[PS3] Blu-Ray Mini Review

[clayj]

OK, so I was at Best Buy last night and they had out the new $1,000 Samsung Blu-Ray player, connected to a Samsung HDTV. (Presumably via HDMI, but I do not know this for sure... and how is it that Samsung has their player out NOW, but Sony's won't be out until OCTOBER?)

Anyway... I wasn't impressed. They had a demo disc running and while a couple of the demos (Chicken Little, Kung Fu Hustle, some Swiss watch video shot by NHK) were pretty impressive, some of the others (The Manchurian Candidate, Pirates of the Caribbean) didn't look any better than standard DVD. In fact, they looked WORSE, because while I was expecting HD video on a par with what I see daily on HBO-HD, INHD, or HDNet Movies, this was fairly heavily-artifacted video. Watching a normal DVD of Ultraviolet on my regular old Sony DVD player last night just emphasized the lack of quality on much of the Blu-Ray playback. Ultraviolet on DVD looked BETTER than much of the Blu-Ray playback I watched.

In other words, the quality of Blu-Ray playback (or HD-DVD playback, for that matter) is largely contingent on the DVD mastering process doing what it's supposed to.

I think any plans I might have had to buy a PS3 purely for Blu-Ray playback are now evaporated. Adam Sessler (from X-Play on G4) made the point that if a PS3 costs $600, and Sony's Blu-Ray player costs $1,000 and DOESN'T play games, then is the PS3's Blu-Ray player inferior in quality to the one in the $1,000 standalone player?

[AP_piano295]

Do you think there is any possibility that the discs being used werent blue ray?

[MacRumorUser]

Well the ps2 laser and dvd playback was inferior to a standalone machine, so hardly any surprise there.

And about the quality of blu-ray this is what I've been saying all along. Films have so much stuff like grain filters and bluring, and the fact that most films are close ups of people talking that there will be very little benefit to watching them in HD over SD

Yes documentarys & sport may really benefit, but movies, not so much at all, hence any necessity to re-buy your dvd collection and spend $1000-1500 to buy a player seems pointelss.

DVD upscaling for LCD & Plasma will probably suffice 99% of buyers and give them a 'slight' percieved image boost over normal DVD.

[clayj]

Do you think there is any possibility that the discs being used werent blue ray?No, it was ONE disc that obviously came with the player.

BTW, interesting side note: Where the Blu-Ray player was being displayed is where the HD-DVD player was previously displayed. A friend of mine asked the BB employee why this was, and he reportedly said "well, Sony paid for the use of that space, so we had to move the HD-DVD player somewhere else". And where was that? Off to the side... and NOT EVEN HOOKED UP TO A TV. That's right. The folks at the Pineville Best Buy expect you to buy an HD-DVD player without even being able to see how it plays. (Great job, folks. I've heard of a soft sell, but this is ridiculous.)

[SilentPanda]

I was contemplating buying an HD-DVD player on Monday (why? just because... I like to spend money) but fortunately I read this article beforehand and well... it all just made sense... (ganked from Slashdot)

http://www.audioholics.com/news/editorials/10reasonsHDDVDsfailed.php

That and my 200+ DVD's look just fine I think... I've looked at Blu-Ray and HD-DVD and neither look better to me...

BTW clayj... why in the crap were you torturing yourself watching Ultra-Violet? :D

[Sutekidane]

Well, the technology is still pretty new, so of course it's bound to get better. It's really hard to judge so early in Blu-Ray and HD-DVD's life.

[XNine]

This is interesting. But there's some things missing here. And how are we to know that the whole setup wasn't screwed up. I mean, it's best buy, not a high end audio/video outlet that knows what they're doing.

Although, it could be that bluray and hd-dvd won't be as impressive as people think. We'll just have to keep our eyes open and make sure that both sides of this war aren't blowing smoke up our asses. It's like the HD Cold War...

[jdechko]

I realized Steve Jobs could sell a fart provided he sued a public Mac forum for talking about it before its release

Oh, that's just too funny. :)

I think, though, that the author pretty much sums it up that high-def DVD's aren't necessarily posed to completely overthrow the DVD market just yet. I have to admit, that on my 30" HDTV, my movies, even at 480p, look excellent. And on standard (non-HD) satellite (over composite, not even S-Video) look really good. So even though I love technology, I'm definitely going to hold off for at least a few years before deciding whether or not to go High-Def for my DVD's (HD Sat will probably come by the end of the year for me.)

[srobert]

This format war is annoying. In the end, it's the consumer who ends up getting caught in the crossfire.

I feel like wathever format I'm going to choose, the other will win. I'm that lucky. :D

I've read an article yesterday about how both next gen HD formats have already failed. MAybe a little over the top but there are some good arguments here and there. Linky (http://www.audioholics.com/news/editorials/10reasonsHDDVDsfailed.php)

I'll probably end up buying a PS3 after the first price drop, but the purchase won't have anything to do with blu-ray. It will be for the games.

[SilentPanda]

I feel like watherver format I'm going to choose, the other will win. I'm that lucky. :D

Well... if you do choose the wrong format at least nobody will want to borrow your discs. :)

[Laslo Panaflex]

Same thing at my local best buy clay J, where the HD-DVD player used to be set up blu-ray is now there. But unlike your best buy, the HD DVD player was set up in the "you try it theater" that has everything under the sun hooked up to a very nice plasma, and that crappy logitech remote. It was nice being able to mess with the HD-DVD player, I like how you can acess the menus while the movie is still running. The Phantom of the Opera was playing, and I must say is looked awsome, FAR FAR better than the blu-ray demo disc.

I 100% agree with Clay J, the blu-ray demo looked horrible, only Chicken Little looked remotely good. It had some sort of weird artifacting, almost like it was trying to eliminate or compensate for film grain (perhaps that's why chicken little looked the best). Who knows though, perhaps the demo disc is just encoded crappy, though the HD-DVD demo disc looked supurb at the demo station before it was moved out in favor of the blu-ray player.

[Timepass]

I see blue ray winning the war because it upper limit far suprase HD-DVD.

Right now the thing holding back blue ray the the manufactoring of the lens for it is hard to do and has a very high failure rate. There is no way to identify which lens are going to bad until after they been completed.

If they figure out a way to decrease the failure rate to drive down the cost blue ray is going to win.

[2nyRiggz]

This is interesting. But there's some things missing here. And how are we to know that the whole setup wasn't screwed up. I mean, it's best buy, not a high end audio/video outlet that knows what they're doing.
Although, it could be that bluray and hd-dvd won't be as impressive as people think. We'll just have to keep our eyes open and make sure that both sides of this war aren't blowing smoke up our asses. It's like the HD Cold War...

Indeed. We might think this thing will look 100 times better than the standard DVD when in reality it doesn't but it is still early in the life cycle.

Bless

[srobert]

I see blue ray winning the war because it upper limit far suprase HD-DVD.

I don't think this is going to matter much to Joe Everybody. As long as his movie fits on a single disk, the rest won't matter much to him. He'll go for the less expensive solution.

Superior formats have failed in favor of their inferior less expensive competitors in the past.

Personally, looking only at specs on paper, I'd go for Blu-Ray, but I'm going to wait a while to see how it will fare in the real world.

Hmm… can they both coexist? Sounds like a consumer nightmare. Any thoughts?

[XNine]

Hmm… can they both coexist? Sounds like a consumer nightmare. Any thoughts?

Oh, Christ, is it ever a consumer nightmare. It's terrible that the average, not-so-inclined consumer will have to choose. Which one is best? Which one has better quality in video and sound? Very few of your average consumer will be concerned with space, which Bluray wins hands down.

I really like the benefits of Bluray personally. I think it's a great format. But if HD HDVD has much better quality audio/video encoding, then HD DVD will be the best to go with.

It really comes down to the lesser evil. Which one that is, we'll have to wait at least a year before I think it's quantifiable.

[srobert]

Another thing I have to get all the details about both format, is how much cripple wear they both sport.

I wouldn't want to pop one of my disk into my computer and be greeted to a message the likes of:

"Sorry (Well, not really) but you are not authorized to play this
media on this hardware configuration. Please contact your local
MPAA stormtrooper for more details and swift punishment".

Well. Maybe I'm just paranoid but I don't like the noise/rumors I'm hearing about both formats. :)

Blu-ray has an experimental digital rights management (DRM) feature called BD+ which allows for dynamically-changing keys for the cryptographic protections involved. Should the keys currently in use be 'cracked', manufacturers can update them and build them into all subsequent disks, preventing a single key discovery from permanently breaking the entire scheme. Blu-ray also mandates the Mandatory Managed Copy system, which allows users to copy content a limited number of times, but requiring registration with the content provider to acquire the keys needed; this feature was originally requested by HP [6] . The lack of a dynamic encryption model is what has made DeCSS a disaster from the industry's perspective: once CSS was cracked, all DVDs from then on were open to unauthorized decryption (commonly known as "ripping"). However this new technology, together with Self-Protecting Digital Content (SPDC), can allow players judged 'bad' to be effectively disabled [7], preventing their use by their purchaser or subsequent owners.[8] See Advanced Access Content System (AACS).
The Blu-ray Disc Association also agreed to add digital watermarking technology to the discs. Under the name "ROM-Mark", this technology will be built into all ROM-producing devices, and prevent content from being reproduced in the event that a watermark is detected. Through licensing, the BDA believes that it can eliminate the possibility of mass producing BD-ROMs without authorization.

In addition, Blu-ray players must follow AACS guidelines pertaining to outputs over non-encrypted interfaces. This is set by a flag called the Image Constraint Token (ICT), which restricts the output-resolution without HDCP to 960×540. The decision to set the flag to restrict output ("down-convert") is left up to the content provider. According to CED Magazine, Sony/MGM and Disney currently have no plans to down-convert, and Fox is opposed to it as well. Warner Pictures is a proponent of the ICT, and it is expected that Paramount will also implement it [9]. Other studios releasing Blu-ray content have not yet commented on whether or not they will use down-conversion. AACS guidelines require that any title that implements the ICT must clearly state so on the packaging.

Commercialized HD DVDs integrate content protection technology specified by AACS LA (Advanced Access Content System License Administrator). "Audio Watermark Protection" is also being considered by AACS for use on HD DVD. If Watermark is adopted by AACS, all HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc players will have a sensor that listens for inaudible audio watermarks in the soundtrack of movies. Studios may insert this invisible mark in the soundtracks of theatrical motion pictures. If a HD DVD or Blu-ray player detects the invisible mark, it means the disc is playing back a copy made from a theatrical print (probably from illegal camcording), and will cause the player to refuse to play the disc. The mark is made by varying the waveform of speech and music in a regular pattern to convey a digital code. These variations are too subtle to be heard by the human ear. Another variation of this system can be used to prevent the playback of discs created by using a camcorder and microphone on a home entertainment center playing a legitimate disc purchased by a consumer. This variation for home entertainment utilizes a watermark that differs from the cinema mark in that it is permitted in normal, signed ROM discs, but generally not permitted on recordable discs.
In addition, HD DVD and Blu-ray players must follow AACS guidelines pertaining to outputs over analog connections. This is set by a flag called the Image Constraint Token (ICT), which restricts the resolution for analog outputs without HDCP to 960×540. The decision to set the flag to restrict output ("down-convert") is left to the content provider. Warner Pictures is a proponent of ICT, and it is expected that Paramount and Universal will implement down-conversion as well [5]. As of March 2006, 5 of the 6 studios releasing HD DVD content have announced they will not use ICT/down-conversion for the time being [6]. AACS guidelines require that any title that implements the ICT must clearly state so on the packaging.

[supremedesigner]

Now we are going to wait for DVD JON to crack both formats :) :rolleyes: :p

EDIT: The force is strong in him.

[zerger]

First and foremost, Blu-Ray is currently saddled with space limitations on the media. They are having a difficult time mass producing dual-layered media and are not expected to deliver dual-layered films until after the holiday season. Because of this, the Blu-Ray titles are being presented in near ancient MPEG-2 conversion. From DVD Town (http://www.dvdtown.com/article/toshibavs.samsung-hd-dvdvs.blu/3595/)

Though purely anecdotal, I saw an upconverted DVD on a Hitachi 52" and was duly impressed. Much of the graininess of standard DVD's (esp as they are rendered on HD TVs) was completely gone.

[MacRumorUser]

Though purely anecdotal, I saw an upconverted DVD on a Hitachi 52" and was duly impressed. Much of the graininess of standard DVD's (esp as they are rendered on HD TVs) was completely gone.

This is what I'm saying. I'm sure for a lot of people upscaled DVD will do until somthing better/cheaper & more convieniant comes along.

Why did UMD fail? Why did MiniDisc & Philips DCC fail to remove cassette tape and die. It was infact a format neither expected that won (MP3)

Why did MP3; a compressed and hence reduced quality product do so so well and become defacto portable standard.

Covieniance and perceived cheapness.

Somthing both HD-DVD & especially BluRay dont seem to offer.

I strongly suspect both formats to die.

[Laslo Panaflex]

My thoughts on all of this are pretty much summed up in this post:

Link (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2532437#post2532437)

[LethalWolfe]

This is what I'm saying. I'm sure for a lot of people upscaled DVD will do until somthing better/cheaper & more convieniant comes along.

Why did UMD fail? Why did MiniDisc & Philips DCC fail to remove cassette tape and die. It was infact a format neither expected that won (MP3)

Why did MP3; a compressed and hence reduced quality product do so so well and become defacto portable standard.

Covieniance and perceived cheapness.

Somthing both HD-DVD & especially BluRay dont seem to offer.

I strongly suspect both formats to die.

Exactly. Convenience is a huge factor. Then there's price. And way farther down the line is image/sound quality.


Lethal

[supremedesigner]

This is what I'm saying. I'm sure for a lot of people upscaled DVD will do until somthing better/cheaper & more convieniant comes along.

Why did UMD fail? Why did MiniDisc & Philips DCC fail to remove cassette tape and die. It was infact a format neither expected that won (MP3)

Why did MP3; a compressed and hence reduced quality product do so so well and become defacto portable standard.

Covieniance and perceived cheapness.

Somthing both HD-DVD & especially BluRay dont seem to offer.

I strongly suspect both formats to die.

Well, for now. I like apple quicktime 7 and it looks perfect to view movies on it. Apple should make their own format :)

[~Shard~]

My thoughts on all of this are pretty much summed up in this post:

Link (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2532437#post2532437)

Good post, I agree. The fact that you need an HDTV to fully take advanatge of the quality (in theory) is one thing, and another is the fact that, well, do movies realy look that much better in HD than on normal DVD? Is the quality really that much better? And further to this, if the original movie wasn't shot in HD, what is the benefit of putting that film on Bu Ray or HD-DVD? Aren't you basically just upconverting it, and not gaining any additional quality?

[LethalWolfe]

Is the quality really that much better? And further to this, if the original movie wasn't shot in HD, what is the benfit of putting that film on Bu Ray or HD-DVD? Aren't you basically just upconverting it, and not gaining any additional quality?

Odds are the movie was shot on film so they'd just go back to the film master and make a HD copy from that. Although, I think, some people started going film->HD->SD a few years ago so they have an HD master already sitting in a vault somewhere.


Lethal

[~Shard~]

Odds are the movie was shot on film so they'd just go back to the film master and make a HD copy from that. Although, I think, some people started going film->HD->SD a few years ago so they have an HD master already sitting in a vault somewhere.

Ah okay, good to know, thanks.... :cool:

[TheMonarch]

I saw the Blue ray demo a BB also, and while I thought the chicken little demo looked superb, the rest of the demos looked extremely lacking. It was no better the the HD programming I receive via satellite.

Especially when they did the DVD/BDROM comparison, they used a picture of a mountain, I could not really tell a difference. I mean, the dvd side was pixelated, but the blue ray side was also blurry. I don't even understand why they put that in there.

Oh, and it was hooked up via HDMI.

[Haoshiro]

BTW clayj... why in the crap were you torturing yourself watching Ultra-Violet? :D

This was curious to me too! I loved Equilibrium so I went to see Ultraviolet on release day in the theater... I was so utterly unimpressed and disappointed. One of the worst movies I have seen in a long time!

On a theoretical positive, it did seem like a lot had been cut from the film... perhaps a Director's Cut version would make the movie actually good... or at least decent.

[sk1985]

From what I've heard a good deal of the transfers for both blu ray and HD-DVD have been kind of lacking. Both use similar compression tools so it mostly comes down to the transfer. You need to remember that these are first gen products. Does anyone remember how poor first gen DVD's looked? Some of the transfers were eye sores. Some were on par or lower then LD. I'd personally give it a year. I'm sure you'll be seeing impressive transfers as the systems get older. It's only now that studios have started transferring their movies onto these new formats. Some movies most likely have been rushed. I'm sure some older tile's source material has decayed a good deal and there transfers most likely were rush and not given the love and care they should have been given. I heard terminator 2 is an eye sore because of that reason. I'm not going to judge either formats till they both mature and become perfected.

[clayj]

BTW clayj... why in the crap were you torturing yourself watching Ultra-Violet? :DMilla Jovovich's bare midriff has a strangely hypnotic effect on me. ;)

[Haoshiro]

From what I've heard a good deal of the transfers for both blu ray and HD-DVD have been kind of lacking. Both use similar compression tools so it mostly comes down to the transfer. You need to remember that these are first gen products. Does anyone remember how poor first gen DVD's looked? Some of the transfers were eye sores. Some were on par or lower then LD. I'd personally give it a year. I'm sure you'll be seeing impressive transfers as the systems get older. It's only now that studios have started transferring their movies onto these new formats. Some movies most likely have been rushed. I'm sure some older tile's source material has decayed a good deal and there transfers most likely were rush and not given the love and care they should have been given. I heard terminator 2 is an eye sore because of that reason. I'm not going to judge either formats till they both mature and become perfected.

Yet many people have seen HD video that has quality far superior to DVD already.

That's the thing, this is a new disc format and I really don't see room to excuse the poor quality because it is "first gen."

We've had the ability to get high quality video for a quite some time, I've seen beautiful trailers at 1080p on my Mac thanks to Apple Trailers, and I've also seen Batman Begins in amazing quality at an IMAX.

If we can do high quality encoding, high quality audio, and have the disc capacity to store it - plus the power to play it back, what excuse is there really?

H.264 + ALC anyone? I just really don't see an excuse for this, I'm sure a small open source team could get together and create something excellent - and it be great even on first release. *sigh*

[MacRumorUser]

That's the thing, this is a new disc format and I really don't see room to excuse the poor quality because it is "first gen."

Exactly....


First Impressions count. If they cant convince with the first wave of titles then they may as well all go home now. Once the consumer is unconvinced, your up against a brick wall when it comes to changing their opinions...

[AlmightyG5]

This guy liked what he saw:http://boardsus.playstation.com/playstation/board/message?board.id=ps3&message.id=445638

Maybe the TV you were watching was only 480/720p. and not 1080p like that guys TV was.... Big difference there.

Also, the Disks seem very scratch resistent which is great for us lazy people!

[Dagless]

For what it's worth there is an article in todays Daily Mail talking about HDTV and how a group of celebrities (i hate that word) don't like this HDTV business. Teri Hatcher, Joanna Lumley and co all against because it shows too much detail in their faces. or something. silly really! I knew a lot of soap actors/actress folk were against it.

am I the only one who isn't bothered about HDTV over the air? I'll buy a next-gen video player when it's safe too and I'll look forward to it when theres something to get excited about. But for the news, the few TV shows I watch I am perfectly content with 480p. even on my folks 40" Viera. Maybe I can say this because I don't watch sports, which apparently get the biggest gain in improvement with HDTV.

Also not buying myself until 1080p is the utter standard. 720p just seems pointless with this super resolution format here too.

[srobert]

Maybe the TV you were watching was only 480/720p. and not 1080p like that guys TV was.... Big difference there.

Are there non-1080i/p TV with HDMI input?

One of the many little things I like about HDTV is that text looks much sharper.

[MacRumorUser]

Are there non-1080i/p TV with HDMI input?

One of the many little things I like about HDTV is that text looks much sharper.

Yeah but if I want sharp text I'll read a book

I'm not going to drop €1,000 for better text on my TV...

[srobert]

Yeah but if I want sharp text I'll read a book

I'm not going to drop €1,000 for better text on my TV...

Hence I tagged this as "one the the many little things". I didn't buy my TV for sharper text. :p

I like the overal HD experience. To name a few other: Discovery channel in HD is breathtaking (as are many other HD channel). Menus in video games take less space or display more info in the same space (text lisible at smaller type size), video games in split screen are much clearer in HD, I love widescreen (TV and Gaming), etc…

[MacRumorUser]

Hence I tagged this as "one the the many little things". I didn't buy my TV for sharper text. :p

I like the overal HD experience. To name a few other: Discovery channel in HD is breathtaking (as are many other HD channel). Menus in video games take less space (text lisible at smaller type size), video games in split screen are much clearer in HD, I love widescreen (TV and Gaming), etc…

I agree documentaries look spectacular in HD, as do games benefit... But general movies I'm less impressed by....

[sixstorm]

With doing some TV shopping recently, my Best Buy had both set up the other day while looking at some sets. Here were the setups:

HD-DVD
Toshiba Player
Westinghouse 42" 1080p LCD

Blu-Ray
Samsung Player
Samsung 40" 1080p LCD

Both were set up side-by-side and were playing the demo disc provided. At a first glance, Blu-Ray looked horrible - absolutly horrible. I thought I was watching a normal DVD upscaled to 1080i or something. "This is new technology? Yeah right!" Other demos and trailers looked ok, nothing impressive.

On the other hand, HD-DVD looked amazing, simply amazing. The BB employee said that the player was not running the disc in 1080p but the TV was upscaling it from i to p. He also claimed that any other players coming out will have the 1080p output ability.

Will I ever buy one of these players? No. I'm actually waiting until the combo drives come out so I can put them in my new PC build. Who will win the format wars? Sony is at a disadvantage just because of the prices. Sony is being ridiculous with their prices anyways (cough PS3 cough). HD-DVD however has lower prices and a better picture if you ask me.

But hey, this is just my opnion.

[princealfie]

Overpriced. Went to BB to compare both formats and I still think that DVD gives the most bang for the buck.

[clayj]

Overpriced. Went to BB to compare both formats and I still think that DVD gives the most bang for the buck.I agree completely... DVD does give the most bang for the buck, especially if you play it on a good television set, use component instead of S-video, and (possibly) use an upconverting DVD player.

The biggest problem with the whole Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD mess is that there are TWO formats. Were it not for VHS, Betamax would have been excellent. DVD had no competitors (LaserDisc doesn't really count), so it was a de facto standard that everyone could live with. But when an early adopter like me says "no thanks" because we're scared to back the wrong horse, you know the movie companies and player manufacturers have screwed up big time.

[Dagless]

ClayJ, that pretty much sums up everything I'm thinking too. I'm not going to go near either format with a bargepole until there is 1 standard. and heaven knows I'm not paying Sony-Style prices for something they grossly overcharge for.

Hell, since getting my 2005FPW monitor I've enjoyed better looking DVD's than ever! even though 480p TV still looks just a tad better. I'm british, it's the best we're used to.

[MacRumorUser]

But when an early adopter like me says "no thanks" because we're scared to back the wrong horse, you know the movie companies and player manufacturers have screwed up big time.

Same position as myself. Sucker for technology, even bought Philips DCC :o Laserdisc and god knows what else, but I'm not touching either of these formats with a barge pole.

[takao]

anybody in europe already seen some demo stations of either one yet ? so far no luck around here.. perhaps i haven't been looking good enough

the problem with both new formats is that the advantages for the user are slim besides higher resolution/better audio

the switch film to VHS had obvious advantages in making watching movies more comfortable for the home user
VHS to DVD: the same since no rewinding, multiple languages (my main reason to buy dvds.. perhaps not that important to native english speakers ;) in the past it was next to impossible to get the original soundversions on VHS), subtitles, and extras

compared to those big advantages what do hd-dvd and blu-ray bring as advantages ? the same as dvd just higher resolution better audio... and that depends on the sources anyway

i will continue to buy dvds the next years...

[~Shard~]

the problem with both new formats is that the advantages for the user are slim besides higher resolution/better audio

the switch film to VHS had obvious advantages in making watching movies more comfortable for the home user
VHS to DVD: the same since no rewinding, multiple languages (my main reason to buy dvds.. perhaps not that important to native english speakers ;) in the past it was next to impossible to get the original soundversions on VHS), subtitles, and extras

compared to those big advantages what do hd-dvd and blu-ray bring as advantages ? the same as dvd just higher resolution better audio... and that depends on the sources anyway

This is an excellent point.

HD-DVD and Blu Ray are not quantum leaps in technology. Consumers came over in droves when CDs were released back in 1982. The new format offered not only a new digital media, but also a way to instantly access tracks across an entire album. Convenience, not technology, drove this format to almost instant consumer adoption. Fast forward to 1997 when the first DVD player was released. Again, convenience, not technology, drove people to the market en masse. Unlike VHS tapes, the new DVD format was smaller, easily navigated and would not wear down over time like existing tape-based formats. Heck, the concept of a shiny plastic disc was new – and quite frankly, it was the coolest thing to hit the technological shelf since solid state technology. In comparison, the high definition DVD formats, (besides the color of the business side of the disc), look exactly the same.

What do the new high definition DVD formats offer consumers over DVD? Technology and more storage. Is this enough? Not on your life. Most consumers are perfectly content with their current DVD players (and indeed some have just jumped on board to DVD in the last several years). While the potential for more extras and alternate endings exists due to increased storage on the new media, in my opinion there is no compelling reason for consumers to migrate over to the new high definition DVD formats in large numbers. :cool:

[sk1985]

Yet many people have seen HD video that has quality far superior to DVD already.

That's the thing, this is a new disc format and I really don't see room to excuse the poor quality because it is "first gen."

We've had the ability to get high quality video for a quite some time, I've seen beautiful trailers at 1080p on my Mac thanks to Apple Trailers, and I've also seen Batman Begins in amazing quality at an IMAX.

If we can do high quality encoding, high quality audio, and have the disc capacity to store it - plus the power to play it back, what excuse is there really?
Also to answer you're question why HD-DVD has better picture quality now is from the fact that the HD-DVD group (M$ and various manufactures) might have higher expectations about their Disk's quality forcing manufacturers to either put out disks with good transfers or to not put them out at all. To be honest there is no reason why picture quality between the two formats should be different. Both use the same compression tools, similar codecs, and the same video formats. Essentially both disk formats are 100% the same, the only differences they have is their physical disks and the amount of data each one holds. So in the only difference is the media in which you get you're movie on (i.e Blu ray or HD-DVD). Virtually all aspects about each format is the same other then the disks. What you will see happening though is blu ray will eventually put out better and better looking disks with much more impressive audio tracks then HD-DVD. Simply from the fact of how much data each disk can hold. It will be similar to how Super Bit disks work and how Criterion collection disks look and sound better then most standard DVDs out (they have higher bit rats, high FPS, and less compressed audio. Thats why they command a premium). Heres how super bit works http://www.hifi-writer.com/he/superbit/superbit.htm and thats how future Blu ray transfers will be handled in the near future (at least in theory their transfers will be larger in size data wise because they'll be less compressed then their rival formate. If that's the case it basically will come down to if a studio is lazy or not. My best guess is that most studios are cheap and lazy and they'll use the same transfers between both formats (You'll start to see this when more and more simultaneous releases happen). So ideally blu ray disk should have better sound quality and picture quality, but I don't think this will happen for some time.

I never once said it was a good excuse to put out poor quality disks. The fact of the matter is that Studio's will rush out disks just to cash in on the first flow of HD-DVD or Blu ray users. It's such a small group right now. I honestly don't see why they'd put out impressive transfers which cost a great deal to do. I'm sure studios are just trying to brake even (in some cases cash in with poor transfers) or meet up with contractual obligations with Sony and the HD-DVD group. Basically they said they'd put out X product by X date. Sucks I know but that's how the world is.

Comparing HD-consumer content to movie theater content is pretty crazy. Most movie theater HD content has been used since 1999 with the first and second new Star Wars movies. Also theaters use a much more raw format that isn't as compressed as what you get on a disk leading to better transfers closer to their source material. In all honesty I think theater HD content is a 100% the same as it's all digital source material. I believe that was one of the advantages George Lucas was blabbering about, that and how cheap distribution will be once they setup networks for theaters to download movies straight from the studio (that won't happen for a few years). I read most of this in Entertainment weekly a few years back when HD-TV's and movies weren't even being made in Hollywood (except for star wars and a handful of others).

[Antares]

Simply put: The picture quality increase from DVD to HD-DVD/Blueray is not as great as it was from VHS to DVD.

[MacRumorUser]

Simply put: The picture quality increase from DVD to HD-DVD/Blueray is not as great as it was from VHS to DVD.

Exactly. The quality leap doesnt justify the price, or incentive to re-invest your nice big dvd collection.

Those looking for slghtly improved picture with their flat screens can buy a HDMI DVD player with upscaling. $150 and gives them a percieved increase in quality without the hassles of format war, and costly equipment....

By the time any of the two formats 'may' catch on, there will be a replacement in the wings offering cheaper, better and universal support....

HD-DVD & BluRay will burn in hell.

[sam10685]

Do you think there is any possibility that the discs being used werent blue ray?

i doubt it... why would they have a new thousand dollar blu-ray player on display with a current gen DVD in there?

[sk1985]

Exactly. The quality leap doesnt justify the price, or incentive to re-invest your nice big dvd collection.

Those looking for slghtly improved picture with their flat screens can buy a HDMI DVD player with upscaling. $150 and gives them a percieved increase in quality without the hassles of format war, and costly equipment....

By the time any of the two formats 'may' catch on, there will be a replacement in the wings offering cheaper, better and universal support....

HD-DVD & BluRay will burn in hell.
Both formats are it will be worth it. It's just not worth it now. You'll see a huge leap in quality in the next couple of years. It's just nuts to think that way. HD-DVD and Blu ray will surpass broadcasted HD content in quality in the next couple of months to a year. Thats the truth. Its like saying STD def TV is on par with HD-TV. DVD's will look so dated in the next couple of years. I say just wait and then judge both formats. DVD's look so bad on HD-TVs it isn't funny. Thats kind of a bonus to upgrade. I will say DVDs do look leagues better with those new players that can pump out HD signals. I.E. you put your DVD in the machine and it converts that standard signal to a 1080i signal or lower.

[Haoshiro]

sk1985

It sounds like you are suggesting Blu-ray is to HD-DVD what Superbit is to DVD. Only that doesn't work, since Superbit is DVD, just with better encoding (hence no extras included).

Now if we had players that had enough power we could be getting 1080p already. Take the latest Spider-Man 3 trailer (http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/spider-man_3/) and do the math... we could fit about an hour of video at that quality on a 4.7GB DVD. That means most movies would work on 2-disc. I guess that would be "Ultrabit" or something.

So we have:
HD-DVD: 15GB, 30GB, and 45GB (single, double, triple layer)
Blu-Ray: 25GB, 50GB (single, double layer)

So it really just comes down to space. Movies can span multiple discs, so that isn't a great reason why one is better then the other (even LotR came on multiple discs for the main feature).

And as has been said by many people, there isn't much of a convience factor. Sure, a single disc is better then multiple... but besides that people aren't really unhappy with DVD quality at this point. I think those 1080p trailers look good (some better then others) but playing my movies at 720p and sitting 10-15 feet away from the screen leaves me with no complaints.

Even if we had 200GB discs... studios will still turn out bad quality transfers, there is no escaping that for some time. And if getting out really nice transfers for the launch of a new format (HD-DVD/Blu-Ray) to impress potential customers is not incentive enough, I don't know what will. There isn't much beyond picture/audio quality to use to wow consumers and they are failing at that already. That is the only thing they really CAN exploit to sell these things and they aren't.

Joe Public is lucky to be running on an HD-TV and if they are they probably do 720p native (maybe 1080i downscaled), plus might not even be using Component or DVI/HDMI, and are likely running the sound out of the HD-TV speakers. The point there is that they already have expensive upgrade options to increase picture and audio quality... they always did and didn't care. These demonstrations may blow them away, but they take it home and play it on a 720p tv with built in speakers and there will NOT be much "wow" left.

So who will this really benefit? Niche enthusiast market... Has that ever been enough to win a format war?

[MacRumorUser]

Did anyone pay any attention to the fact that Sony & Panasonic are working on a new HD format for camera's etc. that uses the H.264 codec

There is a new format also in the wings called HVD... Too many fomats in the next couple of years...

[coffey7]

I JUST CAME FROM BESTBUY AND THE BLU-RAY PLAYER ON 1080P TV LOOKED HORRIBLE.THE HD-DVD PLAYER ON THE SAME TV LOOKED WAY BETTER.They better get that stuff fixed or its going out like the 8-track.

[~Shard~]

I JUST CAME FROM BESTBUY AND THE BLU-RAY PLAYER ON 1080P TV LOOKED HORRIBLE.THE HD-DVD PLAYER ON THE SAME TV LOOKED WAY BETTER.They better get that stuff fixed or its going out like the 8-track.

Looks like your Caps Lock key might be stuck, might want to look into getting that fixed. :p :cool:

[Tommyg117]

I wasn't that impressed when I saw it at bestbuy either. Although the TV at bestbuy was only running at 720p.

[Counterfit]

But if HD HDVD has much better quality audio/video encoding, then HD DVD will be the best to go with.
From Wikipedia Both of the new formats are likely to be backward compatible with DVDs and both employ the same video compression techniques: MPEG-2, Video Codec 1 (VC1) and H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.
They also support the same audio specs. Hell, I think whoever wrote the articles just took the paragraph from one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD-DVD#Overview), and just changed the name to the other (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#Codecs).
I know that in one of my posts, I mentioned the maximum bitrates for each format. One was 36mbit/s, and the other was 36.5mbit/s. It's really so close, that the picture and audio won't suffer from one to the other, unless the HD-DVD producer is strapped for space.

[sk1985]

sk1985

It sounds like you are suggesting Blu-ray is to HD-DVD what Superbit is to DVD. Only that doesn't work, since Superbit is DVD, just with better encoding (hence no extras included).
No I was just using that to make the point that with a larger storage capacity manufacturers have the luxury of making better transfers with less compressed video on a single disk (most super bit DVD's and Criterion DVDs span multiple disks usually). It's kind of nice to have an all in one package. Blu ray could end multi-disk deluxe sets and put everything on one single or double layer disk (menus take up space, audio tracks take up space, extras take up space, ect..). With HD-DVD you all ways have storage concerns and I could see some manufactures going a cheaper route and putting out lower quality transfers every now and then on HD-DVD to jam everything on one disk. You have to remember how expensive each disk is and how expensive each double layer disk is. Truly only time can tell what will happen.

[ifjake]

The only movie I've seen on DVD that I wish was better looking is Finding Nemo. The darker ocean shades kinda drop out. But otherwise, I won't be needing high def media until I can get a 1080p HD screen for 500-800 bucks.

[Haoshiro]

...With HD-DVD you all ways have storage concerns...

Maybe on a single-layer disc, but double and triple are very comparable to blu-ray capacities.

Yes everything on a DVD does take up space. Menus don't take up that much but if they make 1080p menu systems with FMV backgrounds then naturally the space requirements for that will be a lot higher then current DVD.

HD-DVD has the added benefit of them being able to put a DVD-compatible section on the disc so it works with current players, a big plus to me.

Another thing going against these HD formats is Superbit, actually... they sure aen't in high demand despite having better quality. Could that be an indication that consumers aren't all that concerned with quality over convience/price? I love crystal clear video but have passed by Superbit discs due to price, extra clarity wasn't worth a 75-100% price increase; I'm sure that is true for many many other consumers... who are even less concerned with quality then I am.

[takao]

wow i never heard of superbit ... sounds too much like SACD too me

[MacRumorUser]

Both Blu Ray & HD-DVD would be an instant success if....

Price was $200-300 a player

It played all your existing dvd's and they were upscaled

All players outputed HD via component as well as HDMI ( a lot of 12-24 month LCD' & Plasma's dont have HDMI)

Both DVD format & HD format were bundled on one disc or in one package.


Until that happens it will be shakey ground for either of the formats...

[~Shard~]

We have consistently heard it said that the Playstation 3 will “jump start” the market by flooding it with millions of gaming systems capable of handling Blu Ray disc software. The problem with this theory is that the PS3 is not being marketed as a home theater component and, if current installations prove the rule, most will not be situated in the average consumer’s living room. The result is that the PS3 will primarily be a *gasp* gaming system. I just don't think that Blu Ray will make any major leaps forward in market penetration as a home video format – at least not anytime soon.

History is bearing this out, as the HTPC market, (though driven hard by such manufacturers as Microsoft, Dell and HP), has struggled to find a place in the living room. Nearly every gaming system of the past: PS2, XBox, and even the legendary 3DO system have been touted as “set-top boxes” but in reality find themselves situated in more “gaming-centric” environments playing… you guessed it, games. :cool:

[jdechko]

HD-DVD has the added benefit of them being able to put a DVD-compatible section on the disc so it works with current players, a big plus to me.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I though that was a common feature between both HD-DVD and BluRay. I thought with the way the layers were pressed in a BD, that the BD section could be situated closer to the read surface and the DVD section could be situated in the middle, where it currently sits.

[kineticpast]

HD-DVD has the added benefit of them being able to put a DVD-compatible section on the disc so it works with current players, a big plus to me.
I think you might be getting your formats confused. HD-DVD can have DVD content on the disc, but only on the flip side, like the current DVD/CD DualDiscs. Blu-ray Discs on the other hand can have a DVD layer on the same side as the Blu-ray layers, similar to Hybrid SACDs. Presumably they could also easily have two DVD layers on the flip side, but I don't think anyone has bothered trying it (because dual sided discs suck, harder to handle and, due to the discs' added thickness, are compatible with fewer DVD players).

wow i never heard of superbit ... sounds too much like SACD too me
Superbit isn't a disc format, so not like SACD. It is actually just a buzzword for premium DVDs produced by Sony (possibly only in America, as I've never seen them in Australia). They are just DVDs usually without any extra features so the movie can then be encoded with much higher quality due to the extra space.

[MacRumorUser]

In this months DV sony & panasonic working on a new H.264 HD disc format that uses a 'red' laser rather than the 'blue' in blu-ray.

Are Sony are already giving up on the Blu for a more practical format with less tendancy to fail (yield and durabilty not market performance) before it's blu-ray format is even out the door.