----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
If you go to AVSforum much there is usually a thread or two about how
HBO does the zoom-and-crop to ALL their movies (NO OAR for them)
because one of their pointy-haired bosses decided that his Plasma
shouldn't have black bars. There are a few movies done before the
edict but, on HBO you'll generally see slightly fuzzy picture; zoomed
in from 2.35. And, there are some that were 'open matted' like the
Matrix and such, but, overall Showtime and HDnet show OAR--as the
director intended!
erik g
At 02:27 PM -0400 07/26/05, Anthony Rizzuto wrote:
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>I can't agree more. The difference in quality between 480p and 1080i on
>HBO, Showtime, In HD, etc is nowhere near what it was prior to calibration.
>Having said that, there is a dramatic difference in image quality on
>programs that were shot in and for HDTV such as a majority of the
>programming on Discovery HD. This is where I think the format truly shines.
>One last point, with respect to newer films shown on HBO and Showtime HD,
>why is it that a lot them are broadcast in 1:85 to 1 where as the DVD
>version quite often is 2:35 to 1. Are there simply different wide screen
>versions of motion picture out there, and are the 1:85 to 1 versions cutting
>off the detail I'm seeing on the 2:35 to 1 versions. Logically that would
>seem to be the case.
>
>Anthony R.
>Orlando, FL
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>Doug Weil
>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:47 AM
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
>sights of one hand clapping)
>
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>Jason,
>
>Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
>it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you know
>what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
>listen for.
>
>Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile, any
>more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.
>
>I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
>relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
>pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of the
>buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.
>
>Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
>still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
>impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
>and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy, as
>the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
>huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.
>
>Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
>then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do with
>signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO, I
>don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the average
>consumer.
>
>If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
>difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
>public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close to
>approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p or
>1080p HD-format DVD.
>
>Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
>HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
>substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
>improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude, even
>with DVI and HDMI.
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Doug
>Clearly Resolved Image & Sound
>
>Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
>Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993
>
>eMail: [email protected]
>Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com
>
>Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
>http://www.imagingscience.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>[email protected]
>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
>of one hand clapping)
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
>audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
>than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
>tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
>more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
>the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
>different league than audio improvements.
>
>Jason Burroughs
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
>Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
>sights of one hand clapping)
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
>/was
>>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
>sad
>>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
>blew
>>away the common CD.
>
>A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
>the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
>available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
>content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
>listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
>(with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
>really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
>SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
>priced spread?
>
>Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
>(which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
>and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
>to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
>is lower than even the CD sources.
>
>I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
>HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
>practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
>agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
>cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
>the cause as it has been in the past.
>
>
>-- RAF
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
>same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]
If you go to AVSforum much there is usually a thread or two about how
HBO does the zoom-and-crop to ALL their movies (NO OAR for them)
because one of their pointy-haired bosses decided that his Plasma
shouldn't have black bars. There are a few movies done before the
edict but, on HBO you'll generally see slightly fuzzy picture; zoomed
in from 2.35. And, there are some that were 'open matted' like the
Matrix and such, but, overall Showtime and HDnet show OAR--as the
director intended!
erik g
At 02:27 PM -0400 07/26/05, Anthony Rizzuto wrote:
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>I can't agree more. The difference in quality between 480p and 1080i on
>HBO, Showtime, In HD, etc is nowhere near what it was prior to calibration.
>Having said that, there is a dramatic difference in image quality on
>programs that were shot in and for HDTV such as a majority of the
>programming on Discovery HD. This is where I think the format truly shines.
>One last point, with respect to newer films shown on HBO and Showtime HD,
>why is it that a lot them are broadcast in 1:85 to 1 where as the DVD
>version quite often is 2:35 to 1. Are there simply different wide screen
>versions of motion picture out there, and are the 1:85 to 1 versions cutting
>off the detail I'm seeing on the 2:35 to 1 versions. Logically that would
>seem to be the case.
>
>Anthony R.
>Orlando, FL
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>Doug Weil
>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:47 AM
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
>sights of one hand clapping)
>
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>Jason,
>
>Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
>it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you know
>what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
>listen for.
>
>Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile, any
>more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.
>
>I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
>relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
>pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of the
>buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.
>
>Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
>still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
>impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
>and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy, as
>the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
>huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.
>
>Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
>then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do with
>signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO, I
>don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the average
>consumer.
>
>If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
>difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
>public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close to
>approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p or
>1080p HD-format DVD.
>
>Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
>HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
>substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
>improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude, even
>with DVI and HDMI.
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Doug
>Clearly Resolved Image & Sound
>
>Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
>Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993
>
>eMail: [email protected]
>Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com
>
>Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
>http://www.imagingscience.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>[email protected]
>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
>of one hand clapping)
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
>audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
>than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
>tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
>more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
>the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
>different league than audio improvements.
>
>Jason Burroughs
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
>Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
>To: HDTV Magazine
>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
>sights of one hand clapping)
>
>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
>At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
>/was
>>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
>sad
>>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
>blew
>>away the common CD.
>
>A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
>the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
>available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
>content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
>listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
>(with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
>really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
>SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
>priced spread?
>
>Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
>(which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
>and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
>to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
>is lower than even the CD sources.
>
>I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
>HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
>practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
>agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
>cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
>the cause as it has been in the past.
>
>
>-- RAF
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
>same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
>
>
>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted
>that same day) send an email to:
>[email protected]
To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]