Weird question on HDTVs/Blu-ray disks

[Howiefan]

Background info: I've had a Samsung 4665 LCD TV for a few months now and I'm watching DVDs/Blu-ray disks on a PS3.

Is it normal to see lots of grain/noise when you watch HD material from up close (2-3 feet) on a TV? I obviously don't watch TV that close but when I try to calibrate it, I get up close and I always see that kind of thing. When I sit further away, the picture looks smooth. For example, I was watching the beginning of POTC 2 on Blu-ray when you see the sailors on the ship at night when it's raining and I can see a lot of grain/noise in the background from up close. Day scenes look crystal clear though. I'm trying to figure out if it's my TV or if it's normal to notice the grain from a close distance?

Thanks!

[Spiky]

2 things there. Yes, being 3' from the TV should be noisy or pixellated. (noise is a digital artifact) And dark scenes are much more likely to have noise or grain. Grain is a film artifact. The combination of the two can be horrible. The digital part may not be as bad with the best equipment.

[The Cow]

Is your PS3 set to output 1080?

[Howiefan]

Is your PS3 set to output 1080?

Yup. All the PS3 settings seem to be fine. I just don't get why I would see grain in that scene in POTC 2 since all the reviews talk about the transfer being pristine and the blacks being rich.

[Draven]

The film itself has grain on it.

[davidlynchfan]

setting should be on RGB if using hdmi..

[Spiky]

Dark scenes are difficult to shoot whether film or digital is used. I'm not sure how POTC was shot, but either way you will see more issues in the dark. Both technologies are based on sensing light, so when you have none there are errors (digital noise or errors that highlight the grain in film, making it more obvious) when the medium simply doesn't know what to do with what it "sees". Theoretically, we should be able to advance digital sensors to the point where this is far less of a problem. But I think we still have a ways to go on that.

The worst I've seen in modern filming was SW Ep II. This was shot on digital (using early cameras, they are better now), then transferred to film for theaters. The dark scene by firelight had lots of digital noise put on top of film's grain. Horrible. (not to mention the dialog, ugh) The DVDs are infinitely better since they avoided the extra transfer. And probably went through some extra post-processing to get rid of noise. But that kind of work deletes detail, so it isn't always a good idea, sometimes letting some noise exist is the best choice.

[danicus007]

I hate grain or noise or whatever it is. I was watching Spider-Man 2 on Blu-Ray the other day and there is tons of grain throughout the entire movie. I read the review here on DVDTalk and the reviewer praised the video for it's grain?? I don't understand why anyone would like that. When I watch a ball game on ESPN HD it's crystal clear but you pop in movies and there is noise/grain on almost all of them. Some movies are obviously worse than others, but I was just surprised Spidey 2 had so much. I watched T2 on Blu last night and there wasn't nearly as much and the image was super sharp and detailed.

[klemsaba]

I hate grain or noise or whatever it is. I was watching Spider-Man 2 on Blu-Ray the other day and there is tons of grain throughout the entire movie. I read the review here on DVDTalk and the reviewer praised the video for it's grain?? I don't understand why anyone would like that. When I watch a ball game on ESPN HD it's crystal clear but you pop in movies and there is noise/grain on almost all of them. Some movies are obviously worse than others, but I was just surprised Spidey 2 had so much. I watched T2 on Blu last night and there wasn't nearly as much and the image was super sharp and detailed.

Some directors specifically choose a film stock for the grain. It is an artistic expression as well as a limitation of film. Grain can be minimized but not eliminated. Perhaps you don't remember, but Spider-man 2 had the same grain in the theaters.

Pop in the regular DVD version of Spidey2. You'll appreciate the Blu-ray version even with the grain.

[Draven]

I hate grain or noise or whatever it is. I was watching Spider-Man 2 on Blu-Ray the other day and there is tons of grain throughout the entire movie. I read the review here on DVDTalk and the reviewer praised the video for it's grain?? I don't understand why anyone would like that. When I watch a ball game on ESPN HD it's crystal clear but you pop in movies and there is noise/grain on almost all of them. Some movies are obviously worse than others, but I was just surprised Spidey 2 had so much. I watched T2 on Blu last night and there wasn't nearly as much and the image was super sharp and detailed.

Do you think they are shooting the football game with film cameras?

That HD feed is digital from beginning to end.

[danicus007]

Do you think they are shooting the football game with film cameras?

That HD feed is digital from beginning to end.

I honestly have no idea the difference between cameras when it comes to filming sporting events and movies. I just prefer the crystal clear image of sports over the look of movies. I do notice the grain aspects when going to the movie theater, but it's more noticeable (and annoying) on a home TV...even at 61". I don't really watch movies based on the artistic feel of the shooting, etc. Whether a film has grain or not doesn't affect the actual movie to me. I just prefer not to see it is all.

[Spiky]

Oh god, not another one. -rolleyes-

[kefrank]

if you don't like to see film grain, then don't watch films. :)

[danicus007]

Oh god, not another one. -rolleyes-

Well there's no reason to be snobby about it. I didn't thread crap or say anything negative about film grain, all I said was that I prefer not to see a lot of grain and I personally don't see the artistic benefit to adding more grain than film already has. Sorry to have offended such an elitist film buff such as yourself and all of the others who I'm sure are rolling their eyes as well.

[Drexl]

Have you considered that some of it may actually be the TV itself? I don't know if LCD is susceptible to this or not, but I've noticed that if I look at my brother's plasma TV up close, or my DLP projector, I see some noise. This is not in television or movies, BTW; it's visible in things like the setup menu on the PS3 connected via HDMI, or the blue screen when there is nothing else turned on, so it's not a source issue. It can't be seen at a normal viewing distance, or even a close (but comfortable) viewing distance.

[Spiky]

Well there's no reason to be snobby about it. I didn't thread crap or say anything negative about film grain, all I said was that I prefer not to see a lot of grain and I personally don't see the artistic benefit to adding more grain than film already has. Sorry to have offended such an elitist film buff such as yourself and all of the others who I'm sure are rolling their eyes as well.
Sorry, but my nickname is elitist pig around here. I'm really more of an audio buff, video's just for fun.

"I hate grain"....is positive? Anyway, maybe this is more polite, then:

I don't know what review you read on Spiderman2, but I would guess any comments on grain were relative to the transfer from film to digital, not that they were just happy to see grain for the sake of grain. In the transfer, three things can happen. (1) It can become more pronounced, (2) look exactly the same, or (3) be smoothed out.

1) Becoming more pronounced means they did a shitty job on the transfer. That would no doubt receive a bad review from anyone. See my comments on Star Wars above.

2) Staying the same is the ideal that should happen when transferring from film to digital. Or from digital to film, for that matter.

3) Grain being smoothed out may sound good, but that probably means there is loss of detail. Most people do not want to lose detail, as we can see from BD & 1080 debates, so seeing the grain that was there already is preferred.

[danicus007]

Sorry, but my nickname is elitist pig around here. I'm really more of an audio buff, video's just for fun.

"I hate grain"....is positive? Anyway, maybe this is more polite, then:

I don't know what review you read on Spiderman2, but I would guess any comments on grain were relative to the transfer from film to digital, not that they were just happy to see grain for the sake of grain. In the transfer, three things can happen. (1) It can become more pronounced, (2) look exactly the same, or (3) be smoothed out.

1) Becoming more pronounced means they did a shitty job on the transfer. That would no doubt receive a bad review from anyone. See my comments on Star Wars above.

2) Staying the same is the ideal that should happen when transferring from film to digital. Or from digital to film, for that matter.

3) Grain being smoothed out may sound good, but that probably means there is loss of detail. Most people do not want to lose detail, as we can see from BD & 1080 debates, so seeing the grain that was there already is preferred.
No problem man, didn't mean to jump down anyone's throat or anything. I'm just not a fan of that grainy look no matter how it got there. But I understand the why and how and I think I'll be able to continue watching my movies ;) Not that I was going to stop anyway.

BTW: this is the review I was talking about...from the review area here on the site...
Spider-Man 2: Ah, now this is more like it. For the first time, it feels like we're watching high definition. This 2.40:1 transfer is the best I've ever seen 2 look since its theatrical release. The colors are bright and vivid, with excellent delineation. I was much more impressed with the detail. I could make out every rivet in Doc Ock's tentacles, and the slight pockmarks on Tobey Maguire's face. Interestingly, there is a lot of grain on this transfer. But it's not video noise, just a very thick layer of film grain. I actually applaud Sony for including it, as studios often tend to process that sort of stuff out. This is a damn good transfer. 4 Stars.

So based on your comments above, this would be option 2??