I am sick of this

[Paper]

I am not for either at the moment. I think that if one is going to male claims that it is better than the other, it should at least do it properly.

The greater capacity and data transfer rates for Blu-ray will allow the movie studios to release their movies with higher quality video and audio than the HD-DVD format.

How does this work exactly? From what I have understood, both can support 1080p high definition. Surely it just means that you can not fit as much video onto HD DVD as you can onto Blu ray. Even if HD DVD disks are only 30 GB this still means you can fit 5 hours of video onto the disk, more than most films need.

Whereas HD-DVD only has support from three major movie studios (Warner, Paramount and Universal)

This claim is made yet HD DVD has more existing titles than Blu ray and has sold 33% more players than Blu ray. So if Blu ray has all these supporters, where are the titles, and where are the sales?

So far, Toshiba is the only company to officially announce a HD-DVD player and it will only support 1080i output

No this wrong. 1080i and 1080p look no different at that resolution. 1080p is better rendered on current HDTVs, and Toshiba have taken this into account. Read below...

The HD-XA2, on the other hand, gets a bigger facelift, with HDMI 1.3 for enhanced colour and sound, 12-bit processing, 1080p resolution and Dolby True HD 5.1 audio. The problem: It also comes with a bigger price tag of $1,000 (US).

Funny how it costs just as much as Blu ray players. So what difference do we notice so far? None!



Now I am all for debate and I don't want to take sides in this war, I'd rather just wait it out. But if you are going to go making claims and boasting your products then do your homework! What I see here is a poorly researched comparison that uses speculation rather than real hard facts.

[hmurchison]

My suggestion is to just buy both. We're all gear sluts anyways what's another player in the rack going to hurt?

[Paper]

True and hybrids might be coming out soon!

The purpose of this topic was to point out how stupid the whole debate has become. People are going to great lengths to make the alternative look bad.

[phloyd]

Originally Posted by Paper

How does this work exactly? From what I have understood, both can support 1080p high definition.

The resolution is only part of the equation. In order to even come close to fitting the data on the disc they have to compress it. Each Frame of the movie is 6MB uncompressed. So if you do the math you will find you would need a very large disc and high bitrate off the disc to support uncompressed video.

Now there are different ways to compress the data (called things like MPEG2, VC-1 and AVC/MPEG4) but the general rule is the more information or data the compression scheme is allowed, the closer to the original uncompressed data you will get. It gets harder if you are trying to compare VC-1 to MPEG2 for exampe, but the 'bigger is better and more is more' rule tends to apply all else being equal.

That is why some people believe that the larger capacity and higher bitrate that Bluray disc offers is an advantage over HD DVD.

[Paper]

Originally Posted by phloyd

The resolution is only part of the equation. In order to even come close to fitting the data on the disc they have to compress it. Each Frame of the movie is 6MB uncompressed. So if you do the math you will find you would need a very large disc and high bitrate off the disc to support uncompressed video.

Now there are different ways to compress the data (called things like MPEG2, VC-1 and AVC/MPEG4) but the general rule is the more information or data the compression scheme is allowed, the closer to the original uncompressed data you will get. It gets harder if you are trying to compare VC-1 to MPEG2 for exampe, but the 'bigger is better and more is more' rule tends to apply all else being equal.

That is why some people believe that the larger capacity and higher bitrate that Bluray disc offers is an advantage over HD DVD.

I also like the idea of more data storage

The question is, why aren't companies using the full amount of space? On both formats.

[phloyd]

Some of them do - Click was just shy of 50GB.

Generally I think they aim for certain file sizes but do not always hit them - it is not an exact science from what I can tell.

There is also a point where adding more data doesn't make any appreciable difference.

That said, with people talking about sub-10Mbps 'quality' encodes using VC-1 I have to ask myself what is being thrown away or is the master so soft that there is no detail to encode.

Detail requires bits and nothing comes for free...

[Josh]

Originally Posted by Paper

I am not for either at the moment. I think that if one is going to male claims that it is better than the other, it should at least do it properly.

How does this work exactly? From what I have understood, both can support 1080p high definition. Surely it just means that you can not fit as much video onto HD DVD as you can onto Blu ray. Even if HD DVD disks are only 30 GB this still means you can fit 5 hours of video onto the disk, more than most films need.

Blu-ray supports a higher bandwidth, which means that peaks can be substantially higher with Blu-ray, and better quality ensues. This is why you only see a few titles of HD DVD with lossles audio, while Blu-ray has many titles.

This claim is made yet HD DVD has more existing titles than Blu ray and has sold 33% more players than Blu ray. So if Blu ray has all these supporters, where are the titles, and where are the sales?

HD DVD started earlier and is at a much lower price point. As the war goes on, and that advantage dwindles. The number of titles should equal out sooner than later, then exceed HD DVD.

No this wrong. 1080i and 1080p look no different at that resolution. 1080p is better rendered on current HDTVs, and Toshiba have taken this into account. Read below...

Funny how it costs just as much as Blu ray players. So what difference do we notice so far? None!

1080i only looks as good as 1080p when run through a $3000 scalar. If you check out the other thread on TVs, most failed to properly deinterlace, inverse 3:2 pulldown, or both. Having it done properly inside the player is much better than paying $3000 to do it properly outside the player.

Now I am all for debate and I don't want to take sides in this war, I'd rather just wait it out. But if you are going to go making claims and boasting your products then do your homework! What I see here is a poorly researched comparison that uses speculation rather than real hard facts.

I suggest doing some research yourself.

[ay221]

Originally Posted by phloyd

Some of them do - Click was just shy of 50GB.

Generally I think they aim for certain file sizes but do not always hit them - it is not an exact science from what I can tell.

There is also a point where adding more data doesn't make any appreciable difference.

That said, with people talking about sub-10Mbps 'quality' encodes using VC-1 I have to ask myself what is being thrown away or is the master so soft that there is no detail to encode.

Detail requires bits and nothing comes for free...

Not trying to get off topic too much, but click with nearly 50GB had terrible noise from the demo I saw at UE using a 1080p DLP. Not sure if it was the set or what. But I think they should did a poor job with the transfer or got a bad source.

[theknub]

i've heard some of this before. however, the film was filmed digitally. i have heard the vast majority of people say the picture is fantastic. so, i get the feeling it is the setup and not the transfer

[hmurchison]

I saw the Click trailer and wasn't impressed. It looks good but not great. Nothing I saw led me to believe that the same or better couldn't be accomplished with 20GB of movie data.

Everything being equal it's better to have more space/bandwidth to a point. VC1 vs MPEG2 comparisons are poor because we're talking different codecs here.

While studios would love to max out the format consider this. They must process these videos with highend hardware and the bigger they make the files the longer it takes to process. At times you just want to keep the file a small as possible for ease in processing without sacrificing quality too much. That's where the "art" lays.

Frankly I don't see a significant advantage in either format. They are too close in too many areas so I champion the cheaper format. Why pay more? That doesn't mean I wouldn't buy a Blu-Ray player at the right price though and chances are I will.

[theknub]

umm, only one player is cheaper. the next gen player will be the same price. plus, hd-dvd has the "flipper" discs which are more expensive.

long term, not sure how hd-dvd is cheaper

[phloyd]

Click apparently has some source based limitations. Oddly noisy sources are harder to compress (without artifacts) than 'clean' sources so it does not surprise me that Sony needed to use a high datarate encode for this movie.

Some scenes are worse than others but I also saw a lot of noise on some particular scenes when I was paying close attention.

In 'less particular enjpy the movie' mode I didn't have issue with it.

But I would not say it is a reference image quality movie by means.

[BTBuck1]

Paper has been here all of three posts and is sick of it...lmao...

fisrt, these topics your mentioning, most are ancient...all have been thrown around countless times.

It's tough for the newcomer to make a choice, I say get both...I did

[AV_Integrated]

Paper - The references you bring up are reasonable - but some are out of date... both to old and to new.

1. I believe HD-DVD and Blu-ray will eventually look identical unless it is shown that higher encoding rates for VC-1/AVC produce better looking films. In the long run, as BD50 is adopted and utilzed, we may (not will) find that movies are designed to fit on 50GB discs and have extras removed for the limitations of HD-DVD. Not something I would think about now, or even guarantee. But, there is no question that the extra 66% storage space of BD50 will be utilized somehow.

2. HD-DVD has been out almost twice as long as Blu-ray... Shouldn't it have twice the discs to print? Obviously that's not the case either. You see, Blu-ray is slow to start because of some quality control issues. It is likely that by years end, Blu-ray will have about the same number of titles to print and next year they will start pulling away. They had a lot of catching up to do first though and production is VERY limited at this time. As more and more encoders and production houses come online, Blu-ray Disc authoring will begin to increase more and more rapidly.

3. Another post I have shows that 1080i is likely not going to be properly handled by most displays. So 1080i <> 1080p with these sources. With lousy encoding... well, that's a different story. As for the new Toshiba, that's a big step forward, but they still aren't doing a full featured player which would include 1080p/24 output yet like the Sony and Pioneer will deliver. Seems that the price point for 1080p is around $1,000 though... that's twice the price that PS3 will deliver it isn't it?

4. The concept of 'combo' players is not 'fact'. There are NO announced players and the word is that HD-DVD and Blu-ray technologies may be prohibited from coexisting within the same player. This may make it a long time before dual format players ever come to market. Wishful thinking on the part of consumers... at least for now.

The imporant thing to remember is that these technologies are both VERY new. They are undergoing constant change at a level that is amazing. A post made today could be completely wrong by tomorrow, even if it was true today. Likewise, the figures of sales, players on market, etc. really doesn't mean a thing for another year or so when the game systems have had some time to be out there and more players have come to market and more advertising/consumer awareness is out and about. Right now? The numbers are a joke compared to the only format that matters... DVD.

That's the real enemy of both formats - and will be much more difficult to bring down.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by AV_Integrated

Paper - The references you bring up are reasonable - but some are out of date... both to old and to new.

1. I believe HD-DVD and Blu-ray will eventually look identical unless it is shown that higher encoding rates for VC-1/AVC produce better looking films. In the long run, as BD50 is adopted and utilzed, we may (not will) find that movies are designed to fit on 50GB discs and have extras removed for the limitations of HD-DVD. Not something I would think about now, or even guarantee. But, there is no question that the extra 66% storage space of BD50 will be utilized somehow.

2. HD-DVD has been out almost twice as long as Blu-ray... Shouldn't it have twice the discs to print? Obviously that's not the case either. You see, Blu-ray is slow to start because of some quality control issues. It is likely that by years end, Blu-ray will have about the same number of titles to print and next year they will start pulling away. They had a lot of catching up to do first though and production is VERY limited at this time. As more and more encoders and production houses come online, Blu-ray Disc authoring will begin to increase more and more rapidly.

3. Another post I have shows that 1080i is likely not going to be properly handled by most displays. So 1080i <> 1080p with these sources. With lousy encoding... well, that's a different story. As for the new Toshiba, that's a big step forward, but they still aren't doing a full featured player which would include 1080p/24 output yet like the Sony and Pioneer will deliver. Seems that the price point for 1080p is around $1,000 though... that's twice the price that PS3 will deliver it isn't it?

4. The concept of 'combo' players is not 'fact'. There are NO announced players and the word is that HD-DVD and Blu-ray technologies may be prohibited from coexisting within the same player. This may make it a long time before dual format players ever come to market. Wishful thinking on the part of consumers... at least for now.

The imporant thing to remember is that these technologies are both VERY new. They are undergoing constant change at a level that is amazing. A post made today could be completely wrong by tomorrow, even if it was true today. Likewise, the figures of sales, players on market, etc. really doesn't mean a thing for another year or so when the game systems have had some time to be out there and more players have come to market and more advertising/consumer awareness is out and about. Right now? The numbers are a joke compared to the only format that matters... DVD.

That's the real enemy of both formats - and will be much more difficult to bring down.

Well said, AV...well said

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Paper

I am not for either at the moment. I think that if one is going to male claims that it is better than the other, it should at least do it properly.


How does this work exactly? From what I have understood, both can support 1080p high definition. Surely it just means that you can not fit as much video onto HD DVD as you can onto Blu ray. Even if HD DVD disks are only 30 GB this still means you can fit 5 hours of video onto the disk, more than most films need.




This claim is made yet HD DVD has more existing titles than Blu ray and has sold 33% more players than Blu ray. So if Blu ray has all these supporters, where are the titles, and where are the sales?




No this wrong. 1080i and 1080p look no different at that resolution. 1080p is better rendered on current HDTVs, and Toshiba have taken this into account. Read below...

Funny how it costs just as much as Blu ray players. So what difference do we notice so far? None!



Now I am all for debate and I don't want to take sides in this war, I'd rather just wait it out. But if you are going to go making claims and boasting your products then do your homework! What I see here is a poorly researched comparison that uses speculation rather than real hard facts.

All of your poits are wrong.

HD DVD is out of space already. Even at the begining. There is no way this DVD upgrade is going to handle the future HD movies.


1080p is a lot better than 1080i, if you dont like it i dont care, but i want full 1080p!

HD DVD have 15-16 more movies and 7 out of 8 movie studios support Blu-Ray, so your "BIG" lead will melt!

[Paper]

Thank you for your replies

I was not attempting to lead a crusade against Blu ray, and I do find the additional space very attractive. I did this topic wrong by breaking down their points.

The point rather was that the internal argument between the two formats is frustrating. It is simply annoying that these companies couldn't agree, perhaps Toshiba's fault considering most went for Blu ray. Blu ray appears to be taking the lead in bashing HD DVD, when they will virtually be the same in the end. Customers will pick the cheapest option and aren't going to listen to arguments like "I have more space" or "I have 1080p quality". I am a classic example of someone who has been confused by he amount of out dated and incorrect information out there.

The question is, does Blu ray really have anything special to offer me? I don't want a DRM protected disk, I don't want Sony to use an internet connection to determine the legality of what I am doing, and I want the cheaper option. I do understand it all has yet to be confirmed.

Surely someone can understand my frustration with these new technologies?

Oh and as soon as PS3’s go wide, I am getting one!

[AV_Integrated]

Originally Posted by Paper

I don't want a DRM protected disk, I don't want Sony to use an internet connection to determine the legality of what I am doing, and I want the cheaper option. I do understand it all has yet to be confirmed.

Surely someone can understand my frustration with these new technologies?

Oh and as soon as PS3’s go wide, I am getting one!

DRM is not your decision, or Sony's or the Blu-ray Disc Associations decision. DRM is something STUDIOS demand. Warner, Disney, Universal, Fox, etc. all demand high levels of copyright protection. They were extremely miffed that DVD encryption turned out to be lousy. So, stop dreaming. In your lifetime, DRM is not just a reality - it is a reality that will become more and more difficult to defeat.

MMC - Mandatory Managed Copy - Is something that DVD doesn't have, VCR tapes don't have, and should be viewed with a big smile. It is a LEGAL way to copy the video you bought onto other devices (PC) and share the content. Why would you have a problem with it?

Don't be confused on this issue: While it is relatively easy these days to copy DVDs, it is 100% illegal and anyone who copies commercial DVDs can be prosecuted for breaking the law. Someday, perhaps someone will break HD disc encryptions and we will copy them, but that will also be illegal. Your choice is to break the law, or to try to get the rules to fit your usage requirements. Which should NOT include burning a copy of the disc for all your friends.

As for the Internet connection for legal usage - that is, once again, bunk information that was *****d out by HD-DVD fan boys and is not true at all. Most Blu-ray players don't have Internet connections, so clearly this is not even possible.

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by AV_Integrated

Paper - The references you bring up are reasonable - but some are out of date... both to old and to new.

1. I believe HD-DVD and Blu-ray will eventually look identical unless it is shown that higher encoding rates for VC-1/AVC produce better looking films. In the long run, as BD50 is adopted and utilzed, we may (not will) find that movies are designed to fit on 50GB discs and have extras removed for the limitations of HD-DVD. Not something I would think about now, or even guarantee. But, there is no question that the extra 66% storage space of BD50 will be utilized somehow.

Yes there is the potential of better video however as long as HD DVD exists though I expect neutral studios to encode to the least common denominator. The extra space will likely be used for extras.

2. HD-DVD has been out almost twice as long as Blu-ray... Shouldn't it have twice the discs to print? Obviously that's not the case either. You see, Blu-ray is slow to start because of some quality control issues. It is likely that by years end, Blu-ray will have about the same number of titles to print and next year they will start pulling away. They had a lot of catching up to do first though and production is VERY limited at this time. As more and more encoders and production houses come online, Blu-ray Disc authoring will begin to increase more and more rapidly.

Well that depends. HD DVD shipped first but not many people thought they were going to contend in the first place so the launch wasn't really publicized well. I won't make excuses for Blu-Ray they didn't have enough working product. Toshiba faced the same QC pitfalls and still launched early summer. The studios are damn near switching wholesale to VC-1 which the encoding is already there unless you went down Sony's primrose MPEG2 path and had to change like LGF is doing.

3. Another post I have shows that 1080i is likely not going to be properly handled by most displays. So 1080i <> 1080p with these sources. With lousy encoding... well, that's a different story. As for the new Toshiba, that's a big step forward, but they still aren't doing a full featured player which would include 1080p/24 output yet like the Sony and Pioneer will deliver. Seems that the price point for 1080p is around $1,000 though... that's twice the price that PS3 will deliver it isn't it?

[COLOR="Red"] Chicken/Egg. Most people don't have 1080p screens and even that niche doesn't have 24/48/72 support. I think the gist of the post is that you want to purchase capable TVs and those generally come from the larger manufacturers. Getting caught up in specs right now will only lead to "analysis paralysis". If it looks good to your eyes who cares of it's interlaced or progressive? [COLOR="Red"]

4. The concept of 'combo' players is not 'fact'. There are NO announced players and the word is that HD-DVD and Blu-ray technologies may be prohibited from coexisting within the same player. This may make it a long time before dual format players ever come to market. Wishful thinking on the part of consumers... at least for now.

Combo players will come when the BoM allows for it. The Ricoh lens assembly and the NEC and Amtel chips will make it feasible to attempt such a venture. Frankly the companies that said they might do it were a bit premature IMO. There really isn't the backing of asics and other vital components yet to have a clear choice for Universal players.

The imporant thing to remember is that these technologies are both VERY new. They are undergoing constant change at a level that is amazing. A post made today could be completely wrong by tomorrow, even if it was true today. Likewise, the figures of sales, players on market, etc. really doesn't mean a thing for another year or so when the game systems have had some time to be out there and more players have come to market and more advertising/consumer awareness is out and about. Right now? The numbers are a joke compared to the only format that matters... DVD.

That's the real enemy of both formats - and will be much more difficult to bring down.

Right on!

responses inline

[Ascended_Saiyan]

"Yes there is the potential of better video however as long as HD DVD exists though I expect neutral studios to encode to the least common denominator."

Do you think they will continue to do this after the numbers start to play out after first quarter next year? That's sound a bit to much like Microsoft making those same claims for the gaming consoles. That proved to be less than accurate. But, anything is possible.