Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Theatrical Versions) - April 6, 2010

[TheE3Guy]

I'm fairly sure the EE won't need more than one disk per movie. I'm not a huge expert in blu-ray, but I'm fairly sure a movie of 4.5 hours (RotK) at 1080p with DTS-HD Master Audio still wouldn't come close to reaching the max capacity of a 50gb dual BD. But like I said, I'm no expert, I could be wrong. And they could throw all the bonus features on a separate 4th BD instead of putting the features on the discs with the movies.

[Diesel]

The EE will fit on to a BD50 just fine since all the extras will be on another disc.

[maverik1979]

it will probably be close though 28mbps video + 4.5 mbps audio = 65gb (4.5hours) i think
might need to be a truehd encode perhaps?, and maybe slightly less on the video bitrate even so using average 25 mbps for video and 3.5 for audio its still 57gb, unless im getting my sums wrong
1mbps = 0.125 mb/sec correct?

28.5 x 0.125 x 60 x 60 x 4.5
= 57gb

[deado]

The EE's should be on two discs just like the DVDs (if required), because quality is the most important thing

High-bitrate VC1 + DTS-HD MA 7.1 24-bit seem likely at this point (at least for the theatricals), so if the EE were similar specs then they would need 2 discs.

[mredman]

no they really don't need 2 discs for the EE. There can be tons of information on a Bluray. Just look at king kong 200 min + a PiP track and the movie is reference quality

The 2 disc talk is nonesense

[masoud90]

This is probably mentioned 5 million times, but I check this thread once in a while, not constantly. I got my 300 ultimate edition bd today and in it had a thing that said like November 2nd or 3rd for LOTR blu-ray trilogy. Hah!. Yeah okay. Didn't blu-ray.com say that the release was never official and yet an official ad for the bd collection was included along with my 300 bd?

[Goldengirl]

Originally Posted by Diesel

The EE will fit on to a BD50 just fine since all the extras will be on another disc.

Or would the commentaries included on the dvd EE have to be sacrificed in order to get it all on one disc?

[maverik1979]

Originally Posted by maverik1979

it will probably be close though 28mbps video + 4.5 mbps audio = 65gb (4.5hours) i think
might need to be a truehd encode perhaps?, and maybe slightly less on the video bitrate even so using average 25 mbps for video and 3.5 for audio its still 57gb, unless im getting my sums wrong
1mbps = 0.125 mb/sec correct?

28.5 x 0.125 x 60 x 60 x 4.5
= 57gb

can anyone confirm if im geting my sums right?

[DMC86X]

Originally Posted by maverik1979

can anyone confirm if im geting my sums right?

[richieb1971]

For LOTR to establish itself as one of the best blu ray experiences, its bitrate must be dropped in order to get the 4.5hours of footage on one disc.

Commentaries are relatively small lossy audio format. Therefore the space saved by not including it would only add 15 minutes of 1080p video/audio.

Warner have to make a balancing act choice. I am sure they will provide the full 4.5 hour version of the movie, at the cost of a lower bitrate. But if it looks good, its good.. no point worrying what a higher bitrate would look like if your happy with the result of the existing bitrate. Thats how I look at it.

[vegeta88]

Originally Posted by maverik1979

can anyone confirm if im geting my sums right?

Originally Posted by DMC86X

My sentiments exactly, I thought movies were just magically put on Blu-rays. Am I wrong?

[SleeperAgent]

First off, I will note that I'm buying the first release regardless if it's TE, EE, or seamless. I wanna see me some high-def Mordor.

I sincerely hope that they get the EE's onto a single blu each when they are released. Even if this means putting all the extras onto a separate disc for each movie. I hate having to switch discs mid movie. Switching for extras isn't as bad.

[vegeta88]

Originally Posted by TheSoviet

First off, I will note that I'm buying the first release regardless if it's TE, EE, or seamless. I wanna see me some high-def Mordor.

I sincerely hope that they get the EE's onto a single blu each when they are released. Even if this means putting all the extras onto a separate disc for each movie. I hate having to switch discs mid movie. Switching for extras isn't as bad.

I'm waiting for EEs but I completely agree with the rest. Switching mid movie is primitive IMO, I'll switch for the extras with out second thought.

[richieb1971]

You won't have to switch discs, they will lower the bitrate so the main feature fits onto one disc. You can fit 10 hours of video on a 50GB disc with a lower bit rate. The only people that will moan about the end result are those that browse the bitrate and say things like "oh, its only 20mbps it would have been much better had it been a constant 35mbps". For almost everyone else the presentation will be totally acceptable 1080p HD.

[singhcr]

Picture quality is more important to me than having a movie on one disc. That's why the EE's looked so good on DVD.. they had 17 GB for the movie instead of 8.5GB.

Additionally, it's nice to have a break in the middle of a long movie.

Even Blu-ray has its limits to how much you can cram on a disk. 200 minutes is 3 hrs 20 minutes, so it looks like Fellowship and probably Two Towers EE's could fit... but having ROTK at 4hrs30min (270 min) is pushing it.

If they can get it on one disk, that's great- I just hope they don't sacrifice quality in order to do so.

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by singhcr

Picture quality is more important to me than having a movie on one disc. That's why the EE's looked so good on DVD.. they had 17 GB for the movie instead of 8.5GB.

I used to think the DVD's looked good until I tried watching them again one day...close-up shots looked OK but everything else was a blurry mess. lol.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

BTW, did you guys notice in that interview/quote from Jackson the other day he said something to the effect of "not sure" if WB would first release just the theatrical or also the EE versionshttps://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3849

I find it odd that a guy like Jackson, who is intimately involved in every aspect of movie production - especially the technical oversight - would not know more about the release of his masterpiece. These films were the culmination of the ten most creative years of his life; wouldn't he be more involved with the details of its highest definition release to the public?

[hchalla178]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I find it odd that a guy like Jackson, who is intimately involved in every aspect of movie production - especially the technical oversight - would not know more about the release of his masterpiece. These films were the culmination of the ten most creative years of his life; wouldn't he be more involved with the details of its highest definition release to the public?

Not only that....but this is the most anticipated Bluray release of all time

[Velmeran]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I find it odd that a guy like Jackson, who is intimately involved in every aspect of movie production - especially the technical oversight - would not know more about the release of his masterpiece. These films were the culmination of the ten most creative years of his life; wouldn't he be more involved with the details of its highest definition release to the public?

At the moment, it's probably pretty low on his priority list.
He's working on one of the most anticipated movie adaptations of an instant best-seller and one of the highest praised and acclaimed novels of the decade.

Until he finishes everything on The Lovely Bones, I doubt he has much time for anything else.

[aramis109]

Originally Posted by richieb1971

You won't have to switch discs, they will lower the bitrate so the main feature fits onto one disc. You can fit 10 hours of video on a 50GB disc with a lower bit rate. The only people that will moan about the end result are those that browse the bitrate and say things like "oh, its only 20mbps it would have been much better had it been a constant 35mbps". For almost everyone else the presentation will be totally acceptable 1080p HD.

They might, or they might not. Who's to say? There's a lot of opinion stated as fact in your posts and I'm just curious as to where you're getting your information.