RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,164
Posts: 5,402,959
Members: 24,753
Currently online: 382
Newest member: kev404

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > TV & Media

TV & Media Non-Trek television, movies, books, music, etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 17 2013, 11:00 PM   #121
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Where my heart is.
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
I'm very sorry, but your analogy with reference to CD is flawed scientifically, and has been disproved: The 10 Biggest Lies In Audio
That article proves exactly nothing. Its "science" is shoddy and dubious at best. And number ten is such an utterly ridiculous position to take that it completely negates the rest of the article. People hear better than other people, and thus they have a better aural acuity than others.

As far as analog is better, you can through any skewed "fact" or science at the issue as you want, that doesn't make it true.

For one thing, the article assumes vinyl is the preferable medium for analog output. It isn't, and it never was.

But even beyond that, the reason fundamental reason analog is better is because sound is analog. The notes an instrument produces are analog and what the ear interrupts is analog. So any digital representation must be converted twice.

This is why studios have really expensive conversion equipment plugged into the sound boards and why audiophiles spend $1000s on DACs. Admittedly, the technology has come a long way in the last few years, and the cheaper ones are way better than they used to be, but that doesn't change the fact that I would have much rather spent the money on the one I bought on better speakers--or even I high-end pair of cans. But I digress...

The point is, no matter how high the sample-rate might be, in the end, a digital copy is still an incomplete reproduction.

People can argue all they want to about how those bits and pieces are inaudible--and they are--but that doesn't negate their importance. They're what add the nuance to the sound--that "warm" feeling. People can't actually hear them, but they are the proverbial glue that holds the waveform together.

The only reason people don't notice they're missing is because the brain is a powerful doohickey and does an amazing job of filling in those gaps on its own.

That doesn't change the fact that a digital representation, any digital representation, is just a facsimile.

As such, it's no different when it comes to film.

Now, in this case the input side is a bit more existential. It's simplest to just say "life" or "the world" is analog. Or rather, Hamill and Guinness are two "analogs" standing in a desert.

But the rest of the equation is the same: analog>digital>analog. And all that nuance, whether we can see it or not, gets lost.

The reasons media, and society as whole, are all economical in nature and have little to do with quality:

Digital is easy to store, as it takes little physical space and doesn't ever degrade.

It's easy to distribute and/or transport.

It can be copied infinitely without risk of quality loss.

These are all things that save companies money and, really, make things more convenient for the end-user.

*Even high-definition is more of a byproduct of outside technology than it is specifically being digital.

Non the less, if someone created a device that do all these things and still keep it analog, then we'd all still be using analog.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2013, 12:22 AM   #122
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

LOTR does look very nice in HD, and my HD box set of the Extended edition cost me less than what I spend on the orginal DVD version.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2013, 12:24 AM   #123
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

MacLeod wrote: View Post
LOTR does look very nice in HD, and my HD box set of the Extended edition cost me less than what I spend on the orginal DVD version.
That's why I'm torn between buying the Hobbit films in the next three years, and waiting for a complete box set that will be much cheaper.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2013, 02:42 AM   #124
Captain Craig
Vice Admiral
 
Captain Craig's Avatar
 
Location: Nashville,TN
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

I'm likely to upgrade on a complete 6 film Middle Earth saga set.

Assuming that any attempt at doing, in some way, shape or form some Silmarillion films legally will never happen.
__________________
"Picard never hit me." Q-Less(DS9)
"Freedom is the Right of All Sentient Beings" Optimus Prime
Twitter:http://twitter.com/#!/CaptainCraig1
Captain Craig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2013, 02:43 AM   #125
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

True, but I got the Blu-ray version years after it's original release, and it was on sale it cost me something like GB£25 (US$37).

I still got the extended version The Hobbit for around GB£10 less than the RRP.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2013, 01:04 AM   #126
jayceee
Commander
 
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
People can argue all they want to about how those bits and pieces are inaudible--and they are--but that doesn't negate their importance. They're what add the nuance to the sound--that "warm" feeling.
As in even-order harmonic distortion producing a "warmer" type sound?
jayceee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22 2013, 08:14 AM   #127
Ar-Pharazon
Rear Admiral
 
Ar-Pharazon's Avatar
 
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

I ordered the extended blu-ray gift set of The Hobbit AUJ, even though I have the regular blu-ray.
__________________
Rimmer, on what period of history to live in-
“Well, It’d be the 19th century for me, one of Napoleon’s marshals.
The chance to march across Europe with the greatest general of all time and kill Belgians” - (White Hole).
Ar-Pharazon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22 2013, 06:51 PM   #128
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

The Hobbit may be the first movie where I hope they have a "retracted edition" That cuts it down to pretty much what was only in the book.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22 2013, 08:59 PM   #129
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

I thought about that as well. It's not impossible to create.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 25 2013, 05:09 PM   #130
JediKnightButler
Fleet Captain
 
JediKnightButler's Avatar
 
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
View JediKnightButler's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to JediKnightButler Send a message via AIM to JediKnightButler Send a message via Yahoo to JediKnightButler
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

Not any movies I would *rather* have on DVD but I'll usually settle for the DVD if it's not available on Blu-Ray (yet), if there is a good deal on something that I don't care whether or not I have it on Blu-Ray, or if I'm not in a hurry to upgrade something I already own (in which case I might wait to snap it up if/when I see a good deal on it). Given that many movies come with DVD versions, it's rarely even a consideration anymore.
__________________
Do or do not. There is no try.
JediKnightButler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 25 2013, 05:14 PM   #131
JediKnightButler
Fleet Captain
 
JediKnightButler's Avatar
 
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
View JediKnightButler's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to JediKnightButler Send a message via AIM to JediKnightButler Send a message via Yahoo to JediKnightButler
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

sojourner wrote: View Post
The Hobbit may be the first movie where I hope they have a "retracted edition" That cuts it down to pretty much what was only in the book.
I agree. I grew up with the Rankin-Bass animated version and thought it was actually much more faithful to the book than the movie has been so far. Not that the movie is horrible or anything (glad that they brought back featured cast from LOTR) but I don't think that PJ really needed 3 movies to tell the basic story of The Hobbit. Maybe it was the only way PJ felt like he could get some of the expanded Tolkien material on film in some form?
__________________
Do or do not. There is no try.
JediKnightButler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 25 2013, 05:26 PM   #132
USS Triumphant
Rear Admiral
 
USS Triumphant's Avatar
 
Location: Go ahead, caller. I'm listening...
Re: Any films where you'd rather have the DVD then Blue-Ray?

JediKnightButler wrote: View Post
Maybe it was the only way PJ felt like he could get some of the expanded Tolkien material on film in some form?
Might be part of it. The other part might be that it was the only way to get some female characters into the complete sausage-fest that is The Hobbit. And after seeing Tauriel, I ain't complainin'.
__________________
As the brilliant philosopher once said... Everybody, have fun tonight. Everybody, Wang Chung tonight.
USS Triumphant is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.