[darkcecil32]

I know I am going to sound like a complete newb for these questions, so I apologize in advance. It's only that I see so many contradicting answers floating around to the questions I ask that it's hard to tell which answers are actually factual and non partisan and which answers are heavily bias.


1. How do upconverted standard dvd's look on an upconverting player? I know this is a bit of an aribtrary question as it depends on the player, but in general, what are the results of upconverting for older dvds? I mean is it worth re-purchasing a title that is available on both standard definition and next gen dvd? For instance, a movie that I own is Goodfellas. Would there be a huge contrast between playing that on an upconverting player versus playing a blu ray/hd-dvd?


2. How good are the PS3/Xbox 360 as stand alone upconverting dvd players? I am not super hardcore about these things, but if a standalone upconverting player is a much better choice, I may consider purchasing one as an option. But as long as something does its job and does it reasonably well, I will be satisfied. I have no need to buy the latest and greatest of everything.


3. Are the releases of older movies on blu-ray/hd dvd just a marketing gimmick to sucker old people and continue to use old franchises as cash cows? In fact, wouldn't the source material for most older films not even be up to go up to "true hd resolutions" as the source material is so old and hd wasn't even a viable/feasible option for media until only 4/5 years ago as far as I can tell. Once again using Goodfellas as an example, I can't imagine how much better an hd copy of the movie would look over the standard def version on its own, much less upconverted to a higher resolution.

 

[wormraper]



Quote:
Originally Posted by darkcecil32 /forum/post/0


I know I am going to sound like a complete newb for these questions, so I apologize in advance. It's only that I see so many contradicting answers floating around to the questions I ask that it's hard to tell which answers are actually factual and non partisan and which answers are heavily bias.


1. How do upconverted standard dvd's look on an upconverting player? I know this is a bit of an aribtrary question as it depends on the player, but in general, what are the results of upconverting for older dvds? I mean is it worth re-purchasing a title that is available on both standard definition and next gen dvd? For instance, a movie that I own is Goodfellas. Would there be a huge contrast between playing that on an upconverting player versus playing a blu ray/hd-dvd?


2. How good are the PS3/Xbox 360 as stand alone upconverting dvd players? I am not super hardcore about these things, but if a standalone upconverting player is a much better choice, I may consider purchasing one as an option. But as long as something does its job and does it reasonably well, I will be satisfied. I have no need to buy the latest and greatest of everything.


3. Are the releases of older movies on blu-ray/hd dvd just a marketing gimmick to sucker old people and continue to use old franchises as cash cows? In fact, wouldn't the source material for most older films not even be up to go up to "true hd resolutions" as the source material is so old and hd wasn't even a viable/feasible option for media until only 4/5 years ago as far as I can tell. Once again using Goodfellas as an example, I can't imagine how much better an hd copy of the movie would look over the standard def version on its own, much less upconverted to a higher resolution.

I'll try to answer your questions in order as best I can. First things first. What display do you have??? If you have a small less than 42" display you might not find the increase in resolution that big of a deal.


1. DVD upconverting and a true HD source are not even in the same leaque. You can't add information that is not already there to create a better picture. Just to let you know all displays "upconvert" on their own. However cheaper displays will do it rather poorly which is why a good upconverting player is worth it. In terms of a movie being worth it to repurchase, that's totally up to you. I find that 99% of the HD movies that I've seen are worth the upgrade, maybe not at the price they are now but they are still a decent increase at minimum. You will notice big difference on the color saturation and detail level unless you are sitting a massive distance from your display.


2. the PS3 does not Upconvert dvd's at all. Supposedly Sony may be fixing this with a firmware update down the road but nothing is official. The Xbox 360 will only upconvert over VGA. IMO your best bet is to get a good upconverting player like the Oppo 970/981. If you're looking to get HD anyway and are really into upconverting to keep your SD collection alive for as long as possible, I would get the HD-A2 HD-DVD player from Value Electronics. Right now you get the A2 for $299 with $20 shipping and a free HDMI cable. That way you get a cheap entry point into the HD world and an upconverting DVD player to boot. If you wanna get Blu Ray and are worried about upconverting (especially if you have a lower-end/cheaper display with a poor scaler) I would wait for the New Sony player coming out fairly soon. It'll be a bit more exp though. It runs at about $599and will include upconverting. Or your third option is to wait for the Samsung Combo player for $799 (MSRP, could be lower street price) and have the best of both worlds. If you are on a budget though, I would honestly go with the A2 (my personal opinion nothing more), great deal for an awesome upconverter and HD as well.


3. No, HD is not just a marketing gimmick. 99.99999% of movies were shot on film. Film once scanned, can have up to 4k lines of vertical resolution which is several times what HD can do at 1080p. Look at Robin hood on HD-DVD, that was an old movie and looks fantastic. It all depends on how they take care of the master, but I've yet to see a movie, no matter how bad the master was, that didn't at least look a little better than It's SD counterpart.

 

[Kosty]

PS3 does not upconvert DVDs as of ye to 720 or 1080..


HD DVD and Blu-ray players that upconvert can make standard DVDs look very good but a Blu-ray and HD DVD version is clearly superior and can be seen in things such as side and background detail.


HD XA2 and other players with the HQV Silicon Optix Reon video processor offer superior upconversion


As player prices dro closer to the level of upconverting DVD palyers ( teh Toshiba HD A2 is $299 street now, $399 MSRP) you can start to rationalize uying them as hig end upconverting DVD players that as a onus also play HD DVDs (and BD)


If you watch HD DVD or Blu-ray movies you can tell that the difference is clear. Both are above upconverted movies, but the upconverting features of those players allow you to get more mileage out of you existing DVD librarys you already own or to watch titles not available in HD.

 

[Jiffylush]

For comparison you should check out Xylon's threads that compare HD broadcasts, DVDs, and HD/Blu-ray dvds.


PS3 does not upconvert standard dvds at this time, maybe it will in the future, who knows when.


Xbox upconverts dvd over vga only (or hdmi on elite), I don't think it does as good of a job as a true upconverting dvd player (correct me on this if I am wrong).


I am not buying replacements of DVDs I already have at this time, maybe when we get quality kids movies I will start.


edit: late to the party, basically the same info in all the replies

 

[Bailey151]

They've been covered but I'll give you another spin on #1.


Upconverts look pretty good, they are not as good as HD.....but...the results or "wow" factor depend on you & the display. For example the HD vs SD is night & day to me.....for my wife it's "eeeennnnggghh". I'm willing to pay the price of entry, my wife wouldn't pay more than a couple of bucks. My display is the a modest 42" which means I'm not going to see the massive improvements of larger displays (the bigger the picture the more detail becomes important).


Really it boils down to "what's it worth to you"


I've enjoyed some of the older titles more than new stuff - it's quite a treat to see these old classics like they were seen the the theaters (& not like we see them on TV). Makes one say "wow, they really were good".

 

[darkcecil32]

Ah, thanks for all of the replies.


I guess my memory has failed me. I thought I had remembered reading that PS3 does upconvert for movies, just not for games. Whoops.


As for display, I haven't made the jump to HD yet. I plan to go there in about half a year but am just finally coming around to starting seriously think about my options. My budget for TV, sound system, and console will probably not be able to exceed 2,000$, 2500$ tops. That's why I included no tv specs.

For me, that amount of cash is a huge investment, but a home theater has been a dream of mine for owning for about 5 years now. I don't want my own car, I don't need a nice house, I just want good tech ^__^. (I should mention I'm only 20 years old) I know my priorities are a bit skewed, but hey, what the hell.


I am still fighting over 360 and PS3. I will only be able to afford one in the short term, and more and more it is looking like it will be the 360 for me (mainly because the 3rd party titles that are multi-platform go online). I am waiting for the 65 nm elite to hit before I make the splurge.


Anyways, I digress. I guess the biggest question I am thinking of at the moment is whether or not to buy the hd dvd add-on for the 360.I personally think that blu-ray will eventually come out on top of the format wars but both mediums will co-exist for quite a while. So, I have a slight bias towards blu ray for movies.


However, that being said, I am a gamer first and foremost, and more and more it looks like the 360 for me. Especially since Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey are coming out this year...


I apologize for my ignorance and newbish-ness

 

[homerx]

Upconverted DVDs will look good in most cases. The OPPO players are very nice. As well as samsung.

However nothing can compare to a good HD movies. They will almost always look better.


As far as the xbox360 if you don't have one and want one for gaming and HD-DVDs I'd get the elite. It sells for $479. Which is only 79$ more then the premium. The added benifits are a HDMI port. And a 120GB HDD. The HD-DVD ad-on sells for 150-200 depending were you look.


As far as the PS3 like said it won't upconvert DVDs yet. Although someday it may. The Ps3 also offers a HDMI port. But you'll have to buy it. The ps3 averages 600 bucks everywere plus 25-30 for the HDMI cables.


if you a gammer it comes down to the games. At the moment the xbox360 offers the best in next-gen gaming. However the ps3 will catch-up in time prehapps buy christmas. So it up to you.


As far as HD-DVD vs blu-ray.

Well in terms of specs they are pretty much the same. Both sides use the same audio/video codacs (the way in which the movie is compressed to fit within a givin space 15_30GBs on HDDVD and 25-50 on blu-ray)


I'd say take a look a the teir thread at the top of the HDDVD and blu-ray fourms. Cheek off which movies you'd buy. The side with the highest cheeks go with.


I went with HD-DVD in november becase at the time it was 50% cheeper. But both sides are pretty equal in terms of pricing. So really you going to spend about the same..



Now, lets talk about standalone players. the atvatage of going this way is you will get a player deticated to just movies. One of the things I like about stand alone players, that many pepole forget, I'd the LCD display on the front of the player. Its nice as at all times you know what chapter your in as well as run time..

Another atvantage it both sides offer players with 5.1 analog outs. Meaning, if you amplifer has 5.1-7.1 analog in (sometimes known as multi-channel in). And no HDMI you can take atvantage of the lossless audio. (Dolby true HD, LPCM, DTS MA, etc.)


Now the 5.1 analog is only offered in the higer end models such as the toshibia XA2 and A20. Not sure which BD player offer this but you can simply look at the back of a given in store display.





I myself have the XA1 which is a first genration HD-DVD player. It does offer 5.1 outs. However it is very slow starting up (about 2 minnites from hitting open to play screen, which for me isn't bad becase it allows for popcorn and pop time)


If you don't mind the slowness and a few small issues from time to time (which can offten be fixed buy cleaning the disc, even if new I find a cleaning helps. Some say factory leave a light resedue on the disc. I don't know but what ever)

Anyway, you can get one for aroud 300 bucks. Infact walmart has the D1 on closeout price of 370 last I looked.



Ok that's enough wrighting prehapps ill go thew when I get home for spellcheek as it dosent work on my SK3 phone..

G'day

 

[darkcecil32]

Yea, I've been holding out for the xbox 360 because I've heard rumblings of the elite (aka xephyr) for over 6 months. The elite is supposed to go down to 399.99, supposedly, by this fall when it comes out in the white variation. And supposedly that's when the 65 nm chip will come as well, so I think I am better off just waiting. I guess I'm happy that I learned years ago that patience really is a virtue

.

 

[ChrisWiggles]



Quote:
Originally Posted by wormraper /forum/post/0


I'll try to answer your questions in order as best I can. First things first. What display do you have??? If you have a small less than 42" display you might not find the increase in resolution that big of a deal.


1. DVD upconverting and a true HD source are not even in the same leaque. You can't add information that is not already there to create a better picture. Just to let you know all displays "upconvert" on their own. However cheaper displays will do it rather poorly which is why a good upconverting player is worth it. In terms of a movie being worth it to repurchase, that's totally up to you. I find that 99% of the HD movies that I've seen are worth the upgrade, maybe not at the price they are now but they are still a decent increase at minimum. You will notice big difference on the color saturation and detail level unless you are sitting a massive distance from your display.

No, not *all* displays upconvert/scale on their own. Many, however do, including practically all consumer digital displays.


While there is a difference in detail, there should not be a difference in color saturation per se.

 

[wormraper]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles /forum/post/0


No, not *all* displays upconvert/scale on their own. Many, however do, including practically all consumer digital displays.

true, I forgot that there are some displays that don't to any scaling, however I was kinda discounting them being that 99.9999999999999999999999999999% of Tv's/Monitors you can buy at a consumer level will have a scaler.

 

[namechamps]



Quote:
Originally Posted by darkcecil32 /forum/post/0


Yea, I've been holding out for the xbox 360 because I've heard rumblings of the elite (aka xephyr) for over 6 months. The elite is supposed to go down to 399.99, supposedly, by this fall when it comes out in the white variation. And supposedly that's when the 65 nm chip will come as well, so I think I am better off just waiting. I guess I'm happy that I learned years ago that patience really is a virtue

.

Exactly fall is the time to buy a 360 if you can wait.

$400 and has all features of elite and price of premium.

65nm means cooler running, less noise, longer life.


If you really are considering SD upconversion the HD-XA2 is the player to buy. It's upconversion rivals some $800-$1000 SD players and plays HD DVD also. The A2 and 360 are decent upconverter but XA2 is in another league.

 

[namechamps]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles /forum/post/0


No, not *all* displays upconvert/scale on their own. Many, however do, including practically all consumer digital displays.


While there is a difference in detail, there should not be a difference in color saturation per se.

What display doesn't upconvert everything to it's native resolution? A DVD playing on an HDTV that doesn't upconvert would be a small image in center of screen taking up about 1/6 the screen surrounded by black bars 5/6 the screen. All displays upconvert whatever they are fed to the displays native resolution.

 

[N.B. Forrest]

Are the releases of older movies on blu-ray/hd dvd just a marketing gimmick to sucker old people and continue to use old franchises as cash cows? In fact, wouldn't the source material for most older films not even be up to go up to "true hd resolutions" as the source material is so old and hd wasn't even a viable/feasible option for media until only 4/5 years ago as far as I can tell. Once again using Goodfellas as an example, I can't imagine how much better an hd copy of the movie would look over the standard def version on its own, much less upconverted to a higher resolution.



It depends on what you mean by "older". To me, "Goodfellas" is not an older film.


If you're talking about films made more than 30 years ago, which I consider older, then such a "marketing gimmick" has been an abject failure. Look at the release lists for both formats & you'll see a very low percentage of these older, or classic, films.

 

[Big J]

I'ld like to add my 2 cents. Other have pretty much answeredyour questions, so i'll keep this breif. Most HDTVs will upscale, but the DVD players, tend to do a better job. i have a Sony SXRD, and every upscaling DVD player has done a better job than the TV. That said, good HD is still considerably better then upscaled DVDs.

Also, older films can look very very good if the print used is in good shape. my favorite example is Forbidden Planet-it looks FANTASTIC.

J

 

[namechamps]



Quote:
Originally Posted by darkcecil32 /forum/post/0


Are the releases of older movies on blu-ray/hd dvd just a marketing gimmick to sucker old people and continue to use old franchises as cash cows? In fact, wouldn't the source material for most older films not even be up to go up to "true hd resolutions" as the source material is so old and hd wasn't even a viable/feasible option for media until only 4/5 years ago as far as I can tell. Once again using Goodfellas as an example, I can't imagine how much better an hd copy of the movie would look over the standard def version on its own, much less upconverted to a higher resolution.

Hardly.


Here is review for goodfellas from Highdefdigest

Quote:
So I wasn't sure if I should expect much from HD DVD. It certainly seemed, on the surface, to be a strange choice to show off the new high-def next-gen format. But boy, is this new disc a near-revelation. Though the master utilized here is the same as that used for the 2003 standard DVD re-issue of the film, this is an incredibly impressive visual presentation, and I doubt the film has ever looked better.


Encoded in 1080p and framed at 1.78:1 widescreen (slightly opened up from the 1.85:1 aspect ratio of the film's theatrical presentation), I was really surprised at how wonderfully film-like 'GoodFellas' looks. The image is incredibly stable, with little film grain even in the darkest scenes, and wonderfully smooth colors and fleshtones. Scorsese sometimes employs a slight filter effect, which gives some scenes a slightly reddish tinge, but it appears natural and clean throughout.


I was also impressed with the sense of depth and clarity to the transfer -- 'GoodFellas' looks like a new movie throughout, not over fifteen years old. Detail is top-notch, with subtle skin and fabric textures apparent, and a real sense of three-dimensionality to the picture. Blacks are rich and deep, with contrast excellent. I never would have guessed as much, but 'GoodFellas' may be one of Warner's finest HD DVD efforts yet.

Film has no resolution. If the master is in good quality and it is cleaned up a good digital copy can be made. Think of it like scanning a 35mm film slide. If the slide and scanner are of good quality and the slide has been properly maintained it can be captured digitally at far beyond 1080P. If the scanner is poor quality, the operator is unskilled, or the slide is dirty then the quality will be subpar.


Always check reviews of HD movies. Some older movies like Goodfellas (4 of 5 starts) have good reviews. Some are even better. Some movies both new and old look like garbage. The "classic" example of a poor transfer is The Fifth Element. While the SD version is considered reference quality and often used to judge a TV of DVD player the Blueray version is downright awful.


The age of the movie has no bearing on the quality of the HD DVD. Older movies will need the master to be cleaned which takes skill, time and money. Sometimes the studios skip it and try to get by with a subpar master and/or overcompress the movie, or have other technical issues that produces a poor quality.

 

[Kosty]



Quote:
Originally Posted by N.B. Forrest /forum/post/0


Are the releases of older movies on blu-ray/hd dvd just a marketing gimmick to sucker old people and continue to use old franchises as cash cows? In fact, wouldn't the source material for most older films not even be up to go up to "true hd resolutions" as the source material is so old and hd wasn't even a viable/feasible option for media until only 4/5 years ago as far as I can tell. Once again using Goodfellas as an example, I can't imagine how much better an hd copy of the movie would look over the standard def version on its own, much less upconverted to a higher resolution.



It depends on what you mean by "older". To me, "Goodfellas" is not an older film.


If you're talking about films made more than 30 years ago, which I consider older, then such a "marketing gimmick" has been an abject failure. Look at the release lists for both formats & you'll see a very low percentage of these older, or classic, films.

Bad example.


The HD DVD version of Goodfellas is a perfect example of the superiority of HD DVD over DVD upconverted.


The upconverted DVD is nice, and upconverted on a HD XA2 it looks better than broadcast HD, but the HD DVD (haven't seen the BD) is clearly superior. Texture of teh fabrics, skin tones, details on things like print and watch hands all addto a superior experience. Any one thing is subtle. In total its just better.

 

[MovieSwede]

If you shall release older films to HD(really old), I would think the ones that gone through the tecnicolor process is the ones that gonna deliver the best quality. They seem to preserve the quality of the orginal much more.

 

[Slim GoodBooty]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kosty /forum/post/0


Bad example.


The HD DVD version of Goodfellas is a perfect example of the superiority of HD DVD over DVD upconverted.


The upconverted DVD is nice, and upconverted on a HD XA2 it looks better than broadcast HD, but the HD DVD (haven't seen the BD) is clearly superior. Texture of teh fabrics, skin tones, details on things like print and watch hands all addto a superior experience. Any one thing is subtle. In total its just better.

Upconverted DVD is still DVD. I don't understand why people are so enamored by it.

 

[homerx]



Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede /forum/post/0


If you shall release older films to HD(really old), I would think the ones that gone through the tecnicolor process is the ones that gonna deliver the best quality. They seem to preserve the quality of the orginal much more.

The 1934 version of robin hood on HDDVD is a prime example of this just a amazing looking movie...

 

[ChrisWiggles]



Quote:
Originally Posted by namechamps /forum/post/0


What display doesn't upconvert everything to it's native resolution? A DVD playing on an HDTV that doesn't upconvert would be a small image in center of screen taking up about 1/6 the screen surrounded by black bars 5/6 the screen. All displays upconvert whatever they are fed to the displays native resolution.

There are many CRT's, consumer or professional, that don't. CRTs do not have a native resolution. There are many CRTs nowadays though that most all of them will upconvert to one or another resolution, usually 1080i or 540p.


It simply is not factually true to say that all displays upconvert, unless you are ignoring CRTs from the "all displays" term which is quite misleading since CRTs are widely used and remain the critical reference.