Commentary from the Insiders Thread

[bryaaaant]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

I have tried, but no one on either side of this is willing to talk on or off the record on this.

Didn't you say Cinram or whoever your contacts are manufactures for both formats..? Isn't it too convenient that they would only reveal figures for one format? Doesn't this even for a second make you doubt about the integrity and unbiasness (which should be important to every journalist) of your sources?

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

I have tried, but no one on either side of this is willing to talk on or off the record on this.

And why do you think that is?

People are usually estatic to talk about success. Especially if it gains them a strategic advantage over the competition.

Gary

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

As for Paramount, their reasons have been stated publicly, but no one here believes them. They say they only made the move to support HD DVD because of a payoff, even though it was OK for the BDA to pay them off to be neutral.

I suggest you re-read that. I expect THEY is us. Unless you meant to say that THEY (Paramount) say they only made the move to support HD DVD because of a payoff. In which case, I think we ALL agree with that.

It is OK for a company to give incentives to support. It isn't OK for them to give incentives to DENY support.

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

IF Sony is getting the yields that they state, then they should be helping out the independent replicators with the issues that they are having. One in particular has increased yields up to the 50% level from when they started, but there are other companies out there that aren't getting as good of results. If all can attain Sony's stated yields, then I will be the first to say so, because it is worth talking about. But at this point, the independents that I have talked to aren't getting anywhere close to the same results (even though Sony has been helping them in the process).

Absolutely, if the independents are using Sony replication lines. Are they?

Do you think Sony should be helping to setup a Singulus or Panasonic line? THAT is another competitive business. If Singulus drops the ball, then others get more business.

Gary

[Penton-Man]

Guys, don’t pay any attention to the AVMS insider’s FUD. In fact, the way he insulted me several pages back regarding my anonymous posting handle would have probably gotten him banned on AVMS, because I said much less to the A-man while I was a *registered insider* over there and markrubin banned my ass within a few days. He’s lucky to still be here as far as I’m concerned.

His “analysis” of the yield situation is as juvenile as his judgment regarding Cinram. The movie reviewer/reporter is getting tainted information from a limited amount of communications from people that are either seeing things with tunnel vision or have an agenda that he may or may not appreciate.

Hell, somebody (and I'm not talking intern level ) saw what he posted here on our forum about the effective disc capacity of blu-ray discs several pages back, and they called me today, to let me know that what Mr. Vaughn is referring to is old news………”at least 6 months old and there are titles now out on the market to prove it for people willing to crunch the GB numbers”.
“There is no issue here and hasn’t been for a long time.”
Hasn't someone like benes already crunched these numbers in the past to disprove Vaughn's *sources* ?

My personal opinion of some of these so called AVMS “insiders” is that their regular day jobs are either in the dumps or going very slow so they reach out to the internet in an attention seeking fashion, in the meantime, for their 15 min. of fame.

[aygie]

hey Penton, any big News coming up next week?

[RobertB]

This exchange is going beyond the twilight zone...

I will take the word of 2-3 insiders over a dubious "journalist" any day. Why? It's too easy to hide behind "unnamed sources" when everything else points in the other direction.

Considering the amount of BD50 discs on the market and the quality they exhibit I think it is pretty lame to start this big "my supersecret sources tell me that they have big yield problems!" thing. There is nothing that points to this being a problem at this time. If there is...please point me to some official information that could support this argument?

I find it really hard to believe that you are "format neutral" here. Sounds to me like you have an agenda or you're instructed to push someone else's agenda. Even if you dont understand it yourself, it seems obvious that you are continuing an argument well beyond the point of reason. The more you argue the less credible you seem.

Sorry, thats just my "neutral" point of view here. I'm pretty much undecided in this whole ordeal but I'm starting to lean more and more towards Blu-ray due to its obvious strenghts over HD-DVD.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

]
Hell, somebody (and I'm not talking intern level ) saw what he posted here on our forum about the effective disc capacity of blu-ray discs several pages back, and they called me today, to let me know that what Mr. Vaughn is referring to is old news………”at least 6 months old and there are titles now out on the market to prove it for people willing to crunch the GB numbers”.
“There is no issue here and hasn’t been for a long time.”
Hasn't someone like benes already crunched these numbers in the past to disprove Vaughn's *sources* ?

Yeah, there was a pow-wow last fall and the numbers were pretty encouraging back then.

It seems to me his sources are in a new batch of independents with newly installed BD50 lines. As I've said, until this FUD started to hit, the A-man was always saying that NOBODY outside Sony or DADC could make a BD50.

It went from science fiction, to cranked out on an experimental line, to only Sony/Panny can do it, to yields are bad at the independents in 11 months (Oct 16 - Click, the first BD50 title hit the street).

It's rather encouraging that higher-ups are seeing what is being posted. That's very positive.

Gary

[degas]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

My personal opinion of some of these so called AVMS “insiders” is that their regular day jobs are either in the dumps or going very slow so they reach out to the internet in an attention seeking fashion, in the meantime, for their 15 min. of fame.

I'm sorry David, but I'm inclined to agree with this.
Since you are not a true insider, but merely somone who gets information out of others, why are you even claiming insider status?

If everybody would do that, then lots and lots of people could claim to be insiders, which would excavate the meaning of the term.

I think your ambition to be regarded as "someone in the know", has clouded your judgement.

[daman]

Originally Posted by JTK

Shamus was quoting two of the most infamous FUD-sters from AVS and I simply was stating that I wouldn't believe a word from any of that bunch.

why any member here lurking over at AVS and spreading their FUD from that board and bring over here is beyond me.

There are much more productive things to do. For example, go out and walk the dog. Buy a new Blu movie, watching movies with friends, etc..

Don't be consumed with every little details. Things will happen one way or another, and life move on.

[David Vaughn]

Originally Posted by gand41f

What's the display you used for this test?

thanks
gandalf

JVC HD-1 1080p projector.

[gand41f]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

JVC HD-1 1080p projector.

You are one of the lucky ones, if that projector can handle 1080i film-based content correctly. For the rest of us, 1080p output from the player is a big deal, since our TV most likely cannot do inverse telecine.

http://www.hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/1106hook/

Note the sad display in the "3:2 film cadence test" column. It's even worse than regular 1080i deintelacing test, believe me or not.

This test is from late last year but judging from reports we're hearing about new models, the situation doesn't seem to have improved much.

enjoy
gandalf

P.S. No, you don't need 24p input on your screen to get the full 1920x1080 resulution -- 60p will do. The benefit of 24p is a totally different matter.

[mattym]

nicely sidestepped david, lets try again.

Is Paid wrong with his yield claims?

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

I would love to do double blind tests with every one of you guys of a 1080i stream vs. a 1080p one and see how many people could get the two correct. As long as your display does the inverse telecine process correctly from 1080i to 1080p. On my 1080p display, there is NO DIFFERENCE between the two....NONE. They both look and sound very good, regardless of the disc they are on.

Now, if your display doesn't handle the telecine process correctly but will accept a 1080p/24 signal, than an argument can be made that the BD "could" look better, but is that the problem of the format or the display (I think both are at fault).

Well... right here lies the irony I guess then.

At the time of comparison I was still under the mistaken impression that HDDVD players were all HD capable (not 1080i since HD does not include interlaced). When I made my judgements it was prior to gaining the knowledge of the difference, hence, I was 'blind' to the resolution issue. I was confused at the time because of the encodes being stated the same and only found out later that the reason was due to the competitively priced HDDVD players only outputting in 1080i (which basically makes them non-competitive products to Blu-ray since they don't offer the same resolution).

I watched both on two screens: My 50" Panasonic plasma that only does up to 1080i and on my friends 1080p projector (brand escapes me) on an estimated 90" screen. The latter is where the real difference, obviously, shined. In fact, the 1080i vs 1080p difference was 'staggering' as he put it at the time.

I would gladly take a double blind test between 1080i and 1080p on any two displays 50 inches or larger. I know for a fact I can tell the difference, no problem (even at Best Buy under their fluorescent lights). Grandma's eyes have blessed me.

[Neo65]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

Neither would I.

There were rumors earlier before CES07 about Disney going neutral, presumably the same rumblings are happening now. I actually believed it was happening that last time.

Alternately the question of TWX's control over Warner could come up.

The two biggest questions floating around are the potential of Disney going neutral or warner going red exclusive, either of these two scenarios have always been discussed along with the Universal exclusive one.

[amillians]

Attention Team Blu: you'll soon get your own "your yields suck too" bullet point.

Word has leaked that The DVD Forum's WG-11 has approved HD DVD TL51 (the triple layer 51GB varient) as well as the TL HD/DVD combo format...the formal approval is forthcoming, but it's apparently a done deal, and yes, as expected, there's an excellent chance that players using G1 OPUs/controllers will be left in the cold on TL51 due to the inability to correct enough for spherical aberation.

[gand41f]

Originally Posted by Proteus

Well... right here lies the irony I guess then.

At the time of comparison I was still under the mistaken impression that HDDVD players were all HD capable (not 1080i since HD does not include interlaced). When I made my judgements it was prior to gaining the knowledge of the difference, hence, I was 'blind' to the resolution issue. I was confused at the time because of the encodes being stated the same and only found out later that the reason was due to the competitively priced HDDVD players only outputting in 1080i (which basically makes them non-competitive products to Blu-ray since they don't offer the same resolution).

I watched both on two screens: My 50" Panasonic plasma that only does up to 1080i and on my friends 1080p projector (brand escapes me) on an estimated 90" screen. The latter is where the real difference, obviously, shined. In fact, the 1080i vs 1080p difference was 'staggering' as he put it at the time.

I would gladly take a double blind test between 1080i and 1080p on any two displays 50 inches or larger. I know for a fact I can tell the difference, no problem (even at Best Buy under their fluorescent lights). Grandma's eyes have blessed me.

Proteus, see my post above (#1126). He is not lying that 1080i60 has the same amount of information as 1080p24 (or 1080p60 generated by the player from 1080p24 on the disc). What he failed to mention that, most consumer devices out there cannot correctly put the 1080i60 back into 1080p (either in 60Hz or multiple of 24Hz). Thus, you can both be right -- you can see a difference between 1080p and 1080i, and he cannot.

It's almost like the DTS-HD MA vs. uncompressed PCM situation. Technically they contain the exact same amount of information, but the vast majority of devices out there cannot decode DTS-HD MA, thus people only hear the lossless core. So one guy can claim they hear the difference, another can claim they don't, and they both can be right.

My opinion is that 1080p output is still a very good thing for the players. People who buy 1080i players are more likely to be buying cheap displays that cannot do inverse telecine correctly, so they will be watching HD DVD in (essentially) 540p for a long while (maybe forever, given how low in priority inverse telecine seems to be for TV manufacturers). Ironically, only people who have real high-end displays can purchase a low-end 1080i player and not notice a difference.

enjoy
gandalf

[WickyWoo]

OK guys. I'm going to lay down some law here

FEEL FREE TO CHALLENGE DAVID, AGGRESSIVELY IF YOU SO CHOOSE

But attacks NOT using fact, logic and reason such as but not limited to namecalling(and I and the other mods decide what qualifies, ARE NOT KOSHER

Therefore, I will start handing out suspensions and move from there for people who violate that simple mandate. THIS GOES EQUALLY FOR BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUEMENT. We've got a good thing going here, please don't ruin it.

We are not AVS

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

As for Paramount, their reasons have been stated publicly, but no one here believes them. They say they only made the move to support HD DVD because of a payoff, even though it was OK for the BDA to pay them off to be neutral.

If I'm reading this right, this is where your true colors come through. You see, people here are objecting to Paramount stating that there's "real" reasons they went HD DVD exclusive when everyone knows there was a payoff involved.

Is anyone passing judgement (in the context of this fiasco you've created here) re that payoff as it relates to Paramount's comments? No, basically people here are saying, "Cmon, cut the BS Paramount. We all know you got paid." That's different than "Those bastards took the money, and sold us out." Yet, your retort is basically, "It's ok for BD to pay studios, but HD DVD can't (pay studios)?" That is a typical HD DVD fanboy comment circa two weeks ago when Paramount made the announcement.

In the end, most people appreciate honesty, and not blatant lies. At the end of they day, I don't expect Paramount to come and say "We got paid." But they must also assume we're stupid to come out two weeks later and start citing "production problems", etc, etc. People are smart enough to see through that. That's the objection, and it has nothing to do with the payoff (or "promotional considerations") itself.

[WickyWoo]

Disney going neutral is far more unlikely than Uni or Warner going neutral/exclusive

Disney specifically asked for BD+ style protection and region coding, and Toshiba refused them. Both things are HUGELY important to them. With AACS essetially cracked wide open, don't look for that to happen....pretty much ever barring highly improbably Blu disaster.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Disney going neutral is far more unlikely than Uni or Warner going neutral/exclusive

Disney specifically asked for BD+ style protection and region coding, and Toshiba refused them. Both things are HUGELY important to them. With AACS essetially cracked wide open, don't look for that to happen....pretty much ever barring highly improbably Blu disaster.

Disney appears more invested in BD than even Sony...

they'll make money all over the place when BDD takes off with their remastered older classics available in HD...

they will sell..