Japanese 3d bluray dvd player manufacturer who are author also for passing the avchd 2.0 specification are also not equipped this specification in their 3d bluray dvd players unlike Koreans like lg and Samsung are fully equipped with it. So buying Korean manufacturers 3d bluray dvd players is the wisest thing to do now as it is able to play all the specified format and their is no regret of buying anytype of disc which will not be able to play in Japanese 3d bluray players.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 16 of 16
I think it's a bit of an unrealistic assessment. The AVCHD 2.0 spec hasn't been out that long - there's not many devices AT ALL ANYWHERE that fully support it yet.
All the current crops of Korean players I tested, they are playing fine to my test. But those who are the main signatories to this specification the Japanese, all the players the current one are not supportive although they support profile 5 which is can be played back only on bluray disc but not on dvd disc. So the cost of producing 3d bd specification disc becomes much cheaper with dvd duallayer disc with avchd2.0 specification and the Korean players are master in it. So it will be wise decision to purchase lg and Samsung then to purchase sony or Panasonic as a personal 3d bluray dvd player.
Last edited by addu; 15th Dec 2012 at 02:35.
While I already agree that LG is a preferable brand for most consumers, I don't share those thoughts about Samsung.
Profile 5 = BD3D compliant, has nothing to do with AVCHD 2.0 spec. That's extra.
All this talk - which ACTUAL models? Can they even be gotten in other markets than yours?
If you are referring to Samsung, LG, SONY, Panasonic, and the usual junk available at big box stores, I can think of several brands of BD machines that are superior to any of them. Saying that LG is "better" than Samsung is nonsense. They are both toys, even if LG is slightly more likely to last a bit longer (say, for a few months rather than a few hours) and might decode more properly. I wouldn't waste a dime on any of them.
Last edited by sanlyn; 24th Mar 2014 at 11:58.
sanlyn, you are really believing your own hype, aren't you?
Truth is, there are STANDARD, Consumer-level major lines of hardware (not Toys, regarless of what you may posture) and there are High-end, Afficionado-level lines of hardware (as well as the rarer Business/Industrial, Pro, and Military lines). The former are not built anywhere near as long-lived as they used to be (nor as they SHOULD BE), but that is the world-wide trend in consumer electronics and has been for the last 15 years. The latter group have a little bit more profit margin with which they can play around to maintain build quality levels and features. But they DO come at a hefty price. Brands like Oppo and Onkyo often have better bottom line quality and more features, but they cost 5x-10x what standard consumer models do. In these times, most (including myself) cannot even THINK to afford buying into that august group.
But it's just balderdash to exclaim them "junk."
So, don't waste any time (or dime) with them. The OP wasn't really asking you to. He/she wanted to discuss(?-reasonably?) the relative merits of 3D & AVCHD 2.0 players. That's what I was trying to do. I can't figure out WHAT you were trying to do, except either bash the OP, me, or consumer devices in general, or all of the above.
And I guarantee you, that for the PRICE RANGE, a model of LG will vastly outshine a comparatively equivalent model Samsung both in terms of features (particularly consumer flexibility-friendly) and longevity.
If you really want to scientifically debate and rank the various devices in order to improve Videohelp's members' access to quality merchandise, and want to provide actual, verifiable statistical data to back up your statements, I'd gladly like to be a part of that. But without that, at this point, both you and I know that you are just speaking anecdotally, as am I (a Happy LG user, who DIDN'T waste their dimes).
You sometimes have some REALLY GOOD things to say, but then it is sometimes clouded by unrealistic pomposity.
I agree with everything you say , and thanks for agreeing with me as well . To summarize:
I would never recommend a Samsung product. If you'd like some knowledgeable reviews of the LG's playback qualities, you can find them aplenty. It appears the LG BD-390 gets the highest ratings I've seen for LG's, but they don't seem to fare that well when it comes to longevity. Earlier models have so-so to "OK" ratings. Given that you can get better/cleaner playback from Panasonic at nearly half the price, it comes down to your expectations: are you looking for durability? PQ? Audio? Multiple formats? Have at it. According to CNET, they're all pretty much alike, varying mostly by the number and placement of buttons. And I understand the thickness of the chassis is also considered a "cool factor", as well as the ability to play many PC formats that look downright godawful on TV.
The original premise makes no sense. I never got suckered into the hype over 3D anyway, but it seems to fit with the industry's trend for supercilious gimmicks. But would you say that LG displays gimmicks better than some other brand, or would you choose LG for durability? In either case, there's no argument. Both are like buying lottery tickets. Neither LG nor Samsung actually deliver anything more than a multiple-outsourced box made from intechangeable parts from an ever-changing stream of parts makers who are equally interchangeable. Both companies put more of their own OEM parts into other brands than they do into their own.
Whether this stuff is Japanese or Korean is irrelevant. None of them are made in the brand's own country anyway. Even the metalized plastic logos could have been made in Mexico and glued on in the Bahamas.
BD specs change every 15 minutes. Whatever you get, it's obsolete by the time your credit card charge is approved. Worrying about this week's specs is like worrying about the weather.
Last edited by sanlyn; 24th Mar 2014 at 11:58.
Interesting way of both conceding "agreement" and yet insinuating further condescension...
Well, as anybody who has read much of what I post here will tell you, I am one of those who believe 3D is
1) here to stay (it's already been an industry boon since 2004 (polar express) with no end in sight after 9 years and is still expanding markets),
2) not a gimmick (if you fully understand it and play to its strengths, though clearly some producers haven't) but FULL of further artistic possibilties (please see Hugo & Life of Pi!! - in 3D), and
3) not necessarily something to be "suckered" into any more (or less) than surround sound or color or hdr is - though one should only get excited and become an active consumer when you are ready to appreciate it (and I guess you aren't yet)
Of course, I'm trying to make part of my living working in stereo3d, so I am somewhat biased, but I also have been privy to witness some of the literally JAW DROPPING images & enhanced moods that have hitherto be unavailable in 2D.
For all I know, you could have physical problems with binocular vision (a small portion of the population do), so that could make sense of your seeming "sour grapes" remarks.
On the hardware arena, if I could afford it, I would be getting Onkyo, Denon, Oppo, maybe Marantz & older Pioneer equipment also.
Someday when I'm not putting multiple kids through college...
Yet your other suggestions would be much better received if you didn't make clear to all us "unprivileged" that we're living in squalor without the "right" stuff.
BTW, BD specs are only changed (always in a backward-compatible way) about every 6-9 months or longer. It's easy to look up at bluraydisc.com. You're more credible when you don't resort to hyperbole.
All I tested was on u.s.bound players and the latest. On all Koreans players it played fine but I regret about Japanese and they seems to me the biggest manipulator of this entire bluray market.
@cornucopia, I'm with you on the cost factor. I've put cash and time into less than ideal gear. I stll do. But when I get the long-sought chance to upgrade, I do. Thus, my own first BluRay players were 7 months ago, and the new (and old) Denons were all grabbed at closeouts. Not to demean what others own; I've had my share of Panasonics, and Samsung before that, and Toshiba back when they made stuff many people valued with the family pearls. I spent lots of time watching other owners' BD players until I felt I could get my $$$'s worth.
Addu mentions that he found u.s-bound players falling short. No surprise. As with many other countries, u.s. consumers have their quirks. You can find major differences in models shipped to other areas, too. I'm not surprised that the U.S. is often the last place (and sometimes the first place) where innovation or update is marketed. It has to do with factors such as yankee engineers falling behind and unable to service new technology. Or it could be economics or any number of factors, as most big outfits today are not managed by engineers or even by marketing geniuses, but by accountants and investment-market types.
QUOTE=Cornucopia;2206334]Interesting way of both conceding "agreement" and yet insinuating further condescension...[/QUOTE]Sorry, condescension not intended. Occasional disagreement, yes.
Almost every time someone mentions 3D I'm reminded of an early experience with it -- not on a miniscule 40-something-inch screen, but in a movie theater where the screen was bigger than life. Few are likely to see the 3D sci-fi classic "It Came From Outer Space" on a big 3D screen. The kids won't watch because it's black and white. In the movie, Richard Carlson has located a cliffside cave in which the "entity" from outer space has protectively hidden itself. Standing outside the cave, Carlson asks who are you, what do you want? The unseen visitor goes into a longish spiel and attempts to explain, and during that speech the camera looks directly into the dark cave and very slowly, slowly zooms in. What you saw in 3D was a black void of endless depth. The closer the camera zooms in, the deeper the void becomes. The sensation of incomprehensibly increasing depth and void is achieved without a single object in sight, except a small portion of the cave's outer perimeter in one tiny corner of the screen that's near the audience....until the entire screen is filled with "black depth". You know that somewhere, something is in there, and because you can physically feel the depth you keep peering into it, your face leans toward the screen. You aren't just pulled deeper inside by the camera, you can feel and see an infinite black distance and you try to get deeper into it......When you watch this in 2D, those sensations are entirely missing. It's just a boring slow zoom into a black screen.
No matter that the movie is a "B" feature. That scene is celebrated in cinema history because the story line, the development of suspense and mystery, and the effect itself are inseparable. In effective art, form follows function and less almost always means more -- not the other way around. When 3D specialists can ally effect with content, rather than present it as effect for its own sake, I'll be more impressed. The technical skill for doing this exists. What's missing is more depth (pardon the pun).
Last edited by sanlyn; 24th Mar 2014 at 11:58.
Well, I'm with you there regarding creators adding more depth (meaningfulness), import and originality to their storytelling.
There is already a major lack of that in film, whether 2d or 3d.
However, partly because of my technical background, I would consider myself a neo-(hyper?)formalist classicist with post-structuralist tendencies. That's a mouthful, and has some (intentional) ambiguity to it, but it goes a lot towards explaining my approach both of film creation and its appreciation.
So we have some differences in approach - I'm guessing you are more of a realist or straight classicist at heart.
I like your description of ICFOS, and I am heartened to hear you not dissing the technology out-of-hand but requiring its link to context. Btw, while I do promote usage of many/as-many technological elements as possible to "get the job done", the job being the audience's engagement, maybe I should temper that to "as many as necessary" because like you I see no reason to add a dimension to the story for the sake of adding dimensions. The kernal of idea behind the story should enlighten which dimensions are most attuned to evoking that story. So I love a good Black & White movie as much as Color ones, and vice-versa. Monochromaticity is still a strong artistic tool even today.
..ok, that went way offtopic!
I think we've agreed to disagree, but I've learned alot and have some greater respect for your perspective. Hope you can say the same on your side...
I'm from the old school of 3D. I still think it is necessary for each new generation of kids to see it. Once they see enough of it and realize that content is more important than visual stimulation, then they will tire of it and 3D will wait till the next generation of kids to come around. Some of us old guys still remember the stereo '3D' art/photo cards that you looked through special glasses to view. Those were really something, but after you looked at 20 cards or so it was time to eat dinner and we never looked at them again.
Well, I wouldn't say you were from the old school of 3D, more like you were from the old school of 3d-haters, or more likely gimmick-haters.
When 3D (or anything else) is just a gimmick, it doesn't last long. But 3D has more to it than just gimmick, whether YOU'VE witnessed that or not. That part will not die.
And I don't know what you're talking about not liking stereocards, unless you were talking about the stupid disney-fied somewhat recent takeover of GAF/Viewmaster, where the only thing that is sold is "cardboard cutouts of animated characters arranged on a plane". Which would be boring by ANYONE'S standards.
REAL (aka shot-in-3d) Viewmaster reels are collector's items (and I have about 150 of them, along with similar stereopticon formats), including beautiful panaramas of some exotic locales that aren't in existence anymore. Those don't "get boring after 15 minutes" and are worth coming back to for YEARS. And one of the whole point of this recent resurgence in 3D is the rise of digital technology to remove some of the last obstacles that were hindering mass acceptance (which is where old stereopticons & viewmasters were lacking).
If you haven't experienced 3d in this way yet, you really ought to hold off judgement. That's like an insular midwestern US white dude dismissing French cuisine because it's just stuff that has "stinky cheese".
edit: doesn't look like the OP has anything more to say about Japanese vs. Korean bd hardware in terms of 3D and AVCHD 2.0 functionality. Still wondering about ACTUAL models...
You made many good points Scott. Time will tell if you are correct on all of them.
Boy I hope so! I really did want to make some good money this way (you know, something you like and are good at also being something you are a financial success at)...
It is still too soon to tell, though I'm thinking it'll only look that much better when married with higher FPS, 4k+ rez & HDR (those "next big things").
Anybody ever get a chance to watch a pic in "Smell-O-Vision?" What a hoot!
I see merit to all sides of 3D (oops. Another pun. Sorry). Meanwhile, when will this update circus end? -- rhetorical question, I know. It ends when it reaches the point of diminishing financial returns, the same way other ventures run their course. For someone who gets annoyed even at Flash Player nags, I'm on the side of not worrying about updates or who's-on-first with them for at least 3 or 4 years at a time...or longer, if my equipment still works. I realize that being thus outdated might not get me the latest feature or something, but...good heavens, you have to get out sometime. Like, go to a movie and see it the way the creator intended. 3D or not.