By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - So I watched my first Blu-ray movie tonight...

jake_the_fake1 on 10 March 2008

When I saw a blu ray movie for the first time, I instantaneously saw the difference, the image was so clean so sharp so pretty to look at, it helped that my friend has a 40inch 1080p LCD tv, but yeah their was a big difference for me.

So for comparisons sake I tried a DVD, unscaled of course, and it just wasn't as clear, it was kinda blurry, so for me right now it's blu ray all the way.

The only thing where you would not be able to tell the difference is 2D animation, but then 2D animation has no where near the detail of live action movies.



Around the Network
Mars on 10 March 2008

LMAO

the worst movie to see to judge Br vs dvd thanks to 300s gritty style, you are ignorant.

Nothing beats a Pixar movie on BR on a big ass hdtv, dvd is uber crap compared to that. That rat kicked ass.



iclim4 on 10 March 2008
jake_the_fake1 said:
When I saw a blu ray movie for the first time, I instantaneously saw the difference, the image was so clean so sharp so pretty to look at, it helped that my friend has a 40inch 1080p LCD tv, but yeah their was a big difference for me.

So for comparisons sake I tried a DVD, unscaled of course, and it just wasn't as clear, it was kinda blurry, so for me right now it's blu ray all the way.

The only thing where you would not be able to tell the difference is 2D animation, but then 2D animation has no where near the detail of live action movies.

That is false.
Try watching "The Avengers" on Blu-ray
You'll be surprise how 2D can look SO clean and sharp.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                         iclim4 - "The Friends Thread changed my life!" (Pervert Alert!)                                            Tags? 

Lone_Canis_Lupus on 10 March 2008
Entroper said:
Lone_Canis_Lupus said:

3:2 pulldown is really just framerate issues, isn't it? That doesn't mean that it's the same as 1080i. There is still the fact of only half the image being displayed at any given moment. No matter the frame, there will still be that blur in interlaced videos...1080p even in 3:2 pulldown displays the whole image on the screen at any given moment, so even with frame rate issues there won't be that blur effect from interlaced displays.


Well, obviously the display must support progressive scan. Otherwise, supporting 3:2 pulldown doesn't make sense. The point of 3:2 pulldown is to recreate full-frame, non-interlaced images from the interlaced signal when the source material is 24 fps. The display then shows the full frames all at once, not half and half. Just like it would if it were receiving a 1080p signal.


 I thought the point of 3:2 pulldown was to support 60Mhz HDTVs so the video wouldn't be moving faster than it actually should. Which is why 120Mhz TV's are good because instead of adding different amounts of frames each time so it actually plays at the right speed, you only have to add 5 frames for 24fps movies and you only have to add 4 frames for 30fps movies. So 1080p with 3:2 pulldown is still displaying all the lines on the screen...just adding a different amount of frames in certain intervals to make 24fps match 60Mhz(60fps). Or am I mistaken?



PSN: Lone_Canis_Lupus

DSLover on 10 March 2008

i have seen both blu-ray and dvd on a HD TV, i saw no benefit. Blu-ry seems so pointless to me. DVD is fine, also that man with the VHS is right.



 

 

Around the Network
Entroper on 10 March 2008
Lone_Canis_Lupus said:
Entroper said:

Well, obviously the display must support progressive scan. Otherwise, supporting 3:2 pulldown doesn't make sense. The point of 3:2 pulldown is to recreate full-frame, non-interlaced images from the interlaced signal when the source material is 24 fps. The display then shows the full frames all at once, not half and half. Just like it would if it were receiving a 1080p signal.


I thought the point of 3:2 pulldown was to support 60Mhz HDTVs so the video wouldn't be moving faster than it actually should. Which is why 120Mhz TV's are good because instead of adding different amounts of frames each time so it actually plays at the right speed, you only have to add 5 frames for 24fps movies and you only have to add 4 frames for 30fps movies. So 1080p with 3:2 pulldown is still displaying all the lines on the screen...just adding a different amount of frames in certain intervals to make 24fps match 60Mhz(60fps). Or am I mistaken?


You're right about the benefit of 120 Hz displays (72 Hz displays do the same thing, but repeat each frame 3 times instead of 5).

I guess what I'm really talking about is reverse 3:2 pulldown.  The people who author the DVD perform the 3:2 pulldown when they encode the film.  The actual DVD data is encoded in 60 fps, with the frames duplicated 3 times, then 2 times, etc. (you obviously know how that part works).  So when you play it back, there's no frame duplication that needs to be done, it just streams right off the disc.  When I said "a display that supports 3:2 pulldown" I meant that a display can reverse this process when it receives an interlaced signal, and thus display the film in progressive scan.



http://entroper.no-ip.org

Lone_Canis_Lupus on 10 March 2008
Entroper said:
Lone_Canis_Lupus said:
Entroper said:

Well, obviously the display must support progressive scan. Otherwise, supporting 3:2 pulldown doesn't make sense. The point of 3:2 pulldown is to recreate full-frame, non-interlaced images from the interlaced signal when the source material is 24 fps. The display then shows the full frames all at once, not half and half. Just like it would if it were receiving a 1080p signal.


I thought the point of 3:2 pulldown was to support 60Mhz HDTVs so the video wouldn't be moving faster than it actually should. Which is why 120Mhz TV's are good because instead of adding different amounts of frames each time so it actually plays at the right speed, you only have to add 5 frames for 24fps movies and you only have to add 4 frames for 30fps movies. So 1080p with 3:2 pulldown is still displaying all the lines on the screen...just adding a different amount of frames in certain intervals to make 24fps match 60Mhz(60fps). Or am I mistaken?


You're right about the benefit of 120 Hz displays (72 Hz displays do the same thing, but repeat each frame 3 times instead of 5).

I guess what I'm really talking about is reverse 3:2 pulldown. The people who author the DVD perform the 3:2 pulldown when they encode the film. The actual DVD data is encoded in 60 fps, with the frames duplicated 3 times, then 2 times, etc. (you obviously know how that part works). So when you play it back, there's no frame duplication that needs to be done, it just streams right off the disc. When I said "a display that supports 3:2 pulldown" I meant that a display can reverse this process when it receives an interlaced signal, and thus display the film in progressive scan.


 OH! Sorry for the confusion



PSN: Lone_Canis_Lupus

Entroper on 10 March 2008
Lone_Canis_Lupus said:

OH! Sorry for the confusion


No problem.  I should've said "reverse" the first time (though it is often listed without the word "reverse" in TV spec sheets, hence the confusion).



http://entroper.no-ip.org

akuma587 on 10 March 2008

I am dreading buying a new HDTV soon since I will have to immerse myself in research to make the right choice.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Qbanboi on 10 March 2008

:S I haven seen 300 yet, but Simpson on HD, was awesome.