HDTV ain't so good!!!

[Johnny Rico]

acs12798 said:

gastrof said:

AviTrek said:
....It amazes me that best buy/circuit city still try and sell HDTVs with a DVD source....

It can be worse.

I was in a store today that had a DVD feeding into their HD sets, and it turned out the DVD had been made by the VOOM satellite people...

You know...the satellite service that went out of business EONS ago?

I like the way the store is keeping up to date.

On the other hand, I got a digital TV (displays Standard Def but has digital and analog tuners) for $150...brand spankin' new.

Hey, it'll get digital channels, and that's the key thing. I don't need a "just like you're there" picture.

It's TV.

I know I'm not there.

Just felt like commenting on this. Voom still exists, not the satellite provider, but 15 HD channels. Up until today on Dish Network had it. As of today, Cablevision is adding the channels(they own Voom). None the less, Voom still exists. Too see what they have see voom.tv

Yeah, DISH Network has the VOOM Network feeds. Some pretty interesting chsannels in there.

 

[Doug Otte]

Johnny Rico said:
Another thing I think I ought to mention is that it helps to set your source "box" to the resolution that the source material is in.

Let me explain that.

NTSC TV is broadcast in 480i, but when you try to display that resolution on a 720p or 1080i/p set that receiving a like resolution signal from the cable/satellite box, your 480i pic is going to look very blurry. It's like setting a 640x480 jpeg as your desktop pic when your desktop is set to say 1280x1024. It just ain't gonna look good.

So to improve this, you should set your cable/satellite box to either 480i/p so that your TV will reset its resolution (as such, it really doesn't, but it gives that effect) to that lower resolution which makes standard def material look better than it would if your box was set to 720p or 1080i.

I think it all depends upon whether your source box or your TV does better upconverting. People should play around with the settings and see what looks best w/ their own equipment.

And, back to the original discussion: I don't think CBS will even think about converting TNG until they see how well the TOS HD discs sell. The broadcasts had some novelty appeal, but how many people will shell out the money for the HD box sets?

Of course, at that point it's all dependent upon the TNG source material and the amount of work involved, as discussed here and in many previous threads.

Doug

 

[Tomalak]

Noname Given said:

FYI - I was the one who posted that only BetacamSP masters existed, and none of the original/actual film had been saved because I came acoss someone stating that in a Cineplex article a few years ago. Personally, I thought that was a bit crazy given the franchise history of 'rising again'; but they also mentioned the cost of film preservation. If they did keep the raw stock, one issue solved.

That's odd, as I remember reading somewhere that Paramount keeps all the filmed material from Star Trek. If they did, that's remarkable foresight. Hopefully this will be cleared up some time.

 

[Cyrus]

Tomalak said:
a shot of Ten Forward from 'Menage a Troi' was reused in Enterprise's finale, with additional picture information on the edges to make a 16:9 frame.

Did it really have additional picture info on the sides? The 35mm film's native ratio is 4:3 and I doubt if they used any of the widescreen schemes on it for TNG. More likely they cropped the top and bottom to create the 16:9 image (or maybe used cgi to create the additional image).

 

[Good Will Riker]

Admiral Bear said:
To be honest, how good would, for example TNG look in high def anyway?

Some of the source material is 20 year old video. I can't see how that source would stand up to being shown in HD. Wouldn't it be akin to watching SD on a mid-range HD specific LCD? ie it would look pretty bloody awful.

I think current definition DVDs are going to be as good as it gets quality wise for an awful lot of releases which will no doubt be re-released on Blu-Ray or HD-DVD in the future to further milk consumers.

Many people who've upgraded will realise they've all been done over when their shiny new Blu-Ray releases of 30 year old films look a shambles.

I am leaning towards going with Bluray over HD-DVD as of this moment, and between the 2 formats, I hope that Bluray prevails.

I am considering getting a Bluray/HD-DVD combo player, though. I want to make sure that I have a player that is equpped to play all the Bluray/HD-DVD/DVDs that I rent in the coming years.

The majority of my Bluray title purchases will of course be from the 00's. I am not planning to upgrade any of the titles that I currently own on DVD.

 

[Johnny Rico]

Doug Otte said:

Johnny Rico said:
Another thing I think I ought to mention is that it helps to set your source "box" to the resolution that the source material is in.

Let me explain that.

NTSC TV is broadcast in 480i, but when you try to display that resolution on a 720p or 1080i/p set that receiving a like resolution signal from the cable/satellite box, your 480i pic is going to look very blurry. It's like setting a 640x480 jpeg as your desktop pic when your desktop is set to say 1280x1024. It just ain't gonna look good.

So to improve this, you should set your cable/satellite box to either 480i/p so that your TV will reset its resolution (as such, it really doesn't, but it gives that effect) to that lower resolution which makes standard def material look better than it would if your box was set to 720p or 1080i.

I think it all depends upon whether your source box or your TV does better upconverting. People should play around with the settings and see what looks best w/ their own equipment.

Yeah, but I've also read that if you use component cables for your standard def stuff, that it actually looks better than thru HDMI. So I may try this to see what happens.

 

[Tomalak]

Cyrus said:

Tomalak said:
a shot of Ten Forward from 'Menage a Troi' was reused in Enterprise's finale, with additional picture information on the edges to make a 16:9 frame.

Did it really have additional picture info on the sides? The 35mm film's native ratio is 4:3 and I doubt if they used any of the widescreen schemes on it for TNG. More likely they cropped the top and bottom to create the 16:9 image (or maybe used cgi to create the additional image).

Someone posted a comparison around the time the episode aired - it was slightly cropped at the top, but there was definately more on the sides. Transferring film to videotape cuts the resolution dramatically, and can leave extra information on the sides. It's not unlike overscan.

 

[broberfett]

I have some Hi-def channels for my bigscreen through my cable. The difference is amazing. I have a normal CBS channel and a Hi-def one. There is such a difference in picture on a show like Numbers. I really love seeing Revenge of the Sith on Hi-def. I notice that I can read little writing on the shows on Hi-def that might be blurry on a normal channel.