Another proof/sign 30GB just aint enough !!! - Blu-ray Forum

scott1256ca · 09-20-2007, 10:27 PM

what is it we are supposed to be seeing? The shots look blown out and whoever took the pictures didn't have a steady enough hand. Is that supposed to be macroblocking in the background of the first shot? I have no idea what the problem is supposed to be with the second, because of the unsteady hand.

MrVorhees · 09-20-2007, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scott1256ca

what is it we are supposed to be seeing? The shots look blown out and whoever took the pictures didn't have a steady enough hand. Is that supposed to be macroblocking in the background of the first shot? I have no idea what the problem is supposed to be with the second, because of the unsteady hand.

Oh c'mon you cant add microlocking into troys picture by shaking your camera,the whole picture include the tv must have microblocking then!

But ok what about the low bitrates? its NOT a dark scene, its a day scene with moving pictures, also fault of not having a steady hand? 7Mbps is a way TOO low for a next gen codec, its DVD niveau!

I have noticed the same S*** on departed as well, all the low bitrates scenes looked crap and totaly soft, i can give you the exactly timing if you want to check.

kaliraver · 09-20-2007, 10:38 PM

Blame HD-DVD for giving you the lower bitrates since this movie was optimized for the weaker HD-DVD format; lower bandwidth and smaller disc capacity. If it was optimized for Blu-Ray this would not have the macroblocking. WB really has to do seperate encodes to show off the better looking transfer that would always be Blu-Ray.

MrVorhees · 09-20-2007, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaliraver69

Blame HD-DVD for giving you the lower bitrates since this movie was optimized for the weaker HD-DVD format; lower bandwidth and smaller disc capacity. If it was optimized for Blu-Ray this would not have the macroblocking. WB really has to do seperate encodes to show off the better looking transfer that would always be Blu-Ray.

THIS is exactly the opinion i approve!! i couldnt say it any better! THANK YOU!!

SO now, if Warner Bros. still not encode seperate codings most people will never agree that it could look much better on HD DVD, they wont know it better cause the comparison is missing! but if you count 1 + 1 then you can tell its possible to get a better coding for blu-ray by reason of space, and bitrates (40+ on blu-ray)

WickyWoo · 09-20-2007, 10:46 PM

Already being discussed here

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=17415

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Zune 30gb lockup	General Chat	blubullet	37	01-03-2009 09:53 PM
Aint It Cool is HDDVD biased.	General Chat	Ultraviolet	15	11-25-2007 11:06 AM
Another FACT HD DVD's 30GB is not enough! Death Proof ->	General Chat	MrVorhees	13	11-07-2007 12:23 PM
30GB is not enough capacity for HD-DVD	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	HDTV1080P	21	01-14-2007 03:59 AM

09-20-2007, 10:27 PM	#1
scott1256ca Active Member Member since:Oct 2006	what is it we are supposed to be seeing? The shots look blown out and whoever took the pictures didn't have a steady enough hand. Is that supposed to be macroblocking in the background of the first shot? I have no idea what the problem is supposed to be with the second, because of the unsteady hand.

09-20-2007, 10:38 PM	#3
kaliraver Blu-ray Samurai Member since:May 2007 Location:San Francisco Bay Blu-Ray SteelBooks™: (150+) Blu-ray collection:373 Blu-ray reviews:1 Trading Score:285	Blame HD-DVD for giving you the lower bitrates since this movie was optimized for the weaker HD-DVD format; lower bandwidth and smaller disc capacity. If it was optimized for Blu-Ray this would not have the macroblocking. WB really has to do seperate encodes to show off the better looking transfer that would always be Blu-Ray.

09-20-2007, 10:46 PM	#5
WickyWoo Blu-ray Champion Member since:May 2007 Trading Score:2	Already being discussed here https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=17415

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals