Blu-ray, in General

Discuss North American DVDs, Blu-rays, UHDs, and related topics
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:58 pm
Location: Northwest US

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1676 Post by Brian C »

I have Clockwork, EWS, Shining, and 2001, and I think they all look great. It's true that Clockwork is somewhat soft, but it looks very film-like in my opinion. I'd say the same for EWS - whatever flaws it may have (and I wouldn't pretend to be definitive on the subject since I'm watching on a 720p TV), it looks as much like a 35mm print as I can imagine on my TV.
User avatar
fdm
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 5:25 pm

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1677 Post by fdm »

nsps wrote:
Fierias wrote:
nsps wrote: What are the problems with Eyes Wide Shut? All the complaints I've seen about EWS seemed more geared at the film's visual design than the look of the transfer, but maybe I missed some valid concerns…
I'm saying that I don't see any problems.
Sorry—was actually referring to posts above yours (fdm, aox, other combinations of three letters (OK, just those two) saying it was mediocre-to-bad.
Sorry but I didn't say it was mediocre/bad. I said it looked pretty much just like it did in the cinema. I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT. It's only aox who has problems.
User avatar
nsps
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 8:25 am
Contact:

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1678 Post by nsps »

fdm wrote:Sorry but I didn't say it was mediocre/bad. I said it looked pretty much just like it did in the cinema. I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT. It's only aox who has problems.
Thanks for correcting my misinterpretation. I thought you were implying it had been grain-reduced or something with your "ummmm no" post, but I just read your meaning wrong. Sorry about that.
User avatar
fdm
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 5:25 pm

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1679 Post by fdm »

nsps wrote:
fdm wrote:Sorry but I didn't say it was mediocre/bad. I said it looked pretty much just like it did in the cinema. I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT. It's only aox who has problems.
Thanks for correcting my misinterpretation. I thought you were implying it had been grain-reduced or something with your "ummmm no" post, but I just read your meaning wrong. Sorry about that.
ummmm no was aox being cute, not me.
stwrt
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:24 am

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1680 Post by stwrt »

The Blu-Ray for Boogie Nights looks fresh, sharp and pleasing. A lot of these movies had early DVD transfers which look poor nowadays but were re-mastered for special edition DVDs in the later 2000s, so the improvement when they appear on HD is not always immediately apparent (though the Blu-Ray is virtually always better than its DVD version). But afaik Boogie Nights on home video hasn't been revisited since 2000 so the new Blu-Ray is up against late 1990s DVD standards - the Blu-Ray looks night and day better, has far more close detail and more accurate color levels and in some scenes makes the DVD look like a VHS image. Good stuff indeed.
User avatar
fdm
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 5:25 pm

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1681 Post by fdm »

If you're sitting on the fence about going to blu-ray, and your TV only has component video inputs (no hdmi), might be a good idea to get a player by the end of this year... Link
User avatar
nsps
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 8:25 am
Contact:

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1682 Post by nsps »

stwrt wrote:The Blu-Ray for Boogie Nights looks fresh, sharp and pleasing. A lot of these movies had early DVD transfers which look poor nowadays but were re-mastered for special edition DVDs in the later 2000s, so the improvement when they appear on HD is not always immediately apparent (though the Blu-Ray is virtually always better than its DVD version). But afaik Boogie Nights on home video hasn't been revisited since 2000 so the new Blu-Ray is up against late 1990s DVD standards - the Blu-Ray looks night and day better, has far more close detail and more accurate color levels and in some scenes makes the DVD look like a VHS image. Good stuff indeed.
Amazon shows a Boogie Nights DVD from 2007, but I'm pretty sure you're right and it's the same as the 2000 two-disc edition. I can see why they hadn't updated it, as it was a pretty impressive undertaking with the second cast-and-crew commentary along with all the other special features, even if the transfer doesn't hold up as well to today's standards. I just watched PTA's Magnolia (my favorite of his) on Blu last week, and it also looks very good.
fdm wrote:ummmm no was aox being cute, not me.
Wow—apparently I've just gone batty and can't tell who posted what…I must've got mixed up over who was quoted versus who was posting…I do have a nasty virus that I caught at Sundance and has been dogging me ever since. Chalk it up to it eating away my brain.
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1683 Post by swo17 »

They did reissue Boogie Nights on DVD in 2007, but I believe it was just a repackaging of the earlier edition into a two-disc keepcase. I never compared the two editions side by side but the image quality on the reissue left a lot to be desired, so I'm assuming it was just a port of the original. As soon as the price is right, the Blu-ray will be mine...
User avatar
ZizouJuve
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 3:07 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Contact:

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1684 Post by ZizouJuve »

swo17 wrote:They did reissue Boogie Nights on DVD in 2007, but I believe it was just a repackaging of the earlier edition into a two-disc keepcase. I never compared the two editions side by side but the image quality on the reissue left a lot to be desired, so I'm assuming it was just a port of the original. As soon as the price is right, the Blu-ray will be mine...
That was one of my most anticipated Blu's of this year and its well worth it. Hell I even ventured into the devil's lair (Best Buy) to pick it up.
User avatar
dx23
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:52 am
Location: Puerto Rico

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1685 Post by dx23 »

I heard that the Blu-ray left out some extras or easter eggs. Does anyone know anything?
User avatar
nsps
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 8:25 am
Contact:

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1686 Post by nsps »

I know the color bars with JCR's ass were removed from Magnolia, but I haven't checked Boogie Nights.
User avatar
Noiretirc
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: VanIsle
Contact:

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1687 Post by Noiretirc »

fdm wrote:If you're sitting on the fence about going to blu-ray, and your TV only has component video inputs (no hdmi), might be a good idea to get a player by the end of this year... Link
Sigh, I wish I could understand what that all meant. I think I'm rather like John Lennon in this department; "Mr Martin, make this song sound like an orange."
User avatar
fdm
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 5:25 pm

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1688 Post by fdm »

Noiretirc wrote:
fdm wrote:If you're sitting on the fence about going to blu-ray, and your TV only has component video inputs (no hdmi), might be a good idea to get a player by the end of this year... Link
Sigh, I wish I could understand what that all meant. I think I'm rather like John Lennon in this department; "Mr Martin, make this song sound like an orange."
Basically it means that if you got a widescreen TV (or projector) prior to a few years ago when the best connection on it might have been through those three red blue and green connectors (component video), once next year's new blu-ray player models start to appear, and you end up hooking one of them up using those connectors, you will only be allowed to see DVD quality picture (standard definition), even when playing blu-ray discs.

If you get one of this year's (or earlier) model blu-ray players, you'll still be able to see full HD quality picture (high definition) from blu-rays when you use those very same connectors between your blu-ray player and your TV.

If you currently (or in the future) use an HDMI connection instead, you can basically ignore that article.

(That's from the hardware perspective. What wasn't mentioned in the article is that from a software (blu-ray disc) perspective, film companies could theoretically at any time also start "locking" (flagging is the term I think they use) the discs in such a way that even if you have a this year or earlier player, those flagged discs would only allow standard def video to come out of players that are using component video outputs to connect to their TVs.)

So, component video is basically being phased out as a high definition option for blu-ray players, those available now should be fine, unless film companies decide to also start flagging their discs so even that is not permitted (when blu-ray was first introduced, they agreed up front to not flag the discs for several years because most TVs only had component video connections, dunno if/when that moratorium on flagging will end).

More verbose than I anticipated when I started typing, but maybe that'll help a bit. (If too much, the first paragraph or so should give you the gist of the this year's players vs next year's players disadvantage coming up.)
User avatar
mteller
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:23 pm

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1689 Post by mteller »

dx23 wrote:I heard that the Blu-ray left out some extras or easter eggs. Does anyone know anything?
The color bars and the associated easter egg are gone. Everything else is there.
User avatar
Noiretirc
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: VanIsle
Contact:

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1690 Post by Noiretirc »

Thank you fdm, that was quite helpful.
User avatar
manicsounds
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:58 am
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1691 Post by manicsounds »

User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1692 Post by aox »

Sony? is that a good thing?
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:42 pm

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1693 Post by domino harvey »

Well, it's a good thing for fans of the Worst DVD Covers Ever thread
User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:58 pm
Location: Northwest US

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1694 Post by Brian C »

Will Sony have anything to do with them other than basically stamping a logo on the back and collecting a cut?

In general terms though, Sony good, yes?
User avatar
willoneill
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1695 Post by willoneill »

From the article I read, it seems that Sony will be handling all of the marketing on these, and it will be Weinstein that will simply be getting a cut.
User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:58 pm
Location: Northwest US

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1696 Post by Brian C »

I guess the relevant question is who's going to be in charge of the actual content. Are Sony simply going to be releasing transfers that the Weinsteins have already made? Or doing their own heavy lifting?
User avatar
fdm
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 5:25 pm

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1697 Post by fdm »

Noiretirc wrote:Thank you fdm, that was quite helpful.
Sure, no problem. About the only "if" that I thought about later, is possibly they could retro-actively downgrade component video via a firmware update, but that's probably just me being paranoid. (But just in case, might be a good idea to hold off on firmware updates after the end of this year if you're hooked up via component video until someone (else) makes sure ;))
User avatar
nsps
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 8:25 am
Contact:

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1698 Post by nsps »

fdm wrote:
Noiretirc wrote:Thank you fdm, that was quite helpful.
Sure, no problem. About the only "if" that I thought about later, is possibly they could retro-actively downgrade component video via a firmware update, but that's probably just me being paranoid. (But just in case, might be a good idea to hold off on firmware updates after the end of this year if you're hooked up via component video until someone (else) makes sure ;))
Given the consortium's consumer-as-enemy worldview, I don't think you're being paranoid at all.
User avatar
fdm
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 5:25 pm

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1699 Post by fdm »

nsps wrote:
fdm wrote:
Noiretirc wrote:Thank you fdm, that was quite helpful.
Sure, no problem. About the only "if" that I thought about later, is possibly they could retro-actively downgrade component video via a firmware update, but that's probably just me being paranoid. (But just in case, might be a good idea to hold off on firmware updates after the end of this year if you're hooked up via component video until someone (else) makes sure ;))
Given the consortium's consumer-as-enemy worldview, I don't think you're being paranoid at all.
Yeah, I just re-skimmed the article a little while ago, and my skimming led me to believe that if a current component video fully enabled blu-ray player is still being sold next year, this could end up not being paranoia based at all. One of the few reasons I'm glad my component video only HDTV died after a few years. (Replaced with a Sony notorious for its bad optical blocks... but at least it has HDMI :roll:.)
AfterTheRain
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 1:42 am

Re: Blu-ray, in General

#1700 Post by AfterTheRain »

I just got a Blu-ray player today for my birthday. Does anyone know about any DVD-for-Blu-ray exchange programs that are going on? It's because I have a couple of titles that are out on the format and I would really like to know.
Post Reply