Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Why are so many films such low rez / small picture?


cobraii

Recommended Posts

Like whats playing right now " The Spirt of St Louis"

My TV is 1080 and it only uses about 1/2 the screen blacking out the sides and top and bottom.

( I know I can zoom to fill the screen but then the picture is crap ) The only thing that looks good is 4:3.

Why?

When will this change?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been this way for years. Black at the top, bottom, and both sides, and a small image. If I try to enlarge to wide screen, I get very low resolution on the image, and I still have black at the top and bottom.

 

The modern world is baloney.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I know it's been this way for years on TCM and other stations but why? I rent the DVD and it's full screen. Why don't they broadcast to use the full wide screen?

 

Edited by: cobraii on Nov 6, 2010 3:55 PM

 

Edited by: cobraii on Nov 6, 2010 3:56 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

TCM also has an HD channel (actually, it is really upscaled), and as I look at it right now Spirit of St. Louis covers the width of my HDTV. cobraii, call your local carrier. I ended up calling DISH because I had heard there was a TCM HD and the service rep I talked to discovered it was in their system but hadn't adjusted everybody's lineup. Over the phone, he was able to add it on to mine at no charge and I have been watching it ever since.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just checked all of the providers in the St Louis area including Dish and Direct TV and no one

Has TMC or AMC in HD,......Dam what the heck is taking them so long. It seems some have had it since June 2009.

 

Edited by: cobraii on Nov 6, 2010 5:05 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wide screen films are shown to fit entirely within the standard 4:3 ratio of standard TV so viewers can watch it as it appeared in theaters. Every wide screen film that fills the 4:3 screen entirely from top to bottom and side to side is, by definition, cropped. Some DVD versions of the same title are formatted to automatically show a 4:3 version depending on how you have your DVD player set.

 

You'll just have to get up to speed with technology. Most film fans are glad to finally see so many great titles properly.

 

GM

Link to post
Share on other sites

You never stated how *large* your HDTV is. Anything over 37" will cause SD signals to show their limitations. The larger the set, the worst it will look. Even HD eventually will show its limitations with sizes over 60 inches.

 

I have learned this from the old large screen technology back in the 1980's. A proper signal, even analog will look OK on sets 27" or smaller but once you get up to the large screen TV's, the noise and low resolution really shows up and looks terrible.

 

I still use a standard 27" SD TV and my local cable company has upgraded to SD digital as well as the standard HD. They given me with my SD (now digital) package 5 HD channels free of charge and I can view them on my DVD recorder that has the QAM tuner. I have to zoom in and out to compensate for the standard and widescreen programming. HD even makes standard TV's look better but I noticed the very slight difference in resolution quality between zoom in and zoom out.

 

What I've learn so far, when my TV does go out, I will not buy an HDTV set over 42" because of my large SD VHS / DVD library. The new HD upconversion technolgy in the newer VHS/DVD recorders does try to fix the image to a degree.

 

Just remember even with an HDTV, the larger the set, the lower the quality. 1080 will always be 1080, from 25" to the gigantic 85" + size sets.

 

You will have to give all channels time to do the full HD upgrades, this is expensive for some companies but like in the old days of color, it will happen.

 

HD is a repeat of history, the history of color television broadcast back in the 1950's and 60's Even if one would to have bought a color TV back then, all one might see if B&W. Very few stations passed on the color signal and few movies were in color especially the TV programming. It took about 15 years for color to be showned and viewed by everyone.

 

The reason why SD signals especially analog looks bad is that you are seeing the noise and pixals (if SD digital) *better* on an HD set.

 

By the way SD digital cable looks the same as SD Directv.

 

Edited by: hamradio on Nov 6, 2010 7:54 PM (please forgive any typos)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 56" 720p DLP TV. I sit 8' away from it. SD channels look quite good, even when they have to be zoomed, to make a LB picture fill the screen. Of course true HD looks way better, but SD looks way better than it did on my old 46" CRT TV, which was the same height as my 56" HD set. Some sets, and some HD tech does better than others with SD signals. I don't see a lot of noise, and my picture definitely isn't "terrible."

 

If someone has a lot of SD DVDs, and is thinking of going to BluRay, I recommend the $500 OPPO BD player. It has such good upscaling of anamorphic SD DVDs that they look almost as good as HD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whine, whine whine...

 

My tv is also 1080p capable, and I have no problem watching widescreen films on TCM or any other channel's widescreen airings because of the options I have on my tv for various zoom/stretch/fill options. If you want it to look the BEST, then you naturally have to e an actual subscriber to an HD or digital service in order to get the best possible image. You CANNOT simply have a 1080p compatible set with an ordinary cable signal and expect the same results....it doesn't work that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=ValentineXavier wrote:}{quote}

> If someone has a lot of SD DVDs, and is thinking of going to BluRay, I recommend the $500 OPPO BD player. It has such good upscaling of anamorphic SD DVDs that they look almost as good as HD.

 

Valentine,

I'm not sure which Oppo you have but recently the company discontinued at least one of their players to make way for another.

 

However, I have to tell everyone, in my opinion, you should get a Sony Blu-ray player. They play Blu great and upscale DVDs wonderfully...and you can get an excellent one now for only about $100-135. There will likely be under under $100 sales this Black Friday. Sony is the primary supporter of Blu-ray and I have found that it seems to be the one company where one doesn't need software upgrading, at least not anywhere what other companies do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I was referring to the BDP83, but I see you are correct, it was recently discontinued. That's a shame. It was almost universally recognized as a truly excellent reference quality player, at about 25% of the cost of other such players. As to firmware updates, that is considered a strong point of OPPO. They continue updating their firmware, where as Sony does not. I have a Sony 400 disc DVD changer, and have owned lots of Sony products. Most have been reasonably good. But, their customer service, and continued support for their products isn't anything like as good as OPPO's. If OPPO's BDP93 continues to use the Anchor Bay upscaling technology, I'm sure it will be superior to any Sonys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Valentine, sorry, but two things I disagree with:

1. Sony is usually the very first to provide an update if one is needed for the Blu-ray player. I've seen people who own Samsung, LG, etc. complain on boardss that because Blu discs can have new technology on them that the companies have to develop a software upgrade for standing players. But Sony players keep on handling almost everything new without an upgrade of any kind, but they do keep aneye out for one and provide it right away. And I have found the to be very helpful when I have had to call them (they will even send you a disc with a software upgrade free of charge, if one prefers that to downloading it).

2. I don't think you can say Oppo is 25% the cost of other players. 400% the cost is more likely. Next to Pioneer, it was one of the most expensive players out there. For it to have been 25% as you say, and you paid $500, that would mean the other players would have had to been $2,000. Prices for Sony and the like started a few years ago at about $400 but if you have checked recently you would see that competition have brought prices of players way down (to about $100-135, as I mentioned earlier). To pay $500 now is like going out and buying Monster cables...totally unnecessary when others provide as good a picture for a lot less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm talking about the film being shown in it's original format without wasting screen space. There is no need to have bars on 4 sides of the picture, ever! On 2 sides yes, usually top and bottom or depending on the format.

 

Edited by: cobraii on Nov 7, 2010 9:03 AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Until St Louis give you HD, there is nothing you can do except maybe get satellite programming. You can try to reduce the sharpness, which I do at times. I try to make a compromise between clairity and to soften the low resolution pixalization. Like I stated before HD makes *everything* stands out better.

 

You should have seen how bad channels above 60 was in my area before Suddenlink went to SD digital. They sent me the box free of charge. TCM looks better but is still in low res SD. Sorry about your woes, its the price of technology.

 

DTA1.gif

 

Edited by: hamradio on Nov 7, 2010 10:35 AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

cobraii, you mentioned checking all the providers in your area. Out of curiousity, how did you check? If you called, there is a chance someone didn't know. Or if you said TCM, likely they wouldn't have found it.

 

The reason I ask is I just went to DISH Network's web page and under HD programming they have Turner Classic Movies:

 

http://www.dishnetwork.com/hdtv/default.aspx

 

They have different packages, but it is not in the basic one. It is in the America's Top 200 and America's Top 250 packagaes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=filmlover wrote:}{quote}

> Valentine, sorry, but two things I disagree with:

> 1. Sony is usually the very first to provide an update if one is needed for the Blu-ray player. I've seen people who own Samsung, LG, etc. complain on boardss that because Blu discs can have new technology on them that the companies have to develop a software upgrade for standing players. But Sony players keep on handling almost everything new without an upgrade of any kind, but they do keep aneye out for one and provide it right away. And I have found the to be very helpful when I have had to call them (they will even send you a disc with a software upgrade free of charge, if one prefers that to downloading it).

 

Agreed about Samsung and LG, but we must frequent different boards. I read a lot on the AVS Forum, and have kept up with the threads about Sony's two new BD changers, and for a long while kept up on the OPPO BD players when they came out. The vast majority of posts I read would place OPPO customer service as amazingly good, and their equipment, likewise. Almost all posters who mentioned any comparison would place OPPO over Sony. My 400 disc Sony 995 DVD changer has worked well for me, but many people on that forum have had many problems with it.

 

> 2. I don't think you can say Oppo is 25% the cost of other players. 400% the cost is more likely. >Next to Pioneer, it was one of the most expensive players out there. For it to have been 25% as >you say, and you paid $500, that would mean the other players would have had to been $2,000.

>unnecessary when others provide as good a picture for a lot less.

 

I said the the OPPO (at $500) is about 25% the cost of other reference grade players. Obviously, you can buy 6 or 8 BD players for that. Other reference grade players start at about $2,000, and go up to $5,000 and above. OPPO's new BDP 93 will be out soon, at $500, with improvements over the 83, including streaming, but still at the same price. According to the concensus of the posters on the AVS Forum, the 83 provided a much better picture than anything that cost less, and many players that cost far more, on both BD and SD DVDs. Alas, I still have only an OPPO SD DVD player. It's picture is clearly superior to my Sony, which cost three times as much (ok, it IS a changer,) or my Pioneer or my Philips, or my Toshiba, (which died.) So, when I do buy a BD player, it will be an OPPO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...