DVDizzy Forum

Marky_198 wrote:2099net, if you take a magnifying glass and go watch the film through that, and sit 1 inch away from your screen, you can see the blurryness (and many other scenes that are sharp) even better.

Good god, it all makes sense now. No wonder you think restorations and Blu-Ray are bad.

albert

ajmrowland wrote:

Digital Video Essentials=next best thing!

Sorry to disappoint you, but that is what I thought, and after the professional calibration was done, it was a world apart from what I done with DVD Essentials.

Nice try, though. You get props for even knowing about that disc.

Marky_198 wrote:2099net, if you take a magnifying glass and go watch the film through that, and sit 1 inch away from your screen, you can see the blurryness (and many other scenes that are sharp) even better.

Do you enjoy the film more if you do that?

I told everyone here not to give him attention and now look what he's done. He's said something even stupider and I'm running out of awards. Really, don't feed the mogwai after midnight and everything will be fine, if you know what I mean

I just don't understand how a magnifying glass would help your cause in proving as Laserdisc's sharpness but I won't think too hard on that. Head injuries have been known to happen when contemplating Marky logic (maybe it makes more sense afterwords?).

jpanimation wrote: I told everyone here not to give him attention and now look what he's done. He's said something even stupider and I'm running out of awards. Really, don't feed the mogwai after midnight and everything will be fine, if you know what I mean

I just don't understand how a magnifying glass would help your cause in proving as Laserdisc's sharpness but I won't think too hard on that. Head injuries have been known to happen when contemplating Marky logic (maybe it makes more sense afterwords?).

I try to ignore him, but he's like a car accident or something. It's a morbid curiosity, and I simply must know what crap he's spewing!

dvdjunkie wrote:ajmrowland wrote:

Digital Video Essentials=next best thing!

Sorry to disappoint you, but that is what I thought, and after the professional calibration was done, it was a world apart from what I done with DVD Essentials.

Nice try, though. You get props for even knowing about that disc.

I can't really afford proffessional now, though, and Blu-ray's still look great to me! Until I really see the difference, I'm satisfied at the moment.

Don't know if you are living at home or are old enought to be on your own, but the one thing I noticed was while we going through the 200-hour break-in period for the HDTV, our electricity bill jumped quite a few dollars. Since we had it calibrated, it is back down to where it should be, and we don't notice hardly any change at all with the HDTV on for excessive hours.

DVD Essentials is a great program, but if you ever can find the bucks to have your HDTV calibrated, you will truly notice the difference. The gentleman who did the calibration was able to show the non-calibrated picture, the DVD Essentials picture and the 'newly calibrated' picture, and I was sold and new that the $150 was worth every penny. Having all the correct HDMI hook-ups for my Digital HD Cable, and my Blu-Ray and amplifier has made all the difference in the world. Sometimes I think the movie looks better in blu-ray than it did in the theater.

Well, try telling my Mom that, and I'm trying to find work, so there's my reason.

Escapay wrote:

Marky_198 wrote:2099net, if you take a magnifying glass and go watch the film through that, and sit 1 inch away from your screen, you can see the blurryness (and many other scenes that are sharp) even better.

Good god, it all makes sense now. No wonder you think restorations and Blu-Ray are bad.

albert

You are missing the point. Have you seen the examples with the colored lines?
My point is that tv screens can get much bigger in the future, and resolutions can get even higher, but as you can see it's not doing the films much good in many scenes.

But many people seem to love it.
So if you (they) do the above, they would enjoy the films even more?
Weird.

This is exactly what is happening.





This scene from the new restoration looks blurry.
The same scene looks much sharper on the laserdisc version.

Can people please explain to me why they prefer the blurry image?
Why do they love this?

If they take a magnifying glass they can see the flaws of the film even better.
Is that what they want? WHY?

So they really would enjoy the film more watching it that way.

It seems that some people have double standards.
They think all this new stuff is better and earlier/laserdisc versions are crap.
But then they don’t seem to mind scenes like this that actually were better before.
So do they care or not?

I personally think that extreme sharpness ruins animated classics, so I don’t mind a bit of a natural look. But obviously some people care more about formats than the actual scenes/films.
That’s why I’m making this point.

If in 10 years a new version comes out, even more unnaturally sharp, even clearer, higher resolution and it makes this image even blurrier, are all those people happier then?
WHY?

The colored lines are essentially the same resolution, just larger. A 6 yr old could tell you that.

YOU still refuse to listen. You're only proving that the rest of us are right.

Marky_198 wrote:This scene from the new restoration looks blurry.
The same scene looks much sharper on the laserdisc version.

No Marky, that's 3:2 pulldown. It's nothing at all to do with the restoration. And it will have existed on all NTSC versions of Snow White since the beginning of time.

Can you please explain to me why when I have pointed this out before, you have chosen to ignore my explanation?

It's two sequential frames merged together because 24 frames per second (film) doesn't go into 30 frames persecond (NTSC) smoothly. It's nothing to do with the restoration, its all about converting from one medium to another. 24 into 30 won't go without duplication, and simple direct duplication results in jerky movement - thus when having to duplicate frames they are merged with the sequential frame in order to smooth the movement.

Read about it
Here: http://www.zerocut.com/tech/pulldown.html
Here: http://www.projectorpeople.com/resources/pulldown.asp
Here: http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/tv ... uide18.htm
Here: http://www.dvdfile.com/tech/article/wha ... ldown-8799
Here: http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/2/2_3_pulldown.html
In fact read about it here:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&so ... =&aq=f&oq=

It doesn't cost anything to educate yourself. So do so. Then perhaps people will stop treating you like a joke.

You may not have noticed it before because PAL TV doesn't need to do this - it simply speeds up the film from 24 frames per second to 25 frames per second (which is why PAL content runs 3.75% faster than film or NTSC). (All your "beautiful" Disney songs in PAL are not at the correct tempo and key because of this... yet I don't hear you complaining about this being against Walt's wishes? Or complaining that the "beautiful" dance sequence in Sleeping Beauty is too fast?)

Read all about PAL speedup here and learn something else today:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?rlz=1C1G ... al+speedup

But even some PAL DVDs have 3:2 pulldown. Check out the first flight scene on The Rescuers PAL DVD (you know, where the original home video release had the naughty picture in the window) You'll see in order to remove the offensive sequence, the whole scene on the PAL DVD has been replaced with a fixed American version... which includes 3:2 pulldown.

3:2 Pulldown has been part of the DVD system since in began. Its been part of the VHS and LD system too. That capture was taken from a NTSC DVD. Its been part of the NTSC system since the first filmed material was transmitted on TV.

So if anything, its Blu-ray and some of the new HD displays not fixed to NTSC frame rates and with the ability to show 24fps which present a movie exactly as it was filmed (no 3:2 pull down and no 3.75% speed up). So once more, in your ignorance, you've presented another argument of why HD is better.

http://www.gamestooge.com/2007/05/24/ps ... hz-output/

I'm not going to reply to any of your posts again, because you're the one who doesn't understand. You're the one who makes no effort at all to learn how things work. You're the one who doggedly ignores anything which doesn't fit inside your limited worldview. It's like having a conversation with a brick wall (as others have pointed out)

For this particular screenshot of the witch maybe.

But the whole film is full of blurry scenes and parts that DO have to do with the restoration.

I don't like double standards.
Yes, the image is extremely clear and sharp in general. But it also shows the blurryness and all the flaws much more.
Every 7 years a new version of the film comes out. In 7 years technology "improved" once again. So that means the scenes will be even blurrier and all the good things BUT ALSO all the flaws will be even more visible.

Are you happier then? Will you enjoy the film more then?
That's my question.

In 7 years is this 2009 version suddenly crappy?

There's a big difference between a good image and taking it too far.

Actually, the amount of flaws is bigger than the amount of beauty that these restorations give us. When do people realize that this doesn't do the films much good?

So, once again, If in 10 years a new version comes out, even more unnaturally sharp, even clearer, higher resolution and it makes all the good things BUT ALSO all the flaws even more visible.
and some images even blurrier, will you enjoy the film more then?
WHY?

Which brings me to another point.

We all know that they are making unnecessary changes to the films, added fur lines on the Beast, etc. Just because they feel like it.

Can anyone explain to me why they don't change things that would be considered as more necessary by most people?

Like the dirt in Snow White on top of/under the carpet in "A whistle while you work"?

Or the doorhandle in the cottage in Sleeping Beauty that is there in some scenes and disappeared in others?

Marky_198 wrote:For this particular screenshot of the witch maybe.

But the whole film is full of blurry scenes and parts that DO have to do with the restoration.

not to join the bandwagon, but really? Do you read what you write? What netty wrote explains the blurry scenes throughout the film, not just this one.

In part, I get your argument. You're saying that if upgrading to something like bluray makes it so the blurriness occurs, when the LD didn't give us this problem why make the upgrade? In this regards this is a issue with hardware, and nothing to do with restorations so please stop using the word restoration. The thing is, although the older LD's appear more appealing to you it isn't right according to how it was originally intended to be presented. In that case, they needed to be fixed and what we have now is the closest we have to the creator's original intent.

This is all recycled information btw. Many many many people on this forum have told you this.

Also, don't go trying to change your argument towards adjustments they've made to the films while restoring them. Personally I don't know what makes them change certain things over other things (an example being the raccoon in Bambi), but I'm sure they aren't changed on a whim.

As far as your arguments go towards the new versions "taking it too far". Have you noticed you are the only one on that side of the argument? That's because they haven't "taken it too far". This has always been a weak argument and that's because "too far" doesn't even exist yet. "Too far" would be when home entertainment exceeds the original theatrical aspects. Until then fixing past mistakes and presenting us closer to the OTV isn't anything wrong at all.

Technology 10 years from now is incomprehensible, however I'm sure more adjustments to the films will be made. If anything maybe they will fix the overlapping of frames in Snow White, but then they would NEED to alter the original version.
They might make the lines of the edges of characters softer so they aren't "unnaturally sharp", but then they would NEED to alter the original version.
They might fix all of the flaws of the original that HD makes more noticeable, but then they would NEED to alter the original version.

Would you enjoy the films more if they made these changes to the OTV, Marky?
WHY?


P.S. Do not reply saying that you would prefer them to make alterations because that would make 75% of your past posts/ completely irrelevant, and we all know now how much you hate double standards. Also do not reply saying that the older versions (VHS or LD releases) are better since they are further from the OTV than the current bluray, and ever since you began posting you've made it clear you are a OTV "purist" and backing up the older versions of many (not all, i'll give you that. BatB being a big one) of the DAC because that would also be supporting a double standard, which you don't like.