Originally Posted by D-Nice
JakeK is actually correct. You are only suppose to see what they director intended for you to see. If your set has been calibrated to the standard, then it's showing you exactly what you were intended to see.
That's about the biggest bunch of horse hockey I've read today. I've been going to CEDIA events and other home theater events as a video professional for more than 15 years and I can tell you that as far as faithfully reproducing the intended director's "vision", particularly with FILM
most digital displays fall woefully short and cannot come close to matching the ability of a properly calibrated 9" CRT projector, particularly as it comes to reproducing shadow detail. The fact that there is a newer generation of uninformed and uneducated users who haven't had the opportunity to work with high quality displays doesn't negate the fact that digital displays, by and large, are subject to serious bit error issues, motion artifacting, loss of detail, attenuation problems, visible skew, judder, clouding, serious latency issues, blah, blah, blah, on and on. Sure, CRTs are dinosaurs, unwieldy and take a lot of maintenance to maintain in proper calibration and convergence, but oh, my... the pictures they can produce are unbelievable in their ability to show what you are intended to see.
Nonetheless, we live in a digital age. If your set has been calibrated to the highest standard and you still
cannot reproduce the available
detail, it isn't a shortcoming of the director or the fact that we aren't intended to see it. No, it's the fact that the display has shortcomings that it cannot overcome. If you can find actual detail, not amplified noise, by adjusting the brightness or contrast, then the detail that is there is meant to be seen and the display has limitations in its own ability to reproduce that detail in the way it was intended. To accept what you and JakeK offer is to accept the premise that "what you see is as good as it gets". I know better, even if you don't.