The problem with Blu-Ray is twofold:
Firstly even if your TV is HD ready it doesn't mean the picture quality, contrast ratio and frequency response is good enough to make use of Blu-Ray's potential, you can be playing an HD video and the picture won't look that different.
The second problem is that if you do have an awesome TV which accurately processes the Blu-Ray information, the quality of picture becomes unrealistically sharp. The human eye/brain unit naturally expects contrast ratios within a certain spectrum and looking at stuff which is higher than that can be uncomfortable for some. I work in visual media so I'm naturally used to seeing the differences in picture quality, but I think it's safe to say that most people would admit that Blu-Ray looks unrealistic. If you like that, cool. Personally I like to feel as immersed in a movie as possible and that means making it as easy as possible to flow into my brain and trick it into being part of that world.
IMO Blu-Ray as an entertainment medium is a bright shiny gimmick, and unfortunately it follows a trend in cinema where people are attracted to the special effects, picture quality, surround sound etc. and forget that the story they're watching is basically for retards. I like advancements in technology but I loathe the dumbing of visual media culture that seems to be outcome of such things.
Originally posted by StarrmanHD-TV is still awesome for watching THE WORLD CUP!
The problem with Blu-Ray is twofold:
Firstly even if your TV is HD ready it doesn't mean the picture quality, contrast ratio and frequency response is good enough to make use of Blu-Ray's potential, you can be playing an HD video and the picture won't look that different.
The second problem is that if you do have an awesome TV which accurately proce ...[text shortened]... but I loathe the dumbing of visual media culture that seems to be outcome of such things.
OHLEEEEOHLEOHLEOHLAAAA!!! OLEEEEEEE!!! OLAAAAAAAA!!!!
Originally posted by Starrmanlooking at the current crop of frame interpolation implementations, it seems obvious they were done by engineers without proper understanding for animation. any animator worth his salt would've instantly thrown motion blur at the interpolated frames. otherwise it'll look like the current situation, where too agressive frame interpolation makes the picture videoesque. and with interpolation off, it looks just too choppy because of the high angular speed on a big screen.
The problem with Blu-Ray is twofold:
Firstly even if your TV is HD ready it doesn't mean the picture quality, contrast ratio and frequency response is good enough to make use of Blu-Ray's potential, you can be playing an HD video and the picture won't look that different.
The second problem is that if you do have an awesome TV which accurately proce ...[text shortened]... but I loathe the dumbing of visual media culture that seems to be outcome of such things.
I'm sure they'll get it right before long, but for now the middle setting on my sony w4500 is as high as I'm willing to go.
as for the degrading content problem, I tend to disagree. imo the dumbing down was much more a side-effect of commercialisation, which happened far before the technique got good. and now the almost dying art form of cinema has finally been provided a platform to actually strike back. the truly great films will look awesome even in the privacy of your own home, and that WILL open the eyes for the movie laymen, who will realize that there are better ideas for films than robots from outer space that can transform into cars to befriend teenagers.
there will always be the transformer fans, but now the ground is more even for the kurosawas as well. which really weren't meant to be shown on a tiny tv with crap resolution, but instead huge movie theater screens.
about surround sound I totally agree. it's maybe the worst idea after 3d-glasses. I'd prefer my sound in stereo by far, as the surround is ALWAYS off, and you have to fiddle with the balance to get it right in your specific system. but when you get it right, the next movie will be mixed differently and you'll have to tweak again. with stereo you set it once properly, and it's a bullseye. no dynamics problems with explosions vs dialogue ever.
Originally posted by wormwoodI disagree entirely.
about surround sound I totally agree. it's maybe the worst idea after 3d-glasses.
Watching films and hearing them as the director intended is one of the modern joys of home cinema. Hearing sounds that obviously come from behind the camera coming out from behind you helps to immerse the viewer in the film - and without rear speakers you get these added to front channels where it makes no sense for the sound to originate.
Of course, the practice of "re-working" older films and trying to create surround sound where it isn't needed or intended is rather pointless, especially if it is done with little time and skill, and these films are perhaps better watched as they were originally intended too - be it mono, stereo or whatever.
I love hearing the excellent work done by Hollywood's best sound engineers, steering and panning sounds around you as watch films, and watching the same film without it loses something.