Good-bye DVD's

sugarbritchez

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
980
Reaction score
3
anathema said:
Er...which DVDs are you talking about - the original series or the new one? The new series is due out in the US on Valentine's Day, and the original series releases have been coming out for years.
The New ones.........Who in the US is going to sell them? I contacted BBC before Christmas and they said that Dr. Who isn't a US item so they aren't going to market it here. I would love to know where to get it!!!! THANKS!!!!!
 

anathema

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2002
Messages
1,697
Reaction score
48
sugarbritchez said:
The New ones.........Who in the US is going to sell them? I contacted BBC before Christmas and they said that Dr. Who isn't a US item so they aren't going to market it here. I would love to know where to get it!!!! THANKS!!!!!
Well, it's a BBC DVD release, so presumably the usual retailers will have it.

http://www.gallifreyone.com/releases.php

The series is also due for broadcast on the Sci-Fi channel some time later this year.
 

sugarbritchez

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
980
Reaction score
3
**gives Alex a BIG HUG**

Oh Thank you Thank you Thank you for that info...you are the best!!!!!
 

Was Once Ernie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
959
Reaction score
4
Silly me! I didn't realize your location. Yes, going from NTSC to HD is a much bigger difference than from PAL to HD.

anathema said:
I assume you mean a rear-projection set rather than a projector? Oh, and LCDs have another issue I forgot to mention: the 'screen-door' effect; particularly noticeable with projection systems as the LCD panel is much smaller than the one in a direct-view set, but there's a physical limit to how small the inter-pixel gaps can be made.
Yes, sorry again... I do mean rear-projection. I read about the screen door effect before I bought it, but I'm not seeing it. And the viewing angle is vastly improved over CRT rear-projectors. I have to assume it's improved in LCD rear-projectors also, because it's quite good on my set.

anathema said:
TMS is a good case in point: the entire series was recorded on tape. I noticed when the first reviews of the US Season 1 boxset appeared that most of the reviewers commented that they'd never seen the show looking so good, which surprised me: what were they expecting?
I think we got burned over here by the Time-Life DVD releases. They were just poor conversions and worse mastering. It reminded me of what PAL show conversions used to look like in the early 1970's, before digital. Almost like being under water. The new Muppet Show Season Set was a vast improvement over the earlier releases.

:stick_out_tongue:
 

anathema

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2002
Messages
1,697
Reaction score
48
Was Once Ernie said:
Yes, sorry again... I do mean rear-projection. I read about the screen door effect before I bought it, but I'm not seeing it. And the viewing angle is vastly improved over CRT rear-projectors. I have to assume it's improved in LCD rear-projectors also, because it's quite good on my set.
It's getting better generally. From what I've seen, the DLP sets seem to have the best viewing angles, then LCDs and finally CRTs. However, none of them are great, and the vertical angle is usually much much worse than the horizontal, so you really need to have the screen set up at the right height for viewing.

My main problem with LCD TV pictures is that they look flat and artificial. LCDs are great for computer graphics, but I've never seen one that could display an acceptable video picture. The rear-pro sets seem to be a bit better than the direct-view in that regard, but I finally had the chance to put some professional test signals into the 50" Sony earlier today and was seriously disappointed with the results. The Pioneer and Panasonic plasmas I tried, by contrast, produced results almost as good as my studio-grade CRT :smile: There is, after all, a reason why professionals still use CRTs... Sony do a very very nice 36" HD tube, but it has a pricetag of around $25k :-(

I think we got burned over here by the Time-Life DVD releases. They were just poor conversions and worse mastering. It reminded me of what PAL show conversions used to look like in the early 1970's, before digital. Almost like being under water. The new Muppet Show Season Set was a vast improvement over the earlier releases.

:stick_out_tongue:
The Time-Life discs were tolerable for NTSC. They were a bit soft, mainly due to the lower vertical resolution, and suffered from a degree of motion-judder, but I've never seen a standards-conversion (in either direction) which didn't have that. Unfortunately when TL decided to make UK releases, they just converted their NTSC copies back to PAL, which unsurprisingly looked atrocious.

One of the earliest PAL->NTSC conversions was developed by the BBC, and involved some clever maths to create the additional fields from the originals. Results were very good for the time, although I understand that motion-blur and judder was noticeable (I have seen the tapes, but only as reconversions back to PAL which introduces its own set of issues, so I can't say for certain what they looked like). A number of BBC programmes now only survive as these NTSC conversions but fortunately, because of the way in which the conversion was done, it has been possible to develop software which can "unpick" the maths and recover the original video fields. The resulting pictures are only slightly worse than the original PAL recordings would have been (allowing for increased noise and so on) and vastly superior to the results of a regular standards-conversion :smile:

So far as I know, the earliest TMS conversions weren't even this sophisticated. I have copies dubbed from the NTSC broadcast masters in 1983, and it appears that the conversion was done by simply repeating every fifth field...

The approach I currently use for conversions is to do an adaptive deinterlace of the source material in order to preserve as much vertical detail as possible, and then selectively blend fields together to produce the required output. This introduces a very small amount of blurring, but it's not really noticeable unless you know what to look for. PAL->NTSC works best since the destination format is of lower resolution, but both are practical. It's also fast enough to work in real-time on a reasonably-specced PC :smile: The one thing it can't deal with is motion-judder, but from experience this doesn't seem to be a problem unless there is a lot of very fast movement or a smooth movement such as a scrolling credit-roll.
 

Was Once Ernie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
959
Reaction score
4
anathema said:
The one thing it can't deal with is motion-judder, but from experience this doesn't seem to be a problem unless there is a lot of very fast movement or a smooth movement such as a scrolling credit-roll.
The worst example of this I can think of off the top of my head are those horizontal credit crawls that some BBC programs use. Those are practically unreadable.

:stick_out_tongue:
 

anathema

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2002
Messages
1,697
Reaction score
48
Was Once Ernie said:
The worst example of this I can think of off the top of my head are those horizontal credit crawls that some BBC programs use. Those are practically unreadable.

:stick_out_tongue:
Yeah, that type of crawl will suffer badly in a conversion. They look fine in the original PAL ;-)
 
Top