Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Archives > Archives > DVD Talk Archive
Reload this Page >

Can picture quality be translated into figures for comparison?

Can picture quality be translated into figures for comparison?

 
Old 04-08-03, 11:57 PM
  #1  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can picture quality be translated into figures for comparison?

I've ask this question in my local forum but to no avail. Initially i thought the video bitrate may provide some idea, but i realised that it doesn't really reflect on the quality.

anyone have some opinions on this?
zoossh is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 12:02 AM
  #2  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,790
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts
The height and width dimensions are standard. The playing bitrate can vary.

But garbage source material or garbage encoding will result in garbage picture quality. No matter what the bitrate.

If you have garbage source material a high bitrate will just get you a better representation of the garbage.
X is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 12:11 AM
  #3  
Rest in Peace
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: PA/NJ Border
Posts: 1,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
IMHO the answer would be no but

There are considerations like grain or grainy, dot crawl, EE, red push, the chroma bug etc. that are used all the time. Some others do a autopsy on the film and mostly end up miserable.

I chose The Matrix and like 'cypher' I want to be *blissfully ignorant* and enjoy what I paid for! I hope this helps.
danol is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 12:11 AM
  #4  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
then is it true that up till now, there is no way of assessing the quality other than using the naked eye and subjective judgement of the resolution, steadiness, granularity and depth of color? in a way, i can't compare the video quality of 2 different movie using a quanititative parameter, am i rite?

i've saw a comparison of il mare's hong kong, korean and japanese editions on dvdbeaver (video bitrate is jp>hk>kr). all three are widescreen (but i dunno if all three are anamorphic). if the source is the same, then would video bitrate be a gd indicator to compare between the three?
zoossh is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 12:18 AM
  #5  
DVD Talk Legend
 
milo bloom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Chicago suburbs
Posts: 13,541
Received 45 Likes on 30 Posts
In your particular example, I would bet money on the bitrate. Now that's considering the actual physical source is exactly the same. They may have different masters in different areas, and some might be in better shape than others, so the bitrate wouldn't help if it were in bad shape.

A good example of this though is Columbia's Superbits. They generally take an existing very good transfer, and just crank up the bitrate so that it's that much better. In this case bitrate does matter.

However, Lawrence of Arabia is rumored to be coming as a Superbit this year, but their master apparently has a lot of issues with the color timing and some other things according to film guru Robert Harris. All the extra bits in the world won't help if it's just more of the wrong color.
milo bloom is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 01:04 AM
  #6  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,790
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts
I'll bet you could quantify the video quality of different pictures. It would help to have the same picture to do a comparison, but there are general details that I'm sure you could quantify such as real sharpness and detail, and transition/distinction between various objects.
X is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 01:33 AM
  #7  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by X
I'll bet you could quantify the video quality of different pictures. It would help to have the same picture to do a comparison, but there are general details that I'm sure you could quantify such as real sharpness and detail, and transition/distinction between various objects.
i've seen people doing capturing and analysed the pictures, that is surely tedious but possibly fun for some. but i wonder by what parameters do you quantify real sharpness and detail, and transition/distinction, and would there be any programs that would conviniently churned out these figures?
zoossh is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 06:16 AM
  #8  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: On the penis chair
Posts: 5,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by zoossh
i've seen people doing capturing and analysed the pictures, that is surely tedious but possibly fun for some. but i wonder by what parameters do you quantify real sharpness and detail, and transition/distinction, and would there be any programs that would conviniently churned out these figures?
True. It can be fun but confusing. Especially with the movie with intentional grain.
eedoon is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 09:34 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by zoossh
i've seen people doing capturing and analysed the pictures, that is surely tedious but possibly fun for some. but i wonder by what parameters do you quantify real sharpness and detail, and transition/distinction, and would there be any programs that would conviniently churned out these figures?
Sure, one can quantify these parameters. But excluding a handful of exceptions, the assigned values are based on a subjective analysis—much like the judges’ scores in figure skating. I personally don’t like quantitative scales for audio and video quality because I think the values tend to convey an undeserved impression of authority and impartiality that is rarely deserved.

Numeric scales also exaggerate the importance of small differences to some people---people who believe that because Home Theater Magazine assigned the ABC receiver a build quality score of 95, that it is significantly better than the XYZ which only scored a 91.
audrey is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 09:41 AM
  #10  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i have wondered about this, as gamers had derived computer programs that can measure and give a score regarding the performance of the graphic setup. if dvds can be measured in that way with gd reflective values, then it would be a good way for consumers to gauge if they want to buy the dvd. this could be of little relevance to R1 and R2 japanese dvds which had certain standard of quality, but may be important to certain regions where the quality can be as bad as vcds.
zoossh is offline  
Old 04-09-03, 12:25 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Boston
Posts: 11,225
Received 10 Likes on 9 Posts
Originally posted by zoossh
then is it true that up till now, there is no way of assessing the quality other than using the naked eye and subjective judgement of the resolution, steadiness, granularity and depth of color? in a way, i can't compare the video quality of 2 different movie using a quanititative parameter, am i rite?
A "good" DVD transfer is one that accurately reproduces the original photographic look for a movie. Movies do not all look the same.

A film like Minority Report, for example, has a deliberately grainy and blown out image. It's supposed to look like that, and the DVD is an excellent transfer. However, if you were to try to judge it based on some objective scale where grain is bad, it would rate lowly. That would be highly misleading and inaccurate.
Josh Z is offline  
Old 04-10-03, 09:49 AM
  #12  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Josh Z
A "good" DVD transfer is one that accurately reproduces the original photographic look for a movie. Movies do not all look the same.

A film like Minority Report, for example, has a deliberately grainy and blown out image. It's supposed to look like that, and the DVD is an excellent transfer. However, if you were to try to judge it based on some objective scale where grain is bad, it would rate lowly. That would be highly misleading and inaccurate.
oic, that means one needs to know manually how good is the master and how good is the transfer, rite?
zoossh is offline  
 

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.