Agreed. Watching Blu-Rays on a CRT is a waste.

Might not be so bad on a late Sony XBR, heck they even have HDMI+HDCP...

If it's HD, 16:9 and big enough, then yeah maybe those late model CRTs are the exception.

Here's a capture from the Blu-Ray taken right from the disc which is certainly necessary in this discussion as the shot from the CRT doesn't give a good representation of the BD at all. It looks pretty nice in motion. Not perfect but still good.

I still see white crush on the lights.

@nissling
Did you compress the shot or just downscale to 1600x900? I notice dithering on the light flare. I'm just wondering if it's really true that "bluray" specs only do up to 4:2:0 chroma sampling.

Tinypic only allows 1600*900 so they downscaled it.

I find it strange how some complain about white and black crushes and mpeg-compression on DVD and Blu-Ray but never about video noise, dot-crawl, rainbowing, smearing etc. on Laserdisc.

Well I have to lower the ISO on the camera otherwise I get too bright on the brighter images like the lights on the train.

THE MATRIX on itv2 tonight and just finishing now. Its panned & scanned and its the dreadful same as the bluray. Same colour and boasted levels. Also it was uncut with all the head-butting.



Still can't see the extra image detail behind the train lights. The Laserdisc is still the winner.DVD at second position.


I can't stand the audio compression on the PCM Dolby broadcast it feels like a pumping effect. End credits was scope? itv2 too tight to show it in 2.35:1. So more image bottom is visible of Super35.

Because the color accuracy is way better on my CRT than a modern LCD and I'm not going to change displays just for my BD player and PS3, especially when the latter doesn't even have any games I care about that exceed 720p.

It's not always about resolution.

Edit: in regards to The Matrix, I have the 10th anniversary BD and it suffers from the modified color timing that plagues most every release after the original VHS, LD and DVD prints.

Are you for real or do you have some sort of magic high-end CRT that you've compared to the cheapest HDTV on the market? There are lots of cheap LCDs or LEDs out there that doesn't hold up very well but honestly there's no reason for me to see why someone would still stick with a CRT other than economical reasons. I moved from a 20" CRT from Samsung to a 42" plasma from Panasonic (manufactured in 2007) which I got for free from my parents. I don't regret it a single bit, even though I'm mostly watching Laserdiscs and play vintage video games on it.

The Matrix is partly noisy and fuzzy as hell on Laserdisc (just look at the Neo vs. Morpheus sequence), but some scenes do look great like the lobby shootout but it cannot hold up to the much stronger textures on the Blu-Ray. I also prefer the color timing on the Blu-Ray and the captures from Laserbite does absolutley not give a good representation of it as they're all dark and show lots of black crush that doesn't exist on the transfer.

@nissling
Lol. hauntmedoitagain probably meant he uses a HDTV CRT. I would agree 480i CRTs are pretty bad though. Heck, I have a 27" Sony with 10-bit digital 3D comb filter (yeah 3D comb filter even), supposedly one of the latest and greatest 480i CRTs invented, and it does look pretty bad with laserdisc ( lots of nasty blotches and crosstalk ). Was surprised. Can see where you're coming from with composite, crosstalk, and noise though, but I think you'd agree an external comb filter is considerably better through a computer or highdef CRT, than a 480i set IMO.

If I use my computer CRTs , everything does look completely different and better than all the LCDs I've used (and there's no motion blur). Your bluray shot on my laptop LCD for example , looks extremely dull, pale, and overbright (blacks look grey), and I can't really make out the color difference on the other shots. But on my computer CRT the colors are deep and rich; that's actually how I noticed the dithering on the light flare hehe. The only downside I see to CRTs are the small size, but I really don't mind having one as a monitor (kinda nice to be away from scaling and blurays do look very nice on it).

Still can't help but notice a strikingly better picture on the CRT screenshots from laserbite34 . I'm not even joking. It's amazing laserbite34's shots were from a shutter camera using a CRT display with a result of extreme color loss, and the raw bluray shots (albeit downscaled) still show amazingly clear flaws in comparison. I guess I am strange but the DVD or laserdisc of the Matrix, they both look way better than the bluray to me (can actually see all four headlights individually on the train).

Right now I'm debating whether I should get a plasma or 4K LCD-LED. Don't feel like sitting 3-5 feet away from display for 4K, and Plasma does seem more similar to CRT (no motion blur, deep contrast and colors). Unless 4K plasma's are produced, I still might get a plasma .

Great shots BTW everyone. Wonderful thread

Really, really, really want hauntmedoitagain to do some LD Matrix captures through his setup on the same shots. Perhaps nissling can see what a good 3D comb filter is all about. Pretty, pretty, pretty please?!

edit:
@hauntmedoitagain
Nevermind. Noticed you don't have the Matrix LD.

@nissling
Noticed your Alex-1 shots share the same resemblance as msgohan's and cpix's "Wizard of Oz" shots. The HLD-X9 does appear to have contrast or brightness boosted. I hope you don't stop with your LD captures.

I have a Sony PVM-20M4U, it's a broadcast-grade monitor with SMPTE C phosphors that I've calibrated to SMPTE bars on all inputs. There's not going to be a commercial grade display that will top it any time soon, especially when it comes to LCD... even the IPS panel in my iMac doesn't compare.

Anyway, I've never been fond of the huge green shift more recent releases of The Matrix have; it looks okay in the city shots but anything set on the Nebuchadnezzar looks very, very wrong, losing the desaturated sterility they're supposed to have. If you saw the film back when it came out, you'll know exactly what I mean.

If I can ever get a copy of The Matrix LD for a reasonable price (really don't want to pay more than $75 for it tbh and that's being generous) I'll be sure to screencap it, especially since I just got my hands on a Panasonic LX-H670 that has flawless CLV tracking a few weeks back.

Aside from size, weight, geometry, convergence, and power consumption issues (which are significant, don't get me wrong) CRT beats LCD totally. A good CRT is blacker and has better color accuracy, usually twice as much sensitivity in red, for example.

My CRT (XBR960) is a huge pain in the a**. It weighs 250lbs and is three feet thick. However, when it dies I will cry because I vastly prefer it to anything else. This was a $2500 display. I'm not too poor to buy some crappy Vizio.

I have a Bravia LCD of the same size as well. It's way way brighter, but it's not better.

This is a thing that is very hard to explain to people who don't know. With a trillion dollar industry is trying to sell them stuff 24/7 is hard to ignore. If you've ever dealt with pro level video, film, or graphical design you already know this.

If the CRT is HD-ready that is 16:9 and big enough, then fair enough, it very well may be better then some LCD and plasma sets, but anything less and I see a lot of wasted resolution regardless of how much better you think the colors might be, which is where Blu-Ray is a giant leap forward over LD and DVD. I'm not saying Blu-Ray won't look better then DVD and Laserdisc even on a normal old 4:3 CRT because it will, but I just don't think you are quite uderlizing the absolute maximum out of the Blu-Ray format or HD in general.

personally I don't even choose to use either of my CRT displays for DVD or Laserdisc (I upscale both DVD and Laser to 1080i on my LCD TV instead), but I do still have a couple of CRTs kicking around, one flatron hooked up to my PS2 in a different room, and the other I keep around for sentimental value.

I've never stumpled upon any reason for me to prefer CRT. Of course, a good CRT can be very nice in its own way but I've never seen a CRT in my whole life with equally good or better color accuracy than my Panasonic plasma (I'm not much for LCD but I still highly prefer them over CRT).

Either way, I've got The Matrix on LD as well if someone wants any captures from it.

@nissling
If you could post captures with the r7g that would be wonderful (some new caps in addition to the subway). I can't believe you have the Matrix LD, and you prefer the bluray... Do you have the Australian DVD of Matrix? Supposedly it uses the same transfer as the LD. Matrix LD is extremely hard to come by.

The Laserdisc is far from being perfect and is certainly not in the same league as other late releases. It has excessive noise in most scenes (like when Neo gets the phone at his office, the entire wall is filled with green chroma noise) and sharpness tend to feel quite fuzzy. Very characteristic for a Warner title, although some of their releases were more or less outstanding. The first I come to think of is A Clockwork Orange. The ludovicho sequences (especially the one where a man is beaten up) had some really excellent colors and felt very authentic but I remember the Blu-Ray having a similar color timing so it's not really exclusive for the format.

Now I've managed to get lots of captures from The Matrix but also three other titles. Here they are.

Settings used (0-9)

Y-NR: 2
C-NR: 5
3D Y/c: 5
Sharpness: 0

Goldeneye: Special Edition (1995) [ML105544]





Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) [LD 83657-WS]











The Big Lebowski (1998) [ID4500PG]









The Matrix (1999) [17665]























The Matrix clearly have a flawed transfer on Laserdisc (although the stereo mix is outstanding). I'd say Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas looks much better in every possible way. I can provide captures from the Blu-Ray and Scandinavian DVD.

EDIT: By the way, I'm borrowing two of the captures from Hippiedalek just for comparison. Quite a remarkable difference though not exactly the same frames and certainly not the same equipment for recording.

Quite a difference. The connection method I used for getting the screenshot accounts for some of the noise in my screenshots, I obviously didn't correct the aspect ratio either. Your method shows a lot more clarity and better colours than mine. Out of interest what player are you using? Those screenshots were taken a few years ago with my Pioneer CLD-V1210D, if I manage to get DScaler working with Windows 8.1 then I'll have to see if I can improve my screenshots with the DVL 919E that I use now.

I'm using a CLD-R7G and recording was made with a DVR-LX70D. The DVD Recorder suffers from chroma upsampling issues and deinterlacing is soft (my DVDO Edge beats the s**t out of it), but it's easy to record LDs with it and the result can be tolerable. I also think that VLC makes the captures darker (I don't use any external settings in the program) or it could be something wrong with my capture card.

Cheers for the info, a much better set up than I'm using for the occasional capture. Great screenshots!