Blu-ray, in General

[Cinephrenic]

[Darth Lavender]

Short term; this is good news for me. Firesales, etc.
Especially since there wasn't anything terribly interesting on the horizon anyway (The Dark Knight in late 2008, Ben-Hur in 2009, that's about it) I'm sure I'll be more than happy with my 30 or 40 HDDVDs (probably to be increased to about 80 or 90 if the firesales are good enough)

Long term; this is terrible news. It's a little depressing to see stricter DRM and (possible) payoffs winning out over superior specs & cheaper players.
Not sure if I'll ever be getting into the whole Bluray thing (the Region Coding just presents too big an inconvenience. Sure, one can download hacks, etc. (although Anydvd HD has a recommended retail price of something like $120) but unlike DVD, Bluray will be consistently updating firmware, etc. so everytime I bought a new disc I'd then have to wait for the new hack, etc.
And, in market terms, I'd like think there's still at least a possibility of Bluray going the way of... well, whatever format it was that 'won' the DVD-Audio vs SACD war. Last I heard, itunes and the like seemed to be doing okay (once they got rid of the silly DRM) so there's hope for bluray being trounced by video-on-demand. Even failing that, if industry predictions are true, there's every possibility of Bluray finally being largely replaced by region-free bit-torrent downloads.

[Antoine Doinel]

With companies like AT&T already testing charging consumers for volume downloaded, rather than a flat rate, hi-def won't have to worry about people downloading instead of buying. I have a feeling it soon not be very cost effective for consumers to use video-on-demand or bit-torrent services against purchasing physical media.

[patrick]

With companies like AT&T already testing charging consumers for volume downloaded, rather than a flat rate, hi-def won't have to worry about people downloading instead of buying. I have a feeling it soon not be very cost effective for consumers to use video-on-demand or bit-torrent services against purchasing physical media.

At least we have the FTC and Congress to put a stop to this, right? Right? Anyone?

[Antoine Doinel]

With companies like AT&T already testing charging consumers for volume downloaded, rather than a flat rate, hi-def won't have to worry about people downloading instead of buying. I have a feeling it soon not be very cost effective for consumers to use video-on-demand or bit-torrent services against purchasing physical media.

At least we have the FTC and Congress to put a stop to this, right? Right? Anyone?

Well, right now I believe Verizon has said they will not be pursuing the same path as AT&T (which includes voluntarily spying on their customers for the government) but I don't see any reason why broadband providers who want to be make as much money back on their investment in laying out cable for higher speed downloads.

With the Iraq war still being the country's top priority, net neutrality isn't exactly a priority in the White House.

[Gigi M.]

Good point, but do we really need to watch classic black and white films in Hi-Def?

You're joking of course.

Actually well mastered (from 2k) DVDs plus your display's scaling and electronics plus the player's or AV receiever's upscaling can certainly optimize SDs. Certainly PAL discs with the extra 100 lines of rez look good. Compression artefacts aren't really a problem to my eyes with the projector unless it's an already further compressed rip (my copy of the reissue The Birds is a rip of the R1 for instance and the dreaded clayface, motion judder and god knows what else becomes screamingly apparent.) But it's grating to think there are thousands of HD masters out there that could be released in 1080p form. One day..

David, you're absolutely right, however I just made a comparison with Clockwork Orange Blu Ray vs. SD and didn't notice any big difference on my 84" screen with my native 1080p Projector. I sit just 10 feet from my screen, so details are sharp and clean, but Clockwork is just a bad 1080p transfer. Now with 2001 there's a huge difference.

[Ornette]

Actually well mastered (from 2k) DVDs plus your display's scaling and electronics plus the player's or AV receiever's upscaling can certainly optimize SDs. Certainly PAL discs with the extra 100 lines of rez look good.

Yes, David, this is indeed correct with certain DVDs -- one only wishes this was a case far more common outside of homes like Warner and CC etc. But two eyes are never alike, perhaps I'm more sensitive to various compression artefacts than some people are, which, if true, would only be to my disadvantage. I know for a fact that I really suck at noticing judder, which is all the better for me I guess.

Regarding "upscaling chains", this can often be the main culprit when SD material looks like shit on people's plasma or LCD. Perhaps your DVD has an excellent upscaling chip, but this can easily be ruined if your TV's upscaling capabilities suck and the TV needs to scale the signal once again that comes from the DVD (perhaps your DVD is sending a 720p signal, but your TV's resolution is 768p). I've got the most pleasing results when using my PC + Zoom Player + ffdshow and my TV in 1:1 mode (often called PC Mode).

Not long ago I was a bit hesitant when buying certain DVDs, but judging from what's been released so far I think this "HD conversion" will take much longer than many had hoped for when it comes to films other than the latest blockbusters. Now I probably buy more DVDs than ever -- many of which I believe will not see a release in HD for at least 10-20 years, if ever.

[Morbii]

I find that my A35 can upscale certain SD discs quite amazingly - some even looking probably about as good (or maybe even better) as some of my not-so-good looking HD-DVD discs. However, when you see a truly good transfer in 1080/24p (say, Planet Earth), upscaled SD can't touch it.

I also have an Onkyo 805, but I haven't yet tested its upscaling ability (from component, and I imagine it must do it from an HDMI signal as well) - does anyone have any information that would lead me to believe it might be a good idea to spend an hour or two to see how it looks as compared to my A35?

Finally, I'm running a 52" sony XBR4 LCD, so I probably don't even see some of the differences as significantly as those of you with large screened projectors.

[Darth Lavender]

Finally, I'm running a 52" sony XBR4 LCD, so I probably don't even see some of the differences as significantly as those of you with large screened projectors.

I still think the actual size of the screen isn't important. Only things that matter are pixels and viewing distance.

I used to watch movies inches away from a 19" CRT monitor and it was absolutely magnificient (except that one couldn't move around very much while watching) Now, I'm watching on a 720p, 32" LCD and, with various tweaks to the calibration, it is finally approaching the quality of that old 19"

[Morbii]

I still think the actual size of the screen isn't important. Only things that matter are pixels and viewing distance.
I used to watch movies inches away from a 19" CRT monitor and it was absolutely magnificient (except that one couldn't move around very much while watching) Now, I'm watching on a 720p, 32" LCD and, with various tweaks to the calibration, it is finally approaching the quality of that old 19"

That may be, but someone watching a 480i source at 120 inches vs 1080p at 120 inches are more likely to notice a difference, I would think (sans very rich folk who have huge rooms to watch from a distance).

[Morbii]

Wait, maybe I'm confused - david, I thought you were saying you DID notice a difference between SD and non-SD (or are you talking about something completely different). Whatever the case, if you don't mind me asking, how much did your projector run?

[Gigi M.]

But Ive just been sampling discs and fiddling with controls again on the PJ (BTW it's a fucking Sony - the VW60, but it can obviously be a Leviathan.) Some things are revelatory - the best SD encodes obviously take the greatest care with things like grain and chroma. And the best companies (including Fox and UNiversal and Paramount when they bother) can turn out SDs that will upscale very beautifully. Especially if they're taken from 2k or 4k Datacines, obviously.

David, nice to hear you jump the wagon and join the projector life. Some while ago I had the VW50 for testing and didn't like way it handled colors, so I kept my Optoma HD80 DLP. How's the VW60 working for you? The 50 had some 1080p/24 issues and I'd like to know if they're gone with the 60. I've been projecting for about 5 years know and wouldn't change for the world.

[Gigi M.]

David, only wanted to know if you were happy with your unit. The 50 I had for testing didn't had the pop DLP units have. Since I have a dedicated theater whith high ceilings and have measure the dead center of my screen, placement flexibility if not an issue for me. I could go for a bigger screen with LCD or DILA, but don't have the room dimensions. So, DLP works like a charm for me, especially the HD80 which is one the brighters units for its price.

What type of screen are you getting when you get back from Paris?

Best,

[Gigi M.]

Great to hear the Sony is working for you. Since I'm a projector junkie I've learn to calibrate pjs by myself over the years. I own a Cronica Minolta light meter and the basics DVE and AVIA discs.

I do my own installions and currently own a 84" Stewart Studiotek 1.0 gain that is awesome. Over the years I've own several pjs, both lcd and dlp, and the latter is the champ to my eyes by big margen, and I've never seen any rainbows.

On the down side, my room is very small 11.5' x 17' x 12'. With lcd and dila I could bigger but it just wouldn't look right. I sit about 9.5' from the screen, which is the 1.5w (my screen is 41 x 72, 72 x 1.5= 108" / 9') appropiate distance to sit because of my screen size. Also, 1080p dlp pjs lack the short throw lens that lcd and dila have.

Best,

Edit: yes, have a pro calibrate your unit and try to learn as much as can from him. That's what I did a few years ago. The hardest thing to do when calibrating is getting the color to match and the color temp down to 6,500k. On my last calibration I got my Pj to do 6,506k, which is the closest I've ever get on my meter.

By the way a 1.3 gain screen would work great with your pj.

[jaredsap]

It's official. Toshiba just held a press conference in Japan and conceded the war.

[Darth Lavender]

In slightly more detail...

- Toshiba are stopping shipment of HDDVD players to stores by March.
- Voiced continued support of Standard DVD, with absolutely no mention of possible Bluray support.
- Continuing to offer support and firmware updates on existing players (presumably, no more firm-ware updates will be needed once Universal and Paramount officially concede)
- Toshiba are abandoning HDVD standalone drives (as storage devices)
- Toshiba are still undecided about notebooks, etc. with inbuilt HDDVD drives.

Incidental note. Toshiba considered suing Warner for breach of contracts, etc. but decided against it to avoid alienating the American market.


Let the firesales commence. I'm hoping to double my HDDVD collection with the next few months
(Might never get into Bluray. I'll see how it fares against Standard DVD and, most importantly, if the Bluray drives drop in price. Then there's the region-coding, etc.)
One tiny thing Bluray has going for it; I read 1 review today comparing Bluray and HDDVDs of "Ghost Rider" saying the Bluray has slightly more fine grain (every other review of Bluray MPEG4 vs HDDVD VC1 encodes have said the results were utterly identical)
But price and Region-Coding/DRM/Firm-ware updates are going to be the big things preventing me from getting into Bluray for at least a year or two. (I don't think the 1.1, 2.0 thing affects HTPCs?)

[pro-bassoonist]

(Might never get into Bluray. I'll see how it fares against Standard DVD and, most importantly, if the Bluray drives drop in price. Then there's the region-coding, etc.)
One tiny thing Bluray has going for it; I read 1 review today comparing Bluray and HDDVDs of "Ghost Rider" saying the Bluray has slightly more fine grain (every other review of Bluray MPEG4 vs HDDVD VC1 encodes have said the results were utterly identical)

No need to switch into sour-grapes mode. The format has much more going for it than fine grain. Add whatever it is you believe your collection needs and move on - whether it is SDVD or Blu-Ray.

As to your comment about "utterly identical results" of course they will be. Dual releases were encoded according to HDDVD's spec limitations, with other words you have HDDVD encodes on Blu-Ray.

In any event, enjoy your films.

Pro-B

[Tomas]

Toshiba Officially Drops HD DVD -
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/ ... /%3ED/1477

[Morbii]

As to your comment about "utterly identical results" of course they will be. Dual releases were encoded according to HDDVD's spec limitations, with other words you have HDDVD encodes on Blu-Ray.

That's not entirely true. BD CAN actually go up to 55Mbps bitrate whereas HD-DVD was locked at 30. HOWEVER, I believe some current HD-DVDs will look better than their BD counterparts because, to date, layering of a BD is prohibitively expensive (afaik there are no dual layered BDs as of yet), meaning that in reality BD only has 25GB whereas HD-DVD has 30GB of space.

[Darth Lavender]

No need to switch into sour-grapes mode. The format has much more going for it than fine grain. Add whatever it is you believe your collection needs and move on - whether it is SDVD or Blu-Ray.

It isn't sour-grapes. These are misgivings I have always had about Bluray (why do you think I chose HDDVD in the first place?)


This next part, though, is a little harder to say without sounding sour, so I'll be blunt and a tad nasty;
Did you even read my post? I very specifically said most MPEG4 vs VC1 compressions are equal. I'm talking about situations like Paramount's original dual-format release of "M:I3" which was rendered as a 50gig MPEG4 file on Bluray, and as a 25gig VC1 file on HDDVD.

Of course Bluray VC1 vs HDDVD VC1 compressions are identical, but that is not the thing I was talking about.


Like I said, it's not a question of sour grapes. As with buying HDDVD, I will be weighing the pros and cons, etc. (ie. $1000* and the immense inconvenience of all that constantly updated DRM, Region Coding, etc. weighed against being able to watch (for $40 each) one or two of my favourite movies in High Definition.
Now, there'll probably come a time, eventually, were the pros and cons even out (ie. in a year or two, it might be $100 and Region Coding, etc. vs versus being able to watch (for $20 each) some fifty of my favourite movies in High Definition. And when (and if) that time comes I probably will get Bluray.
In the meantime, I am very happy with watching my favourite movies in Standard DVDs that I already own and, in a few instances, in HDDVDs.


*That's the kind of price charged in Australia. And the only ($999) Bluray drive currently available doesn't even play the movies (it isn't advanced enough to handle all the DRM)

[Morbii]

Yes (but here I play devil's advocate) weren't the majority of HD DVDs encoded at 25 gig or less? In other words isn't 25 gig a broadly comfortable bandwidth spectrum for a standard movie?

The real bummers were the early BDs encoded with the Mpeg2 codec which universally looked like shit.

And there's always region coding....

It may be that I misunderstood and the 25/30 difference only amounts to the HD-DVD discs that have more extras than their BD counterparts. Whatever the case, unless I've been duped due to viral fanboy marketing (which seemed to be far worse on the BD side), I'm pretty sure that there are without question HD-DVD discs that are better than their counterparts - whether that be extras or transfer. In the long run, I imagine this would have reversed for sure.

Problematically, this war was won by marketing. HD-DVD had it's shit together with their product but BD had it's shit together with marketing (and the snake move to include drive on the PS3). I think one or both of two things should have happened on the HD-DVD side:
1) X-Box equipped with HD-DVD drive just like the PS3. This would have put so many HD-DVD drives in homes it would have been ridiculous (as it stands, PS3 is really the only reason why BD has so many more players out there).
2) Toshiba should have asked (or bribed) exclusive partners to release all discs as combo DVD/HD-DVDs and cease production of straights DVDs. Can you imagine? HD-DVD replication doesn't cost nearly as much as BD replication.

Another idea is perhaps HD-DVD should have sold for the price of DVDs given its lower replication costs.

Oh well, guess we gotta live with DRM and region coding if we want to be in the hi-def home video world...

[GringoTex]

Raise your hand if you're one of the idiots who bought a slashed-price Toshiba AD3 last month.

*hand*

[Donald Brown]

Raise your hand if you're one of the idiots who bought a slashed-price Toshiba AD3 last month.

Why did you buy it when the handwriting was on the wall last month?

Anyway, it's a solid DVD player with nice upscaling. Don't look at it as a player of a dead format, look at it as a great piece of hardware that serves a current format that isn't going away anytime soon.

[GringoTex]

Why did you buy it when the handwriting was on the wall last month?

I obviously wasn't reading this thread closely enough.

Anyway, it's a solid DVD player with nice upscaling. Don't look at it as a player of a dead format, look at it as a great piece of hardware that serves a current format that isn't going away anytime soon.

Do you know if there's a way to crack the region coding on the AD3?

[Darth Lavender]

I was under the impression that the AD3 was even being marketed as an upscaling DVD player (which just happened to also play HDDVDs)