I had a small dinner party last night and decided to show off my projector and sound system after a few of the guests asked about it. I arbitrarily pulled out "Ghost Rider" on BD and played it via my PS3. Everyone was absolutely "wowed"- so far, so good.

Then a couple of guests asked about the difference between DVD and HDM (I have both). I spent a few of minutes talking about the sharpness, contrast, resolution, etc. and ended up voluteering to show the difference to them. Well, here's where it got tricky. I have the SD of Ghost Rider as well and put it in my Toshiba A3 for comparison. By this time only the guys were left with me and we opened a bottle of wine and started looking at both versions. Lo and behold, the difference was minimal at best to all in the room. Needless to say, questions followed like "How much for that PS3?" and "How much are the disks again?" My only saving grace was really the sound levels between the two. With GR outputting Linear PCM and the A3 doing DD on the SD side (Upconverted to 720P), everyone at least ooh'ed and ah'ed over the perceived sound difference.

My PJ is a 720P Panasonic AE900 on a 100" grey high contrast screen (1.85:1) and I use a Marantz SR-8001 to the projector all via HDMI. The projector is ISF calibrated.

Surely most of you have done the same test with friends! I am sure that something must be wrong as the A3 is good but is not rated that good, nor have I read that Ghost Rider is a demo quality SD disc.

Suggestions?

On a side note: the A3 is the quietest player I have ever connected. I have to crank the sound to about 10 units higher than the same disc on the PS3. Is that die to the PS3 converting everything to Linear PCM?

It depends on the movie, some isnt that good on HD that you can see any major differences.

Demo a different movie.

Did you say your projector is only 720? Maybe that is the problem.

1080p vs 720p.. no comparison.. that was your problem. I don't care how many people tell me 1080 to 720 isn't that much difference.. it's night and day to me.

Welcome to the problem with HDM. The A3 is a damn good DVD player and most regular folks just can't see the difference.

Did you say your projector is only 720? Maybe that is the problem.

Nope, you can see a clear difference on that, u just need to pick a title that really shines (as you would on a 1080P display aswell)

The best is the titles that 3D pop.

yes,pick up a 25 dollar dvd player that won't upconvert,just for demo purposes.:D

I am one who finds HD media to be a marked improvement in almost all cases, even on very small screens. A few months ago I was in Ultimate Electronics, and in their "high end" theater room, they were projecting Ghost Rider. I watched for about 5 minutes, and for the life of me, I couldn't tell if it was HD or SD. I had to go over the the player to see that it was the Blu-ray.

I know it doesn't mean much, but since you had that experience with that movie, I thought I'd share.

Chronicles of Riddick.

Thats a difference.

Go 1080P, get a larger screen and sit closer:D.

1080p, larger screen, closer, and watch it sober

The PJ probably hid compression artifacts present in the SD version. If your display had been LCD or plasma they would have seen more of a difference. Seriously I have a 480 projector that makes 700 mb xvids look just as good as DVDs.

The PJ probably hid compression artifacts present in the SD version. If your display had been LCD or plasma they would have seen more of a difference. Seriously I have a 480 projector that makes 700 mb xvids look just as good as DVDs.

700 mb Xvids do look like DVDs.

Agree with others issue is the 720p projector. I too find with an upscalled SD DVD and a HD-DVD on a 720p projector its difficult to tell difference but HD-DVD on a 1080p is night and day.

Nope, you can see a clear difference on that, u just need to pick a title that really shines (as you would on a 1080P display aswell)



I concur - I can readily tell the differences on my 720P older vintage (than the AE900) Panasonic.

to the O/P:
Steer clear of source that is CG or CG related i.e. green/blue screen.

ted

Following the advice from others in this thread will help, but the most important thing you can do is get new friends so there are no more witnesses to what happened. ;)

It's not so much that it's a 720p projector. The real problem is that the Panasonic AE900 uses smoothscreen technology in order to avoid the screen door effect that LCD projectors (720p and below) are known to have. This reduces sharpness, which makes high def titles appear slightly blurrier than they should. Because DVDs are at a lower resolution, it actually makes them look a bit better... so it's a tradeoff.

I had the AE700 at one point and while there was a difference between HD and DVD, it wasnt very noticeable. The AE900 was an improvement over the one I had, but it wasn't a big improvement. I went to the JVC RS-1 which was a significant step up because of black level, sharpness and resolution.

Just a note -- there are plenty of 720p displays that look much nicer than 1080p displays. Resolution is not the biggest factor. However, you may as well go with a 1080p projector if you upgrade.

Ghost Rider looks great on BD, and 720p isn't the problem either...I owned the 900 when it came out and wasn't very impressed with it. I actually preferred my 1024 x 576 NEC HT510 to it in some ways. I'm still surprised you couldn't notice the difference though. Exactly what screen do you have?

The PT-AE900U LCD projector (Panasonic) has been considered by many one of the best projectors ever made.

Surely most of you have done the same test with friends! I am sure that something must be wrong as the A3 is good but is not rated that good, nor have I read that Ghost Rider is a demo quality SD disc.

Suggestions?


Next time pop in Transformers into the A3 and skip to the desert scene and watch the jaws drop. Then tell them they can get the same player for $149.

Next time pop in Transformers into the A3 and skip to the desert scene and watch the jaws drop. Then tell them they can get the same player for $149.

$128 just about everywhere.:D

"Do not cast your pearls before swine...."

"Do not cast your pearls before swine...."
Especially the swine whose been drinkin' wine.

I've done the same sort of 'taste test' for non enthusiast consumers on 70" 1080p LcOS and 10' 1080p dlp projector.

The results were mixed at best. Some people are fairly impressed by the difference, some are strictly "meh" and a (very) few are really impressed.

Simple truth is most people like the difference but don't see it as a really big deal as enthusiasts do. There's a reason the industry needs a trojan horse to get HDM in the door...

I would vote for the s letter to mean science.

I've done the same sort of 'taste test' for non enthusiast consumers on 70" 1080p LcOS and 10' 1080p dlp projector.

The results were mixed at best. Some people are fairly impressed by the difference, some are strictly "meh" and a (very) few are really impressed.

Simple truth is most people like the difference but don't see it as a really big deal as enthusiasts do. There's a reason the industry needs a trojan horse to get HDM in the door...
Good point. Presumedly, people will get used to watching HDM in their trojan horses and not want to go back.

The PT-AE900U LCD projector (Panasonic) has been considered by many one of the best projectors ever made.

:rolleyes: Give me a break. Maybe one of the best projectors under $2k ever made, but thats leaving a lot of room for improvement.

Got one.

So far I've shown 5 of my neighbors all at different times my HT with HD DVD. The matrix, Transformers, Shooter and Hot Fuzz were the movies I showed them. Three of my neighbors knocked on my door the next day asking where to buy an HD DVD player and the other two came over before the week ended for me to help them get HD DVD and set it up. Those movie's I listed are Excellent for demo material. While the Matrix ( Chopper scene on top of the buildings) and just about any part of transformers really showed how awesome a quality surround sound system can be, I used Shooter, Hot Fuzz and Transformers to show High PQ. The Matrix does have great PQ but those three are better IMO. So far I'm 5 for 5 lol. every person that has seen my HT and HD DVD has went out bought one!

Next time pop in Transformers into the A3 and skip to the desert scene and watch the jaws drop. Then tell them they can get the same player for $149.

That is my favorite part of the whole movie. The gunship shooting at the scorpion kicks butt.

Though I am not a Videophile I would recommend you the following

1) Switch to 1080i/p.
2) Try playing some more reference titles.
3) Stop WUI (Watching Under Influence similar to DUI).

I did my AB comparison with family using Casa Blanca. 720p projector as well (Panasonic AX100) and there was significant difference switching from DVD (my old Denon 2900) to Toshiba A3. My advice is stick with film for showing AB comparisons.

I bet (it has already happened) that everyone is going to tell you the typical respones.
-you dont have a blu ray FULL 1080P SONY TV!!!
-you upconverted that DVD to near high def a big NO NO to compare blu ray to std. DVD
-your PS3 did not have the latest updates by blu ray
-your did not set your PS3 to full output 1080P
-your TV is not 24khz, and/or 75khz, etc..one of those numbers.
-you did not hook it up HDMI 1.3 version if not 1.4 latest and greatest 1.2 degrades PQ.
-NO NO NO reference title that was mastered in full 1080P!!!!!
-your disc was scrated!
-some folks will will go as far as to say, "you didnt have a blu ray compatible TV!!!
-etc....etc.etc........

$128 just about everywhere.:D

129.99 at Costco with a free and much needed HDMI cable, plus 2 movies in the box and 5 more in the mail. The freebies pay for the player.

I bet (it has already happened) that everyone is going to tell you the typical respones.
-you dont have a blu ray FULL 1080P SONY TV!!!
-you upconverted that DVD to near high def a big NO NO to compare blu ray to std. DVD
-your PS3 did not have the latest updates by blu ray
-your did not set your PS3 to full output 1080P
-your TV is not 24khz, and/or 75khz, etc..one of those numbers.
-you did not hook it up HDMI 1.3 version if not 1.4 latest and greatest 1.2 degrades PQ.
-NO NO NO reference title that was mastered in full 1080P!!!!!
-your disc was scrated!
-some folks will will go as far as to say, "you didnt have a blu ray compatible TV!!!
-etc....etc.etc........

And you somehow forgot "go closer to the TV"?:confused:

I've got a 32" 720p, and there is a huge difference once I get people at an appropriate distance (3 or 4 feet). But, if they go across the room, then even those 700MB divx files will look good. =\

Why don't you use Planet Earth as a demo? Those wide panorama shots would absolutely kick butt on a 100" inch screen. There's no way DVD could compare when there are those masses of birds or migrating animals on screen. The resolution then becomes absolutely critical.

I think the point is that it is VERY subjective. And of course some people just dont care. For example, I could stand here and listen to people for hours telling me how powerful their computers are and how much tweaking they do to them. Well...I could care less, kinda like people who are just fine watching dvds I'm just fine with a computer that surfs on-line and that has word and no amount of talking-up can change that.

I think the point is that it is VERY subjective. And of course some people just dont care. For example, I could stand here and listen to people for hours telling me how powerful their computers are and how much tweaking they do to them. Well...I could care less, kinda like people who are just fine watching dvds I'm just fine with a computer that surfs on-line and that has word and no amount of talking-up can change that.

I'm the same way with cars and car audio.

Plus, I imagine there are a lot of guys here (I'm one of them too) who think it's ridiculous to spend thousands of dollars on a shiny piece of rock to wear on a finger. :)

On a thread on downloads I said that 720p was not hi def, and got howled down because the downloads were going to be 720p. I think it was the Apple thread. Now the peeps show up to tell the OP that 720p is not HD. Well what a difference a week makes.

That of course is the problem. The A3 is a very good upconverter and took 480 to 720 very well indeed. The PS3 is an OK HD player but had to down rez the 1080 to 720 and good PQ was lost in the process. Net result is that it looks about the same on lo def hi def.

The OP needs to use 1080 display in order to make any points for HDM.

All HDM is being served ill well by these folks with lo def hi def systems.

we opened a bottle of wine....

hmmm.......

;)

I had the same problem showing off my setup....most people just don't get it. My wife still says she can't tell or see the difference between sd and hd.

Hmmm... Just speaking from my experience, when I got my PS3 and popped in TMNT I knew RIGHT AWAY that it looked no better than regular DVD and that something was wrong.

Sure enough, it was an older firmware that only output 480p when you asked for 720p sources.

Updated it, then BAM, the picture was much better as I had expected it to be.

Now was it night and day? Well, no, but it's officially hard to watch DVDs in that projector room of mine and not wish for a better picture the entire time the movie is running.

My wife absolutely can tell the difference now. She refers to DVD as almost "murky" in comparison.

I noticed the same thing with my A3, it is very quiet and I have to crank my Onky 805 very high. One of the worst offenders is Constantine. As far as I know there isn't anyway around it.

As for the PQ difference, I have not idea but I even on 720p displays I really notice the difference and Ghost Rider does have a very good PQ and SQ (though the movie was so bad it was entertaining).

Probably the least difference I've noticed from DVD's to HD-DVD's/Blu-Rays is on my friends 42" Vizio Plasma that has a resolution a little under 720p. Still I do notice the difference and I hooked my friend up with an A3 and he likes it a lot, likes the improvement on his DVD's as well.

question to OP:

is your ps3 updated? b/c if you played the blu-ray on a just out of the box ps3, it does not convert from 1080p to 720p for 720p displays, you'd have to set it to 1080i and let the projector do the convert, otherwise with a non-updated ps3 you'd get 480p vs a upconverted SD DVD.

My PJ is a 720P Panasonic AE900 on a 100" grey high contrast screen (1.85:1) and I use a Marantz SR-8001 to the projector all via HDMI. The projector is ISF calibrated.Use your Blu-ray disc of Ghost Rider and go to the Resolution Test screen and tell me what you can see in terms of Horizontal and Vertical Resolution.

It's funny how everybody concludes that 720p was the problem.

For one thing, the difference between 720p and 1080p is much less noticeable than that between NTSC and 720p.
Also, there is a thread around here somewhere that shows how many titles don't even have 1080p detail, and yet they are still a huge improvement over the DVD.

I own a 720p Panasonic PJ, and the difference between upconverted DVD and HD is clear as day. Smooth Screen doesn't blur the image, as somebody else said, it blurs the gaps between the pixels where there is no image to begin with.

What was the problem then? Maybe they didn't switch back and forth between HD and SD while both discs were running. Maybe they only watched a dialog scene with mostly face closeups. Combine that with not switching back and forth, and the DVD will look pretty good to most viewers.

Three of my neighbors knocked on my door the next day asking where to buy an HD DVD player and the other two came over before the week ended for me to help them get HD DVD and set it up.

....

So far I'm 5 for 5 lol. every person that has seen my HT and HD DVD has went out bought one!

The really interesting question is are they actually buying HD DVDs or are they buying SD discs (either because they do not really understand or because they do not want to spend the money).

I cannot begin to count how many people I know think they have HD because they have an HD display connected to an SD source. It is often impossible to argue with them.

/carmi

Cave Paintings -> VHS -> Laserdisc -> DVD -> HiDef

Some wont notice the difference and many will not care for the difference anyway.

Btw, why not just use the PS3 for the upscaling part?

This is probably a typical SD vs HD comparison.

You are upscaling the SD for display, and downscaling the HD; hardly a fair comparison of formats.

Nick

I find that unlike us most people just want a nice clear picture and they get that from DVD. They aren't sure that the HDM that they see in the stores looks better because of the TV or the disc or if it even looks better at all.

In fact, many think they are watching DVD when its actually a blu-ray disc. Its natural to think that as the screen size gets bigger you'll see more detail but that isn't the case with DVD or any SD source yet that is what people expect.

Also most people just want to see the movie not the detail. Some movie theaters have better PQ than others but most people just go to a theater thats convenient for them. The one thing that everyone agrees on is that the bigger the screen the better.

I was at the mall once with my friends and we went inside the Sony store to browse around. They had I'm guessing the KDL-46XBR4 with one of those Blu-ray promotions on loop. My friends were floored at the video quality, especially when they showed a few seconds from one of the Pirates movies. I was amazed too. One of my friends was like "it's like I've got an orgasm in my eyes". So, yeah, they should definitely display that TV + Blu-ray at every store and people will drop their jaws at the difference.

I was at the mall once with my friends and we went inside the Sony store to browse around. They had I'm guessing the KDL-46XBR4 with one of those Blu-ray promotions on loop. My friends were floored at the video quality, especially when they showed a few seconds from one of the Pirates movies. I was amazed too. One of my friends was like "it's like I've got an orgasm in my eyes". So, yeah, they should definitely display that TV + Blu-ray at every store and people will drop their jaws at the difference.

Don't tell me this is another case where they were looking at that auto motion plus thing on a 120Hz TV. Then again, if people want to use it, that's their prerogative. If they think they need BD to see that, so be it if it gets more players into homes! :)

Welwynnick, I don't understand what you want him to do. You must upscale the DVD; you can't help but upscale it if you show both sources at the same size, whether that's done by the player or the projector (though I guess it would "help" to use whichever does a worse job). The only way to avoid upscaling is to show the DVD in a small window in the center of the screen, but I think most people are going to see through that and decide it's hardly fair.

I had a decent upconverting Denon player on a 37 inch 768 screen and I can still see the difference :confused:.
In the end smoothing things out isn't really adding detail that doesn't exist :confused:.

Thanks for the input, but I am literally ROFLMAO at those that think the answer is a new projector and sitting closer! Sure, I should replace my projector, get a bigger screen and move my chairs closer to the front of the room so I can irk out a bit more "enjoyment" from discs that cost double those awful 480 resolution discs and force someone to notice. Right? You have got to be kidding.

Listen, I reported in aonther thread last year that I had purchased a 1080 PJ and brought it home with the objective of replacing my Panny 900, but the difference wasn't enough to justify the price. Period.

FYI, during the same evening, when I switched the receiver to the TV input, my Tivo HD was on a cable channel and I grabbed the remote and flipped to HD Net. That really got a wow from my friends because the difference was amazing (oh and BTW HDNet is 1080i, so my projector was having to downrez to 720P).

Bottom line is that my setup is better than 99%+ of the people out there, but the difference is (IMHO) there but not overwhelming (my friends' opinions). Do we really wonder why many say this will be a niche format at best and a miserable failure at worst?

when switching between upscaled dvd and blu-ray on my 60" sxrd, just about 100% of the people i've shown have been amazed by the difference. most of the time they can't believe how bad the dvd looks after seeing the blu-ray version.

i'd have to say its the 720p or something wrong with your setup.

Next time pop in Transformers into the A3 and skip to the desert scene and watch the jaws drop. Then tell them they can get the same player for $149.

should he mention that its a dying format with very little industry support too?

I don't care about the 1080 HD thing any more. I have a A1 and was woo 'ed about how sharp the letters were on the credits but, watching the action on the movie screen (Hd or upconvert) it doesn't make a big differance. Save your friends some money and get the A3 and upconvert the newest block buster sd rentals. Don't bother with hd rentals you won't get the new movies until they become old.

lol, why even bother with an HD DVD player then, just get a better stand alone upconvertor at that rate :rolleyes:.

lol, why even bother with an HD DVD player then, just get a better stand alone upconvertor at that rate :rolleyes:.

Because the A3 is better at it than most and the price is less than any I can think of that do as good a job (the Oppos may be the exception).

Toshiba's new marketing of the players as upconverters with the "bonus" of HD playback may be a decent idea.

So it wasn't the wine. I sat down this morning with a cup of coffee and went through the same comparison as before with the same moive and I added Transformers as the HD disc and the SD version was upscaled by the PS3. To my eyes, there certainly is a difference, but the problem is where the difference is noticeable and what most people look for.

Most people look for resolution in close ups like faces that fill the frame and that is not where it is evident. Even the 480 version can show pock-marked faces or beard stubble. Where you see the big change is in panoramic shots of mountains, cities, or other longer range shots. There it is pretty evident.

However, this makes me stand by my claim that the average person is going to go into this whole format transition kicking and screaming.

Hate to say it, but we really may be looking at SACD Redux: Here's a fantastic new format that has increased quality, but only some of the enthusiasts really get excited and not much the general population.

To the OP, don't feel embarrassed, ashamed when your addiction finally backs of enough to show you it was only a addiction. Thats actually a good thing and can save you from spending cash just to fed it.

Look at the replies!!

It shows you everything to keep warranting a addictive nature by making excuses kinda like the old cartoons devil and angel on the shoulder routine.

Well to do Alcoholics and druggies do the same thing.

Rich say they are connoisseurs, they do it for the taste etc.

Me, I have a addictive nature, but the HDM thing didn't impress me and I actually got the same excuses. Yeah it was better but not enough for me to continue at its high cost nature it has.

Just sit back and enjoy the show instead of constantly trying to warrant why.

To the OP, don't feel embarrassed, ashamed when your addiction finally backs of enough to show you it was only a addiction. Thats actually a good thing and can save you from spending cash just to fed it.

Look at the replies!!

It shows you everything to keep warranting a addictive nature by making excuses kinda like the old cartoons devil and angel on the shoulder routine.

Well to do Alcoholics and druggies do the same thing.

Rich say they are connoisseurs, they do it for the taste etc.

Me, I have a addictive nature, but the HDM thing didn't impress me and I actually got the same excuses. Yeah it was better but not enough for me to continue at its high cost nature it has.

Just sit back and enjoy the show instead of constantly trying to warrant why.


Not bad advice, really. I have noticed that even on a 27" SD set or a 9" set in the car, a good film is still a good film for sure.

I think the point is that it is VERY subjective. And of course some people just dont care. For example, I could stand here and listen to people for hours telling me how powerful their computers are and how much tweaking they do to them. Well...I could care less, kinda like people who are just fine watching dvds I'm just fine with a computer that surfs on-line and that has word and no amount of talking-up can change that.

I'm the same way with cars and car audio.

Plus, I imagine there are a lot of guys here (I'm one of them too) who think it's ridiculous to spend thousands of dollars on a shiny piece of rock to wear on a finger. :)

I had the same problem showing off my setup....most people just don't get it. My wife still says she can't tell or see the difference between sd and hd.

Hmmm... Just speaking from my experience, when I got my PS3 and popped in TMNT I knew RIGHT AWAY that it looked no better than regular DVD and that something was wrong.

Sure enough, it was an older firmware that only output 480p when you asked for 720p sources.

Updated it, then BAM, the picture was much better as I had expected it to be.

Now was it night and day? Well, no, but it's officially hard to watch DVDs in that projector room of mine and not wish for a better picture the entire time the movie is running.

My wife absolutely can tell the difference now. She refers to DVD as almost "murky" in comparison.

question to OP:

is your ps3 updated? b/c if you played the blu-ray on a just out of the box ps3, it does not convert from 1080p to 720p for 720p displays, you'd have to set it to 1080i and let the projector do the convert, otherwise with a non-updated ps3 you'd get 480p vs a upconverted SD DVD.

Use your Blu-ray disc of Ghost Rider and go to the Resolution Test screen and tell me what you can see in terms of Horizontal and Vertical Resolution.

It's funny how everybody concludes that 720p was the problem.

For one thing, the difference between 720p and 1080p is much less noticeable than that between NTSC and 720p.
Also, there is a thread around here somewhere that shows how many titles don't even have 1080p detail, and yet they are still a huge improvement over the DVD.

I own a 720p Panasonic PJ, and the difference between upconverted DVD and HD is clear as day. Smooth Screen doesn't blur the image, as somebody else said, it blurs the gaps between the pixels where there is no image to begin with.

What was the problem then? Maybe they didn't switch back and forth between HD and SD while both discs were running. Maybe they only watched a dialog scene with mostly face closeups. Combine that with not switching back and forth, and the DVD will look pretty good to most viewers.

The really interesting question is are they actually buying HD DVDs or are they buying SD discs (either because they do not really understand or because they do not want to spend the money).

I cannot begin to count how many people I know think they have HD because they have an HD display connected to an SD source. It is often impossible to argue with them.

/carmi

This is probably a typical SD vs HD comparison.

You are upscaling the SD for display, and downscaling the HD; hardly a fair comparison of formats.

Nick

I find that unlike us most people just want a nice clear picture and they get that from DVD. They aren't sure that the HDM that they see in the stores looks better because of the TV or the disc or if it even looks better at all.

In fact, many think they are watching DVD when its actually a blu-ray disc. Its natural to think that as the screen size gets bigger you'll see more detail but that isn't the case with DVD or any SD source yet that is what people expect.

Also most people just want to see the movie not the detail. Some movie theaters have better PQ than others but most people just go to a theater thats convenient for them. The one thing that everyone agrees on is that the bigger the screen the better.

I was at the mall once with my friends and we went inside the Sony store to browse around. They had I'm guessing the KDL-46XBR4 with one of those Blu-ray promotions on loop. My friends were floored at the video quality, especially when they showed a few seconds from one of the Pirates movies. I was amazed too. One of my friends was like "it's like I've got an orgasm in my eyes". So, yeah, they should definitely display that TV + Blu-ray at every store and people will drop their jaws at the difference.

Don't tell me this is another case where they were looking at that auto motion plus thing on a 120Hz TV. Then again, if people want to use it, that's their prerogative. If they think they need BD to see that, so be it if it gets more players into homes! :)

Welwynnick, I don't understand what you want him to do. You must upscale the DVD; you can't help but upscale it if you show both sources at the same size, whether that's done by the player or the projector (though I guess it would "help" to use whichever does a worse job). The only way to avoid upscaling is to show the DVD in a small window in the center of the screen, but I think most people are going to see through that and decide it's hardly fair.

Thanks for the input, but I am literally ROFLMAO at those that think the answer is a new projector and sitting closer! Sure, I should replace my projector, get a bigger screen and move my chairs closer to the front of the room so I can irk out a bit more "enjoyment" from discs that cost double those awful 480 resolution discs and force someone to notice. Right? You have got to be kidding.

Listen, I reported in aonther thread last year that I had purchased a 1080 PJ and brought it home with the objective of replacing my Panny 900, but the difference wasn't enough to justify the price. Period.

FYI, during the same evening, when I switched the receiver to the TV input, my Tivo HD was on a cable channel and I grabbed the remote and flipped to HD Net. That really got a wow from my friends because the difference was amazing (oh and BTW HDNet is 1080i, so my projector was having to downrez to 720P).

Bottom line is that my setup is better than 99%+ of the people out there, but the difference is (IMHO) there but not overwhelming (my friends' opinions). Do we really wonder why many say this will be a niche format at best and a miserable failure at worst?

lol, why even bother with an HD DVD player then, just get a better stand alone upconvertor at that rate :rolleyes:.

So it wasn't the wine. I sat down this morning with a cup of coffee and went through the same comparison as before with the same moive and I added Transformers as the HD disc and the SD version was upscaled by the PS3. To my eyes, there certainly is a difference, but the problem is where the difference is noticeable and what most people look for.

Most people look for resolution in close ups like faces that fill the frame and that is not where it is evident. Even the 480 version can show pock-marked faces or beard stubble. Where you see the big change is in panoramic shots of mountains, cities, or other longer range shots. There it is pretty evident.

However, this makes me stand by my claim that the average person is going to go into this whole format transition kicking and screaming.

Hate to say it, but we really may be looking at SACD Redux: Here's a fantastic new format that has increased quality, but only some of the enthusiasts really get excited and not much the general population.

as I expected as before read POST #33 that I posted typical responses LOL......

I'm the same way with cars and car audio.

Plus, I imagine there are a lot of guys here (I'm one of them too) who think it's ridiculous to spend thousands of dollars on a shiny piece of rock to wear on a finger. :)

I'm with you on the
" it's ridiculous to spend thousands of dollars on a shiny piece of rock to wear on a finger"

Honestly I think like some of you said it depends on the person some will say wow and some will say o.k. I could tell the difference when I first saw King Kong playing on the A1 and I was hooked from then.

To th OP-
I'm not sure why a hobbiest would be embarrassed in front of a non-hobbiest. You don't mention stealing $$$ from the salvation army kettle or spending your 401k, rent or food money for the hobby. Unlike the alchy or drug addict, you aren't going to loose your family, home or your life to this so called addiction.
Ask one of your buds what they spend on thier hobby and you'll most like be scratching your head trying to figure the reasoning out. To each his own.
Can I see a big diff in SD and HD. You bet. Close ups and shots with a lot of depth of field? Yep. Does everyone care? No. Some people still watch tv on a 19" crt and are quite content.
If HDM doesn't go big time will that change my appreciation of it? Hell no.

I do think HDM is going to be a hard sell to the general public, specially with good upconvert players. I was testing Star Wars Episode 3 DVD last night with XA2, and PQ was better than some Blu-ray and HD DVDs I have. This is with a 1080P24 projector on a 150" screen from 14 feet away.

The 900 projector isnt the problem, I actually think the smoothscreen helps bring out the filmlook (have problem with lCD grids)

And the difference between a good HD title and DVD is night and day.

Sure there is room for improvment (as always) but the problem here was the disc.

I was at the mall once with my friends and we went inside the Sony store to browse around. They had I'm guessing the KDL-46XBR4 with one of those Blu-ray promotions on loop. My friends were floored at the video quality, especially when they showed a few seconds from one of the Pirates movies. I was amazed too. One of my friends was like "it's like I've got an orgasm in my eyes". So, yeah, they should definitely display that TV + Blu-ray at every store and people will drop their jaws at the difference.
The split-screen Blu-Ray-vs-SD demo? The SD image is simulated, and encoded on disc at 1080p, so the player and/or television's upscaling processing doesn't clean up the image. That might represent how an SD image looks on some hardware, but an SD image can look much better with a good scaling processor (like the Silicon Optix Reon).

How many non-enthusiasts look at a quality DVD transfer and ever think, "Wow, this movie was great, but I'd prefer more resolution." Same with going to the movies. Unless the print is in bad condition or the movie is out of focus, people watch the movie, become involved in the story, and forget about the quality all together.

Think of it like this:
1. People started watching VHS movies in SD at home.
2. DVD was more durable and improved greatly on VHS quality on SD sets.
3. HD sets and upconverters improved greatly on DVD quality.
4. HD media improves on DVD quality.

The problem for most people as I see it is that the HD set already improved their currently owned DVDs. They look better than ever. Your projector probably impressed them to no end regardless of content. Now you're showing them an increased improvement that does not exceed the jump in quality they got when their SD DVDs went from their 27" TV to their 42" HDTV.

DVDs are widescreen, they are free of artifacting, and they offer 5.1 digital sound. They don't detract from enjoying the movie for most people, including enthusiasts. Amazingly, for some people, it's just TV, and good enough is good enough.

I am suprised that no one suggested that the OP might be embarassed about owning two different version of Ghost Rider.

:)

My setup is a lot more humble than most here (42" 1080p westy) but whenever people are over and I put on a kids movie, they tell that they can't believe how good the TV looks. Then I tell them the reason is BD.

It's the embarrassment of 720p, Full HD is what Blu-ray is meant for.

It's the embarrassment of 720p, Full HD is what Blu-ray is meant for.

To bad most HDMs have a resolution closer to 720P then 1080P.

Theoretical resolution isnt the same as real resolution.

To bad most HDMs have a resolution closer to 720P then 1080P.

Theoretical resolution isnt the same as real resolution.

And 95% of displays are 720 and under.

The problem for most people as I see it is that the HD set already improved their currently owned DVDs. They look better than ever. Your projector probably impressed them to no end regardless of content. Now you're showing them an increased improvement that does not exceed the jump in quality they got when their SD DVDs went from their 27" TV to their 42" HDTV.

Yeah, for many people, going from an SD TV to an HDTV was the first time they experienced anamorphic widescreen and progressive scan, so naturally they appreciate the difference more than those of us who have had those capabilities for years. Plus, the 4:3 downconversion in cheap DVD players isn't so good, and causes more artifacts to be added.

People who have not grown used to highdef don't see the difference immediately. One of the common examples is to look for people's faces, in Live Free or Die Hard, Maggie Q's face looks ok in DVD, even when upscaled, but in BD, she looked like she had some allergic reaction to makeup, her face has significantly more detail. (In this case, it's too much detail, but good/bad, detail is still detail).

You can draw people's attention to fine detail like this, even on a 720P/768 native display, but it's much easier on a true 1080P native display.

After a while, it becomes very easy to tell the difference.

yes,pick up a 25 dollar dvd player that won't upconvert,just for demo purposes.:D

Without having owned an HD A3, I would assume this would be the best thing to do :)

I'm going to assume the A3 was doing a good job of upconverting and the HDM was limited by resolution.

Brandon

It's the embarrassment of 720p, Full HD is what Blu-ray is meant for.

I am suprised that no one suggested that the OP might be embarassed about owning two different version of Ghost Rider.

:)

My setup is a lot more humble than most here (42" 1080p westy) but whenever people are over and I put on a kids movie, they tell that they can't believe how good the TV looks. Then I tell them the reason is BD.

To bad most HDMs have a resolution closer to 720P then 1080P.

Theoretical resolution isnt the same as real resolution.

And 95% of displays are 720 and under.

I bet (it has already happened) that everyone is going to tell you the typical respones.
-you dont have a blu ray FULL 1080P SONY TV!!!
-you upconverted that DVD to near high def a big NO NO to compare blu ray to std. DVD
-your PS3 did not have the latest updates by blu ray
-your did not set your PS3 to full output 1080P
-your TV is not 24khz, and/or 75khz, etc..one of those numbers.
-you did not hook it up HDMI 1.3 version if not 1.4 latest and greatest 1.2 degrades PQ.
-NO NO NO reference title that was mastered in full 1080P!!!!!
-your disc was scrated!
-some folks will will go as far as to say, "you didnt have a blu ray compatible TV!!!
-etc....etc.etc........

Sorry guys but I hear this story all too often. Most people are happy and content with DVD. Is there a difference between HDM and DVD? Hell yes and it is clearly visible to most of us on almost any sized screen. However, most people don't sit around and nit pick the movies they are watching for increased detail, resolution, etc. The simple point is that DVD, even on a 100" screen looks mighty darn good to most people. That and the price of discs is the great impediment that HDM faces.

Without knowing much about projectors or the screen you are using... I would say its your set up. My friend had a mitsubishi 3000 projector, we couldnt see much of a difference between upconverted movies and a BD via the PS3.

He bought a new Sony Pearl (VPL-W50?) and the difference is night and day between upconvert&BD. That projector is a BEAST! Time for you to upgrade.

Also, I would suggest that you lower the screen size to 80". 100" might be streching it..... causing you to lose the detail.

I have an intresting experience.

I recently bought a 32 inch lcd (768P) for news etc. But i tested my HD gear on it just for fun.

The difference between HD and upconverted SD was minor on the 32inch set.

At the same time my dad has a non HD projector (1024*576P) 106inch. But HDM on it looks real good anyway on it.

So whats my conlusion, that resolution isnt the biggest thing the new HD media gives
us. It gives us better compression (less artifacts) and increased chroma resolution.

Also the new masters that we are getting are also a big lift.

Without knowing much about projectors or the screen you are using... I would say its your set up. My friend had a mitsubishi 3000 projector, we couldnt see much of a difference between upconverted movies and a BD via the PS3.

He bought a new Sony Pearl (VPL-W50?) and the difference is night and day between upconvert&BD. That projector is a BEAST! Time for you to upgrade.

Also, I would suggest that you lower the screen size to 80". 100" might be streching it..... causing you to lose the detail.


I have the same projector and its a night and day difference depending on the content.

I have the same projector and its a night and day difference depending on the content.

The mitsu 3000? We could see a diff between BD and upconvert... but it wasnt "Striking". It could be the room set up.

He was using a Da-lite +3 contrast screen at 100 inches, with the projector about 13-15 feet from the screen.

The Sony Pearl, he got refurb for pretty cheap. And it is a silent beast, its 28lbs(the mitsu is 8 or so). If you can find one in your price range... its worth it.

Ghost Rider was not the best choice.

Next time use Die Hard 3.

Fuggliest DVD ever!

as I expected as before read POST #33 that I posted typical responses LOL......

This doesn't exactly make you Nostradamus man.

You do remember what section this is?

(It's poor form to point out your own 'talents' anyway.)

To the OP, don't feel embarrassed, ashamed when your addiction finally backs of enough to show you it was only a addiction. Thats actually a good thing and can save you from spending cash just to fed it.

Look at the replies!!

It shows you everything to keep warranting a addictive nature by making excuses kinda like the old cartoons devil and angel on the shoulder routine.

Well to do Alcoholics and druggies do the same thing.

Rich say they are connoisseurs, they do it for the taste etc.

Me, I have a addictive nature, but the HDM thing didn't impress me and I actually got the same excuses. Yeah it was better but not enough for me to continue at its high cost nature it has.

Just sit back and enjoy the show instead of constantly trying to warrant why.

So you don't like or appreciate HDM. I can understand that as many people are not observant enough or have good enough vision to fully enjoy what the format offers. Many people had rather invest in a jet ski or snowmobile that they only use a few months out of the year. Again, that's fine, to each his own so I hope they enjoy their hobby. However, I don't go to the water sports forums to preach to them about squandering their money on something that they can appreciate and enjoy.

I bet (it has already happened) that everyone is going to tell you the typical respones.
-you dont have a blu ray FULL 1080P SONY TV!!!

I didn't see anything about needing a "SONY TV", did you?

-you upconverted that DVD to near high def a big NO NO to compare blu ray to std. DVD

I only saw someone mention that upconverting a DVD while downconverting Blu-Ray will bring the two closer (obviously)

-your TV is not 24khz, and/or 75khz, etc..one of those numbers.

Where is that in this thread?

-you did not hook it up HDMI 1.3 version if not 1.4 latest and greatest 1.2 degrades PQ.

Where is that in this thread?

-NO NO NO reference title that was mastered in full 1080P!!!!!

Huh?

-your disc was scrated!

Again, where is that in this thread?

-some folks will will go as far as to say, "you didnt have a blu ray compatible TV!!!

Where do you see this???

Bottom line is that my setup is better than 99%+ of the people out there, but the difference is (IMHO) there but not overwhelming (my friends' opinions).I disagree that a 720p display is better than 99%+ of installed displays and I find it some what silly to attempt to compare how good HD is when in most cases you aren't even looking at the source.

I disagree that a 720p display is better than 99%+ of installed displays and I find it some what silly to attempt to compare how good HD is when in most cases you aren't even looking at the source.

Huh? Damn near 99% of installed displays are 720 , 768 or less.

Huh? Damn near 99% of installed displays are 720 , 768 or less.Since you know... where's the URL reflecting up to this Holiday sales? Not to mention the percentage used for HD content viewing... which I'm sure you have as well (based on display resolution).

"In 1080p resolution, LCD TVs were 9 percent of total LCD TV units and 35 percent of all 40 inch-plus LCD TVs." - first quarter '07 LCD sets.

Since you know... where's the URL reflecting up to this Holiday sales? Not to mention the percentage used for HD content viewing... which I'm sure you have as well (based on display resolution).

1080 displays are just now getting cheap enough for people to purchase them. Do you think people didn't buy displays for the other 50 years? 2007 holiday sales couldn't have even put a small dent in the number of displays already in people's homes. You aren't even making a reasonable argument.

You aren't even making a reasonable argument.If it's so unreasonable show me the stats? Installed based as of 12/31/2007... is that so hard? Stop guessing and show some facts. Heck you might not even be that far off but you'll never knew until you show the stats.

To add my experiance, I find it hard to sit through a standard DVD since I got my PS3.
I have the (Oh so crappy poor boy piece of junk 720p) HD70. The difference is obvious on a 96" screen at 9'. But I HAVE to upgrade everything, or it's pointless...

I really like my PJ, for the money, the picture quality and size are amazing, and aven not using the format to its ful potential, I fully enjoy it.

If it's so unreasonable show me the stats? Installed based as of 12/31/2007... is that so hard? Stop guessing and show some facts. Heck you might not even be that far off but you'll never knew until you show the stats.

Nah, you just keep believing that most people have 1080 displays. It seems to be way more important to you than it is to me.

The mitsu 3000? We could see a diff between BD and upconvert... but it wasnt "Striking". It could be the room set up.

He was using a Da-lite +3 contrast screen at 100 inches, with the projector about 13-15 feet from the screen.

The Sony Pearl, he got refurb for pretty cheap. And it is a silent beast, its 28lbs(the mitsu is 8 or so). If you can find one in your price range... its worth it.


I was refering to the 900.

I've deleted a couple posts discussing the format war. Please keep the thread on topic or it will have to be closed.

Thanks
Ron

How many non-enthusiasts look at a quality DVD transfer and ever think, "Wow, this movie was great, but I'd prefer more resolution." Same with going to the movies. Unless the print is in bad condition or the movie is out of focus, people watch the movie, become involved in the story, and forget about the quality all together.

Think of it like this:
1. People started watching VHS movies in SD at home.
2. DVD was more durable and improved greatly on VHS quality on SD sets.
3. HD sets and upconverters improved greatly on DVD quality.
4. HD media improves on DVD quality.

The problem for most people as I see it is that the HD set already improved their currently owned DVDs. They look better than ever. Your projector probably impressed them to no end regardless of content. Now you're showing them an increased improvement that does not exceed the jump in quality they got when their SD DVDs went from their 27" TV to their 42" HDTV.

DVDs are widescreen, they are free of artifacting, and they offer 5.1 digital sound. They don't detract from enjoying the movie for most people, including enthusiasts. Amazingly, for some people, it's just TV, and good enough is good enough.
This is one of the best synopsis I've read so far. I think it is going to take really good marketing to get the masses over to HDM, but I am convinced that it will happen over time. It may even take a lot of trojan horse game players and upscaling players to shift the balance.

I am reminded of the ABX test with a group of ordinary consumers between red book CD and SACD, and the shock of the experts that the audience preferred CD! Maybe the general public is not a gullible as so-called experts!

At the store I work at customers are blown away by the A3 and with the current price we have sold more in a week then any other HDM player since the formats first came to the store. We are running the latest Harry Potter movie in 1080i on a Samsung LNT-4071F. The PQ is jaw dropping to say the least.

Welcome to the problem with HDM. The A3 is a damn good DVD player and most regular folks just can't see the difference.

+1

How much better is the Sony Full HD 1080P set compared to other 1080P sets?

Exactly .... and use a HDM Titloe that is know for its picture and sound quality. I have said all along that most consumers do not see enough of a difference between DVD and HDM due to the fact that up-converted DVD Movies look good compared to HDM movies that have not been mastered and encoded for maximum HD Performance.

I am not sure how well or not Ghost Rider was done. However, between the 720P factor and the upconverting DVD Player ... which I assume you have ... I would not expect to see enough of a difference to convert the avreage consumer to HDM.

yes,pick up a 25 dollar dvd player that won't upconvert,just for demo purposes.:D

Super Bowl coming up! I have a couple of neighbors coming over. My plan is to show them the pre-game (on now) in 480i stretch-o-vision and then turn over to Fox HD at 720P (oh, the lowly 720P for you video snobs out there:)) and ask their opinions of the difference. I know for a fact that one of the two still has SD only so I can't wait to see their reaction. Now, afterward, I may do some other comparison of movies. I am taking suggestions until 6 or 7 PM Eastern Time. I buy almost every big movie on DVD and have about 150 in HDM so let me have it!

FWIW, I think one issue was my equipment. The A3 does a stellar job at 720p and the PS3 does great only at 1080, even though my display is 720. I had the PS3 set at 720, but it is noticably better at 1080 for some reason. Even my 12 year old daughter saw the diff today (with Ghost Rider).

Nah, you just keep believing that most people have 1080 displays. It seems to be way more important to you than it is to me.I never said most people have 1080 displays. You might want to read what I actually said...

I disagree that a 720p display is better than 99%+ of installed displays and I find it some what silly to attempt to compare how good HD is when in most cases you aren't even looking at the source.

So I guess you have no facts to back up your statement?

Huh? Damn near 99% of installed displays are 720 , 768 or less.If so I'm wondering why you would think or post such.

For projector sales alone the last stats I saw was 8% for 2006 and 28% for 2007 were 1080p (worldwide shipments) versus 720p projectors. For TVs I haven't seen a recent number. I understand there are many older units still in use but they are getting recycled especially as the primary viewing display.

I had a small dinner party last night and decided to show off my projector and sound system after a few of the guests asked about it. I arbitrarily pulled out "Ghost Rider" on BD and played it via my PS3. Everyone was absolutely "wowed"- so far, so good.

Then a couple of guests asked about the difference between DVD and HDM (I have both). I spent a few of minutes talking about the sharpness, contrast, resolution, etc. and ended up voluteering to show the difference to them. Well, here's where it got tricky. I have the SD of Ghost Rider as well and put it in my Toshiba A3 for comparison. By this time only the guys were left with me and we opened a bottle of wine and started looking at both versions. Lo and behold, the difference was minimal at best to all in the room. Needless to say, questions followed like "How much for that PS3?" and "How much are the disks again?" My only saving grace was really the sound levels between the two. With GR outputting Linear PCM and the A3 doing DD on the SD side (Upconverted to 720P), everyone at least ooh'ed and ah'ed over the perceived sound difference.

My PJ is a 720P Panasonic AE900 on a 100" grey high contrast screen (1.85:1) and I use a Marantz SR-8001 to the projector all via HDMI. The projector is ISF calibrated.

Surely most of you have done the same test with friends! I am sure that something must be wrong as the A3 is good but is not rated that good, nor have I read that Ghost Rider is a demo quality SD disc.

Suggestions?

On a side note: the A3 is the quietest player I have ever connected. I have to crank the sound to about 10 units higher than the same disc on the PS3. Is that die to the PS3 converting everything to Linear PCM?

Awesome story :D

Next time use an old original vhs player that cost about $1000 back in the 80's. Put in a tape and then show them the high def stuff...that would surely impress them.:)

Better yet use an old beta player.

I am not sure how well or not Ghost Rider was done. However, between the 720P factor and the upconverting DVD Player ... which I assume you have ... I would not expect to see enough of a difference to convert the avreage consumer to HDM.

Well as I written before, I have the same projector and its a night and day difference if you have the right content.

Chronicles of Riddick blows away the DVD version.

I never said most people have 1080 displays. You might want to read what I actually said...



So I guess you have no facts to back up your statement?

If so I'm wondering why you would think or post such.

For projector sales alone the last stats I saw was 8% for 2006 and 28% for 2008 were 1080p (worldwide shipments) versus 720p projectors. For TVs I haven't seen a recent number. I understand there are many older units still in use but they are getting recycled especially as the primary viewing display.Yeah, 8% of sales for that year. The 10 previous years were all 768 or less. The same applies for TVs. tens of millions of displays already in homes that were sold previous to the existance of 1080p displays. There is plenty of evidence there and you even provided some. It does, however, not agree with what you're selling. So, you play games. So be it. The fact is that at this point 95% of displays are less than 768, and those displays do not care if you think they exist or not. Those are the facts. Believe them or don't.

Exactly .... and use a HDM Titloe that is know for its picture and sound quality. I have said all along that most consumers do not see enough of a difference between DVD and HDM due to the fact that up-converted DVD Movies look good compared to HDM movies that have not been mastered and encoded for maximum HD Performance.

I am not sure how well or not Ghost Rider was done. However, between the 720P factor and the upconverting DVD Player ... which I assume you have ... I would not expect to see enough of a difference to convert the avreage consumer to HDM.
I'd like to know what Natures Journey looks like on my Pioneer.

David Pogue wites a widely-read tech column in the New York Times. I think the following quote is interesting:

"So the *only* way to get a 1080p picture on a 1080p set is to buy a high-def DVD player (Blu-ray or HD DVD). That’s the only way.

[D.P. adds: Even then, you won’t see any difference between 720p and 1080p unless you sit closer than 10 feet from the TV and it’s bigger than 55 inches or so.

And even then, you’re not getting any additional sharpness or detail. Instead, as CNET notes, you’re just gaining the ability to move closer without seeing individual pixels: “In other words, you can sit closer to a 1080p television and not notice any pixel structure, such as stair-stepping along diagonal lines, or the screen door effect (where you can actually see the space between the pixels).”]

Q: But a 1080p set costs a lot more than an identical 720p set, doesn’t it?

A: Yeah.

[D.P. adds: At this point, he showed me two plasmas, same brand, same size, same model line, mounted one above the other: one 720p, the other 1080p. The fancier set cost $2,000 more — and the image quality was pixel-for-pixel identical.]"

I don't agree with this, but this all-too-often sums up the way most people look at HD.

Brian

The fact is that at this point 95% of displays are less than 768, and those displays do not care if you think they exist or not.Before it was 99% plus and now it's 95%... where are you getting your numbers (so called facts) from?

Before it was 99% plus and now it's 95%... where are you getting your numbers (so called facts) from?

You need to check my first post. I/m finished with you, however. If we can't have a reasonable discussion, there is no reason for me to see your posts.

Before it was 99% plus and now it's 95%... where are you getting your numbers (so called facts) from?

As for how many, it doesn't matter in this case.

What does matter is that there was one too few 1080 displays. The one the OP tried to use to show a difference. And then he found out the scaler in his projector is better than the scaler in his PS3, well who would have thought.

In either case it is a scaling for the DVD and the HD DVD or Blu Ray and that is just not how HDM is intended to be displayed. HDM is all about 1080.

If we can't have a reasonable discussion, there is no reason for me to see your posts.I keep trying to have a discussion based on your known facts. But for some reason you prefer to keep any reference to how you obtained them a secret.

I keep trying to have a discussion based on your known facts. But for some reason you prefer to keep any reference to how you obtained them a secret.
I don't see how your refusal to acknowledge the history of displays is a discussion. Off to ignore land with you.

Here we go again