criterionforum.org

Has anyone seen the clips of WMV HD from Microsoft? Some of them have 1080p resolution, better than the 720p and 1080i of most of today's HD displays. For those who don't get (as in, possess, or understand ) HDTV, these clips give you a glimpse of that.

I watched all of them and came to the conclusion that it all depends on the program material. Some just doesn't benefit that much from the higher resolution.

I also did a comparison for DVDBeaver on the Terminator 2 Extreme DVD http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcompare/term2.htm .
It compares three versions of the film:

(A) the remastered, HD version on the Extreme DVD
(B) the remastered, non-HD version on the Extreme DVD
(C) the non-remastered, non-HD version on the old Ultimate DVD.

And I noticed a much greater visual improvement going from (C) to (B) than going from (B) to (A). So it seems a good remastering of the source material, like what was done here and for Criterion's Beauty and the Beast and M, gives you worthwhile and often drastic improvement. But a HD transfer, even when done perfectly, may not always give you as drastic an improvement.

I don't know if that's a fair appraisal of what HD-DVD will look like...I mean, that's an HD transfer compressed to fit a DVD-9...maybe I'm wrong, but if that's as good as HD-DVD can look, and it fits on a dual layer DVD, why would they need to go to the expense of creating a new storage medium?

solaris72 wrote:if that's as good as HD-DVD can look, and it fits on a dual layer DVD, why would they need to go to the expense of creating a new storage medium?

That expense may be repaid by higher price points, even it the technology doesn't become mainstream and is ony a niche market. The quote from the Best Buy executive posted above confirms this at the retailer level. The studios are also interested because the newer discs will have more advanced copy-protection (or so I've read).

solaris72 wrote:I don't know if that's a fair appraisal of what HD-DVD will look like...I mean, that's an HD transfer compressed to fit a DVD-9...maybe I'm wrong, but if that's as good as HD-DVD can look, and it fits on a dual layer DVD, why would they need to go to the expense of creating a new storage medium?

According to DVD FAQ, section 3.13, it is possible to fit a 2-hour movie on a DVD-9 disc at 720p resolution.

On the T2 Extreme DVD, the WMV HD version (1080p) occupies only 6.5 GB.

Regarding the quality of WMV HD, from my observation, the clips are exactly as advertised in terms of resolution and details. Shots that have a great depth of field look the best. Objects farthest away from the camera are very noticeably much clearer and more detailed than they would be on standard DVD video. In action scenes, however, the quick camera motion and quick cutting sometimes make the hi-def picture look ordinary.

I invite anyone who owns a HDTV set to take a look at them and do a comparison. (Btw, the resolution of your computer monitor needs to be high enough to see all the details of the 1080p WMV HD clips.)

I highly doubt we'll be seeing any HD-DVD/blu-ray Criterion titles any time soon. Criterion didn't even start producing DVD titles until several years after the format was introduced, and considering the current format war and the fact that most Criterion titles wouldn't benefit greatly from the additional resolution HD provides, it will likely take Criterion an even longer time to begin producing HD-DVD/blu-ray titles.

I was wondering if this wouldn't stop companies wanting to produce the best looking DVD edition of a film. After all, you want the greatest possible difference in quality between the two formats to prove that your latest format is the best and worth upgrading to, so might there not be the same motivation to produce high quality DVDs by companies who have signed up to HD?

Criterion didn't even start producing DVD titles until several years after the format was introduced

Not to be too anal, but it was actually less than a year.

There's no such thing as "too anal" on message boards. Good job.

The Fanciful Norwegian wrote:

Criterion didn't even start producing DVD titles until several years after the format was introduced

Not to be too anal, but it was actually less than a year.

Exactly. I was on the fence about becoming an early adopter, and the news of Criterion's entry into the DVD fray a few months into the format's life decided the issue for me (even though the first discs appeared a number of months after that). My guess is they will wait for the possible format war (pray for THAT to be averted!) to play itself out.

I emailed Jon Mulvaney adn asked him a few questions, and one of them was about this topic.

Jon Mulvaney <[email protected]> wrote:Criterion has been making high-definition masters of our titles for
several
years. While we have made no definite decisions about future formats,
we are
monitoring the development of HD-DVD/Blu-ray technologies closely and
are
prepared for the next generation of DVD technology.

All the best,
JM

What I gather from this is that Criterion will jump right into the Hd/Blue Ray thing if it takes off. If it dosen't, then they'll stay the same.

On one hand I could see Criterion doing at the very least a side CriterionHD thing. But at the same time if this dosen't take off, I don't see them doing anything outlandish.

Just today I read this article about Toshiba preparing a special hybrid HD DVD format which contains a HD side and a normal DVD side. I could imagine Criterion adopting a format like to bridge the gap between DVD and either of the HD formats. People would be able to watch a title on their DVD-player and, as soon as they upgrade to HD DVD, wouldn't have to buy the same title on the new format.

Nah. I think if Criterion does HD-DVD, they'll approach it like they did DVD: like a separate line of products, with a new set of spine number, etc.

It seems very likely to me that HD-DVD/Blu-Ray (of which I believe only HD-DVD will be available as a hybrid format) will become much like laserdisc - a higher quality niche product. But as long as there is a format war on, it seems like it would be somewhat unfortunate for Criterion to jump in.

It seems very likely to me that HD-DVD/Blu-Ray (of which I believe only HD-DVD will be available as a hybrid format)

Actually, JVC introduced a Blu-Ray/DVD hybrid last year.

I don't think either side wants a big war like the Beta/VHS war. I've been hearing that Sony wants to make a deal or something. Sony lost the Beta/VHS war by backing Beta and they may not want to lose again.

I don't think that the HD is catching on as quick. Stations in America are trying to get people to buy them for sports and the like. I think that people don't think it's worth the money for an upgrade (at least in my area). For the HD system to catch on I think they need to create something that is inexpensive like a Model T Ford.

Just an amateur opinion.

Well, most people that buy those setups only do so to impress the neighbors

But, I doubt that HD discs will be 'niched' because the studios/retailers etc want to make profits so they will push for the format.

I just had to jump in here. Folks, everyone is going to embrace HD in a few years because... well, because they'll have to. Not to say that people won't be using their current TV sets (many will). HD converters will be cheap and available for all those who do not wish to buy a new HDTV. The picture won't look HD on their old sets, but they'll at least get to watch their favorite episode of the Rockford Files on it. Folks, the SD signal is going bye bye. Soon, everything will be in HD if you like it or not. All video will be shot in HD (not SD). And when this happens, price will come down (for software and hardware) and everyone can go about their business as if nothing had ever happened. Good night.

Oh, and one last note... in 15-20 years from now, our kids will ask us how we were able to watch such crappy (SD) resolution.

While DVD is great (and it is), nothing beats 35mm prints. I highly doubt HD-DVD or Blu-ray will come close. That is all.

You probably prefer vinyl to cd's.

The Invunche wrote:You probably prefer vinyl to cd's.

Not sure what your point is, since 35mm will kick every video format's ass when seen side by side....even a soccer mom can tell the difference.

Zielske: The difference in quality between DVD and HD-DVD, which I'm assuming will use the highest HD resolution 1920x1080p

HD-DVD is 1080i. I think Blu-Ray might be 1080p but don't quote me on that.

unclehulot wrote:Not sure what your point is, since 35mm will kick every video format's ass when seen side by side....even a soccer mom can tell the difference.

My point had nothing to do with the technical aspects. Rather that on a screen the size of what most people own the difference wouldn't be visible anyway. How would you even begin to compare the formats?

I mean what the hell is the point of a post like this?

pzman84 wrote:While DVD is great (and it is), nothing beats 35mm prints. I highly doubt HD-DVD or Blu-ray will come close. That is all.

Is pzman84re gonna sit at home watching HD-DVD/Blu-Ray thinking "man if only I had a 35mm print of this movie cause this new DVD format isn't that impressive"?

I know I will be...

if one would squeeze an image from 35mm, blue ray or a DVD onto a 17" good quality monitor I don't think anyone would be able to tell the difference in quality. If you want a movie theater experience with a DVD, then put 20 people in a movie theater and give each of them a laptop

I don't think anyone is arguing that HD is equal to or better than 35mm (cause it isn't and never will be). But, the studios aren't going to sell us a copy of their 35mm prints (dream on)... and it's not practical on a consumer level. But there is a huge difference between HD video and SD video. Don't believe me, go and watch a program in HD for a few hours and then watch something in SD right afterwards.

The bad news concerning HD however, is that many movies will be shot on HD video. The last two Star Wars movies is a good case in point. There is a difference between 35mm (and definitely 70mm) and HD. But sadly, the vast majority of people won't be able to tell the difference nor care. So, most studios will choose the cheaper alternative. God I hope I'm wrong about this last point.

What's wrong with dat?