New Line encode question

[alkalinesi]

i heard warner just transfers the hd disc onto the blu ray not using the blu ray potential. being that new line is warners sister company, do they do the same? or because blu is bein released before hd dvd they use blu rays whole dic space? sorry if this has been talked bout before

[tru_to_blu]

Originally Posted by alkalinesi

i heard warner just transfers the hd disc onto the blu ray not using the blu ray potential. being that new line is warners sister company, do they do the same? or because blu is bein released before hd dvd they use blu rays whole dic space? sorry if this has been talked bout before

I dont believe this is true, where did you hear this.

[alkalinesi]

Originally Posted by tru_to_blu

I dont believe this is true, where did you hear this.

which part? isnt is true that that hd dvd and blu rays titles done by warner look and sound the same becuase they are? i read that warner takes the encodes off the hd dvd and puts it onto the blu ray disc or theyre the ports, thats why they have crap audio and all that. but bein that new line releases blu first, are they mastered to blu ray capabilities? sorry if im not making sense

[bajor27]

Originally Posted by alkalinesi

which part? isnt is true that that hd dvd and blu rays titles done by warner look and sound the same becuase they are? i read that warner takes the encodes off the hd dvd and puts it onto the blu ray disc or theyre the ports, thats why they have crap audio and all that. but bein that new line releases blu first, are they mastered to blu ray capabilities? sorry if im not making sense

I understood you the first time, and you're right, warner does just use the same video Encode. We sometimes get different audio, but not always. I wish I knew about New Line, but I don't.

And I have no idea what tru_to_blu was referring to. I think they thought you were saying New Line uses different encodes and they think that isn't true. Again though, not sure.

[FilmmakingFiasco]

Well, according to the DVDtown review on Pan's on HD-DVD, it has 7.1 DTS MA audio, the same at the Blu-ray version. The review said the image was great but if New Line squeezed a DTS MA track onto a 30gb disc, I wonder how much room is left for the video encode.

[MOONPHASE]

Originally Posted by FilmmakingFiasco

Well, according to the DVDtown review on Pan's on HD-DVD, it has 7.1 DTS MA audio, the same at the Blu-ray version. The review said the image was great but if New Line squeezed a DTS MA track onto a 30gb disc, I wonder how much room is left for the video encode.

and much less the extras unless all of the extras are on like on a 2nd disc but new line is doing what warner would do if they went exclusive to a format because the hd-dvd is holding the blu-ray versions back from their true potential with having a 50GB disc

[tru_to_blu]

Im sorry, I misunderstood what you were trying to say because I was sleepy when I posted.

[reiella]

We really won't know with New Line until Rush Hour 3 comes out on HD-DVD...

[ add ]
Erm, maybe not, Pans is out on both from NLC?

ergh
and ya someone could just pop Rush Hour 3 in a bd drive to check the filesizes.

[spicynacho]

What about hairspray? Wasn't that new line?

[Clark Kent]

We could know right now if New Line uses BD encodes or not if someone with a computer BD drive checked the disc size. It was discussed by Amir or one of his lackies on AVS that New Line did specific test encodes of LOTR for each format and then decided to do one common encode for both formats like Warner for its titles. Of course take that with a huge grain of salt because Amir used to spin everything pro-HD DVD.

[paulb]

Disc sizes for the two New Line releases:

Hairspray 38.96 GB
Rush Hour 3 26.14 GB

[ClaytonMG]

I'd like to know why New Line is releasing these 7.1 movies on Blu-Ray, and not giving people a DTS 6.1 core. You can get 6.1 sound on the DVD, but you'd be sacrificing the bitrate. You can get a higher bit rate on the Blu-Ray from the regular core track, but you'd be losing the 6.1 discrete audio. Not cool...

[mastertang]

I think some of us have a philosophical disagreements with Warner and the VC-1 codec. I don't see how a mpeg 4 at 30mbps can be truly the same as VC-1 at half that bitrate. Does the sharing of a single encode sacrifice PQ potential? Sure. But I can't say that Harry Potter or Blade Runner looks bad, it just makes you wonder what could have been.

Conversely, having a common highly compressed encode is good in two ways. First, HDDUD fanatics can't claim they have superior image quality, even though they usually do anyway. Second, the extra space on a BD-50 allows for PCM soundtracks (which studios don't have to pay fees for, unlike dolby and dts (I think there are licensing fees or something)). It also lets us have extras in full HD while HDDUD has to resort to SD o fit it in.

[Alan Gordon]

I own "Hairspray" on Blu-ray, and it's definately a low-bitrate encode... not that it looks bad... just that it's definately an HD DVD port.

The WB store hasn't shipped my copy of "Rush Hour 3" yet, so I cannot comment on it.

~Alan

[reiella]

Originally Posted by paulb

Disc sizes for the two New Line releases:

Hairspray 38.96 GB
Rush Hour 3 26.14 GB

So RH3 most likly is an easy cut and paste to HD-DVD 30gb. Interesting though, if they shaved a gb and change off that size though they could have a single layer press.

[cajmoyper]

I'm trying to say this without being pissy-sounding, but some people here think too much relies too heavily on bitrates. Does it look good, does it sound good, you decide, don't let a bar on your tv tell you.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by cajmoyper

I'm trying to say this without being pissy-sounding, but some people here think too much relies too heavily on bitrates. Does it look good, does it sound good, you decide, don't let a bar on your tv tell you.

Yeah well I seem to notice some issues with the black levels on Rush Hour 3, and also the lack of grain on Hairspray is annoying. I'd rather have it grainy and sharp than blurry and over-processed looking. But I think the black levels on Rush Hour 3 have something to do with how it's filmed.

I take that back, just saw it was 35mm. Oddly enough, it looks like they tried to correct the grainyness on that title too. And now there appears to be some slight compression artifacts on some of the surfaces in the darker scenes.

[Slapper]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Yeah well I seem to notice some issues with the black levels on Rush Hour 3, and also the lack of grain on Hairspray is annoying. I'd rather have it grainy and sharp than blurry and over-processed looking. But I think the black levels on Rush Hour 3 have something to do with how it's filmed.

I take that back, just saw it was 35mm. Oddly enough, it looks like they tried to correct the grainyness on that title too. And now there appears to be some slight compression artifacts on some of the surfaces in the darker scenes.

Sounds like Warner's hands may have touched Rush Hour 3 in all the wrong ways. I can't say I'm surprised, but I was hoping New Line wouldn't be using the same (Microsoft) VC-1 handbook as Warner.

[quetzalcoatl]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

I'd like to know why New Line is releasing these 7.1 movies on Blu-Ray, and not giving people a DTS 6.1 core. You can get 6.1 sound on the DVD, but you'd be sacrificing the bitrate. You can get a higher bit rate on the Blu-Ray from the regular core track, but you'd be losing the 6.1 discrete audio. Not cool...

Because 6.1 DTS is not core it is DTS ES. And with DTS HD MA you only get the core track if you cannot send it bitstream or decode it.


http://www.dts.com/dts-hd/dts-on-bluray-and-hddvd.php

[tru_to_blu]

I think we can look for good things from New Line.