DVD Polizei

I certainly understand your point. Buying an SD DVD version then expecting to pay a premium on the HD version should warrant the HD version to be easily better and not even debatable as to the quality.

I haven't seen Fletch in HD yet but it is on the way to me from DeepDiscount (their customer serviced has improved over the last few weeks, I have to say). I'll add comments if we ever cross paths again.

Paul_SD

Easily to who? The people watching on 42" 720p's from 3 screenwidths away? -Should their opinion carry equal weight to anyone elses?I have less of an issue with people voicing subjective opinions as long as the comments are explicitly qualified in the post with their viewing circumstances- and subjective opinion isn't then tossed out there as objective fact. And personally I thought Deer Hunter looked amazing. Wasn't all that taken with the actual film, but the disc visually was of an extremely high caliber. I wish all the scope movies in my collection could be rendered as well.
and yes, EE sucks at 100" wide. But it is much worse on a lower res source...all else being equal. Luckily for me most of the Uni titles I own don't suffer from this as much as some others.

DVD Polizei

Since there is no standard for watching HD material, other than resolution of the source and not the endpoint of that source, and since there is no standard when it comes to creating an HD transfer, your question is what I'm referring to.

There are no standards in HD. None. The only current and consistent standard is 1920x1080. Everything else varies. The HD format, the HD codec, the HDTV size you're watching the HD content on, the HD player, the movie studios who create the HD content.

But to answer your question about HDTV size, I'd say 50" is about where a person needs to be to benefit from HD content. Some will disagree, but this is just from viewing HD content on various size HDTVs myself. It took me several months to find the right HDTV, but it does seem as if 50" is the sweet spot for most.

We can debate HDTV size and viewing distance forever. However, if you notice, you and I will read posts of people agreeing or disagreeing on a particular title as being obviously beneficial or not so beneficial of HD. In this post, we're debating it. On others, it can be blatant such as Traffic, or on the other end of the HD quality spectrum, Planet Earth. Other titles won't be as easy. So, quite possibly, even the size of the television doesn't matter too much as long as we have enough HD viewers to quantitatively agree or disagree on a particular title.

kbjorn

You really have no one else to blame but yourself....eventually everything will come out on Blu. After all the announcements, HD DVD dumpings..etc..and you still buy a HD DVD not expecting it to come out on Blu?

You should be pissed off at your short sightedness.

Paul_SD

Now would that be a 50" screen from 5' away or 10' away...or doesn't that make a difference? Throwing out a screen size is next to useless without a viewing distance attendent. That is what is meant by the term viewing angle. I may be slightly off here but I believe when you go past 1.5 screen widths distance you quickly start to lose the ability to resolve the difference in detail between a 1080p and a 720p display. If you are someone who naturally prefers a very wide viewing angle (greater distance to the screen) HD and 1080p may just be a waste for your needs.

DVD Polizei

Well, if you said you watched HD movies on a 26" HDTV, I would imagine you weren't sitting a few feet from it during normal viewing distances. Typically, about 7-9ft is the norm. Like I said, HD titles do get a general nod for quality and some do not. While I agree viewing distances are part of the equation up to a point, there is just common sensical viewing from a sample of viewers who will give their opinions which are trustworthy.

Sitting 5ft or 10ft away from a 50" won't make much of a difference. If an HD title is bad, you'll see it at 5ft, 7ft, 10ft, etc. Resolving is used much more in HD debates than what it should be, and varies exponentially due to the size of the television. For example, viewing HD content on 20" LCD HDTV versus viewing HD content on a 50" HDTV. The larger the television, the greater the dynamic viewing distance which is within tolerable viewing measurements. So, what I'm saying is, those who have extremely small HDTVs need to make note, but for most of us, we don't because larger television naturally covers a larger viewing distance.

All things considered, viewing distance is notable, but not necessary to ascertain if an HD title is of a common consensus of quality. Most of us have 42" to 65" HDTVs (and I would say most of us lean towards 50" sizes and larger--maybe we should have a poll?), and this is within tolerable limits of a 6ft to 10ft typical viewing range. So, if someone is viewing their HD content on a 20" HDTV then they probably should make note during their posts and opinions, but most of us don't have 20" HDTVs, and therefore, it's not entirely necessary.

As to 720p vs. 1080p, that's another debate, but again, the common consensus is there isn't much difference overall, and you don't need a 1080p HDTV to ascertain whether an HD title is inferior or not. And having a 720p HDTV doesn't mean you won't benefit from HD as well.

Josh Z

There is no debate to be had anymore.

See first storyboard under The Shining, and the notes written on it:

http://kubrickfilms.tripod.com/id40.html

"THE FRAME IS EXAXCTLY 1-1:85
Obviously you compose for that
but protect the full 1-1:33 area."



From Gordon Stainforth, one of the assistant editors on the film:

"What aspect ratio was The Shining filmed in?
The entire negative was exposed, meaning that there was no in-camera hard matting so the film was effectively shot in Academy 1.37 but it wasn't intended to be shown in cinemas that way. The film was shot and conceived for 1:1.85 ratio screening (and the camera viewfinders had the 1.85 framelines marked on them) This is the standard ratio that widescreen films in the US are projected in. The 1:185 crop was achieved when the film was projected onto cinemas screens..."

bretski

You know, I've seen Fletch more than a few times, but I don't remember the scene where he uses Jack Torrance as a disguise...