Laserdisc
Oct 31, 2003 at 2:37 PM Post #16 of 42
Quote:

. I would have to agree with the consensus that says that picture quality does not approach DVD. It doesn't...


the sound quality on laser disc is supposedly better. I've never done a shoot-out myself to verify though.
 
Oct 31, 2003 at 2:51 PM Post #17 of 42
I got the Pioneer CLD-M450 on eBay for $45 in practically unused condition with the original shipping box. It also has a CD carousel.

As Sol and others have indicated, it's great having a LD player for the stuff that is not on DVD....like the SW trilogy, Millenium and some music videos too. I bought it just so I could play the HBO Bruce Springsteen Unplugged LD which is not available on DVD. The $45 was worth it to be able to play the few LDs I own...I also used it as a CD source when I was between Cd players.

John
 
Oct 31, 2003 at 9:46 PM Post #18 of 42
Ok, but is the stuff that's on LD and not on DVD now forever lost? I mean, won't they put it out on DVD eventually? I would hope so but maybe not. I have quite a few LDs (some are music ones that I really like) and a player with a tempermental motor. I'm not sure if it's worth the money to try to fix or find another player.
 
Oct 31, 2003 at 9:52 PM Post #19 of 42
There isn't a DVD version of the original Akira in Region 1 as far as I'm concerned, and SW: Trilogy isn't avaliable on DVD (or at least only the SE is, but I've never seen that).

I think LD is worth it, and it's also a cool device that nobody knows about, so it's less likely to be stolen.
 
Oct 31, 2003 at 10:02 PM Post #20 of 42
Regarding the original Star Wars trilogy, it's not currently available in any form on DVD. At least not officially
biggrin.gif
. And when it is released on DVD, according to LucasFilms, the SW trilogy will be the SE version because those are the versions that George Lucas envisioned when he came up with Star Wars. So the remastered "original" Star Wars will only be available on LD.
 
Nov 1, 2003 at 10:07 AM Post #21 of 42
Quote:

Originally posted by Sol_Zhen
No, no, no.

Laserdisc does not and can not have better video quality compared to DVD. It’s better than VHS, but does not compare with DVD at all.


I completely disagree. I much prefer the video of laserdisc to DVD. The artifacting from DVD compression I just find way too distracting, whereas the "analog noise" of laserdisc is perfectly tolerable.

Sure if it was an entirely digital movie like Bug's Life or Toy Story, the DVD will be better, but those are the exception, not the rule.

MHO.
 
Nov 1, 2003 at 10:10 AM Post #22 of 42
Quote:

Originally posted by Ohoen
Ok, but is the stuff that's on LD and not on DVD now forever lost? I mean, won't they put it out on DVD eventually? I would hope so but maybe not. I have quite a few LDs (some are music ones that I really like) and a player with a tempermental motor. I'm not sure if it's worth the money to try to fix or find another player.


Some of those discs won't necessarily ever be released on DVD, you should fix it or something.

One could transfer the video to a computer and then record it to DVD -- but use as little compression as possible! (MHO.) You might end up being disappointed later.

I have quite a few records that were never released on CD; older CD's that were released for a time, and then discontinued (due to lack of interest); and stuff. It has to do with popularity.
 
Nov 1, 2003 at 2:07 PM Post #23 of 42
What size TV are you watching on dusty chalk?

Thats pretty much all that matters. Someone watching a small tv has a near irrelevant opinion in this. On my 65 inch widescreen, I see all. I have a collection over 200-250 dvds all burned. Some are re-encoded using tmpgenc compression, some didnt need to be. Picture quality I would rate as "good", hdtv being "excellent". I hooked a friends laser disc up to my tv about a year ago and my opinion on the picture was "medium". Clearly not dvd quality.

Although, you are correct in that there are many annoying artificats tied to dvd compression. And I guess it could be a matter of personal prefence... But I think overall, if tested properly on a big enough screen, dvd will win.
 
Nov 2, 2003 at 12:27 AM Post #25 of 42
Quote:

Originally posted by Dusty Chalk
I completely disagree. I much prefer the video of laserdisc to DVD. The artifacting from DVD compression I just find way too distracting, whereas the "analog noise" of laserdisc is perfectly tolerable.


Agreed. I mean, I just hooked up my brand new Denon DVD-2900 (
very_evil_smiley.gif
Yeeeeeees!) to my TV tonight and watched The Matrix... it rocked. RGB, anamorphic reference DVD, excellent player, excellent RGB cable, old but good and well tuned 16:9 Philips... it was stricktly amazing.
I have seen so many bad DVDs though (compare the first battle in Starship Troopers Laserdisc VS. DVD and you'll know what I mean, that night's sky looks as if is was reduced to about 16 colors on DVD
frown.gif
) that I would always prefer a Laserdisc over DVD for old releases, if said DVD has not seen significant remastering. Compression artefacts annoy me to no end. I hope I can pick up one of the really high-end Pioneer LD-units for cheap one day.
On a less objective level I also prefer Laserdisc as a medium in itself, despite its inconveniences. The packing, the big, heavy discs, the noise when they get spun up... *drool*
 
Nov 2, 2003 at 3:51 AM Post #26 of 42
Quote:

Originally posted by Nefarion
What size TV are you watching on dusty chalk?


I think it's like a 26" Sony Wega. I'll check when I go home. Quote:

Thats pretty much all that matters.


I disagree. Quote:

Someone watching a small tv has a near irrelevant opinion in this.


Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Quote:

I hooked a friends laser disc up to my tv about a year ago and my opinion on the picture was "medium". Clearly not dvd quality.


What laserdiscs did you watch? Like DVD, I think mastering is important. Quote:

Although, you are correct in that there are many annoying artificats tied to dvd compression.


Thanks. Quote:

And I guess it could be a matter of personal prefence...


Exactly. And if I may expand, it's not a matter of personal preference whether these artifacts are there or not, but it's a matter of personal preference as to how much importance to attribute to it. I attribute a lot. Someone else who watches downloaded videos all the time and plays computer games who might be used to it (or maybe just watches a lot of DVD, or maybe just doesn't care) would attribute significantly less importance to it.

It's like the old "analog vs. digital" debate, all over again.

It also might depend on your source material. Clearly, if all of your DVD's are Superbit, then DVD might win. But I have all three laserdiscs of Blade Runner, and any one of them trump the DVD. Quote:

But I think overall, if tested properly on a big enough screen, dvd will win.


I disagree. You might have a majority, but that doesn't mean it's better on some sort of absolute scale. I still think it reduces to personal preferences.
 
Nov 2, 2003 at 4:12 AM Post #28 of 42
My LD of "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" is superior to my dvd version. The funny thing is that the dvd is supposed to be a wide screen version. However when I compared the two side by side the full screen LD shows about the same or more of the horizontal width. The vertical picture of the LD is always more of the picture. Whoever put the dvd version together got really lazy. When I watch the dvd version it bothers me knowing that the top and bottom have been severely chopped off.
280smile.gif
 
Nov 2, 2003 at 4:17 AM Post #29 of 42
Quote:

Originally posted by D-EJ915
the director's cut sucks


You are not the only person to believe that, although we are in the minority.

[size=xx-small]Well, maybe "sucks" is too strong a word. I "prefer" the original theatrical release also. One time when corporate override over the artistic belief of the director was correct, IMHO. But that's the exception, not the rule...[/size]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top