Forum - View topicHey, Answerman! - Back in the Side Saddle
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
edzieba
Posts: 704 |
|
|||||||
9 times out of 10, those I've met who've said they've "never seen the difference between SD and HD" are basing their decisions on poor setups. Stores are especially bad and at this, and a fun passtime for massive nerds such as myself is guessing whether a store HDTV demo kiosk is using composite or SCART. I very rarely find one even using HDMI (or even component), let alone one actually running at anything other than 480p. And that's with the TV in 'demo mode' with contrast and saturation turned up to eye-bleach levels. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
HJSoulma
Posts: 62 |
|
|||||||
I think perhaps you missed my point. I don't claim to be an expert (and that was what my so-called "wish-washy beckpedaling" was about, I guess)-- I just wanted to explain that on the one hand I do appreciate good-looking releases and am not sitting at home with an old tube TV and a VHS player, but on the other hand I am not a serious videophile with a professional setup and a tendency to nitpick even the tiniest of flaws-- I.E., probably an average viewer. If that came off as "defensive" to you, I'm sorry; I was simply attempting to distinguish myself from the users who ARE in fact serious videophiles, since those are the people the vast majority of reviews are coming from despite the fact that, presumably, the vast majority of viewers are not. I am sure that all of the aforementioned blu-ray releases are full of errors that someone of that ilk would care about, but I wanted to express my opinion that, most likely, your average viewer wouldn't care or wouldn't notice these errors. I understand your point that you shouldn't have to settle for a lesser-quality product, but in the case of something like FLCL, unless you want to go looking for ancient out of print DVDs, the lesser product may be your only legal choice for seeing or owning the show. Believe it or not, I also try to look for lots of information about a show I'm buying before I buy it (and if, like in the case of Champloo, there seems to be a lot of negative discussion, I look for comparitive stills and clips as well.) It just so happens that I, unlike the many videophiles who have complained and posted negative reviews about the releases, did not find the new sets to be less visually appealing than either the older sets or, in the case of FLCL, simply not owning the set at all. And THIS is why I felt the desire to post an "ill-informed" review: because the vast majority of reviews of these sets, from what I personally found trying to decide when I was buying them, were from people who did "know the terminology" and who were extremely serious videophiles and who would rather not own a series than own an "inferior" copy. Since (also in my personal opinion, as everything here is, as I not only mentioned in my original post but even explained that therefore I, just as anyone else posting an opinion on something, might not be a trustworthy source) I feel that your average anime fan, even your average anime fan with a blu-ray player, is NOT any of those things, I felt that some fans who would actually be perfectly satisfied with the quality of the releases might be dissuaded from buying them because of those reviews. You say that the discussion needs to be in technical terms, but if you aren't someone who knows the technical terms, extremely technical reviews mean nothing to you. Every review I found looking up these series before buying them was either highly technical and negative (not helpful to your average fourteen year old fan) or just baselessly negative (reviews that went something like "oh man the video is really bad it sucks don't buy it"), which is not helpful to anyone. If your average fan sees only reviews like these, of course they aren't going to buy the product-- even if they wouldn't actually have any issue with it. My only aim in posting was to put out a non-technical (and if you don't think there's a place for non-technical discussion of video, that's your opinion), counter-balancing-ly positive review to simply provide another viewpoint. You said my statement about critics was "juvenile," but I was not throwing up my arms and saying "sigh, everyone's a critic and I am so persecuted" (which, yes, would certainly have been juvenile, and also utterly stupid) but rather that generally speaking, *the people who post reviews of things on the internet are generally very critical viewers-- critics.* Again, I was merely making an attempt to differentiate my opinion from the majority of opinions that have been floating around the internet. I'm sorry you think I'm "part of the problem," but you also have to remember that not everyone feels that all video discussion must be in technical terms or in extreme specifics. Another user meekly posted something along the lines of "I must be the only person who thinks this blu-ray release looked good," and I think that's telling-- your average user is uncomfortable admitting that they liked any upscaled region 1 release because so many very vocal people have expressed such negative opinions about them. The vocal videophile segment of the reviewers has made it practically impossible to express a positive opinion on anything they found flaws with without sounding like an idiot, despite your assurance that "that's your opinion." (And you couldn't even give me that without the caveat of "you don't know what you're talking about.") Frankly, that's what I started out saying I thought the releases looked "fine" and not "good:" I was afraid that if I actually admitted that I thought the releases looked good, that I would have absolutely no credibility, as thinking recent region 1 upscales look good is simply an opinion you aren't allowed to have without being branded "ill-informed" stupid or tasteless. I'm sorry I didn't use the language you would have liked me to to express my opinion, but my original post was not directed *at* people who are serious videophiles or who are neck-deep in the language of technical video review, but rather was simply intended to be a *counterpoint* to it. If I offended you or made you angry or whatever, that was not the point or the intention. But I think I am allowed my opinion, not-technical as it is, without being patronized or called names. So here's my new review, tailored to be as inoffensive as possible: I am an average anime fan who likes blu-rays because to my very personal and subjective eyes they generally look better than DVDs. I am not a video expert, so if you're a video expert, stop reading, because you are probably going to disagree with me. But maybe not, since this is an opinion piece and everyone has a different opinion. I personally, subjectively hold the opinion that I liked the region 1 blu-ray releases of Samurai Champloo and FLCL. Personally and subjectively, with no offense meant towards people who do not hold these views, I thought they looked GOOD. Not just fine, but GOOD. If, personally and subjectively, I had to choose between my old DVDs of Samurai Champloo, in which, to my personal and subjective ears, the audio is unbalanced and, to my personal and subjective eyes, the compression (which, for the record, I do know what is, believe it or not!) was not very good and made the colors, in my personal and subjective opinion, look dark, pixellated and not-so-good, I would personally and subjectively choose the newer blu-ray release. Similarly, if I had to pick between the new blu-ray release of FLCL and not owning FLCL, I would pick the new blu-ray release, as my invisible non-existent DVDs give me very little pleasure. I apologize off the bat to anyone who disagrees with me, and now I will crawl into my hole of apparently-poor-visual-fidelity and stop talking.[/quote] |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Kidnicky
Posts: 79 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
dewlwieldthedarpachief
 Posts: 751 Location: Canada |
|
|||||||
It's not quite the same as with SD; the seating distance required to perceive the maximum detail out of 1080p is very comfortable for the typical viewing angle of 36 degrees. Sure, 2K+ in a sense would be "better", but you wouldn't be able to distinguish the difference unless you were much closer to the screen. Therefore, it's really only useful for a large monitor when photo editing or a giant theatre screen. @HJSoulma: The gesture doesn't go unnoticed, but whether or not you are offensive is not the issue. What's problematic here is misinformation. If you're willing to write five paragraphs about your opinion, I should think you owe it to yourself and your audience to simply distinguish where the facts begin and supposition ends. It's not a question of "do or die" for this release, either. Both of these titles are available for streaming on FUNi's website. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
jr240483
 Posts: 4385 Location: New York City,New York,USA |
|
|||||||
Which probably means your a supporter of them. Just because it's a trading card anime series does not neccessarily mean it's for kids. For teenagers in the 12-17 boys demography,yes. But not for the demography of the audience for 4kids (7-11). And they definitely have innapropriate content for all three series that 4kids butchered,other than the talk of killing and death, (I checked Wikipedia fro my info ) even though American cartoons like Ben 10:Alien Force and Generator Rex talks about klling and death. Like it or not , the series is mainly for young teenagers, not for the kids demo that 4 crap kids are targeting.
Actually, it could. They could face the same fate as the other Shouen Jump series (Gintama & Eyeshield 21 ) and be under the mercy of the mainly sub only companes ( Secton 23/Sental Filmworks and/or Media Blasters) who also does the same policy and give the series ENGLISH SUB-ONLY RELEASES Good for otakus and dub haters,bad for dub pursuits and dub lovers like myself. BUT I kinda doubt TV Tokyo and Konami would allow that. I do not see Funi doing a rescue since thei already have one pice , So I would give a 70-80% that it'll be Viz Media to get the license. Though I wont not be susprise if they get help from CN,if it mean their able to get Dan Green to return as Yugi/Yami since he's done some voice work for some of CN's series (naimly the new pokemon season ) Hoever if TV tokyo does it's own dubbing, it would be interesting cause they cant be as bad as the horror that is 4kids,or their asian counterpart Animax Asia. And besides, I'll gladly take a dub from TV Tokyo over one from Nelvana , cause they would HAVE to do the same edits as 4kids , if not worse to keep it as a "kids show".
Your not the only one that agrees. SM is the main reason my sister is even into anime. Also it's one of my fav magical girl series (next to card captor sakura & mahou shoujo lyrical nanoha ) I even have the old VHS of the DIC dubs that ADV released during the late 90's. ( Though was seriously pissed that they did an uncut sub only version for the DVDs) Was definitely delighted that the manga is being revived, but I too also hope the anime version gets revived , especially the sailor stars series. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Sunday Silence
 Posts: 2047 |
|
|||||||
Question is, who are the purse strings held by "the masses?" Unless i'm missing job opportunities outside of chores around the house a/or gifts from relatives. But as I stated before, this guy was in it to make money, so why did he blow off an opportunity like this? Don't forget the lack of "merchandising" for One Piece as well..... |
||||||||
|
||||||||
enurtsol
 Posts: 14790 |
|
|||||||
One Piece was doing crap on U.S. TV; probably why the merchandise licensee buyers didn't take the bait. 
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Sunday Silence
Posts: 2047 |
|
|||||||
Still, shouldn't 4Kids have done the stuff beforehand? |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
enurtsol
Posts: 14790 |
|
|||||||
Sell the merchandise licenses before the TV showing is a success? |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Kakugo
Posts: 163 |
|
|||||||
Or you could always buy FUNi's DVD, released day-and-date with their new Blu-ray. It may or may not have the same Q-TEC issues as the Blu-ray, I honestly don't know, and I'm quite happy with my old Sync Point box set for the time being.
Not to single you out, but this really needs to be said more often: If you don't know the specifics, you aren't qualified to post an actual review on wither a release is or is not good, at least not in the capacity so many people seem to be in when they review DVD and Blu-ray. That doesn't mean you can't say "Well, I think it looks pretty good!" on a relevant forum, but you shouldn't be looked towards as a person who can objectively call something "high fidelity" or not, either. The issue with FLCL and (especially) Samurai Champloo isn't "they were upscales". It's that they were heavily processed upscales that look worse than they should have. Samurai Champloo used DVNR to remove simulated film grain which was added by the animation staff to evoke a grittier, old-fashioned look to the art design. This isn't a "flaw" inert to the animation like the aliasing on FLCL, it was a stylish choice that FUNimation's upscale removed. And before anyone suggests that upscaling itself removed grain, their release of Rin: Daughters of Mnemosyne contains a similar layer of digital grain, giving us a rough idea of what Samurai Champloo could have looked like had they handled it properly. I'm also a bit confused why you'd start your defense of FLCL and Samurai Champloo with the following:
You don't watch things on a computer, despite an LCD TV and a computer monitor being the same exact technology? You also don't buy useless upscales, but you're defending Samurai Champloo and FLCL? Two "useless" upscales that, incidentally, represent some of the very worst the R1 market has to offer*? Anyway, I've spent so much time pouring over the how and why of FLCL that I've given up. The DVD look bad, the Blu-ray looks bad, but they're such different ends on the "bad" spectrum that it's hard to recommend one over the other. The Blu-ray is probably the lesser of two evils, but it's a thinner line than it had to be - and that's exactly why I'm so upset about it. Had FUNimation performer their own upscale - the same as they have for titles like Guyver, Ouran and Mnemosyne - instead of using the Q-Tec transfer made for Starchild, there'd be no arguments: The FUNimation FLCL Blu-ray transfer would be the best release anywhere in the world, and more or less impossible to top. Sadly, that's not what happened. Keep in mind that the "average user" likely wouldn't care that there are issues with the upscaling method used, so the videophiles have to voice their negativity that much harder. The majority of end users aren't super-picky, but that means their complacency and ignorance damage the product for the rest of the audience that does care. *Well, THE worst is the composite-video sources upscale of Ghost in the Shell included as a bonus feature... but let's not even go there. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Sunday Silence
Posts: 2047 |
|
|||||||
Have the stuff lined up first and then release them. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
enurtsol
Posts: 14790 |
|
|||||||
But wouldn't the prospective merchandise licensees wanna wait to see if the TV show is a success first, before committing to buying the license and producing merchandise, so they don't lose money? |
||||||||
|
||||||||
Deadwing
 Posts: 174 Location: North Augusta, SC |
|
|||||||
What I said was that, for me, it doesn't feel like the same massive leap in quality as was the jump from VHS to DVD. That's not to say it's not a big improvement if you have the right gear. I have on occasion seen some good HD setups (always with plasma displays) and yes, it does look much better than standard-def in such cases. When visiting my parents for Thanksgiving & Christmas last year, we watched some movies on BD (they had just bought a player a few months earlier), and I was impressed at the sharpness and color fidelity. It was the first time I saw something that really showed off what HD was capable of and really made me want to join the HD age. Nevertheless, as nice as it was it lacked the massive "Wow!" factor I experienced when I first laid eyes on the DVD format back in '97.
Aye, but SD doesn't look like crap on an SDTV. I don't recall people in the 20th bemoaning the lousy picture of their flat-screen Sony Trinitron Wegas, wishing for the day when someone invents a big-screen 1080p LED-backlit LCD TV. SD stuff looks perfectly fine on a good SD display. Sure, it might not look as good as, say, Avatar on BD in full HD on a good plasma screen, but it was more than acceptable for its time. Even today, only the snootiest of videophiles can honestly say that a DVD viewed on a good SD display will elicit a response of "OMG! How horrible! It burns teh eyez!" from them. My mid-90s Toshiba still serves me well to this day and the picture is perfectly fine when playing my SNES or watching my DVDs. SD does look like crap when played on an HDTV, though. Playing DVDs on a BD player with a built-in upscaler does offer improvement, but if you're watching a broadcast of a program that's not in HD (which you'll still get even on HD channels), or playing any video game system other than a 360 or PS3 and thus don't have the option of an upscaler, the picture's going to look like garbage. I don't know why anyone would want to play their old SD stuff on anything other than an SDTV. It's a good thing SDTVs can still be found even though the major TV manufacturers have abandonded them, because I'll rue the day when I'm forced to play my old systems on an HDTV (that is unless there's some kind of converter box that makes them look less like ass and the TV guy at Best Buy was just ignorant of them). There's still room for the old cathode ray tube, even if it's just for displaying pre-HD legacy media.
Dangerous? Are you talking about the negligible (well below safe levels) amount of radiation they emit, or the e-waste aspect (something shared by any electronic device)? As for bulk, yes, they're heavy — and most people seem to put convenience above almost all else, so the relatively lightweight flat panel displays have the edge there —, but honestly, how often does the average person move their TV? Electricity consumption? Maybe an issue for some, but not a consideration if picture quality is your main deciding factor. Besides, how much does running one's TV contribute to their power bill (and consequently their carbon footprint)? Less than 2% per screen? My 19" Toshiba probably uses about the same amount of electricity as a single incandescent bulb. I imagine the smaller dimensions & weight (and thus convenience) for a given screen size and larger available screen sizes of new displays (CRTs were limited to around 40") were the main deciding factors for HD CRTs (they did make those) not becoming a mainstream display rather than anything having to do with elecricity use, environmental concerns, or picture quality.
As I mentioned earlier, they made HD CRTs for a short while, and CRTs have several advantages over other displays, including superior color fidelity, contrast, black levels, response time (a boon for gamers), and viewing angle. Of the extant displays, I'd have to go with plasma since it offers better color, contrast, and blacks than LCD, which I consider the least impressive of the mainstream displays (IMO, plasma's biggest weakness is the lack of smaller screens; I'd have to buy a whole new entertainment center if I bought a plasma screen). I was interested in those new "SED" and "FED" displays, as I hear they offer the advantages of CRT while eliminating its weaknesses. Unfortunately, they will likely never be commercially available. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
dewlwieldthedarpachief
Posts: 751 Location: Canada |
|
|||||||
|
＠Deadwing: CRTs are chock full of cadmium IIRC. And you do realize that SD on an HD display is necessarily scaled to the native resolution (and deinterlaced, if applicable) regardless of whether or not you use your BD player to do so, right? It's just that your BD player probably has better hardware going for it.
SD has its limitatations, but it shouldn't look like "crap" (CD?). If it does, it's either poor source material, poor encoding, or poor processing. Just because something is in HD doesn't eliminate these considerations, it only opens the door wider to what is and isn't possible with materials that are up to spec. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group