mverta: There is a lot of evidence for deliberate image-quality reduction in the 2006 DVD. It's not a fact; it's an informed opinion.
mverta: In any case, the degradation of the imagery isn't an opinion, it's a quantifiable fact.
Nice flip-flop there. Which is it?
These are two different statements, Boris. If we take the second statement first: "The image has less quality". THe other statement says "there is evidence the loss of quality is deliberate"
The 2006 DVDs are NOT encoded from a higher resolution source than a laserdisc.
But Mike, Lowry Digital was told to do the highest level of grain removal for the 2004 SE.
mverta: In any case, the degradation of the imagery isn't an opinion, it's a quantifiable fact.
Nice flip-flop there. Which is it?
These are two different statements, Boris. If we take the second statement first: "The image has less quality". THe other statement says "there is evidence the loss of quality is deliberate"
More grain is revealed simply because the DVD's are encoded from a higher resolution source than a laserdisc.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there.
The 2006 DVDs are NOT encoded from a higher resolution source than a laserdisc.
But Mike, Lowry Digital was told to do the highest level of grain removal for the 2004 SE.
But this is not talking about the 2004 SEs.