It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


High Definition & Blue Ray Technologies are a scam. Don't be fooled.

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 05:15 AM
Film studios are now selling their movies in HD and Blue Ray. Don't be fooled it's all a scam. it's better just to buy the regular version of the DVD.
I've take numerous film classes and have digital video experience. Basically, 97% of all films are shot using film, 16mm, 8mm. 35mm. etc. And this film is a celluloid and it captures light to form the shapes, but it's basically a thin film composed of cells.

Film cannot be viewed in HD or Blue ray. it simply cannot, why? because HD and BR are based on pixels, tiny light emissions on the screen. Plasma or other LCD technology. So watching a film that was transferred from film, to HD cannot happen. You cannot ever, watch a film that was shot in cellular film..and watch it on HD or Blue Ray. Because they are different technologies. and they cannot match or relate to eachother. And actually transferring film to a computer destroys the original film image.

Solution? well, George Lucas shot revenge of the sith with HD sony cameras. the first of films to be shot using high definition cameras. So when you have your HD TV and HD player, it will look as it was originally shot and intended to be seen.

Studios will now be selling old films like Terminator, Die Hard, Aliens. And tell you that you are watching them on HD. And that is just not true, you are still watching a movie that was shot using original cell film.

So is HD good or bad? it's good..for television shows that are shot in HD and broadcasted in HD. Or future films that will be shot in that manner in the future. But the premise remains, Celluloid, film cannot be sold as High Definition. Blue ray is another matter, it reads the blue color from the films and makes it look sharper, but the fact remains..most movies are still being shot using traditional film and therefore should be watched at the movie theater.

It would be funny to see studios trying to sell movies or TV shows from the 40's and 50's and say that they are in "HD" or "Blue Ray". They will still look very blurry and lacking color. So, the question is..will you still buy product that is advertised as true, but you know it to be false? And I know that I will never see a film like "The Empire Strikes Back" in true High Definition as it was NEVER Shot in HD.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 05:21 AM

Blue ray is another matter, it reads the blue color from the films and makes it look sharper.


The name Blu-ray Disc is derived from the blue-violet laser used to read and write this type of disc.

Blue ray is just a storage method, and is called as such because there is a blue laser involved. And if you were going to make any colour look sharper, it would be green, because the human eye is most sensitive to that colour.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 05:43 AM

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks

Blue ray is just a storage method, and is called as such because there is a blue laser involved. And if you were going to make any colour look sharper, it would be green, because the human eye is most sensitive to that colour.

Well, I don't know too much about how Blue ray works, But I do remember hearing from my teacher that the blue color is the color that makes the movies look sharper, I haven't done the research for this, but you could be right. However, if you have a blue ray, why would it read green color? I think the idea of BR is to capture the blue tones and make them sharper..

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 05:53 AM
You can take old shot film and make it into HD by scanning it with more detail and maybe digitally enhance in the process.
Besides HD is the same as a normal DVD, just better resolution.

+7 more 
posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 05:55 AM

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 06:11 AM
The 'blue' in blue-ray referrs to the laser used for playback. It's at the blue end of the spectrum and that shorter wavelength than the usual IR lasers in CD/DVD players permits a higher data-density (more gB/disc). The color information is stored digitally and as far as the laser is concerned one bit is basically the same as the next (a 1 or a 0).

Jedi does the truth speak about converted movie quality

[edit on 23/12/2007 by Pilgrum]

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 06:20 AM

Originally posted by Legalizer
Just because you've had classes in film and video doesn't mean you have gotten any smarter since you saw your first Star Wars. Don't act like your "classes" are any kind of qualification, especially if you are not bright enough to do your own research before opening your goon hole.

You seem angry. obviously you are for HD. I didn't mean that film literally got destroyed. I meant it in a way to destroy the film process by scanning the film and turning it into something digital..loosing the original concept. Why would you shoot a film in original film and then turn it into HD? why not just shoot it in HD like everyone else now? like those boring TV show on NBC. Don't gang up on star wars as it will probably never be released on HD anyways. but look, if you want to throw your money away, then you go ahead.

But film, as an art has been lost to digitalized styles and they are trying to sell it as a digital film. when there is NO such thing as digital film.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:31 AM
1) How on earth is the 'original concept' lost when transferring a film to digital?
2) Why wouldn't you shoot film? Btw, at least lost from abc is shot on film.
3) I cant understand what 'throw your money away' means anyway if you get better picture quality.
4) Film as an art isn't about what format you shoot. Art is about content.
5) There is such a thing as digital film, you know when a film is scanned to digital format.

[Edit] Oh forgot, lost was on abc and not nbc

[edit on 23/12/2007 by PsykoOps]

+41 more 
posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 10:06 AM
With all due respect to Mr Jedi,
as a filmmaker,
I must say you could not be more mistaken...

High Definition technology is the OPPOSITE of what you contend.

First of all... as a video technology, it seeks to emulate what is unique
about film celluloid... namely, the progressive frame rate, the 24 frames a second frame rate as opposed to 29.97 of normal video, and most important, perhaps- the resolution level.

So, as a native format, HD is essentially the video format that looks and acts like 35mm film... that is why STAR WARS, shot on a CineAlta, looks like a normal movie- because HD, at the progressive 24fps setting, looks like film. There are other settings- if you watch your local or national news in HD, it will NOT look like film... because they do not want it to- so they use an interlace, not progressive, frame rate type, and rather than 24 a second, they shoot at 29.97... it still looks great- but it appears to be video, and would not be mistaken for film- like STAR WARS could be.

NOW... as to your point about transferring film to HD...

Again- I am being polite here- you are mistaken.

The advantage of HD over regular DVD is not unlike the difference between VHS and DVD. DVD allowed MORE RESOLUTION of the native film to be seen, with better color rendition as well and digital, not analog, sound.

Likewise, DVD- at 480 lines of resolution, is better- way better- than VHS... but HD-DVD and BLU-RAY (essentially identical) is superior to DVD- why?

Because they offer 720 to 1080 lines of resolution- better than DVD.

Why is this important?

Resolution- that is, pixel numbers... as you mentioned, compose an image. Film does not use pixels, as you said- true. But it does use the chemical equivilant of pixels... a film picture is composed of tiny chemical pixels, if you will.

HD is not a sham product- the movie you watch in HD or Blu Ray CAPTURES THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION, AUDIO DESIGN, COLOR RENDITION and SENSE OF MOTION (frame rate) of 35mm film...
the medium shot with to make the film.

To see what I mean- buy a DVD of a movie, and an HD version as well. Use an HD DVD player and watch each one onan HD TV (the HD players can play regular DVDs)... so you see a difference? Like night and day.

Lastly- you ask- who would anyone shoot on film anymore?

Well, as ny name suggests- I support the movement from film shooting to HD video shooting.

The reason people shoot on film- which is about 50-100 times more expensive, is because:

a) At this point, it still looks a little better (but that is changing)
b) Some people are purists
c) Some cinematographers do not want to learn a new medium
d) Stars who are vain DO NOT like HD because it requires more makeup and it can reveal age and imperfections with the wrong lighting- film is guaranteed to make a person look better.
e) Studios demand it- there is a prejudice against video because it has looked so bad for so long, people hate it.

Soon enough, perhaps right after Feb 2009 when ALL TV WILL BE HD BY LAW and NO ONE WILL EER SEE an ANALOG TV SHOW AGAIN (set top boxes will change normal TVs to HD receivers, paid for by the government)... soon after that, HD will have been tweaked with software, lenses and other techniques so it LOOKS MORE AND MORE like film.

Within 10 years from now (presuming we all survive 2012)... almost ALL OF THE MOVIES you watch will be SHOT on HD... and they will be projected a the theaters on satellite-fed VIDEO PROJECTORS, not reel to reel film projectors.

HD is not a false product- it is the future, it is the evolution of video, it is the replacement for costly 35mm film, it is the catalyst for a revolution in communications and entertainment- a revolution whereby small, poor Producers, like me, can compete with Hollywood because HD allows for a movie to be made with little money... that fact, COMBINED WITH the new distribution model of the Web... well, it is a huge paradigm shift- as the middleman- Hollywood and distributors- will be eliminated... and films made independently will be watched and downloaded off the Web... in HD format, completing the covergence of film, TV and the Internet... and making any and every web page a potential TV Channel, Movie Theatre, Record Store... etc.

If you are a filmmaker- HD is the answer to the monopoly of Hollywood- controlling what is made, and therefore, what is seen.

If you are a movie lover, HD allows you to watch, in your home, the movie as it was meant to be seen, by using an HD DVD player and an HD TV. It will also give the cinephile many more choices... since the monopoly will be destroyed- and while there still will be star-driven blockbusters made- there will be many smaller films competing... and a few will break out and be major hits.

As the Chinese say- "may you live in interesting times"...

Boy, are we ever... and HD is a small part of this very interesting era we are now living in...

T Patrick

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 10:31 AM
reply to post by HighDefinitionFilms

Vain talent....heheheh! They will not be the only one ticked off......I work in the Art department, and it sure would make our job tougher too....

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 12:17 PM
Disagree with the OP, totally. My mate's just got a new 1080p tv & a shiny new HD DVD player & we spent the other night comparing formats, between ordinary DVD, upscaling DVD and HD DVD ... using titles in both formats as diverse as "Blade Runner", "300" and BBC documentary "Planet Earth".

And you can notice a difference ... a big difference ... most noticeable for me was the BBC show, it was an episode about the sea, reefs and coral and in HD you could make out individual grains of sand, whereas in ordinary DVD it just didn't have that level of detail. Strangely enough I found upscaling to be the worst format of the three.

But is the difference sufficiently great to jettison all your DVD's for the new format ? Perhaps for movies you really do like ... but not for everything, unless you've got a particularly deep wallet.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 01:06 PM
I agree with legalizer

While scientific data gets shuffled to skunkworks

there are others allowed to carry on in fantasy land and go unchecked.

the dis-information game is as sleazy as all other sleazy
criminal actions of the NWO

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 06:03 PM
Blueray is higher resolution - 1080p vs 480i/p lines of resolution. Yes, a lot of older movies won't look much better, because of the quality in which it was shot. Predator for instance looks really grainy on my hdtv and monitor, but something like the matrix reloaded looks amazingly clear.

Blue-ray actually uses a violet laser. The main advantage to these lasers are a smaller wave length, which means smaller dots, which means more dots per inch on the disk, which means more capacity. Its just a way to read information, but its main purpose is higher storage capacity per disk. The only reason its so expensive is that these lasers are expensive. Once the price of these lasers come down, so will the hd-dvd players. You can get a regular dvd disk drive for $8, cause its a red laser diode.

[edit on 23-12-2007 by Freezer]

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 06:25 PM
reply to post by HighDefinitionFilms

Very well put. Your VHS to DVD analagy was spot on. It's amazing the mis-information that gets put out on the internet.

Put a fork in this thread as it's done.....

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 06:35 PM
Would it be possible to re-scan the original film rolls on the old films? Or are those burnt/locked away/ejected into space/buried?


posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 07:17 PM

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks
Would it be possible to re-scan the original film rolls on the old films?

I believe that's what they do if the original film is availible. And depending on the type of film, it might still be higher quality than current HD formats.

[edit on 23-12-2007 by jra]

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:08 PM
For those of you who want to know the truth and not something overheard in a classroom or made up out of thin air....

Digital cameras replace the strip of crystal-coated plastic film with a high-tech image sensor. An image sensor is a seemingly flat surface composed of millions of photodiodes. These photodiodes are essentially substitutes for the individual silver halide grains found on film. Each diode collects light that will end up representing an individual pixel, or dot, in the final image.

The number of pixels necessary to approximate the amount of detail found in an image captured on standard 35mm film is up for debate. Experts in the industry suggest anywhere from four million to 20 million pixels (four megapixels to 20 megapixels) would do the trick.

So that being said, just about any off the shelf camera with movie mode and pro SLR can shoot in matching quality. Digital film scanners do so at above 24MP. Last I saw before leaving the NAVY was somewhere around 140MP. Way more sensors than silver halides, thus much higher scan than film can capture or display on CRT TV's.

This NTSC format uses a 648 by 486 resolution format. This format makes an allowance for a few additional pixels to be created on the screen edge that may be cut off when displayed. This format is also commonly used by many video compression boards.

Because this format allows you to display a video without losing the "edges" of your video during playback, this resolution seems to be the preference within the industry.

The D-1 NTSC format uses the same standard frame aspect ratio as the NTSC format. Unlike the NTSC format, the D-1 NTSC format uses a 720 by 486 resolution using rectangular pixels.

The D-1 pixels used in the NTSC format are displayed using a vertical axis.
D-1 NTSC Square Pix

This format uses the same standard frame aspect ratio as the NTSC format. Unlike the NTSC format, the D-1 NTSC Square Pix uses a 720 by 540 resolution using rectangular pixels.

PAL stands for the Phase Alternating Line. This is a video standard used by the color television industry and is the common standard used in Europe. This video signal format sets the video to playback at 25 frames per second which contain 625 lines of pixels in each frame.

There are various divisions within the PAL standard which determine what pixel and frame aspect ratios are used. These formats are as follows:

· PAL (resolution 720 x 486)

· D-1 PAL (resolution 720 x 576)

· D-1 PAL Square Pix (resolution 768 x 576)


The D-1 pixels used in the PAL format are displayed using a horizontal axis. This format uses the same standard frame aspect ratio as the PAL format. Unlike the PAL format, the D-1 PAL uses a 720 by 576 resolution.
D-1 PAL Square Pix

This format uses the same standard frame aspect ratio as the PAL format. Unlike the PAL format, the D-1 PAL Square Pix uses a 768 by 576 resolution using rectangular pixels.
HDTV (1280 x 720)

The HDTV stands for High Definition Television. This format is a proposed definition which displays at 1280 by 720 resolution.
HDTV (1920 x 1080)

The HDTV stands for High Definition Television. This format is a proposed definition which displays at 1920 by 1080 resolution.
Film (Academy)

This format uses 2048 x 1536, a standard resolution used for digital film.

Your CRT TV can drift wildly in and out of focus due to its technology being susceptible to magnetic forces. (i.e. polarity shifts, proximity to higher voltage lines).

LCD monitors are different technology all together. They naturally keep the image stable because each element directly represents the same element that was used to capture it.

I watched the latest Batman movie in HD. I was not impressed. Reason being was that I was expecting the film effect that you get when you shoot in 24FPS and I got what looks like straight video shot at 29.97.

I happen to like the film effect, so I'm not rushing out and buying it.

Ya'll do what you want.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 09:30 PM
reply to post by jedimiller

Sorry, but either you misunderstood what your teacher was saying or your teacher does not know what he/she is talking about.

Current hi-def television uses 1920x1080 (1080 lines) of resolution.
35 mm original camera negative motion picture film can resolve up to 6,000 lines.
35 mm projection positive motion picture film has about 2,000 lines.
Sequences from newer films are scanned at 2,000, 4,000 or even 8,000 columns.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 09:37 PM
Hmmmm. Having seen both first hand and upfront. (I have both conventional and blue ray) I have to say there is a major improvment even in your so called legacy films.

What I suspect happened here is that typical academic conundrum:

What looks cut and tried in the classroom, sometimes fails to make the cut in the real world.

Unless your a total fool why would you rush out and convert everything anyway? Sure films like Terminator 2 I wont hesatate, but other films will be fine esp if you have a dvd player that upconverts it anyway.

Or is this an film school assignment where you try to propagate an anti technology rumor and then film it while it spreads?

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 09:51 PM
This is exactly why I like coming to ATS.

I just learned more about film, dvd's, vhs, HD and blueray technology just from reading this post. I'm all for HD and blueray.

Just one question though.' Which is better? 1080P or 1080I.

new topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in