 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
As a film buff, I have been working my way into building up a home theatre. This began with the purchase of a nice LCD projector and Da-Lite 106" screen which I do very much enjoy, with it's approximation of the 'big-screen' experience. The clarity of color and resolution of detail present in high-quality DVD playback is excellent, but I have slowly become more and more frustrated by the blurring and lack of flow that is present in the digital video medium when displaying motion and panning screen shots. The quality of the DVD transfer has some bearing on this, but this problem is apparently part & parcel of the DVD playback format. I have recently upgraded to a Camelot Roundtable DVD player in my quest to attain the best possible picture, thinking that a high quality playback source such as this may be able to go some way towards reducing the motion artifacts/distortion. Well, the player presents a very nice, rich and film-like picture quality and it significantly betters the player I had been using, but does very little for the motion problem, which leads me to believe that this is simply a currently (until the technology develops a bit more) incurable problem of digital video. And I feel that this IS a problem as it robs the film experience of it's ability to fully absorb you into the experience. I'm sure that there has been much discussion on this and I see equipment reviews regularly referring to how well the equipment handles 'motion artifact' issues, but I wonder if anyone has some insight into the technicalities of this issue and whether there is a way to deal with it. I know there are some pretty high-dollar scaler, line quadruplers, etc. out there and it seems that DVI connections are the wave of the future. Is there any current technology or set-up application that could be employed to counter this. Also, what does the future hold for the medium?
Bryan K.,
Music Lover & President-elect of C.C.A.C. (Concerned Citizens Against Cilantro)
Follow Ups:
Does either your player and/or the display device have the 2/3 pull down alogorhythm? That might eliminate what is bothering you about DVD. I assume you know what that means but for those that don't: when film, shot at 24 frames per second (fps) is transferred to video (30 fps) an extra frame is added every five frames to (for want of a better term) "even" things out. That's why preceptively speaking films on video do not have the same level of involvement as actual films do (obviously there are other factors at work as well). The 2/3 process (called by some 3/2) addresses this and smoothes things out for a more film-like presentation.
My player and display device have the 2/3 pull down feature, so I wouldn't expect that to be an issue. From the responses, I realized that I wasn't entirely clear on the exact point I was raising. It is not so much 'motion artifact' (ie. jaggies, etc.) as a pervasive lack of smoothness/blurring in all types of faster motion such as pans across a landscape, quick movement of people and objects. This creates a somewhat disorienting feel that adversely effects the ability of a film to draw you into the experience. The top-dollar player I have did little to alleviate this, in spite of it's excellent color quality and detail resolution, and I have also begun to notice this in most films at the theatre, so I expect it is a result of most films ultimate transformation to a digital project within the final editing process. I am probably fixating on it more than I need to but, as a film buff, this is a MAJOR source of dissapointment. It befuddles me that more people; not just viewers, but producers, directors, etc. find this even remotely tolerable. It surprises me that when I mention these observations to people I know, most don't acknowledge it and if they do agree with my observations, they don't seem to think it is a significantly noticable effect. I think people are beginning to forget what it used to be like to watch a FILM as opposed to a digital display/projection. A very sad state of affairs...
Bryan K.,
Music Lover & President-elect of C.C.A.C. (Concerned Citizens Against Cilantro)
IMO, 480i dvd and hi-def broadcasting playback, using component inputs can be awesome on my 64" screen, with no motion artifacts. Maybe your screen is too big or you are sitting too close...there is a limitation of screen size to sitting distance, especially with standard def/ vcr playback. Some folks even prefer smaller viewing screens, so that everything is in their field of vision.Sounds like you need to try a line scaler processor, wait for hi def DVD, or get a smaller screen.
Well... this is why I still use VHS tapes. DVD sucks and it will continue to suck. Actually what is coming is even worse. Remember MP3??? You are going to get same in Video now.
DVD has never aproached, even close, picture qiality of a good VCR.
Sorry, you are cought in the game and you will not ascape. You will keep being frustrated more and more as you realise things that we engineers knew since first idea of DVD begun. I told people then that DVD is going to be worse than a tape. Can you believe they still say I don't know what I'm talking about. How long does it take for a horse to understand something? Answer... forever.
All I can say is, you've never watched a 480p up conversion to 720p or 1080i on a Samsung DVD-HD1000. If you had, you'd eat your words dude, that's for sure even on a 100" front projection system.What's amazing is, you didn't even say S-VHS. About anybody knows that S-VHS is capable of more lines of resolution on NTSC via S-video than standard VHS via composite video.
Frankly, either way, the comparison is a joke. DVD wins hands down even in 480i. Are you sure you plugged your DVD player up in your comparison?
That doesn't even take into consideration every time you play a VHS tape it degrades in quality. With DVD, the laser never touches the disc.
Lex
Ever since then came out with color, television was ruined. That color artifact screws around with the monochrome signal and all one gets is a rainbow blur. And VHS still carrying the color signal in the tape, it ruins everything. I still use the Fisher Price recorder, which holds the image in black and white.
You MUST be kidding. How do you feel about laserdiscs?
Sorry, never had a chance to test one.
No problems...looks like a movie. Heh...video tape...troll? Fisher Price! LOL!
No motion artifact, no 3/2 reverse telecine studder. Pure pleasure.
Most people are surprised that LD is an older technology than video tape. It was always a niche product with only about 2 million players
in U.S. households. But the picture is MUCH better than tape and since it's an analog medium does not have the problems you seem to be bothered with regarding DVDs. That said, and having a colection of 900 laserdiscs and 600 DVDs, I prefer DVDs.
Laser disc always was and always will be the best quality you will ever see on a crt, rptv, lcd, plasma or fptv...Blacker blacks, whiter whites, much more neutral skin tones, and true 525 line capability all add up to mean Pioneer knew what they were doing. Hook one up to a good line doubler and you have better quality than a cheap movie theatre any day. Too bad the world is full of lazy people who didn't like to get up to flip the disc..or you'd all be bragging about the quality.Obviously my vote goes to the Laser Disc.
Many of the later players play two sides, often enough for a 2 hour CLV LD.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
