PDA

View Full Version : The best and worst of Blu-Ray quality


Pages : [1] 2

bigdaddyhorse
08-27-2009, 05:38 PM
So I finally broke down and got myself a cheap BR player. I haven't started buying discs yet, esp. since not many at the library have BR, so there's lots of good titles on the racks and short wait-lists for those not there.

My first one watched was the new Friday the 13th and I was pretty blown away. Everything was so clear, almost too clear.
Then I watched Predator, Saw 5, 28 Days Later (my lone owned so far) and Resident Evil. They all looked good, but not jaw-dropping.

Last night we watched the first Pirates of the Caribbean flick and holy fucking shit. I recall a buddy telling me how hese looked damn near 3-D, and see what he was saying. Felt like I could at any time walk into my 65" set, grab a sword, and start swashbuckling!
Then we checked out The Prestige, also amazingly clear and sharp.

So what are others opinions and facts of what you've watched?
What are the best, reference-quality discs you've seen?
What is a waste of the format?
Any where a dvd version is actually better (besides for extras or a better cut of the film)?

Marv Inc.
08-27-2009, 05:44 PM
Baraka the best looking Blu Ray ever so far everyone should have it in there collection.

indiephantom
08-27-2009, 05:55 PM
Hey Bigdaddy, glad to see you on board.

I agree that Baraka looks amazing.

I'll just mention some of the best
For catalog titles,
Dirty Harry Collection (especially love how the first two films look)
Friday the 13th- 1 to 3
Nightmare on Elm St. (Canadian)

Newer stuff:
No Country For Old Men
Casino Royale
I, Robot
Shoot 'Em Up

old-boo-radley
08-27-2009, 06:01 PM
I think Dr. No looks fan-fucking-tastic. I don't know if I've ever seen a film that old look so good.

The Chaostar
08-27-2009, 06:07 PM
bigdaddyhorse, you can't expect a film like 28 Days Later, filmed on poor resolution video, to look good on BR. Add to that that most horror movies today tend to have this "gritty / dark / docu-feel" look because, well, I am not really sure. Maybe because it adds to the atmosphere? There are the notable excpetions of course (The Descent being the most jarring one - you gotta see this on BR). So keep in mind that everything you see, most times is in accordance to the original material.

My favorites:
Baraka
Dirty Harry
Salo (BFI) - it looks just great - made the shit scene all the more disturbing
Sweeny Todd

Angelman
08-27-2009, 06:18 PM
Dark Knight. The Imax scenes are breath-taking.

bigdaddyhorse
08-27-2009, 06:39 PM
bigdaddyhorse, you can't expect a film like 28 Days Later, filmed on poor resolution video, to look good on BR. Add to that that most horror movies today tend to have this "gritty / dark / docu-feel" look because, well, I am not really sure. Maybe because it adds to the atmosphere? There are the notable excpetions of course (The Descent being the most jarring one - you gotta see this on BR). So keep in mind that everything you see, most times is in accordance to the original material.



I thought about this after buying it, but it was cheap, I had a $5 rewardzone cert. and only a dub of the real dvd, so I got it. Trying not to re-buy everything, just the important ones, starting with ones I don't have and massive upgrades (gotta find The Thing since I only have old dvd) first.
Descent will be in my collection soon, just gotta find a nice price on it.

Got Dirty Harry from library yesterday. I haven't seen this film in about 15 years and never WS so I'm looking forward to it, esp. after seeing the BR trailer on another disc.

MorallySound
08-27-2009, 07:09 PM
Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter on Blu looks phenomenal for being shot on regular 16mm on a Bolex. I find it hilarious how every review I've read for it has given it 1 or 1.5 stars out of 5 on video quality, when it can't look any better except if you projected the film print itself. How can you rate something so low when it's the best it'll look for the source format? Honestly, for a 16mm film, it looks exactly how it should look and that deserves a 5 out of 5 for video quality from me. If any of you have the DVD version, you know the quality is shit and compressed a ton (Lee Demarbre even said the DVD transfer only cost $300 because that's all the money they had left after completing the film). They were actually offered and did a hi-def remaster for the Blu, and it's well worth the upgrade if you have not picked it up!

f.ramses
08-27-2009, 07:20 PM
The Shining is probably the most incredible looking BD I've watched so far! I can't even count the number of times I thought to myself something along the lines of "Wow, this really looks great!" while watching it and it's not like I was watching it to rate the quality or anything. The same day I watched Terminator III and I found myself questioning how much better most of it looked than the upconverted DVD I watched a while ago but it really didn't look bad or anything. I think I said this somewhere else but I also agree about Salo, especially considering the fact that the last time I watched it I was watching a grainy VHS dub! Watching older movies on BD seems more satisfying than watching newer ones so far but I don't have any real complaints with anything I've seen so far.

grodd
08-27-2009, 07:34 PM
Ones to stay away from are
Evil Dead 2 (Heavy DNR) The DVD looks better in many places
Escape from NY (HD Broadcast version looks better)
The Fog (HD Broadcast version looks better)
The Terminator (Not much better than the DVD)

Ones to enjoy are
Halloween (Even with the "incorrect" color timing)
Friday the 13th part 2 (Best looking of the 3 so far)
Jason vs Freddy (Looks amazing, ultra clear)
Hot Fuzz (One of the best looking discs ever)
Shawn of the Dead
Dawn of the Dead (Both versions)

dickieduvet
08-27-2009, 07:55 PM
Big Trouble In Little China is a must, As are,

Dawn Of The Dead
Day Of The Dead
Land Of The Dead
The Thing
Carrie
The Amityville Horror
Lost Boys
The Omega Man
Planet Of The Apes Collection

Just a few of the top of my head, So many out there that look amazing :)

f.ramses
08-27-2009, 09:03 PM
One disc that kind of annoyed me was the Swedish release of Inside, the only BD release of this movie that I know of. I have my player set to HDMI Auto-Select for resolution however if you put this disc in to play it then you have to manually set it to 1080i in order for it to play back properly (disc is actually 1080i, or so I've read) because on HDMI Auto-Select when you play it you get tearing and stuttering! :/ I haven't actually watched this one, just sampled it, because since finding out how to play it I haven't had the desire to see this movie again. I was really looking forward to seeing this one in HD too but at least I have it for when I do get the urge to watch it again...

crikan
08-27-2009, 09:13 PM
The most amazing disc I've seen is the Blade Runner 5-Disc Collector's Edition (http://www.amazon.com/Runner-Five-Disc-Complete-Collectors-Blu-ray/dp/B000UBMWG4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1251403536&sr=1-2). Blade Runner is now one the most stunning visual materpeices of all-time.

Other great discs are:
Crank (Extremely Crisp)
Dr. No
Casino Royale
Live Free Die Hard

Grim
08-27-2009, 09:40 PM
28 Days Later looks like shit, but it has always looked like shit from day one. I figure the blu-ray is probably about as nice as it'll get. The last ten minutes looks really good, though, since that was done with film and not cruddy DV. The Road Warrior, Blade Runner, 2001, and The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly are absolutely stunning to look at considering their age. If you are fans of those films, I highly recommend getting them. The Fifth Element and the Kill Bill movies (especially Vol. 1) are just a joy to look at, but that's basically a given.

Katatonia
08-28-2009, 12:08 AM
Some of the best Blu-ray transfers I've seen are these, or at least significant upgrades from the DVD versions:

3:10 to Yuma
The 7th Voyage of Sinbad
Apocalypto
Assault on Precinct 13 (1976)
Beowulf
The Boys from Brazil
Bridge to Terabithia
The Descent
Fargo
From Hell
The Legend of Zorro
The Longest Day
Poltergeist
The Road Warrior
The Ruins
Run Lola Run
S. Darko: A Donnie Darko Tale (like it or hate it, it has a crystal transfer)
Sophie Scholl
Sunshine
Trading Places
X-Men Trilogy
Zodiac

As for truly terrible Blu-rays, I'm glad I cancelled this one which I had pre-ordered:
The Beast (http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews46/the_beast_blu-ray.htm)

SaviniFan
08-28-2009, 12:18 AM
Some of the best Blu-ray transfers I've seen are these, or at least significant upgrades from the DVD versions:

The 7th Voyage of Sinbad


I really love the Sinbad films and was looking forward to this blu-ray, but it really didn't seem to be that much of an upgrade from the standard DVD. I'm sure it won't get any better, but I was expecting a bit more out of the picture quality.

Katatonia
08-28-2009, 12:31 AM
I really love the Sinbad films and was looking forward to this blu-ray, but it really didn't seem to be that much of an upgrade from the standard DVD. I'm sure it won't get any better, but I was expecting a bit more out of the picture quality.

Granted, it's a 50+ year old film. However, the color grading on the old DVD's transfer always made me cringe. The colors on the Blu-ray release (and the newer DVD) looked far more natural to me. There's some comparisons over at DVD Beaver (http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDReviews42/7th_voyage_of_sinbad_blu-ray.htm). The 1.66:1 framing is also improved.

Cujo108
08-28-2009, 12:48 AM
Sunshine was the film that really got me on the Blu-ray bandwagon. Seeing it in DLP while it was in theaters, I knew I had to own it in best possible quality. Cloverfield also looks stunning. When I watched the DVD (before the film hit Blu-ray), I was distressed by how the awesome visual of the stealth bombing the creature looked way darker than what I'd seen theatrically. Thankfully, the Blu-ray rectified that problem. Doomsday, The Ruins, A Scanner Darkly and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead are a few others that stand out in my mind as being superior examples of BR product.

As far as catalogue titles go, Assault on Precinct 13 is the one that has impressed me the most so far. I was actually quite surprised by how terrific it looks. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre does as well, and they fixed the sound effects from the DVD to boot.

Grim
08-28-2009, 12:57 AM
Ones to stay away from are
Evil Dead 2 (Heavy DNR) The DVD looks better in many places
The Terminator (Not much better than the DVD)

Really? I thought Terminator looked great and ED 2, even with DNR, surpassed the DVD.

Harry Warden
08-28-2009, 01:19 AM
The Shining is probably the most incredible looking BD I've watched so far! I can't even count the number of times I thought to myself something along the lines of "Wow, this really looks great!" while watching it and it's not like I was watching it to rate the quality or anything. The same day I watched Terminator III and I found myself questioning how much better most of it looked than the upconverted DVD I watched a while ago but it really didn't look bad or anything. I think I said this somewhere else but I also agree about Salo, especially considering the fact that the last time I watched it I was watching a grainy VHS dub! Watching older movies on BD seems more satisfying than watching newer ones so far but I don't have any real complaints with anything I've seen so far.

This is the title I would have picked as well. The Shining was the first Blu-Ray I bought and it has never looked so good. It was like watching the film fo the first time. The detail, sound, depth and color is damn near flawless. I also would recommend American Psycho. Looks amazing on Blu-Ray.

Katatonia
08-28-2009, 01:25 AM
Another I'll throw out is Kickboxer

I've read several reviews that said the transfer barely looked better than the old DVD. I have to wonder if the screener copies used a different shitty transfer or what. The Blu-ray looks very sharp with rich colors, and the lossless DTS Master Audio sounds quite solid.

othervoice1
08-28-2009, 02:18 AM
I have rented and own a lot of blu-rays. These arent neccessarily my favorite ones but ones that stick out in my head from the picture. Planet Earth is amazing - really a must own for blu. For an older movie Blade Runner blew me away- almost looked like a new film. Most newer films all look great in HD but I remember Dark Knight and No Country for Old Men being really impressive. Although an early release, Nine Inch Nails in concert was pretty darn amazing too- almost as good as being there. I could go on and on but these stuck out.
I will also say I was surprised how well The Lost Boys looked- I didnt expect much at all and it was pretty solid. I just bought the Dirty Harry collection but havent watched them yet so looking forward to that. I also just bought Coraline which I hear looks amazing but havent had time to watch yet. Oh also one last one I will mention is The Corpse Bride- there are scenes that have that 3-D look and its a joy to watch in HD.

Vlachio
08-28-2009, 09:59 AM
This is the most amazing film I have ever seen on blu-ray. It totally sold me & made me buy a blu-ray player.
I can't began to describe how freaking beautiful this film looks! Everyone should have this film in they're collection!

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/4141XCHIbAL._SL500_AA240_.jpg

Best looking blu-ray's I have seen!

Coraline
The dark knight
Signs
The Reaping
Omen "4 movie collection"
Dawn of the dead
Day of the dead
Halloween
Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Watchmen
National Treasure 1 & 2
Ninth Gate
The Deep

Now for the absolute worse blu rays I have seen.

Robocop OMG this is so muddy and ooooogly horrible transfer!

Ghostbusters WTF OMG this film looks ugly as hell terrible!

Beastus
08-28-2009, 02:09 PM
BTW, it's BD, not BR (It's Blu-ray disc).

Basically, most of the latest blockbusters look fantastic. And even though some older titles may look a little more "flat", most of them look natural and pretty close to (or even better) that they did originally in theaters.

shape22
08-28-2009, 04:48 PM
Connery Bond fans shouldn't hesitate to double-dip for the first 3 films. From Russia With Love and Goldfinger also look sensational beyond even the highest possible expectations. These are movies I've seen hundreds of times. And I was astounded at how much better they look.

Based on most of the reviews, quality drops off a little with Thunderball. Can anyone personally confirm or deny that?

bigdaddyhorse
08-28-2009, 05:41 PM
So I watched Dawn of the Dead (original) last night and came away ith mixed feelings.
Yeah the lick looked fucking amazing, never seen better. But it felt like some things were wrong.

Audio cues seemed to be missing (sorry I didn't take notes to be more specific). Esp. when they were moving the trucks to block the doors, it felt like some bites and yells were either muted or gone.
The scene with Flyboy and Francine sitting looking misirable, didn't I get to see her titties originally? Here it looked like I should, like she was sitting there shirtless, but it was all darkened out. Am I tripping or thinking of another version? I swore I saw breasts before, I know I did. What gives? I can't find a thread about the BD being Fubar so maye I'm tripping.

BlackAndBlu81
08-28-2009, 05:45 PM
So I watched Dawn of the Dead (original) last night and came away ith mixed feelings.
Yeah the lick looked fucking amazing, never seen better. But it felt like some things were wrong.

Audio cues seemed to be missing (sorry I didn't take notes to be more specific). Esp. when they were moving the trucks to block the doors, it felt like some bites and yells were either muted or gone.
The scene with Flyboy and Francine sitting looking misirable, didn't I get to see her titties originally? Here it looked like I should, like she was sitting there shirtless, but it was all darkened out. Am I tripping or thinking of another version? I swore I saw breasts before, I know I did. What gives? I can't find a thread about the BD being Fubar so maye I'm tripping.

Im pretty sure the titties were in the extended version. The blu-ray is only the theatrical edition.

Grim
08-28-2009, 06:18 PM
I thought RoboCop looked great. It's a grainy film regardless, just like Total Recall and Aliens, so it's always going to look rough, but the blu-ray was a vast improvement in both detail and colors over the DVD.

Kolpitz
08-28-2009, 06:54 PM
Robocop OMG this is so muddy and ooooogly horrible transfer!

I thought RoboCop looked great. It's a grainy film regardless, just like Total Recall and Aliens, so it's always going to look rough, but the blu-ray was a vast improvement in both detail and colors over the DVD.

There were two different releases of RoboCop on BD. The first release was done by Sony, back when they were still distributing MGM titles. Simply put, it was atrocious (on par with Sony's initial release of The Fifth Element). Sony pulled the title before release but, unfortunately, a small amount of discs made it to market and were purchased. The second release was done by Fox and is a vast improvement. It still isn't going to blow anyone away but it does look superior to the DVD. I wonder if Vlachio saw the Sony release.

Ghostbusters WTF OMG this film looks ugly as hell terrible!

I've heard a few complaints about this disc but, honestly, I thought it looked fine. Once again, like Fox's RoboCop, the transfer won't blow any minds but I thought it looked good, and better than the DVD. I watched the DVD of Ghostbusters II right after and I thought the BD of the first film looked better (I never re-watched the DVD of the original).

Shlockjock81
08-28-2009, 09:02 PM
Final Fantasy VII - Advent Children looks f'n STUNNING in Blu-Ray.

Vlachio
08-30-2009, 08:36 AM
Planet Terror & Cloverfield look fucking bad ass on blu-ray!

HellRazor
08-30-2009, 04:58 PM
The 10th Anniversary edition of THE MATRIX look stunning on Blu Ray.

slappy9001
08-30-2009, 05:18 PM
Based on most of the reviews, quality drops off a little with Thunderball. Can anyone personally confirm or deny that?

Compared to the three prior Bond films, I suppose it's fair to say that THUNDERBALL drops off a bit in quality...at least in comparison to those three BD's. The fact remains that the BD of THUNDERBALL is the best the movie has ever looked. The colors especially are much more stable than the Ultimate Edition on DVD.

shape22
08-31-2009, 12:23 AM
Thanks Slappy! Much appreciated.

bigdaddyhorse
08-31-2009, 09:54 PM
So I think I found a bad one, or partially bad at least.
Watched Any Given Sunday last night and it kept having white spots/specs all over the screen every now and then. Is that what the DNR looks like, or are those compression artifacts?
It also had bad grain in a few dark scenes (not any of the stylish flashbacks/fades/etc.), while other scenes looked fucking perfect and amazing.

A true mixed bag. Maybe it's cause it's a library disc, but the playing surface looked brand new and perfect before and after watching. Anyone else have or seen this BD, and if so, is it the same thing?

The Shining was pretty amazing. Almost every shot looked like it was filmed yesterday, just a bit of grain in the opening was all I noticed.

grodd
08-31-2009, 11:15 PM
Really? I thought Terminator looked great and ED 2, even with DNR, surpassed the DVD.

A lot of it depends on which DVD you have also. Comparatively when you compare other DVD to BR transfers, Terminator didn't look that much better than the Deluxe Japanese DVD . Caps-A-Holic is a good place to compare them.
The ED 2 BR was based on the same heavy DNR transfer used by the BotD release. But the Anchor Bay DVD Tin transfer had more detail than the current transfer used. Although there are some moments early on in the movie where I like the BR. There's quite a few threads and screen shots covering transfers at AVS forums.
Here's an example of what happen to the picture. The DNR makes the people look like wax.
http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/index.php?art=full&image=5&vergleich=evil_dead_2#auswahl

Hellbilly
09-07-2009, 07:12 AM
Splinter (2008) looks amazing, and so did the 2-D version of Coraline (2009).
The Last House On The Left (2009) was a beauty to look at as well, even though there was some (I assume intended?) grain at times.

Korngold
09-07-2009, 10:57 AM
I'm surprised in mentioning some of the worse on Blu-Ray no one mentioned the image quality on the Stendhal Syndrome.

I'll even quote Rhett from his review, "Considering what a visual stylist Argento is, I had high hopes for this transfer, but the noise here is a real damper"

Vlachio
09-07-2009, 01:39 PM
Splinter (2008) looked amazing, and so did the 2-D version of Coraline (2009).

Coraline looks amazing on blu ray. :p

philxus
09-07-2009, 05:24 PM
:fire:GRACE looks horrible,so far the only blue-ray in my collection that i have complain,too graini in some parts specially indoors shoots.:mad:if anyone don`t mind those graini parts and want to trade for some other horror blu-ray just LMK!

geddylee
09-07-2009, 07:32 PM
Try Hellboy and Hellboy 2

Hellbilly
09-08-2009, 07:58 AM
Mutant Chronicles: Director's Cut looks great.
Starship Troopers 2 had a few brief but impressive moments near the end, but the rest was kind of grungy and reminded me of standard DVD quality. Or maybe that was the intended look, dunno.

Vlachio
09-08-2009, 02:09 PM
The Last Starfighter looks so damn good. I read so many negative reviews too! Don't know what shit the reviewers were smoking. I highly recommend it to all of you.

http://i25.tinypic.com/2s981l2.jpg

bigdaddyhorse
09-08-2009, 04:06 PM
While not the best BD I've seen, The Thing was truely wonderful in Hi-Def. It felt like seeing it for the first time with all the depth and color. Factor in the age and the A/V quality of the my old dvd, then think about those TV broadcasts, and it was better than I imagined possible. Most of it looked like it was shot a few days ago.

Descent lived up to the hype as well, although I swore I kept seeing specs and shit in the blacks here and there (probably dust on the disc, maybe print damage). Both were 98% perfect and that's good enough.

geeare
09-08-2009, 04:25 PM
If you're into concerts I would highly recommend The Police and The Foo Fighters live at Wembly. There is alot of grain in the Foo Fighters one but it looks really cool and the images are very sharp. SQ for both is great as well. Stay away from Halfords Live at Rock in Rio III. I am a HUGE Halford fan and waited for months for this release and I just picked it up for alot more money than I should have paid. The quality is absolute crap. I swear I have better VHS tapes at home. very dissappointing after such a long wait. Buy the DVD for half the price if you are a fan like me. Altho there may be more extras on the BD, I'm not sure.

Everyone who owns a BD player should own Planet Earth on Blu. It looks AMAZING, especially on my 120 Hz XBR.

Katatonia
09-08-2009, 11:54 PM
The Last Starfighter looks so damn good. I read so many negative reviews too! Don't know what shit the reviewers were smoking. I highly recommend it to all of you.

http://i25.tinypic.com/2s981l2.jpg

I thought it looked quite good too. Apparently the HD-DVD transfer looked pretty underwhelming.

MadmanMarz
09-09-2009, 05:18 AM
Huge fan of the BD..I have been happy with mostly everything I have seen so far with the exception of Hostel Part 2. Lots of grain and the black/dark scenes show this more than I would like. I thought this was maybe just the way the film was shot, but I saw the HD broadcast on Showtime and it looks much better than my BD.

BD discs that surprised by how good they looked are Dr. No, Goldfinger, The Ruins, I Know What You Did Last Summer and Day of the Dead.

Workshed
09-09-2009, 05:20 AM
The Last Starfighter looks so damn good. I read so many negative reviews too! Don't know what shit the reviewers were smoking. I highly recommend it to all of you.

http://i25.tinypic.com/2s981l2.jpg


damn, that is one cool cover.

Vlachio
09-09-2009, 10:22 AM
I thought it looked quite good too. Apparently the HD-DVD transfer looked pretty underwhelming.

I know it looks totally really good! I wanted to crawl into my TV. I was going to push Catherine Mary Stewart out of the way at the end. I would have loved to get on that spaceship muahaha. :rolleyes:

damn, that is one cool cover.

:eek: Yeah I'm totally tits over it too!

closetladdie
09-09-2009, 06:39 PM
The pic qualities of these 2 blu-rays are worst of the worst!!! :fuck:

closetladdie
09-09-2009, 06:41 PM
Blu-Ray quality of I Know What You Did Last Summer I & II & Urban Legend ain't that superb too.

Hellbilly
09-12-2009, 01:44 PM
Here a quick rating on the video quality of movies watched on Blu-ray this week:

Coraline 2D (2009) 10/10 - Simply breathtaking perfect
Splinter (2008) 9-10/10
The Last House on the Left (2009) 9-10/10
Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (2009) 8.5-10/10
Mutant Chronicles (2008) 8.5-9.5/10
The Grudge (2004) 8.5-9/10
Starship Troopers: Marauder (2008) 8.5-9/10
Starship Troopers: Hero of the Federation (2004) 6-8/10

Christ75
09-12-2009, 07:15 PM
The Best BR disc:

- The Godfather Troligy (Coppola Restauration)
- Hellboy II
- Blade Runner (Final Cut)
- Lost (all season)
- Dark City Director's Cut
- Coraline 2D
- Serenity
- X-Men II
- Iron man
- Poltergeist
- Young Frankenstein

The Ghostbusters Blu-ray is great. Yes is granny but this is how the film have too look.


The deceptions:
- The Good, the bad & the Ugly (the picture is really disapointing. Bad restauration, the added scene look even worst and the 5.1 sound suck.

- Dark Knight (the Imax portions look amazing but the rest could have been better)

othervoice1
09-12-2009, 07:36 PM
Blu-Ray quality of I Know What You Did Last Summer I & II & Urban Legend ain't that superb too.

Actually I Know What you Did Last Summer I thought looked really good considering it was a lower budget film that is about 12 years old. Good upgrade from the dvd quality I had previously.

Vlachio
09-13-2009, 01:38 AM
Actually I Know What you Did Last Summer I thought looked really good considering it was a lower budget film that is about 12 years old. Good upgrade from the dvd quality I had previously.

Yeah I have to confirm what your saying. The image quality is way superior and much better then the DVD.

dickieduvet
09-13-2009, 03:27 AM
Got Creepshow today, Looks amazing. PQ is loads better than the UK sp ed, Shame the extras aren't on the Blu-Ray :(

indiephantom
09-13-2009, 04:10 AM
The Last House on the Left (2009) 9-10/10


Yes! My most recent purchase and it's a solid transfer.

captain_brandon
09-16-2009, 01:37 AM
I just recently went Blu, proudly, and I'm VERY glad I did. :D The image quality on my main television set is phenomenal, most of the time, and the sound is an improvement over standard def DVD more then half the time. I'm very glad this improvement came along.

Have gotten my first few Blu-Rays from Amazon over the last three weeks, and the following look's phenomenal to me:

Romero's Day of the Dead.

Romero & King's Creepshow.

Rodriguez & Tarrantino's From Dusk Till Dawn.

RoboCop (indeed a bit towards the grainy, but again, it's how Verhooven shot it)

Ghostbusters (I've heard complaints and there chould have been more newer special features, but again, a wonderful improvement over my DVD set, and I don't mind the mild grain. Look's great in many places and sounds fine!)

The Dark Knight (aside form a fine film I also feel it's a fine 'showing off your system' disc. And yet I've heard some complaints, but I don't know why *shrugs*)

True Blood: Complete First Season (look's great as well as being the fine first part of a cult classic in the making HBO series. I have Season 2, which just had it's Season Finale this past Sunday, pre-ordered).

bigdaddyhorse
10-27-2009, 04:02 PM
Resurrecting instead of starting the "suck-ass Blu-ray thread".
I watched True Romance yesterday. I started out on the BD from the library, but after a few minutes started skipping through, watching a scene here and there (like Drexel's scenes, Oldman fucking rules in this flick) and was beyond underwhelmed. It looked so not right I took the dvd out and compared 5-6 scenes and noticed this:
The upconverted dvd looked better than the BD. It wasn't as dark (showdown at Drexel's lost so much detail due to being way too dark, same with opening Elvis rant and pie with Alabama), faces were clearer (too much DNR?) and even long shots of Detroit skyline looked identical. Colors popped more and fleshtones were more natural. What a disaster for BD!
I read reviews saying this BD was disappointing, but come on. No way should a dvd look better than a BD.
This is kinda a bummer cuz I really love this movie and was looking forward to upgrading to Hi-Def, but after what I saw yesterday with my own eyes, I think I hang on to the dvd and deal with putting in disc 2 for the extras.

On the flip side of that, blind bought Trick 'R Treat and that looks perfect.:D

Chomp
10-27-2009, 08:21 PM
Army of Darkness anyone? I bet a lot of people are put off on buying the BLU of AOD in fear of double, triple, or even quadruple dipping. But let me tell you, it is well worth the buy. And even though its not the superior Director's Cut, don't let that put you off either. It looks down right immaculate....the best I have ever seen it look.

Also watched Nightmare Before Christmas the other day...the detail in that is simply breathtaking.

From the many BLU titles that I have bought, I found that the majority of WB releases have been fairly extraordinary.

Hellbilly
11-01-2009, 08:44 AM
I finally gave in and bought Wrong Turn 3 on Blu-ray. The transfer is solid but lacking that special HD magic.
What I thought was really bad is that 20th Century Fox unleashed coming attractions before the movie presented in non-anamorphic widescreen. The Wrong Turn 2 preview is an ad for the DVD (!) in fullscreen even :eek2:

bigdaddyhorse
11-01-2009, 05:15 PM
I finally gave in and bought Wrong Turn 3 on Blu-ray. The transfer is solid but lacking that special HD magic.
What I thought was really bad is that 20th Century Fox unleashed coming attractions before the movie presented in non-anamorphic widescreen. The Wrong Turn 2 preview is an ad for the DVD (!) in fullscreen even :eek2:

Yeah, I picked up the 3-pack and part 2 looks the best of them, but still doesn't have that HD-magic most BD's do.
Even weirder, these won't play in my computer's drive. I get some error saying to update, but I am up to date and have no issue with any other disc, older or newer, just these 3 won't fucking work. Thankfully they are fine in my player.:rolleyes:

I feel skimped on from these discs. I didn't get a chance to compare them to the dvds as I sold the dvds too quick after getting the BD's. The blu is probably slightly better than upconverted standard dvds.

Katatonia
11-01-2009, 06:18 PM
Even weirder, these won't play in my computer's drive. I get some error saying to update, but I am up to date and have no issue with any other disc, older or newer, just these 3 won't fucking work. Thankfully they are fine in my player.:rolleyes:

Fox sucks about that. It's due to their overly obnoxious BD-Java protection scheme or something. Most of my Fox Blu-rays will play on my computer drive just fine with no problems, but a couple always come up with that "Update your player" bullshit no matter what you do, even with the most recently updated version of PowerDVD 9 Ultra.

Fox is also the only studio that I've had multiple defective Blu-ray discs from. So far, I've bought two Blu-rays (different movies even) which wouldn't even load or play in either my set-top player or on my computer drive. I noticed some really small "pits" near the inner ring of those two defective discs if you looked closely, very strange.

Hellbilly
11-05-2009, 09:26 PM
No surprise but Terminator 2: Judgment Day was a feast for the eyes. Bright, clean and sharp image. The dts audio kicked all sorts of butt as well.

othervoice1
11-06-2009, 03:47 AM
Well while maybe not totally deserving of the "worst" category I have a suggestion for one close to it: "House of Flying Daggers". I love this movie but the blu-ray quality wasnt a huge upgrade from the dvd which was a shame because this movie could have really shined in hi-def. I actually didnt already own the dvd and got the blu-ray for like 9 or 10 bucks so I was fine with that. I am not saying it isnt better then the dvd just it isnt a big difference. Sony should have done a better job with this great flick.

Cujo108
11-06-2009, 04:06 AM
No surprise but Terminator 2: Judgment Day was a feast for the eyes. Bright, clean and sharp image. The dts audio kicked all sorts of butt as well.

That's good to know. I've held off on grabbing it due to mixed reviews of the pic quality.

Hellbilly
11-06-2009, 07:25 AM
That's good to know. I've held off on grabbing it due to mixed reviews of the pic quality.

I thought the image quality was very very good. I didn't notice any dirt, scratches or whatnot. There was a very brief moment of hardly noticable grain. Blink and you'll miss it.

http://image.allmusic.com/00/adg/cov200/dru700/u783/u78372moere.jpg

I bought and watched the Skynet Edition. Apparently there is another release from 2007:

http://image.allmusic.com/00/adg/cov200/drt700/t783/t78353v0qph.jpg

No idea about the quality on that one though.

Hellbilly
11-30-2009, 03:47 PM
Final Destination (2000) wasn't a real stunner on Blu-ray. Solid average. I've expected more but, oh well.

Grim
11-30-2009, 03:50 PM
Final Destination (2000) wasn't a real stunner on Blu-ray. Solid average. I've expected more but, oh well.

I noticed a shit ton of DNR on Final Destination. Still, for the price I paid and when compared to the DVD, I'm satisfied.

HellRazor
12-01-2009, 12:57 AM
Another vote for THE SHINING on blu. Saw it yesterday and it was totally impressive. In particular, during the interview scene, Jack Nicholson's sport jacket practically shimmered right off the screen it was so sharp.

Katatonia
12-01-2009, 01:16 AM
Casino looks great on Blu-ray. Rich colors and a very sharp and detailed transfer.

Shannafey
12-01-2009, 01:23 AM
bigdaddyhorse, you can't expect a film like 28 Days Later, filmed on poor resolution video, to look good on BR.

28 Days Later was filmed on a Canon XL1 camera in Mini DV tape. It will never be HD resolution.

othervoice1
12-01-2009, 01:41 AM
Casino looks great on Blu-ray. Rich colors and a very sharp and detailed transfer.
I will second that!

KamuiX
12-01-2009, 02:45 AM
I'm really happy seeing so many of you guys mentioning The Shining. At another board, I was the only one saying how incredible it looked. Apparently these people aren't impressed unless a film was made in the past few years and is free of grain. The Shining is the epitome of what Blu-Ray should be. One of the best looking "films" I've seen on the format.

HellRazor
12-02-2009, 02:55 AM
Not sure what people like that are expecting. THE SHINING is almost 30 years old. All things considered it looked wonderful on Blu. A definite improvement from the DVD.

Hellbilly
12-05-2009, 08:12 PM
Just done watching Hot Fuzz and it looks amazing!

othervoice1
12-06-2009, 03:26 AM
I thought the image quality was very very good. I didn't notice any dirt, scratches or whatnot. There was a very brief moment of hardly noticable grain. Blink and you'll miss it.



I bought and watched the Skynet Edition. Apparently there is another release from 2007:



No idea about the quality on that one though.

I am pretty sure I read the quality is exactly the same as far as the video is concerned between these two versions.

Shannafey
12-06-2009, 06:17 AM
Now that I have a Blu player, this is a great thread!! Thanks guys!!

The Last Starfighter looks so damn good. I read so many negative reviews too! Don't know what shit the reviewers were smoking. I highly recommend it to all of you.

http://i25.tinypic.com/2s981l2.jpg

Just bought the DVD at Big Lots for $3 a couple of weeks back before I bought my Blu player. Might have to do an upgrade, since the DVD was so cheap anyway!

Army of Darkness anyone? I bet a lot of people are put off on buying the BLU of AOD in fear of double, triple, or even quadruple dipping. But let me tell you, it is well worth the buy. And even though its not the superior Director's Cut, don't let that put you off either. It looks down right immaculate....the best I have ever seen it look.

I actually like the theatrical cut better, but I'm very gun shy of buying this title right away!! As much as I love this film, I'll wait a bit.


Got Creepshow today, Looks amazing. PQ is loads better than the UK sp ed, Shame the extras aren't on the Blu-Ray :(

I bought the UK set and it was well worth it and the DVD looks great. I wouldn't bother with the Blu Ray unless it had the extras and/or it gets to be dirt cheap. I have 2 DVDs already and LOVE that UK set.

bigdaddyhorse
12-06-2009, 04:16 PM
I chekced Creepshow out from the library and watched a few weeks ago, fucking amazing. I'm now pissed the extras aren't there because I really want to get the BD as it looked so amazingly good. Before seeing it I was annoyed they weren't there.

satans-sadists
12-12-2009, 05:53 PM
I've never had anything to say on the High Def forum until now. We just got our first HD tv set yesterday and finally bought a Blu-Ray player. This thread looks like a good reference guide since I'm wondering what to buy now. I prefer older movies and judging by the posts on this thead, it looks like there are lots worth picking up.

The Omega Man is my only purchase thus far. It was cheap and hell, I've always loved the movie. I'm thinking The Shining will probably be next.

2D4EVER
12-12-2009, 06:36 PM
Any Kubrick movie will look great. 2001 especially.

Hellbilly
12-12-2009, 06:41 PM
20 Million Miles To Earth (1957) looks very good for its age. I watched the Ray Harryhausen approved colorized version and I must say it wasn't too shabby.
Will give the original B&W version a spin soon.

Katatonia
12-13-2009, 12:44 AM
Vertical Limit looks great on Blu-ray for a mid-90's film.

Sony have copied Lionsgate's practice and silently reissued this disc with an MPEG-4 AVC encode and a 2008 authoring date...even though this is a 2007 release. The original discs were MPEG-2, so I can't compare with how the old disc's transfer looked.

bigdaddyhorse
12-13-2009, 01:34 AM
Casino = Awesome BD

Hellbilly
12-19-2009, 06:14 AM
See No Evil (2006) looks much better than the standard DVD, and the True HD dts sound delivers.

Sam
12-19-2009, 06:27 AM
Just about all the Blue Underground flicks look great on Blu. Nice and film-like.. I really couldn't ask for more.

Shannafey
12-19-2009, 02:24 PM
I chekced Creepshow out from the library and watched a few weeks ago, fucking amazing. I'm now pissed the extras aren't there because I really want to get the BD as it looked so amazingly good. Before seeing it I was annoyed they weren't there.

That really pisses me off too! I was waiting until I got a Blu Ray to get this Disc, but when it didn't have the extras, I just went ahead and bought the UK DVD.

I've never had anything to say on the High Def forum until now. We just got our first HD tv set yesterday and finally bought a Blu-Ray player. This thread looks like a good reference guide since I'm wondering what to buy now. I prefer older movies and judging by the posts on this thead, it looks like there are lots worth picking up.

The Omega Man is my only purchase thus far. It was cheap and hell, I've always loved the movie. I'm thinking The Shining will probably be next.


How does it look? It is only $10 at Best Buy and I love the film, so I'll probably grab it myself. I watched the Road Warrior last night and other than one night scene (which looked horrible!!) the film looked amazing!


Any Kubrick movie will look great. 2001 especially.

I heard that Full Metal Jacket looks terrible!

bigdaddyhorse
12-19-2009, 08:07 PM
I heard that Full Metal Jacket looks terrible!


Not terrible, but not much improvment.
When compared to other BD's it gets worse, but it's still the best looking of any release on any format, easily.

Grim
12-19-2009, 08:43 PM
That really pisses me off too! I was waiting until I got a Blu Ray to get this Disc, but when it didn't have the extras, I just went ahead and bought the UK DVD.




How does it look? It is only $10 at Best Buy and I love the film, so I'll probably grab it myself. I watched the Road Warrior last night and other than one night scene (which looked horrible!!) the film looked amazing!




I heard that Full Metal Jacket looks terrible!

I know there were two different releases of FMJ. A barebones one right when blu and hd-dvd came out, and then an SE that was released later. I'm not sure if the transfers are different, but I have the latest release and it looks great.

HellRazor
12-19-2009, 08:51 PM
INGLORIOUS BASTERDS looks great on Blu!

bigdaddyhorse
12-20-2009, 03:18 AM
INGLORIOUS BASTERDS looks great on Blu!

Seconded.

spawningblue
12-21-2009, 03:39 PM
I know there were two different releases of FMJ. A barebones one right when blu and hd-dvd came out, and then an SE that was released later. I'm not sure if the transfers are different, but I have the latest release and it looks great.

Yeah the older barebones release looks horrible. The new one is much better apparently.

Original Blu Release
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/54/fullmetaljacket.html

New Release
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1031/fullmetaljacket_de.html

Hellbilly
12-21-2009, 08:36 PM
The Faculty (1998) looks very very good. This and From Dusk Till Dawn are probably my two favorite Blu-ray purchases this year.
Barebones, but those will do till we get fully fledged special editons (if ever).

HellRazor
12-21-2009, 10:15 PM
Watched PLANET OF THE APES (original) last night - another old classic that looks astounding in hi-def!

Anaestheus
12-21-2009, 11:05 PM
I just jumped on board with the Blu revolution, so I don't have a lot to compare. But I have to say that both "2001" and "Crank" were both eye-poppingly amazing looking and definitely stand out as excellent showpieces in my admittedly small collection.

spawningblue
12-22-2009, 04:06 PM
Watched the original Black Christmas. Definitely not one of the better transfers I've seen.

wago70
12-22-2009, 04:56 PM
I wonder how good FANGS OF THE LIVING DEAD or VAMPIRES NIGHT ORGY will look on Blu?

fceurich39
12-22-2009, 09:23 PM
Watched the original Black Christmas. Definitely not one of the better transfers I've seen.

agreed probably the worst quality blu i own or have seen thus far but still better than the dvd quality

Hellbilly
12-22-2009, 09:38 PM
Watched the original Black Christmas. Definitely not one of the better transfers I've seen.
I just watched this today and yeah, I'll have to agree about the quality.
It looked a little better when I changed the usual viewing mode on my LCD though, but not very much.

HellRazor
12-22-2009, 09:46 PM
BENEATH THE PLANET OF THE APES also looked pretty sweet on blue. Could even see the pattern weave on James Franciscus' t-shirt. It also becomes much more apparent how cheap some of the ape makeup was on the extras.

fceurich39
12-22-2009, 10:45 PM
district 9 blu-ray = amazing

Shannafey
12-23-2009, 01:00 AM
district 9 blu-ray = amazing

GOOD! I just picked it up.

Grim
12-23-2009, 04:13 AM
Black Christmas wasn't so hot, but it's the best it's ever looked, so I was satisfied.

HellRazor
12-23-2009, 10:02 PM
DEAD AND BURIED on Blu wasn't anything to get excited about. Slightly better than the DVD. But I think its a problem with the film in general, DEAD AND BURIED was always a pretty grainy movie.

Shannafey
12-24-2009, 04:51 AM
Just watched District 9 and I can also say that it was phenomenal!! Incredible picture and fantastic surround sound mix!

Regurgitate
12-24-2009, 05:52 PM
Place "Young Guns" in the category of worst. I think that it was improperly mastered and had an interlaced source. At least that's the only thing I can attribute the bizarre stair-stepping artifacts that are exhibited throughout the movie. I've seen this on two HD-DVD's as well; Enter the Dragon and Wily Wonka & the Chocolate Factory.

Katatonia
12-24-2009, 11:08 PM
Place "Young Guns" in the category of worst. I think that it was improperly mastered and had an interlaced source. At least that's the only thing I can attribute the bizarre stair-stepping artifacts that are exhibited throughout the movie. I've seen this on two HD-DVD's as well; Enter the Dragon and Wily Wonka & the Chocolate Factory.

Do you have the earlier MPEG-2 Blu-ray of Young Guns that looked like it was a badly upconverted DVD? Lionsgate silently released it with an MPEG-4 AVC upgrade, and it actually looks pretty good.

Lionsgate are really sneaky about that. They've done it with several Blu-rays.

geddylee
12-25-2009, 12:26 AM
Hellboy, Hellboy 2 and 2001 A Space Oddysey look great. Close Ecounters, A Clockwork Orange, Wrong Turn didn't look as good.

mkayers
12-25-2009, 02:26 PM
Whether you like the movie or not is up to you but House of 1,000 Corpses is an awesome transfer also. Can't wait to pick up The Shining.

Shannafey
12-25-2009, 02:50 PM
Place "Young Guns" in the category of worst. I think that it was improperly mastered and had an interlaced source. At least that's the only thing I can attribute the bizarre stair-stepping artifacts that are exhibited throughout the movie. I've seen this on two HD-DVD's as well; Enter the Dragon and Wily Wonka & the Chocolate Factory.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a class action suit against companies for this. If you release something on HD-DVD or Blu Ray, it should be high def, no question about it. Or don't bother releasing it at all! These companies screw consumers enough with multiple releases, but at least those are legit releases. When you just put a film on a high def format in Standard def that is stealing from us! When companies released crappy copies on DVD it was a different story as it wasn't just a format upgrade for quality, as it was a supposedly better and longer lasting format and it was becoming the normal format for film acquisition. There were a lot of movies that were unobtainable, so to have them, even as a poor transfer was a plus. The only reason most people are buying Blu Rays is to have an upgrade of a film they enjoy, in a superior format, so when they aren't utilizing high def transfers, it isn't an upgrade and like I stated earlier, it is stealing from the consumer plain and simple!

SickNick89
12-25-2009, 03:19 PM
The Faculty (1998) looks very very good. This and From Dusk Till Dawn are probably my two favorite Blu-ray purchases this year.
Barebones, but those will do till we get fully fledged special editons (if ever).

The Faculty is out on blu ray? Which region?

Hellbilly
12-25-2009, 03:31 PM
The Faculty is out on blu ray? Which region?
Canadian release, Region A :)

Regurgitate
12-25-2009, 04:09 PM
Do you have the earlier MPEG-2 Blu-ray of Young Guns that looked like it was a badly upconverted DVD? Lionsgate silently released it with an MPEG-4 AVC upgrade, and it actually looks pretty good.

Lionsgate are really sneaky about that. They've done it with several Blu-rays.

I have the old MPEG2 version. I guess you get what you pay for. I bought it at Wal-Mart for 9 dollars if I remember correctly. I don't think I'll be upgrading considering how it was an impulse buy due to the low price. I generally wait to read reviews for catalog titles to make sure the studio didn't take the cheap route and use an old low resolution master. Oh well, when my girlfriend and I watched the Young Guns BD she didn't notice the image quality which is all that matters because I bought it with her in mind anyway.

Regurgitate
12-25-2009, 04:11 PM
I'm surprised there hasn't been a class action suit against companies for this. If you release something on HD-DVD or Blu Ray, it should be high def, no question about it. Or don't bother releasing it at all! These companies screw consumers enough with multiple releases, but at least those are legit releases. When you just put a film on a high def format in Standard def that is stealing from us! When companies released crappy copies on DVD it was a different story as it wasn't just a format upgrade for quality, as it was a supposedly better and longer lasting format and it was becoming the normal format for film acquisition. There were a lot of movies that were unobtainable, so to have them, even as a poor transfer was a plus. The only reason most people are buying Blu Rays is to have an upgrade of a film they enjoy, in a superior format, so when they aren't utilizing high def transfers, it isn't an upgrade and like I stated earlier, it is stealing from the consumer plain and simple!

If you want to contact a lawyer I'll bring my Young Guns BD to the court hearing! :banana:

Shannafey
12-25-2009, 04:54 PM
If you want to contact a lawyer I'll bring my Young Guns BD to the court hearing! :banana:

I know what you mean! It isn't worth it, but don't you agree? It isn't like DVD, whereas it was just a new format. The only reason to release something in Blu Ray is to put it out in High Def. People aren't buying a Blu Ray player like they would a DVD player or a VHS back in the day. It isn't just a movie player, it is still a specialty player and we don't deserve movies that aren't made for the format!

bigdaddyhorse
12-28-2009, 06:00 PM
Wall Street is every bit as shitty as the reviews say it is. Just dull colors and no surround activity, fucking waste of HD. Maybe this movie was fucked to begin with, I can't recall ever thinking any format looked good. Good flick, horrid bd.

Wermode
12-29-2009, 03:18 PM
Donnie Darko looks good to me, and of course District 9 is amazing. The first one I nabbed, though, was Living Dead at the Manchester Morgue...a serious upgrade to my old AB Let Sleeping Corpses Lie.

Shannafey
12-30-2009, 12:35 AM
The first one I nabbed, though, was Living Dead at the Manchester Morgue...a serious upgrade to my old AB Let Sleeping Corpses Lie.


That much of a difference?? If so, I need to grab it, since I love that film!

Katatonia
12-30-2009, 01:26 AM
That much of a difference?? If so, I need to grab it, since I love that film!

It's definitely a huge upgrade from the old Anchor Bay DVD transfer. It's probably not as huge of an upgrade from Blue Underground's more recent 2-DVD transfer...which was a nice upgrade from the old AB disc. I believe that both the Blue Underground DVD and Blu-ray releases were struck from the same transfer.

Shannafey
12-30-2009, 04:17 AM
It's definitely a huge upgrade from the old Anchor Bay DVD transfer. It's probably not as huge of an upgrade from Blue Underground's more recent 2-DVD transfer...which was a nice upgrade from the old AB disc. I believe that both the Blue Underground DVD and Blu-ray releases were struck from the same transfer.

Awesome! I have the AB DVD, so I'll put that on my list for upgrade to Blu! I really only want to upgrade films I really like and ones that warrant the upgrade. Even if it is one of my favs, it doesn't warrant an upgrade if the transfer isn't good or if I feel they are going to come out with 20 more versions like Army of Darkness.

Wermode
12-30-2009, 06:12 AM
One more I forgot: Dark City. I had the old DVD, had not bought the recent special edition. Again, kudos to whoever did that transfer, because the BD looks great to me.

Shannafey
12-30-2009, 03:09 PM
One more I forgot: Dark City. I had the old DVD, had not bought the recent special edition. Again, kudos to whoever did that transfer, because the BD looks great to me.

That one, I did upgrade. And what an upgrade!!

It's me, Billy
12-31-2009, 06:01 PM
Watched the original Black Christmas. Definitely not one of the better transfers I've seen.

Yeah. While I certainly wouldn't call it horrible or unwatchable, it seems like it could and should look so much better. Maybe Don May can get ahold of this one. Look at the magic he worked on The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974).

baggio
01-04-2010, 04:01 PM
And the point of getting Blu-Ray is what?

I thought Blu-Ray was supposed to be awesome. The format is far from perfect. Seems like only about 75% of Blu-Rays are that much better than standard dvd. And horror films being even lower.

Again I ask, what's the point? To spend more money?

crikan
01-04-2010, 04:43 PM
And the point of getting Blu-Ray is what?

I thought Blu-Ray was supposed to be awesome. The format is far from perfect. Seems like only about 75% of Blu-Rays are that much better than standard dvd. And horror films being even lower.

Again I ask, what's the point? To spend more money?

I have over 100 blu-rays and I haven't seen any that aren't clearly better than DVD quality. Complaining that less than %100 of the blu-ray library is stellar is a bit unfair. After all, there are DVD's that are of VHS or lower quality. I find that blu-ray prices are much cheaper than DVD was before blu-ray came around as well. I'd guess that I paid less than $16 for more than %50 of the blu-rays I own. And the boxsets I own didn't cost me more than the DVd counterpart would have.

baggio
01-04-2010, 07:16 PM
After all, there are DVD's that are of VHS or lower quality. I find that blu-ray prices are much cheaper than DVD was before blu-ray came around as well. I'd guess that I paid less than $16 for more than %50 of the blu-rays I own. And the boxsets I own didn't cost me more than the DVd counterpart would have.

See this is where most people make a mistake. You can't use the dvd vs vhs as an comparison to make your point.

When DVD came out, besides quality(a small factor) it was mostly about FORMAT.

The real big reasons that DVD was supposed to be better:

DVD's never needed to be rewind. Had the ability to skip around using chapters. They never(unless extreme conditions) are meant to wear out. Take up less room to store. Ability to be in proper viewing ratios. Had the ability to contain special features, like different audio, different languages, behind the scenes material, etc...

Stuff that VHS could NEVER dream of. That was the whole point of dvd. Dvd quality was not a main reason. That came later. As it can be easily proven by the likes of special REMASTERED editions & Superbit, etc...

Blu-ray was said to be the end all to dvd. Each Blu-Ray could hold 25 GB for single layered & 50 GB for dual layered discs. Close to three times the amount of a double layed standard dvd.

They pitched Blu-ray as holding a complete tv season on ONE disc. All three Lord of the Rings on ONE disc, etc...

It could hold TONS of more content of special features.

Guess what? That never happened.

So what they did was use the whole disc for quality & audio. Except for a small percentage of movies its not that much better that than an upcoverted standard dvd. Sure there are a several movies that are outstanding like Pirates of the Caribbean. But thats a very small percetange. And then and ONLY then it depends on your TV & and your Blu-Ray player & your hook-up connections. You need everything to get the full potential of the Blu-Ray. Most people don't have that set up.


I can show you tons of reviews of films that reviewers specifically say that the movie it a slight upgrade to the dvd counterpart or on par with. Some even are worse, yes worse.

Example: I've seen in person Blu-Ray movies that look no better than my setup using an upconverting dvd player & standard dvd. To be be fair, an every so hair edge to the Blu-Ray.


And as far as price. I personally never paid more than $10 for a movie.

And $20 is my max for a tv series.

And I WILL NEVER buy a Blu-Ray version of a movie I have already. NEVER. It's just not worth it.


And you say you have about 100 Blu-ray's. Do you have those same movies on dvd to compare? (because if you don't , I don't know how one can say it's overwhelmingly better) Does the upgrade really justify you spending an additional $20 for the same movie that you already own, for such a small upgrade in quality?

It's like buying 2009 sports car , & ordering special rims than trashing it because the the new 2010 model has 30 more horsepower. But yet everything else is identical. ... And you have to buy same new rims again.

NaturesMistake
01-04-2010, 08:46 PM
I'm sort of with Baggio here. I got a blu-ray player for my b-day/Christmas and own about forty blu-rays. Most of them are only small upgrades over their dvd counterpart. However, there are a few (like Zodiac) that blow their dvd counterparts away. Every blu I own. I either have on dvd and digitally so I can compare. I will not be upgrading my whole collection, but instead, get movies I know I love.

Dave
01-04-2010, 08:54 PM
Man these blu-ray arguments remind me of myself back in the laserdisc days. Tough seeing a format you love become a second class citizen.

Look, blu-ray is better. It has higher resolution, superior sound, etc etc etc. Obviously transfers are going to be case by case and obviously some source material isn't going to show much, if any, improvement from DVD to blu.

Keep in mind most of us don't have the TV size to let blu-ray strut its stuff. I really wonder about all you guys saying you don't see much of an improvement. Do us a favor and tell us how big your TV is. "I have a 50" TV and I don't see much of an improvement." Okay, get a 100" TV and come back and let us know. Having I done this? NO. And I'm on board with 'blu-ray only showing slight improvements', but I at least know that is due to the limitations of my own equipment.

I bought into HD-DVD and blu more as an investment for the future. If I'm going to buy DVD or blu now, why not get the one that is going to last the longest? Another format may come along but from all I've read, it's unlikely to happen anytime soon, excluding blu-ray 3D. But even if it does, I've stopped with the gung-ho buying that I used to do back in the day, so I really am not too concerned either way.

Grim
01-04-2010, 09:02 PM
And I WILL NEVER buy a Blu-Ray version of a movie I have already. NEVER. It's just not worth it.


And you say you have about 100 Blu-ray's. Do you have those same movies on dvd to compare? (because if you don't , I don't know how one can say it's overwhelmingly better) Does the upgrade really justify you spending an additional $20 for the same movie that you already own, for such a small upgrade in quality?

It's like buying 2009 sports car , & ordering special rims than trashing it because the the new 2010 model has 30 more horsepower. But yet everything else is identical. ... And you have to buy same new rims again.

There are plenty of blu-rays where the quality is much better than the DVD. And about 60% of my blu-rays are upgrades from DVD's I already had so I can say I have made a fair assessment of the improvements.

Blade Runner, The Road Warrior, 2001. Shit, even The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. These are just a few that come to mind that are HUGE improvements over the DVD. Totally worth every penny. Some transfers are admittedly lackluster and not really much of an improvement, but that's a small minority if you ask me. Another thing, and I hate to put it this way, but if someone watching a blu-ray on a shitty HDTV, then the increase in quality would probably be harder to notice. We sell brands like Vizio, Element, and Proscan at my work and I cringe at how washed out and murky their picture quality is.

If people don't want to buy them then whatever, but I think a lot of these folks sticking with DVD are just trying to find reasons to not support blu-ray because of that very reason, they don't want anything to change.

People bitch and bitch about films not being like they were in theaters. Then when something is released that brings us one step closer to that experience, they bitch because they have to buy new stuff. It's lose-lose for the entertainment industry.

baggio
01-04-2010, 09:20 PM
Keep in mind most of us don't have the TV size to let blu-ray strut its stuff. I really wonder about all you guys saying you don't see much of an improvement. Do us a favor and tell us how big your TV is. "I have a 50" TV and I don't see much of an improvement." Okay, get a 100" TV and come back and let us know. Having I done this? NO. And I'm on board with 'blu-ray only showing slight improvements', but I at least know that is due to the limitations of my own equipment.


True. Take your 50" for example. To get the full benefit of 1080p , you should start sitting about 7 feet away & up a little. Anything past 13, it wouldn't matter if your 50" screen was 1080p or 720p. It would all look the same. So if your sitting 13 feet away, Blu-Ray 1080p is a waste of money, just the same as if you were sitting 5 feet & under away... waste of money.

crikan
01-04-2010, 10:02 PM
Except for a small percentage of movies its not that much better that than an upcoverted standard dvd. Sure there are a several movies that are outstanding like Pirates of the Caribbean. But thats a very small percetange.

I can show you tons of reviews of films that reviewers specifically say that the movie it a slight upgrade to the dvd counterpart or on par with. Some even are worse, yes worse.

I donít believe that for a second. You are grossly over exaggerating. I have Casino Royale on both Blu-ray and DVD. It is very easy to spot the differences on my 55Ē Sony KDS-55A2020 running 1080p from a PS3. No DVD is capable of looking like Casino Royaleís Blu-ray. I agree with the others that are theorizing that those of you who arenít impressed with blu-ray donít have setups capable of showcasing the format. If you arenít watching them on 40Ē+ TVs in 1080p than your argument doesnít matter. Be happy with DVD. But donít talk about how blu-ray stinks because you havenít fully embraced the format by upgrading to equipment that can properly showcase it.

Itís not just new movies either. Blade Runner is one the most impressive movies Iíve watched and the recent release The New York Ripper is stunning as well. In both cases they are much better than what DVD is even capable of. You can certainly cherry pick some bad releases, but that isnít a fair representation. And as I said before, if you are smart shopper you donít even need to pay a premium for blu-ray movies.

I have watched more than 50 movies on blu-ray and Iíve yet to see one that only looks as good as an up-converted DVD. And I tend to watch a lot of ďclassicsĒ.

I couldn't care less about how many movies or special features come on each disc. Video and Audio quality and not having to flip a disc is all I care about.

I have more than a couple dozen movies on both DVD and Blu-ray.

crikan
01-04-2010, 10:21 PM
Let me know which one of my blu-ray's looks no better than an up-converted blu-ray and I'll take a look.

My Blu-ray collection (http://www.horrordvds.com/vb3forum/showpost.php?p=605061&postcount=74)

I should also mention that I have rented more than handful of blu-ray's as well.

Wermode
01-04-2010, 10:47 PM
True. Take your 50" for example. To get the full benefit of 1080p , you should start sitting about 7 feet away & up a little. Anything past 13, it wouldn't matter if your 50" screen was 1080p or 720p. It would all look the same. So if your sitting 13 feet away, Blu-Ray 1080p is a waste of money, just the same as if you were sitting 5 feet & under away... waste of money.

Exactly. My setup is close enough to make 1080p worthwhile, so I paid the extra. Totally understandable to go 720p for a larger room, though. Same deal with image quality here: cost vs. benefit.

I think this issue gets complicated because many people are upgrading to big HD TV's, and suddenly some of those discs that once looked fine now look awful. A person with a smaller screen (or has not changed TV's since buying the DVD), may wonder what all the hoopla is about. Then there's upconversion, another endlessly debatable topic. The XBox 360 seems to have a decent upconvert, but I can't say for sure without a side-by-side comparison.

I'm going to have to take this Blu Ray thing on a case-by-case basis. I was content with the DVD of Dead and Buried until I blew it up to 50". On the other hand, Blue Underground's DVD release of The Crazies holds up great on the big screen. With all the cash I have sunk in my collection, a BD will have to be 1) a very good movie, 2) considerably better picture quality, and 3) a very reasonable price for me to replace a DVD.

Shannafey
01-05-2010, 01:02 AM
Everybody has valid points in this argument. DVD was a huge upgrade from VHS for many reasons, but DVD to Blu is a different scenario and as mentioned, you really need the right hardware and connections to make the difference as well as a Blu Ray mastered correctly. I always read reviews before I buy a Blu Ray for that reason. I have a lot of DVDs that look phenomenal upconverted (some are even copies) and I won't rebuy them. I've only rebought 3 films so far. Road Warrior, Hardware and Serenity. Road Warrior was a HUGE upgrade as I only had the VHS because the DVD sucked!! Hardware was a huge upgrade as I have the UK DVD. Serenity is just one of my favorite films of all time and I got a used copy for $10 so it justified the upgrade. Also, I went to one of the digital screenings of Serenity whereas they projected a Blu Ray to a movie theatre screen and it looked incredible, so I was sold. Any new films that come out are priced around the same as a DVD, so I'm going to go for Blu. Likewise, I haven't paid much more than $3-5 for DVDs in the past few years at Big Lots and Pawn Shops, so I will still be buying a ton of DVDs! Unless it is worth paying full price for the Blu version, I'll be happy with DVD. In the past year, there have been a bunch of films released that I didn't buy specifically because I knew I'd get a Blu Ray player soon enough, like Watchmen, Dark Knight and Star Trek to name a few. I'm glad I waited for those!! Dark Knight is AMAZING on Blu!

2D4EVER
01-05-2010, 01:04 AM
Well that is the good thing about today. Blu rays have dropped dramatically in price from their debut. Lots of new releases are only a few bucks more than their dvd counterparts and there are many older releases that are $10-$15. Even movies that weren't given lots of care and attention look markedly better on blu ray than dvd (this includes color, resolution, and less artifacting due to less compression) such as King of New York.

Katatonia
01-05-2010, 02:08 AM
Well that is the good thing about today. Blu rays have dropped dramatically in price from their debut. Lots of new releases are only a few bucks more than their dvd counterparts and there are many older releases that are $10-$15. Even movies that weren't given lots of care and attention look markedly better on blu ray than dvd (this includes color, resolution, and less artifacting due to less compression) such as King of New York.

You can even find a lot of Blu-rays for $7.50 now on Amazon. Blu-rays are also more than simply a visual upgrade. The audio is usually (not always, depending on the studio) lossless or uncompressed, and easily blows away the puny compression rates of DVD.

If you have a poor set-up or a small HDTV, you're likely not going to see a huge benefit from Blu-ray. If you buy cheap hardware, don't always expect to see theatrical quality.

I also look at many DVD's now and notice the terrible compression artifacts. You almost never see that on Blu-rays with the newer VC1 or AVC encoding.

Is every Blu-ray going to look like absolutely reference quality? No, that's wishful thinking due to the source materials for many films. But a good majority of Blu-rays are a VAST improvement over their DVD counterparts. I've even seen several Blu-rays of films that are 50-75 years old and they look stunning. I own well over 200 Blu-rays now, and many I had previously owned on DVD. I can honestly say that all of them look superior in HD.

DVD is an outdated and declining technology now, period. If a Blu-ray comes out for a new film now, I don't even mess with the lesser DVD release. What's the point?

If you like the quality of your DVD's for older films, then keep them by all means. I'm certainly not going to rebuy every film in my collection either.

HellRazor
01-05-2010, 02:26 AM
Why is this even an arguement? Blu Ray is clearly superior to DVD, its a fact. That's like trying to say VHS is better than DVD - even if that's what you think, it is an opinion not substantiated by fact.

The only way a blu ray could be worse than a DVD of the same film is if they used a better source transfer on the DVD - and even then that would have nothing to do with the technology itself. Even playing a DVD on a Blu Ray is an improvement due to the upconversion.

More space = better resolution = improved video and audio quality. What's to debate about this?

Hellbilly
01-05-2010, 02:58 AM
These figures are based on picture quality ratings (5.0 the highest rating) of movies on Blu-ray and DVDs reviewed at DVDTalk.com. The numbers speak for themselves ;)

Blu-ray

5.0 (6.4%)
4.5 (15.1%)
4.0 (33.3%)

DVD

5.0 (1.6%)
4.5 (6.6%)
4.0 (23.1%)

Sort of interesting I think.

Katatonia
01-05-2010, 03:10 AM
More space = better resolution = improved video and audio quality. What's to debate about this?

Exactly, there should be no debate. DVD is the horse always in last place, and it seems people are often playing devil's advocate in favor of a clearly inferior technology.

Kolpitz
01-05-2010, 04:00 AM
Blu-ray was said to be the end all to dvd. Each Blu-Ray could hold 25 GB for single layered & 50 GB for dual layered discs. Close to three times the amount of a double layed standard dvd.

They pitched Blu-ray as holding a complete tv season on ONE disc. All three Lord of the Rings on ONE disc, etc...

It could hold TONS of more content of special features.

Guess what? That never happened.

So what they did was use the whole disc for quality & audio. Except for a small percentage of movies its not that much better that than an upcoverted standard dvd. Sure there are a several movies that are outstanding like Pirates of the Caribbean. But thats a very small percetange. And then and ONLY then it depends on your TV & and your Blu-Ray player & your hook-up connections. You need everything to get the full potential of the Blu-Ray. Most people don't have that set up.


This argument always makes me laugh. I remember in the thread where we arguing whether or not the lack of special features on some Blu-rays bothered us, and this kept coming up. "I don't understand why Blu-rays are lacking special features when they can store so much more than DVD." This is true, although the majority of BDs that are missing special features are single layer 25GB discs, which is a little less than 3 times the space of a DVD. A Blu-ray transfer takes 2.5 - 3 times the space of a DVD transfer, give or take depending on quality. So, yes, BD can store up to 5.5 times the data as a DVD, but the HD transfer takes up a good 2/3 or so of that space. So, if you really wanted to, you could fit a season of TV on one BD or the Lord of the Rings trilogy on one disc but it wouldn't be in HD. So, what's the point? Why invest in a new format just to get 480P again but on less discs? And arguing that the majority of BDs look the same as upconverted DVDs is asinine. Out of the 250+ BDs that I own, I can only think of 3 (Donnie Darko, The Silence of the Lambs and Unbreakable) that didn't completely and totally blow their DVD counterparts away. And, even if Donnie Darko suffers quality-wise, it includes both cuts of the film (so there's your BD that holds more than the DVD).

Paff
01-05-2010, 06:28 AM
More importantly, when you switch to BR (Yeah, I call it that. So what? You wanna make something of it?), it's not like you have to give up on DVD. Your BluRay player will still play your old DVDs. If you think the DVD of a certain movie looks better, then just friggin hold on to it. No law saying you gotta replace it with BR. But when you're at the video store, or if a BR disc has more features than the DVD, then you have that option as well. Being capable of all formats is always the best bet.

baggio
01-05-2010, 03:33 PM
Let me know which one of my blu-ray's looks no better than an up-converted blu-ray and I'll take a look.

My Blu-ray collection (http://www.horrordvds.com/vb3forum/showpost.php?p=605061&postcount=74)

I should also mention that I have rented more than handful of blu-ray's as well.

Let's see, for a quick look. These movies are a slight improvement over the original.

Commando
Days Of Thunder
Friday the 13th Part 2
Point Break
Predator 2
Tomb Raider

My Bloody Valentine 3D (sure it looks crisp, but it made the film look awfully cheap) Clear example of how Blu-Ray can ruin a film.

As for the others in the list, what you have there are Blu-Rays that are considered to be a big improvement over standard and are considered to be on the high end. Not judging those picks, there good, but your list consists of mostly very good Blu-Ray transfers.


P.S. - I have a little problem with "your argument doesnít matter" line. What kind of thing is that to say to somebody?

baggio
01-05-2010, 04:06 PM
Is every Blu-ray going to look like absolutely reference quality? No, that's wishful thinking due to the source materials for many films. But a good majority of Blu-rays are a VAST improvement over their DVD counterparts. I've even seen several Blu-rays of films that are 50-75 years old and they look stunning. I own well over 200 Blu-rays now, and many I had previously owned on DVD. I can honestly say that all of them look superior in HD.

DVD is an outdated and declining technology now, period. If a Blu-ray comes out for a new film now, I don't even mess with the lesser DVD release. What's the point?

If you like the quality of your DVD's for older films, then keep them by all means. I'm certainly not going to rebuy every film in my collection either.

I'm not sure I understand. I'm sure not many of you here are going to take a chance & buy expensive Blu-Ray's unless you REALLY want the film. I'm sure you guys would wait until they were lower in price.

For example I'm not one to buy a new release for $16 let alone $26 for a Blu-Ray. I don't care how much I wanted it.

So it seems like Blu-Ray owners are mostly re buying films they have already. Didn't we go through this 14 years ago? I could see it then, the upgrades (explained before in my earlier post) were understandable.

baggio
01-05-2010, 04:41 PM
So, if you really wanted to, you could fit a season of TV on one BD or the Lord of the Rings trilogy on one disc but it wouldn't be in HD. So, what's the point? Why invest in a new format just to get 480P again but on less discs? And arguing that the majority of BDs look the same as upconverted DVDs is asinine.

Why laugh? That was one of the main pitch points of Blu-Ray.



Out of the 250+ BDs that I own

Even at $10 a pop (which I GUARANTEE) you spent more. That's at least $2500 (not including the "+" ) on films many of which , I'm guessing you owned already on standard dvd. Plus you own about 10% of the entire Blu-Ray library. :eek:

Hey, if you got the money, you got the money, god-bless. I have the cash, but choose not to spend it that way.

spawningblue
01-05-2010, 04:50 PM
If you are sticking to DVD you have to realize it is slowly dying and Blu Ray is the new thing, end of story.

Trick 'r Treat - DVD is missing almost all of the extras including commentary, deleted scenes, making of, ect.

Terminator Salvation - DVD missing Director's Cut and ALL the extras! Yes there is a limited store exclusive that includes the extra cut and some of the extras but still.

2012 - DVD will only be a 1 disc version with an alternate ending, the extra disc with hours of extras will be Blu exclusive

Those are just a few examples to show that they are giving up on DVD to push Blu Ray and mark my words this will continue until DVDs are extra less. That and every new release on Blu Ray has atleast 1 exclusive extra.

Anybody that hasn't jumped on yet is just wasting their money as you don't need to replace your old DVDs but you should definitely be purchasing your newer releases on Blu Ray, especially considering they are usually the same price or cheaper.

And yes, a lot of the Blu Ray releases in the first year were very lacking. Picture wasn't as stunning as the releases coming out now, and they were missing a lot of extras, but that has pretty much stopped now. Some releases leave off their marketing galleries which pisses me off a bit, but other then that Blu Rays include everything their DVDs plus more.

So Blu Rays have superior picture, audio, and extras, why continue to buy DVDs unless you just don't care very much about movies?

My advice to everyone that is sticking with DVDs, don't be stupid! Buy a Blu Ray player now as they can be found for under a $100. You can still watch all your old DVDs, no one is forcing you to upgrade them unless you really want to. Your DVDs will look better in the Blu Ray machine as it upconverts them, and you can buy all your newer purchases on Blu Ray with the better picture, sound and extras and save you from re buying them later. I only have a 32 inch TV and a DTS surround system, so the difference is only slightly noticeable to me, but at least when I do one day upgrade I won't have to rebuy Watchmen or Star Trek or Terminator Salvation, ect. over again.

I really don't get why there is even an argument here. And lately Blu's have been cheaper then their DVD counterparts, so you will make back the money you spent on the Blu Ray machine in no time.

baggio
01-05-2010, 05:08 PM
If you are sticking to DVD you have to realize it is slowly dying and Blu Ray is the new thing, end of story.

Trick 'r Treat - DVD is missing almost all of the extras including commentary, deleted scenes, making of, ect.

Terminator Salvation - DVD missing Director's Cut and ALL the extras! Yes there is a limited store exclusive that includes the extra cut and some of the extras but still.

2012 - DVD will only be a 1 disc version with an alternate ending, the extra disc with hours of extras will be Blu exclusive

Those are just a few examples to show that they are giving up on DVD to push Blu Ray and mark my words this will continue until DVDs are extra less. That and every new release on Blu Ray has atleast 1 exclusive extra.

Anybody that hasn't jumped on yet is just wasting their money as you don't need to replace your old DVDs but you should definitely be purchasing your newer releases on Blu Ray, especially considering they are usually the same price or cheaper.

And yes, a lot of the Blu Ray releases in the first year were very lacking. Picture wasn't as stunning as the releases coming out now, and they were missing a lot of extras, but that has pretty much stopped now. Some releases leave off their marketing galleries which pisses me off a bit, but other then that Blu Rays include everything their DVDs plus more.

So Blu Rays have superior picture, audio, and extras, why continue to buy DVDs unless you just don't care very much about movies?

My advice to everyone that is sticking with DVDs, don't be stupid! Buy a Blu Ray player now as they can be found for under a $100. You can still watch all your old DVDs, no one is forcing you to upgrade them unless you really want to. Your DVDs will look better in the Blu Ray machine as it upconverts them, and you can buy all your newer purchases on Blu Ray with the better picture, sound and extras and save you from re buying them later. I only have a 32 inch TV and a DTS surround system, so the difference is only slightly noticeable to me, but at least when I do one day upgrade I won't have to rebuy Watchmen or Star Trek or Terminator Salvation, ect. over again.

I really don't get why there is even an argument here. And lately Blu's have been cheaper then their DVD counterparts, so you will make back the money you spent on the Blu Ray machine in no time.



And as far as those 3 film examples you gave. For you, but me those are 3 movies I wouldn't buy even for standard dvd for under $5. Well maybe...maybe Trick 'r Treat.

And I'm not buying some crap Blu-ray player for under $100. That doesn't fly with me. There is a real reason why its under $100. And NOT the good reason to rush out and buy one. Nothing in my setup is garbage & I'm certainly not going to start (when & If I move to Blu) with some cheap Blu-Ray player.

spawningblue
01-05-2010, 05:26 PM
And as far as those 3 film examples you gave. For you, but me those are 3 movies I wouldn't buy even for standard dvd for under $5. Well maybe...maybe Trick 'r Treat.

And I'm not buying some crap Blu-ray player for under $100. That doesn't fly with me. There is a real reason why its under $100. And NOT the good reason to rush out and buy one. Nothing in my setup is garbage & I'm certainly not going to start (when & If I move to Blu) with some cheap Blu-Ray player.

That's just three examples, but just about every new release has something extra on Blu Ray. Do you like Wizard of Oz? Even that Blu Ray had an extra 3 hour documentary. The reason I showed those are they are newer releases and it shows that they are starting to not even bother with DVDs anymore to push Blu Ray. Take my word, this trend will continue.

As for the cheap Blu Ray player, fair enough, although even Sony Blu players can be found for $150 I believe. And it makes no sense that you refuse to spend a $100 on an inferior player, yet you probably spend much more on inferior DVDs every month.

I guess to each their own but you should at least start buying new movies on Blu Ray and save yourself lots of cash in the long run.

baggio
01-05-2010, 05:33 PM
That's just three examples, but just about every new release has something extra on Blu Ray. Do you like Wizard of Oz? Even that Blu Ray had an extra 3 hour documentary. The reason I showed those are they are newer releases and it shows that they are starting to not even bother with DVDs anymore to push Blu Ray. Take my word, this trend will continue.

As for the cheap Blu Ray player, fair enough, although even Sony Blu players can be found for $150 I believe. And it makes no sense that you refuse to spend a $100 on an inferior player, yet you probably spend much more on inferior DVDs every month.

I guess to each their own but you should at least start buying new movies on Blu Ray and save yourself lots of cash in the long run.

I really stopped buying dvd's a while ago. Only on rare occasions, I buy a new release. I usually only buy dvd's that will NEVER see the Blu-Ray light of day. I'm more of a big netflix renter & "downloader"

Also:

Also what about the next format? I'll bet anything the next format will be some sort of "cards". No moving parts. Right now I can take a Blu-Ray and rip it perfectly and put it on a flash drive the size of a stick of gum. No moving parts & play it on a HD TV player (no moving parts) the size of a less than a cigar box in full 1080p. And when I said "right now" , I wasn't talking theoretically, I mean't I've done it.

Trust me, it could be done. The "key" is NO moving parts in the next format.

spawningblue
01-05-2010, 05:58 PM
I really stopped buying dvd's a while ago. Only on rare occasions, I buy a new release. I usually only buy dvd's that will NEVER see the Blu-Ray light of day. I'm more of a big netflix renter & "downloader"

Also:

Also what about the next format? I'll bet anything the next format will be some sort of "cards". No moving parts. Right now I can take a Blu-Ray and rip it perfectly and put it on a flash drive the size of a stick of gum. No moving parts & play it on a HD TV player (no moving parts) the size of a less than a cigar box in full 1080p. And when I said "right now" , I wasn't talking theoretically, I mean't I've done it.

Trust me, it could be done. The "key" is NO moving parts in the next format.

If you don't buy movies that I understand holding off until you have a better set up, but for those that buy a lot of movies every month it really makes sense in the long run to switch over.

As for the next format, there will ALWAYS be a next format, but I'm betting Blu Ray will be here to stay for quite some time. The movie companies have put too much money behind it to let it fail any time soon. And I seriously doubt they will release a new format just to play movies off USB cards as it would be pointless for them. If they were going to release another format it probably would have been with the new home 3D, but instead they decided to just release the new 3D format on Blu Ray. I doubt anyone would be stupid enough to try to create another format war just to make the format smaller and with less moving parts.

It's pretty much guaranteed that the next format will be downloads, which is still probably a couple years away, and even then I'm betting the two will coexist for many many years after that. It will be like Itunes and CDs. CD sales may have died down quite a bit the last few years, but they still sell a lot as well. There are always going to be a large group of people that want to hold the product in their hand, that want to have something for their money.

Anaestheus
01-05-2010, 06:38 PM
I can certainly understand anyone holding out on BD conversion for financial reasons. But, for me at least, that seemed a silly idea in the long run. I accept that BD is the new distribution format and that at some point over the next couple of years, I would own a BD player whether I really wanted to or not. My DVD player is a few years old and average lifespan of most technology for me is rarely more than 5 years. And, I knew that at some point I'd probably want a Playstation. So, I had to accept that I will have a BD capable player relatively soon. Besides, I dropped a decent amount of money two years ago and got myself a nice 1080 Plasma.

So, with that in mind, it seemed like I would end up saving more money if I just dropped the money on the PS3 now. I usually spend about $100 a month on DVD purchases. And a good majority of those discs have BD counterparts that cost (at most) $5 more per disc. Now, I could have held off and dropped my usual $100 last month and picked up a few new titles. But, knowing that there is a better looking version available of a film that I really liked and would eventually want to own at the best quality available meant that if I did buy the DVD now, I would also end up buying the film again on BD when I eventually owned a BD player, which I knew would most likely happen within the next two years, either because I bought a PS or because my current DVD player wore down.

So, it broke down to this, I either drop money on a BD player and continue to spend the same $100 a month buying BD movies or I hold off, continue spending my $100 on DVDs and the spend another $100 rebuying all those movies on BD when I have BD player. And even if I only replace half of the discs I expect to buy in the next year, that's still $600 that I would be wasting by the end of the year. Knock out the price of a player and I would still be ahead $500. Or at least $300 if I opted for a PS.

So, two months ago, I picked up my PS3 and I am really glad that I did. The quality difference on a well mastered BD is really stunning. It's nice to know that I am not going to need to rebuy the dozen discs I've picked up since. And I want that quality. That's the reason I got the Plasma set in the first place.

If you are still watching you movies on a screen smaller than 40" you might not notice the difference. But, if any of you own a nice large 1080 set and if you are still buying DVDs, I can't really say I understand the logic there.

crikan
01-05-2010, 06:45 PM
P.S. - I have a little problem with "your argument doesnít matter" line. What kind of thing is that to say to somebody?

My point is that if someone hasn't upgraded their TV and cables to take advantage of blu-ray then they should not be giving passionate anti-bluray opinions because they aren't qualified to do so. I haven't seen where you have listed your equipment so I don't know if you qualify. I donít mean to be offensive, but if you donít have a nice HDTV running in 1080p than you donít know what you are missing. Let me exaggerate to make my point. If you have a 36Ē TV that can only do 720p then you arenít going to see a big difference between ďsomeĒ blu-ray and DVD releases. Itís not because of a deficiency on blu-rayís part.

And I think most fans blu-ray fans could care less about your complaints about not fitting more content. IMO, more people care about video and audio quailty than the number of discs.

Let's see, for a quick look. These movies are a slight improvement over the original.

Commando
Days Of Thunder
Friday the 13th Part 2
Point Break
Predator 2
Tomb Raider

As for the others in the list, what you have there are Blu-Rays that are considered to be a big improvement over standard and are considered to be on the high end. Not judging those picks, there good, but your list consists of mostly very good Blu-Ray transfers.

Not surprised to see those on the list, but I would say that even if those 6 out of my 100 titles arenít a large improvement over the DVD counterpart than that is still a win for blu-ray. As I stated before, there are many DVDs that are no better than VHS, so it is unreasonable to think there wonít be a small percentage of blu-rays that fail to impress. Iíll try to look at Tomb Raider and Predator 2 this week as I have the best DVDs available for both as well.

Let me bring up another scenario to make the case that blu-ray is a huge leap better than DVD. I have the Ultimate Edition DVDs and Blu-ray box sets for James Bond. I am certain that all of those movies come from the same transfers and in every case Iíve seen so far, the blu-ray is noticeablely sharper with better colors and black levels. What you see when watching those blu-rays isnít even possible on DVD. And some of those movies are near 40 years old.

crikan
01-05-2010, 07:01 PM
So, two months ago, I picked up my PS3 and I am really glad that I did. The quality difference on a well mastered BD is really stunning. It's nice to know that I am not going to need to rebuy the dozen discs I've picked up since. And I want that quality. That's the reason I got the Plasma set in the first place.

If you are still watching you movies on a screen smaller than 40" you might not notice the difference. But, if any of you own a nice large 1080 set and if you are still buying DVDs, I can't really say I understand the logic there.

One of my favorite things about the PS3 is that DVDs no longer stall during layer transitions. That drives me nuts when that happens, but thankfully I havenít seen that in years.

baggio
01-05-2010, 07:17 PM
Not surprised to see those on the list, but I would say that even if those 6 out of my 100 titles aren’t a large improvement over the DVD counterpart than that is still a win for blu-ray. As I stated before, there are many DVDs that are no better than VHS, so it is unreasonable to think there won’t be a small percentage of blu-rays that fail to impress.

Your totally missing the big picture.

Again you bring up VHS. But its a bad example. Image quality is NOT the only thing that's important when comparing DVD to VHS. Do I really have to explain again the differences between VHS & DVD? A lot of people don't even use a vhs anymore or even in cases have gotten rid of them. People more than not bought those inferior dvds just because of the dvd convenience.

Plus the thing about 6 out of 100 is still a win for Blu-Ray?

You do realize your "most" of the other choices are of Blu-Rays that are known to be in the excellent level. What about the others that are above average. What about the ones that you don't own that are considered awful?

Let's just pretend for fun that 6 out of 100 are average in your list. That's 6%. The whole Blu-Ray library represented would be like 200 average films. That's completely unacceptable for a format that boosts its supposed to the most superior picture quality ever seen in home technology. And we didn't even touch on the % of below average looking Blu's. I was just doing the average looking ones.

There's only one major difference between Blu-Ray & DVD. Storage space. That's really it. The storage space is what allows for an upgrade in image & sound quality. In all reality, its really not that groundbreaking. It's just like getting a bigger hard drive.

I explained what I could do with a tiny flash drive & small HD player (both with ZERO moving parts) Now that's groundbreaking.

baggio
01-05-2010, 07:41 PM
I just started to laugh to myself with this recent discussion on if Blu-ray is a win win situation because of people saying their collection has stellar looking Blu-Rays, etc...

Ok.....

We are in a The best and worst of Blu-Ray quality thread....

The pages speak for themselves and again prove my point that people are really all buying just the stellar ones. Everybody is basically listing the same titles.

Just admit it, Blu-Ray is like having fine china. You only bring it out for special occasions. DVD is like... you know... gets used everyday. :D

crikan
01-05-2010, 07:52 PM
Your totally missing the big picture.

Again you bring up VHS. But its a bad example. Image quality is NOT the only thing that's important when comparing DVD to VHS. Do I really have to explain again the differences between VHS & DVD? A lot of people don't even use a vhs anymore or even in cases have gotten rid of them. People more than not bought those inferior dvds just because of the dvd convenience.

Plus the thing about 6 out of 100 is still a win for Blu-Ray?

You do realize your "most" of the other choices are of Blu-Rays that are known to be in the excellent level. What about the others that are above average. What about the ones that you don't own that are considered awful?

Let's just pretend for fun that 6 out of 100 are average in your list. That's 6%. The whole Blu-Ray library represented would be like 200 average films. That's completely unacceptable for a format that boosts its supposed to the most superior picture quality ever seen in home technology. And we didn't even touch on the % of below average looking Blu's. I was just doing the average looking ones.

There's only one major difference between Blu-Ray & DVD. Storage space. That's really it. The storage space is what allows for an upgrade in image & sound quality. In all reality, its really not that groundbreaking. It's just like getting a bigger hard drive.

I explained what I could do with a tiny flash drive & small HD player (both with ZERO moving parts) Now that's groundbreaking.

If you read reviews for the 6 you chose you'll find that they are better than their DVD counterparts, they just arenít the best of what blu-ray has to offer. Any reasonable person would find that acceptable. I notice your not mentioning what your setup is. I guessing you donít have a 50Ē+ TV running 1080p. If you did you would not be saying what you are. There is no way anyone that saw Blade Runner, Thunderball or Casino Royale on a modest 1080p setup would say the things you are. Please tell me if Iím wrong.

I bring up VHS vs DVD because we can learn things from the previous format war. It helps in setting realistic expectations.

And for the record I have a very modest setup that could be easily duplicated for less than $2,500 these days. It doesnít take a fortune to get a great blu-ray experience.

And I donít hate DVD. Iíve bought just as many DVDs in the past year as I have blu-rays.

I find your flash drive statement to be silly. Blu-rayís look better than what youíd get by ripping a blu-ray to a flash drive. IMO you wonít see your flash drive idea anytime soon. It will be blu-ray, streaming and digital download (with DRM) for the near future. One of the things studios like about BD is the copy protection.

I donít get your obsession with moving parts?

Anaestheus
01-05-2010, 07:58 PM
Baggio - I don't necessarily understand your points. When people say that Blu-Ray looks better, you seem to be saying "well, of course, you are looking at the discs that are well mastered. What about all the ones that aren't well mastered?" But, doesn't that same argument apply for DVD as well? I mean, how many terrible Brentwood discs are out in the market right now? If you summed up all the DVDs out there right now, I am sure that you would find more than 6% are near or sub VHS quality, Just go to the bargain bin at Walgreens.

And while the flash drive idea is cool, I highly doubt that is going to happen any time soon. A 16 gb flash drive sells for at least $30. And that's with no data at all. You get near four times the storage on a Blu-Ray. I'd suspect that streaming will catch up long before flash drive prices drop enough to compete with disc.

baggio
01-05-2010, 08:16 PM
I notice your not mentioning what your setup is. I guessing you don’t have a 50”+ TV running 1080p.

You would be guessing wrong. I have a 52' 1080p screen, that's why I mentioned the 1080p player in my earlier posts.

I find your flash drive statement to be silly. Blu-ray’s look better than what you’d get by ripping a blu-ray to a flash drive. IMO you won’t see your flash drive idea anytime soon. It will be blu-ray, streaming and digital download (with DRM) for the near future. One of the things studios like about BD is the copy protection.

I don’t get your obsession with moving parts?

I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying. When I rip or get a ripped Blu-Ray. It's the EXACT image that's on the Blu-ray disc. The player plays in full 1080p, just like a Blu-Ray player does.

Plus I watch HD content from premium cable.

My obsession. No obsession whatsoever. No moving parts mean less of a chance of break down. Nothing to scratch. Smaller units. Why is this a bad thing?

crikan
01-05-2010, 08:54 PM
baggio - Well, I guess weíre all entitled to our opinions. I must admit that I find yours to be shocking. I find most blu-rays to be stunning and Iím regularly surprised by the quality of smaller releases like The New York Ripper. I can certainly respect that some people donít think itís worth the money to upgrade discs they own on DVD, but I donít understand how you can be so passionate that most blu-rays do not deliver and experience significantly better than DVD. I do wonder what in our lives makes us have such a different opinion on this subject. Because to me, your arguments sound no different than if you were saying the sky is green and up is no different than down.


The pages speak for themselves and again prove my point that people are really all buying just the stellar ones. Everybody is basically listing the same titles.

Just admit it, Blu-Ray is like having fine china. You only bring it out for special occasions. DVD is like... you know... gets used everyday. :D

I disagree with this as well. There are quite a few people on this board that have diverse collections. And there are plenty of titles I bought where I knew they werenít the best blu-ray had to offer before I bought them. And I was fine with it because not every movie needs to be reference quality. I donít expect that from my hundreds of DVDs so I wonít expect that from blu-ray.

Dave
01-05-2010, 09:05 PM
Personally I think we should just go back to laserdisc. Make them all 16x9 and we are good to go.

Kolpitz
01-05-2010, 09:13 PM
Personally I think we should just go back to laserdisc. Make them all 16x9 and we are good to go.

Dave, it's time to let it go and move on. It's the only way to get closure.

Mutilated Prey
01-05-2010, 09:40 PM
Personally I think we should just go back to laserdisc. Make them all 16x9 and we are good to go.

You and your vinyl :rolleyes:

Katatonia
01-06-2010, 02:12 AM
For example I'm not one to buy a new release for $16 let alone $26 for a Blu-Ray. I don't care how much I wanted it.

Well sure, if you go by Brick & Mortar store prices, Blu-ray discs can be expensive. I mainly buy online where they are far cheaper. Would I rather spend $30 + tax for Inglourious Basterds on Blu-ray in a store the week of its release, or just $17 online? No contest there.

So it seems like Blu-Ray owners are mostly re buying films they have already. Didn't we go through this 14 years ago? I could see it then, the upgrades (explained before in my earlier post) were understandable.

Tell me something, have you actually even viewed a movie on Blu-ray from beginning to end yet?

Even at $10 a pop (which I GUARANTEE) you spent more. That's at least $2500 (not including the "+" ) on films many of which , I'm guessing you owned already on standard dvd. Plus you own about 10% of the entire Blu-Ray library. :eek:

Hey, if you got the money, you got the money, god-bless. I have the cash, but choose not to spend it that way.

It's only money, and people choose to spend their dough in different ways.

Blu-ray generated $1.1 billion in revenue in 2009, a 100% increase from 2008. The number of homes that had a Blu-ray player jumped from 3 million to 8 million. Where is it declining? People are buying into it now more than ever. Blu-ray hardware is now cheap enough that anyone with an HDTV can afford it, and really why shouldn't they?

othervoice1
01-06-2010, 03:11 AM
Ive been getting blu movies in the 7-15 dollar range for the last couple years I have been buying them- you dont have to spend 20-30 for bluray movies. I do admit there are a handful I paid 20.00 or more for when they were released but there are still standard dvds being released around that price range as well. And I disagree with the "fine china" scenario. I am finding more and more I go to my hi-def movies over my standard dvd movies - same thing with cable- I hardly even watch the standard channels anymore unless I am in my bedroom where I have no choice.

HellRazor
01-06-2010, 03:57 AM
If the debate is about whether or not Blu Ray is the superior format, there IS no debate. Blu Ray is clearly and factually the superior format.

Seems to me that what is being debated is "is it worth it to upgrade to Blu"? That answer is going to depend on individual preferences and tastes but I would wager for the vast majority of people on this forum the answer is "yes" and for all the reasons previously discussed.

My DVD collection is nearing 2,000 titles. I have no plans to get rid of my DVDs. The beauty of Blu Ray is that its backwards compatible. My DVDs look even better upconverted on my Blu Ray player than they did before. But all my new purchases are being made on the Blu Ray format if a Blu Ray is available, and I am also slowly upgrading key titles in my collection (and other titles when the price is right, Blu Rays are now falling dramatically in price and titles at or under the $10 mark is more and more common).

So far as the comment about how Blu Ray can ruin a movie - not sure this is a valid arguement. Excessive DNR or some other remastering technique to alter the original film will have the same affect whether its mastered on a DVD or a Blu Ray although the problems may be more apparent on the Blu. But these are mastering issues, not an issue with the format. If mastered correctly, the only thing Blu Ray is giving you is a closer approximation to what the original film actually looks like on a theater screen. The Blu Ray format itself doesn't magically transform the original image into something different.

baggio
01-06-2010, 03:11 PM
Tell me something, have you actually even viewed a movie on Blu-ray from beginning to end yet?


Your kidding, right?

baggio
01-06-2010, 03:29 PM
The beauty of Blu Ray is that its backwards compatible. My DVDs look even better upconverted on my Blu Ray player than they did before.

If that's what you noticed , How much better is Blu-Ray over an upconverted standard dvd in your opinion?

Because in my experience, I even seen a very low (under 1 gig) version of a downloaded & burned movie being played on a Blu-Ray machine on a 55' 1080p Samsung. It looked really good. Many people kept asking if this was an original dvd (which would have been around 8 gigs). I was shocked of how good it looked for a crap version.

So imo, it all comes down to setup.

So far as the comment about how Blu Ray can ruin a movie

Assuming your talking about my My Bloody Valentine (2009) comment.

Just stating what I saw. It makes it look super cheap imo.

crikan
01-06-2010, 05:11 PM
Baggio, this has been going on for awhile now. Let me make sure I understand. Is your main point, that most blu-rays look no better than an up-converted DVD? And that a movie file of under 1GB can look as good?

baggio
01-06-2010, 05:48 PM
Baggio, this has been going on for awhile now. Let me make sure I understand. Is your main point, that most blu-rays look no better than an up-converted DVD? And that a movie file of under 1GB can look as good?

Your purposely trying to be a wise guy now.

After all this, that's what you took from my side of the issue?

Your obviously not paying attention. What's the point of even having a discussion?

crikan
01-06-2010, 07:05 PM
Your purposely trying to be a wise guy now.

After all this, that's what you took from my side of the issue?

Your obviously not paying attention. What's the point of even having a discussion?


Really? I'm that far off base. I wonder how I got that idea? :rolleyes:



And the point of getting Blu-Ray is what?

I thought Blu-Ray was supposed to be awesome. The format is far from perfect. Seems like only about 75% of Blu-Rays are that much better than standard dvd. And horror films being even lower.

Again I ask, what's the point? To spend more money?



And you say you have about 100 Blu-ray's. Do you have those same movies on dvd to compare? (because if you don't , I don't know how one can say it's overwhelmingly better) Does the upgrade really justify you spending an additional $20 for the same movie that you already own, for such a small upgrade in quality?



We can agree on one thing. This discussion is no longer worth having.

Kolpitz
01-06-2010, 07:08 PM
Assuming your talking about my My Bloody Valentine (2009) comment.

Just stating what I saw. It makes it look super cheap imo.

The My Bloody Valentine remake looked like a cheap, shot-on-video (and, it technically was) movie in the theatre, as well. That's the first thing that my friend said when we were done watching it.

baggio
01-06-2010, 08:02 PM
Really? I'm that far off base. I wonder how I got that idea? :rolleyes:


So let's get this straight, your comeback is to post these two quotes from me:

And the point of getting Blu-Ray is what?

I thought Blu-Ray was supposed to be awesome. The format is far from perfect. Seems like only about 75% of Blu-Rays are that much better than standard dvd. And horror films being even lower.

Again I ask, what's the point? To spend more money?

Quote:
Originally Posted by baggio View Post
And you say you have about 100 Blu-ray's. Do you have those same movies on dvd to compare? (because if you don't , I don't know how one can say it's overwhelmingly better) Does the upgrade really justify you spending an additional $20 for the same movie that you already own, for such a small upgrade in quality?


Both which don't even address your comment:

Baggio, this has been going on for awhile now. Let me make sure I understand. Is your main point, that most blu-rays look no better than an up-converted DVD? And that a movie file of under 1GB can look as good?


Most Blu-rays... MOST Blu-Rays

So when I said Seems like only about 75% of Blu-Rays are that much better

That rang a bell to you to say that I think most blu-rays look no better than an up-converted DVD?

Are you ok? :rolleyes:

Sure I didn't mention the upconvert in my very first post. But it was clearly stated in many posts there after. Clearly. And I always clearly stated that Blu-Ray has the slight edge. And gave credit to incredible looking Blu-Rays.



You obviously are not paying attention. That's the real reason not to have the discussion.


I said:


And you say you have about 100 Blu-ray's. Do you have those same movies on dvd to compare? (because if you don't , I don't know how one can say it's overwhelmingly better) Does the upgrade really justify you spending an additional $20 for the same movie that you already own, for such a small upgrade in quality?

Except for a small percentage of movies its not that much better that than an upcoverted standard dvd. Sure there are a several movies that are outstanding like Pirates of the Caribbean. But thats a very small percetange. And then and ONLY then it depends on your TV & and your Blu-Ray player & your hook-up connections. You need everything to get the full potential of the Blu-Ray. Most people don't have that set up.

I can show you tons of reviews of films that reviewers specifically say that the movie it a slight upgrade to the dvd counterpart or on par with.

Example: I've seen in person Blu-Ray movies that look no better than my setup using an upconverting dvd player & standard dvd. To be be fair, an every so hair edge to the Blu-Ray.


As for the others in the list, what you have there are Blu-Rays that are considered to be a big improvement over standard and are considered to be on the high end. Not judging those picks, there good, but your list consists of mostly very good Blu-Ray transfers.

And on that:

And that a movie file of under 1GB can look as good?

question. Notice how you don't address that now. You can't. You know dam well I never said that it looked as good as Blu-Ray.

crikan
01-06-2010, 08:11 PM
So I took two of what could be considered the lowest quality blu-rays in my collection of 100 and directly compared them to their best DVD counterpart.

Tomb Raider Ė First off, the DVD of Tomb Raider is very poor. There is not much detail and the colors are not impressive at all. So I wasnít surprised that the blu-ray is better. That said, the Tomb Raider blu-ray is not impressive either. This might be a case where the source is the problem and weíll never see an impressive version of this movie. There are times when Tomb Raider shows some detail that DVD is not capable of but there are plenty of times where it looks no better than an up-converted DVD. It is definitely worth upgrading on the cheap for fans because the DVD is unwatchable on a large HDTV but this is worst blu-ray I own.

Predator 2 Ė I was surprised by how good the Predator 2 (Special Edition) DVD looks. For a DVD it has a lot of detail and great colors in the daylight scenes in the first 30 minutes of the movie. The Predator 2 blu-ray is not impressive by blu-ray standards but is a slight improvement over the DVD. Seeing how the DVD still looks quite good I could only recommend the blu-ray to the most die-hard fans of the movie (count me in as a die-hard fan).

baggio
01-06-2010, 08:16 PM
So I took two of what could be considered the lowest quality blu-rays in my collection of 100 and directly compared them to their best DVD counterpart.

Tomb Raider Ė First off, the DVD of Tomb Raider is very poor. There is not much detail and the colors are not impressive at all. So I wasnít surprised that the blu-ray is better. That said, the Tomb Raider blu-ray is not impressive either. This might be a case where the source is the problem and weíll never see an impressive version of this movie. There are times when Tomb Raider shows some detail that DVD is not capable of but there are plenty of times where it looks no better than an up-converted DVD. It is definitely worth upgrading on the cheap for fans because the DVD is unwatchable on a large HDTV but this is worst blu-ray I own.

Predator 2 Ė I was surprised by how good the Predator 2 (Special Edition) DVD looks. For a DVD it has a lot of detail and great colors in the daylight scenes in the first 30 minutes of the movie. The Predator 2 blu-ray is not impressive by blu-ray standards but is a slight improvement over the DVD. Seeing how the DVD still looks quite good I could only recommend the blu-ray to the most die-hard fans of the movie (count me in as a die-hard fan).

You are kidding right?

Tell me you didn't just prove my points. Tell me I'm dreaming.

crikan
01-06-2010, 08:32 PM
You are kidding right?

Tell me you didn't just prove my points. Tell me I'm dreaming.

Ya, I get it now. For some reason you have a big problem that less than %100 of blu-rays are jaw droppingly gorgeous. And for some reason the fact that not all DVDs are better than VHS is somehow missing the point or irrelevant. Unless I still misunderstand you I think your expectations of the blu-ray format unreasonable. And despite those two blu-ray's shortcomings, I was happy with the upgrade.

And those two movie are best suited for your argument. I have a dozen more that are a significant upgrade. Casino Royale being one of those.

baggio
01-06-2010, 08:37 PM
Ya, I get it now. For some reason you have a big problem that less than %100 of blu-rays are jaw droppingly gorgeous. And for some reason the fact that not all DVDs are better than VHS is somehow missing the point or irrelevant. Unless I still misunderstand you I think your expectations of the blu-ray format unreasonable. And despite those two blu-ray's shortcomings, I was happy with the upgrade.

What's wrong with you?

You accused me of something that I never said.

You were wrong, don't get all irritated about it. Admit it & move on. And I think a lot people expect high quality from their hard spent money. This new technology is supposed to be top notch. This is not the only thread about problems of Blu-Ray. And many websites with complaints too. They already have double dipping in Blu-Ray. Different versions being better than the previous one. Come on... that's unacceptable. Didn't these companies learn from the previous format. Even the players are all different. So many versions, with updating and crap. And besides you are happy with your purchase, and that's all that matters, right?

Now go enjoy your Blu-Ray's. Put the disc in , then go make a sandwich.

I'm sure it will ready to play when you get back. ;)

spawningblue
01-06-2010, 08:41 PM
What's wrong with you?

You accused me of something that I never said.

You were wrong, don't get all irritated about it. Admit it & move on. And I think a lot people expect high quality from their hard spent money. This new technology is supposed to be top notch. This is not the only thread about problems of Blu-Ray. And many websites with complaints too.

Now go enjoy your Blu-Ray's. Put the disc in , then go make a sandwich.

I'm sure it will ready to play when you get back. ;)

Dude just stop, you are making a fool of yourself. If you don't appreciate the advances of Blu Ray then you are not a fan of film, nuff said.

crikan
01-06-2010, 08:46 PM
Dude just stop, you are making a fool of yourself. If you don't appreciate the advances of Blu Ray then you are not a fan of film, nuff said.

Good to see I'm not alone.

crikan
01-06-2010, 08:57 PM
Now go enjoy your Blu-Ray's. Put the disc in , then go make a sandwich.

I'm sure it will ready to play when you get back. ;)

Here's a Pro tip for ya. Turn off BD-Live and your BDs will load faster.

Be as smug as you want. I haven't seen anyone agree with you on this yet.

baggio
01-06-2010, 09:03 PM
Dude just stop, you are making a fool of yourself. If you don't appreciate the advances of Blu Ray then you are not a fan of film, nuff said.

Hell no!

Nobody is going to put words in my mouth.

Go let somebody walk all over you. I didn't get to be where I am today by getting pushed around. That doesn't work for me.

Having an open discussion about stuff , voicing different opinions is perfectly fine. and I'm hardly looking like a fool on this topic. I have valid points , just as people do on the other side. What's wrong with that?

Hey dude... I'm not the only one has voiced similar opinions on Blu-Ray on this thread & other threads.

baggio
01-06-2010, 09:08 PM
Here's a Pro tip for ya. Turn off BD-Live and your BDs will load faster.

Be as smug as you want. I haven't seen anyone agree with you on this yet.

Err... First of all.

I just said that for the first time ever, like 30 min ago.

Second, it was a joke.



And if you really want to go there. Exactly how long does it take your Blu-Ray player to get to the credit/intro's sequence of a movie? And STARTING with pressing the button to open the disc drawer.

Anaestheus
01-06-2010, 09:11 PM
All I can say is that considering the quality of your screen, I am really surprised that you can't see a significant quality difference with a well mastered BD. I've done disc to disc comparisons with most of the BD discs I own and the increase in detail, color, and the way that BD handles subtle color gradations really blew me away. I am sure that there are mediocre to bad BDs out there, just as there are with DVDs. But, for the films that are treated properly for the format, I find the difference stunning and I don't find comparisons to the difference between VHS and DVD to be to unfounded.

I have no plans to replace my entire DVD collection, but there are definitely a lot of films that do benefit greatly from their treatment on BD and, to me, that is worth the extra few dollars for the disc, and in two cases, due to sales, the BD was actually cheaper than the DVD.

So, even if 25% of the BDs out there are significantly better than the DVD counterpart, I say it's worth the extra cost. It's not like I gave up anything by buying a machine capable of playing them.

And, I don't mean to be insulting here, but have you calibrated your monitor or are you just running off of the factory default settings? If you haven't calibrated your set, that might be another reason why you aren't seeing the difference. Most factory default settings are pretty poor.

And just for the record, here's a list of individual discs that were of note:

Pirates of the Carribean - already mentioned, I know, but still one of the best discs I've seen and a huge improvement over the DVD - less than $20/movie

2001 - another huge improvement over the already well mastered DVD just for the landscapes alone. - $10

300 - the colors don't improve much, but the detail was fantastic, and you can see the entire movie as it was originally shot with the greenscreen, which is pretty damned funny - $30 for the special edition with the book

Dark Knight - worthwhile just for the Imax footage, you can see all the individual windows in the skyscrapers clearly - I bought the Batpod version when it came out so I can't remember the price

Up - $20 for the 4-disc set and the easiest way to see the difference, since it contains both DVD and BD, but the difference is mainly in all the detail, not as much for the color

Big Trouble in Little China - the color is so much richer and you can see all the details in those elaborate costumes and for only $12

Crank - easily the best disc I've seen so far for showing off how much BD just "pops" - $10

Road Warrior - granted, the original DVD was not exactly stellar, but this is the disc that I would reference for showing how BD shows of the best and worst of film quality as there is one sequence shot at night where the film makers pushed the limitations of the film stock and, thanks to high definition, it really shows - $12

spawningblue
01-06-2010, 09:17 PM
All I can say is that considering the quality of your screen, I am really surprised that you can't see a significant quality difference with a well mastered BD. I've done disc to disc comparisons with most of the BD discs I own and the increase in detail, color, and the way that BD handles subtle color gradations really blew me away. I am sure that there are mediocre to bad BDs out there, just as there are with DVDs. But, for the films that are treated properly for the format, I find the difference stunning and I don't find comparisons to the difference between VHS and DVD to be to unfounded.

I have no plans to replace my entire DVD collection, but there are definitely a lot of films that do benefit greatly from their treatment on BD and, to me, that is worth the extra few dollars for the disc, and in two cases, due to sales, the BD was actually cheaper than the DVD.

So, even if 25% of the BDs out there are significantly better than the DVD counterpart, I say it's worth the extra cost. It's not like I gave up anything by buying a machine capable of playing them.

And, I don't mean to be insulting here, but have you calibrated your monitor or are you just running off of the factory default settings? If you haven't calibrated your set, that might be another reason why you aren't seeing the difference. Most factory default settings are pretty poor.

And just for the record, here's a list of individual discs that were of note:

Pirates of the Carribean - already mentioned, I know, but still one of the best discs I've seen and a huge improvement over the DVD - less than $20/movie

2001 - another huge improvement over the already well mastered DVD just for the landscapes alone. - $10

300 - the colors don't improve much, but the detail was fantastic, and you can see the entire movie as it was originally shot with the greenscreen, which is pretty damned funny - $30 for the special edition with the book

Dark Knight - worthwhile just for the Imax footage, you can see all the individual windows in the skyscrapers clearly - I bought the Batpod version when it came out so I can't remember the price

Up - $20 for the 4-disc set and the easiest way to see the difference, since it contains both DVD and BD, but the difference is mainly in all the detail, not as much for the color

Big Trouble in Little China - the color is so much richer and you can see all the details in those elaborate costumes and for only $12

Crank - easily the best disc I've seen so far for showing off how much BD just "pops" - $10

Road Warrior - granted, the original DVD was not exactly stellar, but this is the disc that I would reference for showing how BD shows of the best and worst of film quality as there is one sequence shot at night where the film makers pushed the limitations of the film stock and, thanks to high definition, it really shows - $12

I would add Blade Runner to that list, probably one of the best releases I have seen for an older pic.

crikan
01-06-2010, 09:19 PM
Having an open discussion about stuff , voicing different opinions is perfectly fine. and I'm hardly looking like a fool on this topic. I have valid points , just as people do on the other side. What's wrong with that?

Hey dude... I'm not the only one has voiced similar opinions on Blu-Ray on this thread & other threads.

You have made some gross over-exaggerations and been dismissive to valid counter-arguments. And I don't believe anyone has agreed with you yet.

Can you estimate how many blu-rays have you watched?

And I was really just giving you some advice on how to make the load times better. I didn't really mean to come off like a smartass. But I can understand why you took it that way. I won't defend or complain about BD load times. They have little impact on my experience with Blu-ray.

baggio
01-06-2010, 09:28 PM
All I can say is that considering the quality of your screen, I am really surprised that you can't see a significant quality difference with a well mastered BD. I've done disc to disc comparisons with most of the BD discs I own and the increase in detail, color, and the way that BD handles subtle color gradations really blew me away. I am sure that there are mediocre to bad BDs out there, just as there are with DVDs. But, for the films that are treated properly for the format, I find the difference stunning and I don't find comparisons to the difference between VHS and DVD to be to unfounded.

I have no plans to replace my entire DVD collection, but there are definitely a lot of films that do benefit greatly from their treatment on BD and, to me, that is worth the extra few dollars for the disc, and in two cases, due to sales, the BD was actually cheaper than the DVD.

So, even if 25% of the BDs out there are significantly better than the DVD counterpart, I say it's worth the extra cost. It's not like I gave up anything by buying a machine capable of playing them.

And, I don't mean to be insulting here, but have you calibrated your monitor or are you just running off of the factory default settings? If you haven't calibrated your set, that might be another reason why you aren't seeing the difference. Most factory default settings are pretty poor.



Were you talking to me?

Please don't be like the other guy, not getting what I said.

I never said I can't see a difference in a well mastered Blu-Ray.

One last time: Some quick examples

Sure there are a several movies that are outstanding like Pirates of the Caribbean.

As for the others in the list, what you have there are Blu-Rays that are considered to be a big improvement over standard and are considered to be on the high end.

Seems like only about 75% of Blu-Rays are that much better than standard dvd.

baggio
01-06-2010, 09:35 PM
And I don't believe anyone has agreed with you yet.

Seriously, the thread is The best and worst of Blu-Ray quality. Many have posted there problems with an inferior film in the Blu-Ray format.

Can you estimate how many blu-rays have you watched?

I don't know exactly, but somewhere in the 60 range.

And I was really just giving you some advice on how to make the load times better. I didn't really mean to come off like a smartass. But I can understand why you took it that way. I won't defend or complain about BD load times. They have little impact on my experience with Blu-ray.

Fair enough. I was just going for a little joke to end the back & forth before it got bad. But we are still being civil about this, and going forward ...aren't we?

spawningblue
01-06-2010, 09:41 PM
Hell no!

Nobody is going to put words in my mouth.

Go let somebody walk all over you. I didn't get to be where I am today by getting pushed around. That doesn't work for me.

Having an open discussion about stuff , voicing different opinions is perfectly fine. and I'm hardly looking like a fool on this topic. I have valid points , just as people do on the other side. What's wrong with that?

Hey dude... I'm not the only one has voiced similar opinions on Blu-Ray on this thread & other threads.

The problem is, you don't really have any valid points. Yes, not every Blu Ray will look perfect, but they ALL at least will look better then their DVD version. If that isn't enough though, there are many that look absolutely stunning compared to their DVD versions, especially the releases where the original DVD was only full screen or non anamorphic. Add to that the fact that the audio is almost always lossless and that there are always a few if not a whole lot of exclusive extras and I don't see what you are complaining about. You are getting better video, audio, and extras.

Price is hardly an issue anymore, and no one is saying you have to replace your DVD collection (although I'm sure there will be some releases that you'll want to), and I really don't see what you are arguing about. It is going to replace DVD, it's just a matter of time. Every major company is 100% behind it, Directors are saying they can finally see their movies the way they are supposed to be seen as Blu Ray is the closet to film you can get.

And no, no one is really backing you up, everyone is throwing out facts why it is better. There are a few that said they don't have the money to upgrade right now, but that is about it.

The only complaint I have is that some releases leave off the cool publicity stills, but that's a minor complaint, and only certain companies are doing it. I wish the Blu Ray included every last little extra that all the DVD versions did, but DVDs are the same thing with there so called ultimate editions that are missing previous extras so... that's just something we have to learn to live with.

And most of the early releases that were rushed out are already starting to be replaced. Superman Returns got a lossless audio track, and Gangs of New York is getting the proper treatment it deserves to fix up its video issues. The couple of other releases that aren't so hot were early releases and too will probably be re-released properly. Any release in the past year though has pretty much been perfect and included all the previous extras.

As for the USB stick, that's great that movies can fit on them but you need to just forget about that as that will never happen. Companies have decided to back up Blu and it is getting bigger and bigger every month, they are not going to turn their backs on it any time soon. The next thing will be downloads an the two will probably just coexist together. They wouldn't release a new format just because some prefer USB over discs, unless it can offer something more then Blu which it can't, as more memory isn't really needed. Blu Ray is as close to film you can get and there is no need for it to get any better as not many people have more then 50 inch screens so this is the best that is needed for home viewings.

spawningblue
01-06-2010, 09:46 PM
And even if a small percentage of Blu Rays only look a little better then their DVD versions as opposed to a lot better, isn't that enough to buy a Blu Ray player. Again, they can be found cheap, and again you don't have to re buy all your DVDs. i think that is stuck in your head. Buy it for all your current releases so you have the best version of all your current releases. And then worry about re buying some of the Blu Rays that blow away the DVD version.

And I know before, you said you don't buy too many movies anymore, well then why argue about this. Blu Ray is for fans of cinema that want to see their mvoies in the best way possible, which they DO. All the exclusive extras that are becoming the norm are even more of an incentive.

Anaestheus
01-06-2010, 09:55 PM
Were you talking to me?

Please don't be like the other guy, not getting what I said.

I never said I can't see a difference in a well mastered Blu-Ray.



Yeah, DeNiro, I was talking to you ;)

I guess the key word in my post was "significant" And, maybe I am misunderstanding your overall point. It seemed to me like you were saying that with the exception of some rare cases, there was NOT a significant difference. I think you said there was a hair's difference. And that the difference in quality was not worth all the extra money.

So, I was trying to make a couple of points with my post.

1. There are definitely many discs that are significantly improved by the technology.

2. Upgrading really isn't that expensive these days

If you don't think the upgrade is worth your money, that's your business. And I don't intend to tell you how to spend your money. It just seems that your experience with the technology is drastically different from mine.

Again, I am sure there are bad discs out there. But, it's not due to a weakness in the technology as much as it is a problem with the companies putting them out being lazy. But, that's why we have quality sections in our disc reviews. I wouldn't "blind-buy" a BD any more than I would a DVD.

baggio
01-06-2010, 10:13 PM
And no, no one is really backing you up, everyone is throwing out facts why it is better. There are a few that said they don't have the money to upgrade right now, but that is about it.

No, I never said anybody was "backing me up". And I mentioned other threads & websites.

But here's few that have problems with their Blu-ray transfers:


Then I watched Predator, Saw 5, 28 Days Later (my lone owned so far) and Resident Evil. They all looked good, but not jaw-dropping.

So what are others opinions and facts of what you've watched?
What are the best, reference-quality discs you've seen?
What is a waste of the format?
Any where a dvd version is actually better (besides for extras or a better cut of the film)?

Ones to stay away from are
Evil Dead 2 (Heavy DNR) The DVD looks better in many places
Escape from NY (HD Broadcast version looks better)
The Fog (HD Broadcast version looks better)
The Terminator (Not much better than the DVD)



Now for the absolute worse blu rays I have seen.

Robocop OMG this is so muddy and ooooogly horrible transfer!

Ghostbusters WTF OMG this film looks ugly as hell terrible!

I'm surprised in mentioning some of the worse on Blu-Ray no one mentioned the image quality on the Stendhal Syndrome.

I'll even quote Rhett from his review, "Considering what a visual stylist Argento is, I had high hopes for this transfer, but the noise here is a real damper"

:fire:GRACE looks horrible,so far the only blue-ray in my collection that i have complain,too graini in some parts specially indoors shoots.:mad:if anyone don`t mind those graini parts and want to trade for some other horror blu-ray just LMK!


Starship Troopers 2 [/B]had a few brief but impressive moments near the end, but the rest was kind of grungy and reminded me of standard DVD quality. Or maybe that was the intended look, dunno.

Huge fan of the BD..I have been happy with mostly everything I have seen so far with the exception of Hostel Part 2. Lots of grain and the black/dark scenes show this more than I would like. I thought this was maybe just the way the film was shot, but I saw the HD broadcast on Showtime and it looks much better than my BD.


The pic qualities of these 2 blu-rays are worst of the worst!!! :fuck:

Well while maybe not totally deserving of the "worst" category I have a suggestion for one close to it: "House of Flying Daggers". I love this movie but the blu-ray quality wasnt a huge upgrade from the dvd which was a shame because this movie could have really shined in hi-def. I actually didnt already own the dvd and got the blu-ray for like 9 or 10 bucks so I was fine with that. I am not saying it isnt better then the dvd just it isnt a big difference. Sony should have done a better job with this great flick.


Wall Street is every bit as shitty as the reviews say it is. Just dull colors and no surround activity, fucking waste of HD. Maybe this movie was fucked to begin with, I can't recall ever thinking any format looked good. Good flick, horrid bd.

If you want to contact a lawyer I'll bring my Young Guns BD to the court hearing! :banana:

And oh yeah... you. :lol:

Watched the original Black Christmas. Definitely not one of the better transfers I've seen.

:lol:

Matt89
01-06-2010, 10:20 PM
WTF is so bad about Ghostbusters!!?LOL FUCK!As well, The Terminator and Robocop have never looked that good, but The Terminator still looks QUITE A BIT better than the DVDs.

~Matt

baggio
01-06-2010, 10:23 PM
Yeah, DeNiro, I was talking to you ;)

I guess the key word in my post was "significant" And, maybe I am misunderstanding your overall point. It seemed to me like you were saying that with the exception of some rare cases, there was NOT a significant difference. I think you said there was a hair's difference. And that the difference in quality was not worth all the extra money.

So, I was trying to make a couple of points with my post.

1. There are definitely many discs that are significantly improved by the technology.

2. Upgrading really isn't that expensive these days

If you don't think the upgrade is worth your money, that's your business. And I don't intend to tell you how to spend your money. It just seems that your experience with the technology is drastically different from mine.

Again, I am sure there are bad discs out there. But, it's not due to a weakness in the technology as much as it is a problem with the companies putting them out being lazy. But, that's why we have quality sections in our disc reviews. I wouldn't "blind-buy" a BD any more than I would a DVD.

No problem. I don't doubt with prices are coming down(on BD Players & HD TV's), which will make the product extremely more attractive and unavoidable to resist switching over to the new format. But like you said I wouldn't "blind-buy" a BD. But in a strange way (and I'm talking movies BEFORE the BD technology) they with out a doubt should be stellar in the new format. I'm talking close to over 95% should be in the A+ category. They have really no excuse for reissuing an inferior product. Zero excuse.

New movies obviously should be too, but you never know. Studios can get lazy. Only excuse I can think of , is that they have nothing to compare too.

But to reiterate, older movies, zero Excuse.

... And that's a big part (so far) of the Blu-Ray current library available. And that's the big problem.

crikan
01-06-2010, 10:33 PM
But in a strange way (and I'm talking movies BEFORE the BD technology) they with out a doubt should be stellar in the new format. I'm talking close to over 95% should be in the A+ category. They have really no excuse for reissuing an inferior product. Zero excuse.

New movies obviously should be too, but you never know. Studios can get lazy. Only excuse I can think of , is that they have nothing to compare too.

But to reiterate, older movies, zero Excuse.

... And that's a big part (so far) of the Blu-Ray current library available. And that's the big problem.


Where are you getting your numbers? How do you know that less than 95% of BDs aren't stellar? The impression I am getting is that most BDs getting released now are stellar.

What percentage of DVDs released do you think could be considered stellar? Or do you think that is irrelevant?

spawningblue
01-06-2010, 11:04 PM
Baggio you are killing me!

Let me go through some of the releases mentioned.

Predator, Commando, Robocop, Terminator, ect. were all early releases and were rushed out with no extras either!

28 Days Later doesn't look great but it still looks better then the DVD and the best it ever will. It's not a great example of the format because it wasn't shot 30 mm.

The Fog and Escape from NY haven't been released in NA so I'm not going to argue about them. As there have been plenty of releases that were rushed out overseas only to have a great release here. Canada tends to release a lot of movies through Alliance that aren't very good, but when they get an American release they look great. That's because Alliance rushes out a lot of movie before their time expires. They did the same with DVDs leaving off extras and DTS tracks. Although I heard the Nightmare Blu look amazing.

Ghostbusters looks fine. yes, it has some grain, but that;'s the way it looked in theaters so don;t understand the complaints. The problem is is that a lot of people who don't understand film see grain as a problem. I'm sure Matt can elaborate more on this if you ask nicely.

Grace was a low budget film so there's only so much you can do. And again, grain isn't a bad thing.

Starship Troopers 2 was straight to DVD and Blu, so i wouldn't be surprised if they didn't put much effort into its release. Again though, sure it still looks better then the DVD which I'm sure look like shit.

As for Black Christmas that I commented on, no it does not look the greatest, but like some on here mentioned, it is probably the best it will ever look. It still looks better then the DVD. Would i recommend it as one of your first purchases to show off the new format? No, but I bought it myself because I only has the older edition so i wanted the new extras and it was the same price I believe as the DVD. And although the picture isn't great, it is still slightly better then the DVD so it made sense.

I'm sure all those releases still look better then their DVD counterparts. Is every release going to be perfect, no! But there are more then enough that come close that make it worth upgrading for.

I don't understand why you think every Blu Ray should and will be perfect. With DVD, Laserdisc, CDs, ect. there will always be laziness and releases will get rushed out. That and like DVD sometimes you can only use the best transfer you have. But there are way more releases that look great then not so great. And again, if you don't include soem of the releases that were rushed out during the format war then that number increases drastically. In the past year msot of the releases have been pretty great!

Stop nitpicking the few releases that aren't stunning and look at the ones that are. Every release still looks better then its DVD release so why are you complaining, or for that matter buying DVDs which look worse. If the Blu Ray doesn't look stunning, then I wouldn't want to see what the DVD looks like.

I think your real problem is with the early releases that were rushed out. Should have they been put out with less then stellar transfers and no extras to show off a new format? No! But they were in a format war so they did what they could do. Look past those early releases and you will see how much Blu Ray has improved. These days most releases are as good as you can hope for other then a rare case here and there, which happens with DVD as well. Why aren't you complaining about Lions Gate's Lost Treasures line that used crappy full screen transfers, or all the other recent DVD releases which are full screen or lack proper surround sound, or are non anamorphic. There is no excuse for that these days and there are still plenty of DVD releases that come out half assed yet you think Blu Ray is terrible because every release ins't perfect. ect.

spawningblue
01-06-2010, 11:10 PM
And what odler movies are you talkign about that look so bad on Blu? Again, forgetting the rushed out early releases of titles like predator, Robocop, Commando, ect. that will probably be re-released with extras. What Blu in teh past year has come out that looks terrible?

I can name tons that look amazing.

Casablanca
North By Northwest
Wizard of Oz
Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Friday the 13th
My Bloody Valentine
Monster Squad
Night of the Creeps
Cujo
James Bond series
The Shining
2001
Creepshow
Every Criterion release
7th Voyage of Sinbad
ect., ect., ect.

Matt tends to buy older mvoies, throw in some titles for me. Hell go check out some review sites, a LOT of older titles look great!

Kolpitz
01-06-2010, 11:58 PM
I really don't understand all the hate for the Blu-rays of Ghostbusters, RoboCop and The Terminator. I thought they all looked great. RoboCop had an earlier release from Sony that sucked but that was quickly pulled (most copies didn't even make it to stores). But, the Fox release looks great and, aside from the lack of extras (which I don't care about since I already saw them all), it's a great BD. Maybe it's that I've seen these films countless times, on countless formats (full frame, widescreen, VHS, LD, DVD, TV, etc.) that I know how bad these movies can look. And, to me, the Blu-rays just look amazing.

HellRazor
01-07-2010, 05:00 AM
If that's what you noticed , How much better is Blu-Ray over an upconverted standard dvd in your opinion?

I've found a very noticeable difference between upconverted DVDs and Blu Rays in most cases. The upconverted DVDs look great! The look better than they ever have, the difference has really jumped out at me and allowed me to see my DVDs in a new light. But the Blu Rays are just breathtaking in most cases. Especially when (as in most cases with Blu) the films have been mastered in Hi Definition. My upconverted DVDs are sharper and clearer, but my Blu Rays show me a level of detail I have never seen in some of these films before. In both THE SHINING and 2001 the picture was so sharp I could actually see tiny weave patterns and individual colors on the threads in those patterns on clothing and jackets that I have never seen before. Now can the movies be enjoyed without all that detail? Sure, of course. But its wonderful to be able to see movies in this way, especially with certain films where these details just make the film even more enjoyable.

Doesn't mean that standard DVDs aren't enjoyable, I still love and watch and enjoy my DVDs and can understand why the added detail might not be worth the upgrade for some folks, especially if you don't have a big screen HD tv to get the benefit of all that added resolution. But Blu Rays on a decent HD television setup are stunning. Even the "bad" blu rays are an upgrade from their DVD versions, even if its only a slight upgrade - but in most cases its not a slight difference, its like night and day.

The "bad" blu rays I'm finding sometimes suffer from poor source materials (I was pointing out recently how DEAD AND BURIED was a little disappointing because its grainy in some spots, which I believe is a problem with the film itself and not the mastering. But even so, the picture quality is definately better than my DVD - just less of a "night and day" factor than with certain other films).


Because in my experience, I even seen a very low (under 1 gig) version of a downloaded & burned movie being played on a Blu-Ray machine on a 55' 1080p Samsung. It looked really good. Many people kept asking if this was an original dvd (which would have been around 8 gigs). I was shocked of how good it looked for a crap version.


No question those can look good and it may be an acceptable tradeoff depending on what your priorities and preferences are. But I would also argue that XVID, etc. (just as MP3) are lossy compression formats and will never be as good as the original it was ripped from unless you use a method that results in no compression/loss of clarity.


So imo, it all comes down to setup.


Yes, I agree setup is a key factor. You won't get the full benefit of Hi Definition on a small screen or a non-HD setup. Also, some components are made more cheaply or with more/less features than others.


Assuming your talking about my My Bloody Valentine (2009) comment.

Just stating what I saw. It makes it look super cheap imo.

I'm only saying that Hi Definition by itself doesn't change the source video image. But some of this is more a matter of preference. I know folks who prefer bad transfers of the AIP versions of the old Gamera movies vs. the prestine Region 2 releases because that is how they remember those films from the tv broadcasts of their childhoods. Nothing wrong with that, who am I to say they are wrong to enjoy the films more this way. But if they tried to argue that the picture quality was better, I'd have to say they were on crack. :)

baggio
01-07-2010, 03:39 PM
And what odler movies are you talkign about that look so bad on Blu? Again, forgetting the rushed out early releases of titles like predator, Robocop, Commando, ect. that will probably be re-released with extras. What Blu in teh past year has come out that looks terrible?

I can name tons that look amazing.

Casablanca
North By Northwest
Wizard of Oz
Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Friday the 13th
My Bloody Valentine
Monster Squad
Night of the Creeps
Cujo
James Bond series
The Shining
2001
Creepshow
Every Criterion release
7th Voyage of Sinbad
ect., ect., ect.

Matt tends to buy older mvoies, throw in some titles for me. Hell go check out some review sites, a LOT of older titles look great!

Here's some just SOME below average transfers in Blu-Ray. There might be a couple here on the boarder line but most of these have a ever so slight advantage over an upconverted standard dvd. Totally unacceptable imo for what Blu-Ray claims to do. No excuses.

12 Monkeys
A History Of Violence
American Psycho
Basic Instinct
Basic Instinct 2
Being There
Black Rain
Body Heat
Boondock Saints
Broken Arrow
Bullit
Con Air
Crash
Dark Water
Dirty Dozen
Dirty Dancing
Face-Off
Field of Dreams
First Blood
El Cid
End of Days
Escape From New York
Evil Dead II
Eyes Wide Shut
First Blood
Foutain
Full Metal Jacket
Gangs Of New York
Gladiator
Goodfellas
Gulliver's Travels
Hitch
House of Flying Daggers
King of New York
Lethal Weapon
Lethal Weapon II
M*A*S*H
Nacho Libre
National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation
Near Dark
Patton
Police Story
Reds
Requiem For A Dream
Top Gun
The Forty Year Old Virgin
The Fugitive
The Longest Day
The Manchurian Candidate
The Ninth Gate
The Punisher
The Untouchables
The Sixth Sense
The Truman Show
Trading Places
Saw
Saw II
Saw III
Scary Movie
Short Circuit
Silent Hill
Sleepy Hollow
Star Trek III - The Search For Spock
Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home
Star Trek 6 - The Undiscovered Country
Wall Street
Young Guns
XXX


Should I keep going or... do you get the idea now.

Then I could to list some average transfers. Blu-Ray's much better than upconverted dvd. But very average comparing to stellar transfers like Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl for one example.

baggio
01-07-2010, 03:50 PM
And just so everybody doesn't complain and think I think there aren't good Blu-rays

Stellar ones:


Kung Fu Panda
Bolt
Cars
Chronicles of Narnia The: Prince Caspian
Corpse Bride
Crank 2: High Voltage
Domino
Hot Fuzz
Monsters, Inc.
I, Robot
All three Pirates of the Caribbean movies
Live Free or Die Hard
Man on Fire
Ratatouille
Sin City
Transporter 2
Transporter 3
Wall-E
The International
Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen

spawningblue
01-07-2010, 05:08 PM
Here's some just SOME below average transfers in Blu-Ray. There might be a couple here on the boarder line but most of these have a ever so slight advantage over an upconverted standard dvd. Totally unacceptable imo for what Blu-Ray claims to do. No excuses.

12 Monkeys
A History Of Violence
American Psycho
Basic Instinct
Basic Instinct 2
Being There
Black Rain
Body Heat
Boondock Saints
Broken Arrow
Bullit
Con Air
Crash
Dark Water
Dirty Dozen
Dirty Dancing
Face-Off
Field of Dreams
First Blood
El Cid
End of Days
Escape From New York
Evil Dead II
Eyes Wide Shut
First Blood
Foutain
Full Metal Jacket
Gangs Of New York
Gladiator
Goodfellas
Gulliver's Travels
Hitch
House of Flying Daggers
King of New York
Lethal Weapon
Lethal Weapon II
M*A*S*H
Nacho Libre
National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation
Near Dark
Patton
Police Story
Reds
Requiem For A Dream
Top Gun
The Forty Year Old Virgin
The Fugitive
The Longest Day
The Manchurian Candidate
The Ninth Gate
The Punisher
The Untouchables
The Sixth Sense
The Truman Show
Trading Places
Saw
Saw II
Saw III
Scary Movie
Short Circuit
Silent Hill
Sleepy Hollow
Star Trek III - The Search For Spock
Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home
Star Trek 6 - The Undiscovered Country
Wall Street
Young Guns
XXX

Should I keep going or... do you get the idea now.

Then I could to list some average transfers. Blu-Ray's much better than upconverted dvd. But very average comparing to stellar transfers like Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl for one example.

And of that list how many were released in the past year. Almost that whole list is movies that were rushed out in the first year and will probably get re-released if they already haven't (I know Goodfellas and Gangs of New York are getting re-released very soon). Most of those don't have extras either and that is something that has also changed with Blu Ray.

So yes, there were problems with Blu Ray in its first year and a half as it was at war with HD DVD and they rushed out a lot of discs but I'd say about 90% of that list will probably getting re-released with all their extras intact as well.

Oh, and who is saying those discs are below average anyways. I just looked over a few and...

The Fountain got 4 our of 5 for their video on Blu-ray.com, one of the most popular Blu Ray sites. Top Gun received a 4, Patton a 5, Truman Show 4.5, Dark Water 4, Face Off 4, ect.
Sleepy Hollow, Full Metal Jacket and The Untouchables were re-released with a proper transfers.
Gangs and Goodfellas like already mentioned are getting re-released in the next month or two with proper transfers.

I think you get the point. I think 4 out of 5 is a great score, especially when a 2 out of 5 is still better then most DVDs when using the Blu Ray grading system. So you really aren't doing such a great job proving your points.

Workshed
01-07-2010, 05:13 PM
If Hitch doesn't look good in BD, then I'm never upgrading.

baggio
01-07-2010, 05:14 PM
And of that list how many were released in the past year. Almost that whole list is movies that were rushed out in the first year and will probably get re-released if they already haven't (I know Goodfellas and Gangs of New York are getting re-released very soon). Most of those don't have extras either and that is something that has also changed with Blu Ray.

So yes, there were problems with Blu Ray in its first year and a half as it was at war with HD DVD and they rushed out a lot of discs but I'd say about 90% of that list will probably getting re-released with all their extras intact as well.

Exactly.

spawningblue
01-07-2010, 05:27 PM
And I think you don't realize that a 3 out of 5 for a Blu Ray review doesn't mean it is equal to a 3 out of 5 for a DVD review.

Here's a great example and how Digitalbits reviews their movies.

They review their Blu Rays on a scale of 1-20 for video and audio. A perfect DVD would only be a 10 on the scale, so even a movie that didn't get a great score like say Star Trek VI, it still received a 16 out of 20 for video and an 18 for audio. So its video and audio are still almost twice as good as a perfect DVD.

I'm pretty sure you just aren't actually reading the reviews, either that that or not properly understanding how their scales work compared to DVDs.

spawningblue
01-07-2010, 05:29 PM
Exactly.

Exactly, so now you can safely upgrade as those issues have been pretty much absent the past year and a half. Time to forget about the mistakes made in the first year when they were still testing the market and at war with another format and accept that it is a great format now.

Ash28M
01-07-2010, 05:49 PM
Black Rain


I remember renting Black Rain because Hi Def-Digest gave it an almost perfect score for picture quality. I though it looked like crap.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/527/blackrain.html

HellRazor
01-07-2010, 11:34 PM
Of that list I have the SAW I through III blus as well as BASIC INSTINCT. Haven't watched B.I. yet but don't see any problem with the SAW blus. The video quality is clearly better than my DVD copies. These films are grainy and they use a lot of murky colors - those are issues with the film, not the transfer or the Blu Ray.

Looked up a few reviews of these and the reviewers seem to confirm my thinking, rating them 3 out of 5 on video but also stating things like:

"As mentioned in my previous reviews for this series, the movies are shot in generally dark, dank locales with a muted color palette and the end result is a movie that will never look beautiful on Blu-ray or any other format. "

and

"The image is drab and the colors suffer as a result, but I believe this is more due to artistic choices rather than a faulty transfer."

I really think some people are expecting unrealistic miracles with this format and are attributing problems with the films to problems with Blu Ray. A hi definition transfer isn't going to magically make a crappy looking movie look prestine. If the source film looks like shit its going to look like shit whether you view it in the theater, on DVD, or on Blu. These movies are the exception to the rule. In 99% of the cases the Blu will still look better than the DVD, and better lensed films with good source materials are going to look absolutely stunning.

Cujo108
01-07-2010, 11:41 PM
There's nothing below average about the Requiem for a Dream Blu-ray. I was worried Lionsgate would botch it, as it is my favorite film and all, but I was pleasantly surprised by how great of a job they did with it.

Shannafey
01-07-2010, 11:56 PM
The Fountain got 4 our of 5 for their video on Blu-ray.com, one of the most popular Blu Ray sites. Top Gun received a 4, Patton a 5, Truman Show 4.5, Dark Water 4, Face Off 4, ect.
Sleepy Hollow, Full Metal Jacket and The Untouchables were re-released with a proper transfers.
Gangs and Goodfellas like already mentioned are getting re-released in the next month or two with proper transfers.

I think you get the point. I think 4 out of 5 is a great score, especially when a 2 out of 5 is still better then most DVDs when using the Blu Ray grading system. So you really aren't doing such a great job proving your points.

Yeah, I wonder about those scores on that site!! My friend got Alexander for $10 and when I was over, I was horrified (not at the movie) at the transfer. It looked like a bad DVD yet Blu Ray.com gave it a high score.

Grim
01-07-2010, 11:57 PM
I thought American Psycho looked great, rushed or not.

I'm watching Labyrinth right now and that's another that I can wholeheartedly recommend to fans of the film.

Everything isn't going to look like it was shot yesterday and for 80 million dollars. Some films are just scratched and grainy right down to the negative, but I'll take increased detail and improved colors and contrast wherever I can get it.

dave13
01-08-2010, 03:04 AM
Bullit

really? looked pretty excellent to me.

The Chaostar
01-08-2010, 05:58 AM
Being There looks great.

Paff
01-08-2010, 06:13 AM
Picked up a few more Blus tonight

Carrie

I've watch a little of it, and I'm not too impressed. Yes, I know DePalma used a "soft" style, and I like it a lot. But I think that soft look is pretty much the same on DVD as BR. Plus, the DVD has all those great special features, so I'm holding on to that no matter what.

Death Proof

Again, hard to gauge, due to the intentional cruminess and low-budget look of the film. Worse, I can't get rid of the DVD of this movie either, as my DVD was signed by Zoe Bell.

Halloween

Now this was a fucking revelation, and justifies the purchase of the Blu-Ray player. It's that good. Granted, I never got this on DVD, I've stuck with the Criterion LD, so it's a double leap in quality for me. But yeah. Wow. This is pretty amazing.

Matt89
01-08-2010, 06:48 AM
Picked up a few more Blus tonight

Carrie

I've watch a little of it, and I'm not too impressed. Yes, I know DePalma used a "soft" style, and I like it a lot. But I think that soft look is pretty much the same on DVD as BR. Plus, the DVD has all those great special features, so I'm holding on to that no matter what.

Death Proof

Again, hard to gauge, due to the intentional cruminess and low-budget look of the film. Worse, I can't get rid of the DVD of this movie either, as my DVD was signed by Zoe Bell.

Halloween

Now this was a fucking revelation, and justifies the purchase of the Blu-Ray player. It's that good. Granted, I never got this on DVD, I've stuck with the Criterion LD, so it's a double leap in quality for me. But yeah. Wow. This is pretty amazing.

Wow you held off on all the DVD editions of Halloween? Heh, that must've taken some will power haha.

But I dunno, I was a little unimpressed with Carrie as well, but after further inspection, I've come to the conclusion that it does indeed look way better than the DVD. It's also "correctly" framed at 1.85:1. The DVD edition had thin black bars on all 4 sides of the frame.

~Matt

Paff
01-08-2010, 07:15 AM
Wow you held off on all the DVD editions of Halloween? Heh, that must've taken some will power haha.

I like it, but I've never been a huge huge fan of it. The Criterion LD had a good widescreen transfer, and tons of extras. Plus, when I was standard definition, laser and DVD was not that far apart in quality. So I did not re-buy a lot of my lasers on DVD. That's gonna change with HD though.

crikan
01-08-2010, 02:01 PM
Picked up a few more Blus tonight

Carrie

I've watch a little of it, and I'm not too impressed. Yes, I know DePalma used a "soft" style, and I like it a lot. But I think that soft look is pretty much the same on DVD as BR. Plus, the DVD has all those great special features, so I'm holding on to that no matter what.


I didn't find the video quality to be impressive in Carrie but I got the impression the film couldn't look much better. I'm no expert, so I was wondering if anyone else agrees



Halloween

Now this was a fucking revelation, and justifies the purchase of the Blu-Ray player. It's that good. Granted, I never got this on DVD, I've stuck with the Criterion LD, so it's a double leap in quality for me. But yeah. Wow. This is pretty amazing.

Halloween really blew me away when I saw it. Wow!

Grim
01-08-2010, 03:00 PM
I think a lot of people spend too much time looking for incredibly increased detail, while ignoring other benefits of the format, such as improved colors, richer blacks, etc. If a film is shot on 16mm or shot in a very soft focus, then the improvement in detail may not be that great, but there could still be a wealth of other improvements.

spawningblue
01-08-2010, 06:26 PM
I remember renting Black Rain because Hi Def-Digest gave it an almost perfect score for picture quality. I though it looked like crap.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/527/blackrain.html

Yeah, I wonder about those scores on that site!! My friend got Alexander for $10 and when I was over, I was horrified (not at the movie) at the transfer. It looked like a bad DVD yet Blu Ray.com gave it a high score.

Well don't know what to tell you guys, either there was something wrong with your set ups or you expecting too much compared to how it was shot as every reviewer I checked out gave both of those very high marks.

Sites I checked include High Def Digest, Bluray.com, IGN, Home Theatre Forum, DVD Beaver, DVDTown, DVD Talk, DVDReview and DVD Verdict.

Kolpitz
01-08-2010, 08:32 PM
Well don't know what to tell you guys, either there was something wrong with your set ups or you expecting too much compared to how it was shot as every reviewer I checked out gave both of those very high marks.

Sites I checked include High Def Digest, Bluray.com, IGN, Home Theatre Forum, DVD Beaver, DVDTown, DVD Talk, DVDReview and DVD Verdict.

I haven't watch it in years but I remember being really impressed with the Black Rain Blu-ray. I own Alexander but I haven't watched it yet. Although, the BD of the Final Cut of Alexander has a ton of features that aren't on the DVD (which only has the introduction), including a brand new commentary from Oliver Stone.

Paff
01-08-2010, 09:06 PM
I think a lot of people spend too much time looking for incredibly increased detail, while ignoring other benefits of the format, such as improved colors, richer blacks, etc. If a film is shot on 16mm or shot in a very soft focus, then the improvement in detail may not be that great, but there could still be a wealth of other improvements.

Yeah, alright. Guilty.

Carrie DOES look better on Blu than on the SD DVD, and I did notice the color improvement. It just wasn't as dramatic as some of the other discs I've seen, and I fully acknowledge it's due to the source materials. I'm really impressed with Halloween though. And I had to think about it while I was purchasing it, even though Best Buy had it at just $9.99. Really glad I jumped on that one.

Death Proof was really an impulse buy, but I'm enough of a Tarantino fan I'll probably buy all his films on Blu anyway.

othervoice1
01-08-2010, 11:41 PM
I did watch Rent (the live Broadway show not the movie) on blu-ray last night and it looked amazing. I saw this live once and loved it and this was the next best thing. 5 outta 5 on video quality for this one.

Shannafey
01-09-2010, 04:55 AM
Halloween

Now this was a fucking revelation, and justifies the purchase of the Blu-Ray player. It's that good. Granted, I never got this on DVD, I've stuck with the Criterion LD, so it's a double leap in quality for me. But yeah. Wow. This is pretty amazing.


Really? Best Buy has it for $10 right now. Maybe I'll pick it up this weekend.

I just watched Hardware. One of my favorite films and I've seen it countless times. This was like seeing it for the first time again! I've never seen it look so good!! Damn! I'm hooked on Blu and want to rush out there and buy new ones all the time. It really has made my movie viewing an exciting experience.

SaxCatz
01-10-2010, 06:51 PM
Stricly from an image quality standpoint, these are some of the standouts from my experience so far:
* I don't have as much experience with catalog titles as I have an extensive DVD library and most of the catalog titles I care to see I already own and can only justify rebuying or renting my favorite titles. *
BEST (Catalog Titles)-
Blade Runner 5 Disc Complete Collector's Edition;
My Bloody Valentine;
The Battle of the Bulge;
Halloween (I know there are some complaints about the color timing- but authentic or not I think it looks fantastic); &
Hellraiser.
(I just can't believe how good these releases look, probably far better than when they were initially seen in the theater.)
WORST (Catalog Titles)-
A Christmas Story;
The Dirty Dozen;
The Fifth Element (original, non-remastered release); &
Young Guns.
BEST (New & Recent Releases)-
ANYTHING Disney/Pixar (like 'em or not, these studios just pour the utmost care into their releases);
The Dark Knight;
No Country for Old Men;
Transformers; &
Crank (this movie really shows off the advantages of Blu-Rays deeper color!);
WORST (New & Recent Releases)-
28 Days Later (in its defense- this film was shot in SD so will NEVER look better);
Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone;
Saw.
It should be noted that my inclusion of a title on the list above does NOT mean that it is the best/worst overall image quality. Everything is on a sliding scaled based on the popularity of the release, the year it was released, the style it was filmed in, etc. No, the inclusion of a title on the list above is more a reflection of how impressed/disappointed I was with the PQ of a particular disc.
As far as experience with Blu-Ray disc, I currently own 123 Blu-Rays and have viewed probably 150-200 more in the form of rentals. As such, I feel like I have a pretty good grasp on what makes a good title look great and a bad title look... well... bad.

Katatonia
01-12-2010, 08:11 AM
I was surprised at how good Over the Top looked in HD. A solid upgrade from the old DVD. Rich colors and great details from a clean print. The lossless TrueHD audio track was surprisingly dynamic as well for an 80's film.

Hellbilly
01-18-2010, 08:06 PM
Just done watching Predator (1987). It looks way better than the DVD but those expecting eye-popping shades of green because of the jungle setting will be disappointed. It's also lacking fine background detail in some scenes.
Those complaining about not enough grain rejoice because Predator has plenty.

Vlachio
01-23-2010, 11:37 AM
Watched Predator 2 it's both amazing & horrible in quality. The print used is a big fucking mess. Some scenes look sharp while others look flat & muddy. Digital Noise Reduction is all over this shit.

bigdaddyhorse
01-23-2010, 06:12 PM
Watched Predator 2 it's both amazing & horrible in quality. The print used is a big fucking mess. Some scenes look sharp while others look flat & muddy. Digital Noise Reduction is all over this shit.

Sounds like every review I've read about this, and the only reason I haven't caved in and bought it anyway besides not seeing it for $10 or less.
Sucks, my all-time favs on Blu are getting shafted and coming up short. First True Romance, then this. At least Casino looks great!

Shannafey
01-23-2010, 08:31 PM
I finally bought Star Trek this week. On sale at Best Buy for $17!! OMG!!! What an amazing looking Blu Ray!

Grim
01-23-2010, 10:15 PM
Just done watching Predator (1987). It looks way better than the DVD but those expecting eye-popping shades of green because of the jungle setting will be disappointed. It's also lacking fine background detail in some scenes.
Those complaining about not enough grain rejoice because Predator has plenty.

It's definitely a gritty film. Although it could possibly be a lackluster transfer, after seeing many making-of featurettes on the film, I feel much of Predator was filmed in a guerilla style, so that may lend to the look of the film. Who knows, though. It will probably get a rerelease later on, so we'll see if it's improved upon or not.

Hellbilly
01-24-2010, 06:07 AM
It's definitely a gritty film. Although it could possibly be a lackluster transfer, after seeing many making-of featurettes on the film, I feel much of Predator was filmed in a guerilla style, so that may lend to the look of the film. Who knows, though. It will probably get a rerelease later on, so we'll see if it's improved upon or not.

I actually thought some scenes looked much better but yeah, Predator always had that dirty look going.
I got the disc for peanuts so I wouldn't mind a re-release since this one is also lacking special features.

bigdaddyhorse
01-24-2010, 05:46 PM
I actually thought some scenes looked much better but yeah, Predator always had that dirty look going.
I got the disc for peanuts so I wouldn't mind a re-release since this one is also lacking special features.

Having owned or seen nearly all the releases for this film (including the UK SE dvd), some parts are just gonna be harsh. The scene with Arnold talking to Bill Duke after "The Body" gets smoked has looked like a grainy fucked up print on every version I've seen. Some parts looked great on blu, but the problems remain and seem like they always will. If there was a better print, it seems someone would've found and used it by now.

philxus
01-24-2010, 11:05 PM
I was super desapointed with Halloween II (2009) I really Like the movie but the image quality of the Blue-Ray was Horrible, way to grainy and poor.:mad:

Kolpitz
01-24-2010, 11:47 PM
I was super desapointed with Halloween II (2009) I really Like the movie but the image quality of the Blue-Ray was Horrible, way to grainy and poor.:mad:

I don't want to defend this movie artistically so this statement is purely from a technical standpoint, as I feel this movie has no artistic merits. But, the film was shot on 16mm (Zombie wanted the film to be "raw and dirty," his words, not mine), which may account for the excessive grain and your disappointments with the transfer. I'm not sure if that's the case or if the Weinsteins just fucked it up, but their Blu-rays are generally very good looking so I'd blame the source material.

Also, don't forget (and, I feel like this has been brought up many, many times) but grain IS NOT A FLAW of Blu-ray transfers. Grain is a natural part of film. Cinephiles, such as myself (and Matt89, who has brought this subject up the most), want grain in our Blu-rays. I know, for me at least, it puts a smile on my face. If I watch a movie on Blu-ray that was shot on film and IT DOESN'T HAVE at least some grain, I feel like the film has been excessively tampered with, using DNR.

Don't get me wrong, a film should never be grainier than the original film stock. Some films will be grainier than others and some will only have a slight amount of grain. A film like Halloween 2 will probably be very grainy, due the source stock and Zombie's penchant for making his films "dirty." I think one of the finest examples of film on Blu-ray is the Coppola Restoration of The Godfather trilogy. The films looked like someone was projecting 35mm onto my TV screen, complete with a healthy amount of grain.

SaxCatz
01-27-2010, 03:02 AM
Also, don't forget (and, I feel like this has been brought up many, many times) but grain IS NOT A FLAW of Blu-ray transfers. Grain is a natural part of film. Cinephiles, such as myself (and Matt89, who has brought this subject up the most), want grain in our Blu-rays. I know, for me at least, it puts a smile on my face. If I watch a movie on Blu-ray that was shot on film and IT DOESN'T HAVE at least some grain, I feel like the film has been excessively tampered with, using DNR.


I think one of the finest examples of film on Blu-ray is the Coppola Restoration of The Godfather trilogy. The films looked like someone was projecting 35mm onto my TV screen, complete with a healthy amount of grain.

+1;
I whole heartedly agree with both of these statements.

2D4EVER
02-03-2010, 07:00 PM
I finally watched The Wild Bunch blu ray I bought probably a month ago. Holy shit it looks amazing especially every shot with those cloud-laden blue skies. I think it's only $10 just about everywhere.

indiephantom
02-03-2010, 07:31 PM
Good to see some educated posts regarding film grain and BD. Sometimes I wonder if people have ever seen a film projected when they complain of this. If anything, I've grown to hate the near total absence of natural grain on DVD and LD.

I thought Halloween II had a respectable transfer, consistent with the theatrical presentation.

I do have a title to add to the BEST OF list.

Friedkin's To Live and Die in L.A. :glasses: Do not hesitate to pick this one up! Note to Canadians, this title is an option for HMV's trade in deal...and that means if you bring an old DVD, you can get it for 10 bucks. I brought in my old copy of said film. You actually get a copy of the old SE DVD included, so there was no real reason to keep it. Probably my favorite purchase of 2010 so far, and the sound is great, too.:blabla:

Hellbilly
02-07-2010, 06:14 PM
The HD trailer for the Train DVD on the Saw VI Blu-ray looks amazing. Train isn't the greatest movie ever but hell, I would double dip if Lionsgate released a unrated version on Blu-ray.

satans-sadists
02-07-2010, 07:14 PM
I finally watched The Wild Bunch blu ray I bought probably a month ago. Holy shit it looks amazing especially every shot with those cloud-laden blue skies. I think it's only $10 just about everywhere.

Glad to hear! I may need to include this in my next order. :)

The Chaostar
02-08-2010, 12:05 AM
Wild Bunch DOES look good.

Cpt Rhodes
02-08-2010, 05:43 PM
I am a huge predator fan and love the blu ray but I also have the very rare ultimate gold edition, plus when star wars gets released on blu ray it will be awesome.

Vlachio
02-11-2010, 08:25 AM
I don't want to defend this movie artistically so this statement is purely from a technical standpoint, as I feel this movie has no artistic merits.

You should have stopped right there! +1 kudos! ;)

Katatonia
02-12-2010, 12:20 AM
A Scanner Darkly looks really superb on Blu-ray, it almost jumps out at you from the screen it looks so damned good.

This was an earlier Blu-ray release from Warner however, and they only included a standard Dolby 5.1 audio track, which is okay, but it would have sounded nice lossless or uncompressed.

I can't complain too much though, as it was only $7.99 on Amazon!

Paff
02-12-2010, 01:15 AM
Oh, I should get that To Live and Die in LA disc then. I just saw it for the first time last year and loved it. I picked up a copy of the SE DVD, but haven't watched it yet. I'd gladly go Blu for that movie. Is it cheap anywhere?

I also got The Wild Bunch when it was on sale (~$10), but haven't watched it yet. That's a movie you need to devote some time to. I did preview the disc though, and it looks amazing.

othervoice1
02-12-2010, 02:40 AM
plus when star wars gets released on blu ray it will be awesome.
Yea that is going to make me double dip whenever that actually gets released.

indiephantom
02-12-2010, 11:54 AM
Oh, I should get that To Live and Die in LA disc then. I just saw it for the first time last year and loved it. I picked up a copy of the SE DVD, but haven't watched it yet. I'd gladly go Blu for that movie. Is it cheap anywhere?


I got my copy for 10$ (5 bucks off for trade-in here in Canada at HMV), but Amazon has it for $15.99...pretty good. http://www.amazon.com/Live-Die-L-Blu-ray/dp/B0024F08KQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1265975631&sr=1-1

geeare
02-12-2010, 02:38 PM
the worse Blu-ray I've seen to date has to be the Halford Rock in Rio concert. it's just terrible and I was very pissed off because the Blu cost about 15 more than the DVD and it's hardly even VHS quality. I thought it was some crazy effect they were using at the first of the concert but it just never got any better. too bad. Anyway, sound is awesome. If i had to do it again I would just get the DVD.

Hellbilly
02-16-2010, 06:14 PM
Midnight Movie (2008). Clean image, but not very impressive in HD terms. I'm aware this was a low budget production but still, I've watched upscaled DVDs that look much much better.
As for the movie itself, it was alright. Starts out kind of mediocre/bad/dumb but the final 15 minutes made it worthwhile.

bigdaddyhorse
02-16-2010, 08:00 PM
Caught Star Trek last night from the library, beautiful as it should be.

Can't recall if I ever mentioned how good Trick R' Treat looks on Blu, damn near perfect!

On the bad side, Chasing Amy. I had a feeling hi-def wouldn't benifit this film anyway, and boy was I right. Some scenes looked out of focus and mis-framed, like they used that print Kevin Smith was bitching about on the dvd commentary where he's doing the whole "Fuck DVD" rant. It sounds and looks like what they were talking about just before that in many parts. A few parts looked good and upgraded, but some scenes looked far worse than the Criterion dvd. All in all, very disappointing and not at all worth upgrading unless you have to have the new features.
Considering I haven't seen this disc for under $29.99 yet (haven't looked online, and won't bother after testing it), I can not state how much a rip-off it would be to buy this new. I might buy it if I ever see it for under $10 just for the new commentary and doc (decent doc btw), maybe. I'm thinking more around $5 now. Thankfully I got this free at the library, and didn't mind returning within a week.

HellRazor
02-27-2010, 05:37 AM
Is it just me or was the CABIN FEVER blu not very impressive?

Cujo108
02-27-2010, 06:53 AM
Is it just me or was the CABIN FEVER blu not very impressive?

Agreed. I was underwhelmed by it, and I also noticed some sort of lines in the background during Winston's booze party. That said, I'm happy to have the unrated cut finally.

fceurich39
02-27-2010, 10:01 PM
the crazies looked really good for a 1973 movie on blu-ray

spawningblue
03-01-2010, 06:11 PM
Public Enemies looks amazing on Blu, actually I think it looked even better then it did in theaters. In theaters, during the night scenes it looked really pixelated, but that is all cleared up on Blu. The blacks are perfect, and the forest chase scene looks amazing with its lush greens!