reply to post by jedimiller
You will never 'get it', if you haven't by now with 12 pages of people showing you the light. If I was a mod, SkunkWorks would be too good for it,
since that name implies truth, open-mindedness, and pursuit of technological advances, such as LockheedMartin SkunkWorks ... not transporting hot
dogs to alternate universes through the use of on the job microwaves. And to the poster that excused the OP for the age, thinking they are in their
20s, nope, admitted in another thread on BTS they are 35.
It is not a personal attack, I do agree with some of your postings in other threads, but this reeks of an agenda of some sort.
Your title of the thread is a lie. Plain and simple. If you believed it at first, that is ok, but you have had factoids given time and again, and to
continue to dispute fact reeks of something foul in your intentions. People have given sources, you just give opinions with nothing to back it up at
Here is your chance, to once again state all your beliefs, but this time back it up with sources and examples ... saying an instructor said it does
not compete with the variety of sources and examples given. Using false examples of 1080 is not an argument, so a stretched or upscaled showing of a
movie or series on an HD channel is not an argument, you must use a real HD video, scanned from film such as the Star Wars original trilogy link I
gave that shows the difference.
You do have the right to feel the increase in resolution is not worth it to you, and stick with your SD tv. That is opinion. Though, stock up on SD
tvs, since soon you won't be able to find them in the stores. I still watch my DVDs on a SDtv, but HD is on the HDtv.
What is not opinion is saying it is a sham and BD is no different than DVD ... the increased storage amount allows for more stored information,
allowing 2 MP per frame to be stored. That would be like saying the 360 isn't any better than the original XBox, or the PS3 isn't any better than
the PS2. That is outright false. An opinion would be the PS3 is better than the 360 ... until at least each system has had a game developed that
utilizes near 100% of its capabilities.
HD contains 6x the pixel count of SD, actually 1080p contains 12x the pixel count per frame vs 480i. Therefore, the picture is 6x clearer on a HD
than a SD screen of the same size. BDs are the format that stores much larger amounts of data required to store 6-12x the data of a standard DVD,
allowing either less compression, or similar compression and more storage than HD-DVD.
The Discovery HD channels look really great, and that is broadcast at 1080i, flipping between their SD and HD broadcasts really shows. Sports fans
(like NASCAR and NFL) really notice the difference as well.
Film is 'pixels' of sorts ... it is silver halide crystals ... that is right individual dots that record a point of color. Sounds a lot like a
pixel, doesn't it?
Color motion picture film - Wiki - How modern color film works
Modern color film is made up of many different layers all working together to create the color image. In color negative films there are three main
color layers: the blue record, green record and red record; each made up of two separate layers containing silver halide crystals and
So, not only have you been proved wrong about High Definition video being more than a sham, but your argument that film is celluloid, therefore it is
pixel-less ... since film has always been some form of pixels, whether silver halide, metallic salts, or otherwise.
You argument that Blu-Ray was just enhancing the blue color was so far off it isn't even funny.
Basically, nearly every thing you have postulated has been countered.
I will argue that a 1080p film in your home on an appropriate size screen for your seating distance will look better
than theater quality,
because the film gets spread so thin. 1080p on a movie screen will not look as good yet, but our ability to encode and display higher resolutions in
the home is increasing (though arguably untrue since I have seen DLP movies that looked fine from far enough back to not see the huge pixels). In
fact, I argue that the military grade digital film surpasses 70 mm film by quite a bit.
Since film is technically pixels, it really comes to light that film is nothing more than a 3-layer digital image, combining three translucent photos
cast on silver halide specs (pixels) with one of the 3 appropriate dye-couplers used for each layer.
I really think you just enjoy inciting comments, or are trying to up the thread for more points (even though the essentially don't matter at all). I
cannot believe you actually believe what you are saying anymore.
It is just fine, because for truth, some of us will argue with a proverbial brick wall. Oh well, it will be a fun thread when I am tired of the more