by dbzgundam » Thu Jul 06, 2006 3:37 pm
Ugh, really people... The actual reason a digi-beta looks like crap on the big screen is because it's STANDARD DEFINITION! Sure, it may be dark, but if it's a straight digital transfer, why is anyone speculating this to be from the source? Since when did anyone expect a standard definition tape to look anywhere near as detailed and sharp as a 35mm print?... Since this thread apparently.
Fancy lenses, projectors, and video calibration won't help a low-resolution source. Digi-beta is useless in my own opinion... 90Mbps? That's practically redundant, but then again the color space advantage (4:2:2 YUV vs. 4:2:0 YUV on DVD) is about all you'll gain from using digi-beta over a DVD. Regardless, the video quality will never significantly improve unless a high definition master is obtained, or, like everyone else has suggested, a 35mm print is used.