Do you like 1080p+

[dibbers006]

The initial message was deleted from this topic on 07 November 2023 at 13:19

[gregs656]

Indiana Jones were all shot on 35mm film which is digitally equivalent to 4k (ish) so quite a bit higher than 1080.

[gregs656]

I get what you were saying, was just pointing out that the original recordings have always been high resolution. If you watch Indiana Jones now you're probably seeing something closer to what was intended than watching a worn out VHS recording 20 years a go,

[LeadFarmer]

dibbers006 said:

Call me a product of the 70/80s but films don't quite hit the spot unless they are a maximum of 1080p.

Preferably recorded on VHS @4:3 with a filthy vinette grain of dark noise muddying the whole thing up. A bit of wobble, misalignment, artifacts.

Anything pre-2000... leave it be I want the full 14" box room experience.

And have to walk to the local shops to rent it out, only to find they are all out and have to chose a different film that you aren't really bothered about

I still remember the excitement of winning a competition back on the early 90's at my local Titles video rental store, I was allowed to choose from three VHS films to keep, I chose Point Break as a random punt. What a film that was.

[ScotHill]

What I absolutely can't stand on any kind of movie is motion smoothing (or video interpolation, or the soap opera effect) whereby any film looks fine as long as the camera is static and people aren't moving too much, looks as you might remember it from the cinema; but as soon as anything starts moving too fast the whole screen suddenly looks like it was shot on SVHS. It's a default setting on a lot of TVs, including my parents' and inlaws', and it's really meant for high speed action like sports but it ruins films for me. One night when they went to bed I switched it off and everything went back to normal.

Modern TVs are terrible for non-tech savvy people - again, my inlaws bought an external speaker system for their TV because they said the built-in speakers were rubbish, but it was because the speakers were only playing the left and right channels from 5-channel Dolby broadcasts, I couldn't work out how to default it away from that.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/what-is...

[bloomen]

I appreciate 4K for modern stuff. I don't seek it out for older films.

There are plenty of 4K reissues of old films and to me many of them look worse than the original blu ray release. They might be technically more competent and 'true' but it often feels like watching a higher frame rate. It feels unnatural but you're not completely sure why.

Blade Runner in 4K is so grainy it's hard to see past it.

Below that, 4.3 and tracking going all over the place is definitely not how the filmmaker originally wanted you to see it, though it certainly has the nostalgia factor.

The real way to watch old trash is 16mm. Bit like hard work these days.

Edited by bloomen on Wednesday 8th June 12:09

[colin_p]

Amateurs.

I used to like watching the snooker on a black and white 14" portable with dodgy reception. That was living.

[Lucas Ayde]

My tellies are all 1080p (or lower) and I don't have any issues with the resolution. I'm certainly not going to bin any of them to go 4K. Once one of them breaks any new set is likely to be 4K by default.

Mind you the largest one is 43" which these days qualifies as a 'small' screen, I guess. You really need a big screen (or sat very close) to find issue with 1920x1080 resolution on a regular video feed.

I get that HDR is nice but lack of true black on most screen technolgies kind of takes the edge off of that. I'll likely look for an OLED set when I have to buy a new one.