HDTV makes DVD movie look "less" like a movie?

[web1design]

So you are saying noise and jerky motion mask weak scripts and poor acting?

Noise and jerky motion are not a huge issuse, as far as I can see. I can go to the cinema or watch a DVD on my screen and see a movie and finish feeling like I have watched a story, and have been entertained. The emotional element of having that story played out before my eyes is not stripped of power even though I know its 'just a movie' and the protagonist I am so avidly cheering on or villain who's doom I am so earnestly longing for is an actor.

The effect of whatever settings were running on the HDTV I watched was that all the smoke and mirrors were gone, and the presence of the camera was so strong it robbed the stories of that emotional pull.

An author should not write fictional prose in such a way that, either subtely or blatantly, causes the reader to be reminded of his presense in the lines of the story, his creating of the world made obvious. The world is meant to have its own life. If the 'voice' of the author is too conspicuous the story loses most of its power to asborb the reader and weave its magic.

The HD features causing the reaction in me and others posting here is the cinematic equivalent of the author leaving his clumsy fingerprints all over a story.

However, yes I agree its a subjective issue. One mans meat is anothers poison.

[edDV]

no time for rant now BBL

[fritzi93]

Such a weird thread.

I think some of our newer members persist in confusing motion interpolation with frame repeats. I confess I've never seen really satisfactory motion interpolation. It's very contingent on source material, and goes from so-so to unbearable. On my Philips LCD, at its worst it can exhibit a sort of flickering edge effect on highly contrasted sharp edges. Like the faint wavery tip of a flame. So turn it off already, I have.

Now that has nothing at all to do with frame repeats or anything else in HDTVs. I'm pleased that with 120 Hz I don't have to see judder, and color is much improved over SD NTSC (so long as the HDTV is reasonably well calibrated). Like other long time members here have said, I want the best picture possible, and for the home theater buff, HDTV is a great improvement over the old, small CRTs.

As to an enhanced, more realistic picture detracting from the "film experience", whatever that is, well, I don't get it. Not at all. Hey, if the set is unconvincing (at times) or the lighting poor, I say those guys will just have to sharpen up and do a better job. But that's far from the rule anyway.

[lordsmurf]

the "film experience", whatever that is

It's something people say because "they" also say it -- whoever "they" are.
It's a nonsense meaningless term.

George Carlin would have fun with stuff like this. I can just imagine him now:
"What the hell is a 'film experience'? When I go to the bathroom, do I have a 'toilet experience'?"
"You watch a movie. You take a shit. You don't have an 'experience'!"

[fritzi93]

You know, on further reflection I'll concede just a tiny bit on the subject of being distracted from the story.

When I first got my copy of the restored Blu-Ray of "The Searchers", well, I confess I paid little attention (on the first play) to anything but that gorgeous VistaVision camera work. (I knew the plot quite well anyway). The depth and clarity are just astounding. Monument Valley in VistaVision...jaw-dropping. The restorers did a wonderful job.

But hey, that's also part of the "film experience". Like being in the movie theater in the front row, only better.

[edDV]

So you are saying noise and jerky motion mask weak scripts and poor acting?

Noise and jerky motion are not a huge issues, as far as I can see. I can go to the cinema or watch a DVD on my screen and see a movie and finish feeling like I have watched a story, and have been entertained. The emotional element of having that story played out before my eyes is not stripped of power even though I know its 'just a movie' and the protagonist I am so avidly cheering on or villain who's doom I am so earnestly longing for is an actor.

How does any of that relate to HDTV tech? What is different in a Cinema or on a CRT TV?

The effect of whatever settings were running on the HDTV I watched was that all the smoke and mirrors were gone, and the presence of the camera was so strong it robbed the stories of that emotional pull.

And this differs from a cinema how? A theater projection has more detail unless your glasses are dirty.

An author should not write fictional prose in such a way that, either subtely or blatantly, causes the reader to be reminded of his presense in the lines of the story, his creating of the world made obvious. The world is meant to have its own life. If the 'voice' of the author is too conspicuous the story loses most of its power to asborb the reader and weave its magic.

The HD features causing the reaction in me and others posting here is the cinematic equivalent of the author leaving his clumsy fingerprints all over a story.

Again what would be different in a cinema projection? I think your problems are with the screen writer, cinephotographer or director.

The HDTV issues being discussed are motion judder and frame interpolation.

2:3 motion judder is only seen on classic NTSC CRT TV sets and so called "60 Hz" HDTV models. It is not seen in theater projection, PAL TV sets or "120 Hz" HDTV models.

Frame interpolation from 24p to 120p is more controversial. If you don't like it you can turn it off.

[bujer121]

Thank you for this post. I thought I was going crazy seeing my favorite movies look like a camcorder reality show. I had just bought a new 70" Sharp TV and was really worried about this. Thanks to this post I changed my video setting, that is a factory setting by the way, from Movie Mode Advanced High to Off.

I do have to admit the awesome clarity has it's moments......The Bond girls!!!

[Kalungng]

This is very important post. I just bought a 32" HDTV and finds that all my Blu-ray movies look like they shot on video. I have tried the Movie mode on the monitor but still all the motions of the movie look like they are shot on HD video.

I am very disappointed by this look, my friends told me I am too demanding but I point out to them that when the camera pan on an action or a scene the motion is not as smooth and natural as I see it on normal TV or computer monitors.

They said it is because of the high definition images, the sharp image does something to the eye. I counter that if this is what we are gaining in HDTV I am so sorry that I have to live with losing what is essential to cinema, that is motion.

I tried everything on the dial or menu to correct what I find a sense of the video plastic motion instead of the smooth film motion of camera movement. I wonder of any cinephile here has the same experience here and I am ready to stay away from any more HDTV purchase in the future until the manufacturers really address this instead of saying all the good things about enhancing a cinematic experience here. Are we losing something by gaining image resolution?

[jd95]

This is a good thread. I have noticed the "video feel" when I walked past newer, big TVs in the stores and thought it looked quite odd, but never really gave it much more thought until I just purchased one of these TVs for myself. It's a 47 inch 120hz LG LED-LCD 3D TV. I can't help but seriously dislike the look, and I will try some suggestions posted here to see if it helps. (But even after 2+ years of this thread, it seems like nothing clear-cut has been posted. In fact, I still see some even questioning us as if we somehow hate the idea of clarity and high-def. That's not the case at all!)

I will research some more, but I can't believe there isn't an uproar from filmmakers. This is certainly NOT how they wanted their films seen! Maybe it is nowadays, but an example I'll site is "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring." This is the movie I saw that looked "video-like" when I was in the store about a year ago, and it just so happens I was watching it again yesterday when I got my TV. What the poster said above about how it plainly looked like a film set, where the look made it just seem like a bunch of people in makeup and costumes instead of is spot-on! As should be obvious by now, I enjoyed that movie very much. Watched it repeatedly on CRTs and then hi-def TVs. It always looked like a film to me until I saw it like this. I know some of the painstaking efforts put forth but Peter Jackson and the entire crew who made those films to give it such a realistic look, but now it look absolutely horrible, as if someone was using a handheld cam instead of top-of-the-line film equipment. So please, to those who call us crazy for this, please refrain. There is absolutely no way you enjoy the movie the same way if it looks like this. The Lord of the Rings won Oscars for it's look, and now it's looking horrible on a $1000 television? This is progress? Filmmakers go to great lengths to have the audience not taken out of the feel of the movie, but these TVs are doing it at factory default. It's awful and I wish there was a clear answer, but I admitted already I need to do much more research.

Not only that, but the motion itself is pretty awful as well at times. Motions are sped up and look horrible. I was just watching a bit of "Up in the Air" as an example, and there was a instance where George Clooney was talking and turned his head, for some reason that motion of head-turning was sped up for a brief moment. This sort of thing is awful. This is "tru motion?"

[fritzi93]

Jeez, I have a hard time believing you read the entire thread.

Turn off your "tru-motion" (motion interpolation). Problem solved.

Now, if you object to having *no* 2:3 telecine judder, you're hopeless. You don't get that in a movie theater, nor do you get it with a 120 Hz HDTV that does frame repeats. You *do* have it with 60 Hz sets. I say good riddance to it.

[jd95]

Jeez, I have a hard time believing you read the entire thread.

Turn off your "tru-motion" (motion interpolation). Problem solved.

Now, if you object to having *no* 2:3 telecine judder, you're hopeless. You don't get that in a movie theater, nor do you get it with a 120 Hz HDTV that does frame repeats. You *do* have it with 60 Hz sets. I say good riddance to it.

I did read the whole thread, and said I would try what was mentioned. My concern was that there seemed to be more than one thing happening at once. The "camcorder" feel is one major thing, but the awkward sped-up motion is another.

Judder, from what I understand, is a non-smoothness in motion that is often most noticeable when the camera is panning. How anyone would object to smooth motion is beyond me, and that is not what the discussion in this thread is mostly about.

The main point is movies looking rather horrible on new, expensive TVs where one would think they would look best.

[edDV]

Jeez, I have a hard time believing you read the entire thread.

Turn off your "tru-motion" (motion interpolation). Problem solved.

Now, if you object to having *no* 2:3 telecine judder, you're hopeless. You don't get that in a movie theater, nor do you get it with a 120 Hz HDTV that does frame repeats. You *do* have it with 60 Hz sets. I say good riddance to it.

I did read the whole thread, and said I would try what was mentioned. My concern was that there seemed to be more than one thing happening at once. The "camcorder" feel is one major thing, but the awkward sped-up motion is another.

Judder, from what I understand, is a non-smoothness in motion that is often most noticeable when the camera is panning. How anyone would object to smooth motion is beyond me, and that is not what the discussion in this thread is mostly about.

The main point is movies looking rather horrible on new, expensive TVs where one would think they would look best.

Report back after you turn off frame interpolation. Beyond that it seems your TV is mis-adjusted, probably in store display mode*. Search your model number at the AVS forum for the best user consensus on settings for a home environment.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=25

Beyond that you can hire a certified HDTV calibration expert (Cedia or THX) to tune to your room.

There is nothing in this technology that "speeds up" motion. The technology used is very similar to digital cinema theaters. Do you object to digital cinema? If not, something is wrong with your TV.


* sales research shows that the average consumer picks an HDTV with excess contrast and over saturated colors. This research resulted in the "store display" default designed to sell product. The first thing you should do when you get the TV home is switch to "movie" mode. Then you try frame interpolation on vs frame interpolation off.

[jd95]

Report back after you turn off frame interpolation. Beyond that it seems your TV is mis-adjusted, probably in store display mode*. Search your model number at the AVS forum for the best user consensus on settings for a home environment.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=25

Beyond that you can hire a certified HDTV calibration expert (Cedia or THX) to tune to your room.

There is nothing in this technology that "speeds up" motion. The technology used is very similar to digital cinema theaters. Do you object to digital cinema? If not, something is wrong with your TV.

I turned off "truMotion" (there isn't a setting for "frame interpolation", but I am guessing this is LG's terminology for the same thing) and watched a movie. I didn't get the camcorder feel or odd sped-up motion (a big, big plus!), but it was a new movie to me so I still want to test with a film I am more familiar with.

One other question: does turning off mean that the 3D will work less effectively? I ask because the film I watched last night didn't quite have the 3D effects I thought it would.

Edit - I forgot to mention that I set up the TV up for home use instead of store demo, and even went through a picture wizard that helps set up brightness, contrast, etc., so all that should be good.

[jagabo]

I turned off "truMotion" (there isn't a setting for "frame interpolation", but I am guessing this is LG's terminology for the same thing)

I don't think anyone calls it frame interpolation. There's usually three or four different option for whatever the setting is called. Off gives you 3:2 judder (frames are repeated 6 times or 4 times, alternating between the two, to make 120 Hz out of 24 Hz source material). Low gets rid of the judder but leaves the inherent jerkiness of 24 fps (frames are repeated 5 times each to convert 24 Hz to 120 Hz). Then there are usually a few motion interpolated settings called Medium and High, or some such.

and watched a movie. I didn't get the camcorder feel or odd sped-up motion (a big, big plus!)

The odd sped up motion may have been a mistake in the processing. That often happens with motion interpolation where the computer can't figure out exactly what the in-between frames should have looked like.

One other question: does turning off mean that the 3D will work less effectively?

It shouldn't.

I forgot to mention that I set up the TV up for home use instead of store demo, and even went through a picture wizard that helps set up brightness, contrast, etc., so all that should be good.

Even the home settings are usually way out of whack because the manufactures know that most people prefer over bright, over saturated, over contrasty video. Use a real calibration disc and follow the instructions. You also want to turn of all the automatic image adjustment features like auto contrast, auto saturation, noise reduction (except maybe deblocking), sharpening and edge enhancement, etc. All those things screw up the picture.