|
|
Posted by Jay G. on 04/25/07 12:58
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 17:30:56 -0700, SuperM wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:00:51 -0400, Nelly <nellyblue@gmail.com> Gave
> us:
>>On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:47:39 -0400, Derek Janssen wrote:
>>>
>>> Also, while widescreen movies are processed more or less in their
>>> original theatrical form, fullscreen movies have to be separately
>>> RE-processed for FS disk--
>>> Which means the 4:3 version will look slightly blurrier, zoomed-in and
>>> second-generation.
>>>
>>> If you bought a DVD player for clarity, fullscreen movies bring you
>>> right back to the VHS.
>
>>That's bullshit! I have both versions of The DaVinci Code and except
>>for the size and shape of the display, there is no blurriness
>>whatsoever. The clarity is the same on both.
>
> You're probably looking on a shitty TV, so both look equally shitty,
> even though you call it "clarity".
I'm going to have to defend Nelly and Winfield here, in that Derek's
statements about 4:3 DVDs were blatantly incorrect.
Both 4:3 films and 16:9 films with anamorphic enhancement utilize the full
resolution available on DVD. Even when a 4:3 DVD uses the same master as a
VHS did, the DVD's going to have more resolution because the *master* has
more resolution. For example, the original unaltered versions of Star Wars
were released in letterboxed versions on LD and VHS in the early 90s, but
when it was released on DVD last year using the same master as was used for
the LD and VHS, the DVD had more resolution because the original master had
more resolution than either LD or VHS could contain.
Additionally, I'm not sure what the hell Derek is talking about in regards
to "re-processed." A lot of 4:3 DVDs get their own transfer from scratch,
not "reprocessing" the widescreen transfer. This is because a lot of 4:3
films show more vertical image than the WS version, due to additional image
that was shot but matted out for the WS release. This is primarily used in
1.85:1 AR films, although some so-called "scope" films have additional
image as well due to being shot in Super35 instead of anamorphically.
The only time I could see the 4:3 version being "reprocessed" is if it's a
complete P&S of the WS image. In that case though, they'd be working from
an HD master, which contains far more resolution than DVDs can contain.
Even the P&S image is going to be higher resolution than DVD and will be
downconverted to the proper resolution, something that has to occur to the
WS image as well. So the P&S image isn't going to look "slightly blurrier"
or "second generation" compared to the WS version, since both came from an
image that was higher resolution than DVD, and both went through the same
downconversion for DVD.
So, about the only thing that Derek got right is that the 4:3 version is
going to be "zoomed-in" if it's a P&S job. The "slightly blurrier,"
"second-generation," and "right back to the VHS" are just plain wrong.
-Jay
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|