Film4 is better than BBC HD

[Badger0-0]

Ok, so I'm watching "The Cell" on film 4.

Crap film.

But why does it, imo, slaughter BBC HD for quality?

I know I've been bitching about BBC HD lately, but this really is superior to my eyes, especially with a light scene.

Darker scenes admittedly are not so good, but this shouldn't be happening.

I'm confused

 

[Starburst]

No good reason to compare a SD channel and a HD channel unless they are showing the same programme taken from the same master.
I'm pretty sure (not 100%) that if BBCHD actually started to show as many movies as BBC1 does and in this case screened the native HD master of The Cell it would look much better than the upscaled HD version from F4.

The movie is very colourful and stylised, should look good in HD no matter who screens it.

 

[Badger0-0]

No good reason to compare a SD channel and a HD channel unless they are showing the same programme taken from the same master.
I'm pretty sure (not 100%) that if BBCHD actually started to show as many movies as BBC1 does and in this case screened the native HD master of The Cell it would look much better than the upscaled HD version from F4.

The movie is very colourful and stylised, should look good in HD no matter who screens it.

That's a nice excuse Starburst and I quite like your answer

Except that it seems to indicate that film4 chooses better quality films

No good reason to compare a SD channel and a HD channel unless they are showing the same programme taken from the same master.

You have to be kidding me on this
You're right, there is no good reason to compare, because BBC HD should blow it out the water.
But it doesn't.
By a long chalk, imo.
As I said, it seems by your answer that a poxy channel like film4 gets better masters than the beeb.
Yeah, right.

I'm pretty sure (not 100%) that if BBCHD actually started to show as many movies as BBC1 does and in this case screened the native HD master of The Cell it would look much better than the upscaled HD version from F4.

Really?
I seriously doubt it mate

 

[Starburst]

Except that it seems to indicate that film4 chooses better quality films

Look at Blu-ray or say only movies that are on single layer Blu-ray, there will be variations in the image thanks to the production choices of the movies not because of authoring or encoding. It's that inherent difference with source material which never mattered with SD broadcasting which is now a factor in HD broadcasting and has always played a part in the cinema.

In that respect I don't think the "looK" of any movie is an issue for any broadcaster buying content from Hollywood and as we see the BBC do not buy many HD masters for the use on BBCHD, even over christmas the lineup was pretty poor.

You have to be kidding me on this
You're right, there is no good reason to compare, because BBC HD should blow it out the water.
But it doesn't.
By a long chalk, imo.
As I said, it seems by your answer that a poxy channel like film4 gets better masters than the beeb.
Yeah, right.

Why should it?
The source material varies from movie to movie and I've seen upscaled HD that looks better than native HD simply down to the quality of the master used and grain/noise can be absent from a SD master which produces a smoother image when upscaled while the native HD master has noise and grain.
For many that noise/grain is always a negative even though it may be inherent in the production thanks to the director and his DP making those choices or simply a side effect of storage/wear and tear etc and the lack of investment to create a cleaned up and restored master.

Really?
I seriously doubt it mate

Yeah, that particular movie is very in your face style/graphic wise which like animation and cgi translates very well in an upscaled HD environment and also would probably be well within the performance envelope of a 9.4mbit HD channel.
I am not say BBCHD will always be better especially with TV productions which are aired on BBC1 and BBCHD (the only valid comparison using the same master) but we know for a fact the source master makes a difference so until that is taken into account any comparison between channels is flawed.

 

[Badger0-0]

but we know for a fact the source master makes a difference so until that is taken into account any comparison between channels is flawed.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I know the master will make a difference.

The source material varies from movie to movie and I've seen upscaled HD that looks better than native HD simply down to the quality of the master used and grain/noise can be absent from a SD master which produces a smoother image when upscaled while the native HD master has noise and grain.

As above, but this is nothing to do with noise or grain.
This is simply about the sharpness or plain clarity of the picture.
And it's not as if it's a one-off.
I'm often impressed with ch4, film4 and ch5.
And I'm often decidedly underwhelmed with BBC HD.

I don't think it has anything to do with the masters.