Originally posted by: bongloads
Knock it all you want, but the fact of the matter is : YOU AREN"T GETTING ANYTHING BETTER.
We all know that LD xfers are ungodly soft and have terrible colour balance, so even if the LD fact sites are correct about it being a 2:35 originally - it matters none. You just can't compete with 14.25mbps/avg. video, period.
And being that the capture contains only one audio stream, no menu, and no extras, a dvd conversion will look simply spectacular. The entire capture will fit on a DL dvd with only ~8% bitrate degradation (given the proper encode). Scoff and whine all you want, but some of us who own anything nicer than a 1024x768 CRT and a 1960's-technology tube television will sit back and enjoy this classic in all it's HD glory. Is your hd/sdtv 2:35:1? I didn't think so
Knock it all you want, but the fact of the matter is : YOU AREN"T GETTING ANYTHING BETTER.
We all know that LD xfers are ungodly soft and have terrible colour balance, so even if the LD fact sites are correct about it being a 2:35 originally - it matters none. You just can't compete with 14.25mbps/avg. video, period.
And being that the capture contains only one audio stream, no menu, and no extras, a dvd conversion will look simply spectacular. The entire capture will fit on a DL dvd with only ~8% bitrate degradation (given the proper encode). Scoff and whine all you want, but some of us who own anything nicer than a 1024x768 CRT and a 1960's-technology tube television will sit back and enjoy this classic in all it's HD glory. Is your hd/sdtv 2:35:1? I didn't think so
I have a proper 2.35:1 version of it already, thanks. I'll stick with the PROPER aspect ratio. And no, it's not Super 35.
And I have an HDTV...and an HD DVD player.
Let's knock off the childish comparisons of systems.