Toshiba To Stop HD DVD Player Production

[mBox]

I make wedding videos and the majority of my clients are concerned with HD...

Im all for BD on any mac app platform. I work with digital signage and have been doing a/v for ten years. you go with what you have if you want to stay afloat. at the moment its 720p/10801 MPG2 for what I have to deal with. the displays I work with are only 1080i (one is 1080p..Panasonic 103inch). the only suggestion I have with clients and HD are promises. I usually hang onto all my original data for at least 3 years. anything shot (XDCAM, P2 or miniDV) lately I just charge a small fee for storage. when if things go right, Im ready for BD. last I heard Sonic is BD exclusive but we got away from them years ago. Avid at the moment is still playing catch up with everything else so BD is still a ways yet. We also use FCP and of course were waiting on that too. If you can keep the data that would be great. I work with a wide range of formats and just lately we've convinced our training dept. to buy into PS3s for possible BD playback.
I think they have other intentions but to bide time, were loading the clips onto the future HD players using network/files

 

[chillywilly]

Now that we don't have to worry about current Blu-ray specifications and no more competition from HD-DVD, I expect Apple to have ready some time later this year new versions of iMovie and Final Cut Pro that can master Blu-ray discs, along with offering Blu-ray burners on their Mac Pro tower computer line. It would certainly go a long way in making more Blu-ray discs available, since now you can create a "master" on a Mac Pro instead of a high five-figure UNIX workstation.

When this happens, I will invest in a Mac Pro and move my small video production I do now on my MacBook Pro 15" over, doing mostly DVDs and online video, but having the option to move to BD.

 

[megfilmworks]

I think Apple may not want to support Bluray in their computers because of the obvious competition factor with Apple's vision of a physical media free world.
This paradigm works for content providers, distribution, impulse buyers
and even for the ever increasing movement to be "green".

 

[BobVB]

Considering the fact that the maximum visual acuity of a person with "perfect" 20/20 vision is one arc minute, and the angle subtended by a pixel on a 42" 1080p is significantly less than one arc minute (assuming you sit more than 3-4 feet away from the TV), I would say you got taken. Should have saved some $$$ and gone with 720p.

Well considering the recommended viewing distance for 1080 is 4-6 feet for a cinematic experience he should be fine. High resolution is FOR sitting closer. 720p is great if you are going for a 'sports bar' feel but not for serious movie watching.

 

[Tosser]

The strategic placement of a "?" by me - 'infers' i was asking a question.

Ah, yes, rhetorical questions. It's nice to hide behind such a thing, isn't it"?"

 

[gkarris]

I think Apple may not want to support Bluray in their computers because of the obvious competition factor with Apple's vision of a physical media free world.
This paradigm works for content providers, distribution, impulse buyers
and even for the ever increasing movement to be "green".

Apple can't ignore its Pro customers, and just about all are going High Def and may need to author discs.

Unless, Apple is becoming even more consumer oriented and leaving the Pro market altogether...

 

[chillywilly]

I think Apple may not want to support Bluray in their computers because of the obvious competition factor with Apple's vision of a physical media free world.
This paradigm works for content providers, distribution, impulse buyers
and even for the ever increasing movement to be "green".

While I understand Apple's push for digital media, physical media is still going to be a large part of distributed media. Even for the purpose of backing it up, it's going to be a viable format for sometime. And with the storage capacity of BD, that will help (once Apple adds support) with offline storage.

 

[saltyzoo]

IMHO, Bluray will not replace DVDs. There is a very small difference in watching a film on dvd upscaled vs. HD DVD formats for the average consumer on their average size monitors.
One poster mentioned Bluray blows away Apple HD downloads. On paper I agree, but in reality on my 9 foot wide screen I have ABed HD DVD, Bluray and several Apple HD downloads and the differences are barley visable to the trained eye. And in the case of filmed content, even less visable.
DVD, Bluray and CDs all are going the same direction. They will become a niche market, while downloads (led by lo res) will become the majority player.
Brick and mortar stores are vanishing left and right, and even though downloads are limited at this time, just give it two years and revisit this debate.

You also have to consider the rendering of the disc. I have many DVD's that are rendered so poorly that VHS could easily outperform them. If studios don't spend the extra dough to remaster specifically for the higher res of Blueray, it's not going to make any difference.

Improper mastering could explain why there is no difference to the "trained eye". But then the question comes down to whether or not Blueray is adopted by enough people to enduce better mastering for that format before online streaming becomes the "standard".

 

[Scharke]

What is the portable HD format?

I think Apple may not want to support Bluray in their computers because of the obvious competition factor with Apple's vision of a physical media free world.
This paradigm works for content providers, distribution, impulse buyers
and even for the ever increasing movement to be "green".

I love this idea, but how do I deliver 20 minute film in this paradigm? What is the universal file format for HD that I can post on a server? Something that can be downloaded for archiving, streamed to a computer or TV device, or burned on to the optical media of the end-users choosing? HD MPEG-2? MPEG4?

Entonces, pues. I have two questyions for y'all:

What can I create on my Mac today that I can post to a server as a portable HD movie file?

Why can't someone make a stand-alone player that can play 1920x1080 (Or 720?) MPEG4 files from a standard DVD data disc?

 

[fluidedge]

digital only downloads are all very well and good for movie studios who spend zillions on marketing and advertising their latest blockbuster - they'll get prime position on the iTunes movie store.

what about the small indie film makers, they haven't got the budgets to spend on advertising, if they have to distribute only by online delivery then they're going to get lost in the soup of iTunes. They;ll have no way of getting their small movies to their small/local audience.

I don't think Apple's path to an all digital world is good for all parties.

BluRay also has a $2000 fee to encode/master the audio of some sort doesn't it? (Could be wrong here - but there is a $2000 fee somewhere down the line) Small movie makers would prefer to distribute on HD-DVD as they didn't have to pay any encoding fee.

Does anyone know more about that $2000 fee? I know there is something somewhere about it

 

[gkarris]

Why can't someone make a stand-alone player that can play 1920x1080 (Or 720?) MPEG4 files from a standard DVD data disc?

Already done: HD VMD

http://www.nmeinc.com/technology.aspx

 

[TMay]

I love this idea, but how do I deliver 20 minute film in this paradigm? What is the universal file format for HD that I can post on a server? Something that can be downloaded for archiving, streamed to a computer or TV device, or burned on to the optical media of the end-users choosing? HD MPEG-2? MPEG4?

Entonces, pues. I have two questyions for y'all:

What can I create on my Mac today that I can post to a server as a portable HD movie file?

Why can't someone make a stand-alone player that can play 1920x1080 (Or 720?) MPEG4 files from a standard DVD data disc?

AVC is MPEG4 and it does what you want, around 20 minutes of play time on a DVD disk, in a Blu-Ray player (probably in an HD-DVD player as well). I can do that now with my Panasonic SD-5 and an accessory DVD burner. The glitch is that if I have to edit that video (requiring the Apple Intermediate Codec), then I need to export AVC to DVD, and Apple applications can't yet do that.

 

[fluidedge]

i've found it - mandatory copy protection.

A licence from AACS costs about $2000 PER TITLE.

Not good news for small indie film makers.

 

[MarsUltor]

I think Apple may not want to support Bluray in their computers because of the obvious competition factor with Apple's vision of a physical media free world.
This paradigm works for content providers, distribution, impulse buyers
and even for the ever increasing movement to be "green".

Apple has been a member of the Blu-ray consortium's board of directors since 2005, but has not publicly announced their Blu-ray plans. It is likely that Apple's hesitation about releasing any Blu-ray products has been at least partially due to the ongoing format war.

Answer me this... why would apple be on the bluray consortium board of directors if they had no intention of actually employing the technology?

In my opinion, external media e.g. optical discs, thumb drives, etc, will never die... at least not for a long time; it is cheap, and extremely portable. Sure having your movie collection on your computer is nice, but many people like physical back-ups (especially back-ups that won't get destroyed in magnetic fields eg optical disks), and until we have HHD that are multiple terabytes, saving all this stuff to your computer will tie up your hard drive(s). I personally would rather spend $20 for 100 DVD-Rs (more than 400 GB), than over $100 on an internal or external drive that is only a fraction of that size... and the portability factor is huge.

 

[chillywilly]

i've found it - mandatory copy protection.

A licence from AACS costs about $2000 PER TITLE.

Not good news for small indie film makers.

Edit: found link to Wiki page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Access_Content_System

 

[MarsUltor]

i've found it - mandatory copy protection.

A licence from AACS costs about $2000 PER TITLE.

Not good news for small indie film makers.

It shouldn't matter too much, most indy flicks are picked up by big studios at film festivals like Cannes, and Sundance... that is why most indy flicks are released by offshoots of the biggies like Fox's "Fox Searchlight" for example. The only way to get decent distribution is to ally yourself with a big studio to help pay for some of the distribution costs, and to increase the potential DVD audience of your film.

 

[TMay]

digital only downloads are all very well and good for movie studios who spend zillions on marketing and advertising their latest blockbuster - they'll get prime position on the iTunes movie store.

what about the small indie film makers, they haven't got the budgets to spend on advertising, if they have to distribute only by online delivery then they're going to get lost in the soup of iTunes. They;ll have no way of getting their small movies to their small/local audience.

I don't think Apple's path to an all digital world is good for all parties.

BluRay also has a $2000 fee to encode/master the audio of some sort doesn't it? (Could be wrong here - but there is a $2000 fee somewhere down the line) Small movie makers would prefer to distribute on HD-DVD as they didn't have to pay any encoding fee.

Does anyone know more about that $2000 fee? I know there is something somewhere about it

Both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use AACS as their primary DRM. Blu-Ray adds BD+.

I haven't found anything definitive stating that AACS must be incorporated into the disk authoring, but if you incorporate it, then their would be a fee. Any hardware, HD-DVD or Blu-Ray would have to have AACS support.

 

[diamond.g]

Both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use AACS as their primary DRM. Blu-Ray adds BD+.

I haven't found anything definitive stating that AACS must be incorporated into the disk authoring, but if you incorporate it, then their would be a fee. Any hardware, HD-DVD or Blu-Ray would have to have AACS support.

Wiki claims that AACS is mandatory on BD. That may only be the case for BDMV though. I found this on Roxio's website that shows the difference between BDAV and BDMV.

 

[seashellz]

SONY is in a MESS of debt, and they are subsidizing the BR discs and players-watch for dramatic price increases now that there is no competition. SUCKERS!

SONY and their Rootkit. their DRM, their region locked players-I say f*ck 'em.

>>quote: SACD failed because most people didn't want to replace their CD's and buy new CD players (the quality wasn't that much better to the average joe with an inexpensive system<<< sums it up

I think its a war between S-DVD and as for HD-Ive too many thing to worry about than spending hours in front of the tube- and on my 36" the latest DVDs look great, thank you. Spending hours fretting over black levels--- Its absurd..I dont think 75% of america will care-who wants to buy their collections all over again-or be forced into a BR player when they stop making the S-DVD version of a film

I dont know about some of these home theater nuts-some need professional help-really-its almost that they want the films on the discs to look BETTER than the source-they are insane.
And then downloadable content or flash drives are around the corner, so there goes several billion in SONYs R&D and subsidy investment.

Oh yea-look out or better days-the banking system is about to collapse-and when GM lays off (buys out) 75,000 you can see trouble ahead.

Be VERY thankfull for what you have-there is a storm coming...

 

[Jschultz]

Well considering the recommended viewing distance for 1080 is 4-6 feet for a cinematic experience he should be fine. High resolution is FOR sitting closer. 720p is great if you are going for a 'sports bar' feel but not for serious movie watching.

What baffles my mind as a TV salesman, is when people come in DEMANDING a 42" 1080p set- but they sit 12 feet away. At that distance, 720p is fine, and almost on the brink of 480p being fine.

Who sits 3-4 feet from a 42" anyways? Unless it's a computer monitor!

 

[BobVB]

What baffles my mind as a TV salesman, is when people come in DEMANDING a 42" 1080p set- but they sit 12 feet away. At that distance, 720p is fine, and almost on the brink of 480p being fine.

Who sits 3-4 feet from a 42" anyways? Unless it's a computer monitor!

guess you aren't the TV salesman at the stores I shop at - they point out that you are supposed to be sitting at just beyond individual pixel resolution (which for a 42" diagonal widescreen is 5.5 feet for 1080i and 20/20 vision). And if you want to sit further back they'd be more than happy to sell you a bigger screen

But that is the two living room set ups I've seen: some people are the 'seating on one wall, television on the other' sports bar type setups and then the ones my family always had - tv in one corner, seats for viewing TV a few feet away, rest of living room available for other things. Blood can almost be spilt in discussions about which is 'right'.

But you are right if the viewer is NOT going to sit close enough to the screen for 1080 to make a difference 720 is good enough (yeah and even 480 depending on the screen size and viewing distance)

 

[matticus008]

Well considering the recommended viewing distance for 1080 is 4-6 feet for a cinematic experience he should be fine. High resolution is FOR sitting closer. 720p is great if you are going for a 'sports bar' feel but not for serious movie watching.

Oh, not this crap again. A living room is not a movie theater and a television, even an HD television, is not a movie screen.

If you're building a home theater (literally; a dedicated room) digitally and using a good quality projector, then you can start using cinema-reproduction proportions.

Up until that point, or unless people are suddenly buying 100"+ televisions for their living rooms, dens, bedrooms, and/or family rooms, the room layout is the most significant consideration. Given the average family's budget and the average room size, 1080p does not offer an advantage. It's great for people on the high end who will benefit from it, but it's ridiculous to upsell someone hundreds of dollars on the TV and a couple hundred dollars on the player for something with next to no benefit for the typical home. It's even more ridiculous to tell people to sit 4 feet from their televisions.

 

[jaw04005]

Wiki claims that AACS is mandatory on BD.

BDAV and BDMV are essentially file structures.

AACS is mandatory on all playback devices and software and for authoring BDMV. Adobe's Encore and Roxio's DVDit HD programs both author BDMV complete with interactive menus with AACS protection.

For consumer use, the AACS license is paid by the software company and disc OEM, not the user.

BDAV refers to either the transport stream format used for all Blu-ray content, or the plain format intended for home video with no interactivity.

BDAV is what consumers will normally be using for consumer-created content. It also provides basic menu support. However, it's up to each individual Blu-ray player manufacturer to implement BDAV.

Sony's PlayStation 3 and most other Blu-ray players support both BDAV and BDMV on BD-R and BD-RE (Rewritable) via software upgrades.

BDAV and BDMV should not be confused with BDCMF. BDCMF is a special format comprised of BDMV (which itself contains BDAV) for replicating facilities. BDCMF requires AACS licenses per title, and special software to author such as Sony's BluePrint.

In short:

BDAV (No AACS protection) is for consumer software packages like iDVD, Ulead MovieFactory, Roxio's MyDVD, etc
BDMV (Currently No AACS protection, Eventually will support Basic AACS protection) is for prosumer and professional software packages like Adobe Encore, Roxio's DVDIt! HD and Apple's DVD Studio Pro
BDCMF (Expanded AACS and BD+ protection) is for large-scale commercial software packages like Sony's BluePrint

Update: It gets even more complicated.

Apparently, the Blu-ray Disc Association never intended consumers to use BDMV to author onto BD-R or BD-RE because of piracy concerns. That's why they created BDAV. However, they allowed manufacturers to support BDMV on BD-R for a short period of time (internal purposes, demos, promotional purposes, etc).

But BDA relented and have started allowing manufacturers to support both AACS-encrypted and non-encrypted BDMV discs on their players as an option.

Therefore, if you have a Blu-ray player that supports AACS-enabled Version 3.0 BD-R or BD-RE discs, your player also supports Non-DRMed Version 1.x or 2.0 BD-R or BD-RE discs.

The 1.x and 2.0 discs are what's currently available on the market. The AACS encryption is tied to the disc and activated by the software package. For example, if you own Adobe Encore and put in a Version 2.0 BD-R that doesn't support AACS, Encore will recognize this and burn appropriately.

 

[chillywilly]

AACS is mandatory on all playback devices and software and for authoring BDMV. Adobe's Encore and Roxio's DVDit HD programs both author BDMV complete with interactive menus with AACS protection.

For consumer use, the AACS license is paid by the software company, not the user.

BDAV refers to either the transport stream format used for all Blu-ray content, or the plain format intended for home video with no interactivity.

BDAV is what consumers will normally be using for consumer-created content. It also provides basic menu support. However, it's up to each individual Blu-ray player manufacturer to implement BDAV.

Sony's PlayStation 3 and most other Blu-ray players support both BDAV and BDMV on BD-R and BD-RW via software upgrades.

Very informative post. Thank you for the details.

 

[BobVB]

f you're building a home theater (literally; a dedicated room) digitally and using a good quality projector, then you can start using cinema-reproduction proportions.

But that is the point - you are the one advocating using an entire room for watching TV, i.e. a dedicated room - oddly you just are seemly enamored with the viewers having a less than optimal viewing experience possible.

Why are you so resistant people having a family room where the part of the 'family' who wants to watch tv does so from a good 1080p distance and the rest of the room being available for the rest of the family NOT watching TV? But I said before this subject oddly seems to be almost 'fighting words' for some.

You watch from what ever distance pleases you, please. But don't bother with 1080 if you aren't going to be watching from close enough for it to make a difference.