Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Feb 2012 21:59 UTC
Permalink for comment 508783
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-08-18
Sorry I don't really care what other videophiles think. I chose Predator because the filming and colours on a standard definition television (Sony WEGA CRT that I had) looks fantastic. That is what I am comparing it to..
Anyway Predator has a huge amount of greens, the human eye can see more different greens than any other colour. Also the film looks pretty good almost 30 years later.
I also mentioned Apocalypse now, which on blu-ray is fantastically clear.
Anyway I said the quality is "good enough". My DVDs don't look stretched and blocky and I don't have to buy Blu-rays or download a newer Hi-Def copy. That is the whole point of upscaling anyway.
TBH you can argue the toss all day about what looks best it is purely subjective topic.
I think Lost looks like any of TV series on a beach, newer films with all their CGI effects look weird on hi-def television because everything is a little too crisp. I rather watch something like Generation Kill in hi-def than crap like Lost even if the "quality" isn't there.