Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum rules before posting.

Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free registration is required.

If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.

    Invelos Forums->General: General Home Theater Discussion Page: 1 2 3 4  Previous   Next
DVD vs BluRay
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited Registrantritchf
Loop (noun): see Loop
Registered: March 18, 2007
United Kingdom Posts: 150
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Ok one and alll, is there any point in purchasing anything other than DVD for a film from the 1970's or before?

As an example - Omega Man (Charlton Heston) - DVD UK-£5, Blu-Ray £14.99

Mon Sound, Grainy stock, limited extras.

Would love to hear other's thoughts on at which point to cut off and not buy Blu-Ray.

Ritch
Learning is not mandatory, but then neither is survival.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributortweeter
I aim to misbehave
Registered: June 12, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 2,665
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Depends on the film and the quality of the conversion, not how old it is.

The 1960's era James Bond Blu-ray discs look terrific.
Bad movie?  You're soaking in it!
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorArdos
Registered: July 31, 2008
Reputation: High Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 2,506
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
As tweeter says it really does depend. Some films from the 60's or before look great in HD while some films from only a few years ago look diabolical. It really comes down to the source material available and the quality of the transfer.

Edit: Here is a link to a thread on AVSForum comparing screenshots of DVD Vs HD. I've only looked over a few pages & while they're mostly newer films there are older titles in there as well such as Spartacus. As it's quite an old thread, started over two years ago, some of the shots are from HDDVD versions so any Blu-ray versions that have since come out may not be identical.
 Last edited: by Ardos
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorcvermeylen
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
Belgium Posts: 1,946
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
Over at Blu-Ray.com there is no review for the UK release, but there is for the US release, which is probably the same transfer. They say the transfer is generally good, but some scenes suffer from rather heavy grain. And the grainier scenes do show some print wear-and-tear.

Over at Play.com, the DVD is £4.99, the BD is £11.99 (free shipping). In this case, personally, I'd go for the DVD.

But as tweeter and Forget already stated, you need to verify case by case. Checking out the complete review at Blu-Ray.com, may help you decide. 
View my collection at http://www.chriskepolis.be/home/dvd.htm

Chris
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantCalidain
You're no Daisy at all!
Registered: March 16, 2007
Posts: 405
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
It is a tough call to be honest and I always check the transfer quality of the blu-ray by reading any reviews I can find, such as reviews by High-Def Digest!!!

If I see the movie gets a great review I consider the upgrade.  However I am picky about what I feel should/would benefit from the Blu-Ray specifications so it is very doubtful I would upgrade a rom com/drama/romanace film vs. a sci-fi/thriller/action film!!!
My Collection!!!
 Last edited: by Calidain
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorTaro
Registered: February 23, 2009
Reputation: High Rating
Belgium Posts: 1,580
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
For me it's really a disc-by-disc case. Some releases of even old TV series (like the original Star Trek season 1 Blu-ray) look a lot better on Blu-ray than DVD, as well as sporting better audio and extras.

I always check online reviews of both the DVD and Blu-ray versions on multiple sites, but in general, I noticed in a year's time, I haven't bought a single DVD and buy virtually everything on Blu now.
Blu-ray collection
DVD collection
My Games
My Trophies
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar Contributorcmaeditor
Registered: April 14, 2007
United States Posts: 433
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
In pure theory any film shot on either 16mm or 35mm should look better on blu-ray than on DVD, and most do, due to the higher resolution provided by HD and film. A single 16:9 film frame 35mm has a maximum scanned resolution of 4096x2304 pixels before all that is scanned are the details of the film grain. 16mm has half that (2048x1152 pixels). A Blu-ray image is 1920x1080 pixels while a DVD image is 720x480 (and when stretched horizontally to undo the anamorphic 16:9 squeeze is 853x480). By the numbers Blu-ray images should look better than a DVD image. Most of the time they do, but the quality of the film source can make and HD transfer difficult and not cost effective, if restoration is needed to fix things like scratches dirt and discoloration from bad storage.
Chris
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAce_of_Sevens
Registered: December 10, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
Posts: 3,004
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting cmaeditor:
Quote:
In pure theory any film shot on either 16mm or 35mm should look better on blu-ray than on DVD, and most do, due to the higher resolution provided by HD and film. A single 16:9 film frame 35mm has a maximum scanned resolution of 4096x2304 pixels before all that is scanned are the details of the film grain. 16mm has half that (2048x1152 pixels). A Blu-ray image is 1920x1080 pixels while a DVD image is 720x480 (and when stretched horizontally to undo the anamorphic 16:9 squeeze is 853x480). By the numbers Blu-ray images should look better than a DVD image. Most of the time they do, but the quality of the film source can make and HD transfer difficult and not cost effective, if restoration is needed to fix things like scratches dirt and discoloration from bad storage.


NTSC DVD is 720x480 no matter what aspect ratio it is. Anamorphic only changes the shape of the pixels, not the number. Those numbers you quoted are for high-quality stock, but even so, pretty much any film except maybe 8 mm has more effective resolution than DVD.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorpdf256
PC, iOS and Android
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 810
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:
Quote:
Quoting cmaeditor:
Quote:
In pure theory any film shot on either 16mm or 35mm should look better on blu-ray than on DVD, and most do, due to the higher resolution provided by HD and film. A single 16:9 film frame 35mm has a maximum scanned resolution of 4096x2304 pixels before all that is scanned are the details of the film grain. 16mm has half that (2048x1152 pixels). A Blu-ray image is 1920x1080 pixels while a DVD image is 720x480 (and when stretched horizontally to undo the anamorphic 16:9 squeeze is 853x480). By the numbers Blu-ray images should look better than a DVD image. Most of the time they do, but the quality of the film source can make and HD transfer difficult and not cost effective, if restoration is needed to fix things like scratches dirt and discoloration from bad storage.


NTSC DVD is 720x480 no matter what aspect ratio it is. Anamorphic only changes the shape of the pixels, not the number. Those numbers you quoted are for high-quality stock, but even so, pretty much any film except maybe 8 mm has more effective resolution than DVD.

But a 35mm print that has been playing for a week has a resolution that is closer to DVD than to Bluray. A bluray that was mastered from the original film master should give you a better image than you would see on the big screen in the second week. One of the main reasons to switch to digital is to get away from the film print wear issue.

pdf
Paul Francis
San Juan Capistrano, CA, USA
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAce_of_Sevens
Registered: December 10, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
Posts: 3,004
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting pdf256:
Quote:
But a 35mm print that has been playing for a week has a resolution that is closer to DVD than to Bluray. A bluray that was mastered from the original film master should give you a better image than you would see on the big screen in the second week. One of the main reasons to switch to digital is to get away from the film print wear issue.
pdf


Film doesn't degrade that quickly and dirt and scratches aren't really the same thing as softness.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorMike D.
Registered March 20, 2004
Registered: May 8, 2007
United States Posts: 663
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:
Quote:
Quoting pdf256:
Quote:
But a 35mm print that has been playing for a week has a resolution that is closer to DVD than to Bluray. A bluray that was mastered from the original film master should give you a better image than you would see on the big screen in the second week. One of the main reasons to switch to digital is to get away from the film print wear issue.
pdf


Film doesn't degrade that quickly and dirt and scratches aren't really the same thing as softness.

Actually everytime you play a film, it does degrade a little bit at a time, so a film shown opening weekend vs. week 7 in the days before digital, you would've seen a major difference.  Also storage is an issue as well, since heat and humidity can and does ruin film, which is why studios today keep them in temperature controlled vaults vs. 50 years ago.
We're on a mission from God.


DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorWinston Smith
Don't be discommodious
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 21,610
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Right you are, Mike. it is amazing just how quickly film stock degrades, which is why Disney recently did a thourough restoration of The Little Mermaid and that film just turned 20 this year. The difference in the old film stock was quite striking, of course now it has been restored and digitized, so now the only issue is to follow the Rules
1)Backup
2)Backup some more
3) Backup again
4)Never talk about Fight Club

Skip
ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here

Billy Video
 Last edited: by Winston Smith
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributordee1959jay
Registered: March 19, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Netherlands Posts: 6,018
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
The quality of the new transfer for the Blu-Ray can make a lot of difference for whether or not it's worthwile to go Blu.

I too tend to consult reviews to find out. Some sites that have not been mentioned yet earlier in this thread are
DVDBeaver comparisons
DVDBeaver Blu-Ray Reviews
DVDTalk Blu-Ray Reviews
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantJackKnight
Member Since 11/18/2001
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 90
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I do alot of research into finding out if the transfer is worth it. If it's not, I won't buy it. But I won't buy the DVD either. I've gone 1080p, no going back now. So patience is key. I look at factoring issues like will their be a double dip in the future to the extent of anniversary editions, special editions, etc. And If I have to wait, I'll wait.
The artist formerly known as TylerDurden_73
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributormdnitoil
Registered: March 14, 2007
United States Posts: 1,777
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting JackKnight:
Quote:
I do alot of research into finding out if the transfer is worth it. If it's not, I won't buy it. But I won't buy the DVD either. I've gone 1080p, no going back now. So patience is key. I look at factoring issues like will their be a double dip in the future to the extent of anniversary editions, special editions, etc. And If I have to wait, I'll wait.

Out of idle curiosity, what do folks plan on doing about the thousands of genre films that will never get a blu release?  I appreciate the whole "hi-def rules" concept, but isn't that like cutting off the nose to spite the face?
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantCalidain
You're no Daisy at all!
Registered: March 16, 2007
Posts: 405
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting mdnitoil:
Quote:
Quoting JackKnight:
Quote:
I do alot of research into finding out if the transfer is worth it. If it's not, I won't buy it. But I won't buy the DVD either. I've gone 1080p, no going back now. So patience is key. I look at factoring issues like will their be a double dip in the future to the extent of anniversary editions, special editions, etc. And If I have to wait, I'll wait.

Out of idle curiosity, what do folks plan on doing about the thousands of genre films that will never get a blu release?  I appreciate the whole "hi-def rules" concept, but isn't that like cutting off the nose to spite the face?


If you already own those "thousand of genre films" in DVD then you are set!!!  While my collection pales in comparison to many members on these forums, I will probably never replace every movie I own with a Blu-Ray upgrade so I will be keeping many of my DVD for future viewing!!!
My Collection!!!
    Invelos Forums->General: General Home Theater Discussion Page: 1 2 3 4  Previous   Next