U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Veterans Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-01-2012, 08:06 AM
 
8,402 posts, read 20,657,715 times
Reputation: 6782

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Generally speaking the difference is the same you have between SD TV and HD TV. The resolution of both DVD and and SDTV are realtively small compared to HDTV and BluRay, BluRay can take full advantage of a HDTV. This is about what is available for SDTV and is exactly the max resolution of DVD. This image is stretched over the entire size of the display, the larger it gets the fuzzier it gets.




If we were to superimpose that image on the available resolution for HDTV and Blu Ray:









While refresh rate is important you're going to see a vast improvement with even 60hz especially considering the framerate of the video you are watching is only 24/30FPS. The TV we have is 120hz and it looks fabulous.
This is why I asked the question. I paired many BluRay players with LCD TVs when 60Hz was the only option, and they looked amazing. There is also the point that in a given line of TVs, moving up to gain one feature or benefit brings other features and benefits along. So a 240 Hz or 120 Hz
TV is likely to have a better overall picture for reasons beyond the refresh rate, and any source viewed on it will look better. Of course none of this matters on a plasma.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-02-2012, 03:30 PM
 
235 posts, read 413,448 times
Reputation: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilVA View Post
It depends on the quality of your Toshiba TV. On 60-120hz you'd barely notice the difference. On 240hz its extremely more noticeable of how more crisp and detailed the picture is.
Sorry, but you clearly have less than zero idea what you are talking about. Telling someone they wouldn't notice the difference in BD over DVD unless they have a 240Hz panel shows that you don't even understand the very most basic bullet points of HDTV. Study now, give advice later, young padawan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 03:27 PM
 
235 posts, read 413,448 times
Reputation: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilVA View Post
Thats as dumb as stating that all LCD/LED screens are exactly the same. The change is dramatically different on who manufactured the screen itself and not the label on the plastic.
Honestly, I have no idea what you are even attempting to say here. Of course there are different quality levels of panels. However, your previous post was insinuating that the interpolated refresh rate (60/120/240) was responsible for the picture quality, which shows that you don't even realize that the two aren't even related.Moderator cut: personal remarks

Last edited by Marka; 07-04-2012 at 12:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2012, 07:01 PM
 
Location: Baker City, Oregon
3,817 posts, read 5,979,663 times
Reputation: 6275
The OP was asking whether Blu-ray has a better picture quality than DVD.

He wasn't asking whether some TVs have better picture quality than others (Everything looks better on TVs with better picture quality) or wondering about refresh rates.

The answer is YES. Blu-ray has an MUCH higher resolution. It also uses much better video compression methods resulting in more contrast and richer colors. The sound quality is also better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 02:10 PM
 
235 posts, read 413,448 times
Reputation: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by karlsch View Post
He wasn't asking whether some TVs have better picture quality than others (Everything looks better on TVs with better picture quality) or wondering about refresh rates.
Exactly, nobody was talking about that until NeilVA interjected saying that there was no difference unless you had a 240Hz tv, which was both off-topic and wildly incorrect.

The resolution of BD is one of the myriad reasons that it is superior to DVD, it's really no contest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2012, 04:48 PM
 
16,308 posts, read 25,256,087 times
Reputation: 8302
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilVA View Post
It depends on the quality of your Toshiba TV. On 60-120hz you'd barely notice the difference. On 240hz its extremely more noticeable of how more crisp and detailed the picture is. If you do get a bluRay, get one with upconvert and built-in wifi (not wifi ready). I'd recommend a Samsung BDD6500 (has 3D capability if needed) as it is feature rich and you can now find it for below $100 as its been discontinued and replaced with the BDE6500.
No it is NOT. Remember that movies and most TV is filmed (captured) and broadcast at 24 FPS, which means that it merely displays the same image 10 times at 240.

That said, 240Hz displays do use MEMC (Motion Estimation Motion Compensation) to reduce motion blur by pre-processing the image and reducing motion blur by predicting where the image will be in between frames. The difference between 120 and 240 is very slight and is primarily due to the MEMC, not the speed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2012, 01:42 PM
 
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
11,814 posts, read 13,951,598 times
Reputation: 8047
I was staying out of this because I always get flack for this opinion.

You will hardly notice the difference.

I have a high quality Plasma Panasonic. Netflix wanted to charge an extra $2.00 for Blu Ray. So I upgraded my plan and ordered a Blu Ray and a DVD of the same movie. Played each in the PS3.

I couldn't tell the difference. The Blu Ray MIGHT have had SLIGHTLY brighter colors but overall the difference was near impossible to tell.
Re-did the test with an animated movie.
No noticeable difference.

"But they connect to the internet!" Yea... so it can connect me to some marketing website from Disney or Warner Brothers. oboy sign me up. Same marketing crap they told us when DVD's came out. "You can watch movies from different camera angles!" And the only ones to take advantage of that was the pron industry.
Hype.

Here's something the Blu Ray people seem to forget once they make the jump: Standard DVD's look AMAZING on High Def TV's. They really do.

Blu Ray: the future? Of course. Should you get one? Yes, as they are dirt cheap now.
Will you notice a huge difference versus VHS? Absolutely.
Will you notice a huge difference versus DVD. No.

You all may now tell me I am full of s---... 8)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2012, 04:35 PM
 
235 posts, read 413,448 times
Reputation: 550
No offense, but this is one topic where there really isn't room for "opinion" and I don't mean that in a derogatory way. The difference is STAGGERING and there's really no wiggle room when you compare technical specs. Unless you are using equipment that isn't set up right (yeah, it happens) then there's zero technical evidence that the DVD would look as good.

It'd be exactly like saying that a Fiero is as fast as a Ferrari and sticking to your guns. In no universe is the Fiero faster regardless of how much one argues in its favor. It's an asinine viewpoint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2012, 06:57 PM
 
8,402 posts, read 20,657,715 times
Reputation: 6782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Subzro View Post
No offense, but this is one topic where there really isn't room for "opinion" and I don't mean that in a derogatory way. The difference is STAGGERING and there's really no wiggle room when you compare technical specs. Unless you are using equipment that isn't set up right (yeah, it happens) then there's zero technical evidence that the DVD would look as good.

It'd be exactly like saying that a Fiero is as fast as a Ferrari and sticking to your guns. In no universe is the Fiero faster regardless of how much one argues in its favor. It's an asinine viewpoint.
While I agree that Bluray is a big jump over DVD, GIGO still applies. There are plenty of movies where cinematography wasn't a primary focus (pun intended) and they are not going to be stellar representations of Bluray's advantages. I did a surround system for a guy including an Elite 61" plasma and all the appropriate goodies. He put in some pirate movie from the 90's and was disappointed with the picture. I put in an Eagles concert Bluray I knew he'd enjoy and he was blown away. Not only with the picture but the multi-channel audio specific to Bluray (I forget which format this concert had) was amazing.

Music CDs have the same issues. Some of the music was recorded so poorly that all the special editions, gold discs, remasters, SACD, DVD-A, etc., in the world make little difference. I'm talking about recent stuff, from the last 30 years, not oldies. A good example is Judas Priest's Screaming for Vengeance. Yes, I'm a rocker/metalhead from way back. I like every song on that album, and have bought several editions in the search for improved sound quality. All of them sound like the microphones were around the corner from the musicians, with sweaters over the mikes. I wish I could find a recording that sounds great, but I haven't yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2012, 07:33 PM
 
Location: sowf jawja
1,940 posts, read 8,302,413 times
Reputation: 1042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peregrine View Post

Here's something the Blu Ray people seem to forget once they make the jump: Standard DVD's look AMAZING on High Def TV's. They really do.

eh. . . . . i have to disagree.


they look good, but not amazing; not blu-ray quality.


some are better than others, but some are pure crap. The resolution and bitrate of DVD video isn't even close to blu-ray. i suspect your TV may be the reason you didn't notice much of a difference.


I ripped my entire DVD collection, and was able to look at the bitrates of each. What was a bit surprising, is the newer DVD's that had all the blu-ray advertising at the beginning were encoded with the lowest bitrates; around 3Mbps. One might even say they purposely made the movies look like crap.

Most DVD's I have are encoded around 5Mbps; the highest I ever saw was American Gangster around 10.5Mbps. The resolution will never be above 480p, but the higher bitrate encodes do look better. There was a line of 'Superbit' dvd's that had about the best quality of any DVD you'll see. but still, not blu-ray.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:41 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top