Blu ray??? advice

[paul clifton]

Hey



Pretty dumb when it comes to hardware.



Ive been thinking of getting a Blu Ray player for a while but is it really that much better than a standard dvd when it comes to picture and sound? I have a 40 inch Sony tv, 1080 etc etc. The player I looked at was the Sony BDPS360. its got some great reviews but i thought id ask you lot for an honest opinion. Cheapest I can find it is £154 which incd P+P and multi region.



thanks in advance for any input



Shaun

[GoggleboxUK]

I've also got a 40" bravia and watch BluRay discs on my Playstation 3.



I only own 2 BluRay discs because, as far as I can tell, the only BIG difference is when text (such as credits) are on screen.

[Timmy_Lea]

Can't comment on the Sony player but I've got a Panasonic DMP-BD35 Blu-Ray player & it's rather wonderful with my 32” Panasonic TX-32LZD85. I wasn't totally sold on the Blu-Ray thing but am now a convert. You do have to do a bit of research before buying discs however as they can vary in quality. The Dark Knight looks amazing, in particular the scenes filmed with IMAX cameras. Both The Italian Job & Zulu are also great, the image belying the films ages. Same goes for 2001.

[paul clifton]

cheers for the input guys. Appreciated

[hhhhancock]

I was also considering buying a Blu Ray player but I have a 37" Samsung which is only 720p. Is it worth getting a BR player and is 1080i in any way comparable to a non interlaced (progressive) picture?

[paul clifton]

I must admit when I went from my 720 Sony tv to my 1080, I noticed a big improvement

[GoggleboxUK]

name='paul clifton']I must admit when I went from my 720 Sony tv to my 1080, I noticed a big improvement

A 33% improvement in fact.

[paul clifton]

very true. Wish i was as good at maths lol.



Think ill bite the bullet and buy this sony Blu Ray player. Mind if i cant see a difference ill be on here moaning lol

[Timmy_Lea]

name='paul clifton']very true. Wish i was as good at maths lol.



Think ill bite the bullet and buy this sony Blu Ray player. Mind if i cant see a difference ill be on here moaning lol

It does look like an excellent player, the only thing against it is that it doesn't appear to support DivX but that's not an essential feature.

[Film Man]

I have the Sony (multi Region) Blue Ray connected to a Digital Projector....once seen you will never change!!! Fantastic.

Film Man.

[hhhhancock]

Wouldn't it be a 50% improvement given that half of 720 is 360 add on to the 720 =1080. Or am I looking it from a laymans point of view?



My question in a nutshell is whether there is any significant difference between a picture on a relatively small (nowadays) 37" TV between 1080 non interlaced (progressive) and a 1080 interlaced signal, given that the TV is 100hz.?

[paul clifton]

name='hhhhancock']Wouldn't it be a 50% improvement given that half of 720 is 360 add on to the 720 =1080. Or am I looking it from a laymans point of view?



My question in a nutshell is whether there is any significant difference between a picture on a relatively small (nowadays) 37" TV between 1080 non interlaced (progressive) and a 1080 interlaced signal, given that the TV is 100hz.?

I went from a 40 inch 720 100hz tv, to a 40 inch 1080 tv and I could see an improvment straight away, especially in my dvds

[autolycus]

But the question was between 1080i and 1080p, i believe.



I would also be interested to know the difference - if any.



I know 1080i is the maximum likely to be broadcasted for the foreseeable future. I have a 36" 1080i (HD Ready) Sony Bravia. Is it worth getting 1080p (full HD) to watch 1080p films on my WDTV media player? From where i sit, it's sometimes not that easy to tell even the difference between a BBC HD programme and the SD equivalent provided that the SD signal has a decent quality (bandwidth).



Mind you, my eyesight isn't quite what it was 20 years ago :-(



Oh, and regarding the percentages, i guess it depends on whether it's a percentage of the old or new figure. A bit like the difference between mark up and gross profit.

[Wolfgang]

name='GoggleboxUK']A 33% improvement in fact.

Would you mind explaining this? Surley 50% more lines (720 to 1080) equates to 50% increase in resolution?? 720 is 33% less resolution than 1080 but 1080 is 50% more resolution than 720, unless I am missing something that is?

[Wolfgang]

name='hhhhancock']

My question in a nutshell is whether there is any significant difference between a picture on a relatively small (nowadays) 37" TV between 1080 non interlaced (progressive) and a 1080 interlaced signal, given that the TV is 100hz.?

I suppose 100Hz 1080i would be equivalent to 50Hz 1080p, because it means each line will be refreshed just as quickly even though it is alternately. Your interlaced set with faster refresh rate I suppose would give smoother transition between frames, although I do not know if there would be any discernable difference to naked eye.

[AdrianTurner]

I recently kitted myself out with a Sony S350 which I play through a 40" B&O TV and the difference in quality in my ordinary DVDs is very obvious, thanks to the integral upscaler. I have found Blu-ray discs to be even better, though I'm disappointed with the limited range of titles so far. How The West Was Won is simply astonishing and worth the price of the new system, and even rubbish like The Dark Knight looks great on Blu-ray. Band of Brothers is also spectacular. I did have Gladiator on pre-order but cancelled it after reading the thorough and virtually unanimous trashing it has received. I think the lesson is to do some research on each individual Blu-ray title as it comes along.

[GoggleboxUK]

name='Wolfgang']Would you mind explaining this? Surley 50% more lines (720 to 1080) equates to 50% increase in resolution?? 720 is 33% less resolution than 1080 but 1080 is 50% more resolution than 720, unless I am missing something that is?

Imagine you are in a cinema that seats 720 people.



If another 360 people came in, everyone would have 33% less space and 3 people would share 2 sears not half the space. For that to happen there would need to be an extra 720 people arrive and every 2 people would share a seat.



So the increased capacity of the cinema is 33% not 50%.



An extra 50% of the original number of people arruved meaning there is now 150% of the original number.



100 divided by 150 = 66%



100% - 66% = 33%



Therefore the difference between 720 and 1080 is a 33% increase

[Steve Crook]

name='GoggleboxUK']Imagine you are in a cinema that seats 720 people.



If another 360 people came in, everyone would have 33% less space and 3 people would share 2 sears not half the space. For that to happen there would need to be an extra 720 people arrive and every 2 people would share a seat.



So the increased capacity of the cinema is 33% not 50%.



An extra 50% of the original number of people arruved meaning there is now 150% of the original number.



100 divided by 150 = 66%



100% - 66% = 33%



Therefore the difference between 720 and 1080 is a 33% increase

A great example of how you shouldn't use mathematics



The answer is that it depends which way you're going

A 33% reduction of 1080 gives you 720

But a 50% increase of 720 gives you 1080



In this case they were going from 720 to 1080 so it's a 50% increase



Steve

[paul clifton]

what started as a simple question, well, its really snowballed hasnt it lol

[Automotivehistorian]

BR players were about £400 when they came out and now the cheapest I have seen is 179. The question arises though as to whether the quality suffers compared with more expensive units? It does seem that computer-animation films are markedly superior when played on BR.