compare blu ray vs. upconvert dvd
 

i have a basic question. i have a 1080i toshiba dlp is it worth it to upgrade to blu ray? also, if blu ray scores 100 what would the upconvert score? thanks for the help.

Very tough to say. What's the size of your HDTV. If it's less than 42", you probably won't benefit enough to watch HD movies.

But overall, yes, it's worth it to upgrade to a large quantity of Blu-ray movies. Notice I say a large quantity. I don't say all Blu-ray movies are wonderful. So, read the reviews here and elsewhere to get a better idea and to help yourself make a better purchase.

Remember, upconverting a DVD only means you're upconverting a highly compressed signal to begin with. So inherently, most upconverted DVDs will not compare to Blu-ray (or HD DVD) titles. I say this owning around 200 HD DVD movies, upconverting DVD movies all the time with an HD-XA2, and I'm looking forward to getting Blu-ray movies later this year.

I use the PS3 to watch BD's and upscaled DVDs. I've heard the PS3 is not the best for upscaling DVD's, and maybe that's true because I'm not impressed. Upscaled DVD's still look like DVD quality to me (on my 73" screen). Edges of objects and people look more jagged and rough compared to BD's, and the colors appear washed out compared to the bold colors on BD's.

Blu-rays will always look better than upconverted DVDs. It really comes down to how liberal you are with your money.

A DLP should have a big enough screen that you will notice a difference. I have a 50-inch SXRD and it's plenty big enough to be noticeable.

On my 92" setup (720p front projector), upscaled DVDs still look substantially muddier/murkier than Blus/HDDVDs.

How is it that people always mention this and assume the person is sitting 20' away?

I have a 46" DLP TV, 1080i and I will say that I see a difference in the quality of Blu-ray/HD-DVD versus upscaled DVDs.

But I do agree with DVD Polizei that you won't notice as big of a difference with every single title. I'm sure that has something to do with the fact we don't have as large a screen as many of the people around here.

I'm running the 58" Panasonic Plasma and a SONY Blu player. I was watching my SE of Titanic the other night and it was probably one of the most stunning pictures I've seen on that TV. It looked as good as many of the HD titles I have. If I were to generalize; there are a small number that will show little difference if any, a vast majority of BD will show at least some improvement over SD and a decent number will show a tremendous improvement. If your question is regarding whether it is worth it to invest in HD instead of going with an upconvert player I would say yes. Is it worth it to upgrade every DVD you own to Blu, No.

I completely disagree with this statement. I just replaced my 32" HDTV with a 42" HDTV, and I believe the clarity for HD media was far better than upscaled on BOTH, although upscaled movies looked slightly better on my 32" TV than it does now.

I believe that it will be much better, but regardless of your TV's capabilites, the new HD audio formats make it worth the upgrade alone - - as long as your audio system can handle them.

I have yet to see an upconvert DVD look any different than a normal DVD on my TV (55inch Sony). However, HD-DVD and Blu-Ray look amazing.

^ What kind of upconverter do you have?

Yea. I have a 32 inch Toshiba REGZA and I sit about 6-7 feet away from it when watching. Blu looks great!

7 feet is a bit far for a screen that small. Use the following calculator to find your optimal viewing distance. In your case it would be between 3.6 and 5 feet (according to SMPTE or THX recommendations).

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/v...alculator.html

In response to comments further up, it is not the size of the screen alone that matters, it's the combination of size and viewing distance. If you sit 10 feet away from a 40 inch screen, you are probably too far away to be able to notice the detail and clarity HD movies provide. But if your viewing distance is relative to the screen size, and you are choosing a distance that is considered optimal for your screen size (see calculator above), you will notice a difference even between 1080i and 1080p, let alone SD and HD.

I'd like to be a bit closer, but that isn't feasible right now. But thanks. :)

while an ok guideline, i think a bit too much is made of those screen size/viewing distance charts and recommendations. those are based on the human eye's ability to resolve detail, but resolution is just one of many advantages that blu-ray has over DVD. in the visual department, the colors are much richer than DVD, which is noticeable even beyond the "recommended" viewing distances and the compression artifacts inherent to DVD transfers are significantly reduced, if not entirely eliminated in Blu-ray transfers. lossless or uncompressed audio (up to 7.1 channels) is much more rich and dynamic than what is possible on DVD. BD-Java interactivity, Bonus View and BD-Live make possible a myriad of extra features that DVD cannot match.

my point is that when deciding whether to get a Blu-ray player, there is much more to consider than just the size of your TV and the distance you sit from it.

I agree with your points. The OP, however, was asking if it's worth going Blu-ray with a 1080i TV set. If I combine your statements with mine, I would give him the following recommendations:

1) If the special BD features are important to you, this alone would be a reason to go Blu, even if you only have a 1080i set.

2) If you are sitting somewhat farther away than the "recommended" viewing distance, you won't get any benefit from getting a new 1080p TV set anyway, so stick with your 1080i set, provided that it is of good quality.

3) A well calibrated 1080i set might actually give you a better picture than a 1080p TV set that is still on factory defaults. Spend 300 or 400 bucks on a good calibration (i.e. www.avical.com) instead of buying a new TV set, and Blu-ray will blow you away even on 1080i.

There's too may variables to give a blanket answer to this question. How good is your upconverting player? Are you watching it in 1080i or 1080p? How good / big is your display? How good was the DVD or Blu-Ray transfer?

The best blu-ray movie on the best display blows away any upconverting DVD hands down, but there's other movies I've watchted that aren't that much better IMHO.

No kidding it's not just the size of the screen. That's why I said a 50" is the preferred size--because viewing distance is exactly why this particular size is recommended). But hey, several dozen AV forums with professionals who post about it and thousands of HDTV owners who agree, must be all wrong.

Second, your 1080i vs. 1080p statement is not correct. Once again, most HDTV users AND Professionals agree the differences are so small, you'd need an HDTV larger than 50" to notice the difference--if any.

We can go round and round and round ad nauseum, but my point is, I'm not the only one who's saying this and there are professionals who do HDTV installations and sell these TV's for a living, who agree with what I'm saying. From my own experience, I took these people to task and personally went to several AV stores in my city and looked at 42" HDTVs. Hey, I was willing to shave a few bucks on a HDTV. Who wouldn't. I didn't want a larger set. Fuck, I'd prefer a 32" HDTV. But the differences were so dramatic, that I opted for a 50". I also compared 1080i and 1080p signals and didn't see much of a difference. I couldn't justify the extra $800-$1000 pricetag at the time.

To those who own 42" HDTVs, I'm certainly not saying It's the "wrong" choice. All I'm saying here is what's been known for years. A 42" is fine, but there is consensus amongst a wider group of HDTV owners that 50" is more recommended, and 50" and higher for 1080p viewing. I'm sure we have someone who says his Blu-ray movies look fantastic on a 26" HDTV. Hey, that's great. Knock yourself out.

If the OP has a 42", I'd recommend a 50". If he wants 1080p viewing, I'd recommend something around 55" and prefer it being a plasma or the higher-end LCDs which are capable of producing a 1080p image.

But let's not go down the path of ripping every single syllable of logic apart here, and not even responding with a definitive answer to the OP. There is an answer. Some won't like it, but it's the way it is for this OP and he will figure it out if it doesn't match his viewing style.

But my apologies to the OP. I should have just PM'd you with my thoughts and let everyone else throw figures and philosophies back and forth without giving a direct answer. :)

I have a 1080i 27" Olevia HDTV and my HD-DVD discs look AMAZING compared to my standard DVD's. The quality of the transfers has completely blown me away. I will be getting a PS3 soon to use as a Blu-Ray player.

I don't even understand what your point is anymore. This is just rambling. Let's try to keep it simple.

I have a 60 inch Sony KDS-60A3000 and with a viewing distance of 8 feet I definitely do see a difference between 1080i and 1080p. I can easily test this through my HTPC.

I would wager about a 75-80 if BD is 100 (note not all BD would be 100) since you ask for a score. I have an up-converter (XA2 one of the best available) and a PS3 on a 1080i 57 inch Toshiba. My opinion is from first hand experience so take it for what it is worth. Your best possible DVD vs your worst BD would probably be about 5 points apart on the scale - I tend to stick with new releases and highly reviewed catalog to get the best bang for my buck. (for reference on my scale i would put DVD 480i/p around 50 and LD around 30 with VHS 10 - up-converted DVDs fall just under HD cable which I score around 85-90)