Comparison finds iTunes 1080p video nears Blu-ray disc quality - Page 5

It gets more complicated than that. I've had some access to see how Hollywood studios encode movies for DVD. At least when it comes to big Hollywood movies where they care about the quality of the end product, the process is very much manually done.

Largely all of the tools used are proprietary. The encoding software is proprietary. They have a person who makes a choice about how each scene is compressed. They manually add compression and decrease compression to maximize the picture quality.

That process is very far different from how Apple is creating video for iTunes or how Netflix will encode for its own streaming.

My over all point being. They may wind up more or less at the same point. How they get there is very different.

This is true and many here arguing for Blu-ray feel quality should trump convenience.

The irony being that this same equations fits Blu-ray. Blu-ray is lesser quality than theatrical presentation and is more convenient. Why should the progress of convince somehow stop with Blu-ray?

Being that you are the smartest person you know (since we can insult each other now)- You would know that banding is much more visible on darker colors than lighter colors. So- if your TV wasn't calibrated correctly, and wasn't as bright as it should be, you would see banding much more prominently. In addition, you adjust sharpness when you calibrate. If sharpness is too high, it can exaggerate artifacts or even create them. You could have a Blu Ray that had no Halo or Ghosting artifact that showed, but because your TV isn't properly calibrated- it appears you do. This has nothing to do with the content of the Blu Ray, it is all in your poorly calibrated TV. To claim that calibration has nothing to do with visible artifacts is incorrect. Plain and simple.

But, of course, as smart as you are, you already knew that.

But while you're calling me snobby- I mentioned a $20 Blu Ray that you can buy earlier in this thread- again, I'll mention it- World of Wonder (WOW) from Disney. I believe most people can purchase a $20 Disc- but of course, that would make them snobs too since they would be able to have a pricey and luxurious $20 disc that only the best can afford. Congrats on sounding like a douche.

How many threads do I have to make you look like on idiot before you just stop responding?

Here is the last one you didn't know what you were talking about.

Oh, maybe just one.

No one said that buying BR made you a snob. But the attitude that BR is the only fit format to watch and anyone who doesn't spend a fortune calibrating a TV does.


You were wrong there, too. The guy wasn't fined for filing a frivolous suit. He was fined for ignoring a judge's order.

No one ever said Blu-ray is the only fit format to watch. iTunes, Netflix, etc. all have their place and can co-exist. The problem is that people keep trying to compare Blu-ray and streaming/digital downloads in far less than ideal conditions and claiming it's "nearing" the quality of Blu-ray or that the difference is marginal at best. That's simply not true any way you look at it.

A fortune= $24 shipped to your door.

And the title of that article is "Attorney Orly Taitz Fined $20,000 for Frivolous Birther*Litigation". Even when your wrong, proven wrong, and everyone knows you're wrong. "You" still aren't wrong.

Blu-ray has the edge on quality. No need to keep arguing that point.

Where the argument now is on streaming/downloading being good enough that the mass market could choose it as a viable option despite the fact that Blu-ray has better quality.

Those who advocate for Blu-ray are working so hard to advocate because they know the quality gap is small enough to edge the mass market towards streaming/downloading as their preference.

Also the reason why Hollywood is bending over backwards to lock digital download copies into bolstering Blu-ray sales. Given the choice most people who just choose the digital download and forgo the Blu-ray disc.

So your point is that you're not capable of reading past the headline?

He was fined only because the judge had previously ordered him to stop filing litigation on the matter. That makes it a contempt issue, not a penalty for filing a frivolous suit.


Exactly. For many, many people, DVD is good enough and certainly streamed 1080p is more than good enough. All the people screaming "you can't even compare them" are obviously trying to show off how great they are compared to all of us normal folks.

Which brings us back to one of the points I made very early on in this topic: for the final ouput quality of a video, only the following variables matter: codec, encoder, bitrate. What you are describing is better encoding (apparently optimized manually, which I find very surprising since encoders have very sophisticated algorithms to optimize encoding, that probably beat a human 9 out of 10 times). Since Apple can encode iTunes content with exactly the same encoder and codec for 720p and 1080p, and encoder and codec can be the same as used for Blu-Ray discs, only one factor that matters remains, which is bitrate.

Adding all of this together, there is no way iTunes content can come close to Blu-Ray, which can go over 20 times the bitrate as iTunes for complex scenes.

I have to agree with your math. But...
Yesterday we watched some movies and tv shows in 1080 on our new and just delivered AppleTV3 (came at 730 am). We were blown away by the quality. The videos and sound were spectacular. The video was ready to play in no more than 5 seconds after purchase too, which hasn't changed for us even with the higher resolutions provided. The high quality of the 1080p content on iTunes definitely means that we will never buy another bluray disc. A task already reserved for only the most stellar/blockbuster videos released anyway. btw, the last bluray purchase was avatar upon release in 2009 so it's been a while... It is not worth the effort no matter how easy some describe the process. The truth is that even at 720p, the convenience of iTunes rentals and purchases have made physical copies obsolete in this household.
Another bonus to this system is the streaming we can do of our purchases, and I do not have to maintain storage and back-up of content which is very expensive and a pain. I've got bigger fish to fry...
We have owned all genre of apple tv since the first release, and we were always very pleased with the 720p videos from iTunes. In fact we have had many guests comment on how amazing the video quality was at 720 on these devices. Some thought there was no way a video could look or sound any better than the videos we watched from apple. Mind you I do have an above average set-up here for movies and sound/music. 55" tv with an in ceiling speaker systems and amplifiers from speaker craft. But the video part is what most all people would comment on if asked about the quality of a movie. And if you have a 1080p tv then size/dimension of tv is about the only thing that matters after that, forget the sound too, 99% people don't know shit from apple butter about sound quality. If the sound has clarity, then its great...
now to craigslist that obsolete blu-ray player. Maybe i can get $25 for that $300 machine before the masses realize it's antiquated and cumbersome purpose.

It was nice of Apple to deliver the new TV a day early too!

Once again, your argument is flawed because you want to make an arbitrary definition of 'come close'. For many, many, many people, even DVD is close enough to Blu-Ray that they can be compared. In fact, it's only the geek fringe that wants to insist that if it's possible to see any difference at all that you can't make the comparison because streamed 1080p is worthless.

Aren't DVD sales and rentals still trumping Blu-ray even though most TVs sold are HD? And what about Netflix, cable/sat, and all other video streaming sites that are much more popular than any optical media. Bottom line: Convenience trumps quality in almost all instances.

Did you read anything I wrote except my statement iTunes 1080p doesn't come close? I think I've explained at least 3 times that I already see a huge quality difference myself when looking at video that has 3 times the bitrate of iTunes 1080p, and a Blu-Ray source of the same movie. This is not some kind of geek fringe or some argument based on theory, but a real-life example. I also said this is on a pretty average-size TV and audio setup.

Saying that for some people 'even DVD is close enough to Blu-Ray' is almost a joke, if that's your only argument, then why are you even using Apple products and not some cheap-ass knockoff that happens to get the same work done, just more frustratingly. If you lower your standards enough, anything is 'good enough', why stop at DVD if VHS is 'good enough' for many people?

You seem to have taken the argument from 'iTunes content doesn't come close to Blu-Ray content' to 'iTunes content is crap' or 'iTunes content is unwatchable', but that's not the point. I have no problem watching DVD content or low-quality video streams, as long as the content itself is worth watching. But that doesn't mean the video quality is irrelevant or all of a sudden 'almost as good' as something else which is clearly better.

You have to stop trying to sound logical, have actual proof, and have reason when you speak to jrag. Because he doesn't listen to any of it. He is the Ostrich of all Ostriches- he puts his head in the sand, and doesn't pay attention to the truth around him.

A barometer is simple- you take 100 people in a room, and you have them watch a DVD, iTunes 1080p, and a Blu-Ray- all of the same scenes in the same movie (A Pixar film would be perfect for this). Then you have them pick which is which and pay them $20 if they can identify which is which. I would guarantee you that with a properly calibrated Television and an ideal sitting range, that the vast majority could tell you which is which (if they rate it by best, middle, worst picture quality). Whether we debate what the words "Close to" mean or not (which is about the dumbest empty argument you could have), "noticeable" is a much better word. I, like the majority of others, can notice the difference. Jrag and the other people who are, in his words, inferior to those that have better, calibrated (with a ritzy $20 calibration disc) television sets, might not be able to tell the difference- but they are in the minority. Instead of using "close"- use the word "noticeable". And Blu-Ray is a noticeable improvement over iTunes.

What you're missing is that not everyone shares your perception. To a large percentage of people, streamed 1080p is "almost as good" and blu-ray is not "clearly better".

Note that this isn't asserting that this is true for you or true for everyone. Rather, it is merely acknowledging that people have different perceptions of quality.

Now for a an analogy. I am a beer snob and can tell the difference between Ruination IPA and Triple Hopped Miller Lite. To me the Ruination is "clearly better" and the Miller is not "almost as good". On the other hand, it would be ridiculous to proclaim that everyone shares this perception. Some people can't taste the difference or don't care enough to even notice.

The same could be said in regard to coffee, designer clothing, mp3s and bicycles. It all boils down to personal perception. Quality differences are noticeable to some people but not to others. When discussing topics like this, it is important to be clear if talking about personal preference or average preferences.

Hard to disagree with any of that, except that (acquired) taste is something much harder (impossible?) to quantify objectively, while with video quality, this is pretty straightforward.

But you are just incorrect. "Proceed[ing] with something" such as watching a film, is without a doubt less convenient with regards to physical media. If you want to split hairs, fuel, calories and wear on one's sneakers would all potentially push the cost of obtaining and viewing a BluRay disc higher than an iTunes download. The fact that several of you are even making this argument is absurd, and displays a clearly sophomoric grasp of semantics.

I'm not one to proclaim that iTunes is better than BD quality at this point. In fact, I've yet to switch to iTunes media simply because I like having distinct audio channels when watching a lot of movies and TV shows. Your viewing preference aside, please, for the love of all things Holy and Just, don't try to pretend that words have new meaning just to placate your own need to be empirically correct. Especially when the dictionary so clearly cites a much different meaning. Quoting it only makes you appear deluded.

This obviously must be your first time reading jfannings posts....

Where are you getting movies that are 95% quality of BR? No, surely you aren't talking about iTunes downloads? The video certainly isn't 95% of the quality, and the audio quality is no where near the quality of blu-ray.

Excuse me? How is spending $8 renting an HD from Apple any more convenient, and costly than walking 400m to the video store and renting the same movie on Blu-ray for $4.

Everyone's circumstances are different. Heck I even bike/walk past a video store every day, making getting the blu-ray every more convenient. While we are at it, don't forget the high internet costs, and limited data that I have, it isn't very convenient using most of it to download a couple of movies.



While you're at it, don't confuse your circumstances with anyone else's. The dictionary definition more than meets it.

I see you hail from Texas also. Cheers!

You aren't going to convince anyone but yourself and perhaps a few other simpletons that cheaper is the same as convenient. And speaking of biking, you just backpedaled from your own argument. I can be halfway through a movie by the time you return from your sweaty bicycle ride. You're such a fool that you still react as if I'm attacking BluRay. I'm simply stating that you will appear less ignorant, and in fact make a stronger case for your media of choice, if you stop misusing words that most children understand how to use correctly.

Comprehension seems to be your new issue. You can watch half of a movie in under 5 minutes? Yes, it only takes me about 5 minutes to bike the 400m to the video store grab a movie and bike back, you see my local video store is in a convenient location, together with the fact that the price of the blu-rays at my local video store are conventiently cheaper than the iTunes videos.

Different things are convenient to different people, stop being a fool and ignoring the fact that people are different and have different priorities. If all you can do is start with personal insults to try to support you non-existant agrument than maybe you should start thinking a little harder

Excuse me? Typical AI user, you get challenged by someone and you just start with the insults.

Are you referring to the Ars article? If so, where did they compare the audio?

Guys and gals it may have been mentioned before but I just found out, luckily without purchasing and being let down:

1080p movie content for iTunes Store is only available on Apple TV (3rd generation).
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5183

Harsh mate, harsh.

Well, too bad, the movie studios/Apple(?) yet again pissing away money in the wind.

With the very poor quality of movies today, the big hope of the studios would be, I imagine, for consumers to have instant gratification of 1080p video along with the iPad 3 and various mobile, tablet and Mac devices would be great, particularly that other super-high-res screen aka iMac.

Thanks! You too.


Sorry jfanning- I thought he was replying to jrag at first read- who contributes absolutely nothing. You're a great contributor (whether we agree on things or not)- sorry for getting y'all mixed up.


After re reading, I obviously misread the following:

The word "comparable" was obviously still comparing video and I read it as comparing audio. My bad.

You misunderstand. The KB article is about watching iTunes content on AppleTV 2 and 3, and it's pointing out that 1080p won't work on AppleTV 2 (this is no surprise). Macs can play 1080p from iTunes no problem - you have to select 1080p as a preference in iTunes 10.6 preferences.

Hello. Does anybody knows whether the new 1080p movies downloadable from Apple Store comes in 21:9 (2,35:1) format like Bluray movies ?

You are correct that encoders have greatly improved by leaps and bounds. I'm sure that now the software can do a lot of the work that was manually done a few years ago.

Where I disagree with you is in the fact that compression is much an art as it is a science. Encoders have improved on the science, but they will never equal the eye of a trained professional.

In your mind media companies are using the same off the shelf software the rest of us use. This is not true. All of these big media companies are using proprietary encoders.

The movie comes in the ratio in which it is distributed. Not all Blu-ray content is 2.39:1, and not all SD and 720 content was 16:9. Apple has supported all three ratios for years.

You also miss the fact that tens of millions of iPhone 4/4S, iPad 2/3 can play these 1080P movies connected through HDMI to an HD television.

When did 2.35:1 become a Blu-ray specific aspect ratio?

Hollywood blockbusters are usually filmed in 2.39:1 aspect ratio, so most Blu-ray movies comes in the very same aspect ratio.

I am thinking of buying the Philips Cinema 21:9 television (http://www.philips.co.uk/c/televisio...B4.app101-drp1), therefore it would be nice to know. I appreciate all info on this subject. Thanks.

No worries



That's cool, I thought I had read the same thing, but couldn't recall where it was

I've learned over the years that some folks lack either the ability or the inclination to employ basic logic skills when debating. Regardless of which it is in this case, if you truly believe yourself to be my intellectual superior, well then hats off to ye.

Nice speech.

Now back to topic, how is giving Apple $8 to rent a video any more convenient for me than going 400m to get the same movie on Blu-ray for $3.33 (the rental price I paid yesterday for a blu-ray).

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4095

Note update:
1080p content is only compatible with iPad (3rd generation), Apple TV (3rd generation), and computers that meet the minimum system requirements. HD content purchased directly on iPad 2 or earlier will continue to download in 720p. You may still download the 1080p version using the Purchased page on your computer based on availability.

They should clarify that. 1080p content works perfectly well with the 2nd gen Apple TV, it just plays BACK at 720p. So if you have 1080p files on your computer, they'll stream to it just fine.

Not the ones from the iTunes store. The new 1080p downloads use High-Profile H.264 which the AppleTV 2 is not capable of decoding.