robjcooper
Well-known member
- Sep 29, 2008
- 61
- 0
- 18,540
the_lhc:Two days and 4 pages of replies later and the OP hasn't replied to a single point raised, which leads me to suggest it's a rather subtle troll, although the idea of the iPlayer being much better quality than blu-ray is total nonsense, so maybe not that subtle... The bit that really makes me think it's a troll is...harrisonaard1:The sound - steering or depth/scale - is no different. I have a good budget 7.1system (Q speakers, Pro 50 sub, Sony1200ES Amp)Yes, that's because your amp doesn't decode HD audio over HDMI, so you're listening to the same bog-standard DD/DTS soundtracks as you get on DVD, so it's going to sound the same because it IS the same. It's not blu-ray that isn't that special, it's your system.
the_lhc,
I found the following post from the OP in the hot deals section equally 'enlightening' (apart from Sly being very ugly), so perhaps your theory has more than a grain of truth in it !
Re: Rambo Collection 1-4 Blu Ray £17.99 HMV - BargainFrom a value point of view, I quite agree with matengawhat, but Rambo wasn't even filmed Digitally, never mind in HD! What do you all expect? It's still an awful film-series with a very ugly guy in it! 'High-Definition' just nails that fact right home!
the_lhc,
I found the following post from the OP in the hot deals section equally 'enlightening' (apart from Sly being very ugly), so perhaps your theory has more than a grain of truth in it !
Re: Rambo Collection 1-4 Blu Ray £17.99 HMV - BargainFrom a value point of view, I quite agree with matengawhat, but Rambo wasn't even filmed Digitally, never mind in HD! What do you all expect? It's still an awful film-series with a very ugly guy in it! 'High-Definition' just nails that fact right home!
One other benefit to Blu Rays is the removal of dreaded DVD MPEG artefacts.
Now, not all DVDs suffered but those that do, I find unwatchable. Jerry Maguire Springs to mind, terrible artefacting on dark scenes, even on an upscaled Sony S350 BD player.
Haven't seen the Blu Ray version mind, but I'd assume it can't be as badly compressed as the DVD.
Still a Good DVD, well upsampled can be good. I'd still say on average the Blu Ray is noticeably better - as you say less grainy. Maybe not as much as you'd expected, but that's hype for you.
Now, not all DVDs suffered but those that do, I find unwatchable. Jerry Maguire Springs to mind, terrible artefacting on dark scenes, even on an upscaled Sony S350 BD player.
Haven't seen the Blu Ray version mind, but I'd assume it can't be as badly compressed as the DVD.
Still a Good DVD, well upsampled can be good. I'd still say on average the Blu Ray is noticeably better - as you say less grainy. Maybe not as much as you'd expected, but that's hype for you.
maxflinn:professorhat:
For me, the question on whether to buy a Blu-ray player or a DVD player is now a moot one (i.e. if you had to buy one or the other, as opposed to upgrading). With players now easily available for under £100 and in some places, under the magic £50 price mark, it would be crazy to buy a DVD player now.
...
... I personally use a combination of review sites like High Def Digest (Google it and you'll see it), just to see their opinion on the Blu-ray transfer and Lovefilm, where I can rent the film on Blu-ray to see what I think on films I'm not sure on. If it doesn't look much better than DVD quality but it's a film you want, save yourself some money, send the studio a message that you won't accept Blu-rays of such poor standard and get yourself the DVD!
+1
For me, the question on whether to buy a Blu-ray player or a DVD player is now a moot one (i.e. if you had to buy one or the other, as opposed to upgrading). With players now easily available for under £100 and in some places, under the magic £50 price mark, it would be crazy to buy a DVD player now.
...
... I personally use a combination of review sites like High Def Digest (Google it and you'll see it), just to see their opinion on the Blu-ray transfer and Lovefilm, where I can rent the film on Blu-ray to see what I think on films I'm not sure on. If it doesn't look much better than DVD quality but it's a film you want, save yourself some money, send the studio a message that you won't accept Blu-rays of such poor standard and get yourself the DVD!
+1
I think Blue Ray is far superior especially the sound quality, that alone impressed me and I don't even have a full HD TV, when I do get round to it I will start watching my Blue Rays again.
I have a 37 inch full HD ready tv and am quite disappointed by the picture that Blue Ray gives. Upscaling of standard dvds produces an almost identical picture quality. Admittedly a 50 inch tv would produce a better picture, but who has the room in an average size house for one of these ? People have been sold a lie when it comes to the superiority of Blue Ray.
professorhat
Well-known member
- Dec 28, 2007
- 992
- 22
- 18,895
WILLDEWHURST:Admittedly a 50 inch tv would produce a better picture, but who has the room in an average size house for one of these ?
Recommended viewing distance for a 50" TV is between 5' and 7.5' (clicky). I'd say most people's living rooms could accommodate this if they wanted to.
Your ideal viewing distance for HD on your TV is 3' to 5.5' so is it possible you're not actually sitting close enough to benefit from Blu-ray?
Recommended viewing distance for a 50" TV is between 5' and 7.5' (clicky). I'd say most people's living rooms could accommodate this if they wanted to.
Your ideal viewing distance for HD on your TV is 3' to 5.5' so is it possible you're not actually sitting close enough to benefit from Blu-ray?
professorhat
Well-known member
- Dec 28, 2007
- 992
- 22
- 18,895
i have a lot of blu ray films, i have now ditched dvd in favour of blu ray.
there are some exceptions which i have mentioned on this forum in the past. one that springs to mind is war of the worlds. that was the worst transfer to blu ray ever the dvd was better quality. the blame lies with the studios doing sloppy transfers and not woth the equipment.
watch avatar, cars or star trek on blu ray and the picture quality is miles better and if you have the correct receiver and decent speakers and the sound is sent direct not lpcm then the sound is miles better than standard dolby
i saw cars on sky hd and thought that was good then i put in the blu ray and its even clearer
one point to note though on a 32inch tv the picture difference is harder to see you need at least a 40-46 inch lcd to really notice, i use a 24inch lcd (full hd) for my computer and find it hard sometimes to notice much of a difference when playing blu ray
there are some exceptions which i have mentioned on this forum in the past. one that springs to mind is war of the worlds. that was the worst transfer to blu ray ever the dvd was better quality. the blame lies with the studios doing sloppy transfers and not woth the equipment.
watch avatar, cars or star trek on blu ray and the picture quality is miles better and if you have the correct receiver and decent speakers and the sound is sent direct not lpcm then the sound is miles better than standard dolby
i saw cars on sky hd and thought that was good then i put in the blu ray and its even clearer
one point to note though on a 32inch tv the picture difference is harder to see you need at least a 40-46 inch lcd to really notice, i use a 24inch lcd (full hd) for my computer and find it hard sometimes to notice much of a difference when playing blu ray
If you really do need a 46 inch screen to see the benefit then Blu Ray may be going the way of the Dodo in 2 or 3 years time !
WILLDEWHURST:If you really do need a 46 inch screen to see the benefit then Blu Ray may be going the way of the Dodo in 2 or 3 years time !
Well nobody has said that have they.
What people are saying is that as you go larger on screen size the more apparent the benefits of Bluray become.
Well nobody has said that have they.
What people are saying is that as you go larger on screen size the more apparent the benefits of Bluray become.
nads
Well-known member
- Nov 29, 2007
- 980
- 443
- 19,570
WILLDEWHURST:If you really do need a 46 inch screen to see the benefit then Blu Ray may be going the way of the Dodo in 2 or 3 years time !
my Mother who always says the Sony LCD she bought is not as good as her B&O CRT TV untill a Blu Ray disc is on. and its only a Small Sony circa 30"
my Mother who always says the Sony LCD she bought is not as good as her B&O CRT TV untill a Blu Ray disc is on. and its only a Small Sony circa 30"
robjcooper
Well-known member
- Sep 29, 2008
- 61
- 0
- 18,540
WILLDEWHURST:If you really do need a 46 inch screen to see the benefit then Blu Ray may be going the way of the Dodo in 2 or 3 years time !
A cheaper option is perhaps a visit to Specsavers...
A cheaper option is perhaps a visit to Specsavers...
WILLDEWHURST:Blu Ray is an overhyped and overexpensive format which is only slightly better than dvd.
If you cant tell the difference its because your TV is rubbish or your eye sight. Simples.
If you cant tell the difference its because your TV is rubbish or your eye sight. Simples.
If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
professorhat
Well-known member
- Dec 28, 2007
- 992
- 22
- 18,895
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
I really don't get that.
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
- Jun 27, 2008
- 567
- 1
- 18,890
WILLDEWHURST:If you really do need a 46 inch screen to see the benefit then Blu Ray may be going the way of the Dodo in 2 or 3 years time !
The benefit can be seen even on 19" TV (which isn't even 1080p).
The benefit can be seen even on 19" TV (which isn't even 1080p).
robjcooper
Well-known member
- Sep 29, 2008
- 61
- 0
- 18,540
professorhat:
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
Don't worry prof, neither do I.
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
Don't worry prof, neither do I.
robjcooper:professorhat:
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
Don't worry prof, neither do I.
I'm afraid he's lost me as well.
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
Don't worry prof, neither do I.
I'm afraid he's lost me as well.
laserman16:robjcooper:professorhat:
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
Don't worry prof, neither do I.
I'm afraid he's lost me as well.
i think he means that becuse the benefit in picture quality from blu-rays is more noticeable on larger screens that specsavers blu-ray glasses would need to be bigger too.
makes no sense of course..
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
Don't worry prof, neither do I.
I'm afraid he's lost me as well.
i think he means that becuse the benefit in picture quality from blu-rays is more noticeable on larger screens that specsavers blu-ray glasses would need to be bigger too.
makes no sense of course..
robjcooper
Well-known member
- Sep 29, 2008
- 61
- 0
- 18,540
maxflinn:laserman16:robjcooper:professorhat:
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
Don't worry prof, neither do I.
I'm afraid he's lost me as well.
i think he means that becuse the benefit in picture quality from blu-rays is more noticeable on larger screens that specsavers blu-ray glasses would need to be bigger too.
makes no sense of course..
But as I, like I believe many spectacle wearers, solely use my eyes to watch things with, I can't see the point of buying a pair that cover my whole face !? Unless evolution means that today's new viewers can watch TV using their nose or their cheeks ! Perhaps having a cold means that you can't see the full advantage of Blu-ray !? They certainly have a low threshold of quality, as the appalling mass of wobbling blocks which passes as most of YouTube's content underlines.
WILLDEWHURST:If Specsavers had Blu Ray glasses they would probably have to cover your whole face to see the benefit -a new fashion trend !
I really don't get that.
Don't worry prof, neither do I.
I'm afraid he's lost me as well.
i think he means that becuse the benefit in picture quality from blu-rays is more noticeable on larger screens that specsavers blu-ray glasses would need to be bigger too.
makes no sense of course..
But as I, like I believe many spectacle wearers, solely use my eyes to watch things with, I can't see the point of buying a pair that cover my whole face !? Unless evolution means that today's new viewers can watch TV using their nose or their cheeks ! Perhaps having a cold means that you can't see the full advantage of Blu-ray !? They certainly have a low threshold of quality, as the appalling mass of wobbling blocks which passes as most of YouTube's content underlines.
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram