The Blu Ray Ideal: Too Real?
by scatteredshadows - 8/10/09 9:11 PM
Over the last year, I've gone back and forth over whether to update my rig to Blue Ray. As someone who's traditionally been something of an early adopter, it hasn't been the cost of Blu Ray players that has kept me away.
No the problem is that I'm not sold on the benefits. To be more accurate, I don't know if I LIKE the "benefits". Everytime I've gone into an electronics dealer, I immediately pick out the displays that are running films off of Blu Ray discs because they are the LEAST ATTRACTIVE. The resolution seems so extreme, everything on the screen looks so sharply dilineated, that the cinematic quality is lost. Everything seems like high res security camera footage.
Which is fine if the film is intended to be verite. But was that really how the creators behind "Batman Begins" (particularly awful looking), "Iron Man" or "Slumdog Millionaire" (all playing at the store) wanted their films to be perceived? I doubt it, and it's not what I want from them either. That said, Peter Jackson's "King Kong" was playing on another screen that claimed to be ISF calibrated. And it looked excellent! The image was beautiful, crisp while retaining the cinematic look I thought was lost with Blu Ray. When I asked, the salesperson swore the display's source was a Blu Ray disc, not a DVD.
So, is it possible? If so, can ANY Blu Ray disc look like that if the display is calibrated right? Or did the salesperson not know what he was talking about?