Disappointed with HD vs DVD movies (1 Viewer)

slffl

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Guru
Nov 18, 2003
124
0
So I had a chance the other night to compare directly a HD movie to a DVD movie. It was Star Wars Episode II. TV settings were the same for both componant sources.

Now I've heard that SWEPII was a bad HD transfer, however, I expected it to be at least comparable to DVD. First was the OAR. Not only were the sides chopped off, but also the top and bottom were missing some. So I take it they just zoomed in to get the 16:9 ratio.

Finally was color and resolution. The color on the HD feed was very red and saturated. Also the resolution seemed worse than the DVD when it's actually 6x? as high.

So I have to say I'm extremely disappointed with the premium channel's HD movies. I hope if/when they offer PPV movies that they at least show them in OAR. But until HD-DVD arrives, I think DVD is higher quality overall than HD for movies.
 

squicken

Member
Supporting Founder
Mar 24, 2004
1,046
0
They had to the bad transfer for public safety reasons. If people were allowed to watch the rolling around in the grass scene in their homes in flawless HD, people would smash their TVs with the nearest available weapon in rage. The social costs of loss of property and potential for injury outweighed any benefit of a quality transfer.

Also, I believe we as a forum need to take a stand on something very important. As most of you know, the DVD set of Episodes 4-6 that is being released in Septemeber is crap. It is in fact the 90s special edition, and there are no plans to release the originals. The special editions sucked. Han Solo shot Greedo b/c he Han was a bad-ass MF, not b/c Greedo shot first as portrayed in the special editions. I will never buy thais filth.
None of this "Lucas intneded to make the movies like this, but technology at the time limited him." First off, the technology was there to make Greedo shot first. Just Lucas giving into wussies who like their good guys with smooth edges. Second, clearly Lucas suffered some form of head injury between 85 and 95. How else to explain the horrible decision making thereafter. I'm done.

FREE HAT. FREE HAT. FREE HAT.
 

slffl

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Guru
Nov 18, 2003
124
0
I've already boycotted the SW Trilogy DVD's. I don't care about CG for CG sake, which is what all of the new shots look like. I especially hate the cartoony characters in Jabbas palace.
 

squicken

Member
Supporting Founder
Mar 24, 2004
1,046
0
Oh, the CG is indeed intolerable. But the whole Greedo thing in Episode 4 just bugs me more than any other scene in particular. If I'm spelling Greedo wrong, I apologize. I have 15 year old letterboxed editions of the trilogy, and that'll have to do.
 

Stalker

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 21, 2004
217
0
Kentucky
Something had to be not right!!

slffl said:
So I had a chance the other night to compare directly a HD movie to a DVD movie. It was Star Wars Episode II. TV settings were the same for both componant sources.

Now I've heard that SWEPII was a bad HD transfer, however, I expected it to be at least comparable to DVD. First was the OAR. Not only were the sides chopped off, but also the top and bottom were missing some. So I take it they just zoomed in to get the 16:9 ratio.

Finally was color and resolution. The color on the HD feed was very red and saturated. Also the resolution seemed worse than the DVD when it's actually 6x? as high.

So I have to say I'm extremely disappointed with the premium channel's HD movies. I hope if/when they offer PPV movies that they at least show them in OAR. But until HD-DVD arrives, I think DVD is higher quality overall than HD for movies.

Something wrong somewhere; because I watched SW Episode II ATOTC the other night and it was full screen glorious clarity and DD sound..I was right in the middle of all the action baby!!!

May the force be with you!! :shocked :smug
 

mccujo

New Member
May 4, 2004
4
0
I have seen both the DVD version of Episode II and the HD version. I find that the colors in most DVDs are a bit oversaturated (especially when they are dark). But the colors in Episode II HD were a bit overpowering even for HD. But other than then oversaturation (which was still less saturated than the DVD version), the picture was much better and sharper. I know that people love their OAR, but to be honest, I generally find them to be a waste of screen (with the black bars on the top and bottom). Most movies do not require the scoped format of 2.35:1. Most of the movies shot today are actually framed and shot for a standard 1.85:1 aspect ratio and the scoped versions either contain extraneous extra viewing area to the side that was never really important to the shot or the 1.85:1 aspect ratio film was modified by chopping off part of the top and bottom of the picture to give the impression of a wider 2.35:1 aspect ratio. I know that sounds rediculous to shoot for 1.85:1 and then cut the top and bottom of the picture off to make it 2.35:1, but just check out the Harry Potter movies when they are on HD (especially the Sorcerer's Stone). Watch the HD version and the DVD version side by side and you will see that the 2.35:1 ratio on the DVD was achieved by that exact method. I believe the DVD producers do this because that is the aspect ratio people seem to think is the best and the only way to get the entire picture, but that is not always the case. Now, I have a 16x9 projector and to me, I love the way HD movies use the entire screen. If you only watched the 16x9 version of the Episode II film, I doubt that you would have even noticed any difference. Of course, you are entitled to disagree...
 

mattyro

SatelliteGuys Guru
Apr 19, 2004
142
0
If you think DVD is better than hi def....a) you are watching the sd feed-not hd or...b) you simply dont recognize quality when you see it. or lastly...c) something is wrong with the source or the tv. I have friends who have no interest or bias who take one look at say.."BLADE2" or "Lord of the Rings" and instaantly they recognize that they are seeing something extraordinary. Happens a lot with movies someone has seen 20-30 times on DVD like "Matrix" or "Spiderman".
 

slffl

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Guru
Nov 18, 2003
124
0
Well, there's nothing wrong with the tv or settings. I just watched Blade II last night, and let me tell you, it's something with VOOM. If any of you have ever realized that the picture on D* is more washed out (especially in dark scenes) than E*, this is the same thing I'm seeing on these VOOM premium movie channels. Blade II is a dark movie and it was very hard to make out any details.

And as far as OAR, why not just watch the 4:3 version if chopping off the movie doesn't mean anything to you?
 

Sean Mota

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Sep 8, 2003
19,040
1,738
New York City
slffl said:
Well, there's nothing wrong with the tv or settings. I just watched Blade II last night, and let me tell you, it's something with VOOM. If any of you have ever realized that the picture on D* is more washed out (especially in dark scenes) than E*, this is the same thing I'm seeing on these VOOM premium movie channels. Blade II is a dark movie and it was very hard to make out any details.

And as far as OAR, why not just watch the 4:3 version if chopping off the movie doesn't mean anything to you?

You have to be kidding, right? I watched last night both on E* and V* on both DLP and LCD and saw quite a lot of details and much better than DVD. Even my Sony LCD that does not display True blacks and which hides black details was looking excellent! Then again I have calibrated both displays. The OAR issue is not a VOOM problem. If anything, take with Starz-HD for cropping the movie.
 

slffl

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Guru
Nov 18, 2003
124
0
Well I guess I should say that SOME HD movies are disappointing. Watched Matrix Reloaded and it looked awesome (except for the weird stuttering/fps problem it had for awhile), even the blacks had detail, still not the same when it's 16:9.

But before you call me 'crazy', do a side-by-side of SWEPII and then get back with me. I guess this is one of those things I'll have to take pictures of in order to 'prove' it.
 

slffl

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Guru
Nov 18, 2003
124
0
Well, I did another side-by-side. This time of SpiderMan. Once again the DVD had more detail, especially in dark scenes (which spiderman is full of). Watch Hulk also. Didn't have the DVD to do sBs, but one scene I remember that I will compare to DVD is after Hulk smashes throught the house, he goes to a cabin where the lady is at. She comes out with her flashlight. There is a shot where she's looking up at Hulk and the moon is lighting him and the trees from behind. Now I seem to remember you could actually make out Hulk and the trees in the theatre, but on my TV, EVERYTHING was black except for some moonlit trees.

Also, watched Matrix Reloaded again last night. The 10fps problem happened at almost the exact same time as before!!! This time it started doing it about 10 sec into the Agent Smith fight scene. I wish I knew if this was VOOMs problem or not.

P.S. My TV has been calibrated using an Avia disc. HD video (TDCHD, HDnews, etc) looks great, however, the movie channels have tons of red and no detail.
 

ratam

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
May 11, 2004
33
0
San Francisco
Glad others noticed the frames being dropped in The Matrix Reloaded. It was making me nuts last night but found that other channels were not showing this problem. PQ was excellent, other than some of the fight scenes looking like a slideshow. Siffl, if you are having to zoom-in and seeing a letterbox version of a film, than try another channel. Does not sound like HD.

check this one out:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/anamorphic/aspectratios/widescreenorama.html
 

ratam

Well-Known SatelliteGuys Member
May 11, 2004
33
0
San Francisco
timfouts said:
The problem was with the original feed coming from the source, not Voom. My C-Band system bears witness.

What sort of programming is available on the C-Band? Always wanted one but they are frowned upon for apartment dwellers such as myself.
 

warkovision

SatelliteGuys Guru
Supporting Founder
Mar 30, 2004
147
0
Does anybody know the source material used for the HD transfers? I find it hard to believe that they would use film. If not film, then what? Most likely a DVD I would guess. And I prefer OAR.

slffl said:
Well I guess I should say that SOME HD movies are disappointing. Watched Matrix Reloaded and it looked awesome (except for the weird stuttering/fps problem it had for awhile), even the blacks had detail, still not the same when it's 16:9.

But before you call me 'crazy', do a side-by-side of SWEPII and then get back with me. I guess this is one of those things I'll have to take pictures of in order to 'prove' it.
 

cameron119

SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 18, 2004
288
0
First of all they can't use DVD for the HD source. It is not HD.

Second, what do you suppose the source for the DVD is? Film. The directors FILM the movie since most of them are purists. The only master is 35mm Film in most large budget movies.

To answer your question, the only way to get true HD is to record it live or transfer it from film. Anything else is upconversion.

Did you attempt to read any of the previous posts?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Top