....but you sure can't fool the eye!

These 'tie' pics were taken from the (paused) animation 'Up' Blu-ray Disk*
projected onto a 120 inch screen from a via a 1080p digital projector

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...%20Tie%201.jpg

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...%20Tie%202.jpg

They are not full screen height - probably about 3 feet high in real terms,
but represent a blindidng *night and day* improvement over even the very
best DVD quality at this image size. Smaller displays will produce less
impressive compared results, of course and truly ****ty small displays may
even mask the differences completely....

The pix are nothing fancy - quick, handheld 'manual everything' grabs from a
Nikon digital SLR with a Zeiss Planar 1.4/50mm MF lens; settings as follows:

White Balance - AUTO
ISO - 800
Shutter - 1/60 sec (so ignore colour banding on the shirt)
Aperture - halfway click between f4 and f5.6

Anyone mired in obsolete 'pre HD' technology and wanting to climb aboard
without being taken to the cleaners (all at once) might want to know that a
'scart to HDMI converter' search will yield 238,000 results.

No idea how they work or how effective, though....


*What else? :-)

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Anyone mired in obsolete 'pre HD' technology and wanting to climb aboard
without being taken to the cleaners (all at once) might want to know
that a 'scart to HDMI converter' search will yield 238,000 results

You have a SCART which does HD?

--
*What am I? Flypaper for freaks!?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Anyone mired in obsolete 'pre HD' technology and wanting to climb aboard
without being taken to the cleaners (all at once) might want to know
that a 'scart to HDMI converter' search will yield 238,000 results

You have a SCART which does HD?


Like a lot of people on various AV forums it appears, you are confusing 'HD
quality' with 'HDMI' digital-only connectors.

A 'scart to HDMI converter' is merely an 'analogue to digital' or 'digital
to analogue' (?) converter/connector which (I believe) allows playback of a
Blu-ray disk on a BD player, which never have scart connectors AFAIA and
display the results on a 'non HDMI' telly via its scart connection.

They are not cheap; anyone toying with the idea would do well to
*thoroughly* check what I have said for themselves - I am *informed* it will
work BDP to TV and that the picture quality will be at least no worse and
may indeed be better than a DVD player connected via scart, but I have no
experience of this myself.

My own connections for movies (to digital projectors only) are HDMI all the
way through - for video and audio on one setup; video only on the other
setup with the audio connected two channel stereo only via the phono jacks.




--
*What am I? Flypaper for freaks!?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:

Anyone mired in obsolete 'pre HD' technology and wanting to climb aboard
without being taken to the cleaners (all at once) might want to know
that a 'scart to HDMI converter' search will yield 238,000 results

You have a SCART which does HD?


There are loads of such little boxes around, and very useful they are too.
But what. of course, they cannot do is magically turn SD video into HD.

Quite why Keith thinks it's anything to do with "climbing aboard" is
anybody's guess.

David.

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:

Anyone mired in obsolete 'pre HD' technology and wanting to climb
aboard without being taken to the cleaners (all at once) might want
to know that a 'scart to HDMI converter' search will yield 238,000
results

You have a SCART which does HD?


There are loads of such little boxes around, and very useful they are
too. But what. of course, they cannot do is magically turn SD video
into HD.

Indeed. And my experience of boxes that change 'broadcast' RGB into VGA
that a computer monitor will work with ain't encouraging.

Quite why Keith thinks it's anything to do with "climbing aboard" is
anybody's guess.

Or what it's got to do with audio.

But since Kitty hates all things digital so much I thought he'd have been
running 35mm in his 'home cinema'.

David.

--
*Time is the best teacher; unfortunately it kills all its students.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
David Looser wrote:

There are loads of such little boxes around, and very useful they are
too. But what. of course, they cannot do is magically turn SD video
into HD.

Indeed. And my experience of boxes that change 'broadcast' RGB into VGA
that a computer monitor will work with ain't encouraging.

Quite why Keith thinks it's anything to do with "climbing aboard" is
anybody's guess.

Or what it's got to do with audio.

He has this problem with understanding the difference between HD video and
so-called "HD" audio.

But since Kitty hates all things digital so much I thought he'd have been
running 35mm in his 'home cinema'.

I know people who do use 35mm in their home cinemas. The problem is getting
hold of films to show!

David.

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
David Looser wrote:

There are loads of such little boxes around, and very useful they are
too. But what. of course, they cannot do is magically turn SD video
into HD.

Indeed. And my experience of boxes that change 'broadcast' RGB into VGA
that a computer monitor will work with ain't encouraging.

Quite why Keith thinks it's anything to do with "climbing aboard" is
anybody's guess.

Or what it's got to do with audio.

He has this problem with understanding the difference between HD video and
so-called "HD" audio.

But since Kitty hates all things digital so much I thought he'd have been
running 35mm in his 'home cinema'.

I know people who do use 35mm in their home cinemas. The problem is
getting hold of films to show!

The usual dodge has been to know someone on the inside at a movie theatre.

I knew of someone who had a complete 35 mm cinema with dolby and arc lamp in
their basement. They had what we in the US call "Family connections".

This is exactly the sort of thing that producers are trying to stamp out
with digital. The video is delivered by statellite or over the web, and
only played from a secure server to secure projection devices over secured
links. The server can be accessed over the web and will give usage
information.

"Bob Latham" wrote

I would have thought he meant that people thinking they would like to move
to Bluray have the double expense of buying not only a player but a TV or
display as well. I think he's is suggesting that people could do this in
two stages by using a convertor to their old TV. It seems perfectly
reasonable to me to describe joining the BD users as 'climbing on board'.

A SCART to HDMI converter would allow an SD source to be fed to an "HD Ready
TV", not the other way about. In any case all BD players have
standard-definition video outputs. Come to that all "HD Ready" TVs will also
accept SD inputs, so converters aren't necessary either way.

What troubles me is that what I've just written is very obvious indeed,

Not as obvious as you seemed to think. A converter will not provide HD
results even if one of the units connected to it is HD capable. Neither are
they necessary even if you wanted to do a staged upgrade. Anyway BD players
are so cheap these days I can't see why anyone upgrading their TV would
consider adding a BD player as a "double expense".

so
why did you guys sound puzzled. Either I've missed something which is well
possible or you lot are being deliberately anti Keith. Which would be very
disappointing. I hate these personal wars on this newsgroup. can't we
disagree with someone without falling out and calling each other names
like children.

Keith has become uttterely boring on the subject of HD. This isn't a
home-cinema newsgroup, and the video aspects of BD etc. are off-topic. Keith
knows all this but he'll still start a thread such as this one as he enjoys
trolling. Yes I know we should have simply ignored him rather than react to
his little games.

David.

In article ,
Bob Latham wrote:
I only glanced at a series of resent posts so i may have it wrong but was
he not trying to say that HD audio may be hard to prove worthwhile but HD
video was easy? I thought that was the gist anyway.

It's such an obvious statement that it hardly need making. Good audio gets
quite close to the 'performance' of the ears and has done for many a year.
Video not.

--
*Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Bob Latham" wrote in message
...
In article ,
David Looser wrote:
"Bob Latham" wrote

A SCART to HDMI converter would allow an SD source to be fed to an "HD
Ready TV", not the other way about.

Fair comment, I've not looked.

In any case all BD players have standard-definition video outputs.

They never have scart RGB which is what people would need to feed an SD
analogue TV and only a few have S-Video. You would therefore be stuck with
composite video CVBS which coming from a BD player is a bit ironic.
Component inputs in the UK were very rare on SD sets in fact I know of
none.

Come to that all "HD Ready" TVs will also accept SD inputs, so
converters aren't necessary either way.

That is true but doesn't help someone move into bluray.

What troubles me is that what I've just written is very obvious indeed,

Not as obvious as you seemed to think. A converter will not provide HD
results even if one of the units connected to it is HD capable.

You don't say. Sorry, but that is obvious.

Neither are they necessary even if you wanted to do a staged upgrade.

Possibly true.

Anyway BD players are so cheap these days I can't see why anyone
upgrading their TV would consider adding a BD player as a "double
expense".

Well cheap ones are cheap as in anything.

Keith has become uttterely boring on the subject of HD. This isn't a
home-cinema newsgroup, and the video aspects of BD etc. are off-topic.
Keith knows all this but he'll still start a thread such as this one as
he enjoys trolling. Yes I know we should have simply ignored him rather
than react to his little games.

Or politely remind him this is not a video group but presumably it does
cover 5.1 etc..

I only glanced at a series of resent posts so i may have it wrong but was
he not trying to say that HD audio may be hard to prove worthwhile but HD
video was easy? I thought that was the gist anyway.


You are perfectly correct, but I have just posted a reply to you which
mentions why I brought the subject up.

Ignore all the 'off topic' squealing, Bob - every newsgroup on Usenet goes
on and off topic as its subscribers see fit and many a long and interesting
thread develops. What we have here in ukra is one or two (mostly just *one*
asitappens) people who are terrified that subject matter will stray from the
narrow little path into territory that they do not have a *lifetime's work
experience* of - as Mr Looser's hopeless remarks above clearly indicate....