• 08-13-2006, 08:52 AM
    N. Abstentia
    HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray...both losers.
    Interesting...and along with what is stated in this article I personally feel the biggest obstacle is consumers. Most of whom don't even own HDTV yet, so good luck in talking them into a $1000 player which to them is no better than a $60 DVD player.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20060811/...JlYmhvBHNlYwM-
  • 08-13-2006, 09:21 AM
    drseid
    That writer is wrong on many fronts, and the article title is quite misleading. I found his article quite biased in favor of Blu-ray, actually.

    That said, he focuses on "players costing up to $1500" for both formats... and while this is certainly true, it does not mention that they are also available for as low as $500 (HD-A1) and a street price around $400 or less in some quarters. Hardly a bank breaker for many early adopter types. By next year, both formats will be much less expensive, and as such will be more available to J6P.

    As for the 50GB vs. 30GB... Both formats can support higher amounts than those numbers by adding more layers if needed. He points to that fact later on in the article only for Blu-ray (while seemingly reversing his earlier point), but no mention anywhere that HD DVD can do the same... It is true that Blu-ray has an advantage of 25GB *per layer* over HD DVD's 15GB per layer, but right now BRD is only releasing 25GB single layer discs with the high space consuming MPEG-2 codec, versus most HD DVDs being 30GB dual layer discs using the more efficient VC-1 encoding. Picture quality has been in HD DVD's favor on every release so far that is on both formats for comparioson purposes.

    For all the declarations by the writer and "analysts" that BRD has won the war already, I say they need to visit AVSForum.com and see what they think. ;-) I think they are about 3 months behind the times with their statements... At this point due to BRD's poor start (quality-wise, price-wise and player delays), it really is anyone's to win.

    The studio support does initially favor BRD, but as people buy more and more HD DVD players due to their current video superiority, coupled with their much lower prices, the studios could very well switch sides or release on both formats to hedge their bets... I originally thought BRD had the early advantage due to many factors including this early support, but now it is anyone's game.

    Bottom line is this article is quite deceptive and biased at best, and in some cases flat out wrong.

    ---Dave
  • 08-13-2006, 01:40 PM
    kexodusc
    Storage capacity seemed like a weak feature to me. Discs are cheap, and adding a 2nd like all the double dvd titles out there seems to make it moot.

    Other than that, it's sad that everyone is getting shots in at these formats now- especially since the 2006 version is likely not representative of what these formats will be.
  • 08-13-2006, 01:49 PM
    superpanavision70mm
    VHS had a strong run of 20+ years.
    Laserdisc had a very weak run of about 15 years.
    DVD had a strong and still has a strong run of almost 10 years.
    Beta has a very poor run of about 1 year.
    Divx had a very.... yeah.

    Interestingly enough the HD formats are similar to the phenomenon that happened when Laserdiscs first arrived. The reason is fairly simple. HD formats compared to basic DVD show improvement mainly if your equipment is suitable. Laserdiscs showed improvements as well, but were hard to adopt because of the cost involved and the fact that they were bulky compared to the VHS tape.

    The HD formats really need to play hard into the quality aspect because aside from that...they are not really offering a whole lot more. Extras? DVD has them too. Extras for the longest time were the biggest component of the sale. People would buy movies just for the extras or at least be more inclined to. While the HD stuff might hold more per disc...who cares? Some people enjoy having lots of discs when it comes to DVD's. Those 3-disc sets for movies like BLACK HAWK DOWN....we enjoy those because we really feel we are getting something for our money.

    Case in point...

    If you sold somone a HD version of let's say BLACK HAWK DOWN with all the features on 1 disc as compared to the same material being on DVD, only across 3 discs...people would still feel cheated despite the only difference being the amount of discs. Of course there is a quality difference, but that's only marginal when you consider the small percentage of people who own TV's that are capable of truly demonstrating the difference.

    I am quite suprised about a few things already with the HD formats. My first surprise is that the prices are very competative and marketable. The players and discs are actually all over the place in Walmart. I can't find a huge selection anywhere else...even BB has a small selection. The players might be a bit expensive, but fact of the matter is that the player is probably even keel with regular DVD players that are upwards of that price as well, if not better. So by default the best DVD player out there to some extent is an HD formatted player.

    Anyone else have some thoughts?
  • 08-13-2006, 03:01 PM
    GMichael
    Once they get it right I'll jump on board.

    Get it right =
    Big step up in VQC.
    Backward compatable.
    Many more choices in good movies.
    Price that's reasonably afordable.
  • 08-13-2006, 03:16 PM
    Mr Peabody
    This is second hand info since I have not seen this for myself yet, I was talking to a local high end dealer about which HD disc format the higher end manufacturers are leaning toward and none they carry have jumped on either yet. They do have a distributor and they brought in one of the available HD-DVD players to check out. What he told me was that the HD-DVD was some what brighter but as far as color and over all picture quality that a $1k Arcam DVD player was better than the HD-DVD player. The HD-DVD was around the same retail price and he was upset because he didn't know how he was going to off load the HD-DVD.

    If this proves to hold true, I see HD-DVD and BRD going the way of the SACD and DVD-A. Lot's of promotion, not really taking off to the masses and eventually being just that a nitch or novelty that some have and swear by, where others could care less and not see the value.

    I think it sucks that both force you to use HDMI to get the HD signal. I personally feel this is an inadequate and under developed mode of passing the signals. Maybe with the HD they will make it do what they claim.
  • 08-14-2006, 12:57 AM
    drseid
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    This is second hand info since I have not seen this for myself yet, I was talking to a local high end dealer about which HD disc format the higher end manufacturers are leaning toward and none they carry have jumped on either yet. They do have a distributor and they brought in one of the available HD-DVD players to check out. What he told me was that the HD-DVD was some what brighter but as far as color and over all picture quality that a $1k Arcam DVD player was better than the HD-DVD player. The HD-DVD was around the same retail price and he was upset because he didn't know how he was going to off load the HD-DVD.

    If this proves to hold true, I see HD-DVD and BRD going the way of the SACD and DVD-A. Lot's of promotion, not really taking off to the masses and eventually being just that a nitch or novelty that some have and swear by, where others could care less and not see the value.

    I think it sucks that both force you to use HDMI to get the HD signal. I personally feel this is an inadequate and under developed mode of passing the signals. Maybe with the HD they will make it do what they claim.

    I encourange you to check out both of the new formats with your own eyes, because actually most of the above is untrue... :-)

    First off, *no* DVDs, upconverted or not are as good looking as any HD DVDs of the same movie on both formats... even the worst quality ones. The resolution is just significantly better. That said, if we are talking *upconverted DVD* then it is a closer call. The Toshiba players are really some of the best upconverting DVD players on the market, but then again so is the Arcam. For DVD upconversion I might still go with the Arcam, as it is much faster than either of the Toshibas. The point is that most people are not buying an HD DVD player just for regular DVD upconversion, they are buying it for HD DVD, and in that respect it is no contest IMO.

    In the case of Blu-ray, I have indeed seen BRDs that look as bad or worse than their DVD counterparts (take the Fifth Element for example). This has more to do with BRD not yet utilizing their disc space properly yet, however (they are currently using single layer discs with MPEG-2 encoding). Once Sony and company get the dual layer BRDs to work in a production environment, and switch to VC-1 encoding like HD DVD has, quality should improve considerably.

    As for both forcing you to use HDMI to get the HD signal... this is not true either. Both formats will pass full 1080i signals through their component outs. The issue at hand is the ICT constraint token that could signal to the player off the disc that it needs to downrez the signal to 540p through the component outs. So far, this has not been implemented in any discs (HD DVD or Blu-ray), and in all likelihood won't for many years to come. The rumor in the industry (published on many trusted web sites and magazines alike) is it won't be activated until 2010, and even then it is entirely optional for the studios to use it. Many studios have already committed to never activating ICT, and the rest could follow over time if they see it is not going to work with the consumer (most likely). I would not be too worried about it really. I do agree that the idea should not even have made it out of the gate though.

    ---Dave
  • 08-14-2006, 03:43 AM
    Defshep
    I was just wondering about how much grain from the original print HD or Blu-Ray actually enhances. Couldn't improving the definition make older source material look worse? Maybe this is a stupid question, but I'm just trying to decide if it's worth it yet. For example, I have a couple of Superbit discs. In most cases, the images are sharper on my hdtv. Sometimes, however, limitations in the film are more apparent in the higher bit-rate transfers. Am I making any sense? It seems like it will be alot better once more flicks are shot in high def video.
  • 08-14-2006, 03:55 AM
    drseid
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Defshep
    I was just wondering about how much grain from the original print HD or Blu-Ray actually enhances. Couldn't improving the definition make older source material look worse? Maybe this is a stupid question, but I'm just trying to decide if it's worth it yet. For example, I have a couple of Superbit discs. In most cases, the images are sharper on my hdtv. Sometimes, however, limitations in the film are more apparent in the higher bit-rate transfers. Am I making any sense? It seems like it will be alot better once more flicks are shot in high def video.

    I think I know where you are going here... It is true that the enhanced resolution will display limitations in the original master in all their glory. That said, even with the flaws I have found that the films look better in HD with the higher resolution -- a good example of this is "Sleepy Hollow." While the grain in the original master is made all too visible in HD, the overall picture quality is much improved over the DVD (and the HDTV broadcast version also just recently shown). I will say that while revealing limitations of the source could be considered bad by some, it is also true that when a transfer is good to begin with (even a lot of older films have good master material), then HD will also let the viewer see that too.

    ---Dave
  • 08-14-2006, 04:13 AM
    Defshep
    Thanks for the info, Dave. I think I'll still have to wait until the players make it to the sub-200 dollar range, although the dvd prices themselves are pretty reasonable.
  • 08-14-2006, 06:14 AM
    edtyct
    First of all, no viewing material exists that will inherently defy the benefits of high resolution. That said, however, if an older film, or what's left of it, is in some state of disrepair, a high definition transfer of it in all its faded glory will show all of the flaws. However, with the film restoration techniques now available, many older films stand a good chance of putting their best foot forward again. They may not have the snap of newer films, but they should make a better showing of their original ambience. If the film stock used in the first place had a little visible grain, it should become more evident in HD. What would a film noir be without it?
  • 08-14-2006, 11:53 AM
    Woochifer
    I think the article's conclusions are correct. The biggest challenge is simply convincing consumers that HD-DVD/Blu-ray will offer that much more than DVD, especially since less than 20% of U.S. households currently own HDTVs. The upgrade between VHS and DVD was obvious and multifaceted. The DVD is a compact, random access format that gave just about everybody a noticeable improvement in picture quality, 5.1 audio, and connectivity to their computers. HD-DVD/Blu-ray do not offer up a substantial improvement in functionality, and the technical improvements are only noticeable to consumers who already own HDTVs.

    The problems with HD-DVD/Blu-ray are many. First off, the DVD format was created on the assumption that it would be an interim format. Dangerous thing to assume because consumers that have already invested in the hardware and populated their disc collections, are not going to necessarily go through the whole upgrade cycle again when the DVD format has been out there for less than 9 years, and only passed VHS in market share less than 3 years ago. Problem with creating an "interim" format is that it very well might become an "interim" format that last more than 20 years like VHS dominated for about 26 years.

    With the HDTV standards adopted in 1992, everybody knew that a HD-disc format would eventually come out. The question that I've always asked is why rush the DVD format into the market when everybody saw that the TVs of the not-so-distant future would have HD resolution? If the DVD had been introduced as an HD disc format from the beginning, it would have avoided the mess that HD-DVD/Blu-ray are in right now with a format war and very uncertain market prospects. Even if most consumers don't own HDTVs, a DVD format with HD from the beginning still would have given average consumers the random access, bonus features, surround audio, and compact size -- more than enough reasons to upgrade even without a HDTV.

    As it stands now, Blu-ray and HD-DVD are working from a market base of less than 20% of the total audience, because the only tangible benefit (aside from higher resolution audio that has yet to be implemented) is the higher picture resolution and to attain that benefit requires a HDTV. Compare that to the DVD format, which had almost 100% of the viewing audience as a potential customer.

    And with that ~20% base, Blu-ray and HD-DVD have further eroded their target market by including a forced analog downsampling key that, if activated, would require a copy protected digital video connection for full HD resolution. This would leave about half of the existing HDTV owners out in the cold, because those early HDTVs came with analog component video connections only. For now, the key has yet to be activated on any HD-DVD or Blu-ray discs, but the word has gotten out and the response involved a lot of four-letter variety.

    Oh, and then there's that absolutely idiotic silliness with the format war, which leaves even more potential customers sitting on the fence because not too many consumers want to spend $500 to $1,000+ on a machine that might become an obsolete relic within the next two years. The market might eventually take off as the dust settles and/or universal players that can handle both formats become available. But, in the meantime, as this pissing match drags on and drags the market down with it, other HD viewing options like on-demand and downloading get closer to reality.

    If these resources had been marshaled towards a unified HD-disc format from the very beginning (i.e. with no "interim" DVD format in the meantime), that format very well might have locked down the market and spurred the HDTV growth a lot sooner. As it stands, those of us who choose to watch our movies via disc media might be stuck at 480p for a long time.
  • 08-14-2006, 12:44 PM
    Woochifer
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by superpanavision70mm
    Laserdisc had a very weak run of about 15 years.

    "Very weak" would depend on who you ask. For collectors and hardcore movie enthusiasts, the Laserdisc was the only way to go for almost 20 years. No tapes to wear out, random access, superior picture quality, most movies available in widescreen format (whereas the vast majority of VHS titles were pan & scan only), and the first to market with both AC-3 and DTS 5.1 audio. Only when the DVD format came along did the Laserdisc finally give way.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by superpanavision70mm
    Beta has a very poor run of about 1 year.

    Introduced in 1975 and the last ED Beta machines that were used in professional circles did not go out of production until 2002. I wouldn't call that "1 year." Most video stores stocked dual formats until around the late-80s when Sony started producing VHS machines and studios phased out the Beta format.

    And if your definition of "very poor" includes first to market, forward and reverse scan from the very beginning (early VHS machines could only scan forward, and even the latter mechanisms did not have the precision that the Beta mechanisms had from the beginning), first to introduce Hi-Fi audio, first to include an enhanced resolution mode (SuperBeta was an actual 20% resolution increase, whereas VHS HQ was nothing more than a brightness/sharpness tweak), first to create a video camcorder, first to have a video mode capable of 500 lines of resolution (ED Beta), and all the while consistently producing higher picture quality, then I guess Beta indeed had a "very poor run of about 1 year."

    VHS could not even best the Beta format's picture quality until D-VHS came along in 1998. The primary advantage that VHS had from the beginning was that it could record longer on a single tape, and JVC was much smarter with its marketing even while it kept playing catch up on the technical side.

    And let's not forget that many of the digital PCM studio recordings of the 80s and 90s were stored onto Betamax tape media, so the need for Betamax machines will go on.
  • 08-14-2006, 02:28 PM
    So let me get this straight...
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drseid
    As for both forcing you to use HDMI to get the HD signal... this is not true either. Both formats will pass full 1080i signals through their component outs. The issue at hand is the ICT constraint token that could signal to the player off the disc that it needs to downrez the signal to 540p through the component outs. So far, this has not been implemented in any discs (HD DVD or Blu-ray), and in all likelihood won't for many years to come. The rumor in the industry (published on many trusted web sites and magazines alike) is it won't be activated until 2010, and even then it is entirely optional for the studios to use it. Many studios have already committed to never activating ICT, and the rest could follow over time if they see it is not going to work with the consumer (most likely). I would not be too worried about it really. I do agree that the idea should not even have made it out of the gate though.

    If I buy Samsung's new Blu-Ray player today, I can watch 1080 programming through my component outs?

    Also, is this true for the many up-converting players? For example, can I watch my regular DVD's in upconverted 1080 through the component outs if I buy a Marantz DV6600?
  • 08-14-2006, 03:09 PM
    drseid
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nightflier
    If I buy Samsung's new Blu-Ray player today, I can watch 1080 programming through my component outs?

    Also, is this true for the many up-converting players? For example, can I watch my regular DVD's in upconverted 1080 through the component outs if I buy a Marantz DV6600?

    No, you won't be able to watch 1080i upconverted DVDs through the component outs (nor on any other player I know of). You *will* be able to watch Blu-ray discs on the Samsung in true 1080i, however.

    ---Dave
  • 08-14-2006, 04:08 PM
    Drats!
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drseid
    No, you won't be able to watch 1080i upconverted DVDs through the component outs (nor on any other player I know of). You *will* be able to watch Blu-ray discs on the Samsung in true 1080i, however.

    And I was so hoping that the upconverting players would avoid this arbitrary restriction too. I'm just not willing to give up my existing DVD collection, nor do I care to replace my TV. Oh well, I guess I'll just wait until the smoke clears between HD & BR (or for something better to comes along).
  • 08-14-2006, 05:14 PM
    Woochifer
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nightflier
    If I buy Samsung's new Blu-Ray player today, I can watch 1080 programming through my component outs?

    Well, until the studios decide to start activating the forced analog downconversion, you're fine with 1080 resolution. The problem with using component outputs is that the studios at any time can start activating the forced downconversion key that brings the resolution down to barely above DVD resolution when played through the analog outputs. The studios are playing nice for now, but with their paranoia about digital rights management and copy protection, I wouldn't count on them keeping the "analog hole" open once HDMI-enabled TVs begin to constitute a clear-cut majority of the HDTVs out there.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nightflier
    Also, is this true for the many up-converting players? For example, can I watch my regular DVD's in upconverted 1080 through the component outs if I buy a Marantz DV6600?

    My understanding is DVD players will typically only upconvert the signal through the HDMI outputs, so you'll need to double check with Marantz to see if the analog video outputs are also upconverted.
  • 08-14-2006, 08:09 PM
    edtyct
    I doubt that the Marantz differs from just about every other mainstream player these days. The unofficial agreement between mfgers and content providers is that upconversion will remain the province of digital connections. A few fringe companies, like LG/Zenith and V, inc,. permitted upconversion via component in the early days (I think even then it worked only if the disk in question had no analog copy protection [Macrovision]--in other words, rarely) but no longer. Chinese players, like the Neu Neu, however, may not be under the same constraints. I'm not sure.
  • 08-14-2006, 10:50 PM
    superpanavision70mm
    Wooch...

    Once again you obviously did not get my humor...I wasn't being realistic with how long the formats lasted...it was suppose to be funny. Unfortunately you missed it just like with everything else...you are too busy trying to argue and debate people so that you are right and they are wrong. You have such a wealth of knowledge and everyone else is just stupid I suppose. As for LaserDisc...you don't need to give me a lesson on the format since I am still a big fan of it and have well over a few hundred titles still.
  • 08-15-2006, 10:59 AM
    Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drseid
    That writer is wrong on many fronts, and the article title is quite misleading. I found his article quite biased in favor of Blu-ray, actually.

    Well spoken from the HD DVD camp, however I think the article has a whole lot of merit.

    Quote:

    That said, he focuses on "players costing up to $1500" for both formats... and while this is certainly true, it does not mention that they are also available for as low as $500 (HD-A1) and a street price around $400 or less in some quarters. Hardly a bank breaker for many early adopter types. By next year, both formats will be much less expensive, and as such will be more available to J6P.
    Yes, but for that $500 you only get 2 advanced codecs, the lossless one in two channels only. You do not get 1080P which is the native coding format for the disc itself. This is not what the potential of this format can deliver.

    Quote:

    As for the 50GB vs. 30GB... Both formats can support higher amounts than those numbers by adding more layers if needed. He points to that fact later on in the article only for Blu-ray (while seemingly reversing his earlier point), but no mention anywhere that HD DVD can do the same... It is true that Blu-ray has an advantage of 25GB *per layer* over HD DVD's 15GB per layer, but right now BRD is only releasing 25GB single layer discs with the high space consuming MPEG-2 codec, versus most HD DVDs being 30GB dual layer discs using the more efficient VC-1 encoding. Picture quality has been in HD DVD's favor on every release so far that is on both formats for comparioson purposes.
    HD DVD can only support two layers because of the pit depth. Sony however can support up to 4 layers which top out at 100GB. HD DVD at its best cannot come close to that. And yes HD DVD is winning the picture battle, but so far BR is winning the audio side providing 16bit uncompressed audio as opposed to lossy DD+. Also consider that the Samsung was released with the video filter enabled, and that does make the picture softer. However, poor masters where used in many of the inital BR releases and you cannot expect that Sony will continue that practice. They are just trying to get titles released to support the single player out there. I can tell you for a fact based on what I have seen, and heard when the Pioneer and Sony players are released, things will be much different.

    Quote:

    For all the declarations by the writer and "analysts" that BRD has won the war already, I say they need to visit AVSForum.com and see what they think. ;-) I think they are about 3 months behind the times with their statements... At this point due to BRD's poor start (quality-wise, price-wise and player delays), it really is anyone's to win.
    AVSFforums opinions are not the end all of opinions. The members do not make or break a format. Secondly you are sadly underestimating the fact the only ONE company is going to be manufacturing HD DVD players. ONLY ONE! How long do you thing Toshiba can afford to be the only manufacturer of its players? Without broad support from the manufacturing community, it leaves Toshiba very exposed financially. Toshiba also cannot keep up with the demand for its players, how long do you think that people are going to sit around waiting for their player to come? The last time I check my own BB, they had no $500 players and haven't had any in a couple of weeks. So having a lower price but no product doesn't really give one an advantage.

    Quote:

    The studio support does initially favor BRD, but as people buy more and more HD DVD players due to their current video superiority, coupled with their much lower prices, the studios could very well switch sides or release on both formats to hedge their bets... I originally thought BRD had the early advantage due to many factors including this early support, but now it is anyone's game.
    The studio support for BR stems from the fact there is very broad support amount CE manufacturers, and that includes manufacturers of PC's as well. The studio's recognize that the sheer size of that support will guarantee the success of this format. From what I have heard the studio's are waiting for a couple of things that will really put BR over the top. 50GB dual layer disc, and the introduction of players from Sony, Pioneer, LG, Hitachi, Panasonic, Sharp, and Phillips. All of this will occur next year when most analyst think that this format war will really begin. All of these companies will release players with varying prices, and probably lower than the current offerings. To even think that just because HD DVD came out strong means they have the advantage is a naive, shortsighted, and wishful thinking. I see Toshiba position with HD DVD the same as Sony with Beta. Sony choose to go it alone with Beta, while VHS had wide manufacturing support. VHS won for the consumer, and lost the professional market, Sony lost the consumer market but won the professional market because their product was superior in every way to VHS. Sony sold enough Beta players and recorders to the professional market to consider that format a success in spite of the fact that they didn't win the consumer market.

    Quote:

    Bottom line is this article is quite deceptive and biased at best, and in some cases flat out wrong.

    ---Dave
    Disagree entirely. However in the end we all will see. Right now, I see no one with a advantage. 2007 however is really when the big race takes place. I think only then will it be appropriate to discuss who has the advantage.
  • 08-15-2006, 11:00 AM
    Woochifer
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by superpanavision70mm
    Wooch...

    Once again you obviously did not get my humor...I wasn't being realistic with how long the formats lasted...it was suppose to be funny. Unfortunately you missed it just like with everything else...you are too busy trying to argue and debate people so that you are right and they are wrong. You have such a wealth of knowledge and everyone else is just stupid I suppose. As for LaserDisc...you don't need to give me a lesson on the format since I am still a big fan of it and have well over a few hundred titles still.

    Translation added ...

    Thanks Wooch for pointing out the obvious lapses in the purported facts that I was trying to present. Given that I didn't have much of a clue as to what I was talking about, I had to resort to the spin job of convincing people that I was being humorous about the whole thing. And since I can't point out any factual errors in your response, I resorted to attacking your intentions in an effort to elicit sympathy from the other participants. But, I now realize that all of this is in vain, as any "real genius" would realize. So, anyway thank you for pointing all of this out and I'll get my facts straight next time. Have a nice day!
  • 08-15-2006, 11:36 AM
    drseid
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible



    Yes, but for that $500 you only get 2 advanced codecs, the lossless one in two channels only. You do not get 1080P which is the native coding format for the disc itself. This is not what the potential of this format can deliver.


    It is true that the lossless one is in two channels, but firmware update 2.0 is going to be released any day now (this has been posted on several web sites and forums, and has been confirmed by Toshiba reps) and it will offer Dolby TruHD Lossless for 5.1 channels. This should sound quite good indeed. I actually also prefer the DD+ to the PCM soundtracks on the BRDs, BTW.

    The 1080p output is irrelevant and has been debunked a long time ago by several folks on AVSforum.com and elsewhere. This is more marketing hype by the Blu-ray camp than anything else.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    HD DVD can only support two layers because of the pit depth. Sony however can support up to 4 layers which top out at 100GB. HD DVD at its best cannot come close to that. And yes HD DVD is winning the picture battle, but so far BR is winning the audio side providing 16bit uncompressed audio as opposed to lossy DD+. Also consider that the Samsung was released with the video filter enabled, and that does make the picture softer. However, poor masters where used in many of the inital BR releases and you cannot expect that Sony will continue that practice. They are just trying to get titles released to support the single player out there. I can tell you for a fact based on what I have seen, and heard when the Pioneer and Sony players are released, things will be much different.

    Actually this is incorrect. HD DVD has already tested 3 layer discs and could use them any time they want to (the actual maximum storage capacity for the format is 4 layers with 60GB). That said, I do not know if they ever will, as they really are not necessary (as the dual-layer discs already being used are showing they are quite sufficient). Blu-ray is testing discs that have even more than 4 layers, but those tests so far have mainly been for computer storage use. This of course could change and would allow Blu-ray to expand further as well.

    As for the Samsung player, it was not the best player to debut the format to be sure. I have also heard that the Pioneer in particular seems to be a better representative of what a BRD player can do. That said, the insiders who have seen it in action on AVSforum.com prefered HD DVD (for 1/3 the price currently). I agree that the masters can and will improve over time, and that can only help Blu-ray in the long run. HD DVD of course can also improve...


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    AVSFforums opinions are not the end all of opinions. The members do not make or break a format. Secondly you are sadly underestimating the fact the only ONE company is going to be manufacturing HD DVD players. ONLY ONE! How long do you thing Toshiba can afford to be the only manufacturer of its players? Without broad support from the manufacturing community, it leaves Toshiba very exposed financially. Toshiba also cannot keep up with the demand for its players, how long do you think that people are going to sit around waiting for their player to come? The last time I check my own BB, they had no $500 players and haven't had any in a couple of weeks. So having a lower price but no product doesn't really give one an advantage.

    With respect to the AVSforum statement above... I agree. Of course I never said that they did make or break a format. What they *do* represent is some very knowledgeable folks that tend to be early adopters and industry insiders. Hardly people to ignore when getting a format off the ground. Once the initial launches are complete, it will be J6P who will ultimately determine the success or failure of either format.

    As for Toshiba being the only OEM for the players... That is true for now. There are already other companies that will be getting in on the action quite soon. Still there is no question that Sony and the rest of the Blu-ray camp have the upper hand here.



    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Disagree entirely. However in the end we all will see. Right now, I see no one with a advantage. 2007 however is really when the big race takes place. I think only then will it be appropriate to discuss who has the advantage.

    Agreed, we shall see. :-)

    ---Dave
  • 08-15-2006, 11:40 AM
    superpanavision70mm
    Wooch...you have serious issues. How's that "NEVERENDING" DVD collection going ?
  • 08-15-2006, 12:14 PM
    Woochifer
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by superpanavision70mm
    Wooch...you have serious issues. How's that "NEVERENDING" DVD collection going ?

    Another translation added ...

    Oh poor pitiful me! I got no way to respond other than to lash out and accuse other people of having issues. Otherwise, they'll just see that I have a thin skin and can't deal with the "humor" that I accuse others of misunderstanding. And I guess I also need to get a clue since I still fail to understand that when Wooch refers to a "neverending DVD collection" he means that he keeps adding to it. Hence, it ... never ... ends .. oh, never mind I still don't get it! But, since so much of my manhood is tied to the size of my movie collection, I'll just keep boasting about it until someone notices that I have no other response.
  • 08-15-2006, 12:24 PM
    robert393
    Wow.....heated debate. I don't think anbody would disagree that HD-DVD has gotten a really good jump start, and that BR has been disappoining thus far. However, BR has alot of Studio support, and certainly seems to be superior "on paper". Translating that into a superior product has been more difficult thusfar.

    The whole 1080p hype from the BR camp seems to be just that........hype, as oppossed to reality at this point. Good article regarding the subject HERE.

    Excerpt: "At this point we should address what can only be characterized as a hoax—the notion that Blu-ray must be technically superior to HD-DVD because the Samsung player outputs 1080p, whereas the Toshiba player is "only 1080i." One high-end home theater retailer told me last weekend that the reason you pay $1000 for the Blu-ray player is for the "higher resolution 1080p output." This is absolute baloney. If you encounter any retail sales rep feeding you this line, keep your wallet in your pocket and leave the store.

    The truth is this: The Toshiba HD-DVD player outputs 1080i, and the Samsung Blu-ray player outputs both 1080i and 1080p. What they fail to mention is that it makes absolutely no difference which transmission format you use—feeding 1080i or 1080p into your projector or HDTV will give you the exact same picture. Why? Both disc formats encode film material in progressive scan 1080p at 24 frames per second. It does not matter whether you output this data in 1080i or 1080p since all 1080 lines of information on the disc are fed into your video display either way. The only difference is the order in which they are transmitted. If they are fed in progressive order (1080p), the video display will process them in that order. If they are fed in interlaced format (1080i), the video display simply reassembles them into their original progressive scan order. Either way all 1080 lines per frame that are on the disc make it into the projector or TV. The fact is, if you happen to have the Samsung Blu-ray player and a video display that takes both 1080i and 1080p, you can switch the player back and forth between 1080i and 1080p output and see absolutely no difference in the picture. So this notion that the Blu-ray player is worth more money due to 1080p output is nonsense."



    This is going to be a fun battle, but 2 things are for-sure.
    1) HD video is the future.
    2) The consumer will be the ultimate winner of the format war.

    Let's all be kind, and patient, and enjoy the ride!~

    Robert