AVS Forum banner
21 - 40 of 85 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
677 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/0_70#post_23373334


I agree that blind testing would be nice; but as you point out, it's simply not practical to execute—

Also, blind people are not that good at telling the difference between different resolutions.


(though I heard they were going to release TWoK in braile)



.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,801 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadEd  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/0_100#post_23374629


Also, blind people are not that good at telling the difference between different resolutions.


(though I heard they were going to release TWoK in braile)



.



That would be bad news for Uhura
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,288 Posts
Thanks for the great set of comparisons. TWoK is also one of my favorite Star Trek movies and I think it is so mainly because it has a great villan in Khan. I always seem to really like action movies where the hero is pitted against a terrific villan.


I remember seeing TWoK in a theater in New York City when it was first released, and I also remember waiting for the next Star Trek movie to be released to figure out how they would resurrect Spock.


Now I need to get the BluRay and watch the movie again this weekend.


Cal68
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
I have the 2002 dvd two disc set and remembering seeing khan on vhs in pan and scan format. ...then bought the dvd. It looked ok for a 20 year old film. Lots of extras. It was the directors edition. I also seen khan on syfy in widescreen. Is that the 2009 remaster? Btw just saw into darkness and memories of twok come to mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
677 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/0_70#post_23375158

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadEd  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/0_100#post_23374629


Also, blind people are not that good at telling the difference between different resolutions.


(though I heard they were going to release TWoK in braile)



.



That would be bad news for Uhura

Good for the readers though!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
I'm curious if you could do a comparision with one of the cable companies on demand service. I seem to remember the OP saying he was a cord cutter but would intresting to me as I really enjoy these threads.
 

·
Photographer
I have a nice display and a good sound system
Joined
·
17,760 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by supermr2  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs#post_23385382


I'm curious if you could do a comparision with one of the cable companies on demand service. I seem to remember the OP saying he was a cord cutter but would intresting to me as I really enjoy these threads.

That would be very difficult, because I am a cord-cutter—I don't have cable service. If it's looking good for Philly sports teams this fall, I'll subscribe for a few months from September 2013 through February 2014. Comcast is my cable company. In the past I found the new-release on-demand movies on cable TV looked decent, but the back-catalog stuff was hideous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
I would have loved to see it compared to Laserdisc if only for nostalgic reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
From the DVD section of the review:
Quote:
Thanks to 24p, a clean source image, and progressive scan, the DVD looked great.

How is a DVD 24p? From my understanding, all DVDs are encoded at 480i. I know some have some additional info to assist a player in de-interlacing in order to output a better 480p picture. That is still post-processing though. I'm assuming that some sort of post-processing is being done to output the DVD in 24p? Seems this wouldn't represent the contents of the disc as accurately.


I have a PS3 and BD player, both set to 24p output, but it only affects Blu-ray, all DVDs are still output at 60hz (up to 1080p depending on what scaling im using, but still 60hz). So how is 24p improving the DVD here? What device can output a DVD at 24p?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,789 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hastor2  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs#post_23387412


I have a PS3 and BD player, both set to 24p output, but it only affects Blu-ray, all DVDs are still output at 60hz (up to 1080p depending on what scaling im using, but still 60hz). So how is 24p improving the DVD here? What device can output a DVD at 24p?

The Oppo BDP-83 can, and a few other Blu-ray and upconverting DVD players. But it's less than perfect; subtitles often break it, and some discs are mastered in a way that causes severe problems with it, so I ended up disabling it after trying it only a few times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,168 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hastor2  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs#post_23387412


From the DVD section of the review:

How is a DVD 24p? From my understanding, all DVDs are encoded at 480i. I know some have some additional info to assist a player in de-interlacing in order to output a better 480p picture. That is still post-processing though. I'm assuming that some sort of post-processing is being done to output the DVD in 24p? Seems this wouldn't represent the contents of the disc as accurately.


I have a PS3 and BD player, both set to 24p output, but it only affects Blu-ray, all DVDs are still output at 60hz (up to 1080p depending on what scaling im using, but still 60hz). So how is 24p improving the DVD here? What device can output a DVD at 24p?

Any player doing what used to be called "progressive scan" on a DVD is outputting at 24p - that's what the term means.


What is on the disk, at 60i - which is two alternating fields (odd and even) at 30 frames per second, is not a straight transfer from movie film stock, which runs not at 30 but 24 frames per second. The video transfer is deliberately time-distorted, and produces motion artifacts on screen that can be seen if you're looking for them. Ever see what looks like the teeth of a comb superimposed on the edges of a moving object? That's produced by combining odd and even fields when the object had moved in between those scans! It looks kind of like it had gone through an egg-slicer.


You don't really want to look at an accurate representation of the contents of the disk.


Since the video transfer can't be done frame-for-frame without speeding up the action, a complicated dance step called "3:2 pulldown" was devised, by which certain fields were inserted in the stream more than once to pad out the data stream to come out even over the course of a few frames. In playback, a progressive scan player tries to unscramble those eggs to reassemble the original 24 cinema frames per second.


The initial approach, which involved putting flags in the data stream to mark the beginning of each conversion sequence - for the player to follow when reversing the process - turned out to be vulnerable to edits to the data stream that made the flags incorrect, causing decoding errors. So "flag-reading" players were replaced by "cadence readers" that actually compared pairs of fields looking for identical pairs, to determine where in the dance they really were.


Nowadays, the only real source of errors is if you try to perform 24p conversion on something that wasn't shot at 24 frames per second! I assume modern video equipment can be set to 24fps, so it's largely a matter of looking for motion artifacts in panning shots - if it looks jerky, like frames are being dropped (they are, on the assumption that they're duplicates), try turning off 24p conversion and see if it looks better that way. If so, it was probably shot in 60i.


-Phil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
What! No laserdisc? For shame! My laserdisc copy of Wrath of Khan was the most played laserdisc in my entire collection (Terminator 2 being a strong second).


I had it on VHS when I was a teen, but pretty much wore that tape out. The laserdisc offered so much more detail than VHS it really showed off some of the production flaws in the space scenes. Namely the not quite invisible "box" that surrounds the models and pops around when the ship or camera moves. Empire Strikes Back had the same kind of "box" effect during the space scenes, which makes sense considering both were done by ILM around the same time period, 1980-ish.


I noticed they cleaned up the picture quality significantly for the blu-ray version. The audio still sucks though.... it was Dolby 2 channel stereo when it was released and you can only synthetically "upgrade" the sound so much.


What slays me to this day (and I watched this a couple months ago) is how well Khan holds up.... the models and special effects were terrific, the actors still looked young-ish etc.... all except for the lousy computer displays on the bridge. CRT monitors and VIC-20 graphics were barely acceptable back in 1981, and just look stupid nowadays. I think in one scene in Kirk's apartment he has a PET computer sitting on his desk. Why no one would realize that "modern" technology would look like ass 20+ years into the future is beyond me. The original Star Wars trilogy did this right and never showed any kind of real computers of the day, it was all props and such.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,789 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philnick  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/30#post_23387642


Any player doing what used to be called "progressive scan" on a DVD is outputting at 24p - that's what the term means.

Not true; most progressive scan DVD players "back in the day" output 480p60. For many reasons: (1) almost all CRTs were designed for 60Hz; (2) there was no 24Hz video standard for home use before HDMI; (3) converting DVD to 24Hz can cause issues like I described above.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,168 Posts
The Wrath of Kahn was my favorite Trek film for many years, as much for its morality lessons as its special effects. Not until First Contact did they make a film that went head-to-head with it as a total package.


I was a little miffed by the treatment of the Kobayashi Maru test in the first reboot film. As was clearly explained in The Wrath of Khan, that test was a test of character - would the cadet in the Captain's chair choose to illegally enter the Neutral Zone between Federation and Klingon space in response to the Maru's distress call, or would the cadet "play it safe" and let the Maru's crew and passengers die?


Hence the poignant question posed by Spock while dying in the warp reactor after saving the ship, in TWoK "As you know, I never took the Kobyashi Maru test myself. What do you think of my solution?"


In the 2009 film, the cadet was not given that choice - the cadet was simply ordered to rescue the Maru. That was a needless dumbing-down of that tradition.


As a result, that bit of dialog couldn't be used in the newest film, even though the noble choice had been made.


However, the new film revives the most important part of Trek's heritage - that of social commentary, redeeming it in my eyes. Not for nothing does it have Kirk be ordered to kill a terrorist - and be met with Spock's objection that they should capture him and bring him back for trial instead.


"That's not who we are" indeed.


I hope President Spock sees this film.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
I still have my Laserdisc copy of TWOK as part of a set of movies 1 to 4. I would have let you borrow it for yet another comparison.
 

·
Photographer
I have a nice display and a good sound system
Joined
·
17,760 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/30#post_23387706


Not true; most progressive scan DVD players "back in the day" output 480p60. For many reasons: (1) almost all CRTs were designed for 60Hz; (2) there was no 24Hz video standard for home use before HDMI; (3) converting DVD to 24Hz can cause issues like I described above.

DVD can store 24p movies.


From wikipedia:
Quote:
"DVDs, however, are capable of storing the native 24p frames. Every Hollywood movie is laid to disc as a 24p (actually 23.976p – see below) stream. With a progressive-scan DVD player and a progressive display, such as an HDTV, only the progressive frames are displayed and there is no conversion to an interlaced format – eliminating the appearance of any interlace or de-interlacing artifacts. When displayed on a standard NTSC TV (which only displays 60i) the DVD player will add 3:2 pulldown to the signal.

In traditional television broadcast and VHS, the video stream has 3:2 pulldown added. This material cannot be displayed progressively without the resolution loss of de-interlacing, unless the de-interlacer has accurate cadence detection."

I joined AVS in 2005 so I could learn how to use PC-based software to play back DVDs in 24p and at 854x480 resolution on my first HT projector. HD and Blu-ray followed shortly thereafter, but no question DVD was able to deliver 480/24p video.


The TWoK DVD is from 2009 and is definitely encoded in 24p. Here's the file info of the main stream:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,789 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/30#post_23388045


DVD can store 24p movies.

I didn't say otherwise. What I said is that the players output 480p60, or nowadays with upconverting players, 1080p60.


At least, three years ago when I investigated this , there were only a handful of players that could output DVD at 24p. Today there might be a few more but it's still not a common feature.


(And to be pedantic, NTSC DVD is always 480i60, but if encoded well, it's easy to extract 24p frames.)
 

·
Photographer
I have a nice display and a good sound system
Joined
·
17,760 Posts
Discussion Starter · #38 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/30#post_23388689


I didn't say otherwise. What I said is that the players output 480p60, or nowadays with upconverting players, 1080p60.


At least, three years ago when I investigated this , there were only a handful of players that could output DVD at 24p. Today there might be a few more but it's still not a common feature.


(And to be pedantic, NTSC DVD is always 480i60, but if encoded well, it's easy to extract 24p frames.)

It would appear you came to the wrong conclusion. With "enhanced for widescreen" DVDs, the film is stored at 23.976p, as the screen grab of the file info demonstrates. DVD players add the pulldown to the file to create interlaced output, when needed. If the playback device supports progressive input, there is no conversion to standard NTSC.


You are right that there were limited options in the past for extracting the highest-quality 854x480 progressive signal. That's why I switched to a HTPC, in order to achieve the maximum quality level I could squeeze out of DVD, when using an NTSC-based system. My other choice at the time was to buy an Oppo.


Just to illustrate the point, here are some frame grabs from the unprocessed VOB


DVD frame grab



DVD frame grab



DVD frame grab



DVD frame grab
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,224 Posts
Bears noting that the "silver" dvd edition inserted trims, outtakes, and alternate takes, a habit I wish Hollywood would lose. They did the same for ST VI, ruining one of the most st dramatic scenes. :-( I just watched the original crew BD set and can concur that the BDs are superb. I haven't seen V and VI look this fine in years. And... hurray... I can confirm that the BDs are the original versions, not revisionist bungles.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,789 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic  /t/1474847/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-blu-ray-vs-online-vs-dvd-vs-vhs/30#post_23388778


It would appear you came to the wrong conclusion. With "enhanced for widescreen" DVDs, the film is stored at 23.976p, as the screen grab of the file info demonstrates. DVD players add the pulldown to the file to create interlaced output, when needed. If the playback device supports progressive input, there is no conversion to standard NTSC.

See the thread I linked above for my own journey of understanding. The MPEG at 480i60 contains flags (TOP_FIELD_FIRST and REPEAT_FIRST_FIELD) instructing the player how to recreate the 60 interlaced fields; those flags can also be interpreted to recreate 24 frames. However because some DVDs are encoded poorly, the flags are not reliable, and higher-quality progressive-scan players ignore them and do their own cadence detection to find the 24 frames. The software that generated that screen grab probably looked at the beginning of the MPEG stream, recognized the flag cadence as 2-3 pulldown, and reports it as 23.976 since that's what it will output after the inverse telecine ("IVTC Film").


This has been discussed ad nauseum here on AVS over the years, so I won't go into it further. And anamorphic/"enhanced for widescreen" has nothing to do with the frame rate, only the aspect ratio.


My apologies for getting way off subject. Thanks for the detailed comparisons of the streaming formats. It continues to reaffirm my choice of Blu-ray as the gold standard.
 
21 - 40 of 85 Posts
Top