3- you are after high fidelity sound that dvds lacking you have a decent sound setup

...
All in all though, I still think he's better off with DVD. I seriously doubt his film tastes are so eclectic that the films he wants are not on DVD. If he gets a LaserDisc player his irritating questions will be even more rampant as he discovers the quirks of the LaserDisc format.

Personally, I think the things he tells us are a lot weirder than the things he asks us. Like, for example, that thing about taking his mom and nephew somewhere or how he said he'd p**s off his mom by getting a LD player. I mean, why would one go on the internet to tell people about how they're going to try and p**s their mom off? Or advise on how to hide it from his mom? Why would I help someone p**s their mom off? I mean, who does that?

The mentally challenged. His YouTube Video's make me think he's not all there.

Go SpEd racer, Go...

well, if don't mind what is it.
you said something happend when you were younger in your video.

also what type of audio setup do you have at home, are you going to be able to take advantage
with the LD format?
and if you do have DVD why do you want LD?
just to get a version of die hard that may be slightly less in quality than the DVD?

now i feel that LD has a better picture than DVD, but after having the format since 89 and others longer than me.
but if i started now i don't know that i would, i'm sure i would have a super large DVD collection by now if i
never had LD.

...
What makes you prefer LaserDisc to DVD? I ask, not as any challenge or questioning of your preferences, but because I feel that the extended full RGB chroma response of DVD completely stomps LaserDisc. Unless mastered with Faroudja's Super NTSC encoder, and there are very few LaserDisc's that are, LaserDisc has normal chroma resolution which means 40 lines of full RGB color and 120 lines of orange and cyan (or their mix). DVD's 250 lines of full RGB color gives images a detail and texture that LaserDisc simply doesn't have. It's flat luminance response to 540 lines also allows near-film-based-motion-picture images, since a typical print in the theater has 600-700 lines of resolution due to film weave/jump/jitter and high speed duplication.
...

Rein-O,

What makes you prefer LaserDisc to DVD? I ask, not as any challenge or questioning of your preferences, but because I feel that the extended full RGB chroma response of DVD completely stomps LaserDisc. Unless mastered with Faroudja's Super NTSC encoder, and there are very few LaserDisc's that are, LaserDisc has normal chroma resolution which means 40 lines of full RGB color and 120 lines of orange and cyan (or their mix). DVD's 250 lines of full RGB color gives images a detail and texture that LaserDisc simply doesn't have. It's flat luminance response to 540 lines also allows near-film-based-motion-picture images, since a typical print in the theater has 600-700 lines of resolution due to film weave/jump/jitter and high speed duplication.

Again, please don't take this as anyway damning your preferences or saying they are wrong - I'm just wondering why you prefer it. And, ignoring the awful DNR and sound remixing many studios do, what's your take on Blu-ray?

BTW, what does Rein-o mean or stand for? I got Disclord from my Field-Sequential 3D VHD Video Disc player - before that I used StereoBoy or JukeboxBoy.

Is there any sure-fire way to tell if a disc was mastered with a Super NTSC encoder? Also, what about discs mastered from composite sources like D2 tapes? Does the D2 tape feature full chroma resolution and is then lowered when transferred to LaserDisc or does the D2 tape feature the reduced resolution as well? (I ask this question because I want to know if DVDs mastered from D2 tapes would also feature reduced chroma resolution)

The D2 format is a composite NTSC digital format and has 120 to 150 lines of color resolution and is capable of 500 lines of luma resolution. It has all the same artifacts (except noise) and limitations of composite NTSC LaserDisc. The D1 format was a MUCH more expensive format and was 100% component like DVD. It had around 250+ lines of chroma resolution and flat Luma response to 540 lines like DVD. Super NTSC had to be encoded from a component format like D1 and then stored on an NTSC composite format like D2 or LaserDisc or any of the professional analog videotape formats. No analog consumer video format could carry Super NTSC. Only the analog LaserDisc could.

An easy way to tell if a late-released disc was mastered in Super NTSC is to compare it to an earlier disc... As an example, when played via the 2D comb filter in my Panasonic 900 player, the 3M pressing of Dick Tracy has lots of dot crawl, cross color and "shimmer" in finely detailed areas - a later, Super NTSC disc such as Deep Impact, is basically devoid of these artifacts and you can see much more color detail - there's no need for 3D comb filtering. Super NTSC didn't require a sophisticated 3D comb filter since it "pre-encoded" the video so when comb filtered with a simple 3-line/2D comb filter like most all late model LaserDisc players have, the image would look almost like a true component format such as DVD, with almost no dot crawl and greatly reduced cross color "rainbows" and shimmer.

Using the S-Video output of your player, compare a late pressing like Deep Impact with one from the early 90's, like the Star Wars Definitive Collection, and notice the greatly reduced artifacts, increased color detail and clarity, etc. In the later pressing. They look almost like a DVD - you'll quickly learn to spot them - and also spot discs were the process wasn't used.

Super NTSC was a "smart" NTSC encoding system that constantly monitored the signal for things that would cause visible artifacts, and then it altered its encoding and filtering to encode the signal so the artifacts would be greatly reduced or eliminated completely. Faroudja won an Emmy for it and NBC used it for their prime time broadcasts for years.

LaserDisc's mastered from D2 tapes will have whatever artifacts the comb filter used imparted, since DVD is component, the D2 NTSC signal must be comb filtered into its respective chroma and luma channels. If everything was done right, it will be sharper than the LaserDisc made from the same source since DVD has basically flat frequency response and it won't have any additional noise added from the mastering and pressing process that LaserDisc always add's to a signal.

So any and all discs made before Faroudja's Super NTSC encoder would have only 40 chroma lines for blue? In other words, all composite encoders before that would cripple blue? Also, since orange gets a full 120 lines, I presume that means the same for red and yellow and so blue is the only color affected, is this right? And once Faroudja's encoder was available, did most discs use it?

your eyes are more sensitive to blue light than red and cyan. thats why you can cripple blue in mastering but still have decent outcome. engineer took advantage of strengths and weakness' of human eye sight. the same principle is still used today. full bandwith rgb is 4:4:4 in digital but digital media is stored or broadcast in 4:2:0. that is full luma, half chroma. then your display upsamples it to 4:4:4 RGB.
another example is store settings or many modern displays exhibit too much blue/light to attract customers. watch ice age, eight below, day after tomorrow etc. in store display/vivid mode. ice/snow will be in blue. a properly calibrated set should show snow/ice white.

but then I am not saying more chroma is not welcomed. they had to cut on something, it had to be chroma blue since even a little of it is still visible to human eye.

No, full 3 color reproduction (and every color that can be made from those 3 RGB colors) get a maximum of 40 lines of horizontal resolution. From 40 to 120 lines only a slightly reddish orange and cyan (and their mix) are available. We don't notice this because for large color areas we need full 3 color reproduction. For medium sized areas, 2 color reproduction will suffice and the human eye is most sensitive on the orange-cyan axis, so that was chosen for medium color detail. Above that, for smaller details, it's all reproduced in black and white. NTSC was encoded this way because there wasn't enough space in the spectrum to carry 120 lines of full color, so the "trick" of a narrowband 3 color axis and wideband 2 color axis was developed.

Here's the thing though - from the very start of color broadcasts in 1954, the VAST majority of televisions in NTSC color history only used the 40 line full color RGB part of the signal. The orange-cyan was thrown away, so the sets only had 40 lines of color resolution. All detail above 40 lines was reproduced in black and white. RCA came out with some projection sets in the 80's that used the full color signal, but they sold poorly. Curtis Mathis sets always decoded 120 lines, and made you pay highly for it too. Sony's first consumer set that decoded more than 40 lines of color was their first 35 inch XBR with component inputs in 1998. So, if you have a CRT set, it's about a 99% chance that it only decodes 40 lines of color. This changed with flat panel sets where the increased color detail was used so that NTSC didn't look too awful compared to HD.

Super NTSC, when used for broadcasts, just reduces artifacts, but for LD, because there is no audio carrier above the video like broadcast, there is room for a full 2MHz of full RGB color (160 lines).

Look up NTSC color encoding and decoding on Wikipedia and Google it too for more in-depth info on how color is encoded and decoded in composite NTSC.

From about 1995 or so, many LaserDisc's were mastered with Super NTSC, but only a small minority used the extended color response because Pioneer and the other manufacturers felt the D1 format was too expensive to use. So maybe 20% of late discs have extended color resolution. The proportion grew as Pioneer and the others tried to keep LaserDisc competitive with the vastly higher picture quality of DVD.

They didn't just cut blue, they cut all 3 colors and only provided greater response for orange and cyan, which we are most sensitive too. Notice how many movie posters use orange and cyan nowadays? It's because we are most sensitive to those two colors and notice them.

In terms of eyesight, we are the least sensitive to blue and most sensitive to green. Our eyes have far fewer blue receptors than red and green.