in Search
Untitled Page

ARCHIVED FORUM -- April 2007 to March 2012
READ ONLY FORUM

This is the first Archived Forum which was active between 17th April 2007 and 1st March February 2012

 

Latest post 01-22-2008 9:37 AM by 355f. 31 replies.
Page 2 of 2 (32 items) < Previous 1 2
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-18-2008 3:46 PM In reply to

    • moxxey
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-14-2007
    • South West, UK
    • Posts 2,360
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BV7-40 markIII - Not satisfied with the picture when looking at bluray movies

    355f:

    Im delighted all your blue rays are better than ds dvds but please look at the following

    355F, I don't really need someone else to offer me my opinion. ie. what that forum states is irrevelant.

    What I would say is that some Blu-rays are not well encoded (see my earlier post) and are no better than an upscaled SD DVD. However, the same upscaled DVD has the same issues as the Blu-ray. Indeed, upscaled SD DVDs look more like a copy than the original disc.

    I have SD DVDs and Blu-rays of 300, Last Samurai, Casino Royale, The Departed and many others. Every Blu-ray has better image quality than the SD DVD, but that doesn't mean that I'm impressed with the Blu-ray version of the DVD - like I say above, Ocean's Thirteen is fairly poor in Blu-ray (but the same issues, camera panning, pixelisation etc, apply to the SD DVD, but are just less obvious).

  • 01-18-2008 4:06 PM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BV7-40 markIII - Not satisfied with the picture when looking at bluray movies

    moxxey:
    355f:

    Im delighted all your blue rays are better than ds dvds but please look at the following

    355F, I don't really need someone else to offer me my opinion. ie. what that forum states is irrevelant.

    What I would say is that some Blu-rays are not well encoded (see my earlier post) and are no better than an upscaled SD DVD. However, the same upscaled DVD has the same issues as the Blu-ray. Indeed, upscaled SD DVDs look more like a copy than the original disc.

    I have SD DVDs and Blu-rays of 300, Last Samurai, Casino Royale, The Departed and many others. Every Blu-ray has better image quality than the SD DVD, but that doesn't mean that I'm impressed with the Blu-ray version of the DVD - like I say above, Ocean's Thirteen is fairly poor in Blu-ray (but the same issues, camera panning, pixelisation etc, apply to the SD DVD, but are just less obvious).

     

    Sometimes a survey that has been complied by a substantial group can be accurate. In the case of the discs specially mentioned above one finds that these do indeed have high ratings.

    The issue is further compounded with he fact that the bv7 handles HD far better than SD dvd so there will of course be 'issues' when watching the same disc material HDvSD

     

  • 01-18-2008 4:30 PM In reply to

    • moxxey
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-14-2007
    • South West, UK
    • Posts 2,360
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BV7-40 markIII - Not satisfied with the picture when looking at bluray movies

    355f:

    The issue is further compounded with he fact that the bv7 handles HD far better than SD dvd so there will of course be 'issues' when watching the same disc material HDvSD

    Yes, more obvious pixelisation on DVDs that are pixelated (300 is a good example).

    On a sidenote, nothing compares to a HD movie on Sky HD or BBC HD. Absolutely no pixelisation, stunning clarity, no bad camera panning or anything.

  • 01-19-2008 5:18 AM In reply to

    Re: BV7-40 markIII - Not satisfied with the picture when looking at bluray movies

    "Its not the TV (BV7) ... It´s the new Blu-ray technology ho hasn't developed to its full capacity yet!

    The BV7 inbuilt BS3 is a very powerful video engine and read on a Swedish forum that the Beosystem3 only use about 50% of its totally power with DVD playback and 80-90% with HD material.. "

    That  surely cannot bbe true if Mr andersons Blu ray on his PS3 plays through his BV9 and just now I am looking at a Blutech playing through a compose and it is a clear sharp picture. I must admit they are more succeptible to change and you have to set them up correctly, however with Warner now going across to Blu Ray it sounds like the death knell for HD DVD.

  • 01-21-2008 1:35 AM In reply to

    • Beolab
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on 05-18-2007
    • Sweden
    • Posts 535
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BV7-40 markIII - Not satisfied with the picture when looking at bluray movies

    wilsonsav98:

    "Its not the TV (BV7) ... It´s the new Blu-ray technology ho hasn't developed to its full capacity yet!

    The BV7 inbuilt BS3 is a very powerful video engine and read on a Swedish forum that the Beosystem3 only use about 50% of its totally power with DVD playback and 80-90% with HD material.. "

    That  surely cannot bbe true if Mr andersons Blu ray on his PS3 plays through his BV9 and just now I am looking at a Blutech playing through a compose and it is a clear sharp picture. I must admit they are more succeptible to change and you have to set them up correctly, however with Warner now going across to Blu Ray it sounds like the death knell for HD DVD.

    You misunderstand me..

    What i say is that the Beosystem 3 processor are not using more than 80-90% of total 100% withe Blu-ray or HD-DVD (30Mbps) playback.

     

    So It´s a very powerful engine and can handle Blu-ray material without problems..

    (  The Beosystem 3 Video processor are made by PixelWorks ) http://www.pixelworks.com/

     

    Regards

     

    BL8000 MkII Black

  • 01-22-2008 9:12 AM In reply to

    Re: BV7-40 markIII - Not satisfied with the picture when looking at bluray movies

    Please do not expect wonders with HDMI 1.3 In fact for picture and sound quality there is NO difference between HDMI 1.2 and HDMI 1.3 while using DVD, HD-DVD or blue ray.  There is a very good article on this subject.

     http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ/High-Def_FAQ:_Is_HDMI_1.3_Really_Necessary/853

     

  • 01-22-2008 9:37 AM In reply to

    • 355f
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 04-19-2007
    • Posts 655
    • Bronze Member

    Re: BV7-40 markIII - Not satisfied with the picture when looking at bluray movies

    rvanham:

    Please do not expect wonders with HDMI 1.3 In fact for picture and sound quality there is NO difference between HDMI 1.2 and HDMI 1.3 while using DVD, HD-DVD or blue ray.  There is a very good article on this subject.

     http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ/High-Def_FAQ:_Is_HDMI_1.3_Really_Necessary/853

     

     

    Obviously, one can make a case for- or against anything. HDMI is just a form of transmission.

    The comment- most decoding is now taking place in the players- is just not true now- all the latest offerings due out soon from the major brands will not have in built decoding. This is to save money and reduce the price of BR so establishing a larger market.

    There is no mention about profile 1.1 which if the BR brigade have their way will render previous machines useless with new BR titles.

    In vision, lip sync and deep colour probably are not worth the wait but in audio its different.

    The new audio codecs MA need 1.3 or above and both connected items need to be 1.3 compliant. This is now being engineered into new products- so without it the later codecs are not available- This is quite significant in a high quality AV set up

    So whilst the article states that hdmi will be reverse compatable with the new hdmi varients- you wont get the new codecs

Page 2 of 2 (32 items) < Previous 1 2