Archived: Insiders Thread

[iceman]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Anyone know where Paidgeek is?

The geek is busy doing what he gets paid for:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=6417

[Beta-guy]

Originally Posted by Iceman

The geek is busy doing what he gets paid for:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=6417

it's tough for them as they are busy and it's tough for us, as we keep wishing to hear some one say pssst Warners going blu

on a serious note though, I hope all goes well for the insiders, hope you guys don't work too hard it's the Christmas season after all

[Jazar]

Originally Posted by shamus

With consumers now choosing BD by almost 3 to 1, has your company reconsidered its dual format stance?

From his post @ AVS

We are format neutral and will support both formats until one or the other becomes the clear winner... if that even happens. HD / BD could end up being a niche format like DVD-A if this format war nonsense does not end soon. We have no vested interest in either format and do not really care one way or the other what happens. We enjoy producing quality content for both formats and are happy to have the HD / BD formats available to us to work with.

[darinp2]

Not sure if it is possible to get an answer to this, but either way this could be considered a suggestion.

I saw this here:

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/...3-21361220.htm

With the group's fortunes apparently improving, Dubai International Capital, a fund owned by the oil-rich emirate, announced last week that it had bought a 'substantial' stake in Sony without disclosing the value.

Does anybody know if that fund or the "oil-rich emirate" owns any stake in TimeWarner? If so, could he or one of his representatives let TimeWarner know that they would like to see their support of Blu-ray improve?

--Darin

[space2001]

quick question, What is the diffrence between AVC on Blu-ray and HD-DVD.

And why would HD-DVD do it this way, is it a hardware issue with the flags or something, and how can it be corrected for porting over to blu-ray like Warner does.

Thanks

[blitz6speed]

Originally Posted by Teazle

Same as the difference between ham and cheese on rye vs. on Wonder bread.

This is the insiders thread, no need for chit chat.

The difference between HD DVD and Blu-Ray AVC is the encoders used. There are many different encoders (Panasonic, Sony, Toshiba japan, etc) and they all have something unique to them. Also, Blu-Ray AVC movies are encoded to 1080p24 and flagged that way so you can get perfect picture off of the disc without software processing, HD DVD AVC is encoded to 1080p24 and flagged to 1080i60 which is why 1080p24 on HD DVD introduces artifacts, since it uses software processing to convert the flags.

[space2001]

Originally Posted by blitz6speed

This is the insiders thread, no need for chit chat.

The difference between HD DVD and Blu-Ray AVC is the encoders used. There are many different encoders (Panasonic, Sony, Toshiba japan, etc) and they all have something unique to them. Also, Blu-Ray AVC movies are encoded to 1080p24 and flagged that way so you can get perfect picture off of the disc without software processing, HD DVD AVC is encoded to 1080p24 and flagged to 1080i60 which is why 1080p24 on HD DVD introduces artifacts, since it uses software processing to convert the flags.

so does this mean that even though its at 24fps it converts is to 1080i60 then back to 1080p
Does blu-ray do a simular procedure? or is it pure 1080p right to the screen.

Sorry for the so many question, at my work we will be doing some HD videos and may author them in blu-ray, for our customers that request it. I just want to be able to encode the video properly for there use.

[beatboy77]

I have a question for any Insider who wishes to answer. Is it best for Blu-ray if we buy the Harry Potter films individually or in the box set? Which is WB preferring to see? I ask because I have had one Insider tell me it is best to buy the titles individually and I have had read a very well respected forum member (--darinp) suggest WB wants to see the box set sold.

I personally think buying the individuals makes a bit more sense for two reasons:

#1 - The series is not finished as of yet, so you would have a box set of 5 and 2 individuals down the road. May not look the best for those who display their movies.

#2 - Buying the individuals helps push the overall Nielsen numbers higher by a much larger margin as it would count for 5 sales vs. 1 sale for the box set.

Thoughts?

~Josh

[binarymelon]

Originally Posted by beatboy77

I have a question for any Insider who wishes to answer. Is it best for Blu-ray if we buy the Harry Potter films individually or in the box set? Which is WB preferring to see? I ask because I have had one Insider tell me it is best to buy the titles individually and I have had read a very well respected forum member (--darinp) suggest WB wants to see the box set sold.

I personally think buying the individuals makes a bit more sense for two reasons:

#1 - The series is not finished as of yet, so you would have a box set of 5 and 2 individuals down the road. May not look the best for those who display their movies.

#2 - Buying the individuals helps push the overall Nielsen numbers higher by a much larger margin as it would count for 5 sales vs. 1 sale for the box set.

Thoughts?

~Josh

My guess is that when it comes to their own releases, Warner knows the number of copies shipped, so Nielsen numbers probably aren't all that interesting to them, but profit would be. That being said, I think it leads to the same thing. Individuals would probably have higher profit margins as well as boost the Nielsen numbers.

[ckenisell]

I'm pretty sure the HD-DVD came plans to buy them individually just to boost the "number of discs sold" number. Having said that, I'm buying whatever is the cheaper option. I want to support Warner. I really do. I think they're smart enough to figure out total discs sold and figure out on their own that Blu-Ray is where the money's at.

[Shawnsmail35]

I bought all 5 Harry Potters Individually and it came out to be the same as the Box set on Amazon 104 dollars. So i chose the Individual over the box since no price difference.

[maximus2323]

I'm getting the releases individually. Like Josh mentions, the series is not done yet. If the others fit in the case then maybe my direction will change.

[WickyWoo]

Remember that tere are 2 gimmicky useless dvds in there

Swapping those out will enable you to hold all 7 in that box

[maximus2323]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Remember that tere are 2 gimmicky useless dvds in there

Swapping those out will enable you to hold all 7 in that box

Hummmmmm...

[Penton-Man]

O.K. film aficionados let’s have a Monday morning trivia before they hook me up to the ole bag.
Instead of a quotation from a movie, this be for film aficionados with a keen ear for distinctive music.
C’mon let’s see how many people are watching and listening to their Blu-ray discs – given the fact that Shakira is coming out on Blu-ray very soon.

There is a title out there that has a very short segment of music from a famous Tahitian dance that my Vahine used to demonstrate back in the day when I was footloose and fancy-free called the Tamure.
I will tell you that I am not thinking of the movie Mutiny on the Bounty which may be the first thing coming to the mind of some but, it is a title that I venture alot of you guys and gals either own in your Blu-ray collection or have watched in the past.

For those of you that have not visited the Society Islands (esp. on an *extended* vacation) and are unfamiliar with the music I am referring to, here is a clip for you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOu0S...eature=related

P.S.
Googling is allowed on this one as I don't think it will do you guys and gals a damn bit of good.

[Iceman_II]

I'm half tempted to say Apocalypto... Hell, Mel took literary license to have the Mayans killing people as of they were Aztecs, why not take it further and have them dancing like tahitians... Conquestadores, the royal navy, its all good... After all, you can take his life, but you can'na no take his share of the box office

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by Iceman_II

I'm half tempted to say Apocalypto... Hell, Mel took literary license to have the Mayans killing people as of they were Aztecs, why not take it further and have them dancing like tahitians... Conquestadores, the royal navy, its all good... After all, you can take his life, but you can'na no take his share of the box office

I've actually been to Chitzen Itza and I can tell you that the Mayan's were indeed violent. They had a ball game where the losing side was was sacrificed to the gods. I have photos of the ball court and the hirogyphics depicting the sacrifice of the losing side.

The tour guide was of Mayan decent and he mentioned that many "western" scholars had been wrong about a great many things regarding mayan culture. It was only recently that the proverbial "rosetta stone" for the written Mayan language was discovered and scholars were able to learn more about the Mayan story.

The Mayan empire collapsed under pressure of deforestation and villages being rounded up for human sacrifice. It is now known that the Mayans also employed Toltec mercenaries to round up villagers for sacrifice and slavery.

I would say that they only inacurrate part of the film would have been with the arrival of the Spanish since the Mayan empire had all but disapeared centuries prior to the arrival of the Spanish. It is possible that the ceremonial centre at Tulum could have been depicted in the film but that would have been a small cermonial centre compared to what existed at Chitzen Itza at the height of the Mayan empire.

[Beta-guy]

I HIGHLY doubt I'm correct but... Joe Vs the Volcano? (I googled and failed)

Originally Posted by aristotles

I've actually been to Chitzen Itza and I can tell you that the Mayan's were indeed violent. They had a ball game where the losing side was was sacrificed to the gods.

so... no rematch?

[phloyd]

Originally Posted by space2001

Sorry for the so many question, at my work we will be doing some HD videos and may author them in blu-ray, for our customers that request it. I just want to be able to encode the video properly for there use.

If you encode AVC with 23.976 fps progressive or true 59.97 fields interlaced, it should be compatible with Blu-ray. There is a list of requirements for compatibility that go beyond the above - you would need to consult the Blu-ray Disc standard for the complete list.

Since the HD DVD specification requires the video to appear as 1080i to the decoder, as noted above, the AVC is encoded and stored as progressive frames but the output flags schedule the output video as interlaced fields. This mode is not compatible with Blu-ray disc - though really there is no reason to ever want to use this mode outside of authoring to HD DVD.

[Shawnsmail35]

I could have sworn that the Aztecs were the ones that played that game and sacrificed the losers.... Boy was I wrong