Rubbish Blu-rays

c@tbyte · 29 Aug 2009 at 11:34

Mr_Sukebe said:
I have found an answer. I stopped buying disks a few months ago as I was watching so many films that I have never had time to go back and re-watch the ones I had. Instead I now rent from Tesco DVD rentals, which includes BD aswell as DVD disks. Even their basic plan means that each rental costs just over £1 per film (assuming you do watch 2 films a week). So if the film is naff, it's no big deal.

I do the same from Blockbuster. If they're at the top of the list I normally get them straight away.
Cheap viewing. Love it.

AbsenceJam · 29 Aug 2009 at 12:09

Slogan said:
Full Metal Jacket is an atrocious transfer. An already noisy (visually) film with a noise layer over the top.

Do you have the original or the newer transfer? The newer one is a little soft and could have used some sharpening but is otherwise good.

OCdude said:
Even though it's kinda considered almost a "benchmark" Blu-Ray... I think Planet Earth looks pretty rubbish :/

Banding and lots of compression artefacts. :/

Pigeon_Killer · 29 Aug 2009 at 12:23

Blu-ray Quality Guide

oli collett · 29 Aug 2009 at 12:25

Mr_Sukebe said:
I have found an answer. I stopped buying disks a few months ago as I was watching so many films that I have never had time to go back and re-watch the ones I had. Instead I now rent from Tesco DVD rentals, which includes BD aswell as DVD disks. Even their basic plan means that each rental costs just over £1 per film (assuming you do watch 2 films a week). So if the film is naff, it's no big deal.

I think I may well go down that road and just stick to buying discs that I really want. I expect like most people I've got too many films lying around I don't want!

^TANK^ said:
What tv you watching it on oli collett?

Panasonic TH42 PHD8 - fairly old now and only 720p but does the job for the moment until I move into a place where I can justify something bigger!

Going back to FMJ - are you talking about the original or deluxe edition? I've got the deluxe edition because I heard that it was much better (another one I haven't got round to watching yet though):
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1031/fullmetaljacket_de.html

-Ad- · 29 Aug 2009 at 12:53

Nice set oli, supposed to be truly amazing for SD.

probedb · 29 Aug 2009 at 15:18

The new Gladiator Blu-Ray isn't supposed to be great either. http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents I have it on pre-order but am considering cancelling until they release one with a new transfer.

AbsenceJam · 29 Aug 2009 at 16:03

Yeah it's rather poor, the extended scenes are good but the original ones are heavily DNR'd and oversharpened so there are halos everywhere.

Margaret · 29 Aug 2009 at 16:15

xXx looked the same as DVD really.

EddScott · 29 Aug 2009 at 22:27

Slogan said:
Full Metal Jacket is an atrocious transfer. An already noisy (visually) film with a noise layer over the top.

I was going to mention this. Its the least blu-ray blu-ray I have.

I just assumed it was becuase it was an old film?

x1m · 29 Aug 2009 at 23:22

Old films are irrelevant - good quality 35mm film has something like 6000x4000 pixels in it, making 1080p look rubbish!

Randell · 30 Aug 2009 at 00:09

OCdude said:
The scenes where the camera sweeps over the mountains had REALLY bad judder IMO. Overall it doesn't look sharp at all either.

Maybe it's just me though...!

Judder isn't picture quality is it? To eliminate the judder you need to be watching it at 1080p/24fps.

Chris1712 · 30 Aug 2009 at 00:34

Have to say the Gladiator Bluray is proper gash. Such a shame for such a high profile release. The HDTV broadcast 2 years ago was better, although admittedly wrong AR.

Lets hope it gets re-done like The Fifth Element.

probedb · 30 Aug 2009 at 11:40

x1m said:
Old films are irrelevant - good quality 35mm film has something like 6000x4000 pixels in it, making 1080p look rubbish!

What are you on about?!

Randell · 30 Aug 2009 at 12:29

probedb said:
What are you on about?!

he's right, film is higher resolution than HD. Video isn't but film is.

OCdude · 30 Aug 2009 at 12:29

Randell said:
Judder isn't picture quality is it? To eliminate the judder you need to be watching it at 1080p/24fps.

Err I was watching it in 1080/24

probedb · 30 Aug 2009 at 14:11

Randell said:
he's right, film is higher resolution than HD. Video isn't but film is.

35mm film yes, but I don't understand the "Old films are irrelevant" bit. Also saying 35mm makes 1080p look like **** is a bit silly, 1080p is perfectly good enough for home projection.

Personally I can't wait to see what North By Northwest looks like when it comes out in November, it's getting an 8K rescan so should look awesome

Randell · 30 Aug 2009 at 18:11

OCdude said:
Err I was watching it in 1080/24

well everything I've read about it points to judder being sorted if it's played back at 24fps as (but thats the HD-DVD version). I see the judder on the desert panning scenes, but then neither my TV nor my PJ can output at 24fps (or multiples thereof).

Grimley · 31 Aug 2009 at 09:36

Ghostbusters is pretty bad grain wise, especially right at the beginning, I wouldn't use this disc to show blu-ray to your mates, It'll put them off for life.

Camalot · 31 Aug 2009 at 10:36

What would you say the best blu rays are?

I've only seen Jumper on Blu ray and i thought that was very sharp.

Meatball · 31 Aug 2009 at 12:18

Camalot said:
What would you say the best blu rays are?

I've only seen Jumper on Blu ray and i thought that was very sharp.

Best Blu-Rays I've seen so far:
1) Monsters Inc.
2) Casino Royale
3) Dr. No - Fantastic quality especially considering the films age! The original film has obviously been well looked after.
4) Wall-E
5) Ratatouille