Actually, I wouldn't agree that 35mm film has "exponentially" more detail than 1080p. Of course, it depends on the type and quality of the film and equipment originally used, among other factors, but the 4K/8K scans are done mainly to have high quality masters to work with; to ensure that no detail is lost during the scanning phase. The actual resolution of 35mm film masters is typically much closer to 2K/1080p than 4K.
So, for now, you're totally right, the difference between DVD (especially in NTSC regions) and BD is stunning; I hardly can watch anything in SD anymore after getting used to 1080p ;)
But in a few years, when a "4K Video Disc" enters the market, there really won't be much point in re-releasing most (I say most, because there are ones filmed in 70mm and other formats) pre-digital movies on it. You will only get more realistic film-like grain and not much more actual detail.
@kfyatek Not to mention 4K is pointless to have in the home because you would need a screen the size of your entire wall to even see a difference. Doubly pointless because most people who have HDTV now, don't have screens larger than 42".It might be a niche thing, for the handful of people with video projectors and a screen that can take advantage of it, but I don't see it making much impact. 35mm is closer to 4K than 1080. Higher, actually. Look it up.
@Zaranyzerak If you're taking the number of grain in the celluloid and comparing it to the pixel count, then yes, you're right. But if we were to compare the actual detail reproduction ability, it's getting vague. Well, you may be right that by scanning the original camera negatives we would get more than 4K. But taking into account that the master prints are nth-generation film, I think it's still closer to 1080p.
@kfyatek It's rare for a Blu-ray master to be struck from a nth generation film. More often than not it's either from the original negative, or from an interpositive made from the original negative. Wizard of Oz was scanned at 8K resolution form the original negative. Blade Runner was scanned at 4K for the live action elements, 6K for the effects elements. If there wasn't additional detail to be extracted from those frames, they wouldn't bother with that high a resolution scan.
@Zaranyzerak Well, pretty much everything looks better when it is scanned in higher resolution and carefully downscaled than when scanned in the target resolution from the start. It's better to do processing on higher resolution scans as well. I specifically looked up >=8K scans (of stills, but still frame is even bigger than movie's) and pretty much everything that is lost after downscaling four times is grain noise.
@Zaranyzerak Hi There, i just watched all of ur HD Rants, and i believe you bud, i do see the difference between blu ray and dvd and yes i do believe blu ray is way better resolution, some people obviously cant see the picture quality difference, their eyes must be fucked up or somethin lol. i have a brand new system here, i have one of those LG Cinema 3D HDTVs here, awesome tv by the way, Passive 3D looks Amazing on it!! i noticed on ur channel, ur from BC, Canada, Prince Edward Island here!!
@apeman1980 Greetings, fellow crazy Canuck! Yeah, I've checked out those Passive 3D TVs in stores, awesome stuff. That's what I always said 3DTV should have been in the first place!. Active Shutter glasses are just so damn heavy, cumbersome, EXPENSIVE, and need to be recharged constantly.
I also totally welcome oldies on Blu-Ray. I cannot understand why your videos get any dislikes. Clearly the likes are higher, but the people that dislike must be of relatively low IQ level and don't understand, or it's personal vendetta and don't like you're personality or sense of humor or what they find a lack of sense of sense of humor.
classic superman was good on blu ray just because something is old dosent mean it,s rubbish blu ray polished them up after all classic movie are gem when they go on blu ray and classic flash gorden was good its like saying whats the point in saving comic,s on websites
I thought that this type of ridiculous misconception was an exclusivity for some places in the world, where only a few people have aknowledgement about film making, like here, in Brazil.
Lots of people gets astonished about how old movies can be put into HD, when they were shot before HD "video" cameras existence.
Heres a dumb question..does it really make a difference what size and type of tv you have on how the bluray will look? im wanting a 48'' flat screen of some kind. thanks for answering my idiotic question. I am tv and film illiterate :D
@bethany2nirvana The thing about Blu-ray is the resolution is so high, you'll actually see MORE of the fine detail the larger the screen you use. With DVD, the bigger you go the more pixellated it looks... So yes, I'd say bigger is definitely better with Blu-ray! You'll actually see more and more detail all the way up to a screen size of 120". 48" is a great size, you should see a very noticeable difference between DVD and Blu-ray.
@Zaranyzerak I got a 70 inch, so will my blu ray look all pixelated as fuk? is it too big? FUCK MAN YOU SHOULD HAVE STOPPED ME FROM buying it for 2 grand. god i thought you were here to help people. how is a 70 inch suppose to be more detailed when all size 1080p tvs have the same resolution.
@malows1234 The same resolution yes, but on a smaller screen the pixel density is so high that you simply cannot see the fine details with the human eye. On a larger screen, you can.
@Zaranyzerak i see, how much resolution is imax film. and what does it mean when directors say they wanna go digital instead of film. which is better and more detailed. is digital worse. could you explain the whole situation to me please. you seem like a real clever fellow about this
@Zaranyzerak I got a 32 inch Sony Bravia, I personally think Ben-Hur looks great on my screen. The reason why I got 32 inch is because my room is pretty small. And I read on THX.com that you should measure the size of your room by 0.4 or something like that and then divide it by the size of your HDTV. BTW, you got the Ultimate Collector's Edition of Ben-Hur on Blu-ray? If not, then you should really get it, it is amazing. Probably one of the best films on Blu-ray I've ever seen.
He actually is very right. Apoc Now is actually one of the best looking blu-rays I have ever seen. It's actually better than some other Blu Ray films that were made a long way after that time period. If you say that Apoc Now is bad on blu, you need to start watching more Blu Rays.
@Miller14100 Like I told the guy above you, please watch the video before commenting. I'll give you a hint as to why: Some of my favorite Blu-ray transfers: Taxi Driver, Blade Runner, Psycho, How the West Was Won, Star Trek (60's series, the movies look like shit), The Prisoner (60's series). Getting a clue now? Commenting solely on a video title makes you look like the idiot.
It makes me sad that Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai had to be pieced together from several different materials, because the source is no longer here. At least the Criterion collection for blu-ray looks good.
Well said. This reminds me of a time not too long ago when I was playing an MMO and some players were arguing about what "frame rate" the human eye sees with...
I have to agree with your Space Odyseey point. I just watched Goldfinger on Blu Ray recently, and apart from the period references, the images themselves looked so crisp and brilliant that had I not known it was from the sixties, I would have mistaken it for a far more recent film
I'm used to people not reading a video's description before vomiting out their soul but you'd think they'd have the sense to at least watch the video before commenting.
Keep ranting, brother! Most of the Blu-ray releases I really look forward to are catalog releases, and when I've told people how much I was looking forward to the Blu-ray release of Psycho, or Alien, or The Exorcist, or Apocalypse Now, or Taxi Driver...nine times out of ten, they stare at me blankly before asking, "What's the point?" At which point, I have to go on an HD rant of my own. So thanks for putting this out there, and tackling the issue on more than just a moron-by-moron basis.
@jamesoblivion Yes! I couldn't agree more on looking forward to catalog releases. A properly done catalog release with a nice transfer can breathe whole new life into an old favorite! The majority of Blu-rays I buy are catalog titles.
''What's the POINT of putting OLD movies on Blu-ray? They're not even filmed in HD!''
Yes they are, they were filmed in 1080p and higher before DVD was born, the thing is bunch of you morons including this movie author think Blu-ray is movie format, it is not. That is a name of storage technology using blue laser (refer to wiki for more info) Original quality videos were stored, movies released back then couldn't show that quality, 10 gb on 4.7GB DVD? Now when Blu-ray is out you'll see original
@Shayd93 LOL! I love these kinds of comments. If you watched the actual video instead of just commenting on the title, you'd quickly realize you're preaching to the choir. (Pssst - I made the title that way to draw in the people who actually think those stupid things so the video would educate them) Most movies are filmed on FILM, which is much higher resolution than 1080p. Anyway, check out the actual video where I cover exactly that. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. ;)
@h3fst3r You're welcome. No idea what that other guy's deal is, there's no point responding to him if he isn't even going to watch the video he's commenting on. Oh, and you're clearly not the one with the bruised ego, as he can't even admit to a simple mistake that I was attempting to make LIGHT of and point him in the right direction. Whatever, his problem not ours.
@Shayd93 LOL! I don't know what's the biggest fail. Your first comment or your lame "comeback" to Zaranyzerak's nice reply. Don't be mad at him because you made yourself look like a retard.
@JAREDMICHALLE Yep, I actually buy more older movies on Blu-ray than newer ones. When they're done well, a nice HD transfer can breathe whole new life into an old favorite.
I just watched Frankenheimer's "Grand Prix" from 1966, and I am just amazed by the quality of it, actually I AM IN LOVE WITH THAT FILM NOW!! In that time there was no CGI, and they shot for the first time formula one races with onboard cameras.. MY MIND IS LITERALLY BLOOOOWN!!!! Hay people f*** f***en AVATAR!!
Please look for clips of races on you tube of GRAND PRIX 1966 film (look for HD), and then tell me what you think!
I still get the feeling that you can't be arsed to see anymore than 1920x1080 on a 46'' screen if you're the proper distance away and everything is working properly, but I could be wrong.
@antimatterball21 The irony is, that Predator edition is actually considered one of the worst transfers in the history of the format. The detail that you see isn't even close to how much should actually be visible. They did far too much digital manipulation of the film image, consequently scrubbing out much of the fine details. Hopefully the next release will get it right.
@antimatterball21 Can you tell me which predator blu-ray version that was? Because there is a few versions with different picture quality out there, on blu-ray. The blu-ray reviews of them are unfortunately not good. I really need predator (1987) in my blu-ray collection, i haven`t bought it yet, because of the reviews.
@XxLibra86xX Neither of the currently available Predator editions are worth getting. The first release was a barebones MPEG-2 encode with horrible artifacting throughout. The Ultimate Hunter Edition included most of the extras from the 2-disc SE DVD, but the transfer has been DNR'ed to hell to remove the natural film grain. As a result, much of the fine detail is completely scrubbed away. What detail IS visible isn't even close to how much SHOULD be visible. Keep the DVD for now.
@Zaranyzerak thank`s for letting me know, then i`ll just save my money, and wait for a better release. let`s hope they "do" a better job with the next release of predator then, and that they keep the natural film grain in it.
@Usul573 As with anything, it depends on the source material. In theory, anything up to the 70's culd be put on Blu-ray quite easily since they were all shot, edited and mastered on film. Anything on film is a prime candidate for Blu-ray because film is such a high quality source. But shows from the 80's and 90's, while many were SHOT on film, were often edited and mastered on SD broadcast videotape as a cost-cutting measure. So the only COMPLETE versions of the episodes are SD.
@Usul573 To put shows from that era on Blu-ray properly would mean digging out the original film elements (if they even still exist), then re-constructing every episode from scratch using high definition scans of the film, then re-doing ALL the effects and post production work from scratch in HD as well. For shows like Star Trek: TNG, DS9 and Voyager, this would be required for EVERY episode and would be very costly. Not saying it won't happen, but it would be a massive undertaking to do right.
Hey friend. I really like your videos. Just wanted to ask a quick question really. What in your opinion do you think is the best quality film, visual wise, on blu-ray before 1980? I narrowed it down to three and for me it would be Zulu, How the West was won and The Searches. What are your favourite three?
@KingofTheMafia Realzied you were preaching to the choir after watching the video, eh? ;) Welcome to the good fight to educate the masses about film and HD, hope you enjoy your stay.
@Zaranyzerak-How did you know I didn't watch the video? and high def is awesome and there is a HUGE difference. Plus, I don't like people who drop F bombs every second. It doesnt matter if it wasnt filmed in HD, they can convert it to HD. I got Back to the Future trilogy on Blu Ray for Christmas, and it looks AMAZZING!!
@ThePeterMan123 Your previous comment (and this one) suggest you haven't watched the actual content of the video, but rather are refuting the title (which is intentionally misleading to draw in people who actually DO think that way, so they can be educated by what I talk about in the video) under the assumption that it is my true belief. You are attempting to "tell me I'm wrong", but if you actually watch the video you'll see I completely agree with everything you're saying...
@Zaranyzerak perhaps if you put a title that people would fully understand you wouldn't have to reply to comments like these..makes it easy for everyone and there is no one upset
@Saberwind45871 That would defeat the purpose. The title isn't the issue. It's people ONLY commenting on the title and not even bothering to watch the video. They would "fully understand" if they WATCHED THE VIDEO. You don't go to a video site an only comment on a video's title, that's just plain stupid. And with this series set up the way it is, I can INSTANTLY tell if someone is commenting without watching. So no, won't be changing the titles.
@Zaranyzerak hey what are your thoughts on the the [back then] dreamwave comics of the transformers? Specifically their War Within comics and Highmoon Studios take when they made Transformers: War For Cybertron
@swartsanager2 Yes, it does. As do a lot of older movies. I just watched How the West Was Won on Blu and it was mind-blowing quality. Did you actually watch the video, or just read the title?
@poliv67 Because YouTube's 480p option looks like crap. The 720p option lets me use a higher bitrate and keep the quality closer to my original master file. Plus my titles are 720p, and I often overlay graphics and photos, so that allows me to at least show THOSE in higher quality than SD. Finally, my camera shoot in anamorphic 16x9. So while it's SD, it's the best SD can be. In short, there is plenty of method to my madness.
@poliv67 Gotcha. A lot of people give me crap for using an SD camera, so I figured I'd give you my "all purpose generic standard response to those kinds of comments" just in case. ;)
I hate to admit this, even on hindsight, but I used to think that older films that look crap even on DVD couldn't possibly look any better on blu-ray.
Well, I was wrong.
'74 Texas Chainsaw Massacre looks great on blu-ray. Django looks absolutely fantastic on blu-ray (despite Blue Underground released both the DVD and the blu-ray, the difference in picture quality is like night and day)
...I'm still not convinced Last House on the Left will ever look impressive tho.
@Hoshang2 Please watch the video before commenting. No, DVD is not good enough for old movies. With Blu-ray you see them in quality much closer to their original film quality. Film is much higher quality than Blu-ray, and therefore anything SHOT on film (ie: most movies made in that past 100+ years) is a prime candidate for Blu-ray. Transferred properly, older movies looks stunning on Blu-ray. Watch my newer comparison video to see for yourself.
Isn't film a wonderful medium 35mm. I like how though how the good stuff really is good. With analogue information kept in chemicals. I mean I make pictures, yes using a DSLR but also have a Film SLR.. and you know what. Film is quite something special. Sometimes I even use super grainy types of film. Other times I use film that are super fine and chemical give strong colours. Ah yes shooting the red of the sun going down. On film.. wow!
are they take out dvd commentary is some dvd movies and why most dvds are in widescreen not full screen and how would set your tv up so it could watch 1080p fullscreen dvds
@niqueo01 Sometimes a DVD commentary has been commissioned for a specific edition, so the rights belong solely to the company that released that edition (Criterion commentaries would be a good example). As such, they can't be included on later versions. I actually still have some Laserdiscs that have commentaries that never made it to DVD either.
@niqueo01 Most movies are made in widescreen, and since DVD was originally marketed as a collector's or film enthusiast's format, the majority of movies on DVD are presented in widescreen. This is the way you would see the movie in a theater. The DVD simply shows the movie in the aspect ratio it was made for, and meant to be viewed in. When a movie is cropped for 4x3 fullscreen, you can lose up to 50% of the original image, not to mention completely mess up the composition of the shots.
@niqueo01 Finally, the correct way to view 4x3 content (or "fullscreen") on a widescreen TV is pillarboxed, with black bars down the sides. Otherwise, you would either zoom into the image to fill the 16x9 display, cropping of the top and bottom, or stretch the image to fill the screen which completely distorts the image. Pillarboxed is the only correct way to view 4x3 content on a 16x9 display. Some aspect ratios (4x3, 2.35:1, 1.85:1, 1.66:1) will mean you get black bars, others (1.78:1) don't.
@MattTrevett What I like about 35mm film is that it is chemical. Yes this means things can go wrong but if things go right it is like magic. It is almost sad that I didn't pick up film photography earlier. Because well.. it is pretty much dead now :( Finding places to get the film treated it getting harder..
Sigh :! Still lets not forget the past all.. and lets work in ways so that we can get the digital alternatives up to 35mm standards.
Did everyone buy that chair with that fabric back then? It must have been popular, my mother use to have one. Oh and about the old movies to Blu-Ray I get your point, but isn't it neat to try?
@CYFilmStudent Dunno! It's actually just a floral pattern, but on camera it apparently looks like someone was murdered on it. I can happily state that I wasn't the one who picked it out, that would be my ex (not the ex mentioned in the video, later one).
And I LOVE old movies on Blu-ray! I actually buy more old ones than new ones. Didja watch the vid?
@craftand THANKS! I'm really proud of it. spent MONTHS trying to find one with the exact look I wanted. I feel really lucky to have actually found something even MORE perfect than what I originally had in mind!
How about you get a fucking life instead of sitting on some hideous 1970s loveseat that smells like soggy dog and ranting about shit nobody cares about except the other guys your mutual masturbation club.
@anachronic Wow, you can smell my couch through my YouTube video? AMAZING! I knew they were experimenting with some new viewing modes, but that's really mindblowing. I'm so glad you enjoyed my video, thank you for watching and commenting, helping it to rise even more in popularity! Please, comment some more! Oh, and our club is actually called the "Circle Jerks" and we'd love to have you as a member.
Odd...suddenly this video seems to be popular. Did somebody link it on a forum or something? Not that I mind the extra views, of course, just curious why it's suddenly getting so much attention 5 months after the fact...
@myyootoobusername@kotream Ah-ha! Thought it must have been something like that. Thanks! These trolls are fun, and I certainly have no complaints about more views/comments in the process. They're actually helping me more than they obviously realize... :D IRONY RULES!
Very true. As long as the source is film it will look great on Blu-Ray. The things people should watch out for is old tv shows. These were generally (maybe never, but I'm not sure on that) not shot on film, nor in another HD quality format. This is why many old TV shows don't even look to be DVD quality on their DVD releases. Beware old tv shows, but as nearly every movie ever was shot on film, movies are generally pretty safe.
@Reese268 Yep, specifically stuff from the 80's and 90's. While much of it was SHOT on film, all editing, mastering and post production was usually done on SD video. DVD quality is the best it will ever look unless they dig out the original film elements and REBUILD every episode in HD. Early 80's and older can look good though, as they still used film (aside from some sitcoms). Take a look at the recent Star Trek TOS and Prisoner sets - both 60's shows, all done on film, and they look great!
One of the best movies in BD (in terms of image quality) I ever saw was MOONRAKER (007), from 1979. The new movies from the series (from the 80's and 2000 years) have a very bad image quality in comparison.
Actually, I wouldn't agree that 35mm film has "exponentially" more detail than 1080p. Of course, it depends on the type and quality of the film and equipment originally used, among other factors, but the 4K/8K scans are done mainly to have high quality masters to work with; to ensure that no detail is lost during the scanning phase. The actual resolution of 35mm film masters is typically much closer to 2K/1080p than 4K.
kfyatek 1 month ago
So, for now, you're totally right, the difference between DVD (especially in NTSC regions) and BD is stunning; I hardly can watch anything in SD anymore after getting used to 1080p ;)
But in a few years, when a "4K Video Disc" enters the market, there really won't be much point in re-releasing most (I say most, because there are ones filmed in 70mm and other formats) pre-digital movies on it. You will only get more realistic film-like grain and not much more actual detail.
kfyatek 1 month ago
@kfyatek Not to mention 4K is pointless to have in the home because you would need a screen the size of your entire wall to even see a difference. Doubly pointless because most people who have HDTV now, don't have screens larger than 42".It might be a niche thing, for the handful of people with video projectors and a screen that can take advantage of it, but I don't see it making much impact. 35mm is closer to 4K than 1080. Higher, actually. Look it up.
Zaranyzerak 1 month ago
@Zaranyzerak If you're taking the number of grain in the celluloid and comparing it to the pixel count, then yes, you're right. But if we were to compare the actual detail reproduction ability, it's getting vague. Well, you may be right that by scanning the original camera negatives we would get more than 4K. But taking into account that the master prints are nth-generation film, I think it's still closer to 1080p.
kfyatek 1 month ago
@kfyatek It's rare for a Blu-ray master to be struck from a nth generation film. More often than not it's either from the original negative, or from an interpositive made from the original negative. Wizard of Oz was scanned at 8K resolution form the original negative. Blade Runner was scanned at 4K for the live action elements, 6K for the effects elements. If there wasn't additional detail to be extracted from those frames, they wouldn't bother with that high a resolution scan.
Zaranyzerak 1 month ago
@Zaranyzerak Well, pretty much everything looks better when it is scanned in higher resolution and carefully downscaled than when scanned in the target resolution from the start. It's better to do processing on higher resolution scans as well. I specifically looked up >=8K scans (of stills, but still frame is even bigger than movie's) and pretty much everything that is lost after downscaling four times is grain noise.
kfyatek 1 month ago
@Zaranyzerak
I still wonder about a good 46'' screen and being a proper distance away, and then if we can really see beyond 1920x1080p on that.
Usul573 3 weeks ago
@Zaranyzerak Hi There, i just watched all of ur HD Rants, and i believe you bud, i do see the difference between blu ray and dvd and yes i do believe blu ray is way better resolution, some people obviously cant see the picture quality difference, their eyes must be fucked up or somethin lol. i have a brand new system here, i have one of those LG Cinema 3D HDTVs here, awesome tv by the way, Passive 3D looks Amazing on it!! i noticed on ur channel, ur from BC, Canada, Prince Edward Island here!!
apeman1980 1 month ago
@apeman1980 Greetings, fellow crazy Canuck! Yeah, I've checked out those Passive 3D TVs in stores, awesome stuff. That's what I always said 3DTV should have been in the first place!. Active Shutter glasses are just so damn heavy, cumbersome, EXPENSIVE, and need to be recharged constantly.
Zaranyzerak 1 month ago
I have Star Wars on BR, and the Original trilogy looks great in HD even though the movies weren't filmed in HD.
DjFobse95 1 month ago
@DjFobse95 Of course they look good, they were shot with film. Film is far higher resolution than HD, as I cover in this video.
Zaranyzerak 1 month ago
43 people are freakin' fucktards!
shepherdschapelDOTco 1 month ago
Do they still use film today in order to prepare for whatever comes out after 1080p bluray?
SXGi1b0 2 months ago
@SXGi1b0 Yes, film is still used to this date.
Ryuuken24 1 month ago
I want DORITOS!!
TheChocoboTidus 2 months ago
*facepalm*
fetsen1 2 months ago
I also totally welcome oldies on Blu-Ray. I cannot understand why your videos get any dislikes. Clearly the likes are higher, but the people that dislike must be of relatively low IQ level and don't understand, or it's personal vendetta and don't like you're personality or sense of humor or what they find a lack of sense of sense of humor.
MrCrazyKool 2 months ago
classic superman was good on blu ray just because something is old dosent mean it,s rubbish blu ray polished them up after all classic movie are gem when they go on blu ray and classic flash gorden was good its like saying whats the point in saving comic,s on websites
sonic80474 3 months ago
Zara:
I thought that this type of ridiculous misconception was an exclusivity for some places in the world, where only a few people have aknowledgement about film making, like here, in Brazil.
Lots of people gets astonished about how old movies can be put into HD, when they were shot before HD "video" cameras existence.
aborcsp 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Heres a dumb question..does it really make a difference what size and type of tv you have on how the bluray will look? im wanting a 48'' flat screen of some kind. thanks for answering my idiotic question. I am tv and film illiterate :D
bethany2nirvana 5 months ago
@bethany2nirvana The thing about Blu-ray is the resolution is so high, you'll actually see MORE of the fine detail the larger the screen you use. With DVD, the bigger you go the more pixellated it looks... So yes, I'd say bigger is definitely better with Blu-ray! You'll actually see more and more detail all the way up to a screen size of 120". 48" is a great size, you should see a very noticeable difference between DVD and Blu-ray.
Zaranyzerak 5 months ago
@Zaranyzerak I got a 70 inch, so will my blu ray look all pixelated as fuk? is it too big? FUCK MAN YOU SHOULD HAVE STOPPED ME FROM buying it for 2 grand. god i thought you were here to help people. how is a 70 inch suppose to be more detailed when all size 1080p tvs have the same resolution.
malows1234 3 months ago
@malows1234 The same resolution yes, but on a smaller screen the pixel density is so high that you simply cannot see the fine details with the human eye. On a larger screen, you can.
Zaranyzerak 3 months ago
@Zaranyzerak i see, how much resolution is imax film. and what does it mean when directors say they wanna go digital instead of film. which is better and more detailed. is digital worse. could you explain the whole situation to me please. you seem like a real clever fellow about this
malows1234 3 months ago
@Zaranyzerak I got a 32 inch Sony Bravia, I personally think Ben-Hur looks great on my screen. The reason why I got 32 inch is because my room is pretty small. And I read on THX.com that you should measure the size of your room by 0.4 or something like that and then divide it by the size of your HDTV. BTW, you got the Ultimate Collector's Edition of Ben-Hur on Blu-ray? If not, then you should really get it, it is amazing. Probably one of the best films on Blu-ray I've ever seen.
OldSchoolGamer1203 3 months ago
@Zaranyzerak Oh, and you're right about old films on Blu-ray. Most of them seem to look and sound the best on Blu-ray. Especially special features.
OldSchoolGamer1203 3 months ago
He actually is very right. Apoc Now is actually one of the best looking blu-rays I have ever seen. It's actually better than some other Blu Ray films that were made a long way after that time period. If you say that Apoc Now is bad on blu, you need to start watching more Blu Rays.
akosmo17 6 months ago
We bought Gone with the wind, a 1939 film. Accounting for some damage to the original source it still looks amazing.
ranger3108 7 months ago
Comment removed
SuperGorgeousBoy 7 months ago
When did you get the wig?
MountDoomPictures 7 months ago
You are so wrong. The old movies are shot even higher than HD because it was needed to fit the theater screen. YOU SIR. ARE WRONG!
Delorean100 7 months ago
@Delorean100 Please watch the video before commenting. Thanks.
Zaranyzerak 7 months ago 7
@Zaranyzerak you are sutch an idiot, apocalypse now is the best blu-ray in the market and thats an old movie. i hate pricks like you!
Miller14100 7 months ago
@Miller14100 Like I told the guy above you, please watch the video before commenting. I'll give you a hint as to why: Some of my favorite Blu-ray transfers: Taxi Driver, Blade Runner, Psycho, How the West Was Won, Star Trek (60's series, the movies look like shit), The Prisoner (60's series). Getting a clue now? Commenting solely on a video title makes you look like the idiot.
Zaranyzerak 7 months ago 5
Comment removed
ranger3108 7 months ago
@Hellford667 avsforum is good too. But for just a nice, quick to access collection of comparison, caps-a-holic rocks.
Zaranyzerak 8 months ago
@Zaranyzerak just got back to the future trilogy on blu ray, it's amazing.
michael96686 6 months ago
It makes me sad that Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai had to be pieced together from several different materials, because the source is no longer here. At least the Criterion collection for blu-ray looks good.
hammerinhand 8 months ago
Well said. This reminds me of a time not too long ago when I was playing an MMO and some players were arguing about what "frame rate" the human eye sees with...
....sigh.
jjobie 8 months ago in playlist Music/Film/Video Games
I have to agree with your Space Odyseey point. I just watched Goldfinger on Blu Ray recently, and apart from the period references, the images themselves looked so crisp and brilliant that had I not known it was from the sixties, I would have mistaken it for a far more recent film
BaronVonYogurt 9 months ago
I'm used to people not reading a video's description before vomiting out their soul but you'd think they'd have the sense to at least watch the video before commenting.
eateroftheflame 9 months ago
Keep ranting, brother! Most of the Blu-ray releases I really look forward to are catalog releases, and when I've told people how much I was looking forward to the Blu-ray release of Psycho, or Alien, or The Exorcist, or Apocalypse Now, or Taxi Driver...nine times out of ten, they stare at me blankly before asking, "What's the point?" At which point, I have to go on an HD rant of my own. So thanks for putting this out there, and tackling the issue on more than just a moron-by-moron basis.
jamesoblivion 9 months ago
@jamesoblivion Yes! I couldn't agree more on looking forward to catalog releases. A properly done catalog release with a nice transfer can breathe whole new life into an old favorite! The majority of Blu-rays I buy are catalog titles.
Zaranyzerak 9 months ago
@Zaranyzerak WHAT'S A CATALOG TITLE?
optimegatrongodzilla 8 months ago
@optimegatrongodzilla Catalog title = older movie from a studio's back catalog.
Zaranyzerak 8 months ago
@Zaranyzerak WHAT'S UP WITH THE HAIR THIS TIME AROUND, ZARANYZERAK?
optimegatrongodzilla 8 months ago
''What's the POINT of putting OLD movies on Blu-ray? They're not even filmed in HD!''
Yes they are, they were filmed in 1080p and higher before DVD was born, the thing is bunch of you morons including this movie author think Blu-ray is movie format, it is not. That is a name of storage technology using blue laser (refer to wiki for more info) Original quality videos were stored, movies released back then couldn't show that quality, 10 gb on 4.7GB DVD? Now when Blu-ray is out you'll see original
Shayd93 9 months ago
@Shayd93 LOL! I love these kinds of comments. If you watched the actual video instead of just commenting on the title, you'd quickly realize you're preaching to the choir. (Pssst - I made the title that way to draw in the people who actually think those stupid things so the video would educate them) Most movies are filmed on FILM, which is much higher resolution than 1080p. Anyway, check out the actual video where I cover exactly that. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. ;)
Zaranyzerak 9 months ago
@Zaranyzerak I reject that offer, i'd rather watch cartoons instead of your mouth eating half of the clip
Shayd93 9 months ago
@Shayd93 Okay then, remain ignorant.
Zaranyzerak 9 months ago
@Shayd93 You just have to be an asshole while this video was very educational. Thanks Zaranyzerak, Shady93 go watch your Nickelodeon videos ya jerk.
h3fst3r 9 months ago
@h3fst3r did i hurt your EGO?
Shayd93 9 months ago
@h3fst3r You're welcome. No idea what that other guy's deal is, there's no point responding to him if he isn't even going to watch the video he's commenting on. Oh, and you're clearly not the one with the bruised ego, as he can't even admit to a simple mistake that I was attempting to make LIGHT of and point him in the right direction. Whatever, his problem not ours.
Zaranyzerak 9 months ago
@Shayd93 LOL! I don't know what's the biggest fail. Your first comment or your lame "comeback" to Zaranyzerak's nice reply. Don't be mad at him because you made yourself look like a retard.
YangLinXuan 9 months ago
Please stop attempting to propagate your terrible stupidity
DrZuboc 10 months ago
@DrZuboc Describe precisely in what way you believe I am being stupid.
Zaranyzerak 10 months ago
Oh I don't know maybe cus MORE PEOPLE WANNA FUCKING SEE THOSE MOVIES ASSHOLE
JAREDMICHALLE 1 year ago
@JAREDMICHALLE Yep, I actually buy more older movies on Blu-ray than newer ones. When they're done well, a nice HD transfer can breathe whole new life into an old favorite.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak Oh yeah.That's certainly something I hate.Rather than actually making the movie look better,they just upscale it.
JAREDMICHALLE 1 year ago
@JAREDMICHALLE Or they DNR the hell out of it to remove the natural film grain, making everything look plastic and smeared...
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
Man you're a genius! Great video!
IsaacBTTF 1 year ago
1:08 = sexy
robbiewwebster 1 year ago
I just watched Frankenheimer's "Grand Prix" from 1966, and I am just amazed by the quality of it, actually I AM IN LOVE WITH THAT FILM NOW!! In that time there was no CGI, and they shot for the first time formula one races with onboard cameras.. MY MIND IS LITERALLY BLOOOOWN!!!! Hay people f*** f***en AVATAR!!
Please look for clips of races on you tube of GRAND PRIX 1966 film (look for HD), and then tell me what you think!
nothke 1 year ago
This makes me want a Blu-ray so bad.
So do you mean a few more years there can be new technology that puts Blu-ray to shame?
TheR9RO 1 year ago
@TheR9RO they hav bluray 3d so yah idk how they can make it better than blurayyy what else can they do idkk
Treylogan218BR 10 months ago
@TheR9RO
I still get the feeling that you can't be arsed to see anymore than 1920x1080 on a 46'' screen if you're the proper distance away and everything is working properly, but I could be wrong.
On a 80'' screen....who knows.
Usul573 5 months ago
@antimatterball21 The irony is, that Predator edition is actually considered one of the worst transfers in the history of the format. The detail that you see isn't even close to how much should actually be visible. They did far too much digital manipulation of the film image, consequently scrubbing out much of the fine details. Hopefully the next release will get it right.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@antimatterball21 Can you tell me which predator blu-ray version that was? Because there is a few versions with different picture quality out there, on blu-ray. The blu-ray reviews of them are unfortunately not good. I really need predator (1987) in my blu-ray collection, i haven`t bought it yet, because of the reviews.
XxLibra86xX 1 year ago
@XxLibra86xX Neither of the currently available Predator editions are worth getting. The first release was a barebones MPEG-2 encode with horrible artifacting throughout. The Ultimate Hunter Edition included most of the extras from the 2-disc SE DVD, but the transfer has been DNR'ed to hell to remove the natural film grain. As a result, much of the fine detail is completely scrubbed away. What detail IS visible isn't even close to how much SHOULD be visible. Keep the DVD for now.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak thank`s for letting me know, then i`ll just save my money, and wait for a better release. let`s hope they "do" a better job with the next release of predator then, and that they keep the natural film grain in it.
XxLibra86xX 1 year ago
What about the older TV Shows? They keep releasing just the newer releases of shows. Why don't the older shows ever get released yet?
HollowayMultimedia 1 year ago
@HollowayMultimedia
The only older show on blu-ray that I have seen is the original Star Trek.
Usul573 1 year ago
@Usul573 The Prisoner is also on Blu-ray (1968 British series).
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak
I'm guessing any old show can be put on blu-ray then. Not too common though, I wonder how expensive it is to do.
Usul573 1 year ago
@Usul573 As with anything, it depends on the source material. In theory, anything up to the 70's culd be put on Blu-ray quite easily since they were all shot, edited and mastered on film. Anything on film is a prime candidate for Blu-ray because film is such a high quality source. But shows from the 80's and 90's, while many were SHOT on film, were often edited and mastered on SD broadcast videotape as a cost-cutting measure. So the only COMPLETE versions of the episodes are SD.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Usul573 To put shows from that era on Blu-ray properly would mean digging out the original film elements (if they even still exist), then re-constructing every episode from scratch using high definition scans of the film, then re-doing ALL the effects and post production work from scratch in HD as well. For shows like Star Trek: TNG, DS9 and Voyager, this would be required for EVERY episode and would be very costly. Not saying it won't happen, but it would be a massive undertaking to do right.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak Ahhhh, but wouldn't it be grand???
sgtpepper1138 1 year ago
@sgtpepper1138 Hellz yeah!
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
Calm down bro. You suck.
Garric1 1 year ago
@Garric1 Oh gosh gee, I'm so insulted. Not.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
Hey friend. I really like your videos. Just wanted to ask a quick question really. What in your opinion do you think is the best quality film, visual wise, on blu-ray before 1980? I narrowed it down to three and for me it would be Zulu, How the West was won and The Searches. What are your favourite three?
Shagrat65 1 year ago
u look way better with short hair... just saying
lukes740 1 year ago
I agree, I love being able to watch my favorite movies "Alien" and "Predator" on ble ray. I was shocked at how much better it was. "
JACKED150 1 year ago
Comment removed
JACKED150 1 year ago
I saw A Christmas Story on Blu-Ray, it looks fantastic.
LazyGunGuy 1 year ago
Psycho looks good enough to eat on Blu Ray. x
adomanator69 1 year ago
Comment removed
KingofTheMafia 1 year ago
@KingofTheMafia Realzied you were preaching to the choir after watching the video, eh? ;) Welcome to the good fight to educate the masses about film and HD, hope you enjoy your stay.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
Oh, OK.
ThePeterMan123 1 year ago
Technology today allows them to put them in HD. and it looks GOOD
ThePeterMan123 1 year ago
@ThePeterMan123 Please watch the actual video before commenting. Thanks.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago 2
@Zaranyzerak-How did you know I didn't watch the video? and high def is awesome and there is a HUGE difference. Plus, I don't like people who drop F bombs every second. It doesnt matter if it wasnt filmed in HD, they can convert it to HD. I got Back to the Future trilogy on Blu Ray for Christmas, and it looks AMAZZING!!
ThePeterMan123 1 year ago
@ThePeterMan123 Your previous comment (and this one) suggest you haven't watched the actual content of the video, but rather are refuting the title (which is intentionally misleading to draw in people who actually DO think that way, so they can be educated by what I talk about in the video) under the assumption that it is my true belief. You are attempting to "tell me I'm wrong", but if you actually watch the video you'll see I completely agree with everything you're saying...
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak perhaps if you put a title that people would fully understand you wouldn't have to reply to comments like these..makes it easy for everyone and there is no one upset
Saberwind45871 1 year ago
@Saberwind45871 That would defeat the purpose. The title isn't the issue. It's people ONLY commenting on the title and not even bothering to watch the video. They would "fully understand" if they WATCHED THE VIDEO. You don't go to a video site an only comment on a video's title, that's just plain stupid. And with this series set up the way it is, I can INSTANTLY tell if someone is commenting without watching. So no, won't be changing the titles.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago 12
@Zaranyzerak i was just stating my mind i suppose..i quite enjoy watching your videos, keep up the good work
Saberwind45871 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak hey what are your thoughts on the the [back then] dreamwave comics of the transformers? Specifically their War Within comics and Highmoon Studios take when they made Transformers: War For Cybertron
Saberwind45871 1 year ago
@ThePeterMan123 just watch the fucking video before acting stupid mate. Commenting on titles is stupid. Your parents are rocks.
MrAnthonyLynch 1 year ago
wait wat r u takin about? The Godfather Part 1 look AMAZING on blu ray
swartsanager2 1 year ago
@swartsanager2 Yes, it does. As do a lot of older movies. I just watched How the West Was Won on Blu and it was mind-blowing quality. Did you actually watch the video, or just read the title?
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak I watch the video. is just I wanted to point out that it just looks good on blu ray =)
swartsanager2 1 year ago
@swartsanager2 Ah, okay. And yes, I've heard that one's amazing too. :)
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
you must be the most uninteresting person on youtube!
whatisitfawlty 1 year ago
@whatisitfawlty My 7200+ subscribers disagree with you.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago 12
Fantasia is shiny and perfect!!!
AleXX1995XX 1 year ago
@AleXX1995XX Fantasia looks UH MAY ZING.
sgtpepper1138 1 year ago
You said, that all old films on Blu-ray HAVE AND SHOULD HAVE grain, because if not then there is no picture, only white.
But Fantasia 1940 was not an digital film, the transfer is from an old movie-stripe and it has NO grain on blu-ray !!!!
New Pixar-movies, ok. But Fantasia???
It`s so old and there is no grain on blu-ray !!!!!
Watch it and you`ll see !!!!
AleXX1995XX 1 year ago
What's the point of putting your videos in 720p? They're not even filmed in HD!
poliv67 1 year ago
@poliv67 Because YouTube's 480p option looks like crap. The 720p option lets me use a higher bitrate and keep the quality closer to my original master file. Plus my titles are 720p, and I often overlay graphics and photos, so that allows me to at least show THOSE in higher quality than SD. Finally, my camera shoot in anamorphic 16x9. So while it's SD, it's the best SD can be. In short, there is plenty of method to my madness.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak Thanks for answering, even tough I mostly asked that to make fun of the title...
poliv67 1 year ago
@poliv67 Gotcha. A lot of people give me crap for using an SD camera, so I figured I'd give you my "all purpose generic standard response to those kinds of comments" just in case. ;)
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
It's because film doesn't have a finite resolution, when they transfer them to blue ray they clean the film and capture it at high resolution.
Kanashto 1 year ago
@Kanashto Did you watch the video? Or just comment on the title?
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak title, then watched and realised your style. I was gonna remove the comment but it seemed okay.
Kanashto 1 year ago
Whoooo!!!! Finally I see someone who knows the difference between analog and digital!!!
TechnoL33T 1 year ago
I hate to admit this, even on hindsight, but I used to think that older films that look crap even on DVD couldn't possibly look any better on blu-ray.
Well, I was wrong.
'74 Texas Chainsaw Massacre looks great on blu-ray. Django looks absolutely fantastic on blu-ray (despite Blue Underground released both the DVD and the blu-ray, the difference in picture quality is like night and day)
...I'm still not convinced Last House on the Left will ever look impressive tho.
Takeshi357 1 year ago
It depends on the transfer of the film.
RkivUnderground 1 year ago
@RkivUnderground Did you watch the video?
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
i agree..DVD is good enough for old movies.
Hoshang2 1 year ago
@Hoshang2 Please watch the video before commenting. No, DVD is not good enough for old movies. With Blu-ray you see them in quality much closer to their original film quality. Film is much higher quality than Blu-ray, and therefore anything SHOT on film (ie: most movies made in that past 100+ years) is a prime candidate for Blu-ray. Transferred properly, older movies looks stunning on Blu-ray. Watch my newer comparison video to see for yourself.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
Isn't film a wonderful medium 35mm. I like how though how the good stuff really is good. With analogue information kept in chemicals. I mean I make pictures, yes using a DSLR but also have a Film SLR.. and you know what. Film is quite something special. Sometimes I even use super grainy types of film. Other times I use film that are super fine and chemical give strong colours. Ah yes shooting the red of the sun going down. On film.. wow!
masticina 1 year ago
are they take out dvd commentary is some dvd movies and why most dvds are in widescreen not full screen and how would set your tv up so it could watch 1080p fullscreen dvds
niqueo01 1 year ago
@niqueo01 Sometimes a DVD commentary has been commissioned for a specific edition, so the rights belong solely to the company that released that edition (Criterion commentaries would be a good example). As such, they can't be included on later versions. I actually still have some Laserdiscs that have commentaries that never made it to DVD either.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@niqueo01 Most movies are made in widescreen, and since DVD was originally marketed as a collector's or film enthusiast's format, the majority of movies on DVD are presented in widescreen. This is the way you would see the movie in a theater. The DVD simply shows the movie in the aspect ratio it was made for, and meant to be viewed in. When a movie is cropped for 4x3 fullscreen, you can lose up to 50% of the original image, not to mention completely mess up the composition of the shots.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@niqueo01 Finally, the correct way to view 4x3 content (or "fullscreen") on a widescreen TV is pillarboxed, with black bars down the sides. Otherwise, you would either zoom into the image to fill the 16x9 display, cropping of the top and bottom, or stretch the image to fill the screen which completely distorts the image. Pillarboxed is the only correct way to view 4x3 content on a 16x9 display. Some aspect ratios (4x3, 2.35:1, 1.85:1, 1.66:1) will mean you get black bars, others (1.78:1) don't.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
35mm film is pretty high def..
MattTrevett 1 year ago
@MattTrevett What I like about 35mm film is that it is chemical. Yes this means things can go wrong but if things go right it is like magic. It is almost sad that I didn't pick up film photography earlier. Because well.. it is pretty much dead now :( Finding places to get the film treated it getting harder..
Sigh :! Still lets not forget the past all.. and lets work in ways so that we can get the digital alternatives up to 35mm standards.
masticina 1 year ago
At first, I thought you didn't know what you were talking about. I'm glad I gave you a chance. I forgot about 4K.
agentx3 1 year ago
1:05 nom nom nom nom nom, that was really really gross 0.o
MrPandawesome 1 year ago
@MrPandawesome Good. Glad you enjoyed it.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
30% of the comments = stop saying exponential
30% of the comments = your couch is old
10% of the comments = I commented but didn't actually watch the video
10% of the comments = you live with your mom
10% of the comments = why u h8 blu rae
5% of the comments = wow, thanks for being so informative
5% of the comments = I agree and want to add something meaningful
cshewel 1 year ago
@cshewel Welcome to the wonderful world of the HD Rants' comments section.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@FreeMan3OO Now you're just being silly.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
Nope.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
Old musics are filmed at 15 megapixel, which is enough to be real nice on blu-ray, so STFU
Marco007Marco007 1 year ago
@Marco007Marco007 Actually watch the video before commenting, please. Don't just make assumptions based on the title.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak Nope
Marco007Marco007 1 year ago
@Marco007Marco007 Okay, then comment on the title and look like an idiot. You're preaching to the choir, dude.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak Nope.
Marco007Marco007 1 year ago
@Marco007Marco007 Quite the literate, intellectual fellow, aren't you.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
Did everyone buy that chair with that fabric back then? It must have been popular, my mother use to have one. Oh and about the old movies to Blu-Ray I get your point, but isn't it neat to try?
CYFilmStudent 1 year ago
@CYFilmStudent Dunno! It's actually just a floral pattern, but on camera it apparently looks like someone was murdered on it. I can happily state that I wasn't the one who picked it out, that would be my ex (not the ex mentioned in the video, later one).
And I LOVE old movies on Blu-ray! I actually buy more old ones than new ones. Didja watch the vid?
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
we had the set as a kid, brings back good and bad memories.. I think I finished final fantasy 3 on the love seat :)
craftand 1 year ago
sweet love seat :/
craftand 1 year ago
@craftand THANKS! I'm really proud of it. spent MONTHS trying to find one with the exact look I wanted. I feel really lucky to have actually found something even MORE perfect than what I originally had in mind!
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@craftand
I think I may have the same thing, full set too.
Leenjoey419 1 year ago
How about you get a fucking life instead of sitting on some hideous 1970s loveseat that smells like soggy dog and ranting about shit nobody cares about except the other guys your mutual masturbation club.
anachronic 1 year ago
@anachronic Wow, you can smell my couch through my YouTube video? AMAZING! I knew they were experimenting with some new viewing modes, but that's really mindblowing. I'm so glad you enjoyed my video, thank you for watching and commenting, helping it to rise even more in popularity! Please, comment some more! Oh, and our club is actually called the "Circle Jerks" and we'd love to have you as a member.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak
olololol. I neglected to mention this in my first comment, but you made a great point and this kind of needed to be said.
t4ll3y 1 year ago
@t4ll3y All in good fun, buddy! Keep trollin'!
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak
Back at'cha.
t4ll3y 1 year ago
Odd...suddenly this video seems to be popular. Did somebody link it on a forum or something? Not that I mind the extra views, of course, just curious why it's suddenly getting so much attention 5 months after the fact...
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago 2
@Zaranyzerak It was put on reddit
myyootoobusername 1 year ago
@myyootoobusername @kotream Ah-ha! Thought it must have been something like that. Thanks! These trolls are fun, and I certainly have no complaints about more views/comments in the process. They're actually helping me more than they obviously realize... :D IRONY RULES!
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak reddit
kotream 1 year ago
@Zaranyzerak It was put on Reddit
myyootoobusername 1 year ago
WTF is up with that 1970's love seat. Nice to see you are getting your furniture from your grandma.
halo77gmail 1 year ago
@halo77gmail Thrift shop, actually. My Grandma's furniture is even more hideous... Glad you enjoy the retro style, thanks for noticing!
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
U MAD BRO?
Drach3n 1 year ago
@Drach3n Furious.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago 2
Stop talking. Start writing.
Virjyl 1 year ago
@Virjyl I do both, thanks.
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago 3
Good stuff.
deep62 1 year ago
You're acting too hard. Maybe you should try acting harder?
cauliflowerjones 1 year ago
@cauliflowerjones Acting II: Acting Harder?
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago 2
Very true. As long as the source is film it will look great on Blu-Ray. The things people should watch out for is old tv shows. These were generally (maybe never, but I'm not sure on that) not shot on film, nor in another HD quality format. This is why many old TV shows don't even look to be DVD quality on their DVD releases. Beware old tv shows, but as nearly every movie ever was shot on film, movies are generally pretty safe.
Reese268 1 year ago
@Reese268 Yep, specifically stuff from the 80's and 90's. While much of it was SHOT on film, all editing, mastering and post production was usually done on SD video. DVD quality is the best it will ever look unless they dig out the original film elements and REBUILD every episode in HD. Early 80's and older can look good though, as they still used film (aside from some sitcoms). Take a look at the recent Star Trek TOS and Prisoner sets - both 60's shows, all done on film, and they look great!
Zaranyzerak 1 year ago
One of the best movies in BD (in terms of image quality) I ever saw was MOONRAKER (007), from 1979. The new movies from the series (from the 80's and 2000 years) have a very bad image quality in comparison.
tube2258 1 year ago 2