blu ray quality

[nobblebonce]

are some blu ray better quality than others

reason im asking is because im currently watching saw 3 on br but it doesnt look as crisp as the dark night or i am legend etc, is there a reason for this as i thought they were all the same

 

[Lee]

I bought Starship Troopers and that's not great quality, probably a little better than DVD, unlike Iron Man or Dark Knight which look amazing.

I suppose they can only be as good as the original source material.

 

[nobblebonce]

i know dk was shot with an imax camera in some scenes so im guessin that would of made a difference, but saw 4 is much better quality than 3 and im guessin they were shot with the camera etc

even goodfellas seems better than saw 3 and goodfellas was shot in the 90's

 

[Curley]

The settings on your tv will determine the picture you get

 

[McBunny]

there is far too many possibilities to narrow it down to one thing thats making it worse than other moves some are just really badly encoded some use a less effective codec some had bad source material some films arnt great on hd when they were filmed in certain ways etc

 

[Zygalski]

are some blu ray better quality than others...

Yes.

 

[ForceIndia]

Just watched the mummy, quality was great, but some others have been hardly better than dvd. Dark knight and walle have been the best i've seen.

 

[Naith]

iron man and black hawk down are brilliant on blu ray

but like mcbunny said, too many variables from the camera setup, compressions, player, tv settings...

 

[McBunny]

black hawk down was better on hd dvd they say

 

[Naith]

really?

didnt see it on that format, i thought it was brilliant on BR so can only imagine how good it would of looked on HdDVD

 

[dunganick]

There does seem to be a massive picture quality difference in some films.

Harry potter seems excellent, all the animated stuff is super as you would expect, but hancock is dire as well as oceans 13. Sharper than SD dvd but there is so much noise in the scenes, this is what really bugs me and it seems to be a blueray trait, or at least ive seen it on a large number of movies.

And this is across about 10-15 different tv's and about 5 different b/r players, so i dont personally believe its the settings that are making the biggest difference.

 

[Keydogg]

really?

didnt see it on that format, i thought it was brilliant on BR so can only imagine how good it would of looked on HdDVD

What do you mean by this?

 

[dk]

there is far too many possibilities to narrow it down to one thing thats making it worse than other moves some are just really badly encoded some use a less effective codec some had bad source material some films arnt great on hd when they were filmed in certain ways etc

indeed, it seems to sometimes comes down to the effort the distributor wants to go to to make the trasnfer too. Something like Bladerunner is a 20 odd year old film and i one of the best looking blu-rays i have seen, they've put a lot of effort into the remastering and transfer.

Also, a lot of directors these days love the grain effect and add it in post production which some people don't like as they think it spoils the perfect blu-ray picture but its as the director intended it. This includes films like 300 and miami vice.

The example of saw 3, its all about the gore, the darkness of the movie, its not a blockbuster, just a sequel being banged out as quick as possible to cash in.

 

[McBunny]

really?

didnt see it on that format, i thought it was brilliant on BR so can only imagine how good it would of looked on HdDVD

im sure they said it was cant find teh review now though so i may have been wrong but im sure it was black hawk