it was still there when the sharpening was turned off. But I have to say that in this particular film at least, (Marty) there was no edge enhancement problem to be found anywhere on the screen.

Now I do have AVIA and DVE SD and DVE BD as well as the AVCHD disc. I do know what ringing is and I hate it. This is why I have the sharpening tools on my BenQ w5000 set to either their lowest setting or at least to a neutral setting. I have set up my projector so that the test discs don't show edge enhancement.

At first, I couldn't get 'Marty' to show in it's proper 4:3 AR but interestingly enough, I found that the image was stretched uniformly and if I had to, I could certainly watch a film this way. Fortunately, I don't have to since my projector can force the proper ratio and I did watch the film in it's natural shape.

I really, really like the 1080/24p ability of this player. There were instances whereby I thought that certain images would have driven me crazy with any of my other players using these particular discs. I never had a problem with any panning scenes or any object that would otherwise cause moire.

Although I have the 30 day period in which to decide what to do about this player, I think that I'll most likely keep it as I do appreciate watching DVD material through it.

I'm hoping this may help someone who has been on the fence. My suggestion is to just be as objective as you can and try it out. Who knows? You may like it as much as I do. ;)

Wayne

Wayne,

Thanks for the review. As far as the "nearly HD quality" concept goes, would you say the E500 is midway between a regular upconverted image and HD? 25% of the way there? None, but there is something happening that beats ordinary upconversion?

Would anyone who wasn't informed about the test but who has seen a fair amount of HD assume for one moment an upconverted SD DVD on the E500 was HD?

Thanks for any assessment on this you can give us.

No, there is no comparison. I watched Transformers last night on BD and it was absolutely stunning. Perhaps that's not a fair comparison as it's regarded as a reference disc but on my 106" screen the difference between HD and SD stands out.

However, to answer your question, I do believe that the XD-E500 does render SD material better than I've ever seen it before in my own home. And I tend to think that I have a pretty nice setup. It doesn't get much brighter than a 2.8 gain screen. Remember, I have the Toshiba HD-A2 which is regarded as a very good upscaler and I won't be using it anymore for that purpose now that I have the XD-E500. That ought to tell you something.

I don't believe that anyone who is familiar with HD would mistake the XD-E500 for HD material but still it is impressive at least to me. I would say that this DVD player does outperform anything I've seen with SD DVD. I wouldn't say it's twice as good or anything like that but good enough to plunk my money down. I'd say that this player raises the bar to the point where SD material can now be judged to be in my subjective opinion, almost as sharp as HD, almost as colorful, but still lacking in resolution. I wasn't going to have anything to do with SD DVD anymore but this machine has changed my mind. I can definitely live with it at least for the short term and enjoy it too. I think this machine has narrowed the gap between true HD and SD. I remember my first thoughts upon seeing the first Transformers scene in BD was 'Wow this is everything I've read it to be' and 'Hmmm, I thought it would blow away what I've recently seen on the XD-E500 but no'. It was better yes, but not the huge difference I'm used to which I found to be very interesting and a revelation of sorts.

I don't know what all that means percentage wise as far as improvement goes but I could guess at 50% compared to my other upconverting players which all of them are.

Once again, please let me be clear. HD DVD and BD are better and the difference is obvious on a screen the size of mine. However, this unit has breathed a little bit of fresh life into my DVD collection and I'm looking forward to seeing some of them over again while still enjoying the superior images of the HD formats. I also wish to be clear and reiterate that in my opinion and it's just that, an opinion, the only thing this player lacks image wise is greater resolution because I think it's rendition of colors and sharpness sets it apart from other SD players.

One other thing, anyone who is knowledgeable about the BenQ w5000 will know that it has a reputation of showing video noise. The debate has raged on as to whether it augments noise already present on the disc or adds it's own. I'm of the opinion that due to it's sharp optics it shows noise that other projectors may not. A pleasant surprise regarding the XD-E500 was that it reduces extraneous noise in the image but not at expense of detail. Again, this is my opinion based on what I've viewed so far.

Wayne

Some good, clear points there, Wayne. Thank you.

I'm using a Panasonic AE900U on a 100" Carada Brilliant White screen and it sounds like the E500 might bring something of value to the tons of SD DVDs I've collected. Don't worry, I won't hold you responsible if it doesn't deliver for me :cool: as I totally understand how subjective all of this is.

I have cable HD but am still fine for the most part with SD DVD on my current upconverting player, particularly for older movies. But if I can get a noticable improvement with a better upconverter for $150 or less, maybe I'll go for it. I haven't gone BD yet and am definitely not planning to re-buy all these discs in BD, not that many of them will be available on BD in the next half decade or more anyway.

My only hesitation now is that I've stacked so many different DVD players in my rack (multi-disc players, PAL/region-free player, DVD recorder...) I wish Toshiba combined more into this one besides, as I understand, the PAL/region-free capability. I wouldn't hesitate for a moment if it also played BD and recorded on DVDs as well.

If it was a multi-disc player, that would be great, too. Ha! However, I've been told by Toshiba they have no plans to incorporate BD compatability on their players or produce another multi-disc player in the foreseeable future.

Nice review Wayne and I agree with most of your points. The E500 is a terrific standard def dvd machine. I can't understand why a product which produces this quality output ellicits so much hate from a few posters.

Some sort of psychological issue going on here.

In addition to test patterns, I watched several "real world" DVDs. I tried to pick discs with little to no inherent edge enhancement or compression artifacts in their video transfers. The Hellboy Director's Cut is a very clean disc. With the XDE sharpness filter engaged, distracting edge ringing was added to every scene.

It is intriguing that others are not able to see the same edge ringing using the same/similar set-up as yours or, they prefer to see the picture that way. Now we are in the realm of religion. People of different persuasion can see evidence of their particular belief system all around them (even communism and capitalist belief system are prone to the same fallacies), but it only makes sense to them.

So in this case, either the eyes don't see what the mind doesn't know, or, the eyes see what the mind wants them to see! Intriguing, as I said!:)

I watched the Toshiba on my 120" JVC RS1 at the minimum recommend Thx seating distance of about 12 ft. Of course that was too close and made the camera produced video noise in the darker background too obvious. One MUST sit further back for SD than for HD playback.
They way I see it those with 100+ front projection screens definitely should prefer high definition over standard definition. Even so many cable HD sources are still full of downsampling noise and artifacts.

The conclusion: cable and standard definition are best viewed by the (up to 65") flat panel segment, which is 95% of the buying public.

That being said too many Blu-ray discs are a waste like Cloverfield or Surf's Up where its purposely made to look like standard definition. Or the new Speedracer with its technical limitations:
Version: U.S.A / Region Free
VC-1 BD-25 - SINGLE LAYER DISC
Running time: 2:15:00
Movie size: 21,09 GB
Disc size: 23,98 GB
Average video bit rate: 17 Mbps

NO LOSSLESS (HD) audio.
Dolby Digital Audio English 640 kbps 5.1 / 48kHz / 640kbps

With crap like this do manufactures really want Blu-ray to fail in the long term to save a buck now? I mean this is what Wall Street does, and look where it got them. No doubt about it DVD is the safer investment.

However, to answer your question, I do believe that the XD-E500 does render SD material better than I've ever seen it before in my own home. And I tend to think that I have a pretty nice setup. It doesn't get much brighter than a 2.8 gain screen. Remember, I have the Toshiba HD-A2 which is regarded as a very good upscaler and I won't be using it anymore for that purpose now that I have the XD-E500. That ought to tell you something.

How does the HD-A2 look if you crank up the sharpness setting on the display ?

D

Nice review Wayne and I agree with most of your points. The E500 is a terrific standard def dvd machine. I can't understand why a product which produces this quality output ellicits so much hate from a few posters.

Some sort of psychological issue going on here.

In a nutshell it boils down to how you watch a movie. IF you watch it actively looking for artifacts, you'll find it. Period.

On another note. Like all things in life, we don't have to agree with everything anyone says. As I see it, a reviewer is just another opinion. They have no special insight when it comes to aesthetics (which is really what this is). LOL

I am saying this since I just finished reading an edition of the Absolute Sound. I wonder, if everything is so objective, why they don't do double blind tests for all their products and rate products only based on blind tests (i.e. not know the brand, price etc). Now that would show some guts. But it would probably turn the high end market upside down :)

hitchfan,

I hear ya. Isn't is fortunate that your problem is too many DVD players and not too many women?! :D

The Oppo BD player coming out soon just might address most of your needs, maybe all except for the recording capability.

Star56,

This is a phenomenon that replicates itself in almost every persuasion of life. Two people can look at the very same thing and come away with different conclusions. Makes life interesting doesn't it? :)

emthree,

Interesting analogy there on the perception of this player being in the realm of religion. I'm starting to think that this entire forum is sometimes that way. LOL!

dazzerxxx,

Wel, I don't like any of my other players with the sharpness on the projector cranked up even just a little bit. I've tested them with the sharpness test screen and I always do my utmost to eliminate any ringing at all. And keep in mind, this is ringing that I might see from my normal viewing distance. I can see it from there very easily on the HD-A2 which I highly regard I might add. Also keep in mind that my projector is just about the sharpest one on the planet and I have three different sharpness settings in the menu system that I've turned off or at least as far down as I can go without the image looking blurry which is just as bad as too sharp in my opinion. But I do enjoy a picture that is JUST sharp enough with DVD and I think I've found it in the XD-E500. I do have my eye on the new Oppo player though. This ought to be amazing in almost all respects with video and audio.

Wayne

Wayne,

Thanks for the review. As far as the "nearly HD quality" concept goes, would you say the E500 is midway between a regular upconverted image and HD? 25% of the way there? None, but there is something happening that beats ordinary upconversion?

Would anyone who wasn't informed about the test but who has seen a fair amount of HD assume for one moment an upconverted SD DVD on the E500 was HD?

Thanks for any assessment on this you can give us.

I have a lot of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movies and although I really like what the ED-500 does for DVD, it has never made me think for a moment that my SD-DVD looked like the kind of HD that I get from hi-def media. The ED-500 does do a good job of making DVD's not look so soft however. It really makes watching DVDs on my 110" screen more enjoyable, but it does not make me think that the SD-DVD is HD even for a moment. I think that anyone interested in what the player can do for them should really just try one from Circuit City. You have a whole month to test it out without penalty anyway.

That being said too many Blu-ray discs are a waste like Cloverfield or Surf's Up where its purposely made to look like standard definition.

Care to explain this?

Cloverfield was shot (http://gizmodo.com/347463/the-real-camera-behind-cloverfield) with a HD camera (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/sony-intros-cinealta-f23-highend-hd-camera-for-pro-filmmakers-221786.php).

Surf's up is animation.

How exactly were they "purposely made to look like standard definition"?

Cloverfield has a great video transfer (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1476/cloverfield.html). As did Surfs Up (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1025/surfsup.html). Not too mention both had stellar audio. You sure picked two weird dics to complain about.

So what exactly are you talking about here?

Or the new Speedracer with its technical limitations:
Version: U.S.A / Region Free
VC-1 BD-25 - SINGLE LAYER DISC
Running time: 2:15:00
Movie size: 21,09 GB
Disc size: 23,98 GB
Average video bit rate: 17 Mbps

NO LOSSLESS (HD) audio.
Dolby Digital Audio English 640 kbps 5.1 / 48kHz / 640kbps

With crap like this do manufactures really want Blu-ray to fail in the long term to save a buck now? I mean this is what Wall Street does, and look where it got them. No doubt about it DVD is the safer investment.

1) Speed Racer was a huge flop. Do you expect them to sink more money into it?
2) WB has a history of doing this (for ALL formats).

I would have preferred a better effort. But we are talking about WB here. It is no surprise.

Thanks for the review Wayne. You've given me much food for thought.

I am presently using the Philips 5990 and while I do see occasional deinterlacing artifacts I am happy with the results with films. The 5990 has some problems with video based material so special features often display deinterlacing artifacts.
I would say there is increased ringing as well but it it not terrible. Does anyone else have the Philips 5990 (5992) and the XD-E500? Is the XD-E500 worth the added expense?
I use a 100" screen with an Optoma HD70 PJ. And I never go into a DVD player menu to ADD sharpness. I run the PJ at -1 or -2 sharpness.

Thanks again Wayne - nicely written reviews there.

That being said too many Blu-ray discs are a waste like Cloverfield or Surf's Up where its purposely made to look like standard definition. Or the new Speedracer with its technical limitations:
Version: U.S.A / Region Free
VC-1 BD-25 - SINGLE LAYER DISC
Running time: 2:15:00
Movie size: 21,09 GB
Disc size: 23,98 GB
Average video bit rate: 17 Mbps

Cloverfield was shot on HD video and does not ever look like Standard Definition. I'm curious whether you've actually seen the movie?

The Speed Racer Blu-ray is astoundingly sharp and detailed, even with its low bit rate. It is far, far superior to anything possible on DVD. The bit rate is just a number. It doesn't tell you anything about the quality of the compression work done.

Cloverfield has a great video transfer (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1476/cloverfield.html). As did Surfs Up (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1025/surfsup.html). Not too mention both had stellar audio. You sure picked two weird dics to complain about.

So what exactly are you talking about here?

He picked three weird discs to complain about. I doubt that he's actually watched any of them on Blu-ray.

I am glad you admit that projecting a DVD onto a 100 inch screen makes it softer. So, what we are differing on really is the value or need to correct that softness and the XDE approach. Fair enough.

I think what we really differ on is how to correct that softness.

In a nutshell it boils down to how you watch a movie. IF you watch it actively looking for artifacts, you'll find it. Period.

I've been following this thread with some amusement. It's fascinating to watch the emotional (often bordering on the irrational, and few seem to try to understand what the other side is trying to say) attachments some posters feel for their positions. I have a library of close to 2000 SD DVDs, that I will not be replacing with HD, that I want to watch with the best possible upscaler.

I'm not interested in analyzing to death, a single frame of a movie. I want the best possible 'moving picture'. I wonder sometimes if excessive micro-analysis of artifacts in a frame, often misses the larger point which is how visually appealing is the playback of the movie.

When I first got my 56" 1080p DLP, I was obsessed with tweaking it here, tweaking it there, for what (at that particular moment) I subjectively deemed to be the optimum PQ. But you know what? I got over that obsessing in a couple of weeks, and just started enjoying the overall playback, instead of picking this nit and that nit. And I suspect 99.5% of the viewing public would agree with me.

So this unit has some appeal to me, because the overall viewing experience for many, seems to be a very high quality. It's not HD, but that isn't the point. The point for many of us is whether or not it is excellent SD.

Oh I also wonder if one of the reasons that BD sales are slower than expected, is the cost of BD blanks, making it impractical to make (illegal in some countries, but not all) back-ups.

Oh I also wonder if one of the reasons that BD sales are slower than expected, is the cost of BD blanks, making it impractical to make (illegal in some countries, but not all) back-ups.

The percentage of consumers who feel the need to "back up" their movie collection is miniscule. Video pirates are the only people "backing up" DVDs and Blu-rays to any significant extent, and they're not paying for legitimate merchandise in the first place.

Blu-ray sales are lower than expected due to consumer apathy caused by a widespread misperception that DVD is already High Definition or "near High-Def" quality.

When I first got my 56" 1080p DLP, I was obsessed with tweaking it here, tweaking it there, for what (at that particular moment) I subjectively deemed to be the optimum PQ. But you know what? I got over that obsessing in a couple of weeks, and just started enjoying the overall playback, instead of picking this nit and that nit. And I suspect 99.5% of the viewing public would agree with me.

I can agree that sometimes obsession can come in to play, but I don't think it is true all the time. For example, I recall discussions about screen door effect (SDE), rainbows (DLPs), and motion blur. Some people are just more sensitive to certain types of issues then others. They can be distracting and even cause headaches. Edge Enhancement (EE) is another such potential issue.

These types of things are not limited to videophiles and hobby elistist but are relevant to everyone. So while the XDE might be providing improvements to some it may also be causing an uncomfortable distraction for others that has nothing to do with an elistist attitude.

It can be hard to sometimes differentiate between who is disliking something for the sake of disliking it and who really has a negative impact from its use. It is not all about agenda's for those that happen to dislike the effect the XDE promotes, it may just be they are more sensitive to that type of artifact.

I can agree that sometimes obsession can come in to play, but I don't think it is true all the time. For example, I recall discussions about screen door effect (SDE), rainbows (DLPs), and motion blur. Some people are just more sensitive to certain types of issues then others. They can be distracting and even cause headaches. Edge Enhancement (EE) is another such potential issue.

These types of things are not limited to videophiles and hobby elistist but are relevant to everyone. So while the XDE might be providing improvements to some it may also be causing an uncomfortable distraction for others that has nothing to do with an elistist attitude.

It can be hard to sometimes differentiate between who is disliking something for the sake of disliking it and who really has a negative impact from its use. It is not all about agenda's for those that happen to dislike the effect the XDE promotes, it may just be they are more sensitive to that type of artifact.
Well put smithb.

Blu-ray sales are lower than expected due to consumer apathy caused by a widespread misperception that DVD is already High Definition or "near High-Def" quality.

Yes. I see.

What effect would a (good) $100 BD player have on BD sales?

Blu-ray sales are lower than expected due to consumer apathy caused by a widespread misperception that DVD is already High Definition or "near High-Def" quality.

What is the basis for thinking it is a widespread misperception? I don't have a misperception and people I've talked with don't have a misperception. There are a lot of factors involved.

Number one probably being economics. We just got to a point not long ago when players and media are extremely cheap. Why would the majority of people want to re-invest money into a new format (especially when we are just dealing with entertainment value).

What's really wrong with "good enough". With HD here SD all the sudden is not suppose to be good enough anymore. Just a decade ago we though it was the greatest thing coming from VHS. I think for the majority it hasn't lost its luster yet.

Obviously, there is also the lack of content based on the catalog of SD DVD's.

If anything you would expect everyone on a forum such as this to be all about HD content, but what we see is many happy enough with SD and treading into HD slowly. If that is the case here then the masses that aren't as into this hobby as us are even going to be slower to migrate.

I don't see it as widespread misperception as much as lack of need to make this change in any hurry and hoping prices come down.

Care to explain this?

Cloverfield was shot (http://gizmodo.com/347463/the-real-camera-behind-cloverfield) with a HD camera (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/sony-intros-cinealta-f23-highend-hd-camera-for-pro-filmmakers-221786.php).

Surf's up is animation.

How exactly were they "purposely made to look like standard definition"?

Cloverfield has a great video transfer (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1476/cloverfield.html). As did Surfs Up (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1025/surfsup.html). Not too mention both had stellar audio. You sure picked two weird dics to complain about.

So what exactly are you talking about here?





I think the point he's trying to make, although I'm not speaking for him, is that Surfs Up and Cloverfield were both grainy movies. Well, they looked grainy to me, and the sort of films that don't benefit too much, going from a good SD transfer to HD (IMO).

What is the basis for thinking it is a widespread misperception? I don't have a misperception and people I've talked with don't have a misperception. There are a lot of factors involved.

Number one probably being economics. We just got to a point not long ago when players and media are extremely cheap. Why would the majority of people want to re-invest money into a new format (especially when we are just dealing with entertainment value).

I don't see it as widespread misperception as much as lack of need to make this change in any hurry and hoping prices come down.

True - most of the people I come into contact with are not Audio or Video philes. To many of them DVDs are the high end. BD is something they don't know about and/or don't care about.

I do think many of us who are aware of the improvement BD offers are waiting for the Player prices to come down and for the players to offer a more well (evenly?) reviewed status.

Care to explain this?

Resist Climbing Aboard the Blu-ray Bandwagon?
---------------------------------------------
Because of the bias here I will take time to explaining the obvious to the paid Blu-ray reviewers. Fight fire with fire:
"Certainly not all Blu-ray discs (BDs) are equal; some are better than others. But that depends on the quality of the HD source and the skill of the video transfer technicians. To give an extreme example, most of the film Cloverfield was shot to simulate standard definition camcorder footage. Does it benefit from a high definition transfer? Not much. At best, it can more closely recreate the grungy, cheap videocam look without the additional degradation of standard resolution video playback."
You guys complain to no end about the Toshiba detail enhancement yet miss this. Remarkable :o
http://blog.ultimateavmag.com/thomasnorton/07012008Bandwagon/

Surf's Up has a purposely blurry picture to "simulate" a documentary!
Save your money and get the DVD.

Speed Racer audio is downsampled to 640kbs.
Since SD mastered animation has zero noise, again save your money.
The movie 300 is crap too as its full of terrible noise. Instead just get the DVD as who enjoys watching sharper noise? In spite of the rave reviews too.

I wish I could get paid for writing to AVS forum. Notice i did not say "too" as we don't want anyone to get the wrong impression. :D

Resist Climbing Aboard the Blu-ray Bandwagon?
---------------------------------------------
Because of the bias here I will take time to explaining the obvious to the paid Blu-ray reviewers. Fight fire with fire:
"Certainly not all Blu-ray discs (BDs) are equal; some are better than others. But that depends on the quality of the HD source and the skill of the video transfer technicians. To give an extreme example, most of the film Cloverfield was shot to simulate standard definition camcorder footage. Does it benefit from a high definition transfer? Not much. At best, it can more closely recreate the grungy, cheap videocam look without the additional degradation of standard resolution video playback."
You guys complain to no end about the Toshiba detail enhancement yet miss this. Remarkable :o
http://blog.ultimateavmag.com/thomasnorton/07012008Bandwagon/

Surf's Up has a purposely blurry picture to "simulate" a documentary!
Save your money and get the DVD.

Speed Racer audio is downsampled to 640kbs.
Since SD mastered animation has zero noise, again save your money.
The movie 300 is crap too as its full of terrible noise. Instead just get the DVD as who enjoys watching sharper noise? In spite of the rave reviews too.

I wish I could get paid for writing to AVS forum. Notice i did not say "too" as we don't want anyone to get the wrong impression. :D

So, you are telling people what movies they should/shold not buy in HD? And 300 has no benefit whatsoever via its HD release? Just "sharper noise"? Give me a break. And I notice you leave out the improved audio in all of this, and only focus on the picture. Not too mention any special features.

Oh, and all of that "terrible noise" and such you speak of....yeah, that's called the DIRECTOR'S INTENT. You know, the person actually MAKING the movie wanted that in there as PART of the movie experience for YOU to see.

And you quote a blog??? Nice. How official.

Oh, from the same blog:
Most movies made over the last 60 years were not filmed with HD formats in mind. It’s possible to re-process a film into HD resolution, and the studios are doing so with many movies. However, it’s a manual process, and the results for older or less popular films are mixed. So, before you run out and buy a player, read some unbiased reviews for the titles you plan to re-purchase. Also, keep track of which of your favorite TV shows were recorded in HD, as there’s little benefit to buying the Blu-ray version of a show shot in standard-def!

I guess they shouldn't release any old catalog titles in HD then either, huh???:rolleyes:

The fact is yes, the quality of bluray transfers is variable. The fact is Cloverfield was shot in HD. The fact is Surfs Up is an animation. The fact is that both Cloverfield and Surfs Up received great overall scores from various sites. The fact is their audio is also superior to the DVD versions. The fact is Cloverfield has tons of extra content on its bluray version.

If you are complaining about this stuff now...why did you even buy into HDM in the first place? :confused:

I am failing to understand what your point is here? So because you think certain movies don't benefit from HD and are "crap" we shouldn't buy them?

Maybe there is a reason you don't "get paid for writing to AVS forum".

Yes. I see.

What effect would a (good) $100 BD player have on BD sales?

Depends on who releases the player and where it can be bought. But the way I see it, player prices are not the primary problem.

Software prices at most B&M are still too skewed in favor of DVD. I walked into my Best Buy with all intentions of buying Speed Racer Blu Ray. Guess what. The Blu Ray is priced at $34.99 and the DVD is $16.99 :eek:

This is not the first time either that it has happened. I went in to buy Ice Age for my daughter, the Blu Ray was $35.99 and the DVD was $6.99 :eek:

Whether I go to Best Buy, Circuit City or Barnes and Nobles all have that problem. I am assuming prices will come down, but until then most people who buy a player will simply rent.

But, that too is a problem. I signed up with Netflix. However, almost any new title I wanted was on looooooong wait. I seldom got more than 2 Blu Rays a week. This may have changed, but after a couple of months I just gave up.

These are probably growing pains that will go away with time as the format matures. I believe.

However, another contention is the sheer number of live HD channels that people have access to today on their TV. That along with HD Tivo and HD DVRs mean that many people with their cable subscriptions have access to most new movies on HD with their HD cable. Now, this isn't as good as Blu Ray. But IF I am comparing HD Cable at home to Blu Ray demo in Best Buy, I am probably not going to see a lot of difference.

Lastly, when you walk into a Best Buy or Circuit City what you usually find is HD feeds on all TVs. The feeds are usually bright videos with lots of colors. Then in a few displays they usually have dim Blu Ray movies. Again. Not a good comparison if you want to sell people onto Blu Ray.

I am sure there are others. But it boils down to perception of value.

The percentage of consumers who feel the need to "back up" their movie collection is miniscule. Video pirates are the only people "backing up" DVDs and Blu-rays to any significant extent, and they're not paying for legitimate merchandise in the first place.

Blu-ray sales are lower than expected due to consumer apathy caused by a widespread misperception that DVD is already High Definition or "near High-Def" quality.

Amazingly, even Hulu.com, which I believe is owned by Fox, Warner and Universal show 480p as an HD format! :eek:

Depends on who releases the player and where it can be bought. But the way I see it, player prices are not the primary problem.


Perhaps so, but until I own a player I cannot even rent BDs from Netflix. I do not think the media price difference would be as much as it is if there were more potential buyers (of media) out there (here).

The whoever and where ever part of your quote is a bit vague for me. I'll just say when we can buy good BD players manufactured by the usual suspects and available at the usual locations.

Inexpensive (good) BD players are still what is needed to drive the market, IMO. All else will follow.

The percentage of consumers who feel the need to "back up" their movie collection is miniscule. Video pirates are the only people "backing up" DVDs and Blu-rays to any significant extent, and they're not paying for legitimate merchandise in the first place.

Blu-ray sales are lower than expected due to consumer apathy caused by a widespread misperception that DVD is already High Definition or "near High-Def" quality.

That's not the only reason! There's people like me who can clearly tell the difference between SD and HD, but who refuse to pay two or three and sometimes four times as much for catalogue titles on BD than DVD and 50% more for new releases! I'll bet even those apathetic consumers who think DVD is HD, do or will, feel the same way. I'll buy an occasional "must have" BD, but the rest will be DVD rental or purchase. I'm tired of being exploited by the studios every time I decide to buy a movie. My XDE500 should be here in a couple of days - I ordered it directly from Toshiba. After reading all the posts here I have absolutely no idea what I'm going to think of it. The good news is that NEC and others have new "upconverting" or SR technology that will be incorporated into DVD players soon and may raise the SD DVD bar higher still.

So, you are telling people what movies they should/shold not buy in HD?
Maybe there is a reason you don't "get paid for writing to AVS forum".
Wow! A specific question was asked why these movies were of so so crappy quality, and i explained they were purposely dumbed-down (here the resolution is reduced and noise added).
No going off on tangents as the fact is, the Toshiba 500 is a great buy to extend the life of DVD collections.
Quality movies are becoming tougher to find these days with the terrible economic times. Film financing is difficult to come by and it continues to worsen.

I choose not to get paid to write to AVS forum as its unethical to do so.
If the lobbyist does make a disclosure then everything they say can easily be predicted: the sweet talking is always to increase sales of their products.

The Toshiba 500 DVD player represents a threat especially since the CEDIA attendance was down ~25% (14% official) and even Best Buys profits are sagging. All the while some manufactures (Sony especially) are reducing features while simultaneously raising prices. Anyone can see that the industry is desperate for consumers to spend more, not less. They must be immersed to blindly follow The Blu-ray Bandwagon".
However my strategy is to only buy quality Blu-ray discs 1) once I've rented the DVD 2) want to view it multiple times 3) and know for certain its quality is faithful to the master source and 4) its $20 or less. Front projector owners can bias there views more toward Blu-ray while flat panel owners can save by staying with DVDs. :)

Yes. I see.

What effect would a (good) $100 BD player have on BD sales?

It will help, but not entirely solve the problem. What's needed are 3 things:

1) Consumer education. This is sorely lacking right now.
2) Lower BD hardware and software prices to current DVD levels.
3) Phase out DVD-only players and add Blu-ray capability to all future DVD models.

Because of the bias here I will take time to explaining the obvious to the paid Blu-ray reviewers. Fight fire with fire:
"Certainly not all Blu-ray discs (BDs) are equal; some are better than others. But that depends on the quality of the HD source and the skill of the video transfer technicians. To give an extreme example, most of the film Cloverfield was shot to simulate standard definition camcorder footage. Does it benefit from a high definition transfer? Not much. At best, it can more closely recreate the grungy, cheap videocam look without the additional degradation of standard resolution video playback."
You guys complain to no end about the Toshiba detail enhancement yet miss this. Remarkable :o
http://blog.ultimateavmag.com/thomasnorton/07012008Bandwagon/

Have you seen Cloverfield on Blu-ray? Yes or no? If you had, you'd know that that isn't at all true.

Surf's Up has a purposely blurry picture to "simulate" a documentary!
Save your money and get the DVD.

False. Surf's Up is grainy on purpose. It is not "blurry". The Blu-ray picture quality has considerably more detail than the DVD.

Speed Racer audio is downsampled to 640kbs.

And it's 448 kb/s on DVD. What does that have to do with anything? You're trying to change the topic out of desperation.

Since SD mastered animation has zero noise, again save your money.
The movie 300 is crap too as its full of terrible noise. Instead just get the DVD as who enjoys watching sharper noise? In spite of the rave reviews too.

You have no clue what you are talking about. At all.

I wish I could get paid for writing to AVS forum. Notice i did not say "too" as we don't want anyone to get the wrong impression. :D

WTF is that supposed to mean? :confused:

Perhaps so, but until I own a player I cannot even rent BDs from Netflix. I do not think the media price difference would be as much as it is if there were more potential buyers (of media) out there (here).

The whoever and where ever part of your quote is a bit vague for me. I'll just say when we can buy good BD players manufactured by the usual suspects and available at the usual locations.

Inexpensive (good) BD players are still what is needed to drive the market, IMO. All else will follow.

What I meant is that the low priced players must be from a well recognized brand name and not limited to discounters.

Someone mentioned need for customer education. I believe you can't educate the customer here. They have to perceive the value based on how the product is packaged. Except for Panasonic who seem to be deprecating DVD in their current players, all the other Blu Ray player makers, including Sony are focusing on improving DVD upscaling!

It will help, but not entirely solve the problem. What's needed are 3 things:

1) Consumer education. This is sorely lacking right now.
2) Lower BD hardware and software prices to current DVD levels.
3) Phase out DVD-only players and add Blu-ray capability to all future DVD models.

1. I just don't see how this is possible. There is already plenty of marketing going on for Blu Ray, But it is off set by near HD claims for upconverting DVD players. Here is what Sony claims,

"Breathe new life into your DVD collection with the black DVP-NS700H upscaling DVD player. Enjoy your favorite DVDs, now upscaled to 1080p beauty via the HDMI™ connection"

OR from their Blu Ray player features:

"DVD upscale to 1080p

DVD Upscaling via HDMI™ gets the most out of your existing DVD collection by upscaling standard definition video to near HD quality. 2
Precision Cinema HD Upscale

Precision Cinema HD upscale uses high bandwidth digital-to-analog conversion and processing to detect image changes at the pixel level, rather than at the level of whole scan lines. Additionally, separate algorithms are used to process the moving and still parts of an image, resulting in sharp backgrounds with moving objects that are free from motion artifacts"

If you see here

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665368427

What stands out is the most easily understood feature is DVD upscaling. I am not sure anyone I deal with in real life even knows that Bonus View is, or BD Live and the other mumbo jumbo. But DVD upscaling everyone knows :)



2. Surest way to grow the format. A small premium would be fine (I'd say $5 for software and $50-100 for hardware).

3.That's assuming they don't want to play in the sub $199 or so STB market. Last I checked at most big box retailers, the only DVD players they carried at all were in the sub $200 range. So, that would pose a delimma of sorts.

It will help, but not entirely solve the problem. What's needed are 3 things:

1) Consumer education. This is sorely lacking right now.
2) Lower BD hardware and software prices to current DVD levels.
3) Phase out DVD-only players and add Blu-ray capability to all future DVD models.


This might help. But I think most of the public thinks of DVD as High End. Most people (I meet) do not think DVD is in need of improvement. I DO think it needs improving.
However, education and "getting the word out" is never a bad thing.
YES. When Joe and Jane Average can see the huge PQ and AQ improvement on their neighbor's entertainment system they might want the same.

In 2003 we bought an Infocus X1 and created a little theater in our basement. Within 2 weeks of seeing our setup 2 neighbors had duplicated it. They would not have done so w/o seeing it for themselves.
I think cheaper BD players should be first on the price markdown list. Make BD junkies of us - that's the way it works. I would pay a little extra for media at first.
Not sure about this one for the immediate future. Sounds a little too soon to me. But certainly an eventuality.

What I meant is that the low priced players must be from a well recognized brand name and not limited to discounters.

Someone mentioned need for customer education. I believe you can't educate the customer here. They have to perceive the value based on how the product is packaged.

Yes. Understood.

I don't see a clamoring for BD at all. I want it and a few others I see at the BD bins want it. But the buying public isn't much interested. And I don't know why they would be. HD is just making its way into the average person's home now. It's too bad there isn't a decent cheap BD player to allow them to see how good it can look (and sound).
Then again, I think people are pretty happy with DVD PQ. I'm not, most of the posters here aren't. But to get BD happening we need it available at a reasonable price.

Another problem might be the economy right now. BD will take a backseat to Wall Street and petroleum concerns.

Yes. Understood.

I don't see a clamoring for BD at all. I want it and a few others I see at the BD bins want it. But the buying public isn't much interested. And I don't know why they would be. HD is just making its way into the average person's home now. It's too bad there isn't a decent cheap BD player to allow them to see how good it can look (and sound).
Then again, I think people are pretty happy with DVD PQ. I'm not, most of the posters here aren't. But to get BD happening we need it available at a reasonable price.

Another problem might be the economy right now. BD will take a backseat to Wall Street and petroleum concerns.

I guess when your house AND retirement savings plummet, new investments in AV probably takes a back seat. However, both the Apple and Sonystyle stores in my area are more crowded than ever before. In fact, the Sony folks told me that they were seeing an uptick in PS3 and Laptop computer sales. But poorer TV sales (which I am assuming was due to model year change over). Said, TV sales were closely related to Blu Ray player sales.

So, I think people are buying the players but not the content. I am in that boat currently. My DVD upconversion is good enough that I don't need to obsess about needing it to be on HD. That is really what players like the XDE offers. For many people it will indeed come awefully close to whatever their current HD experience has been.

Also, while glancing through the Blu Ray PQ tier thread I realized that there are people who care about eye candy above all. For them, even the best movies will have a hard time beating HD shows on HD Theatre. The eye candy factor with video v. films gives the edge to video in my opinion.

Again, hard to predict but we'll see how this unfolds. As a consumer I am being discreet on how I spend money on collecting content.

IMO, healthy videophiles simply desire movies to be released unaltered.
But strangely, there are fascist types intent on controlling how others watch their movies. Perhaps it makes them feel important and gives them a sense of control in life.
Generally speaking, those who have a problem with the very existence of the XD-E500 likely fall into that category of videophiles who are obsessive and/or suffering from the illusion that they are more cultured because only they appreciate the true art of film. How lofty.

Are we talking about films or holy books?
At what point does the purist's quest for the one magical experience the director intended become an exercise in futility?

It's your television and your equipment, watch it the way you find it the most edifying and/or entertaining--even if it means (gasp!) changing the aspect ratio.
Period.


This is a truely strange thread. There are alot of people that are taking this player as a personal insult. Maybe it's a continuation of the format war since Tosh is involved and that brings out the BD fanboys.

I've seen the player in action and I'm impressed. Perfect? No.

But what DVD or BD player is?

That being said too many Blu-ray discs are a waste like Cloverfield or Surf's Up where its purposely made to look like standard definition.


Pull the other one.

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Cloverfield/612be673.png

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Cloverfield/7294bc28.png

source (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1039606)

If any CE or video tech company finds a working real-time algorithm to turn pic A into pic B (which includes removing all macroblocking and mosquito noise), they can start printing money now.

It's really interesting to read, what all the XDE owners here care about. LOL

btw. IMO Cloverfield is a friggin' great HD experience. There are even "fake" effects simulating the camera autofocusing, which in HD is very effective as it gives a great change between "in focus/out of focus". Grubert's frames should give you an idea. I can understand if someone doesn't like the movie or its visual style. But saying it doesn't improve in HD is, let's say ignorant, in the sense of unaware. ;)

but don't mind me, carry on

Grubert, am I correct in assuming the first pic is from the XD-E500? If not, why is it on this thread?

Pull the other one.

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Cloverfield/612be673.png

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Cloverfield/7294bc28.png

source (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1039606)

If any CE or video tech company finds a working real-time algorithm to turn pic A into pic B (which includes removing all macroblocking and mosquito noise), they can start printing money now.

I agree. It's a question of degree. Post processing is an optimization problem in that removing one type of artifact will introduce some other side effect. So, in my opinion we'll see different approaches being taken that will appeal to different people.

Also, as far as I can tell no one here has said that DVD is better than Blu Ray! This is the typical strawman that some Blu Ray pushers try to set up the argument as. Not that is not the argument. The question is whether the perceived value is great enough for people to want to pay the premium.

That in the end is a personal choice. Money is a limited resource and some people may prefer to improve other aspects of their life, other than DVD. That is just a simple fact.

The purpose of players like the XDE is to improve your DVD experience. It is just a DVD player. If you don't like what it does there are thousands of other choices. IF you don't like DVD and can't stand all the macro blocking etc. then there are choices for you. But what is the point of trying to prove how great Blu Ray is on every thread where people are discussing a solution for DVD. Blu Ray does not improve DVD. End of story!

Grubert, am I correct in assuming the first pic is from the XD-E500?

No, it is a direct grab from the DVD video file.

If not, why is it on this thread?

Because somebody claimed that the Cloverfield Blu-ray (among "too many" others) was "a waste" because it was "purposely made to look like standard definition." Both claims false, as you can plainly see.

If any CE or video tech company finds a working real-time algorithm to turn pic A into pic B (which includes removing all macroblocking and mosquito noise), they can start printing money now.
Since the DVD capture isn't from the E500 (how was it up converted? Any processing?) I'm not sure why it's being posted here.

Can someone post a pic from the E500? That would help make this post relevant in the E500 thread. Maybe a post a pic of this frame for each mode? The DVD capture looks like it could use a little sharpening (to fool the eye into thinking there's detail). :p

I don't think I'd be using Cloverfield to make a point for Blu-ray though. With all the motion and shake, the increase in detail (which really isn't that great given how it was shot) would be largely masked. Unless you pause it, of course. :p

There's much better movies to make the Blu-ray point with...

John

Also, as far as I can tell no one here has said that DVD is better than Blu Ray! This is the typical strawman that some Blu Ray pushers try to set up the argument as.

Actually, it is reincarnate who set up a strawman using Cloverfield, trying to establish the notion that too many Blu-rays are a waste. Only he was factually wrong.

There's much better movies to make the Blu-ray point with...



Again - I wasn't the one making the Blu-ray point with Cloverfield. reincarnate was the one making the DVD point with it in the first place.

Again - I wasn't the one making the Blu-ray point with Cloverfield. reincarnate was the one making the DVD point with it in the first place.
Again, this is a E500 thread.

John

No, it is a direct grab from the DVD video file.

Can't be. Image size is 1920x1080.

John

Can't be. Image size is 1920x1080.

John

Oookay... Direct grab from the video file, upscaled to 1920x1080 via bicubic upsampling on Photoshop, saved as PNG. Better? :rolleyes:

For more information contact forum member Xylon, who needs no introduction... or shouldn't, for anybody interested in picture quality.

Oookay... Direct grab from the video file, upscaled to 1920x1080 via bicubic upsampling on Photoshop, saved as PNG. Better? :rolleyes:

More information, sure. Better? Not really. How does this relate to what the E500 will do to the image? The whole point of the E500 is that it's going to take that DVD image and add processing to it to try and improve the image. Some will like the post processing, some will not.

This isn't a DVD/Blu-ray comparison thread. The source thread for those captures will handle that topic just fine.

John

This isn't a DVD/Blu-ray comparison thread.

reincarnate said Cloverfield was literally "a waste" on Blu-ray, hence bringing the issue of PQ difference of Cloverfield HD vs SD into the debate.

And I might add - I haven't seen you objecting to his posting that. :D

reincarnate said Cloverfield was literally "a waste" on Blu-ray, hence bringing the issue of PQ difference of Cloverfield HD vs SD into the debate.

Sounds like an opinion to me. Last I checked, everyone was allowed to have one. While I don't agree with everything he's saying, I would agree that Cloverfield wouldn't be a Blu-ray buy for me. The DVD would be good enough. I won't be buying it on either though.


And I might add - I haven't seen you objecting to his posting that. :D
Why would I object to some one's opinion? If you had just stated your opinion, instead of posting a capture that doesn't represent what the E500 would do, I wouldn't have responded to you.

Just curious, have you seen the movie on the E500?

Anyway, my attempt to steer the thread back on topic doesn't seem to be working, so I'll stop now.

John

It will help, but not entirely solve the problem. What's needed are 3 things:

1) Consumer education. This is sorely lacking right now.
2) Lower BD hardware and software prices to current DVD levels.
3) Phase out DVD-only players and add Blu-ray capability to all future DVD models.

You forgot accessibility! I would rent BD locally if I could and it didn't cost more more than 30% than DVD to do so. The beauty of DVD is it's cheap and it's everywhere and for most it's "good enough". What's also hurting BD is the fact that DVD looks so damn good on the newest LCD and plasma T.V.s - it just does!

Where's the incentive to drop BD prices to DVD prices - this means less profit since BD is inherently more expensive to make - good luck with that one and number three also since adding BD drives also increases price and kills sales.

You also forgot the biggest one - the CE manufacturers and the studios' have a major conflict of interest - they have two girlfriends, one being DVD and the other being BD. One looks good while the other looks beautiful. The one that just looks good also makes your meals, washes your clothes, puts out the garbage, does the dishes, manages your finances, mends your clothes and puts out every night. The other one? Well, she just looks great! Now, which one to dump, if one has to chose? :D

Why would I object to some one's opinion?

Because his opinion was unrelated to the E500. If you chastise me for posting information on Cloverfield Blu-ray, why would you approve of posting opinion on Cloverfield Blu-ray.

What goes for the goose...

Just curious, have you seen the movie on the E500?

No. Saw it once on Blu-ray, and that was enough. :D

Thanks for the pic post Grubert. Worth at least a thousand words. Very edifying.

This is a truely strange thread.

Yup, That's entertainment.

Even a little enlightenment every now and then.

Now - back to clanging swords and shields!

Yup, That's entertainment.

Even a little enlightenment every now and then.

Now - back to clanging swords and shields!

Here is a first hand account from someone who seems to own virtually all DVD players! He does not see much E(dge)E(nhancement) in the Sharp mode.

"So I pulled the trigger and picked this player up. You never know what to expect when you here claims like "best upconverting ever" or "near Hi-Def PQ from your sd dvds." I have a lot of sd dvds. Over 2500 titles. So when a player comes along that says it can make them look, at least somewhat better, I get excited. The upconvert players I've previously and currently own are Samsung DVD-HD850, Toshiba HD-DVD A20 and A35, Sony BDP-S300, Samsung BD-P1500, Denon DVD-1910 and the OPPO DV-983H. Now, to get to this players features. Everyone here knows about the 3 picture modes which are SHARP, COLOR and CONTRAST. As many here have no doubt figured these modes artificially enhance whats being displayed on screen. If you have your display properly calibrated, or even close to it, these modes will be of no use, since all they do is push the color and contrast. You could do as much with the settings of your own tv. Now, the SHARP feature has me scratching my head. Automatically you would think EE, right? Yet, that's not what it seems to do on the whole. What I noticed was an improvement in background detail rather than EE on everything in plain sight. That was nice, as it made some of my dvds come to life a little as I've never seen. Even without the XDE features, the upconverting of this player at least rivals the Oppo I mentioned and is superior to all the other players I've mentioned. Now, it's my understanding that this player is on par in its up-convert to Xa2. Those owning that player will probably not be as impressed, if at all. This player is PAL/NTSC and can be made region free. I was able to play some of my region 0 PAL discs with this player right out of the box. That was very cool. Bottom line, I'm very pleased with this player, since it's been the best up converter I've had. Just so I've said it, No, this does not make sd dvds look like hi-def blu-rays. However, it has delivered on the promise of making my sd dvd collection look better then it ever did before."

Cut and Pasted from another forum.

I had about the same thing happen. A friend of mine came over and saw my front projection setup. About 4 days later, he had one too. No research, no idea what to look for etc. He had the projector and screen up and running in no time. He can even play BD on it from his game system. He's quite happy with it, as is his son. I wouldn't even want to watch a sitcom on it, much less a BD. It's horrible. Room with white walls. A 100" cheap screen that's too big for the projector. Lights from the kitchen hitting it, etc. But hey... He's got more lumens, a bigger screen, a bigger contrast number, more pixels etc. than me.

One of my neighbors' setups cannot be used in daylight at all (walls of windows - no curtains) so he runs it like a drivein theater. Movies only when the sun goes down. Cool in the winter - not so cool in the summer. Dark @ 4:30 in the Winter, dark @ 9:30 in the Summer.

Here is a first hand account from someone who seems to own virtually all DVD players! He does not see much E(dge)E(nhancement) in the Sharp mode.

"So I pulled the trigger and picked this player up. You never know what to expect when you here claims like "best upconverting ever" or "near Hi-Def PQ from your sd dvds." I have a lot of sd dvds. Over 2500 titles. So when a player comes along that says it can make them look, at least somewhat better, I get excited. The upconvert players I've previously and currently own are Samsung DVD-HD850, Toshiba HD-DVD A20 and A35, Sony BDP-S300, Samsung BD-P1500, Denon DVD-1910 and the OPPO DV-983H. Now, to get to this players features. Everyone here knows about the 3 picture modes which are SHARP, COLOR and CONTRAST. As many here have no doubt figured these modes artificially enhance whats being displayed on screen. If you have your display properly calibrated, or even close to it, these modes will be of no use, since all they do is push the color and contrast. You could do as much with the settings of your own tv. Now, the SHARP feature has me scratching my head. Automatically you would think EE, right? Yet, that's not what it seems to do on the whole. What I noticed was an improvement in background detail rather than EE on everything in plain sight. That was nice, as it made some of my dvds come to life a little as I've never seen. Even without the XDE features, the upconverting of this player at least rivals the Oppo I mentioned and is superior to all the other players I've mentioned. Now, it's my understanding that this player is on par in its up-convert to Xa2. Those owning that player will probably not be as impressed, if at all. This player is PAL/NTSC and can be made region free. I was able to play some of my region 0 PAL discs with this player right out of the box. That was very cool. Bottom line, I'm very pleased with this player, since it's been the best up converter I've had. Just so I've said it, No, this does not make sd dvds look like hi-def blu-rays. However, it has delivered on the promise of making my sd dvd collection look better then it ever did before."

Cut and Pasted from another forum.

Thanks for the info. What forum did you find this in?
An On-topic post to boot! :eek:

Because his opinion was unrelated to the E500. If you chastise me for posting information on Cloverfield Blu-ray, why would you approve of posting opinion on Cloverfield Blu-ray.

I never chastised you for posting information on the Cloverfield Blu-ray (though that doesn't really belong here either, but for comparison sake I'm OK with it). I objected to you posting a image that isn't what you'd get from the E500. I would have had no objection at all if your post contained an E500 capture. If fact, I'd welcome it.

Trying to change the subject by asking why I'm not attaching someone else won't work as I'm not attacking any one's opinions.

Grubert, you clearly don't seem to be in the market for the E500. Correct? If so, why are you following and posting (incorrect comparisons) in this thread?

John

Here is a first hand account from someone who seems to own virtually all DVD players! He does not see much E(dge)E(nhancement) in the Sharp mode.

Posts like the one you quoted boggle my mind. I do not understand how someone could fail to see the edge ringing this player generates. It's literally everywhere.

It would be one thing to say that the edge ringing doesn't bother you. But to say that it's not there is just factually incorrect.

I never chastised you for posting information on the Cloverfield Blu-ray (though that doesn't really belong here either, but for comparison sake I'm OK with it). I objected to you posting a image that isn't what you'd get from the E500. I would have had no objection at all if your post contained an E500 capture. If fact, I'd welcome it.

Trying to change the subject by asking why I'm not attaching someone else won't work as I'm not attacking any one's opinions.

Grubert, you clearly don't seem to be in the market for the E500. Correct? If so, why are you following and posting (incorrect comparisons) in this thread?

John

I thought you said you were stopping debating with me on this particular point. Seems you're not. Well I am. :p

Posts like the one you quoted boggle my mind. I do not understand how someone could fail to see the edge ringing this player generates. It's literally everywhere.

It would be one thing to say that the edge ringing doesn't bother you. But to say that it's not there is just factually incorrect.
Depends upon how far back s/he is sitting wouldn't you think? I too see quite a bit of ringing but that's when I'm up close... move back some and it becomes difficult to see (you actually have to be trying to see it), move back even further and it disappears altogether. As I see it, some of the most important information in judging someone's opinion of this player is screen size and viewing distance... stuff that's being left out of these personal reviews of the XDE.

Posts like the one you quoted boggle my mind. I do not understand how someone could fail to see the edge ringing this player generates. It's literally everywhere.

It would be one thing to say that the edge ringing doesn't bother you. But to say that it's not there is just factually incorrect.

If you're so determined to convince everyone, why don't you simply post some pictures of this ringing. Not test patterns mind you, but screenshots from movies. I lost track, but I think maybe you are the only one claiming to see ringing and artifacts at 3X screen width. OK, go ahead and insult me or my equipment now, I'm fully expecting you to.

Depends upon how far back s/he is sitting wouldn't you think? I too see quite a bit of ringing but that's when I'm up close... move back some and it becomes difficult to see (you actually have to be trying to see it), move back even further and it disappears altogether. As I see it, some of the most important information in judging someone's opinion of this player is screen size and viewing distance... stuff that's being left out of these personal reviews of the XDE.

Yeah, and if you sit a mile away from the screen and watch it through binoculars, it'll look especially great. :rolleyes:

The ringing is perfectly visible at recommended seating distances. If you're not seeing it, you are willfully trying to not see it.

Yeah, and if you sit a mile away from the screen and watch it through binoculars, it'll look especially great. :rolleyes:

The ringing is perfectly visible at recommended seating distances. If you're not seeing it, you are willfully trying to not see it.

or,

"If you're ARE seeing it, you are willfully trying TO see it.

Same argument can be switched to go both ways.

Instead of arguing back and forth about who is willfully trying to or trying not to see the ringing. Maybe it is as simple as to some it is obvious enough to be distracting and to others it blends in well enough to provide a more statisfying image.

For the previous argument to be valid it assumes everyone's brain processes the information captured through the eyes exactly the same way. That's like saying, we all have two legs so we should all finish a 100 yard dash at the same time. It doesn't work that way. It is very possible for two people to be sitting the same distance away in the exact same environment and still come away with two different perceptions about the image. The same is true with rainbows and screen door effect as is here with the image displayed through the XDE.

No additional motives are necessary. Some like it and some don't. Neither side understanding why the other isn't seeing it their way.

Yeah, and if you sit a mile away from the screen and watch it through binoculars, it'll look especially great. :rolleyes:

The ringing is perfectly visible at recommended seating distances. If you're not seeing it, you are willfully trying to not see it.

If you use binoculars won't it be the same as sitting close?

Yeah, and if you sit a mile away from the screen and watch it through binoculars, it'll look especially great. :rolleyes:

The ringing is perfectly visible at recommended seating distances. If you're not seeing it, you are willfully trying to not see it.

If you can post some pictures of this ringing it may help prove your case. Or are you unable to do that?

Thanks for the info. What forum did you find this in?
An On-topic post to boot! :eek:

Hometheatreforum.com

If you can post some pictures of this ringing it may help prove your case. Or are you unable to do that?

Unfortunately, posting more pictures isn't going to solve anything. First it doesn't really emulate the viewing experience. Secondly, it still becomes a "Don't you see the ringing here, it is very noticeable to me", and "no I don't it just looks sharper".

Yeah, and if you sit a mile away from the screen and watch it through binoculars, it'll look especially great. :rolleyes:

The ringing is perfectly visible at recommended seating distances. If you're not seeing it, you are willfully trying to not see it.

Why is it that everyone is blind but you? :rolleyes:


It's increasingly evident that owner reviews are overwhelmingly positive, and that this player's 'sharp' setting is NOT the same as simply adjusting the TV's setting to 'match', as the XDE uses selective enhancement in a dynamic fashion. There is no way that there could be so many people saying that this player's PQ rivals or exceeds the best upscalers if it were just the Zoran chip + a blanket sharpness setting.

Actually, it is reincarnate who set up a strawman using Cloverfield, trying to establish the notion that too many Blu-rays are a waste. Only he was factually wrong.

Whether something is a waste is a personal opinion. Blu Ray is an HD format while DVD is not. So in general we are talking less compression artifacts and better definition.

But it's a personal choice entirely if the upgrade from a user experience is worth it. There are people who are fine with a Vizio plasma and others who would pay the price of a Vizio plasma just to get one extra tweak to their existing display....again, value is a personal perspective.

I have been told I am crazy for not recognizing that Blu ray and Apple HD are day and night. Well, for me the difference while there is not day and night. For some titles I don't see much diference at all. That's it.

I like what the E500 does based on my experience. It doesn't matter what the industry is trying to push down my throat. As a consumer, I am king :)

Yeah, and if you sit a mile away from the screen and watch it through binoculars, it'll look especially great. :rolleyes:

The ringing is perfectly visible at recommended seating distances. If you're not seeing it, you are willfully trying to not see it.



....if you're not photographing XDE screenshots, you're willfully trying not to photograph XDE screenshots. :)

I stand by my earlier lengthy review. I see no ringing on my 106" Da-Lite High Power screen from my 13 feet seating distance that isn't already on the disc. I'm not willfully trying to do anything. If I'd seen ringing augmented by the XD-E500 I would have boxed it back up and returned it right away. With my Oppo, Toshiba HD-A2, Samsung BD-P1000 (with the latest firmware) and the Sony BDP-301 players in the system as well as the XD-E500 I have lots of opportunity to compare different players and different formats and for SD material I will not use any of the other players anymore.

I'm using the BenQ w5000 1080/24p projector and I have tried to see artifacts artificially being produced by this player from different positions in the room including with my nose almost smelling the screen. Once again, I was elated and astonished to see the absence of these anomalies. I have good vision.

And now to add something to the thread that is bound to stir up some controversy but I have to 'calls 'em as I sees 'em). :)

I think I may have forgotten to mention my impression of what this player did on my Sony 40" Bravia KDL-40S3000 LCD TV. One of the things that has almost given me goosebumps about HD material is the FBI screen that comes up. If you haven't seen it it's truly incredibly sharp and vivid in it's coloring. When this screen first appeared on the LCD TV I did a double take and mistakenly thought I had put a BD disc in the Samsung or Sony player and was actually feeding an HD movie to the TV. It turned out that no, I had correctly inserted an SD disc into the tray of the XD-E500 and it was being upconverted to 1080/24p and sent that way over my HDMI cable. I was truly flabbergasted because I'm not easily fooled by these things and I think I almost could have been this time it was that good.

I went on to play some scenes from the movie and it did quite closely emulate a true HD experience. This is a phenomenal set by the way and it renders regular SD material very, very well but this was a whole other level altogether.

Let me put it to you this way, if I didn't have an HD projector and screen, I'd be using this 40" LCD TV for my movie viewing and I would probably sell both of the BD players in the house and just use the Toshiba XD-E500. The difference between true HD and what the Toshiba player puts out isn't worth the money or effort to go HD on this particular set. Your experience may differ.

I want to reiterate that this is not the experience that I had with my 106" screen. It was fantastic as I stated earlier but not good enough for me to give up on HD. It appears that if you're going to be using large screens then HD is the ultimate viewing experience. The beauty of this situation for me is that I can use the XD-E500 on both the projector and LCD TV and really enjoy my time spent.

No agenda here, just honest opinions and I don't mind if other people disagree based on their own experience or perceptions. I kind of don't appreciate the implication though that I might be blind or so in love with this player that I can't see the forest for the trees. That's where it gets personal and is not only in bad taste but should be out of bounds and not tolerated in this forum.

Wayne

I'm using the BenQ w5000 1080/24p projector and I have tried to see artifacts artificially being produced by this player from different positions in the room including with my nose almost smelling the screen. Once again, I was elated and astonished to see the absence of these anomalies. I have good vision.

I curious about the one comment where you were so close with your nose almost smelling the screen and could still not see any artifacts from the player. Several have noted that the player works well when we sit at least as far back as the standard suggestion, which is 2 X screen width. It sounds like you were much closer then that and still saw no ringing or edge enhancement. Is that correct?

I stand by my earlier lengthy review. I see no ringing on my 106" Da-Lite High Power screen from my 13 feet seating distance that isn't already on the disc.
Wayne
Correct. Ringing is an analog phenomena caused by an underdamped transfer function. It has nothing to do with digital or this players HDMI output.

If you are a Custom Installer addicted to obsolete and inferior analog component video then there might be a least a bit of justification here. The cables may be unterminated (not loaded with 75 ohms) which can causes reflections which may be interpreted as "ringing". It also boosts the signal level and makes everything look like crap like some of the pictures submitted. Or another type of hardware fault. Or non-optimal setup. Or it maybe its a medical condition? :eek:

Someone can post a poll asking if they see "ringing" or not with this player.
Luckily this method limits (American Idol) abuse to a certain extent as one needs hip boots to wade through all muck.

I have one of those "ringing free" E500s :)

Or else I have trained my visual cortex cells to filter out ringing. In any case, E500 equals good PQ.

Has anyone had problems concerning a high pitch whine coming from the machine when it is off. I noticed mine when another reviewer on Amazon mentioned it. I checked mine and it also had the same problem. It actually got loader and more bothersome so I returned it for a new one at CC. Now it's whine free and everything seems fine whether the machine is off or on.

There are actually two reviews on Amazon that mention this high pitched whine. Has anyone experienced this? Anyone know what could cause this? Has it happened to anyone over time? I am one that loves the machine and hopes that there isn't some kind of systematic problem with the machine.

I curious about the one comment where you were so close with your nose almost smelling the screen and could still not see any artifacts from the player. Several have noted that the player works well when we sit at least as far back as the standard suggestion, which is 2 X screen width. It sounds like you were much closer then that and still saw no ringing or edge enhancement. Is that correct?

Yes, I was curious so I viewed material from all over the room, the sides, at my normal viewing position about 12 to 13 feet back and from about a foot away from the screen. It was beautiful, not an artifact to be had from even that close. I purposely looked at curved and straight lines of objects and persons and where the end of a part of one image left off, another began without a thick edge in between. All natural edges nicely blended in to one another. Now this may have been due to this particular disc. This makes me think that any material that does show problems is due to the disc itself and not the player because I have successfully replicated any artifact I've seen using the XD-E500 on other players as well. So I have seen them at times but they aren't unusual or unexpected. If I didn't make myself clear on this point in my last post I apologize. The player will faithfully pass along artifacts if they are there in the first place but I see no evidence of enhancing them. All in all this is now my reference player for SD material.

The thing to remember is that the XD-E500 has not proven at least in this home to make artifacts worse.

Wayne

Picture was taken at 4.5' from the screen. 1080i output to 480p projector


Why would you send 1080i to a 480p projector?

Why would you send 1080i to a 480p projector?

Partly to avoid arguments that it wasn't up-converted by the XDE. Most all the other shots are 480p.

Has any of you guys seen The Lord of the Rings trilogy or Speed Racer on this machine ?
What about Star Wars ? Is this machine worth it if I have a 110' screen ?

I'd say that this player raises the bar to the point where SD material can now be judged to be in my subjective opinion, almost as sharp as HD, almost as colorful, but still lacking in resolution. I wasn't going to have anything to do with SD DVD anymore but this machine has changed my mind. I remember my first thoughts upon seeing the first Transformers scene in BD was 'Wow this is everything I've read it to be' and 'Hmmm, I thought it would blow away what I've recently seen on the XD-E500 but no'. It was better yes, but not the huge difference I'm used to which I found to be very interesting and a revelation of sorts.

Wayne

Now, that's what I call a "ringing" endorsement! :D

now, that's what i call a "ringing" endorsement! :d
:d:d:d

I watch Spirited Away (2001) a Japanese animation masterpiece at 60Hz as 24p had some tearing. I was blown away by how the XDE-500 takes hold of my visual and auditory senses and allows so much more enjoyment of truly great movies.
Here the print was a bit color faded. Since I was watching it at night I tried the contrast mode (which boosts the near black signals) and loved it.
This player is so easy to optimize your enjoyment, all just by pressing a few remote buttons.

I then put on the DVD of the new SpeedRacer a fatally flawed film with many "dead" scenes. Sharp and clear with no noise. However some colors look nice but other are so far over-saturated that it not easy film to watch. To cheap looking like Boones Farm wine!
The ending got a little bit better, but I'm glad to have rented the DVD without blowing twenty times as much in buying the Blu-ray turkey. Take any crappy movie and boost the color control: Presto you have Speedracer.

I watch Spirited Away (2001) a Japanese animation masterpiece at 60Hz as 24p had some tearing. I was blown away by how the XDE-500 takes hold of my visual and AUDITORY senses and allows so much more enjoyment of truly great movies.



The Toshiba XDE-500 has better audio quality compared to the toshiba A3? Like better separation of sound when watching standard dvd ?

I purchased one of these at Best Buy and the unit I got had the deinterlacing problem in paused images. It was most apparent on the opening "Warning" screens which made the text look terrible.

A week later, I got another one from a different store and it did NOT have the deinterlacing problem, even when a video image is on pause.

I am not sure if this has to do with the firmware being updated or not, but it appears that this problem only exists on some of their units. One thing I noticed on the bad player is that it had one of those store display informations cards stuck to the top whereas the the good one did not have it. Both were brand new.

BTW, does anyone know how to check the firmware version on this player?

I have been following this thread ever since the beginning and I have to say that I do like the image quality of the XD-E500. I have purchased the Sony DVP-NS700H and the Pioneer DV-410V in the last few months. I believe that this one is slightly better than the Pioneer, which is slightly better than the Sony. This is just my observation.

Hope this helps out any potential buyers.

The Toshiba XDE-500 has better audio quality compared to the toshiba A3? Like better separation of sound when watching standard dvd ?
The Toshiba is best mated with mild power conditioning. I've used the Belkin PF60 for years. The worst RF pollution offenders need the heavy duty digital output filters -which here makes the sound quality to dull. A simple A/C port change really opens up the SQ. Very sweet with no irritation unlike the first generation of 1080i HDMI chips from Panasonic.

The fact is each new generation of HDMI transmitters and receivers are better engineered. Toshiba engineers learned a lot from there HD-DVD player designs. But it is a rare day indeed when real progress in these areas in publicized.
For example HDMI 1.3 adds in digital signal equalization which greatly reduces waveform distortion but its hardly every mentioned. But deep-color sure is even though hardly anyone uses it. I'm going to go eat some upside-down cake now.

i'm going to go eat some upside-down cake now.

:)

Hi Guys.
Anyone got the Denon3930CI to compare with the new Toshiba XD-E500
My friend as one and dosen't think it will be better than the Denon.
Needless to say I have ordered one from B&H in New York on the results I have seen against the OPPO
Hoping in arrives early next week.
Thanks

You are correct I am not denying that Toshiba could have a good size market for this player. Now as far as my HT goes I do not have a need for the player. I also really do not wish to buy anything from Toshiba for the foreseeable future. Just based on there behavor towards Blu-ray after they decided to throw in the towel. I do not like how Toshiba is acting like the little child that just got there cookie taken from them.

I was pretty much format neutral and purchased titles on both formats during the format war. I favored Blu-ray but would have kept buying HD-DVD if it had won. For me I am focusing on HD Blu-ray movies and I do not watch many of my SD-DVD anymore. I still enjoy them from time to time but I am slowly replacing them with HD versions when available. I am also currently in the middle of a HT overhaul which means I do not have money to spend on non vital equipment. So for me it is not worth it to buy another DVD player, as I already have a Denon DVD-2200 and a Sony DVP-S9000 ES.

Toshiba pushing this player does not help acceptance of HD. While this player has a place in the market it would have been nice if Toshiba would play nice with the other CE manufacturers. And help promote the format that the industry is trying to make successful.
Dave,
This is HAL. I don't think your view is accurately stated. Did you slip and not include HD satellite, cable and broadcast sources? Why the pushing of only Blu-ray and trashing of Toshiba? To your credit you admit it's a threat. :)

Let these 130 channels of MPEG4 "HD" open your eyes:
http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPageNR.jsp?assetId=3420007

Expensive Blu-ray players and discs are not the only game in town. Consumers should be presented with all the options. In this way they can make an informed choice which HD format (if any) they want to pay for. :)

Instead of arguing back and forth about who is willfully trying to or trying not to see the ringing. Maybe it is as simple as to some it is obvious enough to be distracting and to others it blends in well enough to provide a more statisfying image.

For the previous argument to be valid it assumes everyone's brain processes the information captured through the eyes exactly the same way. That's like saying, we all have two legs so we should all finish a 100 yard dash at the same time. It doesn't work that way. It is very possible for two people to be sitting the same distance away in the exact same environment and still come away with two different perceptions about the image. The same is true with rainbows and screen door effect as is here with the image displayed through the XDE.

No additional motives are necessary. Some like it and some don't. Neither side understanding why the other isn't seeing it their way.

Excellent post! Bravo!!!!!!!!!!

People see colors different and the same goes for sharpness/detail in an image. Why can some people find the hidden picture in those optical images in seconds and some can never find them? Some would call seeing every little anomaly as a "gift", while some may consider it a "curse" that requires paying 10s of thousands on equipment to minimize the "horrible" material. :D

I say tomato others say tomato. (somehow that doesn't come out "right" in text like it does with spoken words huh? :p)

Why is it that everyone is blind but you? :rolleyes:


It's increasingly evident that owner reviews are overwhelmingly positive, and that this player's 'sharp' setting is NOT the same as simply adjusting the TV's setting to 'match', as the XDE uses selective enhancement in a dynamic fashion. There is no way that there could be so many people saying that this player's PQ rivals or exceeds the best upscalers if it were just the Zoran chip + a blanket sharpness setting.

I wonder if Josh and a few others got defective units. ;)

I wonder if Josh and a few others got defective units. ;)

That's quite possible, it would explain his inability to comprehend that others don't see the ringing.

These are real photos, undoctored, taken off my screen tonight.

The photos were taken while the video was playing, not paused. Due to the problems the player has with paused frames, the effect of the artifacts are less visible (and less easy to photograph) when the image is paused.

http://www.mindspring.com/~lizap/XDE-1_off.png

http://www.mindspring.com/~lizap/XDE-1_on.png

These are real photos, undoctored, taken off my screen tonight.

The photos were taken while the video was playing, not paused. Due to the problems the player has with paused frames, the effect of the artifacts are less visible (and less easy to photograph) when the image is paused.

http://www.mindspring.com/~lizap/XDE-1_off.png

http://www.mindspring.com/~lizap/XDE-1_on.png

Fake you have turn up your sharpness on your tv or projector, Next time get a better pix shoot

After Looking at Josh's comparison photo, I had some interesting thoughts. First of all, I'm assuming that the photos portrayed are unaltered and therefore I would like to take Josh's word that this is indeed true. Let's for the moment, regardless of which side we happened to support, agree that perhaps Toshiba is actually using newly thought of algorithms to actually sharpen the image of DVD in a way never used in CE DVD players before. Perhaps the XDE zealots like av.pallino and reincarnate have actually seen something that perhaps is a new way in sharpening DVD video.

So where am I getting this presumption that this is perhaps a new sharpening algorithm? If we look at the main gray(grey) structural pole in the middle of the frame and the white one that runs at a 45 degree angle above the word Broad..., we can all make some quick assumptions about what we are seeing.

1. the poles appear slightly out of focus, but not much. There is some contrast between them and the background, but more so on the latter one.

2. both poles look pretty identical on both the un-sharpened and sharpened versions, except save for the accentuated noise in the sharpened version.

3. there isn't what I call any form of EE that others might say to be excessive.

I'm sure there will be some that will not agree with those simple assumptions, taking note that this same image will undoubtedly look different on different PC+monitor configurations.

Now I am the type to believe that ringing is present in virtually every DVD disc that I have ever seen, and yes even on some of the best transfers(It could just be technological limitations with 480i MPEG2 video). So with that said, I also believe it isn't present on every hard edge in videos. Like the examples I stated, I don't see XDE sharpening adding EE to the image any more then what is presently there.

However, I do see the sharpening mode adding excessive noise to an image that already looks pretty decent to begin with. With the sharpness off, we already see symptoms of that bloody ringing on the roller coaster rails, which will probably be seen on no matter what DVD player you use. The sharpening did of course accentuate the ringing and caused it to be more noticeable, but it's pretty much like that for every other DVD player or TV for that matter when sharpening is turned up.

So what about the two poles I referenced earlier? Well there isn't much of a sign that there is extreme EE going on, as I personally don't see any of it. In other words I don't believe this player is adding much to the picture except accentuated noise, when the Sharpening is turned ON. This may be the only proof that I could provide that the player isn't adding excessive ringing and that perhaps Toshiba might really be on to something. Most players and tvs add edge enhancement on digital sources when sharpening is turned off along with more visible noise. Both poles don't have ringing on the sharpened version, so that might be good news to the zealots, but that doesn't take away the fact that we all can see a greater amount of noise and accentuation of the ringing that was already there before the sharpening.

I popped in DVE and was pleasantly surprised to see that this unit does very well on horizontal resolution tests. On the other hand, something is very wrong in the vertical resolution tests.. The correct pictures are from an old Toshiba SD-1200 (pic 1 and 3). The XDE pics are pic 2 and 4. I've used these DVE patterns on many players and this is the first that gives this result. Photos were taken while the disc was playing, not while paused, with all enhancements off. Has anyone else seen this?

Picture 1: SD_1200: DVE reference materials, display setup patterns
http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc118/sirbrookes/pic1.jpg

Picture 2: XDE: DVE reference materials, display setup patterns
http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc118/sirbrookes/pic2.jpg

Picture 3: SD_1200: DVE reference materials, picture resolution patterns
http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc118/sirbrookes/pic3.jpg

Picture 4: XDE: DVE reference materials, picture resolution patterns
http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc118/sirbrookes/pic4.jpg

I popped in DVE and was pleasantly surprised to see that this unit does very well on horizontal resolution tests. On the other hand, something is very wrong in the vertical resolution tests.. The correct pictures are from an old Toshiba SD-1200 (pic 1 and 3). The XDE pics are pic 2 and 4. I've used these DVE patterns on many players and this is the first that gives this result. Photos were taken while the disc was playing, not while paused. Has anyone else seen this?

Is that with the Edge Enhancement turned on? (Sharp mode) If so have you tried it with all the 'enhancements' turned off?

I notice these seem to be PAL patterns and I am sure I read that this player is very bad at doing PAL. Do you have any NTSC patterns to try?

This is with all enhancements off. Activating Sharp or any other mode does not change the problem. Unfortunately I do not have any NTSC patterns lying around.

These are real photos, undoctored, taken off my screen tonight.

The photos were taken while the video was playing, not paused. Due to the problems the player has with paused frames, the effect of the artifacts are less visible (and less easy to photograph) when the image is paused.



To me the EE looks excessive here. Clearly I have never seen anything that approaches what you are seeing here. The ringing and mosquito noise is unbearable in the 2nd picture. In fact it is so bad, that most people I know would not watch even 400kbps live streaming content with that sort of noise (let alone DVD)! XDE is completely useless in your set up, IF this picture is representative of what you're seeing as a general case.

Given that my display is a calibrated Pio 151FD I can't explain it away as my display not being able to resolve detail as well as yours.

What your display chain is showing is fundamentally different from mine.

* If anyone wants to see my images I can PM them to you (again, not sure how big attachments can get with AVS) within the next 45 minutes. I can't upload them from work.

OK. Here are the images from photo bucket. They unfortunately resize it. But the idea is to show that even from an effective distance of 4-5ft from a 60 inch display I experienced no obvious noise that Josh is seeing. These were moving images taken with a Panasonic Lumix FZ 50. The movie is kagemusha and are with BOTH sharpness and color turned on.

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/ToshibaXDESharpColor-1.jpg

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/ToshibaXDESharpColor-1.jpg

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/ToshibaXDESharpColor2.jpg

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/ToshibaXDESharpColor2.jpg

It's foreign to my experience as well.

Wayne

These are real photos, undoctored, taken off my screen tonight.

The photos were taken while the video was playing, not paused. Due to the problems the player has with paused frames, the effect of the artifacts are less visible (and less easy to photograph) when the image is paused.

Interesting. It appears as if video noise is being enhanced in addition to the visible edge artefacts. What is the test material ?

D

Well we are finally seeing some fairly good pictures from Josh. First Josh is showing just a small portion of the screen which is important to preserve the integrity of the images high frequency response.

Second it is far better to to view the entire screen at the normal distance to make a determination. That is where the improvement brought on by the Toshiba really shines.

Hopefully these finally accurate images put to bed the mis-characterization MPEG encoding artifacts or false mastering enhancement and lumping it all together, calling it "ringing" and dumping the blame on the Toshiba. (You would think this were a nasty political race otherwise). I see a picture where the top-end frequency response and detail is raised. I also see some projector induced mis-convergence.
The Toshiba is not adding anything that isn't already there in the highly compressed image. Its simply restoring the natural high end frequency response which was removed during the capture process. As any engineering student will tell you this is a limitation of any discrete sampled digital system.
In Photography we attempt to restore the detail removed by the capture aliasing filters by using a tool called unsharp-mask.

To further complicate the issue here is the softened captured raw image data is then high compressed with very lossy MPEG II compression. This process introduces the translucent artifacts/mosquito noise which always surrounds high contrast image transitions. These translucent MPEG artifacts are clearly evident in both images and illustrate why the industry is moving on to better forms of compression.

Again, at the recommended standard definition seating distances they are largely filtered out, yet the increased sharpness and apparent detail remain.

Of course since we lack so technically (and now were broke financially too), no mention is given of how difficult it is to process only 8 bit based images and not increase the banding and noise levels. Well at lest I do. Thanks go to my fellow engineers for there very effective 3-D noise reduction.

Working within these limitations, the Toshiba XD-E500 comprehensive solution is about the best there can be, and most certainly at this price.
The unique 24p output for SD film sources eliminates the motion blurriness and motion jerkiness (judder) which ALL other Blu-ray/DVD players add-in for 60Hz playback.

Whoever is helping you out from Home Theater, please give them my regards. :)

I purchased one of these at Best Buy and the unit I got had the deinterlacing problem in paused images. It was most apparent on the opening "Warning" screens which made the text look terrible.

A week later, I got another one from a different store and it did NOT have the deinterlacing problem, even when a video image is on pause.

I am not sure if this has to do with the firmware being updated or not, but it appears that this problem only exists on some of their units. One thing I noticed on the bad player is that it had one of those store display information cards stuck to the top whereas the the good one did not have it. Both were brand new.

This is interesting. Did you have the player paused on the FBI warning when you noticed this? Did you use the same discs and scenes in both players? I'm not sure I've seen anything that egregious during any of the warning screens at the beginning of anything I've watched. Too bad you didn't think to take a picture, would have been nice to see it.

I've been in contact with Toshiba support about several issues I've had and they never mentioned anything to me about updated firmware so I doubt there are different versions out there at this early date. Still, curious how two of the same model players could behave so differently with the same source material (if you did indeed use the same discs in both players, if not then it proves nothing.)

I have what was undoubtedly one of the earliest players shipped, bought from CC the day it became available. It included one of the display cards, this is standard practice for earlier units as they figure retailers will display them immediately. Aside from the normal deinterlacing glitch here and there when the flags go bad, I've had no issues like this.

Second it is far better to to view the entire screen at the normal distance to make a determination. That is where the improvement brought on by the Toshiba really shines.

The artifacts I posted are perfectly visible at normal seating distance. They are more difficult to photograph with an average consumer digital camera, however.

Thanks go to my fellow engineers for there very effective 3-D noise reduction.

Do you work for Toshiba or a company affiliated with Toshiba?

Working within these limitations, the Toshiba XD-E500 comprehensive solution is about the best there can be, and most certainly at this price.

Are you honestly saying that you would prefer to watch a movie filled with the sort of artifacts that I posted above?

After Looking at Josh's comparison photo, I had some interesting thoughts .. there isn't what I call any form of EE that others might say to be excessive.

:confused:

Josh - I see edge enhancement even in your original image. It's only going to bring it out even more.

JoshZ

Thanks for posting some pictures. How many mega pixels is your camera? I can even see the pixels. Two of the displays I saw at CC using this player looked like that. A different CC store had an XDE display which looked perfect to my eye, so I decided to try it myself. It was a smaller Sharp aquos. (Spelling?) I have not seen anything like what your pictures show on my IN72. Nothing even close. Do you have access to an IN76, or know anyone in your area with one? They could pause the picture with the projector like I do.

Hey Guys, I have a simple question..the specs for the XD-E500 state that the unit can play back dvd-R discs, but doesn't say anything regarding DVD+ discs.. I have a good many DVD+ discs...can this unit play movies burned on DVD+ discs? I'd love to have this Toshiba IF it can play back DVD+ discs..

Thanks ~

Thanks for the photos Josh. It's all very clear.

I have been playing back some of my burned disk which are all + and have had no problem with them. The only ones i had a problem with would not play on other players. I had trouble with my dvd rom and i reburned with new rom and played fine on the 500.

I popped in DVE and was pleasantly surprised to see that this unit does very well on horizontal resolution tests. On the other hand, something is very wrong in the vertical resolution tests.. Photos were taken while the disc was playing, not while paused, with all enhancements off. Has anyone else seen this?

(See photos in post #912)

Are we seeing half the fields in the DXE pics? The OP states that the disc was playing not paused.

What was the shutter speed?

Nasty resolution in the XDE. hmmm

I have been reading the on going argument about artifacts etc. on the 500 with some amusement. I have read people comparing a low cost upconverter to 1000 dollar players and 1000 dollar ++ video processors and watching on 100 inch screens. Why arent the comparisons with the 50 and 100 dollars players and if the extra features on the 500 warrant the extra 50 bucks. I compared the 500 to my Sony and Sammy upconverting players in the same price range and saw the same artifacts on all of them because they are not high dollars players and if you dont want artifacts fork over a 1000 plus dollars to not see them. I found in my eyes the extra features in general do add a measure of viewing pleasure to the movies. I watched the same scene on each low end player and the 500 with sharp and color on made the picture pop more than the other two. The artifacts that are there or only there if i look for them. For the low end buyer looking to get the most bang for the buck i reccomend this player.

Grubert,

I like to see similar DVD HD comparisons for the following movies.

Seven samurai.
LOTR EE trilogy.
All the laurel and Hardy comedies. (and C. Chaplin and B. Keaton)
Saving Private Ryan.
The Great Escape.
The Birds
North by Northwest
Alien
Silent running
Andromeda strain
...
...

Some of the star wars movies just for fun.

NOW please,

Or should I settle for the mediocre SD picture from my BD30 until you are able to do so for all of those?

To me the EE looks excessive here. Clearly I have never seen anything that approaches what you are seeing here. The ringing and mosquito noise is unbearable in the 2nd picture. In fact it is so bad, that most people I know would not watch even 400kbps live streaming content with that sort of noise (let alone DVD)! XDE is completely useless in your set up, IF this picture is representative of what you're seeing as a general case.

Given that my display is a calibrated Pio 151FD I can't explain it away as my display not being able to resolve detail as well as yours.

What your display chain is showing is fundamentally different from mine.

* If anyone wants to see my images I can PM them to you (again, not sure how big attachments can get with AVS) within the next 45 minutes. I can't upload them from work.

OK. Here are the images from photo bucket. They unfortunately resize it. But the idea is to show that even from an effective distance of 4-5ft from a 60 inch display I experienced no obvious noise that Josh is seeing. These were moving images taken with a Panasonic Lumix FZ 50. The movie is kagemusha and are with BOTH sharpness and color turned on.

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/ToshibaXDESharpColor-1.jpg

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/ToshibaXDESharpColor-1.jpg

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/ToshibaXDESharpColor2.jpg

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/ToshibaXDESharpColor2.jpg

Sneaking in ascreenshot of Ran HD-DVD? :)

The artifacts I posted are perfectly visible at normal seating distance. They are more difficult to photograph with an average consumer digital camera, however.



Do you work for Toshiba or a company affiliated with Toshiba?



Are you honestly saying that you would prefer to watch a movie filled with the sort of artifacts that I posted above?


The artifacts you show are unacceptable in my opinion. However, even from 4 ft away on a 60 inch display my results were very different from yours. No one would miss the kind of artifacts you are showing.

Sneaking in ascreenshot of Ran HD-DVD? :)

No criterion collection DVD. I tried to find a movie that was not on HD!

Looks like you paid the player a compliment :)

I may have some screenshots from Emperor and the Assassin. Let me check.

Criterion released on HD DVD? Wow.

Thanks jerryg25 for the reply regarding DVD+ discs; guess I'll get the Toshiba then. :>). I do appreciate the information.

Thanks again.

The artifacts I posted are perfectly visible at normal seating distance. They are more difficult to photograph with an average consumer digital camera, however.

Do you work for Toshiba or a company affiliated with Toshiba?

Are you honestly saying that you would prefer to watch a movie filled with the sort of artifacts that I posted above?
Josh you have a lot of growing up to do. BTW what are your expert credentials? (excluding ISF and 120Hz Monster Training please)

Please be consistent and stick with your mis-characterization of imaginary ringing.

Here are some more facts:
The total number of DVDs available by the end of the year is expected to pass 90,000 titles, according to the DVD Release Report.Meanwhile, a total of 684 Blu-ray Disc titles are in release.
There are 132 DVD titles for every Blu-ray title.:p

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/technology/news/e3i0532517b5fc5d6afcb6fee83a6a3f4f1

Well encoded movies look awesome in this player. Last night I watched Die hard ,the last one, and thought it looked great. I like what sharp mode does.
I just don't understand why some people have this hate for some companies.

Sneaking in ascreenshot of Ran HD-DVD? :)

How about from Throne of Blood and The Emperor and the Assassin. These are 2 ft from a 60 inch display.

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/P1020145.jpg

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/P1020163.jpg

I'd say these don't look anything close to Josh Z's screenshots :)

Grubert,

I like to see similar DVD HD comparisons for the following movies.

Seven samurai.
LOTR EE trilogy.
All the laurel and Hardy comedies. (and C. Chaplin and B. Keaton)
Saving Private Ryan.
The Great Escape.
The Birds
North by Northwest
Alien
Silent running
Andromeda strain
...
...

Some of the star wars movies just for fun.

NOW please,

Or should I settle for the mediocre SD picture from my BD30 until you are able to do so for all of those?

How about Throne of Blood :)

http://i441.photobucket.com/albums/qq134/avpallino/P1020148.jpg

Not bad from 2 ft on a 60 inch screen for and old movie...

Grubert,

I like to see similar DVD HD comparisons for the following movies.

Seven samurai.
LOTR EE trilogy.
All the laurel and Hardy comedies. (and C. Chaplin and B. Keaton)
Saving Private Ryan.
The Great Escape.
The Birds
North by Northwest
Alien
Silent running
Andromeda strain
...
...

Some of the star wars movies just for fun.

NOW please,

Or should I settle for the mediocre SD picture from my BD30 until you are able to do so for all of those?


Seven Samurai,L&H, C.C. and B.K. will all be 4:3 and display in the true ratio only in the low 480p resolution. So won't be a fair reflection of the player's XDE abilities!

Well encoded movies look awesome in this player. Last night I watched Die hard ,the last one, and thought it looked great. I like what sharp mode does.
I just don't understand why some people have this hate for some companies.
So do I and I'm been in video for 28 years.
The intense hatred is because their livelihood depends upon it. If the Toshiba XDE-500 succeeds in cracking the SD-is-good-enough door back open, their huge investment in conditioning will suffer catastrophic failure. Like Wall Street.

Mathematically even if Blu-ray discs cost the same as DVD, it cannot possible replace DVD it as Sony would have to release 9000 titles a year for 10 years. 9,000 * 10 years = 90,000 discs
Therefore DVD is here to stay.
Its not hard to imagine that Sony will quietly walk away from Blu-ray within 5 years. They have much experience of abandoning formats and their customers.

I went to Borders Bookstore today and Batman Begins was $50! I paid $18 on HD-DVD. Here is the proof
http://www.borders.com/online/store/TitleDetail?sku=883929017690

Or Close Encounters of the Third Kind is up to $45 on-sale too!
http://www.borders.com/online/store/TitleDetail?sku=043396228597

The fact is no average consumer is going to touch Blu-ray as they are waiting for prices to drop. The industry spin has been that prices will be coming down. :o The actual truth is what you see at BB or Borders.

To be fair. Borders charges MORE than MSRP for their movies from what I have seen. I would NEVER buy a movie there because of this.

BD movie prices DO need to come down for it to come out of niche staus IMO, especially for the catalog titles where the BD version could cost 4x as much as the same title on SD DVD. This needs to happen as much with the movies as it does with the players IMO, or players like the XDE player and other upscalers will continue to sell more than BD players and hence more movies.

Grubert,
I like to see similar DVD HD comparisons for the following movies.

Different threads please. Grubert doesn't have (and likely never seen) an E500. If someone wants to post screen shots from an E500, I'm all for it.

John

No criterion collection DVD. I tried to find a movie that was not on HD!

Looks like you paid the player a compliment :)

I may have some screenshots from Emperor and the Assassin. Let me check.

Criterion released on HD DVD? Wow.

Maybe you could find some here:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews31/ran_HD.htm

They seem to have the exact same screen images as you!

I just stumbled onto this thread, but am surprised at how happy people are with this player. I submitted a review of it yesterday at UAV and it should go "live" next week. Needless to say, I was less than impressed. It's build quality is pretty cheap for the price and there are much better options in the marketplace if you are willing to spend more money.

These are real photos, undoctored, taken off my screen tonight.

Thanks for posting the screen shots Josh! Can you list what equipment and DVD/scene you used for this? Also, how close where you from the screen? I can see the screen structure. If that's you're normal view distance, that would bug the hell out of me. :D Can you post a pic from normal viewing distance as well.

Also, can you post the same scene from a DVD player that has "good" up converting? I'd like to see what it's suppose to look like.

John

Thanks for posting some pictures. How many mega pixels is your camera?

Honestly, I have no idea. My wife lost our original digital camera and bought the replacement on her own. I don't know the specs. What I can tell you is that the artifacts in the photos I posted are representative of what I see with my eye.

Josh you have a lot of growing up to do. BTW what are your expert credentials? (excluding ISF and 120Hz Monster Training please)

Please be consistent and stick with your mis-characterization of imaginary ringing.

Here are some more facts:
The total number of DVDs available by the end of the year is expected to pass 90,000 titles, according to the DVD Release Report.Meanwhile, a total of 684 Blu-ray Disc titles are in release.
There are 132 DVD titles for every Blu-ray title.:p

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/technology/news/e3i0532517b5fc5d6afcb6fee83a6a3f4f1

Way to dodge my questions. Let me ask them again. Please try to answer this time.

Do you work for Toshiba or a company affiliated with Toshiba?

Are you honestly saying that you would prefer to watch a movie filled with the sort of artifacts that I posted above?

Hey guys,
I just picked up the Toshiba. I just got the 46 inch Mitsubishi LCD with the sound projector built in for my bedroom a few weeks ago. I had a really aweful old DVD player that looked awful on the set.


I must say, I am SUPER impressed. I was very reluctant with these 'near' HD comparisons. The best I had ever seen was the Denon 5910 and while REALLY Sweet, it was still not HD. I still beleive garbage in garbage out.

But, some of my DVDs look MINDBLOWING good. and yes.....very 'near" HD.
My wife saw me watching Revenge of the Sith, and simply could not believe it was not HD. It is quite interesting how this thing 'sharpens'. At first I though it would be scam, but it is NOT. I just put on Nemo, and WOW. Quite honestly, it is like my DVD collection, is getting a new lease on life. I really mean it.
For $149.00 i am just thrilled. I just wish it was a bit better made and less flimsy.

:)

Thanks for posting the screen shots Josh! Can you list what equipment and DVD/scene you used for this?

The scene is the rollercoaster clip on the HQV test disc. I used that because it has a relatively static shot that plays out for a couple minutes and I could get a good picture at regular playback speed without pausing. This was played on a BENQ 1080p DLP projector, with the XDE set for 1080p output.

I tried to get some shots from regular movies. Although I can easily see the same artifacts, I couldn't get a good shot without pausing, and pausing masks some of the artifacts, making them harder to photograph.

Also, how close where you from the screen? I can see the screen structure. If that's you're normal view distance, that would bug the hell out of me. :D Can you post a pic from normal viewing distance as well.

In order to get a clear photo, I had to put the camera right up next to the screen. The artifacts are perfectly visible to my eyes at my regular seating, but I don't have a professional camera that can capture the detail from that distance.

From what I'm seeing posted in this thread, neither does anyone else here. Most of the photos in this thread are not even remotely representative of the video output of this player.

Also, can you post the same scene from a DVD player that has "good" up converting?

I'll try when I can find the time. I have a lot of other stuff going on and not a lot of opportunity to set up another photo session like this.

I doubt I'll be able to recreate that exact shot from that exact angle, anyway. I played the clip in my Oppo 980 and it looked closer to the "before" photo.

Once again a reviewer for a magazine has downplayed this player because it is cheaply built. I own the xa2 which weighs a ton and cost me 22 dollars for shipping and the Oppo 983h cost me 13 dollars because they are well built. The 500 shipping was free because it weighs almost nothing. I like saving shipping cost after all all the case does is keep dust and objects from falling into it. All players have a power supply, mother board and dvd loader plus a few output connectors. Weight doesnt make a player good or bad, viewing a movie is what counts in the long run and granted if i put the 500 up against my 983 or xa2 and run the test disks it wont compare to them but i like the picture it puts out when playing a movie and it is going in the bed room on a small tv so it should look really good as it looks good on my 50 inch Sony. Pay more money get a better picture sure but what if all you have is 150 to spend?

I just stumbled onto this thread, but am surprised at how happy people are with this player. I submitted a review of it yesterday at UAV and it should go "live" next week. Needless to say, I was less than impressed. It's build quality is pretty cheap for the price and there are much better options in the marketplace if you are willing to spend more money.

Like a Blu Ray player? :)

I agree the build quality leaves a lot to be desired. My reviews are on a 60 inch Kuro plasma. I sit around 8 ft away. I am impressed from a pure PQ perspective.

Dave do you still do DVD reviews or only Blu Rays now? Thanks.

Sneaking in ascreenshot of Ran HD-DVD? :)

I should have said Ran instead of Kagemusha. Anyway, I have the Criterion DVD for both :)

Sorry, I just realized I had put Kagemusha instead of Ran. I love Kurasawa....one reason to still own DVD.

Way to dodge my questions. Let me ask them again. Please try to answer this time.

Do you work for Toshiba or a company affiliated with Toshiba?

Are you honestly saying that you would prefer to watch a movie filled with the sort of artifacts that I posted above?

Josh are in any way compensated to promote Blu Ray? What is your ratio of DVD Blu Ray reviews? Thanks.

I just stumbled onto this thread, but am surprised at how happy people are with this player. I submitted a review of it yesterday at UAV and it should go "live" next week. Needless to say, I was less than impressed. It's build quality is pretty cheap for the price and there are much better options in the marketplace if you are willing to spend more money.
I don't beleive you "stumbled upon this thread" as UAV and Home Theater Magazine are owned by the same people and many of their staff write for both sites. Apparently Josh has failed and reinforcements are being called in. This is unprecedented. Remarkable. Amazing.

Remember they are leading the assault against this player, because they, in their own words "Leading The Blu-ray Bandwagon".

They are even "going live" because time is of the essence to kill the Toshiba by whatever means necessary. Guys I've got more ammo, but all I can say is REMEMBER THE ALAMO!:cool:

What I'm learning from this thread is that I should be very skeptic of magazines or "expert" reviews.

Like a Blu Ray player? :)

I agree the build quality leaves a lot to be desired. My reviews are on a 60 inch Kuro plasma. I sit around 8 ft away. I am impressed from a pure PQ perspective.

Dave do you still do DVD reviews or only Blu Rays now? Thanks.

I did DVD reviews for Home Theater Spot earlier this year, but have stopped doing them because frankly, they weren't getting read. All of my movie reviews at UAV are Blu-ray only, but I still watch DVDs of TV shows, which aren't available in HD yet and I have a collection of over 500 DVDs, which I don't get to watch as much as I would like since I review a few movies a week on Blu-ray. In August, I watched three seasons of LOST, the first 2 on DVD and the third on Blu-ray. The Oppo did an outstanding job upconverting the episodes, but when I popped in the first disc of season three on BD, it was like getting a new pair of glasses (metaphorically speaking...I have 20/20 vision). Putting the same disc in the Toshiba revealed far less detail and was much softer....turning the "sharp" setting on, did make the picture sharper, but caused other issues such as ringing around brightly lit objects and making the picture much too "edgy" and unnatural.

I think my review will be seen as fair when read in full.

I sit 9.5 feet away from an 88 inch (diagonal) Stewart Firehawk screen, with a JVC HD-1 projector.

Those who want to spend many thousands more they are welcome to go with Blu-ray.

yes, the difference between $150 (the price of the XD) and $400 (the price of a PS3) is 'many thousands'. :rolleyes:
it's not like your dvd's evaporate when you buy a blu ray player. enjoy your DVD's upscaled on your PS3 while adding new discs on blu ray.
The PS3 is just about as good as my XA2 for upscaling, which would seem to put it around the XD's level as well from what people are reporting in this thread.
To me, the XD seems to only make sense as a product for people who have an ax to grind against blu ray. You get no advantage over buying a PS3. You don't get access to true HD discs, ps1, 2, and 3 games, and all the excellent media streaming capabilities that the PS3 gives you.

I don't beleive you "stumbled upon this thread" as UAV and Home Theater Magazine are owned by the same people and many of their staff write for both sites. Apparently Josh has failed and reinforcements are being called in. This is unprecedented. Remarkable. Amazing.

Remember they are leading the assault against this player, because they, in their own words "Leading The Blu-ray Bandwagon".

They are even "going live" because time is of the essence to kill the Toshiba by whatever means necessary. Guys I've got more ammo, but all I can say is REMEMBER THE ALAMO!:cool:

Each site is run independently of the other. 95% of my reviews have been at UAV, but I have had one run for Home Theater. Also, the readership between the two is quite different. Home Theater caters more to the masses and UAV to a higher-end crowd...just look at the products we have reviewed and you will see that.

As for Josh and I talking and "calling in reinforcements", I didn't know Josh did an evaluation until yesterday afternoon. When I know I am getting a product in for review, I avoid reading anything about it so my evaluation isn't tainted in any way.

For the record, I've never been happy with the PS3 as an upscaling DVD player in the slightest degrees. It has improved with firmware releases, but it still is a distant second to the Oppo 983, and for that matter, so is the XA2 (I know that's sacrilege to some on this board). Frankly, until I got the 983, I used an Oppo 970 with HDMI out at 480i into a Lumagen scaler.

One last thing, there hasn't been a HD player yet (HD DVD or Blu-ray), that does a great job with DVD upscaling. Good yes, not great. I personally use two different players in my system...BD30 for BD's and Oppo 983 for DVDs.

PFC5 has known me for many years from HTS and knows I'm a straight shooter. I call 'em as I see 'em.

Josh are in any way compensated to promote Blu Ray?

I am not compensated to "promote" Blu-ray in any form. I am compensated to objectively review Blu-ray hardware and software, however.

The irony of your accusations is hilarious to me. You should read what the bozos on blu-ray.com have to say about me "promoting" the format. They call me a Blu-ray hater because I was one of the few in the industry to treat Toshiba's HD DVD format fairly.

What is your ratio of DVD Blu Ray reviews? Thanks.

I currently write for two publications that no longer review DVDs, only Blu-rays. However, prior to that I have written hundreds of DVD reviews.

I don't beleive you "stumbled upon this thread" as UAV and Home Theater Magazine are owned by the same people and many of their staff write for both sites. Apparently Josh has failed and reinforcements are being called in. This is unprecedented. Remarkable. Amazing.

Dave and I do indeed work for the same parent company, but I did not "call in reinforcements". He found and joined this thread on his own, whether you want to believe that or not.

Please answer my earlier questions:

Do you work for Toshiba or a company affiliated with Toshiba?

Are you honestly saying that you would prefer to watch a movie filled with the sort of artifacts that I posted in my photos earlier?

What I'm learning from this thread is that I should be very skeptic of magazines or "expert" reviews.
Yes this is a wonderful example and we should all be grateful for AVS Forum for allowing us to think and speak for ourselves. Thank you Alan Gouger. Apparently the industry is setting up a larger lobbing effort here. With this much resources its neither going to be a fair or pretty. Notice they choose NOT to publicly bring in Kris Deering who is without a doubt assisting behind the scenes.

We are outgunned now and should realize it. The record is here in this thread for all to see, as long as Josh does not go and delete his somewhat bizarre and hysterical posts.

Remember the industry and Sony plan to be moving to HD Internet downloads. Blu-ray downscoping is already being speculated:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10042820-17.html

So do I and I'm been in video for 28 years.
The intense hatred is because their livelihood depends upon it. If the Toshiba XDE-500 succeeds in cracking the SD-is-good-enough door back open, their huge investment in conditioning will suffer catastrophic failure. Like Wall Street.

Mathematically even if Blu-ray discs cost the same as DVD, it cannot possible replace DVD it as Sony would have to release 9000 titles a year for 10 years. 9,000 * 10 years = 90,000 discs
Therefore DVD is here to stay.
Its not hard to imagine that Sony will quietly walk away from Blu-ray within 5 years. They have much experience of abandoning formats and their customers.

I went to Borders Bookstore today and Batman Begins was $50! I paid $18 on HD-DVD. Here is the proof
http://www.borders.com/online/store/TitleDetail?sku=883929017690

Or Close Encounters of the Third Kind is up to $45 on-sale too!
http://www.borders.com/online/store/TitleDetail?sku=043396228597

The fact is no average consumer is going to touch Blu-ray as they are waiting for prices to drop. The industry spin has been that prices will be coming down. :o The actual truth is what you see at BB or Borders.

Surely you must have noticed that the Batman Begins is the Limited Edition Giftset (which you failed to state). The LE set has an MSRP of...$49.99, which Borders is charging. This version was not available on HD DVD. Do you even know why it costs more?

Curious as to why you chose Borders....hmmmmm: Maybe this has something to do with it?
To be fair. Borders charges MORE than MSRP for their movies from what I have seen. I would NEVER buy a movie there because of this....

Surely you wouldn't be exaggerating certain aspects of this thread now, would you?

I don't beleive you "stumbled upon this thread" as UAV and Home Theater Magazine are owned by the same people and many of their staff write for both sites. Apparently Josh has failed and reinforcements are being called in. This is unprecedented. Remarkable. Amazing.

Remember they are leading the assault against this player, because they, in their own words "Leading The Blu-ray Bandwagon".

They are even "going live" because time is of the essence to kill the Toshiba by whatever means necessary. Guys I've got more ammo, but all I can say is REMEMBER THE ALAMO!:cool:

You forgot to tell me to put on my tinfoil hat.

To say your motivations in this thread are suspect would be an understatement.

And if you knew anything about Josh or Davids positions during the format war you would not be claiming they are bluray conspirators. Maybe you should do some investigative reading on these two...you may not run your mouth so much afterwards about their character and motivations.

To follow on Josh's point, I am not in any way paid to "promote Blu-ray." In fact, I've been banned from Blu-ray.com for questioning the viability of the format last summer (2007) because of production concerns in manufacturing.

The reason why most sites are promoting Blu-ray is because its an advancement in technology. Its akin to a site starting in 1999 reviewing VHS tapes, since that was the dominant format at that time.

Will BD enjoy the same success? I highly doubt it. DVD was the perfect product at the perfect time. It was expensive at first (just like Blu-ray), but as adoption increased, prices started to drop. The same will happen with Blu-ray, but at a much slower pace. DVDs have the benefit of working on both SD and HDTVs. I would laugh at anyone buying a BD player to hook-up to a 30 inch Triitron circa 1995....what a waste of money. BD most likely will be the last optical format we will see, then some other medium (downloads) will take over. In the mean time, I plan on building a collection of BD's of films I enjoy because once watching them in 1080p, an upconverted picture pales in comparison. In addition, the audio upgrade is just as pronounced.

I am not compensated to "promote" Blu-ray in any form. I am compensated to objectively review Blu-ray hardware and software, however.

The irony of your accusations is hilarious to me. You should read what the bozos on blu-ray.com have to say about me "promoting" the format. They call me a Blu-ray hater because I was one of the few in the industry to treat Toshiba's HD DVD format fairly.



I currently write for two publications that no longer review DVDs, only Blu-rays. However, prior to that I have written hundreds of DVD reviews.

That's fine. I think many reviewers are in your shoes. Also, if I were seeing what you are seeing I would be saying the same things. In the end we can only report based on what we see.

Perhaps my set up is more forgiving. I don't know.

Honestly, your results from the player are horrifying in my opinion. Perhaps my Polk iSonic table radio (that has a DVD player) would have a hard time doing worse.

Josh are in any way compensated to promote Blu Ray? What is your ratio of DVD Blu Ray reviews? Thanks.

Once again...if you knew Josh's stance during the format war you would not be making these types of comments.

Like reincarnate, I suggest you do some reading on the topic.

One last thing, there hasn't been a HD player yet (HD DVD or Blu-ray), that does a great job with DVD upscaling. Good yes, not great. I personally use two different players in my system...BD30 for BD's and Oppo 983 for DVDs.

PFC5 has known me for many years from HTS and knows I'm a straight shooter. I call 'em as I see 'em.

The Oppo 983 would definitely be a better choice for DVD. No doubt.

And if you knew anything about Josh or Davids positions during the format war you would not be claiming they are bluray conspirators. Maybe you should do some investigative reading on these two...you may not run your mouth so much afterwards about their character and motivations.

bt12483,

Thanks for the kind words. As you state, I would welcome anyone to go back and look at my post history and dare to call me a shill.

Also, I have taken some heat from manufacturers when I've been critical of their equipment and I haven't backed down. If something doesn't perform up to my personal standards, I will say so.

Yes this is a wonderful example and we should all be grateful for AVS Forum for allowing us to think and speak for ourselves. Thank you Alan Gouger. Apparently the industry is setting up a larger lobbing effort here. With this much resources its neither going to be a fair or pretty. Notice they choose NOT to publicly bring in Kris Deering who is without a doubt assisting behind the scenes.

We are outgunned now and should realize it. The record is here in this thread for all to see, as long as Josh does not go and delete his somewhat bizarre and hysterical posts.

Remember the industry and Sony plan to be moving to HD Internet downloads. Blu-ray downscoping is already being speculated:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10042820-17.html

It is obvious what you are doing here. Only a fool would be mislead. What shameful behavior.

Why is it people keep shoving BlueRay down our throats. This is a thread about the 500 upconverter and not BlueRay or Hd disks. I believe everyone will agree sd upconverter can look good but will not compare to HD disks. So why not just keep the comments about the 500 and leave all the touting of BlueRay in the other forums.

bt12483,

Thanks for the kind words. As you state, I would welcome anyone to go back and look at my post history and dare to call me a shill.

Also, I have taken some heat from manufacturers when I've been critical of their equipment and I haven't backed down. If something doesn't perform up to my personal standards, I will say so.

I have disagreed with you on some points over the past few months...but you are no Rob Enderle, that's for sure.;)

The Oppo 983 would definitely be a better choice for DVD. No doubt.

It's also a lot more money (although it does handled DVD-A and SACD discs). A large majority of consumers will be happy with the Toshiba, but the publication I write for is for enthusiasts, and I write to that crowd. I can't tell you how many houses I've been too where people rave about how good their display looks with the contrast at 100% and the video mode set to VIVID. Once I put on my sunglasses, I agree with them and ask for their remote control and adjust the picture and offer to come back with AVIA or DVE to fix it for good. Generally speaking, I get a phone call requesting I come back because they no longer have a headache from watching TV and their picture is improved from the minor adjustments I make.

I have disagreed with you on some points over the past few months...but you are no Rob Enderle, that's for sure.;)

What points were those? Also, who's Rob Enderle? Never heard of him.


Edit...just did a search on him. No, I'm not like him. I didn't predict a winner in the format war and didn't have a horse in the race. I reviewed both HD DVD and Blu-ray titles and players. I was concerned with Blu-ray's manufacturing, but liked its specs on bandwidth. I liked HD DVDs manufacturing process, because it was evolutionary and thought it would/could lead to lower prices sooner, but the bandwidth limitations and the PS3 were its ultimate undoing.

What points were those? Also, who's Rob Enderle? Never heard of him.


Edit...just did a search on him. No, I'm not like him. I didn't predict a winner in the format war and didn't have a horse in the race. I reviewed both HD DVD and Blu-ray titles and players. I was concerned with Blu-ray's manufacturing, but liked its specs on bandwidth. I liked HD DVDs manufacturing process, because it was evolutionary and thought it would/could lead to lower prices sooner, but the bandwidth limitations and the PS3 were its ultimate undoing.

Those points ^^^:)

It's all good now.

Looking forward to your review of this player.

Those points ^^^:)

It's all good now.

Looking forward to your review of this player.

No problem. BTW, there are still some issues with manufacturing capacity, which is why a lot of Warner's releases are on BD-25's...Cinram is working around the clock producing The Dark Knight BD's for what will be the best selling BD ever. That disc alone will push Blu-ray towards mainstream along with lower prices on hardware this holiday season.

But back on the topic of the Toshiba...sorry for the off topic discussion.

Once again...if you knew Josh's stance during the format war you would not be making these types of comments.

Like reincarnate, I suggest you do some reading on the topic.

I've been reading Josh's reviews and articles for years before I joined AVS. The amount of back-biting and baiting directed at him in this thread is absurd.

There coming out of the woodwork within minutes. Wow! Pounce guys.

I'm not going to argue endlessly as I'm not paid to do so. I've spoken my mind, presented the facts and that is that.
You may be able to now dominate this thread with coordinated effort but you will still loose, as the intelligent public is rejecting Blu-ray. Its just too darn expensive for the benefits it offers over DVD and other sources of HD (cable, satellite and broadcast).
In many foreign countries (like Korea) many viewers already download HD movies. That will occur here to once the cable companies negotiate a cut of the movies revenue.
I've rented three DVD's for 0.99 cents that I'm going to go watch and enjoy immensely on the XD-E500.
Now go do your dirty-work. I wash my hands of this unprecedented industry effort. :mad:

Hey Dave i agree with you about one thing and that is how horrible alot of tv i have seen because the people watching them are using factory presets, ugh. When i got my 500 i hooked it up to the same input as my 983 and put in the dve disk and was surprised how close the settings were so i wonder why the presets on tvs arent calibrated to dve standards say a bright room setting a dark and a medium set. Most are poor at best. No matter if player is cheap or high dollar or HD media it looks bad on presets. Need and industry standard for this i suppose.

I've been reading Josh's reviews and articles for years before I joined AVS. The amount of back-biting and baiting directed at him in this thread is absurd.

Now that Josh has posted what he sees I have zero issues with his posts. I would be the same if I were seeing what he was seeing.

To put this in perspective. Until I saw his screnshots, my only yardstick was what I saw. As you can see, my own expeence with the player is very different.

I can't explain the differences.

This is HAL. I don't think your view is accurately stated. Did you slip and not include HD satellite, cable and broadcast sources? Why the pushing of only Blu-ray and trashing of Toshiba? To your credit you admit it's a threat.

IMHO Toshiba has only produced this player to cut into the Bluray market and to also prolong the life of DVD. While there are other sources of HD from cable, satellite and broadcast sources. I feel that there are many people that have HD cable and satellite that may not be buying Blu-ray. And for the most part the people that might buy the Toshiba E500 player would most likely have HD cable or satellite. IMHO Toshiba came out with this player trying to hang onto the revenue stream from DVD since HD-DVD died. And in a small way to be a torn in Sony's side for them beating Toshiba's HD-DVD format.

Guy's, Dave Vaughn is a good reviewer. I'll believe what he says. You don't need to attack people just because you don't agree with them.

reincarnate, you're going to far. Attack the points, not the people.

John

The vertical black bar on the right is the shadow of my camera support. This is the older disc, but should be comparable I think. I can see individual pixels from my screen. Sharpness is on.

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/508/coaster.jpg

Bingo! :cool:

This is exactly what I'm seeing with my player. That shot is a beautiful representation of what the XD-E500 is doing in my home. Who wouldn't want to view their DVD collection if the results were like this?

I'm just thankful that I don't see what Josh sees. I can only hope that he has a bum player. I don't know how else to explain it other than deception or mistakenly using another player. Since I trust that Josh didn't make a mistake and isn't intentionally trying to trick anyone, I must conclude that his particular player is defective or there is something else going on in his video chain contributing to the problems in the photo he posted.

Wayne

This will be my last comment about the pq of the 500 that i got to go with my wifes new hdtv in her bed room. She like Starwars movies so i put in Starwars 3 and we just got through watching it and the pq was great. My wife generally doesnt comment about pq but she said the picture looked like hd to her and that i should quit playing with it and get it hooked up in her room so she can watch her chickflicks in hd. Yes it is that good on my set up so i think i got the only 500 that plays right. Sorry everyone.

kbgl,

It would help if you could post two shots, one with sharpness on and one off. While I don't see issues with the shot you provided I also can't put into perspective what the XDE 500 would be improving.

The vertical black bar on the right is the shadow of my camera support. This is the older disc, but should be comparable I think. I can see individual pixels from my screen. Sharpness is on.

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/508/coaster.jpg

Which display device do you use? Is it 720p or 1080p? Maybe that's where we are seeing a difference. :confused:

One last thing, there hasn't been a HD player yet (HD DVD or Blu-ray), that does a great job with DVD upscaling. Good yes, not great. I personally use two different players in my system...BD30 for BD's and Oppo 983 for DVDs.

PFC5 has known me for many years from HTS and knows I'm a straight shooter. I call 'em as I see 'em.

Not even the LG BH200 with the qdeo?

I haven't used the LG player, but the qdeo processing is used the Pioneer Elite SC09 AVR and the results were middling on test patterns, but much better with "real world" material.

Which display device do you use? Is it 720p or 1080p? Maybe that's where we are seeing a difference. :confused:

Feeding 1080i to a 480p IN72 projector. Sharpness is on. This is not the same disc Josh used. This is an older one. I was going to try the same frame he had, but it's not on this disc.

kbgl,

Why are you sending 1080i to a 480p display? You should just send 480p to minimize the amount of conversions between resolutions. If you display takes 480p, find the best 480p player out there and use that.

I remember my first projector, the Infocus X1. If memory serves me correctly it was 800 x 450 native. Anyway, I distinctly remember HD sources looking demonstrably better than SD DVD. Not real HD of course but an improvement.

Wayne

I did DVD reviews for Home Theater Spot earlier this year, but have stopped doing them because frankly, they weren't getting read. All of my movie reviews at UAV are Blu-ray only, but I still watch DVDs of TV shows, which aren't available in HD yet and I have a collection of over 500 DVDs, which I don't get to watch as much as I would like since I review a few movies a week on Blu-ray. In August, I watched three seasons of LOST, the first 2 on DVD and the third on Blu-ray. The Oppo did an outstanding job upconverting the episodes, but when I popped in the first disc of season three on BD, it was like getting a new pair of glasses (metaphorically speaking...I have 20/20 vision). Putting the same disc in the Toshiba revealed far less detail and was much softer....turning the "sharp" setting on, did make the picture sharper, but caused other issues such as ringing around brightly lit objects and making the picture much too "edgy" and unnatural.

I think my review will be seen as fair when read in full.

I sit 9.5 feet away from an 88 inch (diagonal) Stewart Firehawk screen, with a JVC HD-1 projector.

As you know David I have a lot of respect for you and your opinions over the years, so I have no doubt your review will be fair. ;)

It does sound like you didn't think much of this player, but did your review take into account the price of this player, and not only comparing it to more expensive upscalers?

I would love to see a comparison to similarly priced upscalers myself, so we can get a bang for the buck comparison. I have no doubt the XA2 & Oppo 983H will look better, but I wonder about similarly priced ($100-200.00 range) upscalers.

I also wonder if some of the "tricks" (like what 3D movies do on our eyes) this player might be doing with SD DVD content is missed by the traditional objective tests.

Thanks as always for any info you can provide.

One last thing, there hasn't been a HD player yet (HD DVD or Blu-ray), that does a great job with DVD upscaling. Good yes, not great. I personally use two different players in my system...BD30 for BD's and Oppo 983 for DVDs.

PFC5 has known me for many years from HTS and knows I'm a straight shooter. I call 'em as I see 'em.

For sure Dave. I trust your judgment more than any other pro reviewer just because you are a fair and honorable guy and a straight shooter. ;)

To follow on Josh's point, I am not in any way paid to "promote Blu-ray." In fact, I've been banned from Blu-ray.com for questioning the viability of the format last summer (2007) because of production concerns in manufacturing.

The reason why most sites are promoting Blu-ray is because its an advancement in technology. Its akin to a site starting in 1999 reviewing VHS tapes, since that was the dominant format at that time.

Will BD enjoy the same success? I highly doubt it. DVD was the perfect product at the perfect time. It was expensive at first (just like Blu-ray), but as adoption increased, prices started to drop. The same will happen with Blu-ray, but at a much slower pace. DVDs have the benefit of working on both SD and HDTVs. I would laugh at anyone buying a BD player to hook-up to a 30 inch Triitron circa 1995....what a waste of money. BD most likely will be the last optical format we will see, then some other medium (downloads) will take over. In the mean time, I plan on building a collection of BD's of films I enjoy because once watching them in 1080p, an upconverted picture pales in comparison. In addition, the audio upgrade is just as pronounced.

The funny thing Dave is i never thought of you as favoring HD DVD or BD, but rather a highly qualified person that saw good and bad with both formats and when you mentioned the mfg yield issues for BD%) disc replication was when people started falsely saying you favored HD DVD.

Knowing you for a long time and discussing the format war before the first shots were fired, I KNEW this, but many people just didn't like to speaking bad things about their format and that BD mfg info pushed them to that false conclusion. You took a lot of heat for something that turned out to be completely true, and many STILL likely owe you an apology IMHO, for some of what they said back then. ;)

Once again...if you knew Josh's stance during the format war you would not be making these types of comments.

Like reincarnate, I suggest you do some reading on the topic.

Here I am defending Josh again, just like the old format war days. :lol:

I always thought Josh kept an open mind on BOTH formats, but many of the BD fans looked at anyone saying ANYTHING nice about HD DVD, must be a HD DVD fan and a BD hater.

Some of that mentality still exists today, and people REALLY need to over the format war IMO.

I do wonder if Josh has a defective player judging by the pics he posted before though. Maybe that explains why he was so harsh on this player in his review.

Josh. Have you ever considered this, as I know several people elsewhere complained that the first player they got had a lot of obvious deinterlacing issues/jaggies, and more video noise and ringing but when they exchanged it for another player, they saw almost none of that.

Sorry about the multiple posts. Playing catchup on this thread. ;)

I've been reading Josh's reviews and articles for years before I joined AVS. The amount of back-biting and baiting directed at him in this thread is absurd.

Agreed. First Josh Z and now Dave V. Whatever happened to challenge the post, not the poster around here?

kbgl,

Why are you sending 1080i to a 480p display? You should just send 480p to minimize the amount of conversions between resolutions. If you display takes 480p, find the best 480p player out there and use that.

For HD material this is certainly not true. 1080i fed into a 480P EDTV panel looks far far superior to 480p fed into the same panel.

kbgl,

Why are you sending 1080i to a 480p display? You should just send 480p to minimize the amount of conversions between resolutions. If you display takes 480p, find the best 480p player out there and use that.


Well Duh... OK that was harsh. (Not you're harsh Dave. I'm harsh for saying "Duh") And an attempt to be funny. :)


I'm intentionally using 1080i so that the player will up-convert it. No one here is interested in its 480p output. I realize the projector has to work on it some more and may lose a little quality because of additional scaling.

The funny thing Dave is i never thought of you as favoring HD DVD or BD, but rather a highly qualified person that saw good and bad with both formats and when you mentioned the mfg yield issues for BD%) disc replication was when people started falsely saying you favored HD DVD.

Knowing you for a long time and discussing the format war before the first shots were fired, I KNEW this, but many people just didn't like to speaking bad things about their format and that BD mfg info pushed them to that false conclusion. You took a lot of heat for something that turned out to be completely true, and many STILL likely owe you an apology IMHO, for some of what they said back then. ;)

From what I know issues around Blu Ray are significant enough that the only hopes for many of the key IP owners to make money off of Blu Ray is from hardware. But is pretty hard when the best selling product and best associated with the format is also the most subsidised. Hence why Sony and others will not talk about Blu Ray as an engine of growth (corporate profitability and margin) until they can start making money on the PS3.

The inability to make much money from the format in terms of royalty is why some of the major backers like Sony, Samsung and Panasonic are now focusing more on downloadable content v. Blu Ray.

Again, nothing to do with Blu as a format. It IS and in my opinion WILL be the highest quality format for home video for a long long time. But the format war in the end made it a very very costly war for all (except the studio). In a way, Microsoft came way with little loss and Toshiba ended up with the Cell Processor!

So technical and business forces make it harder for Blu Ray to replicate the success of DVD.

I am not criticizing Blu Ray as a format. It is the best solution now. Just pointing out that in addition to technical, there are business issues that are a direct result of a format war and the need to end it when they had to.

It was a war that was really won by Disney, Fox and Warner et al more than Sony, Panasonic et al.

Nothing to do with XDE. But sort of....

Let's keep to the player discussion, thanks.

larry

Larry... Can you fix the gallery, or delete some of my pictures in it?

I haven't used the LG player, but the qdeo processing is used the Pioneer Elite SC09 AVR and the results were middling on test patterns, but much better with "real world" material.

Exactly! My player did not perform well with HQV tests but is superb with real life content.

What happens is the chip makers have their own test patterns when they test their processing.

It was good business for HQV to publish their tests commericially since that becomes a benchmark.

I believe Meridians new reference display also using qdeo for upscaling.

I would have kept the Toshiba is the build was better and the post processing had a little user control - high, medium, low etc.

However, multiple processing settings were probably not possible with the chip they have. Also, this type of XDE processing or selective edge enhancement is designed with better chips in mind and they should have used the cell.

Also features like proper aspect ratio control and a better build quality should have been offered.

My recommendation is that Toshiba should have offered a multi role player - DVD upscaling + media server/Netflix or one where you can download digital copies directly for playback (i.e. with a hard drive).

I am puzzled why they went with a Zoran.

I doubt Toshiba had much room to move when it came to the chip it used, build quality etc. if it wanted to sell its first attempt at something like$150.00! I told a friend that I had ordered on from Toshiba for 169.00 (Canadian) and his comment was - "Wow, that's really cheap!" So I guess it's all relative.

To David Vaughn - you say you write for enthusiasts and therefor BD dominates - fine. I would classify myself as an enthusiast - two HTs one with a gamma corrected and colour corrected (green filter) G90 fed by a Lumagen (1080p) in one and the other with a gamma corrected colour corrected (red filter) Marquee 8501 (LC) fed by a Lumagen along with a Samsung 52" LED LCD and also a digital projector. I have an assortment of HD DVD and BD players and a dual drive HTPC. I still use DVD and have ordered an XDE to see what's gong on. Your publication isn't interested in people like me? Wow! I'm interested in movies - BD, HD DVD and DVD!

Larry... Can you fix the gallery, or delete some of my pictures in it?
You mean this? Fatal error: Call to undefined function: merge_links() in /home/avsforum/www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/includes/class_bbcode.php(435) : eval()'d code on line 2

I can't do anything, but I posted the problem and hopefully David Bott can fix it.

larry

I wonder if this thread would be anything like it is if this player was made by Panasonic or Samsung or anyone other than Toshiba.

I'm really intrigued (and also a bit worried) about all these reports of people who had "bad" players and then returned them only to get "better" ones. Too bad no one thinks to take a couple quick screen shots before exchanging, it would be nice to confirm there's some real issue with the performance of different units.

I've seen first hand how various test patterns like the anamorphic resolution and sharpness patterns on Avia, which are actually still frames on the disc paused for 60s each, are absolutely butchered by this player. I even noted the warning screen which came up (again, another still shot) had obvious artifacts and missing or corrupted picture elements. So it makes me wonder, do I have one of these "bad" players? I even pulled out my old RP91 and hooked it up just to confirm, and sure enough all these patterns were once again displayed properly. Even knowing this is an artifact of pause mode on this player, it still makes me wonder if something like this isn't going on during playback.

But then I think back to all the film-based content I've watched over the last several weeks which has looked absolutely outstanding on my RS1x at 104" using the 1080p/24 mode. And compared side-by-side to an XA2 the upconversion performance was only a tad less in the opinion of two seasoned AVS'ers due to the slight over sharpening in the XDE as compared to the XA2 at the "1" setting. But mitigating this with the sharpness control on my PJ, I feel I've reduced it to an equivalent level.

I've never seen anything like the pics Josh posted. Any artifacts I've noticed were already there on the disc as confirmed by disabling the sharpness mode. I think the most accurate shots posted here which reflect what I see were the shots from SW towards the beginning of the thread. A definite perceived increase in sharpness without any obvious ringing affects.

For me, even if the Oppo 983 supported 24fps output, it would still have been a difficult decision to invest that amount of money in a SD player. With upconversion that's at least as good as any other player around the same price, and the support for 24fps mode, it made the XDE an easy choice. Just as the PQ of this player shouldn't be directly compared to HD, neither should its overall upconversion performance be compared to VPs at many times its price.

kbgl - why not setup an account at photobucket or similar? Also, why is that pic you posted so dark? If its supposed to be the same scene Josh took pics it makes any comparison impossible.

I just want to reiterate to those who believe that this is a crap player that Frank Derk thought my Ran DVD screenshots were from the HD DVD!

Now, in my books that is the true test of any upscaling product. My screenshots were from the Criterion Collection DVD. They were from around 4 ft from a 60 inch display.

The question here is do we evalutate this based on test patterns or actual video. For me, the fact that someone would mistake a DVD for an HD media is high acclaim any way you see it.

OK. I don't know enough about Frank Derk but he does seem to be an enthusiast :)

FWIW. I set up an account in photobucket and simply email the files there.