If you don't like the threads contents, then steer clear of it.
After all the topic is pretty clear.
I know, I was just attempting humor and not doing very well Truth is, I was just surprised that this thread is still going (it's been open since I started visiting the site a few months back. I just figured site moderators close threads that go on for a certain amount of time. I'm not saying the discussion isn't valid (obviously harkens back to the ancient Beta-VHS war), just thought the thread was about the longest I'd ever seen.
I know, I was just attempting humor and not doing very well Truth is, I was just surprised that this thread is still going (it's been open since I started visiting the site a few months back. I just figured site moderators close threads that go on for a certain amount of time. I'm not saying the discussion isn't valid (obviously harkens back to the ancient Beta-VHS war), just thought the thread was about the longest I'd ever seen.
This thread has been going on for just about 2 years now. It has been split off twice (there was a 2005, and then a 2006 version). I don't see why moderators would stop a discussion from continuing, just because it is long. As long as it is staying on-topic, and people are active in the thread, I don't see whats wrong.
Now to steer this back on topic...
In case anyone is following, the new AACS stuff (which is on both Blu-Ray and HD DVD), it appears to have already been broken. Slysoft AnyDVD HD can already backup the new Matrix movies, for which Matrix 2 and 3 are using the new processing key (sorry, my terminology might be wrong on that, I try and follow the doom9 stuff as best I can). I am just waiting for it to make its way into the open source tools, so that I can continue to rip my HD DVDs to my AppleTV.
In case anyone is following, the new AACS stuff (which is on both Blu-Ray and HD DVD), it appears to have already been broken. Slysoft AnyDVD HD can already backup the new Matrix movies, for which Matrix 2 and 3 are using the new processing key (sorry, my terminology might be wrong on that, I try and follow the doom9 stuff as best I can). I am just waiting for it to make its way into the open source tools, so that I can continue to rip my HD DVDs to my AppleTV.
This is going to make a huge difference to me at least, I've become used to ripping my DVDs for playback in front row, I like the easy access of the simplified selection process. The thought of going back to physical media on BD has slightly dampened my enthusiasm for it. Being able to rip the new formats (once I buy a Mac with a suitable drive!) will be an interesting experience as many questions are still unanswered. 1. will the quality drop of compression be significant to notice 2. will HD space (cost or usage vs ripping quality) play a part in deciding if this is a pleasurable experiance/process. 3. will Apple offer 720 line downloads?
---
I have recieved my copy of Black Hawk Down and watched part of it, the difference seems huge (I do feel a touch of emperors new clothes) but I want to give this a fair go, and am therfore still waiting on delivery of Casino Royal (it appears to be taking a slower journey to me than these things usually do ) I feel that I will then be able to make a comparison and sound judgment between BD and DVD.
I know, I was just attempting humor and not doing very well Truth is, I was just surprised that this thread is still going (it's been open since I started visiting the site a few months back. I just figured site moderators close threads that go on for a certain amount of time. I'm not saying the discussion isn't valid (obviously harkens back to the ancient Beta-VHS war), just thought the thread was about the longest I'd ever seen.
No problem as Kupan has said, this thread has been going on for a long time, I have been following them for a while, only recently joining in as I decided which format to opt for.
It interests me greatly to see which way this "war" will go (I don't really like that term) and will be interesting to see some entrenched posters views if Apple decide to opt for a single format. I have made my choice baised on my hopes, so I am interested to see where Apple will move to.
It interests me greatly to see which way this "war" will go (I don't really like that term) and will be interesting to see some entrenched posters views if Apple decide to opt for a single format.
I'm as big an Apple partisan as anyone, but their choice of optical formats won't make an atom's worth of difference to me in terms of my format purchase. In fact I would not be at all surprised if Apple went Blu - in optical storage, bigger is always better, and I've always thought that if the market did diverge, it would be that Blu-ray would emerge as the storage medium and HD DVD as a home-theater format.
I'm waiting for the next MacBook Pro revision as it's time to retire my PowerBook, and I'd seriously consider adding a Blu-ray drive if Apple offered it an an option. That would let me be format-neutral, so long as there was a way to pump the ouput to a TV. However, I don't know if there are any ultra-slim BD drives on the market yet, so I doubt we'll see it in the next revision.
I think Funai though "will" likely deliver the first low cost BD player. However I believe the rumors regarding HD DVD players is true as well. I wouldn't be surprised to see both platforms existing at Wal-Mart friendly pricing going into Xmas 2007 and calendar 2008.
Funai is a HD DVD Promotion Group general member. They've never spoke of exclusivity. I think Wal-Mart denied that any deal with Fuh Yuan had been done but I don't think they denied that talks were ensuing.
I think consumers will have some nice options for HD players by years end. Whether they be Blu-ray or HD DVD. Hell it must be the year of HD because even I have convinced my gf she needs a new 37" HDTV. That was no easy feat..she doesn't generally care about electronics.
1. will the quality drop of compression be significant to notice 2. will HD space (cost or usage vs ripping quality) play a part in deciding if this is a pleasurable experiance/process. 3. will Apple offer 720 line downloads?
Well, over at doom9, there is a lot going on. People have been doing downconverts from 1080p to 720p, and fitting a full HD movie in about 6GB of space. The quality is outstanding (nearly indistinguishable). Why such a drop in file size? Well for one, going from 1080p to 720p frees you up a lot of leg room:
1920x1080 = 2073600 pixels
1280x720 = 921600 pixels
Less pixels to encode means less file size, and usually a smaller bitrate for similar quality. going from 720p to 1080p is an increase of 2.25 times. And if your display is only 720p, having a 1080p disk is next to useless, as it is down-converted to 720p anyways. So doing HD DVD from 25GB (or so) down to 6GB (or so) is very possible, and as codecs mature, this may even get better. So on a 500GB hard drive, we are talking around 75 HD quality movies being stored.
The problem is there seems to be a disparity in bitrate. You're saying that you're dropping the resolution to 44% of the original HD source. But you're dropping the bitrate down to anywhere from 24 to as low as 20% of the original bitrate (depending on whether it's a 25GB Blu-ray disc or a 30GB dual layer HD DVD; don't even think about the losses from a 50GB dual-layer Blu-ray). Obviously, something's being lost, especially since the 20GB VC-1 HD DVD encodes are widely considered fairly soft and grainy to begin with.
The problem is there seems to be a disparity in bitrate. You're saying that you're dropping the resolution to 44% of the original HD source. But you're dropping the bitrate down to anywhere from 24 to as low as 20% of the original bitrate (depending on whether it's a 25GB Blu-ray disc or a 30GB dual layer HD DVD; don't even think about the losses from a 50GB dual-layer Blu-ray). Obviously, something's being lost, especially since the 20GB VC-1 HD DVD encodes are widely considered fairly soft and grainy to begin with.
how did you come up with such none sense?...
low bit rate of pristine source material is better than high bit rate of dirty source... Look at all those 50GB BD movies with mediocre PQ. Remember the first 50GB title?... was it Click the first 50GB disappointment?
bigger movie file size does not mean better PQ..... AVC & VC-1 vs. MPEG2 have been heavily debated for some time now and I can't believe I'm still hearing such none sense about bigger size = better PQ. Well.... if you're talking about same codec, then it could be true...but you're not.
Funai is a HD DVD Promotion Group general member. They've never spoke of exclusivity.
And I never said anything like that, but they have publicly announced plans for Blu-ray and not HD DVD at this time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison
Hell it must be the year of HD because even I have convinced my gf she needs a new 37" HDTV. That was no easy feat..she doesn't generally care about electronics.
37" sounds small - even for us Europeans that aren't that used to big screen tvs
And believe me, when you've had your 37" for a little while you'll think it's too small. That's how I feel about my 43" - I wish I'd bought a 50".
low bit rate of pristine source material is better than high bit rate of dirty source... Look at all those 50GB BD movies with mediocre PQ. Remember the first 50GB title?... was it Click the first 50GB disappointment?
bigger movie file size does not mean better PQ..... AVC & VC-1 vs. MPEG2 have been heavily debated for some time now and I can't believe I'm still hearing such none sense about bigger size = better PQ. Well.... if you're talking about same codec, then it could be true...but you're not.
The only one talking "none sense" here is you. PotC is a 50GB transfer and has gotten great reviews so far, and yes, it's AVC. Meanwhile, check over at AVSForum and you'll see a lot of complaints about your "pristine" VC-1 encodes. Besides, you're comparing apples to oranges. You're not comparing HD source to downconverted 720p. You're just claiming that some HD source looks better than others. As usual, you haven't addressed the point at all, which is if the studios have to author at a high bitrate whether it's a pristine source or dirty source, how is it that people can downsample to as little as half of that per pixel yet still claim the quality is indistinguishable? If that were really the case, the studios never would have needed that high bitrate to begin with. Are you saying that the people on Doom9 have better tools, equipment, skills and codecs than the studios do?
And I never said anything like that, but they have publicly announced plans for Blu-ray and not HD DVD at this time.
I think Wal-Mart denied that any deal with Fuh Yuan had been done but I don't think they denied that talks were ensuing.
37" sounds small - even for us Europeans that aren't that used to big screen tvs
And believe me, when you've had your 37" for a little while you'll think it's too small. That's how I feel about my 43" - I wish I'd bought a 50".
Yeah I'm curious to see what Funai brings. If I don't like the pricing of Universal players next year then I'll grab a seperate BD player and burn up another HDMI port.
37" is small. I told her that's basically a 32" CRT TV stretched but you know women...they often think a large TV is going to dominate the living room. I laugh because her 27" inch is jutting out far more than any LCD TV would. I agree...50" is where things get fun.
So last night I set up my HD-D2 from Costco. I am still stuck in SD land myself. Those of you will remember that my previous living arrangements were with my best friend and he had a HD CRT Philips. However, watching HD DVD at SD resolutions is like watching the best Superbit DVD. So far I've viewed my Tokyo Drift, Aeon Flux and Serenity. I'm going to watch The Corpse Bride (I've never seen it...blind buy) tonight or tomorrow.
I can't wait to get my HD set now. First things first though I need a new entertainment center and a couple of other things. I can handle good SD playback for now.
The only one talking "none sense" here is you. PotC is a 50GB transfer and has gotten great reviews so far, and yes, it's AVC. Meanwhile, check over at AVSForum and you'll see a lot of complaints about your "pristine" VC-1 encodes. Besides, you're comparing apples to oranges. You're not comparing HD source to downconverted 720p. You're just claiming that some HD source looks better than others. As usual, you haven't addressed the point at all, which is if the studios have to author at a high bitrate whether it's a pristine source or dirty source, how is it that people can downsample to as little as half of that per pixel yet still claim the quality is indistinguishable? If that were really the case, the studios never would have needed that high bitrate to begin with. Are you saying that the people on Doom9 have better tools, equipment, skills and codecs than the studios do?
Why don't you head over to doom9 and find out ;-)
Once the tools get to that "easy enough stage" (no more compiling SVN copies of ffmpeg), I'd be more than willing to walk you through it to get your opinion. But frankly, I have seen a couple of 720P rips, and they look great. And I think there are enough over at doom9 that would agree. I think it might be a little early in the game for you, unless you have seen the rips, to be judging on quality.
And I have said nothing about 50GB blu-ray disks. My guess is that of that 50GB, 35-40 is for the movie, yes? So of that 35-40 we are talking a reduction to about 8.4-9.6 GB. But this is speculation, as I haven't seen any Blu-ray rips.
[EDIT]: And don't forget about audio. The audio on these disks take up a lot of space. I don't recall what codec, or at what bitrate, is being used on the rips (I think ac3...), but it is also a space saver.
The only one talking "none sense" here is you. PotC is a 50GB transfer and has gotten great reviews so far, and yes, it's AVC. Meanwhile, check over at AVSForum and you'll see a lot of complaints about your "pristine" VC-1 encodes. Besides, you're comparing apples to oranges. You're not comparing HD source to downconverted 720p. You're just claiming that some HD source looks better than others. As usual, you haven't addressed the point at all, which is if the studios have to author at a high bitrate whether it's a pristine source or dirty source, how is it that people can downsample to as little as half of that per pixel yet still claim the quality is indistinguishable? If that were really the case, the studios never would have needed that high bitrate to begin with. Are you saying that the people on Doom9 have better tools, equipment, skills and codecs than the studios do?
Maybe it's time that you be the judge and see for yourself. The internet quotes can go so far. As you can see, many like to post on the forums and most of them will not be considered as knowledgeable or correct comments because just about everyone can type none sense and walk away.
BTW, when comparing your own statement above.... let's say PotC vs. Click... both 50GB titles, which title has higher bit rate but how does that translate to the PQ?....
Comments
Gosh, why didn't I think of that
If you don't like the threads contents, then steer clear of it.
After all the topic is pretty clear.
If you don't like the threads contents, then steer clear of it.
After all the topic is pretty clear.
I know, I was just attempting humor and not doing very well
I know, I was just attempting humor and not doing very well
This thread has been going on for just about 2 years now. It has been split off twice (there was a 2005, and then a 2006 version). I don't see why moderators would stop a discussion from continuing, just because it is long. As long as it is staying on-topic, and people are active in the thread, I don't see whats wrong.
Now to steer this back on topic...
In case anyone is following, the new AACS stuff (which is on both Blu-Ray and HD DVD), it appears to have already been broken. Slysoft AnyDVD HD can already backup the new Matrix movies, for which Matrix 2 and 3 are using the new processing key (sorry, my terminology might be wrong on that, I try and follow the doom9 stuff as best I can). I am just waiting for it to make its way into the open source tools, so that I can continue to rip my HD DVDs to my AppleTV.
Now to steer this back on topic...
In case anyone is following, the new AACS stuff (which is on both Blu-Ray and HD DVD), it appears to have already been broken. Slysoft AnyDVD HD can already backup the new Matrix movies, for which Matrix 2 and 3 are using the new processing key (sorry, my terminology might be wrong on that, I try and follow the doom9 stuff as best I can). I am just waiting for it to make its way into the open source tools, so that I can continue to rip my HD DVDs to my AppleTV.
This is going to make a huge difference to me at least, I've become used to ripping my DVDs for playback in front row, I like the easy access of the simplified selection process. The thought of going back to physical media on BD has slightly dampened my enthusiasm for it. Being able to rip the new formats (once I buy a Mac with a suitable drive!) will be an interesting experience as many questions are still unanswered. 1. will the quality drop of compression be significant to notice 2. will HD space (cost or usage vs ripping quality) play a part in deciding if this is a pleasurable experiance/process. 3. will Apple offer 720 line downloads?
---
I have recieved my copy of Black Hawk Down and watched part of it, the difference seems huge (I do feel a touch of emperors new clothes) but I want to give this a fair go, and am therfore still waiting on delivery of Casino Royal (it appears to be taking a slower journey to me than these things usually do
I know, I was just attempting humor and not doing very well
No problem
It interests me greatly to see which way this "war" will go (I don't really like that term) and will be interesting to see some entrenched posters views if Apple decide to opt for a single format. I have made my choice baised on my hopes, so I am interested to see where Apple will move to.
http://www.funaiworld.com/investors/...df/ks_e554.pdf
It interests me greatly to see which way this "war" will go (I don't really like that term) and will be interesting to see some entrenched posters views if Apple decide to opt for a single format.
I'm as big an Apple partisan as anyone, but their choice of optical formats won't make an atom's worth of difference to me in terms of my format purchase. In fact I would not be at all surprised if Apple went Blu - in optical storage, bigger is always better, and I've always thought that if the market did diverge, it would be that Blu-ray would emerge as the storage medium and HD DVD as a home-theater format.
I'm waiting for the next MacBook Pro revision as it's time to retire my PowerBook, and I'd seriously consider adding a Blu-ray drive if Apple offered it an an option. That would let me be format-neutral, so long as there was a way to pump the ouput to a TV. However, I don't know if there are any ultra-slim BD drives on the market yet, so I doubt we'll see it in the next revision.
The cheap Wal-Mart players could be Blu-ray players after all:
http://www.funaiworld.com/investors/...df/ks_e554.pdf
Ummm....no
Who supplies Wal-Mart with DVD players?
Multiple manuf.
I think Funai though "will" likely deliver the first low cost BD player. However I believe the rumors regarding HD DVD players is true as well. I wouldn't be surprised to see both platforms existing at Wal-Mart friendly pricing going into Xmas 2007 and calendar 2008.
However I believe the rumors regarding HD DVD players is true as well.
They are still rumors though - rumors that have been denied by Wal-Mart.
Btw. if you didn't read the pdf, Funai has a 52% market share in the US regarding DVD players.
They are still rumors though - rumors that have been denied by Wal-Mart.
Btw. if you didn't read the pdf, Funai has a 52% market share in the US regarding DVD players.
Yes I don't deny the penetration of Funai. However keep in mind.
http://www.hddvdprg.com/eng/about/member.html
Funai is a HD DVD Promotion Group general member. They've never spoke of exclusivity. I think Wal-Mart denied that any deal with Fuh Yuan had been done but I don't think they denied that talks were ensuing.
I think consumers will have some nice options for HD players by years end. Whether they be Blu-ray or HD DVD. Hell it must be the year of HD because even I have convinced my gf she needs a new 37" HDTV. That was no easy feat..she doesn't generally care about electronics.
1. will the quality drop of compression be significant to notice 2. will HD space (cost or usage vs ripping quality) play a part in deciding if this is a pleasurable experiance/process. 3. will Apple offer 720 line downloads?
Well, over at doom9, there is a lot going on. People have been doing downconverts from 1080p to 720p, and fitting a full HD movie in about 6GB of space. The quality is outstanding (nearly indistinguishable). Why such a drop in file size? Well for one, going from 1080p to 720p frees you up a lot of leg room:
1920x1080 = 2073600 pixels
1280x720 = 921600 pixels
Less pixels to encode means less file size, and usually a smaller bitrate for similar quality. going from 720p to 1080p is an increase of 2.25 times. And if your display is only 720p, having a 1080p disk is next to useless, as it is down-converted to 720p anyways. So doing HD DVD from 25GB (or so) down to 6GB (or so) is very possible, and as codecs mature, this may even get better. So on a 500GB hard drive, we are talking around 75 HD quality movies being stored.
The problem is there seems to be a disparity in bitrate. You're saying that you're dropping the resolution to 44% of the original HD source. But you're dropping the bitrate down to anywhere from 24 to as low as 20% of the original bitrate (depending on whether it's a 25GB Blu-ray disc or a 30GB dual layer HD DVD; don't even think about the losses from a 50GB dual-layer Blu-ray). Obviously, something's being lost, especially since the 20GB VC-1 HD DVD encodes are widely considered fairly soft and grainy to begin with.
how did you come up with such none sense?...
low bit rate of pristine source material is better than high bit rate of dirty source... Look at all those 50GB BD movies with mediocre PQ. Remember the first 50GB title?... was it Click the first 50GB disappointment?
bigger movie file size does not mean better PQ..... AVC & VC-1 vs. MPEG2 have been heavily debated for some time now and I can't believe I'm still hearing such none sense about bigger size = better PQ. Well.... if you're talking about same codec, then it could be true...but you're not.
Yes I don't deny the penetration of Funai. However keep in mind.
http://www.hddvdprg.com/eng/about/member.html
Funai is a HD DVD Promotion Group general member. They've never spoke of exclusivity.
And I never said anything like that, but they have publicly announced plans for Blu-ray and not HD DVD at this time.
Hell it must be the year of HD because even I have convinced my gf she needs a new 37" HDTV. That was no easy feat..she doesn't generally care about electronics.
37" sounds small - even for us Europeans that aren't that used to big screen tvs
And believe me, when you've had your 37" for a little while you'll think it's too small. That's how I feel about my 43" - I wish I'd bought a 50".
how did you come up with such none sense?...
low bit rate of pristine source material is better than high bit rate of dirty source... Look at all those 50GB BD movies with mediocre PQ. Remember the first 50GB title?... was it Click the first 50GB disappointment?
bigger movie file size does not mean better PQ..... AVC & VC-1 vs. MPEG2 have been heavily debated for some time now and I can't believe I'm still hearing such none sense about bigger size = better PQ. Well.... if you're talking about same codec, then it could be true...but you're not.
The only one talking "none sense" here is you. PotC is a 50GB transfer and has gotten great reviews so far, and yes, it's AVC. Meanwhile, check over at AVSForum and you'll see a lot of complaints about your "pristine" VC-1 encodes. Besides, you're comparing apples to oranges. You're not comparing HD source to downconverted 720p. You're just claiming that some HD source looks better than others. As usual, you haven't addressed the point at all, which is if the studios have to author at a high bitrate whether it's a pristine source or dirty source, how is it that people can downsample to as little as half of that per pixel yet still claim the quality is indistinguishable? If that were really the case, the studios never would have needed that high bitrate to begin with. Are you saying that the people on Doom9 have better tools, equipment, skills and codecs than the studios do?
And I never said anything like that, but they have publicly announced plans for Blu-ray and not HD DVD at this time.
I think Wal-Mart denied that any deal with Fuh Yuan had been done but I don't think they denied that talks were ensuing.
37" sounds small - even for us Europeans that aren't that used to big screen tvs
And believe me, when you've had your 37" for a little while you'll think it's too small. That's how I feel about my 43" - I wish I'd bought a 50".
Yeah I'm curious to see what Funai brings. If I don't like the pricing of Universal players next year then I'll grab a seperate BD player and burn up another HDMI port.
37" is small. I told her that's basically a 32" CRT TV stretched but you know women...they often think a large TV is going to dominate the living room. I laugh because her 27" inch is jutting out far more than any LCD TV would. I agree...50" is where things get fun.
So last night I set up my HD-D2 from Costco. I am still stuck in SD land myself. Those of you will remember that my previous living arrangements were with my best friend and he had a HD CRT Philips. However, watching HD DVD at SD resolutions is like watching the best Superbit DVD. So far I've viewed my Tokyo Drift, Aeon Flux and Serenity. I'm going to watch The Corpse Bride (I've never seen it...blind buy) tonight or tomorrow.
I can't wait to get my HD set now. First things first though I need a new entertainment center and a couple of other things. I can handle good SD playback for now.
The only one talking "none sense" here is you. PotC is a 50GB transfer and has gotten great reviews so far, and yes, it's AVC. Meanwhile, check over at AVSForum and you'll see a lot of complaints about your "pristine" VC-1 encodes. Besides, you're comparing apples to oranges. You're not comparing HD source to downconverted 720p. You're just claiming that some HD source looks better than others. As usual, you haven't addressed the point at all, which is if the studios have to author at a high bitrate whether it's a pristine source or dirty source, how is it that people can downsample to as little as half of that per pixel yet still claim the quality is indistinguishable? If that were really the case, the studios never would have needed that high bitrate to begin with. Are you saying that the people on Doom9 have better tools, equipment, skills and codecs than the studios do?
Why don't you head over to doom9 and find out ;-)
Once the tools get to that "easy enough stage" (no more compiling SVN copies of ffmpeg), I'd be more than willing to walk you through it to get your opinion. But frankly, I have seen a couple of 720P rips, and they look great. And I think there are enough over at doom9 that would agree. I think it might be a little early in the game for you, unless you have seen the rips, to be judging on quality.
And I have said nothing about 50GB blu-ray disks. My guess is that of that 50GB, 35-40 is for the movie, yes? So of that 35-40 we are talking a reduction to about 8.4-9.6 GB. But this is speculation, as I haven't seen any Blu-ray rips.
[EDIT]: And don't forget about audio. The audio on these disks take up a lot of space. I don't recall what codec, or at what bitrate, is being used on the rips (I think ac3...), but it is also a space saver.
The only one talking "none sense" here is you. PotC is a 50GB transfer and has gotten great reviews so far, and yes, it's AVC. Meanwhile, check over at AVSForum and you'll see a lot of complaints about your "pristine" VC-1 encodes. Besides, you're comparing apples to oranges. You're not comparing HD source to downconverted 720p. You're just claiming that some HD source looks better than others. As usual, you haven't addressed the point at all, which is if the studios have to author at a high bitrate whether it's a pristine source or dirty source, how is it that people can downsample to as little as half of that per pixel yet still claim the quality is indistinguishable? If that were really the case, the studios never would have needed that high bitrate to begin with. Are you saying that the people on Doom9 have better tools, equipment, skills and codecs than the studios do?
Maybe it's time that you be the judge and see for yourself. The internet quotes can go so far. As you can see, many like to post on the forums and most of them will not be considered as knowledgeable or correct comments because just about everyone can type none sense and walk away.
BTW, when comparing your own statement above.... let's say PotC vs. Click... both 50GB titles, which title has higher bit rate but how does that translate to the PQ?....
Start googling online, now....