Universal HD encodes "not good enough" to port? How?

[Nick Graham]

With the Bits reporting that Universal is thinking it's existing HD transfers are "not good enough" for Blu-Ray, I'm kind of curious how they cam eto this conclusion. A lot of their day and date titles look good, as do a good chunk of their catalog titles (well, at least the earlier ones before they went into quantity over quality mode). Regardless, they are PQ wise on par with a lot of what Warner has released and will continue to release on BD through the first quarter of the year.

Audio-wise the titles that only got Dolby Digital Plus 1.5 Mbps tracks would have to be only Dolby Digital on the Blu release, but PQ wise they have a solid allotment of titles they could do quick and dirty ports of (aside from the whole HDi to BD-J hurdle) just to get some stuff on store shelves. Granted we all benefit if they re-encode each title, but from the sounds of it that means a year
before any Universal Blus hit the shelves.

[SpaceDog]

I'm guessing that Universal has seen what Blu Ray can do, looking at titles like Pirates or Ratattoille (sp) in particular. They've decidide that their HD-DVDs are inferior.
Nice they are clear on that at least.

[dialog_gvf]

I expect recycling HD DVD encodes, especially the many that didn't get the higher reviewer PQ ratings (4.0 and above) would probably not sell well. The reviewers would no doubt take Universal to task for not fixing the problems.

There are a number of titles that have EE, which probably means they used an HD master created for DVD. And the rush to get so many titles out meant they didn't do much in the way of re-mastering or restoration work.

There are a good number that should port reasonably well. But, even a top tier title like King Kong is known to have grain pulsing.

Gary

[HDTV1080P]

It would be nice to have Universal Studios movies mastered for the BLU-RAY format using a 50GB disc with high bit rate MPEG-4/AVC or VC-1. The HD-DVD format has a lower quality disc since the bit rate is lower and movies max out at 30GB for that format.
7.1 and 5.1 PCM or DTS HD Master audio is a reality with BLU-RAY do to the extra 20GB of space.

[Izzy]

Man, Bourne on BD is gonna sell a TON of copies.

Come on UNI!

[marzetta7]

Originally Posted by Nick Graham

With the Bits reporting that Universal is thinking it's existing HD transfers are "not good enough" for Blu-Ray, I'm kind of curious how they cam eto this conclusion. A lot of their day and date titles look good, as do a good chunk of their catalog titles (well, at least the earlier ones before they went into quantity over quality mode). Regardless, they are PQ wise on par with a lot of what Warner has released and will continue to release on BD through the first quarter of the year.

Audio-wise the titles that only got Dolby Digital Plus 1.5 Mbps tracks would have to be only Dolby Digital on the Blu release, but PQ wise they have a solid allotment of titles they could do quick and dirty ports of (aside from the whole HDi to BD-J hurdle) just to get some stuff on store shelves. Granted we all benefit if they re-encode each title, but from the sounds of it that means a year
before any Universal Blus hit the shelves.

The reason they are on par with Warner is because Warner was having to neuter their encodes to the lowest common denominator--HD DVD.

You'll find that both of them, Universal and Warner, rating-wise (both video and audio) make up the bottom of the pack, and its no suprise because of the storage discrepancy on HD DVD.

[jason_grumpy]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

I expect recycling HD DVD encodes, especially the many that didn't get the higher reviewer PQ ratings (4.0 and above) would probably not sell well. The reviewers would no doubt take Universal to task for not fixing the problems.

I agree with Gary on this. Universal has consistently averaged the lowest PQ scores compared to ALL other studios. The Blu Studios have obviously made huge strides in PQ with higher bit rate AND lossless audio throughout the better part of 2007. Universal really has been left behind with quality.

It's also arguable that Paramount has the Blu authoring experience and can make the transition much easier -- not to mention a certain high profile director pushing for the encode HIS way for a certain high profile release on Blu. I would suspect Paramount is already re-authoring other discs for their transition.

With Disney, Fox, Sony, and Lionsgate already pushing the limit, and New Line (done already) and WB to follow in May, Universal will have no choice but to raise the bar for quality.

This is a good thing for movie lovers. My main concern about Universal would be their inexperience with Blu, and push rehashed encodes to Blu just to get discs out. At least it gives us pause to think that when Universal jumps in, it will be with both feet.

[Izzy]

Originally Posted by marzetta7

The reason they are on par with Warner is because Warner was having to neuter their encodes to the lowest common denominator--HD DVD.

You'll find that both of them, Universal and Warner, rating-wise (both video and audio) make up the bottom of the pack, and its no suprise because of the storage discrepancy on HD DVD.

I disagree, you can have great movies on less space.

This is more of a studio thing esp Uni. Uni cared about quantity, not quality. Trust me, if we dont hold them to a high standard on BD, they will crank out the same uselss catalog titles with crap encodes.

[unreal1080p]

Originally Posted by Nick Graham

Universal is thinking it's existing HD transfers are "not good enough" for Blu-Ray... from the sounds of it that means a year before any Universal Blus hit the shelves.

I'm ok with that (1 year wait).

Once they go Blu exclusive, they can concentrate on day and date releases with "proper" video transfers & lossless audio. I have no problem waiting 1+year for the catalog titles... I would'nt buy straight to Blu-Ray HD DUD ports anyway... so they might as well re-work their titles with proper video transfers rather then waste their time.

[Spankey]

Universal is thinking it's existing HD transfers are "not good enough" for Blu-Ray... from the sounds of it that means a year before any Universal Blus hit the shelves.

Universal "could" release new films while offering catalogue titles more slowly. At this point, they have nothing to lose. Obviously they rushed HD-DVD titles to market. The crap HD-DVD owners have been accepting as quality is really sad.

[marzetta7]

Originally Posted by Izzy

I disagree, you can have great movies on less space.

This is more of a studio thing esp Uni. Uni cared about quantity, not quality. Trust me, if we dont hold them to a high standard on BD, they will crank out the same uselss catalog titles with crap encodes.

And even greater movies with more space.

My statement still holds true overall, in terms of ratings from various websites. I agree that they still need to be held to a high standard, and indeed, encodes need to be handled delicately, but also in order to make the movie experience even more encompassing, higher bit rate encodes (that take up more space) and better audio (that take up more space) will raise the bar higher for Universal.

[Nick Graham]

Originally Posted by Spankey

Universal "could" release new films while offering catalogue titles more slowly. At this point, they have nothing to lose. Obviously they rushed HD-DVD titles to market. The crap HD-DVD owners have been accepting as quality is really sad.

True - they could just start with new day-and date titles and re-do everything they have released for HD-DVD. At the same time, there is a decent chunk of their HD-DVD output that looks at least as good as some of the middle of the road Fox, MGM, and Warner releases (even a title or two that is close to the best Blu has offered, such as Hot Fuzz), so I'm kinda surprised they aren't taking the cheap route on Blu and just planning to recycle some transfers. Most of their catalog titles over the last year desperately need redone, but I'm surprised the same studio that has been pretty infamous to using existing transfers as long as humanly possible (and sometimes longer) are all of a sudden concerned about PQ.

Paramount pretty much mastered the art of milking as much PQ out of the limitations of HD-DVD as possible, so I'm definitely expecting them to recycle.

[Papi4baby]

Originally Posted by Izzy

I disagree, you can have great movies on less space.

This is more of a studio thing esp Uni. Uni cared about quantity, not quality. Trust me, if we dont hold them to a high standard on BD, they will crank out the same uselss catalog titles with crap encodes.

Originally Posted by marzetta7

And even greater movies with more space.

My statement still holds true overall, in terms of ratings from various websites. I agree that they still need to be held to a high standard, and indeed, encodes need to be handled delicately, but also in order to make the movie experience even more encompassing, higher bit rate encodes (that take up more space) and better audio (that take up more space) will raise the bar higher for Universal.

Your both correct, it is a size issue, and a quality issue.

For example i recently rented the WAR DVD and The Kingdom DVD, guess which one had a better quality of video!!! Give up, well WAR, The Kingdom image was blurry and down right discosting. I sure hope Universal get's their act together when they start to release on BD, because i for one will not buy crap encodes.

P.S. The Kingdom is a Universal fim, War is Lionsgate.

[reiella]

Universal titles, especially catalog, were pretty low on the picture quality.

[Guinness7]

What it comes down to is it looks like Universal has there work cut out for them when they come over to blu.

[WickyWoo]

With the Bits reporting that Universal is thinking it's existing HD transfers are "not good enough" for Blu-Ray, I'm kind of curious how they cam eto this conclusion

Not all of them. There's a large percentage of their catalog titles that look like ass, and they need to redone when going for a longterm format instead of shovelwared out as part of the "100 Universal HD DVDs this year" program

[ryoohki]

btw, it takes about an hour to Re-Author a HD DVD (VC1 Encoded) to BluRay with a HOME COMPUTER! Without menu or anything. So it's really NOT complicated to do it.

The DD+ track's aren't compatible tought.. they would have to either reencode them to DTS or TrueHD the master on all their movies..

[scott1256ca]

well, let's be honest. It wouldn't take much to redo just the audio.

I think some of the thinking about having to improve quality might have to do with them cranking out too many titles. The film stock may not be in the best shape for some of the older titles, and they probably didn't do much, if anything, to restore them. And frankly, if they aren't going to take the time to redo them and improve the video quality, what is the point of buying them in HD? If the video is going to be mediocre anyway, I'll just stick with dvd.

Some of their newer titles, like the Bourne stuff seems to be fine, if the reviews are any indication. I think they spent no time restoring film and no time hand tweaking the encodes to get the most out of them. They'll have to if they want to sell BD, because when I see a movie with a 3.5/5 PQ that I already have on dvd, I'm sure not inclined to repurchase. Sorry, but lossless audio won't be enough to make up for mediocre PQ. Get your act together for the switch Uni, and then say goodbye to the dark side.

[WickyWoo]

btw, it takes about an hour to Re-Author a HD DVD (VC1 Encoded) to BluRay with a HOME COMPUTER! Without menu or anything. So it's really NOT complicated to do it.

That's just changing the block size

I suggest you don't elaborate any further though.

Universal's biggest problem is that they're using masters that are as much as a decade old for their HD DVDs, especially on older films like Last Starfighter. Telecine has come a long way in the last decade, time to do them again, especially for an evergreen like that

[ryoohki]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

That's just changing the block size

I suggest you don't elaborate any further though.

Universal's biggest problem is that they're using masters that are as much as a decade old for their HD DVDs, especially on older films like Last Starfighter. Telecine has come a long way in the last decade, time to do them again, especially for an evergreen like that

Of course i won't

Yeah i owned a HD DVD for about.. May 06 to Jan 2007. They were some good one like Pitch Black and The Thing, but most of them had a LOT of Edge Enhancement...