The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > trek11 blu or dvd
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 07-13-2009, 08:54 AM
Futureguy Futureguy is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel View Post
Assuming blu-ray is good quality (they often arent) then I will consider getting both the movie and a player. That would certainly cost about $200 at least. However if the bluray is only so-so I will save the money on the player and just get the DVD

I thought that blu-ray was supposed to be the current "ultimate" in storing and playing of hi-def movies. Did it not win out over hi-def DVD?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-13-2009, 09:54 AM
Samuel Samuel is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,883
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Futureguy View Post
I thought that blu-ray was supposed to be the current "ultimate" in storing and playing of hi-def movies. Did it not win out over hi-def DVD?
True but the closest Trek example is the 6-disc set for the movies. I dont have it but everyone says WoK is the only one that was fully remastered for HD. Everything else is, in effect, just scaled up with some extra filtering. I assume nuTrek wouldnt try to get away with that but I will wait and see.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-13-2009, 10:29 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beetlescott View Post
Horatio,
I have a VCR hooked into my system. I started putting together my system in 1992. I have the very first Onkyo prologic receiver, I got it in 1996. It is just a 5 channel! I just bought a 50" Plasmae screen TV and I adore it! I also got a Blu Ray player to go with it, and I really love it. I'll be getting the BluRay disc, but honestly, I hadn't thought about it not playing in a regular dvd player! (my wife fusses at me for lending our movies anyway!) so now, people won't borrow them! Anyway, when I plugged in my BluRay Player with my new TV and my old receiver, I COULDN'T BELIEVE THE DIFFERENCE IN THE SOUND! My old receiver never sounded better! You were talking about old school, I put in Titantic last night, on VHS, and it sounded AWESOME as ever. Didn't look bad either. I refuse to go out and re buy all of my movies that I have on VHS, especially the ones in Dolby ProLogic or HIFI!
Seems as if analog technology does pretty well when the system it is played on is good.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-13-2009, 10:56 AM
Kiko Kea Kiko Kea is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 464
Default

I am considering buying an HDTV and blu-ray, but now, after a bit of consideration, I'm not certain. Honestly, I rarely watch TV- no shows, no movies...just the news if something happens. When working on a quilt, I like to sit and watch old British comedies like Keeping Up Appearances and Are You Being Served. But, that's only every now and then. And, other than my son watching sports or some History Channel stuff, the rest of the family doesn't watch TV much, either.

If the prices drop before Christmas, I might go ahead and get a new TV/blu-ray set, but otherwise I think I'll get the best DVD they offer, for the time being. Then again, watching Spock in hi def.....
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-13-2009, 11:01 AM
Kiko Kea Kiko Kea is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paradise
Posts: 464
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beetlescott View Post
Horatio,
I have a VCR hooked into my system. I started putting together my system in 1992.... You were talking about old school, I put in Titantic last night, on VHS, and it sounded AWESOME as ever. Didn't look bad either. I refuse to go out and re buy all of my movies that I have on VHS, especially the ones in Dolby ProLogic or HIFI!
What is the vhs picture like on the HDTV? I'm with you about buying movies just to have them in blu-ray.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-13-2009, 11:02 AM
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
OneBuckFilms OneBuckFilms is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 909
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel View Post
True but the closest Trek example is the 6-disc set for the movies. I dont have it but everyone says WoK is the only one that was fully remastered for HD. Everything else is, in effect, just scaled up with some extra filtering. I assume nuTrek wouldnt try to get away with that but I will wait and see.
That's incorrect. They went back and did cleanup, and scanned from the original prints for the Blu-Ray release.

There are quality issues due to the fact that the Noise Removal was dialled up way too much, but this only becomes an issue with very large HD displays.

Most consumers will never notice this.
__________________
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-13-2009, 12:30 PM
Samuel Samuel is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,883
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneBuckFilms View Post
That's incorrect. They went back and did cleanup, and scanned from the original prints for the Blu-Ray release.

There are quality issues due to the fact that the Noise Removal was dialled up way too much, but this only becomes an issue with very large HD displays.

Most consumers will never notice this.
Hmmm. I thought I read that the other 5 were taken from the previous DVD releases with extra filters. Not the DVDs themselves but the original scans used for them. Also that WoK was the only one that had extra work put into it vs just noise reduction. Perhaps I misinterpreted it.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-13-2009, 12:46 PM
OneBuckFilms's Avatar
OneBuckFilms OneBuckFilms is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 909
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel View Post
Hmmm. I thought I read that the other 5 were taken from the previous DVD releases with extra filters. Not the DVDs themselves but the original scans used for them. Also that WoK was the only one that had extra work put into it vs just noise reduction. Perhaps I misinterpreted it.
This is an article that explains what the actual issues are:
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/review...ews051409.html

Here is the relevent paragraph:
Let's address the quality issue right at the start: While the new high-definition presentations on these discs are much-improved over the previous DVD editions, and the new Star Trek II restoration is absolutely first-rate, the video quality is probably not quite what some high-end Blu-ray fans are hoping for. They aren't not bad looking, and as I said they are definitely an improvement over the DVD versions in terms of color fidelity/depth and overall contrast, but it's clear that too much noise reduction has been used to reduce print grain and give the films a more uniform appearance. Unfortunately, that's also meant that fine-image detail... and yes, at least some grain... is missing from the image - the very things that make a high-definition film transfer look... well, film-like. Now, the problem here is not nearly as bad as it was on Fox's Patton or The Longest Day Blu-rays, but it's still a little frustrating. Those of you with HD plasmas under the 40-inch range shouldn't be too troubled. But for those of you, like me, who use HD front projectors to obtain the most theatre-like experience on screens in the 100-inch range... well, the lack of grain and fine detail really hurts the image. The problem is that it's only really been in the last year or so that the Hollywood technical community has come to fully understand the impact of grain reduction on Blu-ray image quality at large viewing sizes, and has begun to strike a better balance when using grain reduction on HD masters. Naturally, with the exception of Trek II, most of the films in this box were remastered prior to that time. So it's an issue, but one that people shouldn't blow out of proportion, because there's a LOT that's great about this set.
__________________
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-13-2009, 01:26 PM
Samuel Samuel is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,883
Default

Ahh I see. So the idea is not that they werent new transfers, they just didnt look significantly better than the DVD versions.

However, how far back were the other 5 remastered compared to the newer WoK? Thats what I get from the quote. That Khan was new while the others were not... that they were done before they understood DNR more fully. And what were they originally remastered for? The DVDs in 200x or the bluray? I think that is where the confusion is.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-13-2009, 04:01 PM
jevans64's Avatar
jevans64 jevans64 is offline
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Madison, AL
Posts: 116
Default

Gonna buy the Blu version because I haven't bought a DVD since HD-DVD came out in 2004. I have both HD-DVD and Blu.

Yep. I concur with that review above. I think they used 2k digital masters that they created for a possible HD-DVD release but didn't run them through a full digital cleanup. I think Khan was so bad that they went ahead and gave that film the full treatment with a 4k digital mastering. I just wish Paramount would have taken the time to go back to the film masters, re-scan at 4k, and run them through a digital restoration to correct film defects.

I have a 65" DLP and do notice softness in the video because of too much noise reduction. There are some places where I saw some left over film dirt and other types of defects. Khan looked good though but I think ST 3 and 4 were the worst of the 6 films -- BUT -- ALL of the Blu versions look way better than the DVD versions I have. I still think the $65 I paid for all six movies on Blu is still a pretty good deal.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:24 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.