Personally, I prefer to experience movies when *I* want to see them (including pauses for bathroom breaks), and without having to listen to the people in front of me discussing the plot of the movie (or the mother four rows away disciplining her unruly kids).
Plus, of course, the equipment is only as good as the operator. I've watched movies that were out of focus a good part of the time, or in theatres where the sound balance was way off. If it's too bad I complain to the manager. The experience of a well set up all-digital cinema is pleasant. But that still forces me to watch when it's convenient for them, not for me, and they still want exorbitant sums for drinks, etc. And with increasing age, and decreasing hearing and vision, a large-screen HDTV with a 5.1 surround sound system is just fine, and noticeably better than a small screen and only stereo sound. On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 09:24:28PM +0100, DagT wrote: > You didn?t get the point did you? > > If you want quality you go to the movies. HDTV may be better than TV > but it is still second best. > > And yes, I do prefer to listen to music live, but that is harder to > accomplish so I have a good stereo. > > DagT > > Den 20. des. 2006 kl. 20.53 skrev J. C. O'Connell: > > > I never claimed that HD equals a good print. Buts its way > > closer to a good print/REALITY than analog TV is or ever was and thats > > the > > whole topic of discussion here. Just because you prefer a print > > over HD image or going a movie theater over a HD image, that is not > > the point, the point is that HD tv image is preferable to an analog TV > > image, because these both are the same thing as each other in > > terms of function, its just that HD does it much more accurately. > > Movie theaters and still prints are not the same function/thing > > as either HD and analog tvs. > > jco > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of > > DagT > > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 3:50 AM > > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > Subject: Re: RE: Please everyone set up an email filter > > > > > > Yes, I have. Quality. I have yet to see a screen with the same > > quality > > as a good print. The 21" apple monitor is OK, but still not that > > good. > > Not just the sharpness but also the texture of the picture is > > better on > > paper. > > > > Movies are different, and I still prefer to watch a good movie in a > > cinema with darkness and no distractions from family, telephones etc. > > Action and science fiction may be OK to watch at home but I avoid > > looking at the really good ones at home. It just spoils the > > impression. > > > > DagT > > > >> > >> Fra: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Emne: RE: Please everyone set up an email filter > >> > >> Have you ever asked yourself WHY? > >> Its not very logical that you > >> can appreciate a really good "print" > >> but video picture quality doesnt > >> matter at all to you. That would only be logical > >> if you didnt watch TV at all. Umm, let's see, > >> maybe you are not aware of really how good > >> (how much better than analog) a HD image can look and thus assume you > >> dont or wouldnt care but you actually would once you see the > >> difference? Thats all I can come with with your still being of sane > >> mind.... jco > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > >> Of DagT > >> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 5:18 PM > >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> Subject: Re: Please everyone set up an email filter > >> > >> > >> No, it is true. I couldn?t care less about TV quality, but I love a > >> good print. So much in fact that I still make fiber based and > >> selenium toned BW prints from 6x6 negatives myself. Accept the > >> difference. > >> > >> DagT > >> > >> Den 19. des. 2006 kl. 23.04 skrev J. C. O'Connell: > >> > >>> I forgot something, THE PICTURE (quality) IS NOT > >>> IMPORTANT "for a lot" of people? Are you crazy? I am posting this > >>> stuff in a photo forum inhabited by mostly photographers. > >>> They should know better than that unless all they watch is > >>> hillbilly shows like COPS, Pro Wrestling, AND Fear Factor. Thats not > >>> the demographic of this group I dont think makes > >>> any sense to say that. Vastly improved picture > >>> quality enhances motion pictures just as much it does > >>> still pictures...Come on with this stuff! > >>> jco > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > > > >>> Of Cory Papenfuss > >>> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 4:23 PM > >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >>> Subject: RE: Please everyone set up an email filter > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > >>> > >>>> Why should I "accept" an opposing opinion > >>>> (especailly one I STRONGLY oppose) I that dont believe in or > >>>> cannot be > >>> > >>>> backed up with a good factual argument to support > >>>> it. I wont and never will. Its called conviction. > >>>> I dont expect everyone to agree with me on everything, > >>>> and many many things are gray which I avoid. > >>>> But to expect me to just "accept" anything else > >>>> without good cause is simply crazy. And secondly, > >>>> I honestly believe that there are people posting > >>>> here opposing viewpoints they dont even believe > >>>> in just to oppose me no matter what I post. > >>>> jco > >>>> > >>> > >>> You don't have to accept it. You should, however, realize that > >>> others might have a wildly different point of view and an opinion. > > > >>> That > >>> > >>> doesn't make them wrong, just different from your viewpoint. When > >>> you express your *opinion* as FACT and then argue with those who > > don't > >>> agree > >>> > >>> with those "facts," it incites anoyance. > >>> > >>> The HDTV "argument" was particularly obtuse. Yes the picture is > >>> > >>> better... quantifiably so. Yes the prices have come down... they > >>> are still not cheap. You fail to understand that for a lot of > > people, > >>> TV is > >>> > >>> not very important... whether the picture is NTSC or IMAX, it > >>> doesn't matter to them. It's a *personal choice* on their part that > > you > >>> need to > >>> > >>> be able to accept and understand. > >>> > >>> -Cory > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> ******************************************************************** > >>> ** > >> > >>> ** > >>> * > >>> * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA > >>> * > >>> * Electrical Engineering > >>> * > >>> * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University > >>> * > >>> ******************************************************************** > >>> ** > >> > >>> ** > >>> * > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > >> DagT > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> [email protected] > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> [email protected] > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > DagT > > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
