FX4 wrote:Then get a 35MM projector, I mean we are talking about a $90.00 STB here. It's good enough for me and I am really picky. I can't stand all the digital artifacts watching a streamed ATV HD movie. Drives me nuts. The only real complaint my wife and I came away with is the dynamic range is compressed on the 5.1 THX track. Other than that it was a thoroughly enjoyable viewing experience far exceeding anything I thought this little box could do. I think you are being way too esoteric about your viewing experience. You are talking about the very top end of the analog format which is pretty much dead anyhow on a low end digital STB.
Okay -- I'll invest $20,000 in a 35mm projector for which I have no space, and begin collecting prints for $1000 a pop. That's clearly the only solution for someone who has already stated he's more than satisfied with a good 1080p transfer. Way to create a straw man argument.
It has nothing to do with the capabilities of the Roku box. Again, you create a straw man when you erroneously imply that I have any issue with the capacities of my $90 Roku. I have an issue with upscales that are being misleadingly marketed as HD when in fact they're HD only in terms of the actual file's resolution, where the native format is 480i/480p or lower.
Shall I begin creating a list of the likely 100+ titles on Vudu that appear to be mere upscales? Generally, if the title is even on Vudu to begin with, "esoterica" does not apply. "Esoterica" applies when you're talking the content on Fandor, or the videophile's dogmatic rejection of 30fps telecines.
You're not offering a clean, logical argument here that incorporates all of my points and observations. You appear to already have your mind made up and to be fixed to your position. You appear to be offering a blind, inflexible (and consequently faulty) defense. Again, I wonder if you've some affiliation with Vudu, Roku, or have anything actually at stake. If not, then your position flirts with fascism, as an entity like Vudu doesn't need your individual voice of support, yet you offer it anyway. Why? Vudu and the copyright holders retain 100% of the decision making power. They are responsible for the appearance of upscaled "HD" content and the dirty practice of finding a way to charge an HD premium for SD content. I have zero decision making power; I can merely report that I've found this.
How does it serve you to create straw man arguments and employ an aggressively dismissive tone ("Then get a 35mm projector") so as to undermine my argument and lend support to an amply empowered corporate entity (they're owned by Wal Mart) that has all of the decision-making authority, in this situation, and is using some of its discretion to make ethically unsound choices? What do you stand to gain by doing so, or what do you stand to lose by not doing so? What's at stake for you?