bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | ?
Sure, it may be better than HD DVD.. but is it better than blu-ray? Considering the trend HD DVD has had in their encoding quality, upconverted DVD is almost as good. |
|
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
 ·WOW Internet and C..
| said by bogey780  : Considering the trend HD DVD has had in their encoding quality, upconverted DVD is almost as good. What are you talking about? Are you trolling again, trying to claim that HD DVDs have poor video encoding?  Please. There have been many blind tests with both versions of the film on both BR and HD DVD, they all look the same, some have minor difference each way, but nothing major. Nor did any upconverted DVD look as good as either of them. |
|
JoeG4
join:2001-12-16
945941 | How dare a small company try to do this! Only AT&T and comcast are allowed to start up media enterprises, and anyone who wishes to challenge will either go bankrupt or bought out! |
|
Siryak
join:2005-11-26
 ·WildBlue
1 edit | reply to bogey780
said by bogey780 :Sure, it may be better than HD DVD.. but is it better than blu-ray? Considering the trend HD DVD has had in their encoding quality, upconverted DVD is almost as good. Never put away those $ony pom poms do yah. It is a shame people will try to mislead people with BS like this to support a company they aren't even a part of. |
|
partysource
join:2000-11-25
Phoenix, AZ | reply to imrf
I agree with you! Blue-Nay is BETA Re-Born!
I am going with HD-DVD |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to imrf
'There have been many blind tests with both versions of the film on both BR and HD DVD, they all look the same, some have minor difference each way, but nothing major.'
So you're telling me that the same encode looks the same across two seperate containers? I'm shocked!
No, the trouble is HD DVD hasn't had a really great encode in a while. Hot Fuzz was probably the last truly great one. Since then it's just been half-hearted attempts. They're just not trying hard to make the best. No wonder when their entire userbase consists of people who really don't care about getting the best. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to Siryak
It's not BS. HD DVD just hasn't been having great AV scores lately. They're just not trying anymore. |
|
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| No, the trouble is HD DVD hasn't had a really great encode in a while. Hot Fuzz was probably the last truly great one. Since then it's just been half-hearted attempts. They're just not trying hard to make the best. No wonder when their entire userbase consists of people who really don't care about getting the best. You really have no idea what you're talking about, and just showing how much of a fanboy of Sony you truly are. As if the BR discs are nothing but fantastic and perfect in every way. You have absolutely no argument so you just start throwing FUD everywhere, and then call the people who opted for HD DVD, idiots. And that you think that only people who buy BR want the best in high def movies. You really do live in a dream world. It really is fun watching you make a fool out of yourself. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | tsk tsk..I didn't call them idiots.
I said they just don't care about quality. And so far it's been proven by their support.
So you really think that a 3.5 release is "high quality"? |
|
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| said by bogey780 :And so far it's been proven by their support. It has? How so? You mean that since the majority of all HDTVs out there are 720p or 1080i, that they are smart enough to not need to spend $400+ on a 1080p player, which would be useless for them. I find you theory pretty dumb. I'm sorry, but you're just grabbing at straws because you are mad that you spent a crapload of money for a BR player and others had opted to go for HD DVD and spent a lot less. So you call them names and claim they don't know quality if it hit them in the face. Man, fantasy island must be awesome, it's just too bad I'll never be able to go there.
So you really think that a 3.5 release is "high quality"? What are you talking about? Arbitrary numbers don't mean a thing. Going by the way you think, I'm sure there are 3.5 or less BR releases as well. |
|
Sly
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Johnson City, TN
clubs:
 ·Packet8
·Callcentric
·Comcast Formerly ..
1 edit | reply to bogey780
said by bogey780 :tsk tsk..I didn't call them idiots. I said they just don't care about quality. And so far it's been proven by their support. So you really think that a 3.5 release is "high quality"? I don't normally get involved in these useless arguments but you are acting like an idiot. Here is a screen shot from the same movie both in HD and Blu-Ray format. Even in a still it's almost impossible to see any differences much less in full motion. I bet if I took off the captions you would only get it right half of the time... 
--
"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men."
- Plato - |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | I opened both images in two separate IE windows, and alt-tabbed between them.
The "grain" is significantly more detailed on the Blu Ray version, which is consistent with the format's higher data rate. The random nature of film grain is compression's worst nightmare.
The reality of it is, I would not really care which one I was watching on my 50" plasma. If I had a 100"+ image from a projector going, I might be more concerned about such fine details.
We need dual format players.
--
Laser eye surgery rocks! I love frickin' laser beams. |
|
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to bogey780
I'd like to have some of whatever you're smoking.
At launch, BluRay was only using MPEG2 encoding, where HD-DVD had most of its movies in VC-1. At that point, the picture quality vote was (almost) always in HD-DVD's favor.
Nowadays, while both have predominantly went to H.264 for the video encoding, some try to play with what the sound codecs are available. To BluRay's advantage, they have the disk space to support uncompressed audio tracks relatively easy. But at the same time, the Dolby TrueHD and other types of codecs available to HD-DVD make it so that they are able to provide more codec types and better non-price extras with their movies (see 300).
And now that BluRay is making BD-Java support required for players, many of the companies outputting bluRay movies have all tried using it in a hackneyed DRM way, which makes many of these movies unplayable on 90% of the BluRay players out there. What few HD-DVD's share the same fate are from the companies that are outputting media to both formats, alluding to that they probably just put out a half-arsed copy-paste job for each format, DRM and all. But even then, less HD-DVD players appear to be having the inability to play these DRM-enabled HD-DVD's than BluRay players with DRM'd BluRay. |
|
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to djrobx
said by djrobx :We need dual format players. LG makes one  , but it's $1000  |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to Sly
You do realize comparing the same encode from a blu-ray and a HD DVD is like comparing the end result of WinRAR and WinZIP. You're going to see the exact same info. Sheesh.
Why does Transformers not have HD audio? Because HD DVD couldn't do it. Every time HD DVD delivers an inferior product it's because HD DVD did the best it could with what it had. Which is lacking so often. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to imrf
'What are you talking about? Arbitrary numbers don't mean a thing. Going by the way you think, I'm sure there are 3.5 or less BR releases as well.'
There were a lot of 3.5 releases... last year when it was all new. But it's unexcusable for a non-catalog title to look so poor in HD. |
|
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| said by bogey780 :There were a lot of 3.5 releases... last year when it was all new. But it's unexcusable for a non-catalog title to look so poor in HD. Again, what are you talking about. Show some proof of all these 3.5 or less titles like you claim. Otherwise, you're just pulling things out of your backside, like you always have when talking about HD DVDs or BR. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to C0deZer0
'At launch, BluRay was only using MPEG2 encoding, where HD-DVD had most of its movies in VC-1. At that point, the picture quality vote was (almost) always in HD-DVD's favor.'
True. the tides have turned as now they can't spend so much time hand-tweaking the encode to fit all that data so well in a 30GB VC-1 encode. It's why King Kong rocked and after that... well they were still really good. And now it's just mediocre.
'But at the same time, the Dolby TrueHD and other types of codecs available to HD-DVD make it so that they are able to provide more codec types and better non-price extras with their movies (see 300).'
If they can fit it on the disc. Transformers couldn't get anything above DD+ because of bandwidth. In fact Blu-ray has more lossless tracks than HD DVD because PCM is available, it has the bandwidth for it, and all players support it.
'And now that BluRay is making BD-Java support required for players'
BD-J has always been required. You're referring to the 1.1 profile which requires memory minimums and PiP support. This will NOT AFFECT MOVIE PLAYBACK. It will only affect 1.1 features. What you're hinting at is BD+ which has always been in the spec and required from the start. HD DVD does not support BD+ and no HD DVDs have it. They both however have AACS. Which has not presented any problem with playback on either format. |
|
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to bogey780
said by bogey780 :Why does Transformers not have HD audio? Because HD DVD couldn't do it. They could have done it if they felt the real need for it. There are so few receivers out there that could even utilize it, they must have felt that the extras would be better. I'm sure once more receivers with HDMI inputs they will release a special edition with it on there, like all studios love to do.
You do realize that there are plenty of BR discs that don't have HD audio. But you'll probably skirt the issue like you always do. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to imrf
»www.hddvdstats.com/index.php
»www.blu-raystats.com/
Blu-ray wins on audio.
For a slightly HD DVD biased review site try this:
»hddvd.highdefdigest.com/reviews.html
And even then you still don't see much that's impressive. |
|
