Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

High Definition Television

  • 09-01-2012 10:25PM
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭


    I was in a mate's house over the Christmas & he was boasting about his new HD Sky box and how brilliant everything looked on it. I was staying the night so ended up watching quite a bit of HD TV... to me, it looked bloody awful - admittedly, the football looked good, but it made everything look hyper-real and over digitalised. It even made The Bourne Identity look like a dodgy made for TV movie.

    But the worst was an ad I saw for new HD versions of classic 60s movies... here, you had glorious films that were painstakingly shot on real film absolutely destroyed by some idiot who thought that digitising some of the most beautiful photography in cinematic history was a good idea.

    I nearly put my foot through the high definition screen and by the time I went to bed, my head hurt & my heart had sunk... all I wanted to know was why... why? Why?!?!!!

    So, what's your opinion on HD, or have you even seen any HD TV yet? I have and the future looks grim.

    HD TV 254 votes

    Seen it & love it
    0% 0 votes
    Seen it & hate it
    87% 221 votes
    Never seen it
    6% 16 votes
    What?
    6% 17 votes


«13456

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,029 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    I think it's pretty cool myself.

    It's fantastic for nature programs.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,456 ✭✭✭✭Creamy Goodness




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 433 ✭✭Rocky_Dennis


    I'm still watching bog 1, 2, 3 and 4, never mind a HD TV. My television works fine and dandy so I wouldn't waste money on a TV that will probably be half the price next year.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,651 ✭✭✭✭El Weirdo


    It's great. Especially if you have a big screen - you can really see the difference.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    I think it's pretty cool myself.

    It's fantastic for nature programs.

    I'd say it'd work well for the likes of those, but most of the stuff I saw looked worse than standard definition. I suppose it'd be cool enough if you could switch from one to the other with the remote.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭The King of Moo


    I think it's pretty cool myself.

    It's fantastic for nature programs.

    This for me is the best thing about it.

    Watching films I've seen before in standard definition just feels weird though. Everyone seems to move too fast in some indefinable way, and it looks too clean.
    It's not too bad with new films though.

    The worst thing about HD for me though, is how used to it you get. Now it looks normal to me, and standard definition tv just looks like a muddy mess.
    Though a bigger TV would help.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,458 ✭✭✭senorwipesalot


    I added it to my sky package and cancelled it the next day.
    The difference in picture quality didnt justify another 15 euro pm.
    Cant see this 3D load of cobblers taking off either.
    Although the PS3 is excellent on hdtv.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 871 ✭✭✭bertie4evr



    But the worst was an ad I saw for new HD versions of classic 60s movies... here, you had glorious films that were painstakingly shot on real film absolutely destroyed by some idiot who thought that digitising some of the most beautiful photography in cinematic history was a good idea.

    Do you watch all your films with a projector?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,818 ✭✭✭Minstrel27


    But the worst was an ad I saw for new HD versions of classic 60s movies... here, you had glorious films that were painstakingly shot on real film absolutely destroyed by some idiot who thought that digitising some of the most beautiful photography in cinematic history was a good idea.


    What's wrong with older films being shown in 1080p? I have Ben Hur on Blu-Ray and it looks and sounds phenomenol.

    What classic 60's movies did you watch?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    Boobs like great on it though.

    Tbf


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,808 ✭✭✭FatherLen


    i love hd.


    there i said it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    I heard they've got the internet on computers now.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,863 ✭✭✭✭crosstownk


    HDTV is excellent. Sky HD, Apple TV, PS3 - all in HD. HD makes Battlefield 3 so much better!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,626 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    It adds a whole new level to porn. You can see the sperm swimming atop the girl's face after he blows his load.

    The David Attenborough commentary on the Blu-Ray brings it all to life.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    I was in a mate's house over the Christmas & he was boasting about his new HD Sky box and how brilliant everything looked on it. I was staying the night so ended up watching quite a bit of HD TV... to me, it looked bloody awful - admittedly, the football looked good, but it made everything look hyper-real and over digitalised. It even made The Bourne Identity look like a dodgy made for TV movie.

    But the worst was an ad I saw for new HD versions of classic 60s movies... here, you had glorious films that were painstakingly shot on real film absolutely destroyed by some idiot who thought that digitising some of the most beautiful photography in cinematic history was a good idea.

    I nearly put my foot through the high definition screen and by the time I went to bed, my head hurt & my heart had sunk... all I wanted to know was why... why? Why?!?!!!

    So, what's your opinion on HD, or have you even seen any HD TV yet? I have and the future looks grim.

    movies shot in the 60's were shot on much, much higher resolution than what a 1080p tv can show you, a 70mm film like Lawrence of Arabia would have a 3 or 4k resolution iirc as opposed to 1080p. older movies can look absolutely phenomenal in HD, The Searchers is one of the best looking blu rays you can get, same as Alien, puts modern movies to shame.

    did your friend have it on factory settings? hate that, fake everything turned on, its like when you go into Harvey Normans and they have everything on default, the tv would sell itself if you optimised it.

    the searchers screenshot (not even in 1080p): http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=231&position=4


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,581 ✭✭✭✭TheZohanS


    HDTV + WD TV Live + HD movie downloads....(arrrrr me mateys) look really good in HD, I downloaded a 50GB HD file of Avatar, it's amazing.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    It adds a whole new level to porn. You can see the sperm swimming atop the girl's face after he blows his load.

    The David Attenborough commentary on the Blu-Ray brings it all to life.


    Makes him sound real camp in this documentary though.





  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 871 ✭✭✭bertie4evr


    Because they were shot on 35mm film, which cinematically is far more aesthetically pleasing than digital.

    :confused: Surely you've watched DVD's of those films or seen them on TV.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    krudler wrote: »
    movies shot in the 60's were shot on much, much higher resolution than what a 1080p tv can show you, a 70mm film like Lawrence of Arabia would have a 3 or 4k resolution iirc as opposed to 1080p. older movies can look absolutely phenomenal in HD, The Searchers is one of the best looking blu rays you can get, same as Alien, puts modern movies to shame.

    did your friend have it on factory settings? hate that, fake everything turned on, its like when you go into Harvey Normans and they have everything on default, the tv would sell itself if you optimised it.

    the searchers screenshot (not even in 1080p): http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=231&position=4

    That screenshot looks amazing. The dipstick probably did have it on Harvey Norman settings.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    I do prefer the look of actual film to digital myself, it has a depth that digital doesnt imo, which looks very flat, works well for some movies but I much prefer how older films look. something like Blade Runner will look amazing forever, because its so well shot, whereas the cgi laden digital movies being made now wont.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 629 ✭✭✭Sierra 117


    I love HD.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    That screenshot looks amazing. The dipstick probably did have it on Harvey Norman settings.

    if he has any Pixar movies they usually come with a THX optimiser, its a series of audio and visual test cards to make sure the picture is just right, like adjusting the contrast so you cant see particular parts of an image etc, its worth running one to get everything the way it should be, and tweaking it for personal preference.
    factory settings on tv are sh1te, and I cant stand those fake blur free image things, it makes every single frame look overdone and digital, thats probably why the Bourne movie looked crap a they have good transfers on blu-ray, movies are meant to have motion blur, when they mask it over it looks too artificial, loads of tvs have these fake blur removing effects, they look horrible though as your eye can tell straight away when something doesnt move right.

    look at Blade Runner and Alien, they look staggeringly good for movies made in the late 70s and early 80s:

    http://images.static-bluray.com/reviews/130_5_large.jpg

    http://images2.static-bluray.com/reviews/130_4_large.jpg

    http://images.static-bluray.com/reviews/3441_1_large.jpg

    http://images4.static-bluray.com/reviews/3441_6_large.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,758 ✭✭✭✭TeddyTedson


    HDTV was only really introduced because with the introduction of wide screen "flat TVs", larger and larger screens began to hit the market, so a higher resolution was needed to keep the quality just as good as what we're used to on the old standard 14" screen.
    Every station will eventually be broadcasting in 720p as a minimum so you'll get used to it.
    3D though, what a gimmick. I don't think that will ever take off. Even though they're developing televisions that can display 3D without the need for glasses I just don't see them catching on.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    HDTV was only really introduced because with the introduction of wide screen "flat TVs", larger and larger screens began to hit the market, so a higher resolution was needed to keep the quality just as good as what we're used to on the old standard 14" screen.
    Every station will eventually be broadcasting in 720p as a minimum so you'll get used to it.
    3D though, what a gimmick. I don't think that will ever take off. Even though they're developing televisions that can display 3D without the need for glasses I just don't see them catching on.

    3D has its place, Avatar looked incredible, but it needs to be shot in 3D, not altered post production like Clash of The Titans or most movies coming out as 3D rereleases. hell one of the best 3D movies was Jackass, as it was shot that way and used the format brilliantly, its a gimmick, but one that got a LOT of people going back to the cinema for Avatar, as it was the only way to see it like it was intended. the movie itself may be have been average at best, but it look fcuking jaw dropping.

    IMAX though, thats something we need in this country, I'm going to London for The Dark Knight Rises in IMAX, and it'll be worth it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    3D though, what a gimmick. I don't think that will ever take off. Even though they're developing televisions that can display 3D without the need for glasses I just don't see them catching on.

    Every 15 years or so, they wheel out some new crappy version of 3D & it inevitably never works beyond the gimmick factor. Personally, it gives me a headache.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭we'llallhavetea_old


    haven't even seen anything in hd :o
    tis a sheltered life i lead begorra!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,650 ✭✭✭✭minidazzler


    It takes getting used to.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Have a large HD LED (Even sharper!) TV and I have to say I love it.

    Watching films on it - especially ones involving nature is unreal.
    Add to that, watching concerts or shows is fantastic. As mine has also got 5.1 surround sound, the experience is even better.
    'Apocalypse Now' in HD and 5.1 sound is an experience to live through. Simply fantastic.
    Same goes for the likes of Lord Of The Rings and Saving Private Ryan, just to name two more.

    I have Sky but do not pay for their HD service - I feel its a rip-off.

    I also have a computer attached to my large HD screen.
    Playing games on that is just as excellent.


    The quality of what you see as HD, relies on the make of the TV manufacturer's also.
    I have seen poor HD on crappy makes of TV also.
    The "HD Ready" one's are just a joke a lot of the time!

    Also VERY important is the quality of your HDMI cabling!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,835 ✭✭✭✭cloud493


    HD tv is brilliant. Its really got me into games, like console gaming, since the TV I used to play was so small I couldn't be bothered most of the time, and stuff looks so amazing. Its an entirely new experience.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,331 ✭✭✭RichieC


    seen it and I'm like... yea... grand.

    hardly blew my socks off.


Advertisement
Advertisement