Blu-Ray != Good Quality

Post by **undamned** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:54 am

So, if you haven't followed the other Blu-Ray discussion, I'll catch you up by saying that Blu-Ray can be awesome. I recently scored 5 (6-1 for a friend) Blu-Ray movies off of Amazon for <$10 a piece. I'm sure glad that's all I payed.

I was told by a friend that there were differences between the quality of BD movies. I have confirmed this myself as of yesterday. The first BD I'd seen was Black Hawk Down. Great quality. Really showed some strong detail. Following were:

Pirates of the Caribbean (original) - Wonderful. If you liked the movie at all, this is a must see on BD.
Ice Age: The Meltdown - Amazing. If all CG movies come to BD like this, I will have quite a collection of BD's!
The Last Samurai - Letdown. I wouldn't go so far as to say the conversion to BD was horrible, but it's barely better than DVD quality, imo.
March of the Penguins - Letdown had a sequel. This looks like DVD quality.
Relentless Enemies - OK. Not as bad as the above film (though both are from National Geographic), but not amazing either.
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen - Wonderful. On par with Pirates and Black Hawk Down.
Spiderman 3 - Amazing. Pirates quality.
Blade Runner - [Quality varies]. Quality ranges from sub-DVD to very sharp (Pirates quality). If you enjoy the original, this is quite a treat.

The quality is a combination of two major factors: Original film quality and production quality. Relentless Enemies is an enjoyable watch (as are most nature shows in HD) but you can see a huge difference in the film quality based on the lighting of the scene. Night scenes are horribly grainy for the simple fact that they were filmed that way. Day scenes look much cleaner, but still not the near razor sharpness of some of the newer films like Pirates.

The second factor, Production quality, can really shine in the case of older films like Blade Runner. The painstaking care they took in cleaning up the original film content for this flick is very impressive. Some scenes were beyond even what today's fancy filtering tricks are capable of fixing, but many shots are well beyond DVD quality.

In conclusion, I'd recommend subscribing to Netflix or some budget savvy rental service which will allow you to rent some BD's before you start throwing $20-$30 around for each movie just to get it on BD. I would be quite sore had I payed $27 for The Last Samurai (one of my favourite films) only to find it barely better than my DVD that I got at a pawn shop for $5.
-ud

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:02 am

nexxgen media sucks because companies are not likely to spend resources on the effort needed to do transfers of a sufficient quality for the format (even though they are doing so as of late), which doesn't help that the only people who care aren't a terribly big customer base overall

it's also a lack of education about the nexxgen media formats to the consumers, most of whom connect their HD-capable cable boxes through composite and call it a day, and i'm not even getting to consumer apathy and high cost of entry at this point

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:40 am

Practically anything by Disney is at least Pirates quality. At the moment Disney is getting top marks by reviewers.

Fox is top notch all the way, although Predator just got an average score. Latest releases like Silver Surfer are awesome.

Sony are generally excellent as you can imagine, its their format.

Warner bros use the same codecs and bitrates as the HD-DVD version to save money, well up until now as they are now BD exclusive. Might explain Last Samurai, which is on its way to me as we speak.

Lionsgate is a mixed back. Condemned and Crank were filmed using 1080p cameras, not using 35mm film. Judge for yourself if you think its good looking or not -

Crank HD capture (276.53 KB)
Crank HD capture #2 (192.74 KB)

<embedded images changed to links for those running less than 1920x1080 desktops. -inc.>

Post by **undamned** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:36 pm

Being as I can't be accused of spamming my own thread...

Fairly comprehensive Blu-Ray Review Site (you can sort movies by video quality with the pulldown menu, but I don't necessarily agree w/ all his ratings; Blade Runner and Last Samurai are certainly not 5 stars):
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/reviews_alpha.html

Half off Amazon Blu-Ray's:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html?i ... 1&plpage=1

Amazon 100 Blu-Ray Giveaway Contest:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html/? ... 1000181121

Blu-Ray Bargain Forum (must register to view):
http://forums.highdefdigest.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20

-ud

professor ganson · Post by **professor ganson** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:52 pm

Most impressive picture quality-wise that I've seen:

Planet Earth
Lost (season 3)
Casino Royale

Least impressive:

Babel (too much sunlight seems to screw up picture quality)

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:15 pm

professor ganson wrote:too much sunlight seems to screw up picture quality

Ah, so that's why Sunshine was so screwed up. Too much sunlight

UnscathedFlyingObject · Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:36 pm

Blue-Ray != Good Quality.

This either means they are either Excellent or Bad Quality. Aren't there any that are just plain old Good Quality?

Jon · Post by **Jon** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:38 pm

I want Ratatouille on bluray. Anyone seen in high def yet?

Post by **undamned** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:48 pm

nexxgen media wrote:Twiddle sucks

-ud

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:50 pm

undamned wrote:
nexxgen media wrote:Twiddle sucks
-ud

you're gay

-tiw

professor ganson · Post by **professor ganson** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:55 pm

Ceph wrote:
professor ganson wrote:too much sunlight seems to screw up picture quality
Ah, so that's why Sunshine was so screwed up. Too much sunlight

This may just be a joke, but in any case I liked the way Sunshine looked on Blu-Ray. I've seen quite a few blu-ray discs because I rent them on NetFlix, and Blu-Ray was probably average or a bit better.

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:57 pm

This reminds me of the early days of DVD, when reviewers raved about transfer this and extras that, giving great scores to some retarded big budget action flicks. Frankly, what's the point? I'm pretty sure that Transformers stinks just the same on a Blu-Ray and on a moldy, worn-out VHS.

Necronom · Post by **Necronom** » Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:58 pm

Jon wrote:I want Ratatouille on bluray. Anyone seen in high def yet?

Yes, really enjoyed it, great quality. Watched the 1080p reencode, on my PC, playback from hard drive. HDDVD, Bluray - don't need them

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:51 am

I'm looking forward to BD-R as a storage medium. One 100GB disc = 23 4.3GB DVDs; sounds pretty nifty. Too bad it's going to be a while before BD burners and discs will become affordable. I'll probably switch to BD-R as soon as the price per GB reaches 12 Euro-cents and when writers cost 150 EUR or less.

Necronom · Post by **Necronom** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:17 am

Ceph wrote:I'm looking forward to BD-R as a storage medium. One 100GB disc = 23 4.3GB DVDs; sounds pretty nifty. Too bad it's going to be a while before BD burners and discs will become affordable. I'll probably switch to BD-R as soon as the price per GB reaches 12 Euro-cents and when writers cost 150 EUR or less.

Using external hard discs is cheaper and more convenient. Burn only the most important stuff and store the rest on hd. It will take a while for BD-R to reach the same price and quality/durability level of a DVD-R. Prepare for a long waiting

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:10 am

Necronom wrote:
Ceph wrote:I'm looking forward to BD-R as a storage medium. One 100GB disc = 23 4.3GB DVDs; sounds pretty nifty. Too bad it's going to be a while before BD burners and discs will become affordable. I'll probably switch to BD-R as soon as the price per GB reaches 12 Euro-cents and when writers cost 150 EUR or less.
Using external hard discs is cheaper and more convenient. Burn only the most important stuff and store the rest on hd. It will take a while for BD-R to reach the same price and quality/durability level of a DVD-R. Prepare for a long waiting

Aren't BD-R supposed to be more durable than DVD as it is? A quick price check shows that there are already dual layer BD-R writers (50GB) for below 200 EUR now: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Blu-Ray-DVD-Write ... 0212044935

It's just that the discs are still very expensive; currently 12 EUR for one single layer BD-R (25GB). Of course that's still way too much (you could buy 20 DVD-R (=86GB) for the same price.

Valgar · Post by **Valgar** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:02 pm

Jon wrote:I want Ratatouille on bluray. Anyone seen in high def yet?

I own Ratatouille and Cars. Both are on their own level above everything else, it is absolutely orgasmic. They are considered the best looking blu-ray titles to date.

I've read Kingdom of Heaven looks great.

Nuke · Post by **Nuke** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:34 pm

Blue Ray=Good Quality=

Pirates of the Caribbean (mediocre)
Ice Age: The Meltdown (Was there really need for a second one?)
The Last Samurai (Tom Cruise plying a Samurai.... nuff said)
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (Almost as shitty as the comic it's based on is good)
Spiderman 3 (An insult to fans everywhere)

=

Post by **undamned** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:35 pm

Nuke wrote:Blue Ray=Good Quality=

Pirates of the Caribbean (mediocre)
Ice Age: The Meltdown (Was there really need for a second one?)
The Last Samurai (Tom Cruise plying a Samurai.... nuff said)
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (Almost as shitty as the comic it's based on is good)
Spiderman 3 (An insult to fans everywhere)

=

We aren't rating based on the movie content, we're talking visual quality.
-ud

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:38 pm

Naturally older stuff can't be re-filmed to take advantage of the higher quality. I don't get it.

Necronom · Post by **Necronom** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:30 pm

Neon wrote:Naturally older stuff can't be re-filmed to take advantage of the higher quality. I don't get it.

The source material of most movies, even some very old ones, is of a way higher quality/ definition than what your standard DVD player and TV screen can display. Many of the recently released older films in HD (2001, Bladerunner, Romero's Dawn of the Dead) are coming very close to the actual quality of the source material. This difference in depth and sharpness of the picture (skin textures for example, even in old stuff like Kurosawa's The Seven Samurai) can be pretty much mindblowing if you have the proper screen (1080p).
Sure a good DVD of 2001 is nice but once you saw the recently released HD version you'll never want to watch it in SD again.

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/241/2001 ... yssey.html

@Nuke:
Spiderman 3 is the best one imo. It has everything...and yes, I'm a fan of the comic books, especially McFarlane's stuff.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:53 pm

35mm and 70mm film provide in excess of 2000 and 4000 lines of data respectively. Or something like that.

For VHS, it had to be downgraded to 240 lines
For DVD, it had to be downgraded to 480 lines
For BD and HD-DVD it has to be downgraded to 1080 lines.

The only problem is, that the masters are getting older. So as resolutions double and triple, your seeing more and more shite that you don't want to see.

I watched about 20 minutes of Underworld unrated this morning, I had to change the settings on my TV to get a PQ I was happy with. Apparently this is a 5 star PQ movie. But then again we are all at the mercy of the technology we are running it on.

If your in the States get condemned or Crank as these movies are filmed with 1080p cameras. So you get zero grain, ultra bright details just like the Pixar movies, except its live.

If your loaded, get the Pioneer Kuro Plasma series of TV's. They are definitely above and beyond almost every TV out there. I had to settle for a Sony Bravia LCD. Its a great TV but it has its drawbacks, most lacking is the black levels.

So just because a review site gives 5 star ratings, please remember there is a big difference between a properly calibrated $3000 Pioneer Kuro and a Samsung $800 screen of the same size.

Post by **undamned** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:51 am

neorichieb1971 wrote:So just because a review site gives 5 star ratings, please remember there is a big difference between a properly calibrated $3000 Pioneer Kuro and a Samsung $800 screen of the same size.

undamned wrote:... I don't necessarily agree w/ all his ratings; Blade Runner and Last Samurai are certainly not 5 stars):
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/reviews_alpha.html

Also, remember that some reviewers are so enamored by watching "a good movie" they give something too high of visual ratings. The reviewer of the site I linked to goes on about how he's watched Blade Runner 50 times. I can't help but think that he's a wee bit biased (and my hands-on demo proves he is).
-ud

Necronom · Post by **Necronom** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:52 am

undamned wrote:
neorichieb1971 wrote:So just because a review site gives 5 star ratings, please remember there is a big difference between a properly calibrated $3000 Pioneer Kuro and a Samsung $800 screen of the same size.

undamned wrote:... I don't necessarily agree w/ all his ratings; Blade Runner and Last Samurai are certainly not 5 stars):
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/reviews_alpha.html
Also, remember that some reviewers are so enamored by watching "a good movie" they give something too high of visual ratings. The reviewer of the site I linked to goes on about how he's watched Blade Runner 50 times. I can't help but think that he's a wee bit biased (and my hands-on demo proves he is).
-ud

Maybe he's biased, maybe not. Fact is, Blade Runner UCE (both HDDVD and BluRay) is flawless. It really is

Asherdude · Post by **Asherdude** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:30 am

I'm totally sold on Blu-ray. Don't have a player yet, but that'll change soon enough. There's a nice little Samsung Blu-ray player for $299 that's been begging me to buy it for the past 2 weeks.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 8:59 am

Beware of Samsungs. Some discs don't play certain features and some movies just don't want to boot up.

The problem is the blu ray format isn't set in stone. There are java upgrades, PIP, split streaming, branching and other elements of the format that are in their infancy. Standalones have bad loading times as well, especially with java scripted discs.

I would just get a PS3 for that money, its wireless, you get up to date firmware often and its a damn fine player. Basically, if your going to struggle with firmware updating and stuff like that I think your in a very crappy position. Because of the cell processor in the PS3 java scripts run at lightning speed. Standalones don't have fast processors.

The only reason to get a standalone player right now is for 7.1 DTS HD MA and I wouldn't suspect many on this forum would have a set up that would take advantage of that audio track.

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:59 am

Don't forget that Blu Ray 1.1 is already out. And while PS3s can be updated, not all stand alone players can. You'll still be able to play any movie with a BD 1.0 player, but not all additional features work. So make sure not to buy a BD 1.0 player.

And by the way, there'll soon be BD 2.0, which will have more onboard flash ram and internet connectivity. Seems like it's planned for BD 2.0 to become the general BD standard.

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 11:04 am

I got Bridge to Terabithia this morning, im watching it now and I believe its the best PQ I've seen on BD so far.

Its easily up there with dead mans chest. Which was my no1 title beforehand.

Asherdude · Post by **Asherdude** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:02 pm

neorichieb1971 wrote:Beware of Samsungs. Some discs don't play certain features and some movies just don't want to boot up.

The problem is the blu ray format isn't set in stone. There are java upgrades, PIP, split streaming, branching and other elements of the format that are in their infancy. Standalones have bad loading times as well, especially with java scripted discs.

I would just get a PS3 for that money, its wireless, you get up to date firmware often and its a damn fine player. Basically, if your going to struggle with firmware updating and stuff like that I think your in a very crappy position. Because of the cell processor in the PS3 java scripts run at lightning speed. Standalones don't have fast processors.

The only reason to get a standalone player right now is for 7.1 DTS HD MA and I wouldn't suspect many on this forum would have a set up that would take advantage of that audio track.

Samsungs are getting firmware updates too. http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=586 And I have no intention of using a PS3 to play back movies. Not only does it not decode DTS-HD Master Audio, but it won't work with any universal remotes either. And why would I want a PS3 when Sony's own full fledge blu-ray player costs the same as the base PS3?

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:22 pm

If it costs the same, wouldn't you rather get a game system combined with a BD player? I wonder if there's really such a big difference between the audio types, and why wouldn't a programmable universal remote work with a PS3?