Does Your Better Half Appreciate Blu Ray?

MSALLA · January 2009

Just wondering. Has anyone had a friend come over to watch a movie that is NOT into the hobby say wether they notice a difference or not?

steveinaz · January 2009

My mom & dad just left after a visit. They did comment numerous times about how good the picture was on my HDTV. Dad was real impressed with BBC's "Galapagos" (1080i) bluray.

wingnut4772 · January 2009

steveinaz wrote: »

Bev notices on better transfers. I haven't seen a Bluray that looked worse than it's SDVD counterpart, but I have seen some movies that are barely better in quality. "Step Brothers" is a pretty poor Bluray. OTH, some movies really pop with Bluray. We watched Scooby Doo the other night, it was awesome on Blu.

Scooby Doo?! Now that's a waste of a good Blu Ray.

manman · January 2009

well... I'd imagine that people who are not into the hobby that go over to someones house who is on a forum like this one is going to be impressed even if it's NOT blu-ray, haha. Most people who aren't into this kind of stuff probably don't have huge nice TVs and sound systems, so it doesn't take a whole lot to get them impressed. My cousins came over the other day and were like, "woah, your tv looks awesome!" and it was just showing SD comcast cable, haha.

comfortablycurt · January 2009

I get the same a lot. In my opinion, my system sucks right now. With my Goldstar bookshelfs up front, and really crappy Prodynamic satellites for surround...and a little Pioneer 8" 75 watt sub. It's nothing to write home about. My friends come over though, and "woah! Your surround system kicks ****!!" When I say that I'm hoping to upgrade it soon, they ask me why I would even need to upgrade it. "But it already sounds so good!! You don't ever need to upgrade it!!" :rolleyes:

Marty913 · January 2009

manman wrote: »

It's not about the type of movie at all. Any movie CAN benefit from blu-ray, but it's more about what you mentioned about spending the money on a good transfer. It takes up into the realm of about 4k lines of resolution to get close to the level of detail film can give you- so anything from old to new movies regardless of genre can get a big advantage from blu-ray.

I think you and I agree on this. My only point was that some movies with high action content and/or fine precision movement or great length are hurt more than others with the commonly used VBR upper limits of SD (say 6Mbps, 9.8 max). They would obviously be improved to a greater extent than a stand-up comic's 90 minute routine sitting on a chair compressed to 4Mbps. Increasing that to the theoretical Bluray maximum of 40mbps will not do you much good. Even 6Mbps is probably overkill and could be easily handled with up conversion. As I said, I think we're saying the same thing.

Sorry for getting a little off-topic Darla. Yes, people do notice when they come over but I'm not so sure it's the BR. The up conversion of the current new players is pretty amazing on some standard DVDs.

MSALLA · January 2009

I also noticed that on newer TV's (1080p with high refresh rates) the difference is far grater. Bern and I were walking through the mall the other day and the Sony store had 2 1080p sets next to each other playing pirates 1 blue ray and the quality of the more expensive set was incredable. I didn't think there would be such a jump in picture quality from one 1080p to another.

wingnut4772 · January 2009

MSALLA wrote: »

I also noticed that on newer TV's (1080p with high refresh rates) the difference is far grater. Bern and I were walking through the mall the other day and the Sony store had 2 1080p sets next to each other playing pirates 1 blue ray and the quality of the more expensive set was incredable. I didn't think there would be such a jump in picture quality from one 1080p to another.

That's what I am wondering as far as the set goes. Upconverted SD DVDs do look pretty sweet on my Kuro. I can see where someone who is not in the hobby would wonder 'what's the point?'?

Upstatemax · January 2009

A 1080p set with 120hz will make a BIG difference with blu-ray...

I watched Iron Man on Blu-ray at my house (3yr old Sony 1080i) then on my fathers new Samsung LN52a750 (1080p, 120hz) and the difference was HUGE.

Much more clear, picture looks almost 3-D. :cool:

Even non-1080p sources look a lot better... The 1080i from the cable box looks much better on his set also...

Igo · January 2009

A 120Hz refresh rate will make its biggest impact when there is a lot of movement on screen. A new picture is painted 120 times a second instead of 60 times a second. Still won't do anything for the "stand up comic" mentioned earlier in this thread.

Upstatemax · January 2009

Igo wrote: »

A 120Hz refresh rate will make its biggest impact when there is a lot of movement on screen. A new picture is painted 120 times a second instead of 60 times a second. Still won't do anything for the "stand up comic" mentioned earlier in this thread.

Yup, but the higher native panel resolution will...

1080i signal is still diplayed at 1920x1080.

MSALLA · January 2009

Upstatemax wrote: »

The 1080i from the cable box looks much better on his set also...

I found that when I switched the cable box to 1080i from 720p some channels looked better but most went real grainy. Even though the detail in the picture was better, it was so grainy that it was unbearable.

Upstatemax · January 2009

MSALLA wrote: »

I found that when I switched the cable box to 1080i from 720p some channels looked better but most went real grainy. Even though the detail in the picture was better, it was so grainy that it was unbearable.

What TV?

The Samsung LN52a750 has a great picture with 1080i... There are a few programs that come up only in 720p and we found they look much worse (IMO).

It can depend on the TV... My bedroom TV (42" LG) has a much more grainy look to the picture than my Sony in the livingroom.

Marty913 · January 2009

I wonder too (for some setups) exactly what's doing the conversion (up or otherwise). For some it's the cable company and/or their box, others their receiver, and some just letting the display handle it (my current setup). Same choices usually for DVD watching - several conversion choices.

Stores use a distribution system usually so the source is usually equal. On the other hand, you occasionally see a BR player directly driving a display sitting next to a display using the "house distribution system". Guess which one looks better?

Not sure there's any right way or wrong way but I haven't found too many cable (or Sat) boxes with first class electronics. I set my HD DirecTV box to just pass everything through. Both that and my Panasonic BR are HDMI directly to the display. At least it's easier to find the culprits when the picture looks bad.

MSALLA · January 2009

Upstatemax wrote: »

What TV?

The Samsung LN52a750 has a great picture with 1080i... There are a few programs that come up only in 720p and we found they look much worse (IMO).

It can depend on the TV... My bedroom TV (42" LG) has a much more grainy look to the picture than my Sony in the livingroom.

I also have a samsung. Like I said, some channels looked amazing. But, others looked detaled but grainy. I was told by a friend who works for verizon that if the broadcast is not done for 1080i it could look worse. I'm not sure on this but it makes sense.

SEH · January 2009

Igo wrote: »

A 120Hz refresh rate will make its biggest impact when there is a lot of movement on screen. A new picture is painted 120 times a second instead of 60 times a second.

Film is shot at 24 fps, so the display will already be refreshed more often than the source was captured. What difference would it make how much movement there is frame to frame?

Done properly, 120 Hz would be 5:5 pulldown, no judder. The benefits of this would be most noticeable on long, slow pans and scrolling credits, not on extreme movement.

Done improperly (as it likely is on cheaper 120 Hz LCDs) frames will be interpolated. Since no interpolated frame will ever have the resolution of a real frame, and since they will outnumber real frames 5 to 1, the result will be a softer picture.

cheddar · January 2009

What some people may be doing, as they switch resolutions, is testing the quality of the scaler they are using. So I would imagine that this would lead to a wide variety of user experiences depending on their equipment.

When 1080p TVs were first coming out, Sharp made a 45" TV that had a native 1080p resolution LCD panel. But the electronics in the outboard connector box limited resolution to processing 1080i signals at best. So even if it got a 1080p signal, it would downconvert it, pass it through the electronics in the box, then upconvert it to 1080p to send to the monitor. But you could connect the 1080p source directly to the monitor, bypassing the box, if you didn't care about using the DTV tuner, etc. in the box.

So I was able to see the difference in quality between a native 1080p signal passed to a native 1080p panel without any of the usual electronic processing in between. The difference was phenomenal in sharpness and quality when I bypassed all the electronic processing of the box. Sharper, better colors, more detail, no more black crush in the greys. My Sharp is getting pretty old, so I would imagine that newer sets would have better processing/scaling of the picture. But when you see such dramatic shifts in picture quality when switching resolutions, it would seem like a limitation of the processing chips more than a straight difference between 1080p/1080i/720p.

Sherardp · January 2009

Mine noticed on the 126 inch screen. Also noticed the difference in PQ when I calibrated the PJ. Also noticed when I bought a new Panasonic BD player, also noticed damn near everything else I buy. But what can anyone say I'm the bread winner so I buy what I want. BD is awesome............back to the OP topic.

Igo · January 2009

Obviously TV means more to some than it does to others. LOL

parasomia · January 2009

I've had people come over and have that WOW effect. I have also had people come over that thought it was nice, but nothing amazing. Of course it always depends on the transfer.

When "The Dark Knight" hit blu ray in December I jumped on it. I loved the movie and couldn't wait to have it. I think it looks awesome and is usually my new reference disc. For everyone here that has watched it, you may know where I'm heading with this: IMAX. Yes, this is an expensive technology and yada yada the cameras are big and heavy and loud. Don't tell me though those IMAX scenes didn't make you feel all warm inside

I know there are new technologies in the work and all. but as we have seen, IMAX has some ability to work Now. I believe Nolan said he'd like to shoot his next movie in all Imax if conditions allowed for it. I believe this gives HD that amazing edge that would change peoples minds, Now. It wow'd me and I felt those scenes were stunning. Now, when I show people Blu-Ray and I show them the Imax Scenes from the Dark Knight. There is always the WOW factor.

P.S - I think there is a lot of cool potential in blu-ray live IF treated right.

janmike · January 2009

100%.

wingnut4772 · January 2009

The Imax scenes in DK were awesome. It actually made the other scenes look SD by comparison. Why is it so difficult to shoot entirely in the Imax format?

parasomia · January 2009

I know. I get depressed lol and say "what iiifffff he just did it alllll like thaaaaaaaaat".

I think the reason why its difficult is because well, cost. I can't remember numbers right now, but I know it took a lot of film to shoot very little. Also, I thought I read the IMAX cameras were over a hundred pounds which made it difficult to shoot scenes. They are also very loud I guess which makes it hard to record dialog and such.

I think that barrier is being broken though. At least I hope because it just smokes everything else right now. Besides going to an actual IMAX theater I guess.

Systems · February 2009

wingnut4772 wrote: »

I am sitting here watching an SD DVD 4:3 ratio version of Ladder 49 with the
GF and she turns and says to me, " See how good this movie looks? It's every bit as good as Blu Ray. I really don't see a difference and I would never buy a Blu Ray player ".

So, after I picked up my jaw in disbelief, here I am venting my amazement.

I am wondering how many people have this same opinion? A co-worker told me his GF says the exact same thing.

(To soften the blow though, she did sing the praises of my 60' Pioneer Kuro. )

Well, my wife won't watch anything but HD feeds and Blu Ray, since we made the switch....

Does Your Better Half Appreciate Blu Ray?

Comments