BluRay worth it!!!!
Discussion
stevieb said:
Fatman2 said:
^^ from my (relatively short) experience with 3D TV I'd tend to agree.
I was hoping for a cinema-esque experience but was disapointed due to the lack of projection.
Having watched a few 3d movies at the cinema it does work for some films, but it can be a distraction for others. I was hoping for a cinema-esque experience but was disapointed due to the lack of projection.
At home i have already ruled out 3d for the next 3 years as i just purchased a HD Projector
I think we may have to wait until the next generation at least for higher refresh rates as I think they're currently using 96Hz which doesn't seem fast enough given my experience. A friend who was there was troubled by flicker that I didn't 'see' though maybe that's what gave me the headache.
Trouble is that almost all the films that seemed to be demo'd were cartoon type, rather than a 'proper' film, so not for my taste anyway.
On the topic of flicker, IIRC from my physiology lectures, the critical fusion rate (i.e the frequency at which a strobed image / light can be detected to be flickering) is dependent on the fatigue of the viewer, indeed it has been used as a fatigue measure.
So, if you are susceptible to it, you are best off watching it when not tired, which will minimise the flicker effect.
So, if you are susceptible to it, you are best off watching it when not tired, which will minimise the flicker effect.
rhinochopig said:
On the topic of flicker, IIRC from my physiology lectures, the critical fusion rate (i.e the frequency at which a strobed image / light can be detected to be flickering) is dependent on the fatigue of the viewer, indeed it has been used as a fatigue measure.
So, if you are susceptible to it, you are best off watching it when not tired, which will minimise the flicker effect.
As we appear to have all gone and gotten our anoraks on....So, if you are susceptible to it, you are best off watching it when not tired, which will minimise the flicker effect.
The human eye needs film to run at 24 frames per second to see a constant moving image (rather than a series of rapidly changing single images. IIRC, most 16mm film cameras shoot at 25 fps to allow for variances in this amongst people, including, as you rightly point out, those with fatigue.
Not much point shooting at 25fps if it's going on to a BluRay at 1080/24p as they'll have to slow it down a touch. 
I don't think I was tired the other day at the demo as it was in the middle of the day and I'd had a decent lie in being a Saturday. I reckon I'm just not suited to 3D or at least the active glasses version running at 96Hz (that's if I'm even right regarding this figure). They're also quite heavy on top of normal prescription specs as I found out. I'd have to consider getting prescription 3D specs if 3D becomes the norm.
Regardless, the 2D stuff from BluRay looked pretty good although the £1,000 Arcam player they were using might be a bit OTT unless you want it match existing Arcam gear. I was well behaved though as I didn't think it looked sufficiently better (if at all as theirs wasn't calibrated) than my recently calibrated older JVC projector to warrant the £5k or so upgrade cost. I'm sticking with what I've got for at least another year I reckon.
I don't think I was tired the other day at the demo as it was in the middle of the day and I'd had a decent lie in being a Saturday. I reckon I'm just not suited to 3D or at least the active glasses version running at 96Hz (that's if I'm even right regarding this figure). They're also quite heavy on top of normal prescription specs as I found out. I'd have to consider getting prescription 3D specs if 3D becomes the norm.Regardless, the 2D stuff from BluRay looked pretty good although the £1,000 Arcam player they were using might be a bit OTT unless you want it match existing Arcam gear. I was well behaved though as I didn't think it looked sufficiently better (if at all as theirs wasn't calibrated) than my recently calibrated older JVC projector to warrant the £5k or so upgrade cost. I'm sticking with what I've got for at least another year I reckon.
Well ordered a s370 from amazon (£105 with works discount). With a few films that I have been holding off buying.
The only thing that is going to annoy me now is that the hdmi cable is going to be visable, all other cables are buried behind the wall.. time to update the wiring for the living room and redecorate. Well it's been 4 years time for a spring makeover.
The only thing that is going to annoy me now is that the hdmi cable is going to be visable, all other cables are buried behind the wall.. time to update the wiring for the living room and redecorate. Well it's been 4 years time for a spring makeover.
Edited by stevieb on Monday 29th November 23:40
rhinochopig said:
Definitely worth it. Surprisingly, it was the sound quality that really impressed me. It's a quantum leap over DVD.
I've bought a couple of BDs versions of DVDs - I have Alien / Aliens for example - and I won't be replacing them all, but it is a much better viewing listening and watching experience.
It was the sound quality that has also impressed me the most so far.I've bought a couple of BDs versions of DVDs - I have Alien / Aliens for example - and I won't be replacing them all, but it is a much better viewing listening and watching experience.
I really struggle to see 3D taking off in this country....I really don't see that unless you have a 50"+ screen that it can really work properly. Even then you need to sit very close which means that only one or two people can sit in the perfect position. I just don't think you average UK living room is big enough to do it properly.
Beardy10 said:
I really struggle to see 3D taking off in this country....I really don't see that unless you have a 50"+ screen that it can really work properly. Even then you need to sit very close which means that only one or two people can sit in the perfect position. I just don't think you average UK living room is big enough to do it properly.
It's never going to take off until they develop a system that doesn't require glasses and has a wide viewing angle. I bought a Sony S570 Blu-Ray player which happens to be 3D ready but that I bought it for it's wifi and hard-drive. I don't have a 3D telly nor do I plan on getting one.I'm still sure that physical media (full stop) will become old hat before properly high quality Bluray media becomes the norm.
I'm not convinced that things like iTunes video rentals etc are there yet in terms of quality. Nor that our internet infrastructure could handle us all downloading on demand. But equally, I don't think it will be long before they are (within 5-10yrs).
As a result, I can't be arsed investing in a more expensive physical media type.
My current set up does a great job at displaying DVD images. The sound's perfectly fine (extremely good really) for the living room. I'm pretty sure I'll be downloading high def films regularly before ever feeling a massively pressing need to buy into Bluray.
Put it this way...I think I first became properly aware of music downloads about 13yrs ago (call me slow, I know!). I was far from convinced about the quality of it, but within a few years that wasn't the case. I don't think I've bought a physical CD in 5yrs now, and can't believe we ever had to house hundreds of CDs in racks in our living space...
We'll be thinking the same of DVDs (I already rip these as soon as they're bought, and stick them in the loft) and Bluray in short order.
I'm not convinced that things like iTunes video rentals etc are there yet in terms of quality. Nor that our internet infrastructure could handle us all downloading on demand. But equally, I don't think it will be long before they are (within 5-10yrs).
As a result, I can't be arsed investing in a more expensive physical media type.
My current set up does a great job at displaying DVD images. The sound's perfectly fine (extremely good really) for the living room. I'm pretty sure I'll be downloading high def films regularly before ever feeling a massively pressing need to buy into Bluray.
Put it this way...I think I first became properly aware of music downloads about 13yrs ago (call me slow, I know!). I was far from convinced about the quality of it, but within a few years that wasn't the case. I don't think I've bought a physical CD in 5yrs now, and can't believe we ever had to house hundreds of CDs in racks in our living space...
We'll be thinking the same of DVDs (I already rip these as soon as they're bought, and stick them in the loft) and Bluray in short order.
SirBlade said:
I read recently that only about a third of movies are actually better in the blue ray format, Avatar being a prime example.
This means that 60% of stuff on BR disks is s
te.
This might relate to a 'review' in What Hifi IIRC, which to be blunt was total bThis means that 60% of stuff on BR disks is s
te.ks as are most of their reviews. I don't think I've seen a BluRay that looked worse than a DVD on my 10' screen and I've seen about 200 or so. I know there are some that have excessive edge enhancement so they look better on smaller screens like 50" plasmas , but most discs don't have this treatment. I can understand not buying a stack of BluRays, but when you can rent for around £1 a disc I can't see why you would choose a DVD if the film is available on BluRay.Re the sound part of BluRay, be aware that even older amps can benefit as if you don't have HD decoding, you still benefit from a higher bitrate from DTS 'core' which is 1.5mbps compared to most DVDs at less than half that figure, so much less compressed.
Edited by OldSkoolRS on Thursday 2nd December 00:13
Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff