Does Blu-ray video look better then HD DVD video?

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by reiella

In motion are they? See, I'd also contend that a 20mbps encode is miles ahead of a 30 mbps encode, but then again, I'm the one who needs glasses, neh?

20/20 vision here. I've actually tried out both versions of Flags of our Father and both looked similar...but again, I watch the movie...not pausing each frame to see every possible spec and flaw.

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Downhere

20/20 vision here. I've actually tried out both versions of Flags of our Father and both looked similar...but again, I watch the movie...not pausing each frame to see every possible spec and flaw.

What's your viewing angle/distance/screen etc if I may ask. Just curious

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

What's your viewing angle/distance/screen etc if I may ask. Just curious

I sit right in front of a 65" display about 11-12' back. I also go to a family member's house every other weekend and watch movies there as well...they have a 110" screen using an Epson Home Cinema 1080 projector. Anything else?

[Deciazulado]

The distance to the 110" screen? And of course if both are 16:9 or one is 2.35-2.40

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

The distance to the 110" screen? And of course if both are 16:9 or one is 2.35-2.40

Yes, 16:9. When I finish college and save up money I definitely want a scope set-up...that's my goal.

Hmm, when I go to my uncle's house I sit in the first row, about 10-11 feet from the screen.

[richteer]

Originally Posted by reiella

And in motion, upscaled DVDs are similar in PQ.

For suitable values of "similar", perhaps. I've compared upscaled DVDs with their Blu counterparts on my PS3. Even on a 32" 1080p display from ~12' away the difference was striking (I'm thinking specifically of The Fifth Element).

[noi375]

Originally Posted by Downhere

This thread is about if Blu-ray's PQ quality is better than HD DVD. My response was they both offer great PQ.

You completely lost me there - it is like being asked which football team is better and you answered both teams are great. I am sure it maybe be true, but you never answer the question. This question is like the outcome of the Superbowl - there can only be one winner after the game is over - a "tie" is not acceptable. This is not a baseball All Star Game, you know

I am just saying if (which almost all of us know is not true) HD-DVD has "great" video quality just like Blu-ray, and Blu-ray can store more of it on the same disc, wouldn't that automatically suggest Blu-ray is better, especially since the cost is basically the same to the consumer?

I don't know - sometimes HD-DVD is saying things that really make me question their common sense - it's like people asking you whether you want an one million dollar gift or two million dollar gift (after tax, no strings attached), and you pick the one million dollar gift (actual dollar amount). I just cannot find any sense in that...

[lch]

Originally Posted by Downhere

It will always come down to the compressionist and the quality of the print used.

yes, compressionist are important.
but the best they can do is to take what your target is and try to fit them it.

eg. when working with hd-dvd, they have to take into consideration of 36mbps max bitrate for video/audio on a 30gb disc while when working with bd, they can push to 40mbps video 8mbps audio on a 50gb disc.

[noi375]

Originally Posted by oscar_in_fw

The biggest reason folks continue to support HD DVD is because they've already made the investment (hardware and software) in the format and don't want to see that investment wasted. A possible secondary reason (or excuse) is the temporary advantage HD DVD has in terms of "frills" (e.g. IME, PIP, HDi).

I can understand those reasons, but that is not the reason various people are saying why HD-DVD should stay - that's the part I am having problems with.

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by noi375

You completely lost me there - it is like being asked which football team is better and you answered both teams are great. I am sure it maybe be true, but you never answer the question. This question is like the outcome of the Superbowl - there can only be one winner after the game is over - a "tie" is not acceptable. This is not a baseball All Star Game, you know

Hey, one can like both teams...nothing wrong with that. It doesn't always have to be a love or hate kind of thing. One can love and appreciate two different formats or teams or whatever.

[Joe Cain]

Originally Posted by Downhere

Hey, one can like both teams...nothing wrong with that. It doesn't always have to be a love or hate kind of thing. One can love and appreciate two different formats or teams or whatever.

Clearly you've never spent time in the state of Alabama.

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by Joe Cain

Clearly you've never spent time in the state of Alabama.

lol...no, can't say that I have.

[rushmore9]

You have two of the same cars, but one has a tank that is a good 20 gallons larger.

Which one do you choose?

[mdm1699]

Originally Posted by noi375

I can understand those reasons, but that is not the reason various people are saying why HD-DVD should stay - that's the part I am having problems with.

It has a lower cost of entry to consumers, who are willing to accept the limitations for some measure of satisfaction.

[kknight]

Originally Posted by Downhere

Reviews are good as a guide only. I like to go by my feeling as to whether the pic quality is up to par. Personally, both have fantastic pic quality. Kong, Hot Fuzz, Transformers, The Mummy films, etc. on the HD DVD side have all been amazing. POTC 1 & 2, The Patriot, Underworld, F4-2, etc. have all been amazing on the Blu-ray side. I think a love for one product over the other can cloud one's judgement, but that's just my honest opinion.

Nah... I don't agree. Things haven't been amazing for me on the HD-DVD side. I'm not impress with Transformers, it could of been better especially in the dark scenes... I feel as though HD-DVD PQ hasn't improved much since the day it was released.

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by kknight

Nah... I don't agree. Things haven't been amazing for me on the HD-DVD side. I'm not impress with Transformers, it could of been better especially in the dark scenes... I feel as though HD-DVD PQ hasn't improved much since the day it was released.

To each his own I guess.

[aphex]

Originally Posted by rushmore9

You have two of the same cars, but one has a tank that is a good 20 gallons larger.

Which one do you choose?

uh that makes no sense. I would take the lesser. I care about speed and weight. 20 extra gallons of gasoline? No thanks.

lol I get what you're saying. But we don't need an anology. In terms of data, more space is better(specially with the higher bandwith that we have)

[reiella]

Originally Posted by richteer

For suitable values of "similar", perhaps. I've compared upscaled DVDs with their Blu counterparts on my PS3. Even on a 32" 1080p display from ~12' away the difference was striking (I'm thinking specifically of The Fifth Element).

And it seems, rather amusingly, my point was lost. Oh well.

Thought it was obvious with the vinyl remark, might have to make it blount.

Compare a 10mbps encode to a 20 mbps encode. Compare a 20mbps encode to a 40 mbps encode.

They do have a tendancy of looking a bit different, neh?

We've established that apparantly a 20 mbps encode is noticably different than a 10 mbps encode. What's in the air is what difference a 40 mbps encode makes over a 20 mbps.

Unless, of course, the premise is that the 20mbps is the upper-band of what the human eye can see 'in motion' for a 1080p image (in which case, I pose the question why did we ever go past 35mm film for movies, but hey whatever .

[Neo65]

Originally Posted by Downhere

Hmm, sorry, I don't watch a movie in frames, I watch it in motion and try to watch the film to actually enjoy it. Going frame by frame is being a little too nitpicky. At least in my honest opinion.

I've watched the best from both formats and honestly, in motion they are both very similar. Now if you want to watch a movie frame by frame then that's your choice, but for 99% of the people in the world they watch it in real time and therefore both are similar in PQ quality.

Well the question is "does blu-ray video look better than HD DVD video?" Most of the time, the same movie will look the same, but the quality of the master has more to do with the final product more than the actual compression.

But my answer has to do with cases where known stress test video streams can be encoded to exploit the limits of each format.

Even if hypothetically 95% of the population can't tell or don't care, even if only 1% can tell a few torture tests apart consistently. For example, MI:3 has what looks like compression mistakes by the operator (go easy on the ROI settings eh?) on the VC-1 version on HD DVD in the convenience store around the border between dark and light areas of the frame.

The question of "does it look better" is mostly answered by : depends, but there are cases when it does look better.

As for concrete examples of the same movie encoded by two companies using different tools : Face Off in japan has a BD version distributed by disney, and there are screenshots around AVS comparing this version with the HD DVD version. The HD DVD version had significant DNR applied.

[aphex]

Originally Posted by reiella

In motion are they? See, I'd also contend that a 20mbps encode is miles ahead of a 30 mbps encode, but then again, I'm the one who needs glasses, neh?

in motion they definately are.