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

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Downhere

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.

Nice

Mmm you'll need a 140" Scope screen for the same constant height distance.
Ahh one day curved giant OLEDS!

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Nice

Mmm you'll need a 140" Scope screen for the same constant height distance.
Ahh one day curved giant OLEDS!

That would be so awesome. Seriously, a 140" scope screen would be killer. *sighs...day dreams* lol. One day, one day I will have a scope set-up.

[Jim Morrison]

I have most of HD-DVD's 'big-hitters' - Hot Fuzz, Kong, Transformers etc - and whilst they are all quite superb examples of HD (apart from the moments of 'banding' in Kong), in my opinion none of them quite have the level of detail or depth seen in some of Disney's titles - in particular POTC: DMC & Apocalypto.

[Pilam69]

Originally Posted by reiella

And in motion, upscaled DVDs are similar in PQ.

Just like when listening to music, CDs are similar to Vinyl... Or MP3s to CDs...

If you have any type of quality TV and/or a larger TV then upscaled DVD is NOT similar in quality AT ALL.

[RobertB]

Originally Posted by Pilam69

If you have any type of quality TV and/or a larger TV then upscaled DVD is NOT similar in quality AT ALL.

100% agree. While SD DVD can look very good upscaled, it cant touch premium Blu-ray transfers.

[Grisle]

I don't even like DVDs anymore...I'm sure many of you are like that too.

[Downhere]

Originally Posted by Grisle

I don't even like DVDs anymore...I'm sure many of you are like that too.

Some DVD's aren't bad, Star Wars and LOTR's look good upscaled. Of course they can't touch anything in High Def, but for now they aren't bad.

Of course, when they are eventually released on High Def everyone will say the DVD's suck. lol.

[lch]

Originally Posted by reiella

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 .

if your source is only 20mbps, encoding at 40mbps won't help anything at all.
eg audio cd ~ 1.5mbps. if you code at 1.5 or 3, they will still sound the same.
but in movie, they are not.

as you mention, most of the source is analog 35mm, which if represent in digital will be infinite bandwidth and infinite resolution.
we are trying to compress less, so that the result will have less compression artifacts and retain more faithful representation.
and in this case, bd have bigger space and bandwidth help.
if not we be going to the store to buy 500gb hdd for each movie we want, to get the same 2-4k resolution digital theatre are using, which is still compressed, just lesser %

[noi375]

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.

I know that, but you are still missing my point - in a ball game like Superbowl, one team HAS to win. You cannot hope for a tie - people won't let it happen. It's fine to like both teams, but there has to be a winner. We are not talking "pre-game" talk here - it's all about outcome, so only one choice...