OK, I need to explain myself a little before I expand on that subject line.
Last Christmas I got my first Blu-Ray player and high-def TV. Now, my brother (who is a technophile) did some pretty heavy-duty research regarding the TV. The fact is, I enjoy watching old movies, and old TV shows. I have more than 1,300 DVDs in my collection. One of the things that turned me off HD initially was that the sets I was previewing were all big 1080 LCD sets. And anything that wasn't utterly HD'd to the moon looked like shite.
So as a compromise I went with a 720 dpi Plasma. Plasmas are friendlier towards lower-def images, as is 720. I know full well this isn't "full" HD, but if it means being able to, say, enjoy watching Farscape, or the upcoming Six Million Dollar Man/Bionic Woman DVDs, or those old Charlie Chaplins I've got - Or even that $2 video I found of old public domain Flash Gordon serials - then I'm willing to make the sacrifice. And 720 looks fantastic compared to SD.
I recently had a chance to view a couple of recent Blu-Ray releases on a 1080 LCD set - specifically Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland. And I noticed something right away.
Some people can't actually tell the difference, but when viewing film, there is a gloss to the image. Colors are generally brighter, the picture is brighter, and it gives it a rather professional look. Videotape does not have the sheen. It more closely resembles what the human eye actually sees, except colors aren't normally quite so bright and it has a somewhat "home video"-style feel to it. I'm referring to its use in dramatic productions (as opposed to, say, videotaped sitcoms or live concert events).
If you want a side-by-side comparison of film vs. video, look at an episode of the original Battlestar Galactica or Buck Rogers alongside a 1970s-era episode of Doctor Who, in particular scenes shot in a studio (those scenes were usually videotaped). I'm not suggesting comparing recent productions to old, like say current DW, because many productions today are actually shot on videotape, but later digitally processed to resemble the film look.
So I'm watching Alice in Wonderland, and I realized - the sheen is gone. It's as if I'm watching the movie rendered on videotape.
Initially, I had a "gee that looks cool" reaction. Seeing a movie rendered to look like a videotape did give it a bit of a hyper-real feel, especially when the CG characters appeared on screen.
But then I realized that what I was watching looked very much like some of the old chromakey, videotaped productions of the 1970s. I remember in fact an Alice Through the Looking Glass production done that way, plus the Starlost immediately came to mind with its heavy reliance on "virtual sets" decades before the term was even coined.
It struck me as interesting how we seem to be moving backwards a bit. Or maybe full circle is a better way of putting it. I'm not saying Starlost or 70s Doctor Who has 1/100th of the production values of Alice in Wonderland. But I still very much got the same vibe looking at Burton's Alice, rendered as digital video, as I got watching some of those old shows.
The biggest thing is that by removing the sheen and creating a more "you are there" element, it destroys a lot of suspension of disbelief. I love classic DW to bits, but when I watch the old videotaped scenes there is no doubt that it's just some scenes shot in a studio. I don't "lose myself" in the movie. When I watch videotaped TV comedies I treat it as I do going to see a live play - I don't "lose myself" in the story, I remain fully focused on the fact I'm in a theatre. I still enjoy the show, but in a different way.
So like other recent innovations, like 3-D, I'm not sure if I'm a big fan of this element of HD. I might well be willing to stick to the 720 glass ceiling (which I'm told exists anyway so long as I want to continue enjoying old shows without being distracted by things like pixelation and heavy grain) to maintain the suspension of disbelief when I see a movie, especially in the SF/F arena.
I'm curious whether this phenomena is just related to very recent releases. I have seen clips from older movies on 1080 and I don't remember noticing this. Does Avatar go this route, too?
Alex
Last Christmas I got my first Blu-Ray player and high-def TV. Now, my brother (who is a technophile) did some pretty heavy-duty research regarding the TV. The fact is, I enjoy watching old movies, and old TV shows. I have more than 1,300 DVDs in my collection. One of the things that turned me off HD initially was that the sets I was previewing were all big 1080 LCD sets. And anything that wasn't utterly HD'd to the moon looked like shite.
So as a compromise I went with a 720 dpi Plasma. Plasmas are friendlier towards lower-def images, as is 720. I know full well this isn't "full" HD, but if it means being able to, say, enjoy watching Farscape, or the upcoming Six Million Dollar Man/Bionic Woman DVDs, or those old Charlie Chaplins I've got - Or even that $2 video I found of old public domain Flash Gordon serials - then I'm willing to make the sacrifice. And 720 looks fantastic compared to SD.
I recently had a chance to view a couple of recent Blu-Ray releases on a 1080 LCD set - specifically Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland. And I noticed something right away.
Some people can't actually tell the difference, but when viewing film, there is a gloss to the image. Colors are generally brighter, the picture is brighter, and it gives it a rather professional look. Videotape does not have the sheen. It more closely resembles what the human eye actually sees, except colors aren't normally quite so bright and it has a somewhat "home video"-style feel to it. I'm referring to its use in dramatic productions (as opposed to, say, videotaped sitcoms or live concert events).
If you want a side-by-side comparison of film vs. video, look at an episode of the original Battlestar Galactica or Buck Rogers alongside a 1970s-era episode of Doctor Who, in particular scenes shot in a studio (those scenes were usually videotaped). I'm not suggesting comparing recent productions to old, like say current DW, because many productions today are actually shot on videotape, but later digitally processed to resemble the film look.
So I'm watching Alice in Wonderland, and I realized - the sheen is gone. It's as if I'm watching the movie rendered on videotape.
Initially, I had a "gee that looks cool" reaction. Seeing a movie rendered to look like a videotape did give it a bit of a hyper-real feel, especially when the CG characters appeared on screen.
But then I realized that what I was watching looked very much like some of the old chromakey, videotaped productions of the 1970s. I remember in fact an Alice Through the Looking Glass production done that way, plus the Starlost immediately came to mind with its heavy reliance on "virtual sets" decades before the term was even coined.
It struck me as interesting how we seem to be moving backwards a bit. Or maybe full circle is a better way of putting it. I'm not saying Starlost or 70s Doctor Who has 1/100th of the production values of Alice in Wonderland. But I still very much got the same vibe looking at Burton's Alice, rendered as digital video, as I got watching some of those old shows.
The biggest thing is that by removing the sheen and creating a more "you are there" element, it destroys a lot of suspension of disbelief. I love classic DW to bits, but when I watch the old videotaped scenes there is no doubt that it's just some scenes shot in a studio. I don't "lose myself" in the movie. When I watch videotaped TV comedies I treat it as I do going to see a live play - I don't "lose myself" in the story, I remain fully focused on the fact I'm in a theatre. I still enjoy the show, but in a different way.
So like other recent innovations, like 3-D, I'm not sure if I'm a big fan of this element of HD. I might well be willing to stick to the 720 glass ceiling (which I'm told exists anyway so long as I want to continue enjoying old shows without being distracted by things like pixelation and heavy grain) to maintain the suspension of disbelief when I see a movie, especially in the SF/F arena.
I'm curious whether this phenomena is just related to very recent releases. I have seen clips from older movies on 1080 and I don't remember noticing this. Does Avatar go this route, too?
Alex
