480i Resolution DVDs

I recently bought a DVD of Richard Jewell from (fulfilled by) Amazon. It seemed blurry and out of focus. I initially thought the DVD might be a bootleg, but Blu-ray.com indicates the resolution of the DVD is 480i. Can this be correct? 1080p seems pretty standard. I cannot imagine a major motion picture studio in this day and age (Warner Bros.) issuing a DVD with such low resolution. It was like watching a VHS tape or low-def TV. I've never run into this problem before.

 

That's correct. The DVD format is NTSC (in the U.S.) and that's 480 interlaced lines (of 525).

EDIT: As far as being blurry, there may be something else going on with the material on the disc, like a poor standards conversion, inferior source material, or something similar. Even though NTSC is standard definition, it should still look good and sharp.

 

Still, I cannot believe a major motion picture like this would be issued in 480i. It's like 1990s technology. Is this done frequently? It's the only time I've run across it.

 

That's what DVD's are, 480i. Some people prefer them because they are cheaper, or are happy with DVD quality or their DVD players upscale the display to 1080i. My player upscales and plays blu as well. but a lot of DVD's look, after upscaled, about as good as the blu. The sound is better on blu, noticeably. I wonder if a DVD played at 480 would look blurry to me now, after all of these years watching 1080 and higher?

 

Amazon also has that film on blu-ray. Perhaps you should buy that instead.

 

They do to me, but not so bad that I can't watch it. So, not really BLURRY, but definitely softer.

 

OK. Then what am I missing here? Why does the movie look so horrible? Will a Blu-ray version of this movie be any better?

 

I did. I'm hoping its better. But I've been watching DVDs for a long time (as has everyone), most recently It's a Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood and even some old Hitchcock standard DVDs, as well as the most-recent seasons (non-Blu-ray) of Doc Martin and Game of Thrones. They all look good, if not great, on my Blu-ray player.

 

It might be a bootleg, that's been an issue with Amazon for awhile. I looked around the web and found no complaints about the picture quality.

 

I've seen a few, but no more. The case is stamped "Disc Made in Mexico" (for what it's worth) and is really flimsy. But it otherwise looks legitimate (e.g., the inserts, the digital download code and the disc itself).

 

I see "Richard Jewell" is a Warner-distributed title, so the "Disc made in Mexico" stamp is perfectly normal (I have some of these, too). No idea about the issue at hand, but maybe it's really just a crappy DVD transfer. These things happen.

 

VHS is 240
DVD is 480
Blu ray is 1080
Ulltra HD is 4k

 

My mistake on the DVD resolution. My knee-jerk reaction was that my TV is 1080 and the DVD is listed as 480 so that must be it. Perhaps the resolution is below 480. If VHS is 240, then my DVD copy seems about there.

 

I hear ya. Don't forget some Blu ray players can up convert it to 1080i

 

I've noticed standard DVDs indeed look great on my Blu-ray player - maybe even to the point of being enhanced as you indicate. But Richard Jewell was a horror show.

 

I guess it was just a poor recording. I remember recording all my important VHS to DVD and ya, it was still 240 no matter how you looked at it. But it looked pretty good at the time.

Maybe you just got a bad transfer...

 

That's the best - and the only - explanation so far. I am surprised that can happen with a mass produced DVD, but if it can it can. But I should have the Blu-ray soon - only a few dollars more, as it turns out. I could have watched the rest of the movie for the story for free (since I'm returning it), but (1) I want to enjoy the movie without the distraction of blurred faces; and (2) I might want to watch it again.

 

Many people are not aware that DVDs are not in HD.

You have to remember that HD did not exist back when DVDs were invented.

A minor correction regarding VHS. VHS is also 480.

 

You might consider that particular DVD title may have not had additional processing added to make it sharper. There are screegrabs of Blu-Ray titles like the Wizard Of Oz example below that show it be quite blurry played through my Sony BD player and a photo I took of how my 32in. 720p SamsungHDtv renders it cranking up its sharpening and eyeball calibrating for tonality and white balance.

Very different wouldn't you say for a Blu-ray? You may need to make sharpening adjustments on your TV. Not sure.

 

I keep coming back to the fact that every single standard DVD I've played on my Sony UBP-X800M2 Blu-ray player - even an old Dick Van Dyke episode from the 1960s - has looked marvelous. Then, all of a sudden, the Richard Jewell DVD looks like it was shot through a fog filter. I already have my sharpness on the high side. I wouldn't think I would need to increase it just for one DVD.

Though there are not a lot of negative comments about the resolution, here is one from Amazon that mirrors my experience.

This review is not about the movie, but the DVD which I had to experience. It has a terrible picture, "deserving" it a place among the worst DVDs not just of this century, but in the history of the medium.

The whole disc looks like it has undergone a soft focus treatment -- I was more than once looking for my glasses (which I found to have on evertime, of course). The resolution that Warner has put on disc here is equal, of not worse that VHS releases. Particularly if you plan to want this film on a larger screen (such as via projector), avoid this release.

Let me add that I found it quite disgusting that a major Hollywood studio is behind this release of a brand new 2019 film, and I wonder whether this is a strategic move to steer consumers toward higher priced mediums such as Blu-ray and 4K.

 

Is it a legitimate Warner Bros. Archive disc? Is it possible it's a bootleg? It's only a 2019 film, so it should look sharp as a tack.

As several others here have advised above, I think at this point, it's a mistake to buy DVD anything in 2020. You should at least be equipped with Blu-ray, if not 4K Blu-ray. A movie like this will look tremendous in HD or 4K.

 

It is 90s technology 95 to be exact

 

Better resolution in Europe (PAL)

 

It seems to be a legitimate Warner Bros. Entertainment DVD in a crappy ECO-Box case (first one of those pieces of **** I've seen). Nothing about the disc - which has official looking serial numbers and bar code-type markings - or the packaging looks wrong.

I haven't bought a standard DVD in a very long time (except for this one, which I took a chance on because it was part of Amazon's 3-for-2 deal). I have a Sony UBP-X800M2 Blu-ray player, which has worked very well with library DVDs and Blu-rays. Frankly, I was astonished how good some of the Warner, Criterion and Kino Lorber Hitchcock films have looked on my system. So good, in fact, it made we wonder whether I even needed to buy a Hitchcock Blu-ray collection (which I did).

 

Really. I wonder why that is.