The Avatar Blu-ray Release Thread

[CoMaToast]

But your nice way of putting the extras does kind of make someone wonder if its worth the extra $$

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by TTUBatfan2008

As for the bitrate, that's why I said it will be interesting to see if they are full of it or not. The proof will be in the pudding. I am skeptical about it just like you.

Newflash HD-DVD lost the format war. If studios were limited to 30 gigs then dropping extras for the sake of bitrates might be justified. With a BD-50 to work with Avatar could be given a reference quality 2D video and audio presenation and still have enough room for 2 hours of HD extras or 12 hours of SD extras all on one disc. If you simply don't care about 3D and don't like extras fine buy this release but please please don't be stupid enough to believe that lack of extras and 3D has anything to do with quality and isn't an obvious studio cash grab. Cause thats exactly what it is nothing more and nothing less.

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Newflash HD-DVD lost the format war. If studios were limited to 30 gigs then dropping extras for the sake of bitrates might be justified. With a BD-50 to work with Avatar could be given a reference quality 2D video and audio presenation and still have enough room for 2 hours of HD extras or 12 hours of SD extras all on one disc. If you simply don't care about 3D and don't like extras fine buy this release but please please don't be stupid enough to believe that lack of extras and 3D has anything to do with quality and isn't an obvious studio cash grab. Cause thats exactly what it is nothing more and nothing less.

I'm no fool. Read what I wrote. I said I was curious to see if the bitrates live up to the hype. There's this website called CinemaSquid that lists all the specs for Blu-ray's. I'll check that out. I'm expecting it to have a bitrate similar to Fox's other titles (not maxed out), but it would be interesting if they actually live up to their own marketing on this. As for 3D, I don't give a crap about it. The glasses bother my peripheral vision and I prefer to watch films in 2D right now, until Hollywood gets their act together and develops 3D technology that doesn't require glasses. As for the theater, I prefer IMAX footage (such as in TDK) to 3D.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by TTUBatfan2008

And if we have zero interest in watching extras for this particular movie, then what?

As for the bitrate, that's why I said it will be interesting to see if they are full of it or not. The proof will be in the pudding. I am skeptical about it just like you.

Indeed, it would be interesting to see a blu whos bitrate was averaging above 40mbps though.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Newflash HD-DVD lost the format war. If studios were limited to 30 gigs then dropping extras for the sake of bitrates might be justified. With a BD-50 to work with Avatar could be given a reference quality 2D video and audio presenation and still have enough room for 2 hours of HD extras or 12 hours of SD extras all on one disc. If you simply don't care about 3D and don't like extras fine buy this release but please please don't be stupid enough to believe that lack of extras and 3D has anything to do with quality and isn't an obvious studio cash grab. Cause thats exactly what it is nothing more and nothing less.

No reason to put 5 hours of HD video on one disc, this should've been a two-disc release from the get-go. That it's a double-dip cash grab is obvious but I'll take this over an over-stuffed disc like The Hangover any day.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Indeed, it would be interesting to see a blu whos bitrate was averaging above 40mbps though.

The movie is nearly 3 hours. It'll be around the low-mid-30s most likely, with the audio tracks factored in.

Grain is the main enemy of compression at these bitrates, and since this is all CGI and digital video, this won't be a compression torture test like a 16mm film. Still, maximizing A/V parameters is never a bad thing.

If you want to see 40mbps, go rent GI Joe.

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by 42041

The movie is nearly 3 hours. It'll be around the low-mid-30s most likely, with the audio tracks factored in.

Grain is the main enemy of compression at these bitrates, and since this is all CGI and digital video, this won't be a compression torture test like a 16mm film. Still, maximizing A/V parameters is never a bad thing.

Yeah, grain is the biggest challenge. I think the first two Godfather films are probably the toughest challenge on Blu-ray so far. Both films are framed on Blu-ray at 1.78:1 so there are no black bars to take away from the amount of compression needed. Both films have a ton of grain. Part II is 3 hours, 20 minutes. That sucker is pretty much maxed out and the bitrate is in the low 20's I think. It looks fantastic despite all the challenges and limitations.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Indeed, it would be interesting to see a blu whos bitrate was averaging above 40mbps though.

You will never see a Blu-Ray with video bitrate above 40 mbps. 40 mbps is the formats maximum allowed bitrate.

Not that it matters cause a bitrate that high is completely unessesary for even 3D video. The only reason Blu-Ray has a maximum video bitrate beyond 25 mbps was so studios could choose to still use MPEG-2. With AVC and VC-1 bitrates above 25 megabytes per second is never ever ever ever nessesary for 2D 1080p video. Avatar can be given a gorgous perfect reference quality 2D presentation on Blu-Ray and still have about 20 gigabytes of empty space for extras.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

With AVC and VC-1 bitrates above 25 megabytes per second is never ever ever ever nessesary for 2D 1080p video. .

16mm begs to differ.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by 42041

No reason to put 5 hours of HD video on one disc, this should've been a two-disc release from the get-go. That it's a double-dip cash grab is obvious but I'll take this over an over-stuffed disc like The Hangover any day.

Are you aware that at least half of all 2 disc sets released on Blu-Ray could easily have been fit on one. The only reason that many releases are 2 disc sets is because studios believe that having two discs gives the set more percieved value that will increase sales. If consumers weren't so easily dupped by studio marketing BS alot of discs could be saved.

In what way shape or form is The Hangover overstuffed?

[42041]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Are you aware that at least half of all 2 disc sets released on Blu-Ray could easily have been fit on one. The only reason that many releases are 2 disc sets is because studios believe that having two discs gives the set more percieved value that will increase sales. If consumers weren't so easily dupped by studio marketing BS alot of discs could be saved.

In what way shape or form is The Hangover overstuffed?

Because it has awful mushy 15mbps video tracks?
Let me guess, that your reg date is shortly after HDDVD's withdrawal isn't a coincidence. Same pointless "How dare they make something as good as possible, when it could be just adequate!!!" non-arguments.

[ArmyOfDarknessAW]

Originally Posted by 42041

Because it has awful mushy 15mbps video tracks?
Let me guess, that your reg date is shortly after HDDVD's withdrawal isn't a coincidence. Same pointless "How dare they make something as good as possible, when it could be just adequate!!!" non-arguments.

What the heck does when he registered have to do with what you guys are talking about? Did you really hate HDDVD that much that you needed to bring that up?

[42041]

Originally Posted by ArmyOfDarknessAW

What the heck does when he registered have to do with what you guys are talking about? Did you really hate HDDVD that much that you needed to bring that up?

Because I don't understand these "why must the studios curse us with high bitrates" posts
There's no rational reason for it so I'm assuming it's irrational format war bitterness....

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by 42041

Because I don't understand these "why must the studios curse us with high bitrates" posts
There's no rational reason for it so I'm assuming it's irrational format war bitterness....

I don't think anyone actively DISLIKES high bitrates. It's just that it is not necessary to have 35-40 mbps encodes - lower average bitrates can still produce exceptional results, as we have seen time and time again. I have never seen a Blu-ray where the encode made or broke the video quality - 90% of it is always going to be the quality of the master. I certainly have nothing against high bitrates and would never complain about one, but at the same time I'm not going to rage about 20-25 mbps average bitrate titles and act like it's some huuuge injustice that ruined the disc.

And really, it's kind of amazing that people are bringing up WB in negative terms in a thread about a disc that is SHAMELESSLY being double- and triple-dipped. Biggest movie of the year, bar none, and the disc is going to be entirely barebones? The bitrate argument is just a smokescreen, and you're buying into it hook line and sinker. If Fox really thought they needed an entire BD50 for this movie, hey fine - then include a second BD! WB gave a second disc for Dark Knight and Watchmen and other titles (and obviously other studios have done this as well). But Fox can't find the spare change for that, considering the billions Avatar pulled in?

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by 42041

Because it has awful mushy 15mbps video tracks?
Let me guess, that your reg date is shortly after HDDVD's withdrawal isn't a coincidence. Same pointless "How dare they make something as good as possible, when it could be just adequate!!!" non-arguments.

On the contrary I couldn't be happier Blu-Ray won. Avatars eventual 3D Blu-Ray release would be impossible on HD-DVD. Though I will continue to defend my belief that sub-25 megabyte per second bitrates are more then enough for 2D HD video (releases like Watchmen, I am Legend, and King Kong prove that pretty well) however its not enough for 3D. Had HD-DVD won we would be probably given some kind of compromised 1080i quality 3D not the 3D Full HD that Blu-Ray standard we have now. Even if HD-DVD could include rates high enough for 3D Full HD video it would be limited to 2 hours thanks to the low storage capacity and thus Avatar would need to be spread over two discs. Only on Blu-Ray can a 3D Full HD presentation of Avatar be possible on one BD-50. Several other releases like Gone with the Wind, King Kong the directers cut, and Watchmen the Directers cut could never have been done on HD-DVD so when I watch these releases I think God Blu-Ray won.

Why do I oppose using bitrates so high? Cause its a waste thats why. Higher bitrates does not NOT increase video quality. Its a lame excuse for studios to save a buck on compression work when they should be using that space for extras and other content without requiring we change discs. What you are is a number cruncher who sees movies as a list of specs when you should be judging a movies quality with your own eyes.

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

I don't think anyone actively DISLIKES high bitrates. It's just that it is not necessary to have 35-40 mbps encodes - lower average bitrates can still produce exceptional results, as we have seen time and time again. I have never seen a Blu-ray where the encode made or broke the video quality - 90% of it is always going to be the quality of the master. I certainly have nothing against high bitrates and would never complain about one, but at the same time I'm not going to rage about 20-25 mbps average bitrate titles and act like it's some huuuge injustice that ruined the disc.

And really, it's kind of amazing that people are bringing up WB in negative terms in a thread about a disc that is SHAMELESSLY being double- and triple-dipped. Biggest movie of the year, bar none, and the disc is going to be entirely barebones? The bitrate argument is just a smokescreen, and you're buying into it hook line and sinker. If Fox really thought they needed an entire BD50 for this movie, hey fine - then include a second BD! WB gave a second disc for Dark Knight and Watchmen and other titles (and obviously other studios have done this as well). But Fox can't find the spare change for that, considering the billions Avatar pulled in?

Exactly. What I can't stand is people thinking that this disc being barebones is somehow rewarding us when in reality Fox is screwing you. What Fox is doing is really brilliant. They are actually tricking number crunchers to thank them for screwing them over. You high bit rate lovers Fox is laughing at you to the bank.

The belief that bitrates equal quality is almost religous. No matter how many examples I can give of low bit rate discs kicking the ass out of high bit rate discs nobody will give up there faith in the numbers. I almost find it sad. It takes a special kind of person to believe that no extras is a good thing.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

What you are is a number cruncher who sees movies as a list of specs when you should be judging a movies quality with your own eyes.

I watch a disheartening number of movies, with my own two eyes, that reveal conspicuous compression artifacts. Video compression is a complex thing and you could bring up individual examples all day, but here's the bottom line: higher bitrates will never DEGRADE quality. If how good something 'could' be is not a concern, then let's stop complaining about lossy audio tracks. High bitrate DD and DTS tracks already sound excellent, why waste a few gigabytes you could spend on special features?

But if you think there's nothing wrong with The Hangover, it's obvious we've got completely different ideas of what a good disc is. I won't derail this thread further, I really don't have the patience for debating the obvious.

[NL197]

Originally Posted by LeBougre

Cover Art for Europe apparently (France & Spain maybe) :

It is indeed the same for the US (larger image):

[Show spoiler]

This is from the Los Angeles Times.

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

It takes a special kind of person to believe that no extras is a good thing.

It takes an even more special kind of person to post on an Internet message board with poor spelling and grammar while insulting other people's intelligence.

[Grim Reaper]

i hope this comes in a steelbook case.