Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[Truewitt]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

BD-Live and other add-ons have nothing to do with "The perfect Hi-def movie experience," but that point may not yet be understood. Precisely like film restoration or building a house. If your foundation is rotten...

And this is a pity.

RAH

I don't want to step on your crusade, but people also need to know that the time and money spent on BD-Live is nothing in comparison and does not affect the quality of an A/V presentation one iota.

It's extremely silly to say that it's quality A/V or BD-Live. One has nothing to do with the other.

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by Truewitt

I don't want to step on your crusade, but people also need to know that the time and money spent on BD-Live is nothing in comparison and does not affect the quality of an A/V presentation one iota.

It's extremely silly to say that it's quality A/V or BD-Live. One has nothing to do with the other.

The point is that the priority should be on the A/V quality. Once the A/V quality is optimal beyond a shadow of a doubt, spend all you want on BD-Live and other do-dads.

Nobody is saying get rid of it - just that it shouldn't be the primary focus.

[Truewitt]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

The point is that the priority should be on the A/V quality. Once the A/V quality is optimal beyond a shadow of a doubt, spend all you want on BD-Live and other do-dads.

Nobody is saying get rid of it - just that it shouldn't be the primary focus.

And I'm just saying one really has nothing to do with the other. The A/V quality isn't sacrificed by the very minor, in relation, time and money spent on the development of BD-Live.

I'm saying that arguing against BD-Live to improve A/V quality is meaningless. It's like arguing against Sony for offering a video store on their PlayStation network because it takes away from games. One does not affect the other in that way.

It's not like anyone is saying, "We're not going to do a new scan and transfer of this movie because we have this cool new BD-Live feature that will make people not care about the quality."

[Jeff Kleist]

I think what he's trying to say is that the return on the money from BDLive stuff does not equal what having a solid product would, especially in the long term.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

As far as one studio is concerned, I believe the word "have" should be past tense. If the majority of cinephiliacs cease pre-ordering and wait for reviews, one sector of sales numbers will quickly erode by their own doing.

BD-Live and other add-ons have nothing to do with "The perfect Hi-def movie experience," but that point may not yet be understood. Precisely like film restoration or building a house. If your foundation is rotten...

And this is a pity.

RAH

In a email to BILL HUNT he said that he does talk to you time to time.I told him next time he talks to you ''THANK ROBERT'' for ranting on this subject.WOW here you are! So i'll thank you myself.THANKS ROBERT for ranting at certain studios on horrible blu-ray transfers. And don't stop.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I think what he's trying to say is that the return on the money from BDLive stuff does not equal what having a solid product would, especially in the long term.

Thanks JEFF,that does puts it in a nutshell. Once in a while certain studios need the clock cleaned

[Uxi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I think what he's trying to say is that the return on the money from BDLive stuff does not equal what having a solid product would, especially in the long term.

Right. And at worst, it's putting polish a turd. That can't ever end well.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

As far as one studio is concerned, I believe the word "have" should be past tense. If the majority of cinephiliacs cease pre-ordering and wait for reviews, one sector of sales numbers will quickly erode by their own doing.

BD-Live and other add-ons have nothing to do with "The perfect Hi-def movie experience," but that point may not yet be understood. Precisely like film restoration or building a house. If your foundation is rotten...

And this is a pity.

RAH

Or the other one,''IF THE ROOTS NO GOOD,THE FRUITS NO GOOD''.
Orthe basic one''Crap in,Crap out''.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Truewitt

And I'm just saying one really has nothing to do with the other. The A/V quality isn't sacrificed by the very minor, in relation, time and money spent on the development of BD-Live.

I'm saying that arguing against BD-Live to improve A/V quality is meaningless. It's like arguing against Sony for offering a video store on their PlayStation network because it takes away from games. One does not affect the other in that way.

It's not like anyone is saying, "We're not going to do a new scan and transfer of this movie because we have this cool new BD-Live feature that will make people not care about the quality."

But when a studio puts out a crappy title[pq],knowly useing a recycled hd master ,they are saying they don't care about the quality.If they did care like sony does, they would have the money to do a remaster and the bd live like sony does.No matter there intent,thats the message they send!

[hanser]

Hi Jeff,

I see that Finchers "The Game" is announced on BD in Germany for August. Can we expect the same transfer as the HDDVD had? It received very mixed reviews.

[Jeff Kleist]

Like I've said, I've given up on any speculation on the Uni discs, at least for the time. being

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Like I've said, I've given up on any speculation on the Uni discs, at least for the time. being

Which is sad. By now you'd think they'd have gotten the message and start representing that they are making a change.

[MerrickG]

Jeff,

Perhaps this is a better question for Penton since he is well connected with Sony, but is probably well out of his know. Im curious if you think that Sony will actually have any surprises in store this year for E3 or will it all get leaked before hand.

MS (Halo: Reach) and Nintendo (SMG2 and Metroid) seemed to have shockers but with Sony they never seem to have any surprises.

Will that change this year? PSP2 seems to get mentioned a lot.

Resistance 3 with a fall release date is all I want!

[jaaguir]

Some of Eastwood's already released Warner catalog titles have been re-released now with new cover art (conciding with the new batch of his catalog releases).
I'm guessing they're not re-masters (I'm not even saying there was a need for that), but I was curious as to why Amazon would price the old edition ("The gauntlet" for example) at $10 and the new one at $14.5. Any idea, anyone? In any case, they're definitely not new scans, right?

By the way, I agree on how Warner's ordinary catalog has improved (the image quality) since around a year ago, and I congratulate them. I think it was early last year, the cheap catalog batch including "Tango & Cash" and "Point of no return" and some others was the first one to show they were using new scans, a very welcome move.


Thanks

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

As far as one studio is concerned, I believe the word "have" should be past tense. If the majority of cinephiliacs cease pre-ordering and wait for reviews, one sector of sales numbers will quickly erode by their own doing.

BD-Live and other add-ons have nothing to do with "The perfect Hi-def movie experience," but that point may not yet be understood. Precisely like film restoration or building a house. If your foundation is rotten...

And this is a pity.

RAH

I agree and I don't mean to sound cynical or negative, but maybe part of it is just a reflection of our culture from a certain perspective. In many areas, more emphasis is placed on the cosmetics of packaging, the looks, the hype, etc. and little on the actual substance. Unfortuately, some Blu-ray movies (to an extent) are no different.

By the way, this is all the more reason why I cannot say enough about how great the Godfather BD set is!

[Truewitt]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

But when a studio puts out a crappy title[pq],knowly useing a recycled hd master ,they are saying they don't care about the quality.If they did care like sony does, they would have the money to do a remaster and the bd live like sony does.No matter there intent,thats the message they send!

Thank you. That is exactly my point. The decision is to save money by using the old materials. They know this is what they are doing and why...to save money. I just think throwing something like BD-Live into the mix when complaining just confuses the issue.

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by Truewitt

Thank you. That is exactly my point. The decision is to save money by using the old materials. They know this is what they are doing and why...to save money. I just think throwing something like BD-Live into the mix when complaining just confuses the issue.

It's not confusing the issue. It's making the point that blu-ray isn't better "because of bd-live" or "because of maximum movie mode" - it's better because we can get a more faithful representation of the video and audio elements.

Video and Audio First. Bells and Whistles second. The issue is that some studios think the bells and whistles will sell the product and make the AQVQ secondary. This is just wrong.

AQVQ to a 10, then work on some fantastic extra features, thank you.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

It's not confusing the issue. It's making the point that blu-ray isn't better "because of bd-live" or "because of maximum movie mode" - it's better because we can get a more faithful representation of the video and audio elements.

Video and Audio First. Bells and Whistles second. The issue is that some studios think the bells and whistles will sell the product and make the AQVQ secondary. This is just wrong.

AQVQ to a 10, then work on some fantastic extra features, thank you.

I literally couldn't agree more.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

It's not confusing the issue. It's making the point that blu-ray isn't better "because of bd-live" or "because of maximum movie mode" - it's better because we can get a more faithful representation of the video and audio elements.

Video and Audio First. Bells and Whistles second. The issue is that some studios think the bells and whistles will sell the product and make the AQVQ secondary. This is just wrong.

AQVQ to a 10, then work on some fantastic extra features, thank you.

Right! But as JEFF pointed out sony seems to do both.As i said before what ever they put on bd live for any movie ,a year or two when i view the movie again does bd live matter? ....no!

As others have pointed out UNIVERSALS problem maybe BIG DADDY G.E. ,who owns them. SO maybe UNIVERSAL NEEDS A NEW OWNER!

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

Right! But as JEFF pointed out sony seems to do both.As i said before what ever they put on bd live for any movie ,a year or two when i view the movie again does bd live matter? ....no!

As others have pointed out UNIVERSALS problem maybe BIG DADDY G.E. ,who owns them. SO maybe UNIVERSAL NEEDS A NEW OWNER!

I'm not sure how much better Kabletown will understand the home video business than G.E. The truth is that the only thing any product manufacturer understands is $$. How much $ do they have to spend to get your $$$, and which math allows them the best spread. The best way for us to vote is to not support inferior product. We as enthusiasts need to stick together and reject inferior product. We also need it to be known why we are rejecting it.

I'm a huge Kubrick fan who has never seen Spartacus. I won't until they do a proper new edition.