Originally posted by: boris
But it´s not as bad as the devilish film grain reduction of the shitty 2004SE´s, is it? *LOL*
However, ordering from Region 4 (NZ/Aus) may actually be slightly cheaper then buying off the shelf in the USA, as our market has lower prices. But then again, price is the least important thing when talking about quality.
Originally posted by: seventiesfilmnut
The PAL version will be better, even if it has been resized. It's not the fact of the resolution, but the fact of the interlacing methods. Interlaced PAL will always look better then Interlaced NTSC
Please define "interlacing methods" for me. Both systems use the same interlacing methods, just with a different framerate (50 half frames vs 60 half frames).
What you probably mean is 3:2 pulldown. Now, go quickly check wikipedia to present us your knowledge here.
, also the PAL colour pallet is more accurate (and to be honest, it's been up-scaled from NTSC resolution, not from "NTSC").
Argh.... Please define "PAL colour pallet" for me, and explain, how PAL can have more colours than NTSC. Could be quite entertaining.
Also, a version up-scaled from SD to HD will look better, if it's been passed through a really good up-scalier.
Almost perfect repetition of what other forum members said here, except the spelling mistakes....
So I would have to say PAL. From the screenshots posted, the PAL picture extends all the way to both sides, whereas the NTSC one doesn't.
Ummm, huh? DO we have to understand that?
For me this is evidence and a give-away of scaling - but it's good news that they scaled it to the full width. The NTSC image may well be a bit sharper in certain scenes... but it won't look as good as a PAL image.
Again: what evidence? blablablablabla.....
Also, when played on a CRT telle, NTSC will have more visible scan-lines then PAL.
LOL! boris, you are truly an unicum here!
The first time I heard that NTSC has actually MORE visible scanlines than PAL....
This may not bother some, it doesn't both me ... but others are bothered by it - especially those who own widescreen CRT Telle's.
The PAL version will be better, even if it has been resized. It's not the fact of the resolution, but the fact of the interlacing methods. Interlaced PAL will always look better then Interlaced NTSC
Please define "interlacing methods" for me. Both systems use the same interlacing methods, just with a different framerate (50 half frames vs 60 half frames).
What you probably mean is 3:2 pulldown. Now, go quickly check wikipedia to present us your knowledge here.
, also the PAL colour pallet is more accurate (and to be honest, it's been up-scaled from NTSC resolution, not from "NTSC").
Argh.... Please define "PAL colour pallet" for me, and explain, how PAL can have more colours than NTSC. Could be quite entertaining.
Also, a version up-scaled from SD to HD will look better, if it's been passed through a really good up-scalier.
Almost perfect repetition of what other forum members said here, except the spelling mistakes....
So I would have to say PAL. From the screenshots posted, the PAL picture extends all the way to both sides, whereas the NTSC one doesn't.
Ummm, huh? DO we have to understand that?
For me this is evidence and a give-away of scaling - but it's good news that they scaled it to the full width. The NTSC image may well be a bit sharper in certain scenes... but it won't look as good as a PAL image.
Again: what evidence? blablablablabla.....
Also, when played on a CRT telle, NTSC will have more visible scan-lines then PAL.
LOL! boris, you are truly an unicum here!
The first time I heard that NTSC has actually MORE visible scanlines than PAL....This may not bother some, it doesn't both me ... but others are bothered by it - especially those who own widescreen CRT Telle's.
But it´s not as bad as the devilish film grain reduction of the shitty 2004SE´s, is it? *LOL*
However, ordering from Region 4 (NZ/Aus) may actually be slightly cheaper then buying off the shelf in the USA, as our market has lower prices. But then again, price is the least important thing when talking about quality.
Then, this DVD set would have absolutely lost against nearly every DVD release of a major motion picture during the past 6 years.