Standardized video codecs?

[LeoneFan]

I agree, AVC would be the best option and I'm glad that more and more Blu-ray studios are using the codec. Nothing wrong with MPEG-2, but why waste disc space.

[Chad Varnadore]

There should be no real difference in space requirements for MPEG-2 at 30mbps and AVC at 30mbps. It's not the same as comparing a compressed codec like TrueHD to uncompressed PCM. MPEG-4 is just newer, was designed with high def more in mind, and allows compressionists more flexibility and greater control in their job, allowing them to push bitrates lower with less obvious artifacting should disc space be strained due to a films length or the volume of extras. But the least amount of compression they use the better.

[jbuttler007]

Progression and advancement in technology will with no doubt go with vc-1.

[Chad Varnadore]

Originally Posted by jbuttler007

Progression and advancement in technology will with no doubt go with vc-1.

Based on the majority of what they're doing now, lets hope not.

I think Microsoft is using HD DVD as a test platform to refine VC-1 (read: find the limits that will still fool most people) for VOD. That's why they deny that the few high bitrate encodes that Disney has done are any better than low bitrate from Warner. They need to get bitrates lower for HD quality VOD and don't want people to realize there's a performance cost that would give packaged media another edge. Of course the same argument could be made regarding BD and HD DVD now. But, everybody now knows that HD DVD isn't Microsoft's long term goal.

[Frode]

Cost and encoding time also figures into the equation. It's far faster and easier to get an mpeg2 encode ready than it is to do the same for VC1 or AVC.

[KenThompson]

Mpeg 2 may be old but it sure can look good when it has room to breath. High bit rate avc or mpeg 2 use up the same amount of space if coded at same rate, so just sit back and enjoy our great looking movies.