Saturday, 28 February 2015

Blu-ray Disc Releases : 4K

I just read about 4K blu-ray discs. Am I going to have to replace all my blu-rays with 4K? I am now going to have to replace my portable blu-ray player? I spend money upgrading from VHS to DVD & DVD to blu - ray. Now I have to upgrade all over again! UGH!

Samsung BD-F7500 4K Upscaling 3D Wi-Fi Blu-ray Disc Player

Samsung BD-F7500 4K Upscaling 3D Wi-Fi Blu-ray Disc Player

Person B
Only if you plan to upgrade to a very large 80" or larger 4k Ultra-HDTV, or if you plan to sit right up close to the screen of your smaller than 80" 4k Ultra-HDTV, or if money is no object, which is clearly not the case. Otherwise, don't waste your money; you'll see very little difference.

In my opinion, blu-ray is more than clear enough for the average home cinema viewing experience (60" or smaller screen) to make movies immersive, wash over you, for these old eyes tired of working anyway. Maybe younger kids will have a different opinion.

I'm wondering how many of us really care about pixels when we're trying to enjoy, be entertained

I spend money upgrading from VHS to DVD & DVD to blu - ray. Now I have to upgrade all over again! UGH!

I'm with you. After being around this home entertainment thing for a few decades, buying laserdiscs (I was never into VHS), DVD and now blu-ray, I'm of the hard-learned-through experience opinion that 4k makers are just trying to get us to spend more of our hard-earned money, because there's no profit in 1080p hardware and media for them anymore. I'm of the opinion that this is not about art or technical perfection; it's about money. Unless I happen to win million$ in the Lotto and can thus afford to build a dedicated home cinema room with a front-projector capable of throwing a 10-foot image on the wall, blu-ray is IT for me.

Person A
For future blu-rays that will be only available in 4K, I won't be able to watch them on my portable blu-ray player.

Person B
Maybe in 20 years blu-rays will only be available in 4K, and, provided we're even here, are living and have good eyesight, 4K products will be a lot cheaper at that time, so don't worry about it.

DVDs of every new release are still being made despite blu-ray being on the market since 2006, because there's still a "Wal-Mart" segment of the population that can't afford or doesn't care enough to upgrade to 1080p blu-ray.

As "entertainment on the go" seems to be the increasingly normal movie viewing choice these days, I'm amazed there are even portable 1080p blu-ray players! I would think portable media players would only play DVDs, Ultraviolet, digital copies, highly compressed youtube clips and such, and that the screen of a portable device would be too small to even show the resolution of 1080p! Maybe a tablet would have a big enough screen to see the resolution advantages of blu-ray...?

Person A
There are some portable blu-ray players but not many.

Person C
I wouldn't even expect my current BD player to last much more than 10 years, going

Glasgow's FOREMOST authority Italics = irony. Infer the opposite please.

Person B
Yeah, Marmaduke, my old Sony blu-ray player pooped out too. Thankfully, I was able to get a new Sony blu-ray player for $36 all in, including shipping, from Amazon. It has a much quicker load time and even offers Wi-Fi and ability to access internet downloads. Technology is a beautiful thing, if you can wait for it to get cheap.

Person D
4k is just a bonus for collectors. So no, you don't have to worry about transferring from Blu-Ray to 4k Blu-Ray, that doesn't even make sense. 4k is basically the blu ray equivalent of the "Superbit" DVD craze that promised quality above standard DVDs.

Unless you have a large home theater screen above 80", you wont even be able to notice the difference between Blu Ray and 4k Blu Ray.

Person A
Thanks for letting me know!

Person E
Even those "Superbit" DVDs were crap.. still had blocky picture and half-bitrate DTS at best. I have a couple of old HK kung fu movies in "Ultrabit" editions and the only difference is they max out out the video bitrate, but even with bitrates around 9mbps it still looks fuzzy due to the low pixel count and outdated codec.

Person F
1. Superbit did in fact offer better image quality than releases that used some arbitrarily low bit rate. Granted not every viewer may have noticed the difference, but given the choice, I'd always choose "better".

2. 4K is completely different than using less lossy compression. But once again, just because you might not be able to notice any difference is not a good reason to deny the rest of the world the benefit.

3. That stupid movie theater chart that so many people think is Gospel is not. There's an obvious alternative to using ridiculously large screens: sit closer. Works just fine. Anyone who knows simple math should be able to figure it out.

Person E
Oh believe me i'll be able to see the difference, and I know damn well that once I see the difference it will be glaringly obvious. At least enough to force me to upgrade a fair portion of my collection all over again...

Person B
Sit closer: Sounds easy enough, until you realize HOW MUCH CLOSER you'll have to sit to a 60" screen to reap the benefits of 4k you'd see on an 80+" screen, basically right on top of the screen, impractical for most easy chairs and living environments.

A WALL-SIZED image from a front-projection system in a dedicated home cinema room is really the benchmark to ascertain the visual benefits of 4k. 4k is digital CINEMA and a cinema screen is LARGE.

Person F
4k is digital CINEMA and a cinema screen is LARGE.

That's the thing -- it's not "CINEMA". It's a TV format, an extension of 1080p. TV stuff like raster scanning is still there. And, like it or not, it is being used in places other than movie theaters. On the production end it's very common to see ~24" 4K monitors in use

The future doesn't care who accepts it and who doesn't; it just keeps on coming. Trying to apply old rules to new things is pointless.

Person B
4K may be a FORMAT, but the RESOLUTION of 4K can only be SEEN on a CINEMA-sized screen. 4K stands for 4,000 lines of resolution, almost 4x 1080p. 4K used to be only the domain of 35mm or larger negative film, and yes, now video technology has evolved to 4K as well. 4K resolution commands a large-screen viewing experience.

Those production crews who sit right on top of a 24" 4K monitor may be able to accurately judge color and contrast on that small 4K monitor, but not resolution; they will happily only SEE roughly 720p on that little 4K screen. Maybe 720p is enough to tell if a 4K shot is in focus, but it is not enough to really languish in and enjoy the fine detail of 4K.

If as an end user you want to spend double your money on technology that you won't see, go right ahead. Me, I'll wait until 4K price drops lower than 1080p and then, even though I won't see the benefit of 4K on a small screen, 4K price will no longer be an issue.

It's not rules; it's common sense.

Person F
4K may be a FORMAT, but the RESOLUTION of 4K can only be SEEN on a CINEMA-sized screen.

Prove it.

I'm tired of this bone-headed rumor-mongering. So put up or shut up.

4K used to be only the domain of 35mm or larger negative film...

Please list the different "4K" films sold over the ages. Precisely how do they make the film grain into exactly square shaped pixels?

Those production crews who sit right on top of a 24" 4K monitor may be able to accurately judge color and contrast on that small 4K monitor, but not resolution; they will happily only SEE roughly 720p...

So you're saying in essence that all of the engineers and other industry professionals are idiots and fools, and are just wasting money. Well, show us the math, big boy. Prove to us with actual numbers and equations how your intellect is so superior.

It's not rules; it's common sense.

Oh, so the laws of nature can just be ignored when you apply what you call "common sense", eh? I'm going to make a bold prediction. You're not going to produce any formulae to back up your claims. Why? Because "common sense" makes them irrelevant? No, it's because you're wrong.

Person B
Prove it.

Give me a 24" 4K monitor and give me an 80" or larger 4K monitor and I'll prove it.

Yes, this is tiring. I'm out.
Why Person B is Wrong

Person F
Since I'm here not particularly to win debates, but primarily to share knowledge, I'm going to answer the questions that Person B cannot. Hopefully my thumbnail sketches of how optics work will put to rest a lot of the false myths that are propagating around here.

4K may be a FORMAT, but the RESOLUTION of 4K can only be SEEN on a CINEMA-sized screen.

This is wrong because the human eye doesn't care about linear screen size, it cares about arcs of vision. The well-known "20/20 vision" uses an arbitrary 20 feet of distance, but most people know that they can successfully focus on objects at distances other than 20 feet. The actual measure is 1/1 arc min, and can be applied to eye charts of any size. That's why those machines at the DMV aren't 2 stories tall! It's also why you don't need a gigantic movie screen in order to see higher resolutions.

If 20 feet was truly magical, movie theaters would have only one row of seats, and the arbitrary chart-makers might have a point. But that's not the case, so it's foolhardy to pretend otherwise.

Human vision is a matter of angles, not linear measures. As long as the human eye can focus on a screen, it's a perfectly acceptable size. And, as we have seen with virtual reality goggles and Google Glass, we can use optical lenses to greatly extend the range of what the eye can focus on. In short, screen size simply isn't a factor as long as the pixels are there.

In the past there have been practical reasons for having lots of people sitting in large darkened rooms to watch movies. Most of the reasons had to do with the cost of the projection equipment and media. Well, times change. Now its possible for individuals to own and possess smaller versions of the classical movie theater! This is a Good Thing! Today it's possible to watch movies with exceptional resolution in a much smaller space than before. Tomorrow the average size of this viewing space will be even smaller! We already see young people preferring to watch movies and TV programming on small screens. It's already happening. The reason why is because technology has advanced to put more pixels into ever-smaller areas. "Future is now!"

The truth is that companies like Ortus Technology are selling full 4K (4096 V-line) screens smaller than 10", and smart phone makers like LG and Samsung are producing "Quad HD" (1080 * 2 V-line or 1920 * 2 H-line) screens that come mighty close to the 4K standard. These can't be viewed with full clarity with the naked eye (unless the viewer has 20/16 vision), but with the addition of a simple lens...they can, and

4K stands for 4,000 lines of resolution, almost 4x 1080p.

Actually "4K" stands for 4 *2^10, or 4096 vertical lines of of presentation. (Those of us who have been involved in computing for some time now know what a "K" is.) Notice that I say "presentation", not "resolution". I do that because those lines are not a function of the visual acuity of the beholder; they exist no matter what. The lines don't magically go away if the beholder is blind (willfully or otherwise) to them. Likewise, they don't magically disappear because someone doesn't believe in the technology.

4K used to be only the domain of 35mm or larger negative film...

The truth is that there is no such thing as "4K film", and never was. The 4K construct was thought up in the age of electronic imagery, and is only 12 years old. video technology has evolved to 4K as well.

Actually it's the video technology that carries 4K entirely. The Dalsa Origin, the first 4K camera, is a video camera, not film. All 4K cameras use electronic imagery and digital representation. Film plays no role in 4K.

Those production crews who sit right on top of a 24" 4K monitor may be able to accurately judge color and contrast on that small 4K monitor, but not resolution; they will happily only SEE roughly 720p on that little 4K screen.

This has already been debunked, but suffice it to say that the (mostly Panasonic) 4K monitors used in 4K production actually do show the full 4K resolution when set to do so. And yes, people with normal vision can indeed use the full resolution of these screens to check focus and other detail-oriented tasks. The people who make the movies and TV shows that you watch are not the fools.

It's not rules; it's common sense.

Actually is is the rules. And while popular-but-wrong notions may be common, they certainly are not sensible! In the past, many people have believed that:

1. The earth is flat.
2. The sun and planets revolve around the earth.
3. There are 4 elements: earth, air, water and fire.
4. "Bad air", not germs spread disease.
5. Stomach ulcers are caused

Here's a nice "top 10 list": ng-widely-held-scientific-theories/

Assuming normal vision, if your viewing distance is at least twice the diagonal size of your TV, you will get no benefit from 4K. To see the FULL benefit of 4K, your viewing distance needs to be about equal to the diagonal size of your TV. Anywhere in between and you'll get some benefit from 4K but won't be able to see all the detail.

Screen size doesn't matter

Person B
Assuming normal vision, if your viewing distance is at least twice the diagonal size of your TV, you will get no benefit from 4K. To see the FULL benefit of 4K, your viewing distance needs to be about equal to the diagonal size of your TV. Anywhere in between and you'll get some benefit from 4K but won't be able to see all the detail.

Thank you, dusso, my point exactly. And "assuming normal vision": That's the kicker. How many of us have perfect 20/20 vision near and far? Resolution and screen screen size factors have to be adjusted to our eyes and the practicality of our living space.

Speed: A cinema screen is at least 50 feet diagonal, so it's very easy to see the detail of 4K on a cinema screen, even in the back row of the cinema. On a 24" 4K TV, your eyes will strain to see the same detail, unless you sit 24" away, and is that practical in a home viewing environment?

And let's not forget and take into consideration the issue of ambient light around the screen. In a cinema, once the movie starts, the only light in the cinema is the light coming from the image on the screen; the rest of the cinema is pitch-black. This makes it very easy for your eyes to fixate on just the image on the screen. At home, or in a production environment, chances are it's highly likely that there will be a lot more ambient light around the screen, in the form of table lamps, daylight and/or fluorescent light fixtures. This ambient light makes it much more difficult for the eyes to perceive not only resolution, but color and contrast on the screen. As you said, Speed, yes, these things can be controlled, with add-ons.

I don't care about being right or wrong, Speed, I'm just trying to paint a picture for you so you can (hopefully) see and understand what I'm talking about. I see and understand what you're talking about.

Person F
I think that you and several other people who post here think that "cinema" is magical, and that newer technologies somehow can't match it. I maintain that that sort of magical thinking is wrong, and I can prove it.

Mia Khalifa isn't a Muslim.

Mia Khalifa isn't even from a Muslim family. She is Lebanese American but she was raised Catholic (no longer practicing).

Why muslims was "upset" with her.. In one of her videos filmed by Bang Bros, Mia Khalifa is seen wearing a hijab (part of female Muslim dress) while describing it as "problematic" and "gross". Many took offense to the depiction, insisting that she was purposely putting Islam in a bad light. She has received death threats as a result of the video.

This is not Mia Khalilfa MP3 but MIA (feat. Juicy J) Wiz Khalifa

The following is not Mia Khalilfa MP3 but MIA (feat. Juicy J) Wiz Khalifa, From the Album Cabin Fever 1 & 2 [Explicit] as below songs

1. "Phone Numbers" (featuring Trae Tha Truth & Big Sean)
2. "Cabin Fever"
3. "GangBang" (featuring Big Sean)
4. "Errday" (featuring Juicy J)
5. "Taylor Gang" (featuring Chevy Woods)
6. "Hustlin'"
7. "Middle of You" (featuring Chevy Woods, Nikkiya & MDMA) WillPower, Hollywood HotSauce (co.)
8. "WTF" , Sonny Digital (add.)
9. "Homicide" (featuring Chevy Woods) RMB Justize, DJ Spinz (co.)

Friday, 27 February 2015

Blu-ray is not always better than DVD

Blu-ray is not always better than DVD.. For example, I recently bought Leon Blu-ray (UK edition) and was disappointed the Menu system is wayyy too mundane and uninspired compared to the US DVD version.

Big Hero 6 DVD, Ryan Potter (Actor), Scott Adsit (Actor), Chris Williams Don Hall (Director)

Big Hero 6 DVD, Ryan Potter (Actor), Scott Adsit (Actor), Chris Williams Don Hall (Director)

Yes, because a snazzy menu always trumps six times the pixel count and uncompressed audio.

Menu system? Seriously???

I think you've got your priorities in the wrong place, boy. You're talking about the creativity, or lack thereof, of menu designers, not the technical specs of the blu-ray format itself.

Menu system ok then [[laugh]]

You example means nothing at the end of the day, if you think about it... Would I rather have better picture and sound quality or a better menu presented? Yeah, I appreciate when a good menu is done for a film, but I much prefer the quality of the better audio and picture over a menu I spend seconds looking at.

Sure the movie and pixels trump the menues/easter eggs etc but I partly agree with you OP. I don't get why they make a nice bluray and make the menues feel like a budget dvd from 1999 or drop some of the fun easter eggs that the massive dvd releases had.

The menus for Star Wars, A

And ye the UK Leon release is beyond crap menu-wise. Feels like an intern made it.

Thank you for agreeing with me. I mean, the difference is so stark between the two menus. The US DVD version is animated, and there is a bit where you click on an option, and a sound plays like a bomb and it explodes into more options. The menu is a joy to look at.

I like nice menus because, I don't immediately watch a film, sometimes I need a bit of time to get settled down, to fix myself a drink or whatnot, so I leave it on the menu screen while I am getting ready.

Also, I think the Leon Blu-ray menu is particularly poorly done because to switch between the Director's cut and Theatrical version, it wasn't clearly defined. It just had "Play Movie", how are we suppose to know which version is that? Then I realised the "Theatrical Version" is tucked away elsewhere, and the "Play Movie" version is the Director's cut

Ugh, I hate that gimmicky crap. Simple menus are best.

Depends if you care about Picture and sound quality (I do).

The only way where the DVD can be better, is when all the DVD extras have not been ported over to the Blu-ray. That is damn annoying.

You're not only wrong. You're wrong at the top of your voice

The menus may not look like much, but blu-ray has got it where it counts, kid.

I can't imagine Clerks being any better on BR than it is on DVD.

Don't be so ignorant, it's much better. The details and black levels are far more accurate.

I have a different opinion than you so I'm somehow ignorant?

Blu-ray will always look better unless the studio screws up, I apologize for coming across as rude.

Studios do screw up though.

Some blu rays are not remastered or restored to fully utilise the potential of the format.

Amadeus for instance is apparently DVD type quality picture and sound on blu ray.

It's worth checking reviews before forking out cash for a poor quality release.

It's also worth having a multi-zone player so you can cherry pick the
releases from anywhere in the world.

my player cost £50 and with a firmware upgrade from the internet can play any DVDs or Blu Rays.

Personally I recently bought the German blu ray of Leon because it has 7.1 audio.

Also I bought the US Citizen Kane because it is very good restoration (UK restoration is apparently awful).

Also I bought the Swedish release of the Mission Impossible films because only their Blu Rays have lossless audio (well 1-3 anyway).

I would love to buy the Die Hard films but will wait for them to do a proper remastering job on them first.

With regards to menus, I personally would rather have a basic menu, I don't want to have to wait while excerpts from the film are played - especially if I haven't seen it yet. Probably the best compromise would be that one can skip the animated menu if necessary, it would be great if this could be done also for trailers, and FBI and copyright warnings.

Amadeus for instance is apparently DVD type quality picture and sound on blu ray.

Entirely incorrect.

An example of a bad Blu-ray is Dirty Dancing.

A rare example of a movie that does not need Blu-ray since it was shot in standard definition is 28 Days Later.

28 Days Later may not benefit from BD picture quality but the DTS-HD sound on the BD is a major improvement on the DVD's squashed Dol

I will agree that sometimes studios screw up in the transfer. Mad Max 2-The Road Warrior, for example, in its 2007 blu-ray incarnation (Max on the cover against blueish-orange skies) is a pale, washed-out facsimile of its more rich, colorful 1996 DVD transfer, and the magnificent six-track Dol

Thankfully, Warner got it about as right as it's apparently going to get this time in its 2013 blu-ray remaster (Max on the cover against grayish skies), with more of the rich color palette as well as the omnipotent 360-degree surround gyrocopter flyovers from the DVD reinstated.

Most of Warner's early BD releases were garbage. Lossy sound, 1080i DVD masters deinterlaced to faux-1080p, strangled bitrates and generally just crap.

A simpler menu means more space available for the movie, which means they can use a higher bitrate and make it look better. Or they can use the space for more special features.

Look at Dark Knight, for example. It skips the menu entirely and starts the movie automatically. No trailers or anything either. All it has is the pop-up menu that appears over the movie. This is almost perfect, the only problem is that the lossy audio track is selected

Blu-ray is not always better than DVD.

That's a lie and you know it

I would say that in most cases BR is better than dvd

BD holds more data than DVD, which is better. What that data contains is subjective.

Paula Abdul is Jewish

I'm stunned to read she is Jewish

She might have a black heritage. It's stunned to read in the bio that her parents were both Jewish. Must be her father's Middle Eastern roots that give her that look. Still I'm inclined to think she has some black ancestory.

Anyway Paula Abdul was so sexy on vh1 divas. She's got all these hot women around her (LEONA LEWIS I LOVE YOU!) and she's like the ringleader of hotness! lololololol she should do more hosting shows wearing sexy dresses surrounded by other hot chicks that's cool.

Paula Abdul, Greatest Hits: Straight Up!

Paula Abdul, Greatest Hits: Straight Up! the following songs

1. Forever Your Girl (Single Version)
2. Straight Up (Single Version)
3. Cold Hearted (7"Edit)
4. The Way That You Love Me (Single Version)
5. Knocked Out (Single Version)
6. One Or The Other
7. Opposites Attract (7" Edit)
8. Rush, Rush (7" Edit)
9. The Promise Of A New Day (7" Edit)
10. Blowing Kisses In The Wind (Edit)
11. Vibeology 3:20 $1.29 Buy MP3
12. Bend Time Back 'Round (Single Version)
13. Will You Marry Me
14. My Love Is For Real (Radio Edit)
15. Crazy Cool 4:02 $1.29 Buy MP3
16. If I Were Your Girl
17. Ain't Never Gonna Give You Up (Radio Edit)
18. It's All About Feeling Good

Thursday, 26 February 2015

Downloaded videos

Discussing about Downloaded videos

Is it possible to burn videos bought and downloaded from iTunes onto blank DVDRs so they can be played in DVD players? I was thinking it would be nice to buy a bunch of them and put them onto a disc to to play in a regular DVD player connected to a big screen TV.

I burn music from iTunes and Amazon onto CDRs that work in CD players, but I was thinking music videos might be different.

Movavi Video Converter for Mac 5

Movavi Video Converter for Mac 5

Personal B
I'm not sure about that. It seems counter productive though. Why not just buy physical copies. You can rip the files & play them on anything you want. Along with burning those files onto a disc. Then you can resale the original copy you bought.

Personal A
When has it ever been possible to buy physical copies of music videos? Only place I ever saw them is on MTV and now they are on YouTube. I've only seen a few DVDs of music videos and they only had maybe ten on them at the most, and never the ones I wanted.

I'm not wanting to sell them, I just wanted to make a DVD with a bunch of videos on it that I could watch on a regular TV with a DVD player.

Personal C
What format are they? If it's mp4 or avi you should have no trouble playing them from a DVDR or even just USB since the majority of players now are compatible with those formats. Unless you're using a DVD player from 10 years ago.

Personal A
I don't know what format the videos are. I haven't actually bought any yet. But iTunes is famous for non-compatible formats.

My DVD player is from about 2006. It plays DVDRs I burned myself but will not play Warner Archive Collection DVDRs. They only play on my computer.

Personal C
Usually you can tell what format they are either

Actually, just get a Blu Ray player, even you don't intend to use the format, the player will still provide an increase in DVD image quality as well as the aforementioned multiple file-type compatibility.

Also, if you have trouble with iTunes files on non-Apple devices, usually they can be converted to another format (avi or similar) with a simple freeware program.

Personal A
I've only downloaded music from iTunes. I just burn it onto a disc with iTunes and then rip the contents of the disc to my computer. Then the songs become mp3 files.

A blu ray player would probably be better. If I buy a new DVD player I'd want one with a recorder in it, and there are only two made anymore.

Personal C
Do you mean you're burning files to audio CD then ripping to mp3? That actually causes even further degradation of quality since the mp3 compression algorithm can't discriminate between a regular CD and compressed files burned as CDDA files. A converter program would allow you to retain the full quality of the original file, otherwise a lot of the low-end and high-end frequencies can end up being gutted twice over and results in a file that will sound distorted at higher volumes...

As for recorders, from what i've noticed the price difference between a BD recorder and DVD recorder is very small these days. Plus the blue laser is capable of much more accurate error correction, which means DVDs that may have skipped on a DVD player will play without any problems in most cases.

Personal A
Yes, that's what I was doing. As far as I know my burning program only deals with mp3 and wav files. Nothing sounds distorted but I haven't played anything at that high a volume. I don't have any complaints about how my music sounds, at least not yet. I have been told in the past that wav files are inferior to mp3. mp3 files are larger so it makes sense they would be better quality. I did use an online service to convert some incompatible files to mp3 before burning them, but they were low bandwidth and someone told me they weren't any good.

I didn't even know there were blu ray recorders. I was talking about DVD burners.

Personal C
Huh? PCM WAV files are uncompressed direct copies from CDDA format. Mp3s are busted down to anywhere from 1/10th to 1/3rd of the original file size. A lot of the compression artefacts are difficult for the human ear to detect but they become more obvious at high volumes, or when played on high-grade equipment. The only way a WAV file could be smaller than an mp3 is if it's encoded at some ridiculously low bit rate, which would indeed cause quality loss.

Blu Ray recorders/burners have been out for a while, both for computers and home theater. They're compatible with blank DVD discs too.

Personal A
I checked and the MPEG 4 audio files and wav files are about 2 mega

A few months back Best Buy didn't have any recorders other than the two DVD burners.

Personal C
That's odd, but I guess wav files can be any size. Bitrate varies a lot too, mp3s can be anywhere from 32kbps (sounds like total crap) to 320kbps (sounds good). The wav files you had must have been low bitrate. Loud doesn't always equal good though, the louder a digital audio file sounds the more likely it is to clip and distort, which results in an unpleasant harshness to the sound.

I'm not sure about the US market, it seems to be quite unique. Perhaps try a more specialized store as big chain stores often have a very limited range of electronics.

Personal A
One person some time back was talking a lot about bitrate. He said the files that were anything less than 320 weren't so good. Maybe I should hang on to the MPEG 4 files I still have. I have my music software set to rip at 320, so anything I rip from a CD is 320. Files I've bought from Amazon are 280.

But in regards to music video files, I'll buy a few and see what format they come in. From what you're telling me it would be easier then to determine what procedure I should use to get them onto discs.

Personal C
Yeah, 320 is pretty much the only bitrate worth bothering with.. anything above 192 is okay but still loses a lot of low-end clarity. CDs run at 1.4mbps, quite a significant difference.

I'd say it's a 90% certainly that music videos from iTunes are either mp4 or mov format, both of which will play from a USB or data disc on the newer Sony BD players. If you want to burn them to a DVD-R that will play as a standard DVD disc, there's plenty of freeware converters available that can easily do that too.

Personal A
I'm sure it's easy enough. I'll readily admit that I'm pretty behind in technology.

Personal C
It's a damn minefield for sure, very hard to keep track of everything. Even salesmen in those departments can't keep up. Last time I bought a BD player I told the rep I needed one with on-board HD audio decoding and he had no idea what I was talking about...

Personal E
I'm pretty close to say no of the possibilities of turning iTunes videos in to DVD or even Blu-ray if its in HD.
The reason is that most places like iTunes puts DRM inside their videos, there

Also one reason why the so called WEB-DL releases are in such a high demand on torrent and various forums. WEB-DL's are typically made of MP4's, where they have removed the DRM and then done muxing to a MKV file instead, so that playback is possible on any unit you can think of, who supports MKV playback.
Rarely recoding is done and that is only on the audio if it contains 5.1, then they convert the AAC in to AC3 for better support.

Personal D
Yes, with the right tools. You'd need something to decrypt the iTunes video files, then something to convert them to MPEG-2 NTSC VOBs and subsequently to a DVD structure and image, then burn the image onto a DVD. There are I'm sure many different tools and workflows that can accomplish this, but if I had to do it on my computer right now with the apps I have, I'd use AVS4Mac M4V Converter Plus for the decryption, VisualHub to convert the file to a DVD image, then Toast Titanium to burn to DVD. The M4V Converter and Toast are both paid apps, and VisualHub is long-abandoned shareware.

Personal F
Are we making assumptions about the downloaded files which may not be true? The m4v files I’ve downloaded from iTunes don’t have to be decrypted at all. It’s a simple to run them through a video editor (they need to be encoded anyway) outputted as MPEG/MPG with AC3 audio at 48K. If one sets compliant FPS and dimension (720 x 480 for example), any DVD authoring tool, such as Nero, can easily add the DVD video structure without re-encoding. No way (or reason for that matter) to worry about “VOBs” because that’s part of the DVD structure added

Personal D
I'm not sure about music videos, but TV episodes and feature-length films from iTunes are indeed encrypted and can't just be plopped into an editor. I speak from experience--I've put together reels for friends who are actors where they've given me crappy DVDs or low-res files as the source, and (lacking "other" ways to get the material) I decided to use an iTunes download instead as the source to provide them with a higher-quality reel for their website; it's why I purchased that app I mentioned earlier in the first place.

And as I mentioned in my earlier post, there *are* multiple tools and workflows one can use; the one I outlines is simply the one I'd go with, with the applications I already have, and the quality and control that I want. Once that m4v is decrypted, whatever tools one uses to turn video files into a playable DVD will suffice.

Personal C
Yeah it makes sense that movies and TV shows would have DRM. Music videos are more of a promotional thing, no one makes any real money from them so there's no real need to control their distribution so tightly.

Personal G
If it comes as AVS, why not just master to a Blu-ray file system, and skip the transcoding? You can record BD-5 and BD-9 discs using standard DVD media to save money. With Blu-ray players as cheap as DVD video players, why not?

Kate Hudson, Almost Famous

Kate Hudson showed such promise in Almost Famous. She was just stunning in that movie and it totally seemed like she would become an amazing actress. Instead, she chose to become the female version of Matthew McConaughey and never make a good movie again. Damn shame.

Matthew McConaughey has completely turned around his career and over the past couple years has been choosing amazing, projects..

Kate Hudson, Almost Famous

Kate Hudson, Almost Famous

Kate Hudson was so good in "Almost Famous" and then there isn't one film in the following a few years that is even close to that quality or where she seems to even put in an effort really ... it's such a shame ... really ... someone who can do the Penny Lane role so well really does have talent ... why doesn't she use it?

Wednesday, 25 February 2015

DVD or Blu-Ray?

Discuss.. DVD or Blu-Ray?
Person A
I'm trying to collect favorite movies from my favorite actress. I see plenty of options on some titles in DVD, but on Blu-Ray it's not as plentiful, more expensive and coming from another country. I really like Blu-Ray, but should I just get the DVD and be done with it?

DVD or Blu-Ray? Samsung BD-F5700 Wi-Fi Blu-Ray Player

Samsung BD-F5700 Wi-Fi Blu-Ray Player

Person B
It depends what type of film it is realy.. if it's an older film, or a low-budget one or a drama or comedy type film, Blu Ray isn't really going to make a huge difference. Where it does make a difference is higher budget films with a lot of visual effects, or music-based films due to the increase in audio clarity. Also if your TV is smaller than 40" the difference in quality won't be as obvious.

In the end it's entirely up to how much you want to spend. Personally I don't buy DVDs any more, even for low budget films, since I notice the difference too much. But i'm a bit OCD like that...

Person C
It depends what type of film it is realy.. if it's an older film, or a low-budget one or a drama or comedy type film, Blu Ray isn't really going to make a huge difference. Where it does make a difference is higher budget films with a lot of visual effects

I beg to differ, Ermagurd. Blu-ray makes a difference on ANYTHING shot on 35mm film or finer than blu-ray resolution digital formats like 4K. I've seen films from the '70s and earlier that really pop on blu-ray in a way they didn't on DVD. I will agree that, in a comedy, while blu-ray does still show more resolution than DVD even in a comedy, seeing every pore in an actor's complexion isn't necessary to laugh.

Person A:
If the films you want are really obscure and are only available on DVD, they should be dirt-cheap on DVD, so go ahead and buy them on DVD, especially if you can buy them locally and thus not have to pay for shipping and handling. Then you won't have gotten screwed too badly financially on the DVDs if and when the films finally arrive on blu-ray later. Meanwhile, you'll still enjoy some of the finer nuances in your favorite actress's performances on DVD.

Person B
I beg to differ, Ermagurd. Blu-ray makes a difference on ANYTHING shot on 35mm film or finer than blu-ray resolution digital formats like 4K. I've seen films from the '70s and earlier that really pop on blu-ray in a way they didn't on DVD. I will agree that, in a comedy, while blu-ray does still show more resolution than DVD even in a comedy, seeing every pore in an actor's complexion isn't necessary to laugh.

The second part of your post was actually exactly what I meant. Of course even a comedy will look much better (and as I said, I don't even buy DVDs anyway, but I haven't bothered to upgrade most of my comedy DVDs to BD) but it's only necessary if the visual content of the film is a major factor. For films where the dialogue is the central aspect of focus, the experience only really improves on Blu Ray because the lossless audio makes it easier to understand what the actors are saying. So, something like Clerks is hardly going to become a noticably more enjoyable experience on Blu Ray than on DVD, but a film like The Other Guys where action and visual effects are mixed in with the laughs, it does make a difference.

Person D
So, something like Clerks is hardly going to become a noticably more enjoyable experience on Blu Ray than on DVD,

Heh, Clerks looks worse on Blu Ray than DVD ;-) Was probably best on Laserdisc.

Person E
It's shot on 16mm and Smith apparently disliked that it was transferred to HD.

Person B
Yeah, something that rough just doesn't work in HD. It's even worse with 28 Days Later, the BD looks identical to the DVD because it was shot in SD PAL format.

Person E

As you can see, Blu-Ray makes a difference. Even on old movies.

Person F
The quality of a Blu-ray is better than a dvd , but it also really depends on the screen and blu-ray deck you're using . Recent Blu-ray players will play dvd's and also upscale them (improve their quality) . Many blu-rays will generally display in letter-box mode (cut-off black strip at top and bottom of screen) , so you really need a home-theatre screen to show detail (over 50" diagonal screen size). Many of my favorite movies are only available in dvd , so a recent good quality blu-ray player will definitely make the difference !

Person G
If its elder films, then i suggest reading the reviews done
They have trashed several elder films on Blu-ray, even big budget ones, because the image looks like crap on these HD releases.

Person B
Excessive DNR is usually the main culprit in making old films look like rubbish. Predator is obviously the most glaring example, it literally looks like everyone in the film is a wax dummy that's been rubbed down with ba

Person F
Yes I agree , not all transfers to Blu-ray mean an improvement in quality . Some of the American comedies from the 80-90's that I have got on blu-ray have been fantastic , and a few are worse than their dvd's . There are a few threads in this forum talking about bad transfers.

Jordin Spark is nice.

Jordin Spark is very nice. She has given so much time for good causes and charity. Although, I didn't think she would win American Idol, she has matured and her voice is good. She has been invited to several Washington, DC events and handles herself quite well. It's been 9 years since Jordin won and she has grown up to be a lovely woman.

I will be anxious to see her acting in a remake of "Sparkles."

Track Listing of Sparkle: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack Soundtrack by Whitney Houston Jordin Sparks

Track Listing of Sparkle: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack Soundtrack by Whitney Houston Jordin Sparks:

1. I'm A Man- CeeLo Green
2. Yes I Do- Carmen Ejogo
3. Running- Goapele
4. Jump Carmen- Ejogo, Tika Sumpter & Jordin Sparks
5. Hooked On Your Love- Carmen Ejogo, Tika Sumpter & Jordin Sparks
6. Something He Can Feel- Carmen Ejogo, Tika Sumpter & Jordin Sparks
7. His Eye Is On The Sparrow- Whitney Houston
8. Look Into Your Heart- Jordin Sparks
9. One Wing- Jordin Sparks
10. Love Will- Jordin Sparks
11. Celebrate- Whitney Houston & Jordin Sparks

Tuesday, 24 February 2015

Galaxy S5, Verizon Wireless

Looks like that Galaxy S5 is a piece of sht... THey think by just making the phone bigger is gonna mean more sales. Its thicker, wider, heavier and uglier than the S4. S4 actually looks better. [ [[laugh]] ] And this is coming from an S3 (and iphone5s) owner.

Samsung Galaxy S5, Black 16GB (Verizon Wireless)

Samsung Galaxy S5, Black 16GB, Verizon Wireless

I don't understand the constant negativity displayed by people when the next iteration of a cellphone isn't up to par with their standards. When the Galaxy S4 came out all owners of the S3 bashed it because it wasn't a huge step forward. People who change phones every year are the main ones giving harsh reviews to different products:

Google Nexus 5
Samsung Galaxy S4
iPhone 5C

Each of those devices were just refreshes of previous models. The main target audience they want are the users who are using older models such as the Galaxy S2, Galaxy S Blaze, iPhone 4, Nexus 4, Galaxy Nexus, HTC Sensation. Since majority of those contracts are up and the companies are heavily going with the installment plans rather then contracted 2 year agreements.

I personally use a Galaxy Note II and will wait to see if the Galaxy Note 4 is worth the upgrade.

Blu-ray Slipcovers

Discuss.. Blu-ray Slipcovers

Person A
I'm just curious, do you keep the slipcovers or throw them away?

On the blu-ray forum, I mentioned that I always threw away the slipcovers, and many posters over there expressed disbelief and anger. I didn't realize that slipcovers were so treasured.

Blu-ray slipcovers Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Person B
I would have to say mostly yes to that i throw them away, since i have only kept two of the slipcovers that came with the movies i have bought over the years.

But they are kinda also important, since one is for the steel book version of Skyfall and the other for the 2009 Star Trek movie, both having no detailed standard Blu-ray covers.

Person C
It depends. If the slipcover is just an exact replica of the BD slick, I take it off and put in a box I have for all sorts of excess packaging of that sort. That makes it easier to file discs in my shelf, since they then take up marginally less space and I don't have the problem of slipcover edges getting scuffed up. If the slipcover artwork is unique i'll keep it on the case and file it on a separate shelf I have for discs with such packaging.

Person D
I usually keep them

I only threw the Slip Cover to Wayne's world out because it got ripped

Jennifer Hudson's tribute was spectacular!

Jennifer Hudson 's tribute to Whitney Houston was perfect all the way around. She is such an awesome and powerful singer but she restrained that voice out of respect to Whitney and it was still Fabulous. Every single critic and celebrity have given nothing but high praises to Jennifer and it boggles my mind that some people still feel the need to hate. No matter, nothing will take away from true talent.

Jennifer Hudson, J-Hud and why I lost respect for the Oscars

Jennifer Hudson, J-Hud and why I lost respect for the Oscars

These award shows are a sad mix of 70% politics and 30% recognition of genuine talent/achievement. It's always been obvious, but it became an unbearable joke the year when Melissa Etheridge won an oscar for one of the worst songs ever written, Jennifer Hudson won an oscar because they forgot the oscars aren't the grammys, and Eddie Murphy DIDN'T win the oscar because Alan Arkin was getting old.

Jennifer Hudson has an AMAZING and UNBELIEVABLE voice, and deserves every award for music she gets. But her acting, namely her acting in Dreamgirls, is some of the worst acting I've ever seen. Her singing performances were emotive while still being slightly awkward, and every bit of her dialogue was literally worse than an actor in a High School drama production. Jennifer deserved a Grammy for her vocal work, not an Oscar for her acting.

Monday, 23 February 2015

D-VHS D-Theater movies

Discuss.. D-VHS D-Theater movies
Person A
Does anyone have any movies on this format that they're willing to part with. I'm interested in any title you might have. Thank you!

Muppets Most Wanted

Muppets Most Wanted

Person B
I remember that format! Sadly, I never invested any money in it. I was into LD and then DVD. Sorry I can't help you, but good luck!

Person C
I had no idea this even existed. Reminds me of DCC (Digital Compact Cassette), a last ditch attempt

Person D
Never knew that digital vhs existed, and supported 50 gig of data in mpeg format like a bluray.

That must be fascinating to try, 720p VHS at 28,2 Mbit/s.

Person E
WOW... Sorry I just sold my JVC D-VHS unit and about 20 titles on ebay a few months ago. Looks like there are still a lot of titles selling but for far more than I would be willing to buy them for.

Good Luck on your search!!!

Person A
Dang! I would have loved to buy your collection.

There is a seller that has 4 for $37 which I might buy tomorrow & about 10 other titles in the 10-$15 range.

I'll probably buy some of those.

I posted an ad on Craigslist, the only person that replied was trying to sell me there standard vhs. Which I have no use for. Unless it's a title unavailable on DVD/blu-ray.

Hopefully I'll find someone in the near future who has titles they no longer need.


Jennifer Connelly, Why was She so popular in Japan in the '80s?

Jennifer Connelly, She is one of the most beautiful women in the world. What she look like a lot more before she had her face lift and boob job. I don't think she had a face lift, her her weight loss just made her face look somewhat different in shape. Her boob job was to have them reduced, and that was also effected by weight loss. Her round face and very innocent look was certainly a turn on.

BTW, Jennifer Connelly, She was so popular in Japan in the '80s. This is just educated guesswork, but it's because she was a perfect fit for the idol culture that was prevalent at that time, as it valued 14 to 16-year-old girls with a "cute" look and a wholesome image. She was a cute teenage girl, and she had the right aesthetic for a Japanese audience (big eyes, very pale skin, shiny dark hair etc.). She seems to have been marketed mainly on the strength of how cute she was over any perceived sexiness, and many of the images of her in Japanese magazines are actually pretty infantilising (Jennifer with her mother, Jennifer with a teddy bear, Jennifer skipping etc. etc.). This makes the Japanese images of her seem rather jarring in contrast to the more familiar Western ones, which tend to emphasise her sexuality more.

The Rocketeer, Starring Jennifer Connelly

The Rocketeer, Starring Jennifer Connelly

'Rocketeer', not just strickly because of her, but because the film itself strikes a cord with me, it being a kinda full movie of early sci-fi serials.

Sunday, 22 February 2015

it widescreen TV if its not really widescreen?

Both the TV and the image on it have aspect ratios wider than 4:3.

Lots of TV commercials that were shot in NTSC or PAL video are still in use, and most TV stations air them as-is, in their original 4:3 aspect ratio, pillarboxed to fit the 16:9 HD format.

For whatever reason, many of those ads were letterboxed inside of the original 4:3 image. I suppose that when letterboxed TV shows were new, and 4:3 TV sets were still the norm, that letterboxed ads looked cool and were less intrusive.

Why don't they scale them up to fill the full HD screen? Some do, and it looks like crap.

Why don't they shoot it again in HD? They probably can't afford to.

Widescreen Proscan PLEDV1945 19-Inch 720p 60Hz LED TV-DVD Combo

Proscan PLEDV1945 19-Inch 720p 60Hz LED TV-DVD Combo

This could be a subchannel on a PBS station, probably Create. It looks like it's formatted for viewing on an old 4:3 TV (letterboxed), and when you view it on a 16:9 screen it becomes pillarboxed as well.

The CW used to look like this where I live, but within the last couple of years they fixed it so it's now fullscreen.

It is often used

This way if you use the zoom fonction on your receiver or your tv you will have a correct full screen version of the movie, that the only way for them to achieve it and you have the best result.

You can have the widescreen version of the movie in full size of your tv screen that way (but with a non-hd resolution).

Emma Heming, Where..

Emma Heming, She takes hot to a whole new level. She is one the hottest women, without a doubt, she's pretty! Bruce Willis is one Lucky Son of a B1tch. Yeah he still has it alright... On 21 March 2009, Heming married actor Bruce Willis in the Turks and Caicos Islands.

She's from but on a few sites it states that her ethnicity is english/guyanese, born in Malta. She was raised in north London, United Kingdom and California.

GLAMOUR Daryl Hannah talks; Emma Heming cover

GLAMOUR Daryl Hannah talks; Emma Heming cover

The folowing her films
2001 Perfume as Model #3
2007 Perfect Stranger as Donna
2007 The Comebacks as Megan
2013 Red 2 as Kelly

Saturday, 21 February 2015

Any movies, DVD edition is preferable over the Blu-Ray?

Discuss.. Any movies for which the DVD edition is preferable over the Blu-Ray?

Person A
For picture quality, special features, or any other reason.

Sony BDPS5200 3D Blu-ray Disc Player with Wi-Fi by Sony #1 Best Seller in Blu-Ray Disc Players

Sony BDPS5200 3D Blu-ray Disc Player with Wi-Fi by Sony #1 Best Seller in Blu-Ray Disc Players

Person B
Only one I can think of right now is:

Tombstone (Director's Cut)

The DVD is preferrable to the blu-ray simply because the director's cut, to my knowledge, is not available on blu-ray! Only the theatrical cut of Tombstone is available on blu-ray!

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. I'd LOVE to own the director's cut on blu-ray. It offers numerous character scenes that fill in some rather gaping plot holes in the theatrical edition, most notably:

Why wasn't Doc Holiday available to help the night the Erpp brothers were shot? Because, in the director's cut, he was upstairs in his hotel room drunk.

When did McMasters get killed? We see his body being dragged back to Charlton Heston's character's farm. In the director's cut, we see him going to confront the bad guys, his former gang, the Cowboys, telling them he's going to stick with his new friends, because "At least they don't go around scarin' women" and their lead mouthpiece, Ike Clanton, says "There's just one you gonna get back to 'em?"

Person C
Another one I can think of is Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, because it is on 2 DVDs which has Director's Commentary, 42 deleted scenes, loads of featurettes, and loads more features, while the blu-ray only has the Director's Commentary.

Person B
I'd also like to say John Carpenter's The Thing. The HD-DVD (now an extinct format), and probably the Special Edition DVD, had more special features than the blu-ray. The HD-DVD, and probably the special edition DVD, had oodles of interesting documentaries, including makeup artist Rob Bottin talking about his legendary Thing designs and execution. The blu-ray only has the commentary track from the HD-DVD and probably special edition DVD, which is interesting, but the blu-ray, with the exception of the commentary and a superb transfer of the film, is rather lean, and lame,

Person D

The BD in stores at the moment has the "Things Take Shape" and other features from the collectors edition DVD.

Person B
The Thing BD that has all the special features including "Things Take Shape" documentary: Thanks, Marmaduke! I'm going to buy it!

Person E
For picture quality, special features, or any other reason.

I doubt there are many where the DVD has better picture quality (wow how badly would they have to mess up the transfer for that) but plenty where there are features or even cuts that the DVD has but the BR lacks. That's why I never get rid of the DVD even after I get the same movie on BR.

Granted this is mostly an issue with movies that were released on DVD years before BR, and not contemporary DVD/BR releases (especially when they're sold together in a combo pack).

Person F
Predator has a transfer that makes the people look like Barbie dolls. It looks ridiculous.

Person G
Predator has a transfer that makes the people look like Barbie dolls. It looks ridiculous.

That doesn't aplly to all Blu-Ray editions of the movie.

Person H
I second that.

Optical media is all about storing bits. In that respect, more bits is better. Blu-ray is better because it holds more bits.

The content that's encoded into those bits is another matter. Since there's no rule of nature (or law) that says that there can only be one release per medium, I think it's rather pointless to talk about this as a "DVD edition" matter when bad data can be introduced into either medium equally easily.

I have CDs of some of my favorite music albums that have been remastered and re-released over the years. The audible difference is in the mastering process, not the medium. So if I were to say that a CD in a "jewel box" package sounds worse than a newer release in Digipak packaging, which sounds worse than the latest release in a cardboard sleeve...I would be barking up the wrong tree.

Person I
Kiss Of The Dragon got a really bad Blu Ray treatment. No extras and the picture quality is awful, barely better than DVD. A lot of Fox's early BD releases are crap though, took them a while to figure out what they were doing. Same with Warner Bros but at least they were smart enough to port the extras from the DVD editions onto most of their early BD titles.

Person J
Lonesome Dove Tv serie
I among the filmed project that were filmed in 4x3 (full screen) and for the bluray they cropped the top and bottom to make it 16x9. And for the great sceneries this film show, or just to see the actors in the way they were filmed. It may be better in DVD.


Person K
Ghostbusters. The Blu Ray is the grainiest thing I've ever seen. Though the new 4K remaster edition blu ray is a lot better.

Do you know the way to Shell Beach?

Person D
Mid to late eighties eastman stock strikes again.

Die Hard is another which suffers from this.

Person L
A bunch. Some blu-rays have been orange and tealed or had the colour timing messed up in other ways. There's a blog with a list... if I remember the link I'll post it here.

Person B
Raiders of the Lost Ark.

This is one of my favorite films and I was really looking forward to seeing it on blu-ray in high-def! What a disappointment. I actually prefer the transfer used for the DVD over the transfer used for the blu-ray.

The DVD, minus its resolution limitations, is how I remember Raiders looking in cinemas in terms of color and contrast.

The blu-ray of Raiders, despite receiving according to reviews the "royal, red carpet treatment" in the form of a velvetty, organically sharp 4k transfer, is flawed in terms of contrast. The bright scenes are too bright, the highlights are blown out white and the dark scenes like in the Ravenwood bar are too dark.

Plus the whole transfer has this yellow-orange teal that makes the picture look way too warm, making lightning flashes outside the Well of Souls and other lighting that was supposed to look blue when mixed with the yellow-orange teal of the transfer look gray.

I really hope the problem is only in the transfer and not in the original negative. I'd hate to see a great film like Raiders fade away and vanish forever, be buried in the sand for a thousand years like the Ark of the Covenant! I'd like restoration artists to take another Indy whip-crack at transferring Raiders properly in the future. With Raiders cinematographer Douglas Sloccombe no longer here with us on this Earth to supervise the transfer, and Raiders director Steven Spielberg who signed off on this transfer apparently having no idea what the film is supposed to look like, the only reference point is the old transfer used for the DVD. Restoration artists: Use that old transfer as the technical benchmark for what Raiders is supposed to look like!

Plus the sound of Raiders on blu-ray is a mixed bag. The soundtrack has been mastered from the original 6-track, and Been Burtt appears to have added a few new sound-FX here and there, like water dripping in the South American temple in the beginning, which is great. But bass has been overexaggerated and John Williams' superb, legendary music has been reverbed out to the point where it sounds like the London Symphony Orchestra is performing the Raiders score at a ball game.

The soundtrack on the DVD, despite being pseudo-"mastered in 5.1" from the 2-channel Dol

Person M
The Sword in the Stone (1963):
It is in your best interest to pick up either the Walt Disney Gold Classic Collection DVD or the 45th Anniversary DVD. The 50th Anniversary Edition Blu-ray is a scrubbed/soft mess. I can only assume the 50th Anniversary DVD is the same.

Lilo and Stitch (2002):
Your best bet is the 2-Disc Big Wave Edition DVD from 2009. It has some fantastic extras (including a 2 hour making of documentary.) The Blu-ray copy has no extras at all!

If I told you cretins, your feeble brains would fail to comprehend it. - The Shredder

Person B
Mad Max 2-The Road Warrior (2007 first blu-ray edition; Max against blueish-orange skies on the cover).

The color is muted and the night scene, when Max is trying to make it out into the wasteland with gas cans on his shoulders and falls into a crevase alerting the Lord Humungus' Dogs of War, has been unnaturally and unnecessarily brightened up to the point where there is horrendous grain visible and a faded blue strip running down the left side of the frame. The DVD,

Plus the sound in the 5.1 mix in the 2007 BD has completely lost its omnipresent 360-degree surround effects, most notably when we come out of the blower on Max's V8 Interceptor in the beginning and the gyrocaptain's copter flying overhead, spectacular effects! The sound in the 2007 BD appears to be primarily a front-channel 3.1 mix. Disappointing to say the least, because those 360-degree surround effects are so awesome on the DVD.

Thankfully, Warner got it right again in 2013 when they re-did the transfer for the 2013 BD re-release (Max against grayish skies on the cover), so after all their and our dollars spent on the sub-standard 2007 version, all is well again. Why in the hell couldn't they have gotten it right the first time in 2007?

Person O
The Terminator as the Special Edition DVD release, why? You get the original Mono sountrack, that is missing on the latest Blu-ray release.
They changed a lot of the audio, such as the sounds of the weapons, when they converted the audio to 5.1
In the original Mono track, the weapons sounds a whole lot more nasty.

Person I
The original Terminator BD apparently had a 5.1 PCM upmix of the mono track. But it was only released in the USA... but the UE DVD had much better extras, which is why it's still in my collection.

Person B

I hate how Universal's sound designers reverbed-out and sent to the far, far surrounds John Williams' legendary music score in the blu-ray's 7.1 mix.

Don't get me wrong, the picture is superb and Universal's sound designers did a great job adding some nice new 360-degree splashes during the 4th of July Amity beach panic scene, but John Williams music, music that director Steven Spielberg has repeatedly lauded as being 50% responsible for the success of Jaws, music that won John his first Oscar for Best Original Score, has been reverbed out so thin for the 7.1 mix that it has lost much of its impact.

This is particularly evident in the opening of the movie. Just after the Universal logo and prior to the movie's first "A Zanuck/Brown Production" title, against black, amidst the sound of distant whales singing, in the original 1975 mono mix, you hear Johnny's "DAAA-DUM" two bass viol notes signalling the presence of the shark. Those two bass viol notes instantly trigger our primordial dread and terror. Those are the two notes that continue to keep people all over the world out of the water.

The 5.1 mix of the DVD spread Johnny's music into stereo with some surround, mixed in with bubbles and other undersea activity, a bit of tampering with the original conception, but OK, not too objectionable.

The 7.1 mix of the blu-ray reverbs out Johnny's music so thinly against all those bubbles that you can't even HEAR the opening "DAAA-DUM"!. Perhaps in commercial theatrical cinemas, where Jaws is being re-released, you CAN hear the music because the speakers in cinemas are more spread out and the sound is thus more delineated. In home cinemas, you can't hear the music.

Universal's sound designers: Just because you CAN do something does not always automatically necessarily mean that you SHOULD. Sometimes you gotta leave well enough alone!

Thankfully, Universal included the "quaint" original 1975 mono mix of Jaws, that has Johnny's "DAAA-DUM" music once again loud, front and center, on English Audio 2 (2.0 mono) of the blu-ray for film purists.

Person N
The theatrical cut of Troy was never released on Blu-ray, only the Director's Cut, which completely rearranged the soundtrack. I adored Troy's music, so this renders the Blu-ray basically unwatchable for me.

Kingdom of Heaven had that incredible 4-disc Director's Cut set on DVD with tons of special features, but I think the Blu-ray release is bare-bones.

The only way to get the original audio for The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly is to own the old, un-restored DVD.

The original trilogy of Star Wars is only available on the '06 2-disc DVDs (but with issues many have pointed out before)...

Person I
^Actually not true about The Good The Bad And The Ugly, newer copies of the remastered-in-4K version include the original mono soundtrack. The first remaster accidentally recycled the audio tracks from the original BD release, but it was quickly recalled and replaced with a new version with corrected audio.

Kingdom of Heaven has also been re-released with all the extras and all three versions (theatrical, DC and Roadshow DC), but only in the USA so far.

Person N
Interesting, I wasn't aware of the new KOH release. I'll probably just hang on to my old Blu-ray and 4-disc DVD though.

Looks like you're also right about the Man with No Name set, from what I'm reading out there. However, I just got the latest 4K Remastered set a few weeks ago at Best Buy, so according to internet chatter I should have the right set. But I could've sworn when I played it after I bought it, the correct audio was not on the disc. I'll have to look again when I get home today.

Person I
There's probably still a bunch of older copies floating around of the wrong-audio version.. here's a guide to which version is which:

Discs with the original mono track have 9193 V2 printed on the inner ring of the disc.
Discs with the downmixed track have 9325 printed on the inner ring of the disc.

Apparently there's no difference in packaging, they just changed it and didn't make any announcement.

Kingdom of Heaven would be worth the upgrade if you have a high-grade display, the old BD used the outdated MPEG-2 video codec, while the new one uses AVC MPEG-4.

Person N
Well whaddaya know, I have the correct version after all. Thanks for the info!

America Ferrera, Latinas in Hollywood

it seem that every woman in hollywood who is latin seems to only date white men. There are the few who do not Eva Longoria- but she at one point did. And the men they date are not men of any substance- excluding Salma Hayek- boyfriend is major (14 billion). The woman in hollywood who are latino tend to date men who are white and have nothing going on.


America Ferrera: Latina Superstar (Hot Celebrity Biographies)

America Ferrera: Latina Superstar (Hot Celebrity Biographies)

Eva Mendes- white guy whose last job it seems was in 2005- some kind of director
America Ferrera- white guy from college
Sara Ramirez- some random white guy who was an extra on HER SHOW
Salma Hayek- some white guy but he is wealthier than wealth can even imagine but before then it was B-list actors
Rosario Dawson- white guy that was better looking than her- plays on Sex and the City
Roseyln Sanchez- white guy from the soaps!!
Zoe Saladana- white guy with no acting credits
and the list could go on

Eva Longoria- JC Chasez ouch!!!

Friday, 20 February 2015

Can I hack my Sony Bluray player to be region free?

I have a few region free blu rays from UK that will play the movie, but the special features won't work because they're in PAL format. Can I make my Sony Bluray player region free?

Sony BDPS3200 Blu-ray Disc Player with Wi-Fi

Sony BDPS3200 Blu-ray Disc Player with Wi-Fi

Unlikely. That sounds more like a hardware issue than a region thing.

Some other brands can be modified fairly easily, though I don't know about special features:

I just made sure to choose a region-free & multiformat (for DVD) and region-changeable (for Blu-ray) player to begin with. Though I don't have any foreign Blu-rays yet, it does play PAL DVDs just fine.

If you have a Blu-ray drive in a computer, use MakeMKV to rip the extras to mkv files then play them on a media player.

TVs manufactured in the USA can't receive PAL signals. The region coding has nothing to do with it. Possibly you may be able to watch the features on a BD-ROM drive if you have one.

First off, IIRC the whole reason for "region free" discs is so that you can play them on any disc player. Your player, and your TV or monitor will still need to support whatever the resolution and frame rate that the disc is recorded in though.

It's doubtful that you have Blu-ray discs in PAL, as PAL is an obsolete standard definition analog TV format. If you're sure it's PAL format, it's probably a DVD, not a Blu-ray. DVDs were made to be played primarily on standard definition TV sets. There are some wide screen "extended definition" DVD formats that require special TV sets or monitors. ED wasn't very popular in North America, and was seen more in Europe. So it's possible that you have a PALplus wide screen recording that isn't compatible with North American TV sets. So if it's actually a DVD (especially one for widescreen playback), you may have to work hard to get it to work with your existing TV gear.

If you have a "region free" Blu-ray (or DVD) disc that's from the UK, and it's not playing in the US, chances are that the video uses a 25 or 50 fps frame rate that's incompatible with your Blu-ray player and/or TV set. In that case your best bet will be to use a computer to transcode the video to whatever the native TV format is where you live. You can buy multistandard players and TV sets, but this is costly, and not very practical for the sake of just a few discs.

If you deal with a lot of discs from places with different video standards, and want to hack a "regular" Blu-ray player to ignore region codes, your best bet is to buy the cheapest player that you can find. The "no name" brands are most likely to have alternative firmware available for them. Look for the hacked firmware before you buy! Sony has a vested interest in selling movies, so they're the least likely to provide hacked firmware for their players.

US television manufacturers seem to be quite arrogant in the way they only manufacture their displays to receive 24p and 60hz signals. Most other countries have sets which receive both 50hz and 60hz, which actually makes sense.

Blu Rays made for region B territories sometimes have extras in 576i definition, others have the film in 1080i/50hz. In the former instance, usually it's because they've been ported over from a PAL DVD. As for films in 1080i, that's just stupid and results in me tracking down an imported version.

US television manufacturers seem to be quite arrogant in the way they only manufacture their displays to receive 24p and 60hz signals.

There haven't been any US television manufacturers for over 30 years! Way back then it wasn't "arrogance", it was the sheer cost of the additional circuitry, not to mention the lack of demand that made multi-standard TV sets not economically viable in North America.

Blu Rays made for region B territories sometimes have extras in 576i definition, others have the film in 1080i/50hz.

That's just a poor quality product. I would return such discs. It's not that hard to upscale to a uniform resolution and frame rate.

As for films in 1080i, that's just stupid and results in me tracking down an imported version.

It may seem "stupid" now, but it was a necessity when 1080p sets were rare and costly. And the deinterlacing algorithms in most contemporary 1080p sets can make 1080i video look great. Much easier to buy a decent TV set than get angry at the disc.

I wouldn't risk destroying your blu-ray player to try it. It's less dangerous to the blu-ray player to simply pony up some US dollars to buy the US blu-ray version, or, cheaper still, buy the US DVD versions of those movies, which will most likely have the same special features, albeit not in high-def, assuming those special features are even in high-def on the blu-ray.

Amber Tamblyn, Simple and innocent girl.

Like Amber Tamblyn, have not seen such an innocence and beauty anywhere. The acting of Amber in the Grudge 2 was best and that acting has made me her fan.

Her round face with golden hair that God has really taken some time to make that face. She is really simple and so quite that a person wants to look continuosly on her face.

Wish Amber Tamblyn should make lot's of success in the Hollywood and should sparkle like a star in the sky.

Watch Joan OF Arcadia! She's Lovely and amazing.

Love her movies especially Normal adolescent behavior.

She also loves Poetry.

Bang Ditto Hardcover by Amber Tamblyn (Author)

..Bang Ditto by Amber Tamblyn (Author), A new collection of poetry..

is her Second Book

her third collection of poems titled, "Dark Sparkler" to Harper Collins

her debut book of poems, entitled Free Stallion

Thursday, 19 February 2015

iPad and lower versions of computer itunes

Do I REALLY have to have the latest version of iTunes on my computer in order to sync with my iPad? The version I currently have on my computer has vital features I am unwilling to part with. Am I SOL?

Apple iPad mini MD531LL/A (16GB, Wi-Fi, White / Silver)

Apple iPad mini MD531LL/A

Update your iTunes on your computer, you won't loose what you have in your older version once the installation is finished you still have all your features there and yes to sync your iPad to your computer you need the latest iTunes version.

Bruce Willis, the movies he is 'known for'...

The movies Bruce Willis is 'known for'... are The Sixth Sense, Die Hard, The Fifth Element and Moonrise Kingdom. Moonrise is in their because it's one of his best roles in recent years..but The Fifth Element instead of Pulp Fiction? Even Twelve Monkey's would fill the spot better than The Fifth Element.

But in the last couple of years his career went from great to making 3rd rate movies,...Maybe somebody's gotta call his agent and say something about it, because his movies are getting worse and worse...

Bruce Willis, Red

about.. Bruce Willis, Mary-Louise Parker, Red.. RED is a silly but very fun movie. Red is the action-comedy with a lot of fun

about.. Over the Hedge (2006)? Bruce Willis voices the main character in that movie, but it hardly sounds a bit like him: He sounds a whole lot younger and more energetic. James Berardinelli's review that mentions the disconnect between Willis and his cartoon character, and Willis said in interviews that the directors told him to have a higher pitched voice. It's an interesting footnote in his career when he voiced a cartoon raccoon that didn't really sound like him at all.

Wednesday, 18 February 2015

Gillian Anderson, getting hotter as she gets older

Is Gillian Anderson getting hotter as she gets older?! She was hot in X-files, did she look fine in Hannibal! she does get hotter as she gets older. Also, great actress!

notice during the 3rd season of the X Files, every year is doing her justice. Beautiful woman.. Although I prefer her with a more Auburn/red hair look, but Gillian Anderson is classically gorgeous. watching her in Hannibal and she is stunning. watching 'The Fall' recently and she's looking fine. She rocks that blonde hair. She looks better as she gets older. She ages like fine wine

Gillian Anderson, Hannibal Season 2

Gillian Anderson, Hannibal Season 2

Between her star turns In the fall and hannibal and on stage in streetcar, gillian anderson really is at the top of her game. After her great performance in bleak house I have high hopes for war and peace too.

Surely it's onwards and upwards from here!

Gillian is wonderful!!!

Gillian Anderson's Films:
1986 plays in Three at Once role as Woman 1 , Short film
1988 plays in A Matter of Choice role as Unknown , Short film
1992 plays in The Turning role as April Cavanaugh
1997 plays in Chicago Cab, aka Hellcab role as Southside Girl or Brenda
1998 plays in The X-Files role as Dana Scully
1998 plays in The Mighty role as Loretta Lee
1998 plays in Playing by Heart role as Meredith
1999 plays in Princess Mononoke role as Moro , Voice
2000 plays in The House of Mirth role as Lily Bart
2005 plays in The Mighty Celt role as Kate
2005 plays in A Cock and Bull Story role as Herself/Widow Wadman
2006 plays in The Last King of Scotland role as Sarah Merrit
2007 plays in Straightheads, aka Closure role as Alice Comfort
2008 plays in The X-Files: I Want to Believe role as Dana Scully
2008 plays in How to Lose Friends & Alienate People role as Eleanor Johnson
2009 plays in Boogie Woogie role as Jean Maclestone
2010 plays in No Pressure role as Herself , Short film
2011 plays in Johnny English Reborn role as Pamela Thornton ("Pegasus")
2012 plays in Sister role as Kristin Jansen
2012 plays in Shadow Dancer role as Kate Fletcher
2012 plays in Room on the Broom role as Witch , Voice
2013 plays in Mr. Morgan's Last Love role as Karen
2013 plays in From Up On Poppy Hill[59] role as Hana Matsuzaki , Voice
2013 plays in I'll Follow You Down role as Marika
2014 plays in Sold role as Sophia
2014 plays in Robot Overlords role as Kate
2015 plays in The Departure role as Blanche Dubois , Short film

Gillian Anderson's Televisions:
1993 plays in Class of '96 role as Rachel , Episode: "The Accused"
1993–2002 plays in The X-Files role as Dana Scully , 202 episodes
1995 plays in Eek! the Cat role as Agent Scully , Episode: "Eek Space 9"
1996 plays in ReBoot role as Data Nully , Episode: "Trust No One"
1996 plays in Future Fantastic role as Herself , 9 episodes
1996–2002 plays in Hollywood Squares role as Herself , 5 episodes
1997 plays in The Simpsons role as Agent Scully (voice) , Episode: "The Springfield Files"
1999 plays in Frasier role as Jenny , Episode: "Dr. Nora"
1999 plays in Harsh Realm role as Video Narrator , Voice (uncredited)
2005 plays in Bleak House role as Lady Dedlock , 14 episodes
2008 plays in Masterpiece role as Herself , Episode: "Sense and Sensibility"
2010 plays in Any Human Heart role as Duchess of Windsor , 3 episodes
2011 plays in The Crimson Petal and the White role as Mrs. Castaway , 2 episodes
2011 plays in Moby Dick role as Elizabeth , 2 episodes
2011 plays in Great Expectations role as Miss Havisham , 3 episodes
2013–present plays in The Fall role as Stella Gibson , 11 episodes
2013–present plays in Hannibal role as Dr. Bedelia Du Maurier , 9 episodes
2014 plays in Crisis role as Meg Fitch , 10 episodes
2014 plays in Robot Chicken role as Fairy Godmother , Episode: "Up, Up, and Buffet"
2014 plays in National Theatre Live role as Blanche DuBois , Episode: "A Streetcar Named Desire"
2015 plays in War and Peace role as Anna Pavlovna Scherer , Upcoming series
2016 plays in The X-Files role as Dana Scully , Upcoming series

Gillian Anderson's Stages:
1983 plays in Arsenic and Old Lace role as Officer Brophy , City High School, Grand Rapids, Michigan[60]
1990 plays in A Flea in Her Ear , The Theatre School, De Paul University, Chicago, Illinois
1991 plays in Absent Friends role as Evelyn , Manhattan Theatre Club, New York
1992 plays in The Philanthropist role as Celia , Long Wharf Theatre, New Haven, Connecticut
1999–2000 plays in The Vagina Monologues , Los Angeles & London
2002–2003 plays in What The Night Is For role as Melinda Metz , Comedy Theatre, London (West End Debut)
2004 plays in The Sweetest Swing in Baseball role as Dana , Royal Court Theatre, London
2009 plays in A Doll's House role as Nora Helmer , Donmar Warehouse, London
2010 plays in We Are One: A celebration of tribal peoples , Apollo Theatre, London
2014 plays in A Streetcar Named Desire role as Blanche DuBois , Young Vic, London

Android micro SD card

Question about the android micro SD card.. What flash drive should I buy for my android so that I can use it to download music to the card from my PC? Please give a name or a link.



SanDisk invented flash media, and is currently a top brand for it. But more than the brand, you want to look for the data rate that your Android device supports, and buy flash media that meets or exceeds that spec.

Since the price difference is small, and SD cards can last years if cared for, I'd buy the "fastest" SDXC card available, currently UHS class 3. Here's a FAQ about SD card data rates, or "speed*":

* Note that electrons move at the same speed regardless of data transfer rate, so confusing data rate with "speed" is confusing.

International Shipping Eligible