iTunes 1080p Content Comes Close to Blu-ray Quality, But Can't Quite Match

[hexonxonx]

Man, I miss CDs. Do you remember when you could still buy those? If they were around today that simplest of optical media would be 30 years old.

It's a pity optical media liked CD and DVD dies out so quickly.

I quit buying CDs back in the late 90s and the last DVD I bought was back in 2006. I don't even have a BR player. I love that I can have everything on my computer (plus Apple TV2, just need a TV to go with it). I've gone completely without cable/satelite any buy my movies/TV shows on iTunes and have for many years now.

I'm one of those who helped put a nail in CD/DVDs coffins, gladly.

 

[locust76]

This just in: Heavily compressed video not as good as video that's not so heavily compressed

No kidding! Still, amazing how close the image quality actually does come to Blu-Ray. I will still prefer watching my favorite movies on Blu-Ray, but at least I can download high-quality video for on-the-go knowing that it's 80% of Blu-Ray quality at 20% the file size...

 

[AppleScruff1]

I quit buying CDs back in the late 90s and the last DVD I bought was back in 2006. I don't even have a BR player. I love that I can have everything on my computer (plus Apple TV2, just need a TV to go with it). I've gone completely without cable/satelite any buy my movies/TV shows on iTunes and have for many years now.

I'm one of those who helped put a nail in CD/DVDs coffins, gladly.

Whee did you get your music from the late 90's until iTunes came out?

 

[Burger Thing]

Of course if it was the other way around and Apple had invented Blu-ray then almost wouldn't be good enough coming from a competitor. Compressed 1080p content would be a lame attempt to match the perfection of Blu-ray. See how that works?

I think it is hilarious, that in so many of your posts you criticize and make fun of "fanboys" but on the other hand you are deliberately stirring the pot with your silly black & white categorizations. Don't you think it is lame and very superficial? I can't believe you are not getting bored doing this

What is also hilarious is, that people trying to justify or convince that their way (Blu Ray vs. Download) is right one.

What Apple offers, is one way to obtain or watch a movie. If you prefer for some movies to have the convenience to download it onto your home systems and just enjoy the movie because of its story and at the same time have a reasonable quality which is probably better than the one of our average cable provider: Great. Here is your solution.

If you prefer for some movies terrific picture and sound quality, then you go and buy a Disc.

I really don't understand why people trying to make or create a deathmatch here. Personally I enjoy having options and use both.

 

[AppleScruff1]

I think it is hilarious, that in so many of your posts you criticize and make fun of "fanboys" but on the other hand you are deliberately stirring the pot with your silly black & white categorizations which contributes virtually nothing useful here.

What is also hilarious is, that people trying to justify or convince that their way (Blu Ray vs. Download) is right one.

What Apple offers, is one way to obtain or watch a movie. If you prefer for some movies to have the convenience to download it onto your home systems and just enjoy the movie because of its story and at the same time have a reasonable quality which is probably better than the one of our average cable provider: Great. Here is your solution.

If you prefer for some movies terrific picture and sound quality, then you go and buy a Disc.

I really don't understand why people trying to make or create a deathmatch here. Personally I enjoy having options and use both.

How am I stirring the pot? I am stating my opinions, just as you are. How many times have you heard someone here criticizing another companies products because they aren't quite as good as Apple and that they should try to do better? You know, like Android is almost as good as iOS, Windows is almost as good as OSX, etc, etc. No one but Apple innovates, etc etc. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, Apple has performed an engineering miracle by making iTunes 1080p content "almost" as good as Blu-ray. Now that is hilarious.

 

[drjsway]

You must not be checking the fine print on your contracts then....

Wow, had U-verse for years, didn't realize I've been capped. I've been autopaying so I don't even know if they charged overage fees. Pretty sure I went over 250GB many times.

 

[hexonxonx]

Whee did you get your music from the late 90's until iTunes came out?

Well, the last CD I actually bought was Lil Jagged Pill and that was in 1995. I just didn't buy anything after that. Napster started in 99 and that's when I got into music again. I bought my first iPod in 2004 and that's when I started buying music on iTunes although I used that iPod for only a few weeks and lost interest in it.

As far as DVDs, I had bought the seasons 5-9 of the X-files in 2006 at BestBuy with the intent of ripping them into iTunes. Lost interest in that and when the seasons became available on iTunes, I bought them. The DVDs have sat there collecting dust ever since.

 

[Burger Thing]

How am I stirring the pot? I am stating my opinions, just as you are. How many times have you heard someone here criticizing another companies products because they aren't quite as good as Apple and that they should try to do better? You know, like Android is almost as good as iOS, Windows is almost as good as OSX, etc, etc. No one but Apple innovates, etc etc. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, Apple has performed an engineering miracle by making iTunes 1080p content "almost" as good as Blu-ray. Now that is hilarious.

You just don't get it, do you. You assume a lot with your "if it was the other way around then they would say these and that and Bla Bla Bla. And again: you categorize everything into black & white.

Guess what? I have an open mind about technology and there are plenty of forum members who think likewise. But now let me assume something as well. If I would post here, that yes, Android is almost as good, but not as polished as iOS, then you would jump in and put me into the "ignorant Apple fanboys" category, right? Hmmm, should I tell you that that my device (Android, Galaxy Note) feels sluggish at times, hangs, has to be forced into restarts, inverts its colors at times? Ah, na, better not to confuse you living in your little black and white world.

And yes, Apple did a reasonable good job with their 1080p compression algorithms, which will be probably good enough for the average family, so their kids can watch Finding Nemo and having fun instead of pixel peeping.

Funny thing, is that people like you labeling it a "miracle". Sarcasm goes well with pot stirring, huh?

 

[samcraig]

An uncompressed 1080p movie would take more than 1TB of space. The fact that Apple comes close to blu-ray with even more aggressive compression is a win for Apple, and an embarrassment for blu-ray.

I personally think you choose your words poorly. Or rather - you speak in hyperbole which makes it hard to take you seriously even if you have a valid point.

an "embarrassment" for blu-ray? Not at all. Not even close. Personally I'm embarrassed at the streaming/cable industry in total for perpetuating the notion that just because they've labeled their stream/channel "1080P" that it means hi-def for both picture (and sound - which is implied) which couldn't be further than the truth since they obviously leave out compression.

While technically "accurate" - it's extremely misleading. And if Blu-Ray does eventually become obsolete without a COMPARABLE solution - then it's a big loss for consumer.

Almost as good isn't the same as being equal.

 

[chirpie]

And yes, Apple did a reasonable good job with their 1080p compression algorithms, which will be probably good enough for the average family, so their kids can watch Finding Nemo and having fun instead of pixel peeping.

Funny thing, is that people like you labeling it a "miracle". Sarcasm goes well with pot stirring, huh?

Wait, I don't think Apple engineered these algorithms, I thought they were updates of the standard spec?

And actually Finding Nemo would be a perfect torture test. Deep dark gradient blues would be easy to spot macroblocking on. ^_^

 

[dashiel]

What's wrong with TV being placed over the fireplace? Do you think iMax movie theaters should be banned?

Over the fireplace is a decision based on convenience/aesthetics opposed to proper viewing angle. IMAX viewing angles are not random or convenient, the entire room are designed for optimal viewing.

 

[chirpie]

Over the fireplace is a decision based on convenience/aesthetics opposed to proper viewing angle. IMAX viewing angles are not random or convenient, the entire room are designed for optimal viewing.

I dunno man, I'd put fireplace mounting as bad for viewing angles as well. At least, that's what my neck tells me after 2 hours...

 

[AppleScruff1]

You just don't get it, do you. You assume a lot with your "if it was the other way around then they would say these and that and Bla Bla Bla. And again: you categorize everything into black & white.

Guess what? I have an open mind about technology and there are plenty of forum members who think likewise. But now let me assume something as well. If I would post here, that yes, Android is almost as good, but not as polished as iOS, then you would jump in and put me into the "ignorant Apple fanboys" category, right? Hmmm, should I tell you that that my device (Android, Galaxy Note) feels sluggish at times, hangs, has to be forced into restarts, inverts its colors at times? Ah, na, better not to confuse you living in your little black and white world.

And yes, Apple did a reasonable good job with their 1080p compression algorithms, which will be probably good enough for the average family, so their kids can watch Finding Nemo and having fun instead of pixel peeping.

Funny thing, is that people like you labeling it a "miracle". Sarcasm goes well with pot stirring, huh?

I read this forum on a daily basis and I see ample evidence of what I posted. I never said all members did this, but many do just as I stated. I didn't call you or anyone else a fanboy or violate any TOS. I stated my opinion and my comments aren't directed at anyone in particular. If you feel better insulting me, so be it. You don't like what I posted, fine. We just disagree.

 

[D.T.]

Over the fireplace is a decision based on convenience/aesthetics opposed to proper viewing angle. IMAX viewing angles are not random or convenient, the entire room are designed for optimal viewing.

I dunno man, I'd put fireplace mounting as bad for viewing angles as well. At least, that's what my neck tells me after 2 hours...

Yeah, we’re trying to work this out right now. I want to migrate the main set downstairs over the fireplace, but the current design/mantle would place it _way_ too high (if it could even fit).

The fireplace is just such wasted space for us for the most part (we’re in Florida), it almost never gets used, but at the same time, don’t want to plug/cover it up.

We’re talking to a guy around the corner who does some interior remodeling about how he could redesign the fireplace in such a way to be able to mount a television as low as possible (and probably on some kind of tilt/swivel type mount).

Our friends have a 36-42”-ish sized set over their fireplace and high ceilings and I’ll swear it’s at least like 8-9, maybe 10 feet high, when we’re watching TV over there it’s like watching a space shuttle launch...

 

[samcraig]

What is also hilarious is, that people trying to justify or convince that their way (Blu Ray vs. Download) is right one.

What Apple offers, is one way to obtain or watch a movie. If you prefer for some movies to have the convenience to download it onto your home systems and just enjoy the movie because of its story and at the same time have a reasonable quality which is probably better than the one of our average cable provider: Great. Here is your solution.

If you prefer for some movies terrific picture and sound quality, then you go and buy a Disc.

I really don't understand why people trying to make or create a deathmatch here. Personally I enjoy having options and use both.

I like having both options too. But the reality is - as more streaming options become dominant - it can very well turn into a deathmatch. Meaning that it's entirely possible for the better medium (by better I mean quality) to die simply because of the percentage of users choosing one over the other.

I'm all for progress and convenience. But I also appreciate quality. And it's my hope that these roads run parallel in the future or merge - but not that one simply ends.

To me, listening to some of my vinyl is still a FAR superior experience than listening to the same on CD. At the same time - I fully appreciate CDs and now, of course, MP3s/other formats. We did give up some quality in exchange for "future proofing" music. Beta provided better quality - but (in all seriousness) the porn industry chose to standardize on VHS and that was the death knell for Beta as a consumer product.

But to say there's no "deathmatch" (which I am not saying you ARE saying as fact) is short sighted because ultimately - studios will produce what is profitable and has the largest audience.

 

[AidenShaw]

Wow, had U-verse for years, didn't realize I've been capped. I've been autopaying so I don't even know if they charged overage fees. Pretty sure I went over 250GB many times.

I was way over the cap for years, but it wasn't until the end of September that I got my first warning (via email), followed shortly by the first overage charge. (This was about the time that stories of AT&T beginning overage charges for mobile use surfaced.)

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Bull... I'll admit the iTMS videos look nice, but there is no way they can be compared to blu ray quality. What are the files encoded at? 3-5 Mbps? Blu rays get up to about 40Mbps! That's a huge reduction of data.

This is a meaningless statement. It's not how big the file is, but how good the quality is. You can go full uncompressed and get a MUCH larger file than even Blu-Ray puts out, but your quality won't go up exponentially just because your file size does. We're talking about small incremental losses across huge reductions in data. In short, I'm amazed the quality is as good as it is considering how "huge" those file size differences are. It shows just how good the H264 compression really is to lose so little quality with such huge reductions in file sizes. Short of a head-to-head comparison, I doubt most people would notice a difference in casual viewing, especially people without 90"+ sized screens or sitting two feet from the TV.

 

[Anonymous Freak]

I forgot what happens when you try and stream from your computer to your TV when your internet goes out. Does AppleTV do ad-hoc? Because I'm pretty sure it doesn't. I could be wrong.

And hey - you're reading someone on these boards who ditched over 900 DVDs in favor of ripping them to a hard drive and using Apple TV.

I just wouldn't do the same for blu-ray.

As someone else replied - AppleTV works with local-only networking just fine. (I know someone who uses it in their RV to stream from a headless Mac mini. The mini acts as WiFi hotspot that the AppleTV connects to. When home, they copy new files to the mini from their other computers. They found that this works better than using a first-gen AppleTV that they were using before.)

Yeah, I've ripped my entire DVD collection, and am in the process of ripping my Blu-ray collection. Although now I'll have to start re-encoding over at 1080p - as I have the raw .mkv disk images in "bulk storage", and have been converting those to 720p H.264 until now. (Oh well, it takes long enough per disc that I wasn't very far through the collection.) I suppose I should just take the time to get the automated process set up like the thread here has instructions on.

 

[swagi]

Exactly. Software decoding of lossless audio and passing of PCM multichannel has been included in the HDMI specs since almost the beginning....its just not been implemented because all the companies and their copyright protection BS makes lossless audio difficult to decode on a standard computer GPU that doesn't have the specific drivers and all that other HDCP crap

You mean that HDCP-crap, that even an AppleTV is capable of?

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2599277?start=0&tstart=0

Just asking...

 

[AidenShaw]

In short, I'm amazed the quality is as good as it is considering how "huge" those file size differences are. It shows just how good the H264 compression really is to lose so little quality with such huge reductions in file sizes.

Most recent BDs are also H.264 - so the only difference is the profile.

Apple is simply using a profile defined long ago that greatly increases the CPU need to encode, and modestly increases the CPU needed to decode.

However, they've created a somewhat "proprietary" format - because most players without hardware decode support for high profile won't be able to fall back on software decode.

If you buy into Apple's walled garden (or, as they currently prefer to call it "Apple's ecosystem") and replace your devices with new ones with the new hardware support (cha-ching!) you'll be OK until you hit your ISP's bandwidth caps.

 

[hipnetic]

This 'Blu-ray or bust' nonsense just comes across silly to me. Am I to believe that you people watch all of your content via Blu-ray? Do you not watch Netlflix (which is horribly compressed), or cable HDTV (also badly compressed)?

Convenience is going to win. It's as simple as that, but I certainly want the combo of convenience and quality.

A Blu-ray can hold 50GB, but the main movie and main non-lossless soundtrack typically ranges between 20-28GB. And I personally suspect that the studios intentionally use up most of the space that the format allows, either because, hey, they've got 50GB to work with, so why go through the extra effort to optimize it down to a smaller size, and also because it serves as a nice piracy deterrent. You rip a Blu-ray and end up with a 28GB file, and that takes a bit longer, requires more disk space, and if you want to then send it through another process to compress it further, it will take a good deal of extra time.

Personally, I'm excited about the new ATV, but I don't anticipate buying any HD movies from iTunes. As others have mentioned, if you're willing to wait, you can buy some great movies on Blu-ray for $15 or less. And, frankly, I don't *want* to buy many movies. So I mainly rent and utilize a combination of Redbox and Netflix (disc by mail). Paying $20 to own a digital copy of a movie that I probably won't want to watch a 2nd time till a year or more later doesn't appeal to me. And $5 24-hour rentals also aren't very compelling, when I can rent from Redbox for less than $2. I don't put this on Apple, though, as I suspect that these prices are mostly driven by the studios.

So, for me, I plan to rip my Blu-rays and convert them down using Handbrake to more highly compressed 1080p MP4 files. Now that the latest version of the ATV iOS (even the 720p version) can play high-bitrate 1080p files smoothly, I'll probably convert my movies to 1080p MP4 files, but keep file sizes closer to 10GB or more. Disk space is cheap, and I don't need to carry/watch these on-the-go, but YMMV.

 

[AidenShaw]

I mostly agree, but

So, for me, I plan to rip my Blu-rays and convert them down using Handbrake to more highly compressed 1080p MP4 files. Now that the latest version of the ATV iOS (even the 720p version) can play high-bitrate 1080p files smoothly, I'll probably convert my movies to 1080p MP4 files, but keep file sizes closer to 10GB or more. Disk space is cheap, and I don't need to carry/watch these on-the-go, but YMMV.

If disk space is cheap, then why compromise (and lose the high bitrate audio) by Handbraking them? Just save the BDs to .ISO files so that you have everything....

 

[hipnetic]

If disk space is cheap, then why compromise (and lose the high bitrate audio) by Handbraking them? Just save the BDs to .ISO files so that you have everything....

Well, I still need to play these files in multiple rooms of my house. I like using an ATV because it's cheap, small, low-power, and has a better UI than other streamers (whether running the native UI or XBMC).

If I use XBMC, I can pretty much play full-bitrate Blu-ray rips, but only if they're encoded with h264, and I don't believe that XBMC supports lossless audio (perhaps that's changed more recently, or perhaps you can convert DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD to a different compatible lossless format). But I think I can live happily without lossless audio, and it will save a bit of space, and keep compatibility higher. But even then, the Blu-ray rips are going to be 18-28GB. While the ATV appears to be able to play these files smoothly, I do run into stutters and pauses which appear to be network-related, even when hard-wired over ethernet. And if a video isn't encoded as h264 (e.g., VC-1), the ATV's GPU can't decode that natively, so it won't play smoothly anyway, and you *have* to use something like Handbrake to convert it to MP4.

So an advantage of getting the files down smaller (say 10GB) is that they should be able to flow through the network more smoothly (even wirelessly). Plus, if I convert them to MP4/M4V files, I don't have to bother with jail breaking/XBMC, which saves another hassle, and allows me to take advantage of the native ATV's video buffering feature, which seems like a better method than how XBMC buffers video. Plus, even though storage is cheap, smaller filesizes mean quicker transfer times when moving them from one hard drive to another.

Finally, even though I don't personally have a need (currently) to play movies on my iPhone, my wife has an iPad 2 and I could envision someone in the house (or on vacation) wanting to use that. Again, you could jailbreak that and install XBMC, but you'd still have to work through the limitations listed above.

And who knows...maybe having all of these movies readily available to stream reliably to my non-jailbroken iPhone 4S might lead to other use cases. For example, quickly pulling up a movie/scene so that I can remind myself about what transpired when discussing a movie with someone, or maybe taking a snapshot of the scene to post somewhere. And when I go on vacation, maybe I just load up a few movies on my laptop's hard drive or a single external drive to take with me, rather than have to bring all of my hard drives on the trip.

If you're only going to play these files inside your house, can run gigabit ethernet, don't mind using an HTPC or more capable streamer, and only have a room or two to serve, than keeping the full rips with lossless audio is definitely a desirable choice for many. For me, I'm willing to give up *some* quality (but still have a far superior picture compared to DVD) for the added convenience factors that an < 10GB MP4/M4V file will offer.

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

This 'Blu-ray or bust' nonsense just comes across silly to me. Am I to believe that you people watch all of your content via Blu-ray? Do you not watch Netlflix (which is horribly compressed), or cable HDTV (also badly compressed)?

Convenience is going to win. It's as simple as that, but I certainly want the combo of convenience and quality.

A Blu-ray can hold 50GB, but the main movie and main non-lossless soundtrack typically ranges between 20-28GB. And I personally suspect that the studios intentionally use up most of the space that the format allows, either because, hey, they've got 50GB to work with, so why go through the extra effort to optimize it down to a smaller size, and also because it serves as a nice piracy deterrent. You rip a Blu-ray and end up with a 28GB file, and that takes a bit longer, requires more disk space, and if you want to then send it through another process to compress it further, it will take a good deal of extra time.

Personally, I'm excited about the new ATV, but I don't anticipate buying any HD movies from iTunes. As others have mentioned, if you're willing to wait, you can buy some great movies on Blu-ray for $15 or less. And, frankly, I don't *want* to buy many movies. So I mainly rent and utilize a combination of Redbox and Netflix (disc by mail). Paying $20 to own a digital copy of a movie that I probably won't want to watch a 2nd time till a year or more later doesn't appeal to me. And $5 24-hour rentals also aren't very compelling, when I can rent from Redbox for less than $2. I don't put this on Apple, though, as I suspect that these prices are mostly driven by the studios.

So, for me, I plan to rip my Blu-rays and convert them down using Handbrake to more highly compressed 1080p MP4 files. Now that the latest version of the ATV iOS (even the 720p version) can play high-bitrate 1080p files smoothly, I'll probably convert my movies to 1080p MP4 files, but keep file sizes closer to 10GB or more. Disk space is cheap, and I don't need to carry/watch these on-the-go, but YMMV.

I find it odd that you say convenience is going to win, suggest that people use more then just Blu Ray then proceed to go on about how you still use disc based media that you rip. That's not very convenient and seems to undo your point about using things other then Blu ray!

 

[314631]

iTunes 1080p honestly looks better to me than bluray. It's stunning. I'm glad Apple never gave in and added bluray drives to their products. It's unnecessary and consumers definitely don't want to be burdened by discs anymore.