|
|
Posted by M.I.5 on 01/10/07 08:16
"Joshua Zyber" <joshzyber@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4ICdnczWnNnHDz7YnZ2dnUVZ_tOmnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "M.I.5" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:45a350cf$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
>>> The major studios do not release new titles in non-anamorphic
>>> letterbox format. They just don't. Your insistence that the Dead
>>> Man's Chest DVD is in this format is borderline delusional. You're
>>> clearly misunderstanding the readout on your DVD player.
>>>
>>
>> Well that's what thought to start with and they certainly claim that
>> they don't. Which is why I copied the .VOB file without the .IFO file
>> and played that. It is clearly in letterbox.
>>
>> I would post a frame grab if it wasn't for the fact that binary
>> attachments are verbotten.
>
> Upload it to the www and post a link here.
>
I wish I could, but I am prohibited my my company from loading non work
related files to this PC.
>>> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pirates-Caribbean-Dead-Mans-Chest/dp/B000IHZ4F6/sr=8-1/qid=1168299841/ref=pd_ka_1/202-0832938-4850212?ie=UTF8&s=dvd
>>>
>>
>> That looks very much like the edition that I have.
>
> If you bought a legitimate copy in the UK, that is the edition you have.
> Disney has only released the one edition.
>
I took it back to HMV last night, who didn't really understand what I was
talking about (no surprise there!). However, HMV are pretty reasonable
about these things, and exchanged it without quibbling. The new copy is
clearly different and plays in anamorphic widescreen with obviously greater
clarity. A quick check shows that the .VOBs really are anamorphic
widescreen this time.
I don't understand why there should be a difference unless there was a
mastering error along the line somewhere and a few got out before they could
be recalled. It does happen.
Anyway, I'm happy now.
>> I'm afraid, I'm becoming very cynical about this because Sky have
>> clearly degraded their transmissions from just before Christmas.
>> Their digital quality was marginally better than Freeview, but now it
>> is very noticeably worse (and Sky deny that anything has changed).
>> Their output contains advertisements for their HD service that are
>> clearly better than their standard output (are people really taken in
>> by this?). Their early HD adverts actually caused problems with some
>> Sky boxes as the artificially lower MPEG compression caused problems
>> (with Pace Sky+ boxes being particularly badly affected). The adverts
>> naturally only contain slow moving material designed to compress well.
>
> And this has what relevance to our discussion?
>
Merely background information.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|