or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › Just got Samsung Blu-Ray Player and 4 Movies.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Just got Samsung Blu-Ray Player and 4 Movies. - Page 4  

post #91 of 267
I'm not saying that your own deinterlacer is or isn't. I'm saying that for most folks using outboard scalers/deinterlacers... feeding them 1080i to convert to 1080p won't produce optimal results. So suggesting that the obvious answer is to just feed 1080i to an outboard deinterlacer is a bit misleading unless one clarifies that the outboard scaler perform proper inverse telecine.

Even many $$$ outboard scalers that brag about "1080p!" scaling don't do 3-2 reversal for film-based 1080i60.
post #92 of 267
Quote:
all I mean to say is that if the demo clips I saw at the Sony Style store have anything to incidate... it's not the fault of MPEG2 that's leading to the softness in the 5th E.
Maybe not with MPEG2 per se, but Sony's use of it in this instance. S. Spears says the bit rate for 5tE isn't all that high. If Sony couldn't be bothered or was unable to do better, that's a problem.

Quote:
the LOA HD clips on the demo disc were THE MOST IMPRESSIVE HD I'VE EVER SEEN
All the more reason to slap Sony upside the head and tell them "hey, you idiots! this isn't good enough!".
post #93 of 267
You would think Sony would hand pick these titles to ensure that they all look great to promote the BD advantage. That is what surprises me the most.

Dont release The Fifth Element (which was a pretty bad movie anyways with a wonderful DVD transfer-thats why I watched it as a reference piece) unless it looks stunning.
post #94 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
Facts are the things that used to matter to people posting on AVS way back when before all this HD DVD/BD hullaballo started.... remember?:D
Oh... those things. Yeah, I've heard of 'em.
post #95 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR
I have a hard time with that. The fact is that 35 mm film has more detail than ANY of the HD formats. I think a better way to put it might be that Sony's TRANSFER of the film might not be as sharp as it could be/should be. We know for a fact, for example, that Sony's HD transfer of Lawrence of Arabia was no great shakes and NO one would argue that a 70 MM FILM isn't sharp enough to impress!
True, but this film is heavily, heavily animated with computers. I'm not sure at what resolution the effects were completed at, but they may not be at high enough resolution to hold up. They probably looked good for then, but compated to what we're used to now, they may not pass muster.
post #96 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew P
You would think Sony would hand pick these titles to ensure that they all look great to promote the BD advantage. That is what surprises me the most.
Maybe they had no choice, for one reason or another?

In Japan, Toshiba released the theatrical version of The Riddick Chronicles, and it looks quite terrible. The difference is huge when compared to the US HD DVD. I can't see why Toshiba released the movie in Japan as one of the first titles - unless they had no choice on the matter.
post #97 of 267
Chad,

that thought went through my mind as well. Perhaps the 5th element was intentionally "softened" on film to mask the blend of CGI and live-action given the dated computer software that was used for the effects. That's actually quite a common practice. It could be that up till now the SB DVD was really showing us a very accurate depiction of the real source?

In any case... I sure would like to see the interpositive myself to judge where the softness is coming from!
post #98 of 267
Or, David, maybe it was softened to dull the effects of Bruce's receding hairline...
post #99 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by pteittinen
Maybe they had no choice, for one reason or another?

In Japan, Toshiba released the theatrical version of The Riddick Chronicles, and it looks quite terrible. The difference is huge when compared to the US HD DVD. I can't see why Toshiba released the movie in Japan as one of the first titles - unless they had no choice on the matter.
No choice? I do not buy that for Sony or Toshiba. Isnt The Fifth Element a Sony movie? Delay the title or dont release it, or maybe if youre Sony you release a sub-par version to be replaced in 6 months?

I dont get it.
post #100 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Boulet
Facts are the things that used to matter to people posting on AVS way back when before all this HD DVD/BD hullaballo started.... remember?
Feels like it happened in another life.
post #101 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
I'm just saying we shouldn't say something is a "problem" until we know that it is. It's just as much of an "if" either way.

But rather than saying it "is" a problem which is not proven at all, I'm saying we should be honest that it's just an "if" and treat it as a *concern* until we know the facts.

Facts are the things that used to matter to people posting on AVS way back when before all this HD DVD/BD hullaballo started.... remember?

:D
Refreshing it is, to actually hear a voice of reason these days--good point David !
post #102 of 267
Andrew,

what if the 5th element looks as good as it can given the film source? We don't know yet, so it's too early to judge.

Has anyone here seen the 5th element in HD before? How did it compare to other reference HD transfers?
post #103 of 267
I have 5th Element on DVHS, from HBO, and it looks good. I believe the BD release will look better.
post #104 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad R
True, but this film is heavily, heavily animated with computers. I'm not sure at what resolution the effects were completed at, but they may not be at high enough resolution to hold up. They probably looked good for then, but compated to what we're used to now, they may not pass muster.

That would be a decision made for the BD release then. I have a 45 MBit/s version of The 5th Element and it doesn't look soft at all, it's very detailed with amazing colors. So if they release an average looking version now, I'd bet they have a better looking superbit in the pipeline for next year.
post #105 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew P
No choice? I do not buy that for Sony or Toshiba. Isnt The Fifth Element a Sony movie? Delay the title or dont release it, or maybe if youre Sony you release a sub-par version to be replaced in 6 months?
I'm only guessing. Some of the titles released in the first wave make no sense at all.
post #106 of 267
You are lucky. I just called both Best Buys by me, and they said they aren't expecting the BR player until the beginning of July. Even the place I preordered it from, Ultimate Electronics, said the same thing.

However, coold, please tell me that you can destroy the rumors about the BR movies not having special features on them, ESPECIALLY Fifth Element.
post #107 of 267
Stephan and sspears,

we look forward to your comparisons between your current HD copies and the 5th E BD when you're able!

-dave
post #108 of 267
Hold it. How many people have actually seen the BD-release of TFE? How many of those are in the position to give utterly reliable opinions on the image quality?

Let's not forget that so much of this is subjective. For example, I bought the Apollo 13 HD DVD because someone (Digital Bits, maybe) raved about the picture quality. When the title finally arrived, I was tremendously disappointed with it. For the most part it looked like a well-scaled DVD.
post #109 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
Andrew,

Has anyone here seen the 5th element in HD before? How did it compare to other reference HD transfers?
Comcast ON DEMAND has The Fifth Element available as one of the free HD titles (at least in the Boston area). Someone could probably set up a comparison to it, if they also have it in their area. (Accepting of course the limitations of HD ON DEMAND)
post #110 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naylia
Comcast ON DEMAND has The Fifth Element available as one of the free HD titles (at least in the Boston area). Someone could probably set up a comparison to it, if they also have it in their area. (Accepting of course the limitations of HD ON DEMAND)
YOu can't compare cable images to DVD/BR/HD-DVD images.
post #111 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by pteittinen
Let's not forget that so much of this is subjective. For example, I bought the Apollo 13 HD DVD because someone (Digital Bits, maybe) raved about the picture quality. When the title finally arrived, I was tremendously disappointed with it. For the most part it looked like a well-scaled DVD.
That's just crazy talk :)

Maybe you were looking at the special effects. Like someone mentioned earlier in this thread, sometimes the special effects are not rendered at a high enough resolution to take full advantage of HD. But I thought the non-special-effects shots in Apollo 13 looked amazing on HD-DVD.

--
Steve
post #112 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanefsky
Maybe you were looking at the special effects. Like someone mentioned earlier in this thread, sometimes the special effects are not rendered at a high enough resolution to take full advantage of HD. But I thought the non-special-effects shots in Apollo 13 looked amazing on HD-DVD.
Tom Hanks - the ultimate Special Effect.

But seriously, thanks for proving my point.

edit: Oh, and about rendering of SFX: not high enough for HD, but high enough for theatrical release? Nah.
post #113 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Kain
YOu can't compare cable images to DVD/BR/HD-DVD images.
Sure you can....and I'm hoping the BD disc looks better than the HD ON Demand. People are concerned about the quality of a disc...you compare the movie to any other similar souce. OTA HD version or DVHS version would clearly be a better source for comparison, but lacking those HD ON Demand is something to compare to and certainly more worthwhile comparing to than the DVD.
post #114 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Kain
YOu can't compare cable images to DVD/BR/HD-DVD images.
What are you talking about, put them side by side. If the cable image produces a better picture than your BR/HDDVD. Then there is a problem.
post #115 of 267
Well if you put it that way, then yes, you can.
post #116 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
Has anyone here seen the 5th element in HD before? How did it compare to other reference HD transfers?
Good, not great, is how I would describe the version I have from HBO. I would hope (and expect) that the BluRay version would look better. I have the HBO one burned on 2 DVDs in the format to play on the HD DVD player, so could use that in a comparison.

I am curious as to how the Samsung player does with 1080p output of HD and pausing. The HD-A1 only provides one field and so causes jaggies while paused that aren't normally there at speed. It would be nice if the Samsung would use two fields for a full frame while paused with 1080p output.

If TFE on BD isn't transparent to the master (which I don't know), they could have always split it across 2 disks if video quality was a high enough priority for them (but that would decrease the opportunities for double dipping).

--Darin
post #117 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
BTW, the LOA HD clips on the demo disc were THE MOST IMPRESSIVE HD I'VE EVER SEEN. It was astonishingly "window like". Wow. I wonder if they did a new film-digital transfer?
Demo disks can use high bitrates. For that one I hope they use more than 25GB unless they can get this long movie to look like that in just that amount of space (which I doubt with MPEG2).

--Darin
post #118 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naylia
Sure you can....and I'm hoping the BD disc looks better than the HD ON Demand. People are concerned about the quality of a disc...you compare the movie to any other similar souce. OTA HD version or DVHS version would clearly be a better source for comparison, but lacking those HD ON Demand is something to compare to and certainly more worthwhile comparing to than the DVD.
The ON Demand version is cropped.
post #119 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2
Demo disks can use high bitrates. For that one I hope they use more than 25GB unless they can get this long movie to look like that in just that amount of space (which I doubt with MPEG2).
I seriously hope they use more than 25GB for this one...
My HD-recording of LOA is over 35GB already and that's video and one audio track only, no extras...
post #120 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by overcast
What are you talking about, put them side by side. If the cable image produces a better picture than your BR/HDDVD. Then there is a problem.
Exactly.

It's the easiest and ultimate practical experiment anyone can do for both HD-DVD and BR.

Where fence sitters like me may finally be tempted to early adopt is when/if words start coming 'round that even the best cable, satellite and especially OTA is being equalled or surpassed consistently, in terms of picture quality.

The obvious caveat is the source material itself, of course. ;)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Players
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › Just got Samsung Blu-Ray Player and 4 Movies.