Blu Buy You? - Blu-ray Forum

James Morrow · 07-02-2006, 10:44 PM

It’s still very early days for high-definition – particularly for full HD, the 16:9 1920 by 1080 pixels, progressively scanned variant (also known as 1080p) that is designed to be capable of reproducing the best of 35mm cinema quality in the home. Whilst HD-DVD tops out at the much lower quality 1080i (interlaced), a number of full 1080p quality Blu-Ray films and players are due to launch later this month, and dual-layer (50GB) half-height and laptop BD/DVD/CD writers have been available OEM from Sony for over a month now.

The Sony VGN-AR11S 17” laptop offers 1920 by 1200 pixel resolution (playing 1080p with black bars top and bottom) and 50GB BD recording along with DVD & CD support, 200GB of hard disk space and an HDMI output for connecting to compatible displays, but a Sony Style brochure in the July issue of T3 magazine claims that it offers full HD (1080i) resolution – likely to be a typographical error, but it does raise an important point that there are currently many so-called “high-definition” displays out there which are not capable of displaying the copy-protected 1080p high-definition material which is about to be released.

For example, the HDMI standard has recently been revised to support up to 1080p resolution with copy protection – vital to allow Blu-Ray players to output the full high-definition signal to them. As more and more full high-definition Blu-Ray players become available the supply of fully compatible monitors will increase rapidly, and the currently high prices will fall, but now is not a good time to buy.

So what is required of a 16:9 display in order to support full high-definition? First of all, it must have a native resolution of either 1920 by 1080, 3840 by 2160 or 7680 by 4320 pixels. Second, it must accept and display a copy-protected 1080p signal via HDMI input (some current display, for example, are 1080p capable via VGA inputs, but only support 1080i via the HDMI input(s), and copy protection will only allow full high-definition via copy-protected HDMI). Plasma displays have difficulty achieving full 1080p resolution, and use a relatively large amount of power; LCD displays use less power (particularly when employing an active LED backlight) and OLED and FED/SED displays less again, whilst combined LCD and spatially modulated LED backlight displays have the potential for highest quality; but longer term, electronic paper technologies have the potential to provide the lowest powered displays available – admittedly relying upon ambient lighting.

In terms of players, the Samsung BD-P1000 is already out, for around US$1000. Although it was originally going to be launched a month or so earlier as a 1080i machine, to compete directly with HD-DVD, it has now been upgraded to 1080p and also includes up-conversion of DVDs to 1080p. Similarly, the Sony BDP-S1 is due for a similar price, and the aforementioned VAIO VGN-AR11S laptop is already available for around £2000. Also, Panasonic plan to launch their DMP-BD10 BD/DVD/CD compatible Blu-Ray player in September for less than US$1500, and players are also due from other manufacturers, such as the Pioneer BDP-HD1 Elite (~US$1800), the Philips BDP9000 and LG BD199 (both ~US£1000), the Samsung BD/HDD BD-HR1000 (with 400GB hard drive) and the Sharp DV-BP1U player. Note that all Blu-Ray machines are fully 1080p compatible apart from the Sharp, which is currently limited to just 720p/1080i.

Employing much lower power lasers than HD-DVD, Blu-Ray recording technology is already well established, and it is likely that Blu-Ray recorders will become available before the end of the year, offering the option of recording over four hours of full high-definition on a 50GB disc (or a day or so of standard-definition in high quality.)

Pioneer began shipping the BDR-101A PC drive that supports recording on BD and DVD in mid May for around US$1000, but the initial version doesn’t support dual-layer recording, so it's limited to just 25GB. As mentioned earlier, Sony have had both half-height and laptop Blu-Ray C drives available OEM since April, and these do support dual-layer 50GB recording, along with CDs and DVDs. Panasonic are due to launch their half-height dual-layer BD/DVD/CD recorder, the LF-MB121JD next week. BD/DVD/CD writers are also due from Samsung (the SH-B022A), Philips (the SPD700 Triple Writer) and LG (the GBW-H10N) - all at around US$500.

Nearer to Christmas, the Sony Playstation 3 [PS3], which has two HDMI-based 1080p outputs, is due to be released in early November for around £400. At last, things are about to get interesting…

On the frame rate front, as you know, standard films are shot at 24 frames per second [fps], HD IMAX runs at 48fps and UHDV runs at 60fps. The human vision system tends to adapt to what it is given - within limits, and most newer display technologies don't have the refresh problem that causes flicker with CRTs (SGI, for example used 144Hz updating in the Reality Engine 2 in the early nineties), but certainly rates over 100fps will show benefit as we become acclimatised to them. Not surprisingly, Sony already have a roadmap out past 100fps for 1080p...

suprmallet · 07-03-2006, 02:49 AM

This post looks like it was written from Sony's marketing department.

HD-DVD as a format can do 1080p, too. The current player cannot, but the next gen players will. I also notice that you didn't mention that the Samsung's 1080p upgrade actually involves downgrading the native 1080p signal to 1080i and then upconverting that 1080i signal back to 1080p. So you're not seeing true 1080p, but what the Samsung thinks 1080p might be.

thunderhawk · 07-03-2006, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suprmallet

you didn't mention that the Samsung's 1080p upgrade actually involves downgrading the native 1080p signal to 1080i and then upconverting that 1080i signal back to 1080p.

Sounds silly to me. Why do downgrade and upgrade again?

suprmallet · 07-03-2006, 06:22 AM

Because the initial chip (the one that first receives the signal) can't accept 1080p.

James Morrow · 07-03-2006, 08:42 AM

...I see; now, let me get this straight: if the next generation version of product x (which doesn't exist) is planned to include feature y then product x has feature y - even when it doesn't? Historically, DVD may be seen as the next generation optical disc product after CD. Does this mean that CD is a multi-layer product which can store around 5GB of information on a single layer? Or could it have been described as a multi-layer 25GB per layer product in the early 1980s, or as a 1TB or 1PB holographic Blu-Wav product?

Ludicrous as it is, if Samsung are down-converting 1080p to 1080i and then up again it's hardly surprising that reviews comment on how much better its 1080i performance is than its 1080p performance (in comparisons with other BD players). Note, however, that other BD players have shown much higher quality on 1080p - indicating that they are likely to have a better implementation of 1080p technology. Yet it's still early days for consumer 1080p, so I would be careful what you buy - both in player and display terms.

Suffice to say that, with high quality material, properly implemented 1080p should be far better than either 1080i or 720p, and note that neither 1080i nor 720p meet the requirements for high definition laid down by Sony and NHK in the 1960s...

Of course, BD has other significant advantages over AOD besides 1080p, including 25GB, 50GB and soon 100GB discs (with 200GB also demonstrated), the potential to go significantly beyond this, and existing recordability (50GB recordable drives are available now for both laptops and desktop PCs).

Whilst Sony has developed much of the BD technology, launching the first high definition BD recorder in Japan in early 2003, Blu-Ray is comprised of a large consortium of companies - not any single company or small group of companies. ... yet 1080p24 is only the beginning, with much higher frame-rates, SHDV and UHDV in the pipeline (but not in this generation of player)...

suprmallet · 07-03-2006, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Morrow

...I see; now, let me get this straight: if the next generation version of product x (which doesn't exist) is planned to include feature y then product x has feature y - even when it doesn't? Historically, DVD may be seen as the next generation optical disc product after CD. Does this mean that CD is a multi-layer product which can store around 5GB of information on a single layer? Or could it have been described as a multi-layer 25GB per layer product in the early 1980s, or as a 1TB or 1PB holographic Blu-Wav product?

Your argument is erroneous and I will explain why. All HD-DVDs made so far are encoded at 1080p. The current player can only play up to 1080i. But the progressive transfer is what is actually on the disc. So the disc itself is outputting 1080p, but the player is interlacing it before it gets to the TV. Your argument of my claims being the equivalent of calling a CD a holographic disc is pure hyperbole, as HD-DVD can actually do what I am saying it can do.

The moment someone makes an HD-DVD player with a chipset that can output at 1080p, every HD-DVD available WILL output in native 1080p. Do you understand that? HD-DVD IS 1080p. The Toshiba player is not. Big difference than what you are trying to spin it as.

Oh, and P.S. multi-layer BD discs have met with some difficult obstacles in production. Again, your posts sound like they are taken straight from Sony press releases. I agree that if Sony were able to actually offer all that they have promised with BD, that it would be a fantastic medium. Right now, it's nothing but untapped potential.

James Morrow · 07-03-2006, 11:53 AM

Hi Supermallet.

I see, so you can buy 1080p discs in HD-DVD, but you can't actually play them at 1080P? Most people are aware that full high-definition masters are at 1080p, but if your player can't actually output 1080p (i.e. all current HD-DVD players) you are limited to buying a product which you know is only capable of providing significantly lower quality from the outset.

Yes, you might buy discs, safe in the knowledge that the "next generation" HD-DVD players will be able to display them at full quality, but you might not be that impressed with buying a player that you know is obsolete every time you look at a disc. Some people might even make the mistake of getting a 1080i display to match their HD-DVD player - which would be a double whammy. The CD, DVD, BD example may be stretching a point, but it is still a valid application of the term "next generation" - not hyperbole. I would be grateful if you could tell me when the next generation HD-DVD players, capable of full 1080p output, are going to be available, and the recorders. Oh, and some idea of pricing would be useful...

Best regards,

James

georgir · 07-03-2006, 12:53 PM

this 1080i/p fuss is stupid as hell.
first of all, why the hell would they even make TVs that can't accept progressive? today's fixed-pixel displays only show progressive anyway, not interlaced, so if they made the tv accept interlaced, it's doing some deinterlacing in order to display it. so supporting a progressive input will infact be simpler than interlaced. i think interlaced formats should've all died together with CRTs, don't see why they're the more used ones.

an interlaced signal isn't necesserily worse than a progressive one, if it's at double the framerate (fieldrate?). converting from 25fps progressive to 50fps interlaced can be lossless with a simple frame split, and is completely reversible.
on the other hand, the conversion from progressive to interlaced might purpously average together every two even fields, so that it becomes "real" interlaced signal, and that might eventually look better on interlaced displays (i.e. some CRTs) but will be irreversible and will lead to quality loss.

the deinterlacer should know how the signal was interlaced in order to restore it properly. the deinterlacing algorythms that work best for real interlaced signals, filtering and averaging certain pixels etc, will wreck the quality of a signal that was simply framesplitted. an algorythm that just combines frames will restore a simply-split signal to exactly match the original progressive source, but is terrible for a real interlaced signal...
this whole thing seems like it _can_ work perfectly well, but was complicated beyond belief.

bluray (and HDDVD?) content is stored at 1080p24 from what i know. does anyone know what algorythms are used by the current players to convert it to interlaced output? if they are just using the simple frame splitting, they're just fine. and can be deinterlaced with the simplest possible method too.
also, how does the deinterlacer in current 1080i TVs work? can the user select the deinterlace method?

The Don · 07-03-2006, 01:25 PM

I agree....I don't care if it is 1080i/p.....I doubt I am going to notice the difference anyways...

it is just like the 720p/1080i arguments as to which one was better....those arguments were hilarious....because the only comparisons we had were of TV broadcasts that vary by company anyways.....TNTHD apparently offers 1080i...but looks only a little better than standard digital TV....

sorry to stray off topic...lol....but I could care less if it downcoverts and then upconverts again...and yes, it probably does do this...but the PQ isn't going to be much better or worse either way and none of us will notice the difference...

vick vega · 07-03-2006, 01:45 PM

I can watch the same program, switching back and forth between digital hbo and hbo hd. The hd hbo is much better in picture quality

JTK · 07-03-2006, 02:52 PM

Welcome to first gen/first rev.

Welcome to the early adoption/glorified beta tester period.

Psiweaver · 07-03-2006, 05:22 PM

The good news is that things can only get better.

suprmallet · 07-03-2006, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Morrow

Hi Supermallet.

I see, so you can buy 1080p discs in HD-DVD, but you can't actually play them at 1080P? Most people are aware that full high-definition masters are at 1080p, but if your player can't actually output 1080p (i.e. all current HD-DVD players) you are limited to buying a product which you know is only capable of providing significantly lower quality from the outset.

Yes, you might buy discs, safe in the knowledge that the "next generation" HD-DVD players will be able to display them at full quality, but you might not be that impressed with buying a player that you know is obsolete every time you look at a disc. Some people might even make the mistake of getting a 1080i display to match their HD-DVD player - which would be a double whammy. The CD, DVD, BD example may be stretching a point, but it is still a valid application of the term "next generation" - not hyperbole. I would be grateful if you could tell me when the next generation HD-DVD players, capable of full 1080p output, are going to be available, and the recorders. Oh, and some idea of pricing would be useful...

Best regards,

James

I think I see the confusion. By next generation, I don't meant NEXT FORMAT. I mean the next run of players, coming early 2007. And the jump from 1080i to 1080p isn't as significant as you make it.

So, since you wanted to know when the 2nd gen of HD-DVD players will be out, it's going to be in early 2007. They will play 1080p.

JTK · 07-03-2006, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psiweaver

The good news is that things can only get better.

Exactly right.

James Morrow · 07-04-2006, 07:43 AM

Hi Supermallet,

yes, next generation can mean many things, from a simple revision to a new format, and beyond. However, there is a vast difference between the highest quality you can achieve with a true interlaced signal and that achievable with a progressively scanned signal of the same nominal resolution - especially when there is a straight 1:1 or 1:n mapping between pixels on the disc and those on the display. I'm sure that ShadowSelf can elaborate - or you can look up our discussion related to this from some time ago.

That's good to know that 1080p HD-DVD machines will be out early next year. Do you know, does that include recorders?

Best regards,

James

suprmallet · 07-05-2006, 02:29 AM

I do not know if that includes recorders, because I've never been particularly interested in the recording side.

BTBuck1 · 07-05-2006, 03:41 AM

I keep reading that the current HD-A1 is upgradeable to output 1080p when a firmware comes along. I read this in other forums, it this true? If so, what are they holding off for?

zombie · 07-05-2006, 04:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian@BBY

I keep reading that the current HD-A1 is upgradeable to output 1080p when a firmware comes along. I read this in other forums, it this true? If so, what are they holding off for?

I don't know if it's possible or not but there certainly is a lot of speculation that it is.

suprmallet · 07-05-2006, 05:26 AM

I'd say there's a lot of unfounded hope that there is.

I honestly don't know if it's possible, but I haven't seen a post that proves it could output 1080p.

georgir · 07-05-2006, 02:36 PM

once again, the content on hddvd discs is progressive, and if the HD-A1 is not filtering it in any way when interlacing it, there is no information lost. the right deinterlacer can recover it completely.

07-02-2006, 10:44 PM	#1
James Morrow Member Member since:Jun 2004	Blu Buy You? It’s still very early days for high-definition – particularly for full HD, the 16:9 1920 by 1080 pixels, progressively scanned variant (also known as 1080p) that is designed to be capable of reproducing the best of 35mm cinema quality in the home. Whilst HD-DVD tops out at the much lower quality 1080i (interlaced), a number of full 1080p quality Blu-Ray films and players are due to launch later this month, and dual-layer (50GB) half-height and laptop BD/DVD/CD writers have been available OEM from Sony for over a month now. The Sony VGN-AR11S 17” laptop offers 1920 by 1200 pixel resolution (playing 1080p with black bars top and bottom) and 50GB BD recording along with DVD & CD support, 200GB of hard disk space and an HDMI output for connecting to compatible displays, but a Sony Style brochure in the July issue of T3 magazine claims that it offers full HD (1080i) resolution – likely to be a typographical error, but it does raise an important point that there are currently many so-called “high-definition” displays out there which are not capable of displaying the copy-protected 1080p high-definition material which is about to be released. For example, the HDMI standard has recently been revised to support up to 1080p resolution with copy protection – vital to allow Blu-Ray players to output the full high-definition signal to them. As more and more full high-definition Blu-Ray players become available the supply of fully compatible monitors will increase rapidly, and the currently high prices will fall, but now is not a good time to buy. So what is required of a 16:9 display in order to support full high-definition? First of all, it must have a native resolution of either 1920 by 1080, 3840 by 2160 or 7680 by 4320 pixels. Second, it must accept and display a copy-protected 1080p signal via HDMI input (some current display, for example, are 1080p capable via VGA inputs, but only support 1080i via the HDMI input(s), and copy protection will only allow full high-definition via copy-protected HDMI). Plasma displays have difficulty achieving full 1080p resolution, and use a relatively large amount of power; LCD displays use less power (particularly when employing an active LED backlight) and OLED and FED/SED displays less again, whilst combined LCD and spatially modulated LED backlight displays have the potential for highest quality; but longer term, electronic paper technologies have the potential to provide the lowest powered displays available – admittedly relying upon ambient lighting. In terms of players, the Samsung BD-P1000 is already out, for around US$1000. Although it was originally going to be launched a month or so earlier as a 1080i machine, to compete directly with HD-DVD, it has now been upgraded to 1080p and also includes up-conversion of DVDs to 1080p. Similarly, the Sony BDP-S1 is due for a similar price, and the aforementioned VAIO VGN-AR11S laptop is already available for around £2000. Also, Panasonic plan to launch their DMP-BD10 BD/DVD/CD compatible Blu-Ray player in September for less than US$1500, and players are also due from other manufacturers, such as the Pioneer BDP-HD1 Elite (~US$1800), the Philips BDP9000 and LG BD199 (both ~US£1000), the Samsung BD/HDD BD-HR1000 (with 400GB hard drive) and the Sharp DV-BP1U player. Note that all Blu-Ray machines are fully 1080p compatible apart from the Sharp, which is currently limited to just 720p/1080i. Employing much lower power lasers than HD-DVD, Blu-Ray recording technology is already well established, and it is likely that Blu-Ray recorders will become available before the end of the year, offering the option of recording over four hours of full high-definition on a 50GB disc (or a day or so of standard-definition in high quality.) Pioneer began shipping the BDR-101A PC drive that supports recording on BD and DVD in mid May for around US$1000, but the initial version doesn’t support dual-layer recording, so it's limited to just 25GB. As mentioned earlier, Sony have had both half-height and laptop Blu-Ray C drives available OEM since April, and these do support dual-layer 50GB recording, along with CDs and DVDs. Panasonic are due to launch their half-height dual-layer BD/DVD/CD recorder, the LF-MB121JD next week. BD/DVD/CD writers are also due from Samsung (the SH-B022A), Philips (the SPD700 Triple Writer) and LG (the GBW-H10N) - all at around US$500. Nearer to Christmas, the Sony Playstation 3 [PS3], which has two HDMI-based 1080p outputs, is due to be released in early November for around £400. At last, things are about to get interesting… On the frame rate front, as you know, standard films are shot at 24 frames per second [fps], HD IMAX runs at 48fps and UHDV runs at 60fps. The human vision system tends to adapt to what it is given - within limits, and most newer display technologies don't have the refresh problem that causes flicker with CRTs (SGI, for example used 144Hz updating in the Reality Engine 2 in the early nineties), but certainly rates over 100fps will show benefit as we become acclimatised to them. Not surprisingly, Sony already have a roadmap out past 100fps for 1080p...

07-03-2006, 08:42 AM	#5
James Morrow Member Member since:Jun 2004	...I see; now, let me get this straight: if the next generation version of product x (which doesn't exist) is planned to include feature y then product x has feature y - even when it doesn't? Historically, DVD may be seen as the next generation optical disc product after CD. Does this mean that CD is a multi-layer product which can store around 5GB of information on a single layer? Or could it have been described as a multi-layer 25GB per layer product in the early 1980s, or as a 1TB or 1PB holographic Blu-Wav product? Ludicrous as it is, if Samsung are down-converting 1080p to 1080i and then up again it's hardly surprising that reviews comment on how much better its 1080i performance is than its 1080p performance (in comparisons with other BD players). Note, however, that other BD players have shown much higher quality on 1080p - indicating that they are likely to have a better implementation of 1080p technology. Yet it's still early days for consumer 1080p, so I would be careful what you buy - both in player and display terms. Suffice to say that, with high quality material, properly implemented 1080p should be far better than either 1080i or 720p, and note that neither 1080i nor 720p meet the requirements for high definition laid down by Sony and NHK in the 1960s... Of course, BD has other significant advantages over AOD besides 1080p, including 25GB, 50GB and soon 100GB discs (with 200GB also demonstrated), the potential to go significantly beyond this, and existing recordability (50GB recordable drives are available now for both laptops and desktop PCs). Whilst Sony has developed much of the BD technology, launching the first high definition BD recorder in Japan in early 2003, Blu-Ray is comprised of a large consortium of companies - not any single company or small group of companies. ... yet 1080p24 is only the beginning, with much higher frame-rates, SHDV and UHDV in the pipeline (but not in this generation of player)... Last edited by James Morrow; 07-03-2006 at 08:46 AM.

07-03-2006, 12:53 PM	#8
georgir Active Member Member since:Mar 2005	stupid i/p this 1080i/p fuss is stupid as hell. first of all, why the hell would they even make TVs that can't accept progressive? today's fixed-pixel displays only show progressive anyway, not interlaced, so if they made the tv accept interlaced, it's doing some deinterlacing in order to display it. so supporting a progressive input will infact be simpler than interlaced. i think interlaced formats should've all died together with CRTs, don't see why they're the more used ones. an interlaced signal isn't necesserily worse than a progressive one, if it's at double the framerate (fieldrate?). converting from 25fps progressive to 50fps interlaced can be lossless with a simple frame split, and is completely reversible. on the other hand, the conversion from progressive to interlaced might purpously average together every two even fields, so that it becomes "real" interlaced signal, and that might eventually look better on interlaced displays (i.e. some CRTs) but will be irreversible and will lead to quality loss. the deinterlacer should know how the signal was interlaced in order to restore it properly. the deinterlacing algorythms that work best for real interlaced signals, filtering and averaging certain pixels etc, will wreck the quality of a signal that was simply framesplitted. an algorythm that just combines frames will restore a simply-split signal to exactly match the original progressive source, but is terrible for a real interlaced signal... this whole thing seems like it _can_ work perfectly well, but was complicated beyond belief. bluray (and HDDVD?) content is stored at 1080p24 from what i know. does anyone know what algorythms are used by the current players to convert it to interlaced output? if they are just using the simple frame splitting, they're just fine. and can be deinterlaced with the simplest possible method too. also, how does the deinterlacer in current 1080i TVs work? can the user select the deinterlace method?

07-03-2006, 01:45 PM	#10
vick vega Banned Member since:Apr 2006 Blu-ray reviews:2 Trading Score:1	what about hbo hd I can watch the same program, switching back and forth between digital hbo and hbo hd. The hd hbo is much better in picture quality

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
If Jaws comes out on Blu-ray will you just buy the first one or buy all 4	Wish Lists	moe	28	07-30-2009 05:54 PM
WIN THE WAR: Buy Blu-ray this 4th Quarter. Buy WB discs... let your sig show it!!!	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	DaViD Boulet	218	01-04-2008 09:24 PM
Massive Blu-ray Group Buy Day: Which movies did you buy on April 21st?	Blu-ray Movies - North America	Eve6insideandout	38	04-23-2007 03:01 PM

07-03-2006, 02:49 AM	#2
suprmallet Active Member Member since:Jun 2006 Blu-ray collection:264	This post looks like it was written from Sony's marketing department. HD-DVD as a format can do 1080p, too. The current player cannot, but the next gen players will. I also notice that you didn't mention that the Samsung's 1080p upgrade actually involves downgrading the native 1080p signal to 1080i and then upconverting that 1080i signal back to 1080p. So you're not seeing true 1080p, but what the Samsung thinks 1080p might be.

07-03-2006, 06:22 AM	#4
suprmallet Active Member Member since:Jun 2006 Blu-ray collection:264	Because the initial chip (the one that first receives the signal) can't accept 1080p.

07-03-2006, 11:53 AM	#7
James Morrow Member Member since:Jun 2004	Hi Supermallet. I see, so you can buy 1080p discs in HD-DVD, but you can't actually play them at 1080P? Most people are aware that full high-definition masters are at 1080p, but if your player can't actually output 1080p (i.e. all current HD-DVD players) you are limited to buying a product which you know is only capable of providing significantly lower quality from the outset. Yes, you might buy discs, safe in the knowledge that the "next generation" HD-DVD players will be able to display them at full quality, but you might not be that impressed with buying a player that you know is obsolete every time you look at a disc. Some people might even make the mistake of getting a 1080i display to match their HD-DVD player - which would be a double whammy. The CD, DVD, BD example may be stretching a point, but it is still a valid application of the term "next generation" - not hyperbole. I would be grateful if you could tell me when the next generation HD-DVD players, capable of full 1080p output, are going to be available, and the recorders. Oh, and some idea of pricing would be useful... Best regards, James

07-03-2006, 01:25 PM	#9
The Don Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Apr 2006 Blu-ray reviews:12 Trading Score:2	I agree....I don't care if it is 1080i/p.....I doubt I am going to notice the difference anyways... it is just like the 720p/1080i arguments as to which one was better....those arguments were hilarious....because the only comparisons we had were of TV broadcasts that vary by company anyways.....TNTHD apparently offers 1080i...but looks only a little better than standard digital TV.... sorry to stray off topic...lol....but I could care less if it downcoverts and then upconverts again...and yes, it probably does do this...but the PQ isn't going to be much better or worse either way and none of us will notice the difference...

07-03-2006, 02:52 PM	#11
JTK Blu-ray Knight Member since:Jan 2006 Location:www.blurayoasis.com	Welcome to first gen/first rev. Welcome to the early adoption/glorified beta tester period.

07-03-2006, 05:22 PM	#12
Psiweaver Special Member Member since:Jun 2006 Location:Los Angeles,CA	The good news is that things can only get better.

07-04-2006, 07:43 AM	#15
James Morrow Member Member since:Jun 2004	Hi Supermallet, yes, next generation can mean many things, from a simple revision to a new format, and beyond. However, there is a vast difference between the highest quality you can achieve with a true interlaced signal and that achievable with a progressively scanned signal of the same nominal resolution - especially when there is a straight 1:1 or 1:n mapping between pixels on the disc and those on the display. I'm sure that ShadowSelf can elaborate - or you can look up our discussion related to this from some time ago. That's good to know that 1080p HD-DVD machines will be out early next year. Do you know, does that include recorders? Best regards, James

07-05-2006, 02:29 AM	#16
suprmallet Active Member Member since:Jun 2006 Blu-ray collection:264	I do not know if that includes recorders, because I've never been particularly interested in the recording side.

07-05-2006, 03:41 AM	#17
BTBuck1 Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Jun 2006 Location:Oceanside, CA. Blu-ray collection:507 DVD collection:1	I keep reading that the current HD-A1 is upgradeable to output 1080p when a firmware comes along. I read this in other forums, it this true? If so, what are they holding off for?

07-05-2006, 05:26 AM	#19
suprmallet Active Member Member since:Jun 2006 Blu-ray collection:264	I'd say there's a lot of unfounded hope that there is. I honestly don't know if it's possible, but I haven't seen a post that proves it could output 1080p.

07-05-2006, 02:36 PM	#20
georgir Active Member Member since:Mar 2005	once again, the content on hddvd discs is progressive, and if the HD-A1 is not filtering it in any way when interlacing it, there is no information lost. the right deinterlacer can recover it completely.

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals