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

page: 9
6
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 29 2007 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Wow,

When I win the lottery I'm going to invite a few of you intelligent people to put your heads together and help me decide which best A/V components I will need to make my cinema room be the best on the block!

However, if I win enough, maybe I'll just ask ILM (Lucas) or even Speilberg to drop in...

Cheers




posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 12:07 AM
link   
I'm sticking with the original claim that, in these early days of HD video, a lot of what is available on HD media now isn't actually HD but you're expected to pay the same for it.

Lurkers like me >
are waiting for all you technology buffs to buy up big so when I decide to buy into it the prices will be wayyy lower and the majority of released movies will be true HD quality (available for hire too)


Has anyone released compilations like '25 movie classics on 1 disc' yet?
The quality of those should be really special. or not.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Johnmike
reviews.cnet.com...
Looks like blu-ray wins.

Looks like a pretty old article. Under video game console support, they list “Nintendo Revolution”. (Revolution was the code-name of the Wii up until April 2006.)



Originally posted by thehumbleone
You guys are delusional. Look at the base blu-ray has with the millions upon millions of Ps3 owners out there. I can attest to this as many of my friends use blu-ray because of their ps3.

Millions upon millions? Check your numbers again. PS3 is selling very poorly.


Originally posted by Flyer

Originally posted by MurderSmurf
Oh, that’s a fact, is it?

Where did you glean that “fact”?


From the BBC

news.bbc.co.uk...

A survey.




Originally posted by MurderSmurf

There are significant negative repurcussions. Let’s start with the industry implementing more and more copy-protection on their media, which hurts innocent people when it renders said media unplayable on their equipment, or worse yet, drives their equipment to an early death.

Thats the industry doing that, not the file sharers, in fact, DRM just drives people to get cracked copies of everything.

The industry wouldn’t be doing it if file sharing didn’t bother them so much. And no, DRM doesn’t “just drive people to get cracked copies of everything.” It drives the relatively smart ones to do so. It hurts everybody else.




Originally posted by MurderSmurf
Obviously not, but obviously very often someone may have bought a DVD or CD if they couldn’t find a downloadable copy.

Quite the opposite, people buy the music after they have sampled it for free

Both.




While it isn’t directly true, indirectly it is. The studios don’t have bottomless pockets. Bootlegging hurts them, and it trickles down to the artists.

Not really, artists make most of their money by touring and hardly get anything from cd sales unless they are Britney or Madonna and they arent hurting for cash.

You’re generalizing there.


Originally posted by Pilgrum
I'm sticking with the original claim that, in these early days of HD video, a lot of what is available on HD media now isn't actually HD but you're expected to pay the same for it.

Earlier in the thread I think I defined what HD is pretty well.

A lot of what is available on HD now is definitely genuine HD.

It probably just isn’t the best that HD can offer.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan

Sorry but you must be the delusional one since you forgot about all the X-box consoles which use HD-DVD.


Good way to ignore my last post that proved you wrong.

Speaking lies again I see? Everyone knows that HD-DVD is an AD-ON for the xbox-360. In fact you have to pay 200$ for it. Talk about a rip off. www.google.com...



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MurderSmurf

Millions upon millions? Check your numbers again. PS3 is selling very poorly.



Actually yeah, it has sold millions. you'd be surprised at the things you learn when you read.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:10 AM
link   
I was watching spiderman on blue ray. looked too blue toned for my taste. I don't know, it's not the real color on the screen. if I'm going to invest in something like this, lets say 3000 for the HDTV, 400 for the player, 1000 for the movies I want to watch. Aliens, star wars, superman, back to the future, terminator, the thing and labyrinth. then, I think I may begin with HD. it looks sharper and more colorful. of course, I'd rather watch a movie at the movie theater...but I can't watch star wars on a theater anymore so i'm restricted to home entertainment. A rip-off in itself. So HD for now.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Sounds like either your TV, player, or the connection between them. Maybe color settings are off, maybe they just suck. It being "too blue" is either the power of suggestion or one of those issues; the kind of disc it's on shouldn't make too much of a difference.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jedimiller
I was watching spiderman on blue ray. looked too blue toned for my taste. I don't know, it's not the real color on the screen.


There are controls for color/color temperature/hue/thater mode/whatever. They can be used, you know.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehumbleone
Speaking lies again I see? Everyone knows that HD-DVD is an AD-ON for the xbox-360. In fact you have to pay 200$ for it.

How am I telling lies?
I never said that the HD-DVD player was included with the X-box, I only said the it uses the HD-DVD player.

Xbox HD-DVD sales jump 1000%

BTW, Sams had a Xbox HD-DVD player for only $99.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
I'm sticking with the original claim that, in these early days of HD video, a lot of what is available on HD media now isn't actually HD but you're expected to pay the same for it.


That's probably true to en extent, just like some of the stuff you buy in DVD is VHS conversion



Lurkers like me >
are waiting for all you technology buffs to buy up big so when I decide to buy into it the prices will be wayyy lower and the majority of released movies will be true HD quality (available for hire too)


That's also my plan. I simply can't be coughing up $29 for an HD movie.

One (very bad) movie, the "Ultraviolet", was shot using the top of the line Sony HD cameras and it shows even in the standard DVD via the S-video connection. I mean the picture is freaking crisp already. I can only imagine what it would look like in true digital domain.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
That's also my plan. I simply can't be coughing up $29 for an HD movie.

Yes, that is expensive and I see your point but it still costs the same to rent a HD movie as it does a regular DVD whether its HD-DVD or Bluray from places like Netlix.

[edit on 31-12-2007 by 4thDoctorWhoFan]



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:03 PM
link   
I think I wrote all I have to say about this subject in earlier pages...

Just one thing...

Every year- especially in 2009 when ALL TV GOES HD BY LAW...

Every year there will be MORE and MORE "films" being shot on HD.

This means that there will be HD-DVDs and Blu-Rays with NATIVE HD movies, as well as those shot in film and transferred.

While the HD shot ones will remain in the same digital domain from shot to edit, the 35mm films will be transferred- and they will still be HD versions of the films- rather than VHS or DVD versions...

Anyway- film is dead- well, more like dying.

TPM



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by HighDefinitionFilms
Every year- especially in 2009 when ALL TV GOES HD BY LAW...


That's not true. It will be DIGITAL, which is not the same as HD. I watch digital SD all the time now. It's 480i.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by HighDefinitionFilms
Every year- especially in 2009 when ALL TV GOES HD BY LAW...

True, if it happens. You seem informed so you probably already know that this is NOT the first date the FCC has set. Previously it was 2006 and I believe there was another date set before 2006.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by HighDefinitionFilms
Every year- especially in 2009 when ALL TV GOES HD BY LAW...


That's not true. It will be DIGITAL, which is not the same as HD. I watch digital SD all the time now. It's 480i.


Do you have a HDTV?
If so, I'm sure you realize you can currently also receive most of your local stations in HD over-the-air.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by jedimiller
I was watching spiderman on blue ray. looked too blue toned for my taste.

Bluer than the DVD and HD-DVD editions?



Originally posted by Johnmike
Sounds like either your TV, player, or the connection between them. Maybe color settings are off, maybe they just suck. It being "too blue" is either the power of suggestion or one of those issues; the kind of disc it's on shouldn't make too much of a difference.

Power of suggestion gets my vote. No offense but jedimiller comes off as extremely suggestible. So much so that I’m surprised he hangs out here. Or maybe not.



Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Pilgrum
I'm sticking with the original claim that, in these early days of HD video, a lot of what is available on HD media now isn't actually HD but you're expected to pay the same for it.

That's probably true to en extent, just like some of the stuff you buy in DVD is VHS conversion

I have yet to see a DVD sourced from VHS, but I have seen some bad NTSC conversions. Grave Of The Fireflies is one. Processing the DVD on my computer, I see a lot of “rainbow effect”. You can see a bit of what I’m talking about here.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Do you have a HDTV?


Yes, and a good one at that. Recipe: print out an internet ad and go to your local PC Richard, than haggle
They promise to beat any published price minus shipping.


If so, I'm sure you realize you can currently also receive most of your local stations in HD over-the-air.


Sure. I get them via cable w/o box (which I keep with the older TV). There are a few HD stations, not too many... Look fantastic, expesially those in 1080p. And many more digital SD channels.



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   
We are talking about HD in terms of DVD...

but since we are on the subject,

I thought the parallel issue of TV switch-over

is worth noting... and so, to that end:


www.msnbc.msn.com...


A primer on the 2009 Great HD SwitchOver!

TPM



posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
There are a few HD stations, not too many... Look fantastic, expesially those in 1080p. And many more digital SD channels.


I don't think any stations are transmitting 1080P. As far as I know 1080i is the highest currently being broadcast. I now the Fox stations use 720P and CBS & NBC transmit in 1080i.
What station are you receiving in 1080P?



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Our national free-to-air TV was originally proposed to become all digital by shutting down analog transmission this year like right now. All channels are currently available in HD and as a sweetener there's even additional available channels but due to unprecedented consumer resistance the analog shutdown has been blown out to 2010 and I don't even see that as definite with the roaring trade in standard analog widescreen TV's at very attractive prices.

Maybe a handout of free STBs would make the difference.

From what I've seen it really doesn't matter what resolution/clarity there is when the programming is exactly the same old crap as always





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join