Blu Ray vs Up converted dvd

[andrecan2002]

I own a Sumsung DVD player that up converts regular DVD to 1080p through an HDMI cable. Is there a big difference between up converted movies and blu ray considering that both are 1080p.

[TheGreenDude]

Upscaled DVD's don't add in the extra details (video and audio) that exist on a native 1080p source such as Blu-ray, and the compression used on DVD's in comparison to that on most Blu-ray discs results in such a loss in quality that at any resolution BD's look better.

[bfocussvt]

No, though Blu-ray movies cost almost twice as much as DVDs the quality will look the same from a native 1080p Blu-ray to a 480i DVD.

[REDMAN]

Originally Posted by andrecan2002

I own a Sumsung DVD player that up converts regular DVD to 1080p through an HDMI cable. Is there a big difference between up converted movies and blu ray considering that both are 1080p.

Let's put it this way....


Bluray's standard resolution is 1080.
DVD's standard resolution is 480.

That should tell you enough. DVD can't touch Bluray with a 15 foot pole. You can't add detail that isn't there to begin with. (1080 vs. 480)

[GardenVariety]

If you close your eyes Upscaled Dvd's will look just as good.

[adammagyar]

Originally Posted by andrecan2002

I own a Sumsung DVD player that up converts regular DVD to 1080p through an HDMI cable. Is there a big difference between up converted movies and blu ray considering that both are 1080p.

get 300 on DVD and HD DVD and compare the two. that should be a good enough answer

[bfocussvt]

Originally Posted by GardenVariety

If you close your eyes Upscaled Dvd's will look just as good.

Just like when you cover your ears Dolby Digital sound as good as TrueHD and DTS-HD MA.

[REDMAN]

Please don't buy into Toshiba or anyone else's crap.

Upconverted DVD's look okay, but they cannot and will not meet Bluray disc standards.

Spend the extra money and enjoy TRUE HD content. It will be well worth it.

[snakeeater69]

Upconverted DVDs are not even close.

[DavidAg02]

Andre -

Your sig says that you have an HD-DVD player? Do you notice a difference when watching those? If not, then something may be seriously wrong with your setup.

[Blacklac]

In general, Bluray will be much better, but that is even screen size dependent. Smaller screens will have smaller differences. But yet, it still comes down to each individual movie. An awesome DVD can hold it's own against a bad Bluray, easily. Bluray's seem to be getting better in quality overall compared to early releases.

You just have to decide if it's worth the (possibly) large amount of money for the upgrade. $250-whatever you want to spend, $20-30/movie, possibly surround sound, extra wiring maybe... I could certainly live with my Oppo 983 and SD DVD's on my 50", if I had to. A quality upconverting player makes a difference and many that continually say "SD makes me puke!" simply haven't seen what a quality player can do. I love my HD/Blu stuff, but I find myself buying less and less movies lately, really only getting the must-haves.

One day, a nice projector will bring my HiDef love back.

[BLK71]

Ok, Flame me if you want, but at least give me the chance to explain.

This is one of my pet peeves (sp?) with Blu-Ray/HD-DVD. There doesn't seem to be a standard of quality for a film to be transferred to Blu-Ray. What I mean is the picture and audio quality of all films on Blu-Ray should be graded at 5 stars or they shouldn't be released on Blu-Ray. Period!

There is nothing worse then spending $20 - $40 on a Blu-Ray movie only to find out your upconverted DVD looks just as good. And there are MANY titles where this is the case. Sure the "Transformers" and "Wall-e" look great, but what about "Kiss of the Dragon" or "28 Days Later"? The upconverted DVD looks just as good or even better.

So to answer the original qestion, NO Blu-ray does not always look better than an upconverted DVD. I would suggest that before buying your next Blu-Ray, check out the review page and see what the experts have to say. They are pretty much "spot on" when it comes to grading the quality of the video and audio. Don't spend $34.99 for a Blu-Ray that just doesn't look or sound that good. Save your money for the good conversions like "Iron Man" and movies with 4 stars or higher.

Just my 2 cents.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by BLK71

Ok, Flame me if you want, but at least give me the chance to explain.

This is one of my pet peeves (sp?) with Blu-Ray/HD-DVD. There doesn't seem to be a standard of quality for a film to be transferred to Blu-Ray. What I mean is the picture and audio quality of all films on Blu-Ray should be graded at 5 stars or they shouldn't be released on Blu-Ray. Period!

There is nothing worse then spending $20 - $40 on a Blu-Ray movie only to find out your upconverted DVD looks just as good. And there are MANY titles where this is the case. Sure the "Transformers" and "Wall-e" look great, but what about "Kiss of the Dragon" or "28 Days Later"? The upconverted DVD looks just as good or even better.

So to answer the original qestion, NO Blu-ray does not always look better than an upconverted DVD. I would suggest that before buying your next Blu-Ray, check out the review page and see what the experts have to say. They are pretty much "spot on" when it comes to grading the quality of the video and audio. Don't spend $34.99 for a Blu-Ray that just doesn't look or sound that good. Save your money for the good conversions like "Iron Man" and movies with 4 stars or higher.

Just my 2 cents.

Now you should know there are three very important factors that determine the quality of a HD (BD) release:

1) The condition of the original master. Any scratches or issues with the original master will show up on every subsequent remaster.

2) Time and/or money spent in the HD transfer process, which is usually determined by how well the producing studio handles the entire process.

3) Remaster time frame. If the BD you are watching has not seen a remaster (cleanup) in over a couple years then that remaster has been collecting dust and so forth. A BD will normally look at least twice as good with a new remaster.

[Ace_of_Sevens]

Originally Posted by BLK71

Sure the "Transformers" and "Wall-e" look great, but what about "Kiss of the Dragon" or "28 Days Later"? The upconverted DVD looks just as good or even better.

That's because most of 28 Days Later was shot on a digital video camera at standard definition. The ending was 35 mm and there will be a huge difference there.

[Mark1021]

Originally Posted by Ace_of_Sevens

That's because most of 28 Days Later was shot on a digital video camera at standard definition. The ending was 35 mm and there will be a huge difference there.

I seem to remember reading something about the original Star Trek series being filmed as opposed to video taping the ST-TNG series and the source material for ST-TNG not being high enough quality to merit an HD release as ST-TOS did. If true, then the original source MUST be considered in whether or not an upconverted DVD can look as good as a BluRay (or HD-DVD) disc. Like an earlier poster said, upconverting can't add information that isn't there, but in the same manner, BluRay can't create information that isn't there, either, in the case of the original material being shot on video tape.