PDA

View Full Version : My big upgrade decision


Nemesis
09-25-2007, 12:43 PM
ok, so i bought a 46" samsung 1080P tv a few months back.. and have been holding off on purchasing either a blu-ray or hd-dvd player because.. well.. it looks to me like blu-ray is the way to go BUT it isn't region free! :'( and that basically rules out any format in my eyes because well over half my dvds are R1 (as opposed to my r4 locally purchased dvds).. and i refuse to buy hd-dvd if it is an inferior format.. time may fix the region free issue with blu-ray, but all the time in the world will not give hd-dvd the capacity that hd-dvd has

so what i've decided to do is buy a blu-ray rom for my pc (while i wait for a stand alone region free blu-ray player) and output that to my tv... so given that i have almost completely avoided every blu-ray/hd-dvd thread on this and every other forum, the question i put to you all is... what are the top 10 MUST BUY releases on blu-ray? (and if you reallllly reallllly think that hd-dvd is superior, what are the top 10 must buy releases on that format?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated :)

dickieduvet
09-25-2007, 12:57 PM
Go HD-DVD, you will never look back, :)

Nemesis
09-25-2007, 01:00 PM
why's that though? better movie selection? better quality?

Grim
09-25-2007, 01:04 PM
With HD-DVD, you're going to get a lot of genre classics like The Thing and American Werewolf in London. Yet with Blu-ray, you'll have Dawn of the Dead, Evil Dead 2, etc. I couldn't decide so I went with both!

Nemesis
09-25-2007, 01:07 PM
yeah, i figure that in the long run it won't matter.. but back to the question, what are the 10 essential movies to buy on either format? :)

dwatts
09-25-2007, 02:37 PM
There is no quality difference between blu-Ray and HD-DVD. Only a capacity difference, region coding, and the fact that Blu-Ray's specs aren't yet fully in place. If it's quality you want, with less nonsense, then the only choice is HD-DVD.

The capacity difference is a red herring.

Nemesis
09-25-2007, 11:03 PM
ok, but again, format differences aside, what are the must have titles at the moment! ;)

othervoice1
09-25-2007, 11:36 PM
I personally prefer HD-DVD- but either way you go might want to just rent movies over buying them for now to be on the safe side-

othervoice1
09-25-2007, 11:40 PM
HD DVD is overall cheaper, better interactive menus, region free so you can get some blu-ray USA exclusive movies like Underworld imported to the States but you cant vice versa for blu-ray- the movies are pretty much split- I like some stuff blu ray has exclusive and some stuff hd-dvd has exclusive- once dreamworks and paramount went exclusive like universal did with hd-dvd it has become pretty split on movies - also blu ray can no longer try to say they hold 50 gig compared to hd-dvds 35 gig (or whatever it is) so in the long run are better blah blah- hd-dvd has okayed a 51 gig disc now but probably wont use it in regular production until it is really warranted - this is naming a few of the reasons i personally like hd-dvd better- that and I got an hd dvd add on for my xbox 360 for around 170.00 bucks with free movies

othervoice1
09-25-2007, 11:45 PM
http://www.highdefdigest.com/
This is your must go to site for all info on blu ray and hd dvd and reviews of movies released on both- blu ray right now has more movies released while not neccessarily better movies- but HD-DVD as stated has paramount/dreamworks who will no longer make blu ray (which is a really recent development) and you can import stuff for hd dvd so that is evening out now on exclusives- also for hd dvd imports this is a must have site too http://forums.highdefdigest.com/showthread.php?t=3010

dickieduvet
09-26-2007, 12:16 AM
The deciding factor that swayed me over to Hd-Dvd was the lack of region coding as I am in the UK. I don't want to wait months for a UK release.Same principal I have been using for almost 10 years with a region free Dvd player :)

X-human
09-26-2007, 01:03 AM
Region Coding isn't really being utilized by Blu-ray right now, and companies like Warner Brothers say they never will be. New Line, Disney and Fox are the only three I believe are using it. It'll be circumvented just like it is on SD-DVD, I wouldn't hold back because of it. Infact people have been ordering the Spider-man Blu-ray boxset from Australia because Sony doesn't even use region coding. It's a non-issue.

Here are some choice Blu-ray picks:

300
Casino Royale
Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl
Halloween
Dawn of the Dead
Day of the Dead
Evil Dead 2
Devil's Rejects
House of 1000 Corpses
The Descent

The Anchor Bay titles are catching some flack because of nit picks, but I think overall are worth buying. They're more right than wrong.

And just to bust a few other myths, Blu-ray has very interactive menus and features. It also has a higher video bit rate for video so no the formats don't look identical. Blu-ray gives HD the breathing room it needs. It's the best choice.

othervoice1
09-26-2007, 01:09 AM
Make sure to check that site out and check the video rating for any movies you do like- there are plenty of movies I like on both formats that are not worth buying - some movies are almost no different then their standard dvd counterparts- so whether you decide blu ray or hd dvd i would always decide to check the review of the disc before making a purchase decision- some are great and some suck in video upgrade

KamuiX
09-26-2007, 01:19 AM
And just to bust a few other myths, Blu-ray has very interactive menus and features. It also has a higher video bit rate for video so no the formats don't look identical. Blu-ray gives HD the breathing room it needs. It's the best choice.

Indeed...I was watching The Lookout on Blu-Ray the other day (my first Blu-Ray, as I picked up a PS3...seen a few HD-DVD's before), and it looked and sounded incredible, better than the couple HD-DVD's I've seen. Seeing the average bitrate was 32MB/sec on the film was pretty awesome as well. I have The Fountain waiting on my shelf, and that should be an incredible experience in 1080p :)

17thJuggalo
09-26-2007, 03:07 AM
I'm not expert on this subject, but isn't Blu-Ray beating the snot out of HD-DVD in sales due to the PS3? I wouldn't want to be on the side of a losing format, even if it is "better".

JW77
09-26-2007, 03:22 AM
I'm not expert on this subject, but isn't Blu-Ray beating the snot out of HD-DVD in sales due to the PS3? I wouldn't want to be on the side of a losing format, even if it is "better".

Blu-Ray software generally outsells HD-DVD by 2:1.

Which sounds good on paper, but HD-DVD owners actually appear to buy more software. Factoring in the PS3, there are considerably more BR-capable players out there than HD-DVD players.

Sony also runs the risk of tying the Blu-Ray format to the PS3. It runs the risk of being a fad like UMD.

othervoice1
09-26-2007, 03:23 AM
in hardware sales of standalone players hd-dvd is winning- in movie sales for this year blu ray was winning due to more studio support and the ps3 (even though the ps3 sales are hurting) paramount/dreamworks just decided to leaev blu ray and go hd-dvd exclusive and hd dvd players are expected to be under 200 for christmas - sales of either format are very very small so neither side can beat the 'snot' out of each other at this point- after the ps3 release sony made statements trying to say it was over which has since proven to be quite untrue- dont believe the hype<: anyone for hd dvd or blu ray can go round and round and round- several experts even believe for the first time a format will co-exist- anyways at this point it is very much up in the air- and if you look at amazon movie sales and netflix rentals hd-dvd seems be even or even have a slight edge http://amazon.highdefdigest.com/- and for the record anyone who has an hd player check out 'Casino' - I recently got this and it looks great in hd

indiephantom
09-26-2007, 03:46 AM
How is DVD holding up in sales? I just can't afford to make any changes for awhile. I might buy a new laptop next year, and will maybe get one that plays HD or blu-ray. But the prices need to come down some.

othervoice1
09-26-2007, 03:52 AM
blu ray and hd dvd sales are very very very small in comparison to standard dvds- which is why any edge either hd dvd or blu ray tries to say it has over the other doesnt mean much right now- will probably be a couple years before a winner (if any) is decided

othervoice1
09-26-2007, 04:01 AM
amazon has a few deals right now- there are sales on blu ray and hd dvd quite often anymore- usually free movies being thrown in

http://amazon.com/b/ref=amb_link_5422412_49/102-4947954-3552113?ie=UTF8&node=193642011&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-6&pf_rd_r=17JRBGRJMBS6CYMT5907&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=310817801&pf_rd_i=130

Dave
09-26-2007, 04:57 AM
There is no quality difference between blu-Ray and HD-DVD. Only a capacity difference, region coding, and the fact that Blu-Ray's specs aren't yet fully in place. If it's quality you want, with less nonsense, then the only choice is HD-DVD.

The capacity difference is a red herring.

You say there's no difference, but you then list the major differences between the two and call call capacity difference a red herring. Huh? Want to explain that.

Blu-Ray's additional capacity is huge. Capacity=quality. Quality = #1. High bitrate or the ability to have extras and retain the higher bitrate is huge.

But there's only one choice for any film buff wanting to buy high def right now: get both. Or screw em, like I did, and get a satellite with HD channels (Monsters HD is owns both formats in terms of selection for high def horror).

If were to buy in right now, I would get the PS3 and the Xbox 360 add-on drive. I don't plan to do either, but the Amazon deals are awfully tempting. So far I've resisted and since implementing my 'only going to buy it if I watch it more than once a year' policy, I've only bought about one DVD in the past year. I'm just in no rush since most of the movies I want I already have on standard DVD, aren't available on high def, and even if they were, my setup just isn't high end enough to display the improvement.

rxfiend
09-26-2007, 05:47 AM
I have a question about HD players, what if you hooked up a player to a standard tv that has at least component inputs, how would it look?

dwatts
09-26-2007, 07:15 AM
--You say there's no difference, but you then list the major differences between the two and call call capacity difference a red herring. Huh? Want to explain that.--

I wrote there's no quality difference. Since I've not seen any. ;)

--Blu-Ray's additional capacity is huge. Capacity=quality. Quality = #1.--

Disagree. I've seen no evidence that the extra capacity is giving a better image nor better sound. Hence, I said it's a red herring. In fact, since they used an inferior compression algorithmn on early Blu-Ray discs, some of them look WORSE than HD.

Extras thus far on HD (either format) have been underwhelming. And with current blu-Ray drives not even being up to Blu-Ray spec 1.1, HD-DVD can do things like Picture in Picture that Blu-Ray simply can't. It's promised for future drives, but there are doubts whether older discs will even play in the newly speced drives. Only the PS3 thus far looks like it can be updated via firmware to cater for it.

So technically, HD-DVD is better. Quality wise, they're the same. Capacity Blu-Ray wins. Personally I think you have to look at these things rather than check off feature sets. At the moment, these are even.

JW77
09-26-2007, 08:24 AM
I have a question about HD players, what if you hooked up a player to a standard tv that has at least component inputs, how would it look?

It would look like standard DVD.

Unless you have a HDTV, there's not much point in getting either BR or HD-DVD.

rxfiend
09-26-2007, 08:45 AM
how about mpeg/pixelization? I would think it'd look better in that way. The TV I have is a 36" flat screen tube and does a damn good job at Standard dvds, but it also shows the flaws on some discs due to poor authoring.

dwatts
09-26-2007, 09:35 AM
It might well look better on standard DVD, since I believe the majority of hi-def players include an upscaler.

JW77
09-26-2007, 11:45 AM
A standard def television will limit you to 480 lines of resolution, the same as a regular DVD. Whereas HD is either 720 or 1080 lines. An upscaler shouldn't make much difference if all you have is a standard DVD; in fact it might degrade the image since it's being upscaled and then down-scaled again for the SDTV.

Not sure about artifacting for poor authoring. While the HD discs should have better transfers than SD-DVD, you also run the risk of introducing new problems by dropping the 1080 image down to 480. Downscaling a 16:9 DVD for a 4:3 television can introduce moire patterns and jagged diagonals. I would assume that dropping 1080 down to 480 could do the same thing.

dickieduvet
09-26-2007, 11:54 AM
No

dickieduvet
09-26-2007, 11:57 AM
HD-DVD will be gathering more support in the new year, Warner will decide which way to go after the holiday sales reports come in.

Nemesis
09-26-2007, 12:49 PM
hrm, maybe i should wait till xmas then... there will be more titles and they may be more affordable.. plus it seems that a lot of the current releases are questionable video quality so maybe the studios will get their shit together in the next few months (or better than now at least)

X-human
09-26-2007, 08:58 PM
Nemesis is looking for recommendations for Blu-ray movies, so far few have provided and the rest is a retread of the HD disc thread. Let's stay on topic shall we?

Over on AVS Forum they have what they call the "Tier Thread" which lists Blu-ray discs by quality of presentation. You can check out the list and see what movies you might be interested in and how they compare to each other. All on one listing: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=858316

I'll have to check out The Lookout. The Fountain looks amazing, they used a lot of in camera effects so it has a very cinematic feel to it. It really made me feel like I was watching film and not a digital medium. The Prestige is also excellent both in presentation and the movie itself; Scarlett Johansson, how can you go wrong?

dwatts
09-26-2007, 10:23 PM
Get Casablanca. It's a WOW.

rxfiend
09-26-2007, 11:51 PM
A standard def television will limit you to 480 lines of resolution, the same as a regular DVD. Whereas HD is either 720 or 1080 lines. An upscaler shouldn't make much difference if all you have is a standard DVD; in fact it might degrade the image since it's being upscaled and then down-scaled again for the SDTV.

Not sure about artifacting for poor authoring. While the HD discs should have better transfers than SD-DVD, you also run the risk of introducing new problems by dropping the 1080 image down to 480. Downscaling a 16:9 DVD for a 4:3 television can introduce moire patterns and jagged diagonals. I would assume that dropping 1080 down to 480 could do the same thing.


thanks for the info.

othervoice1
09-26-2007, 11:59 PM
--Blu-Ray's additional capacity is huge. Capacity=quality. Quality = #1.--

Disagree. I've seen no evidence that the extra capacity is giving a better image nor better sound. Hence, I said it's a red herring. In fact, since they used an inferior compression algorithmn on early Blu-Ray discs, some of them look WORSE than HD.

Extras thus far on HD (either format) have been underwhelming. And with current blu-Ray drives not even being up to Blu-Ray spec 1.1, HD-DVD can do things like Picture in Picture that Blu-Ray simply can't. It's promised for future drives, but there are doubts whether older discs will even play in the newly speced drives. Only the PS3 thus far looks like it can be updated via firmware to cater for it.

So technically, HD-DVD is better. Quality wise, they're the same. Capacity Blu-Ray wins. Personally I think you have to look at these things rather than check off feature sets. At the moment, these are even.[/QUOTE]

Totally agree the xtra capacity on blu ray isnt even being utilized right now and makes no difference in picture or audio quality- and as I said before HD-DVD now has approved a 51 gb disc so it is capable of now having larger capacity than blu-ray- but the hd-dvd camp is sensible- why charge consumers more for players and/or movies when the xtra space is of no use right now- they have it and will use it if and when it is neccessary or wanted by the consumer

othervoice1
09-27-2007, 12:02 AM
hrm, maybe i should wait till xmas then... there will be more titles and they may be more affordable.. plus it seems that a lot of the current releases are questionable video quality so maybe the studios will get their shit together in the next few months (or better than now at least)

the best thing to do is wait- the competition is making each camp lower prices fairly quickly and you can only benefit by waiting a while- there was a rumor that warner was going to hd-dvd but it was quickly squashed by warner- but sometimes rumors have a way of having some truth behind them- in any case prices will be cheaper and many more movies will be released while movies that have been out for a while will come down in price - i mainly jumped on board cuz the hd-dvd add on for my 360 was so cheap and with the free movies was about the same as a standard dvd player

Reverenddave
09-27-2007, 12:50 AM
I own both a BR and HD player, along with over 200 movies (about 60/40 HD-DVD). Here's my opinion.

Pick up an HD-DVD player this year. You should be able to get one for under $250. It'll come with 5 free movies through a mail-in offer. Plus you might find a promo where the store will throw in a few movies (Amazon recently offered 3 free HD-DVDs with each HD-DVD Player). This will at least get you started. And the Toshiba HD-DVD players are excellent at upscaling standard DVDs.

Then next Christmas, get a Blu-Ray player. By then the prices on PS3 and stand-alone players will drop. I wouldn't be surprised to see a BR player around $300 at that time.

As someone that's bought a lot of HD movies, here's my overall impressions.

BR tends to put out movies that are more recent. Looking through my BR collection, I don't see many films that came out before 2000. HD-DVD seems to have more catalog titles. My HD-DVD collection has a few old classics and many from the 70's, 80's and 90's.

BR discs are slightly more expensive due to a higher MSRP. I buy most discs at Amazon, because they usually have the lowest prices. So a few days ago I did a search at dvdpricesearch and here's what I found:

BLURAY Under $20 = 202 titles
HD-DVD Under $20 = 243 titles

BLURAY Over $20 = 196 titles
HD-DVD Over $20 = 120 titles

The basic breakdown at Amazon is 51% of all Blu-Rays are under $20 and 67% of all HD-DVDs are under $20. The numbers get much closer if you bump it up to $25. 74% of all Blu-Rays are under $25 and 78% of all HD-DVDs are under $25.

Interestingly, I tend to find better used prices on Blu-Rays. But maybe that's just my buying habits.

In regards to Must Own discs, everyone likes different movies, but here's some of my favorites:

HD-DVD
King Kong
Serenity
The Thing
The Frighteners
Dawn Of The Dead
Casablanca
The Warriors
300
The Fountain
Big Lebowski

BLURAY
Pirates Of The Carribean 2 (there's a video problem with #1)
The Prestige
The Descent
House of 1000 Corpses
Devil's Rejects
Fifth Element
Casino Royale
Starship Troopers (UK Import)
Kingdom Of Heaven: Director's Cut
Halloween

othervoice1
09-27-2007, 03:22 AM
This shows one disadvantage of being region free- some studios dont like it- one reason Disney didnt side with HD DVD - kinda crappy on the part of the studios that think this is a big deal if you ask me:

Video Business is reporting that New Line Cinema will be releasing the title Hairspray day and date on DVD and Blu-ray discs only on November 20.

The HD DVD version of the title will be held back until the first half of 2008 due to the format’s lack of regional coding, effectively making Hairspray a Blu-ray exclusive for the Holiday Season.

To add to this the Blu-ray version will have a “Behind the Beat” picture-in-picture-type option allowing viewers to watch behind-the-scenes footage and commentary concurrent with the running feature, making it one of the first picture in picture titles.

The HD DVD will reportedly include Internet and Web Enhanced features.

Dave
09-27-2007, 03:32 AM
How is the extra space on BR not being utilized when 50gb discs are in fact being released? Are you telling me that these discs have the same bitrate as HD-DVD? I'm sure they are in fact higher quality, have more extras, or have more soundtracks. How is that not superior again?

othervoice1
09-27-2007, 03:38 AM
Blu rays larger capacity does not give it better graphics than hd-dvd - also as said several times hd-dvd now has 51gb if they want to use it but there is no need to right now because it gives it no better quality or advantage over blu ray- most of the movies coming out right now blu ray nor hd dvd are even giving you as many xtra features as the standard disc is putting out so hopefully that changes over time

othervoice1
09-27-2007, 03:41 AM
How is the extra space on BR not being utilized when 50gb discs are in fact being released? Are you telling me that these discs have the same bitrate as HD-DVD? I'm sure they are in fact higher quality, have more extras, or have more soundtracks. How is that not superior again?

if you can in fact find some information stating this in some way please share and cite your source as everything ive ever read does not show the extra capacity gives blu ray any better picture quality nor have i heard of more features due to xtra space then hd dvd

Nemesis
09-27-2007, 04:32 AM
surely there are limits to how good an image can look on a 1080P and at some point the picture can't be improved no matter how much extra space you throw at it.. what extra space does is allow you longer movies, more extras, more complex menus? unless someone has definitive evidence what the max bitrate of a 2 hour 1080P movie is and how much space it can take up then this argument is pointless??

X-human
09-27-2007, 04:52 AM
Blu rays larger capacity does not give it better graphics than hd-dvd

Yes, it does. It also has a higher maximum for bitrate:

Blu-ray 48.0 Mbit/s
HD-DVD 30.24 Mbit/s

With higher disc capacity you are better able to utilize higher bitrates. Even with higher capacity HD-DVD can't go over 30.24 Mbit/s. PERIOD. This isn't an opinion. This is black and white facts.

There already IS a Blu-ray player you can find for less than $300, it's the BDP-S300. It also upscales SD-DVDs. It's also 1080p, the cheaper HD-DVD models only do 1080i. It also comes with a deal to get 5 free Blu-ray discs and also has the Amazon 3 disc deal as well.

HD discs are priced the same. Meaning catalog titles have the same MSRPs regardless of the format. New Releases have the same MSRPs regardless of the format. Actually HD-DVD discs often cost more because they have some combo discs which usually are $5 more, which many people complain about manufacturing problems with.

Also on Reverenddave's "Must have" HD-DVD list the following titles are also on Blu-ray:
The Warriors
300
The Fountain

Casablanca is coming very soon according to Warner end of 2007 but I suspect first quarter 2008. The Dawn of the Dead on HD-DVD is only the remake, which is the censored version. Also 300 is a combo disc on HD-DVD and is more expensive than the Blu-ray release.

Reverenddave
09-27-2007, 05:36 AM
I haven't seen any reviews that recommend a BR over an HD-DVD based on video quality. Some reviews of early discs actually recommended the HD over the BR due to poor encoding. That problem's been fixed. But I don't think I've ever heard anyone say, "Get the BR disc instead of the HD-DVD disc because it has better video".

I don't know where you're finding the BDP-S300 for under $300. I checked pricegrabber and Amazon, and I don't see it for less that $430. At Amazon I don't see any BR players under $400 (unless it's used or refurbished).

When catalog movies are released on both formats, the prices are the same. But Blu-Ray has more exclusive discs priced at $34.99 and $39.99. For example, all the upcoming Fox BR's will be $39.99 and a lot of the Disney BR are $34.99. HD-DVD does have some combo discs which are more expensive. But I provided numbers from Amazon that back up my findings. HD-DVD has a higher percentage of low priced discs (under $20).

Also, The Warriors is a Paramount title and will no longer be available on BluRay. 300 and The Fountain are available on both. But the HD-DVD of 300 has some exclusive features.

My recommendation to the original poster is to plan on getting both formats. Start out with HD-DVD, because it's more affordable at this time. Then pick up a BR as soon as the priced drop a little more.

Think of it this way: What's $500 going to get you?

HD-DVD: Toshiba HD-A2 HD DVD Player ($238) and 20 HD-DVD (7 Free at Amazon + 13 bought for $20 each).

BLURAY: Sony BDP-S300 Blu-ray Disc Player ($438) and 8 Blu-Ray (5 Free at Amazon + 3 bought for $20 each).

Reverenddave
09-27-2007, 05:54 AM
Actually, I just re-read the original poster's question. For some reason I was thinking of someone else's question.

My information probably isn't very useful. You're in Australia. There are different prices and exclusive distribution deals over there.

Even though HD-DVDs aren't region coded, I popped a Region 3 NTSC DVD into my player and it wouldn't play. I don't know if you'll have the same problem with a player bought in R4.

I don't think either format is "inferior". Aside from a few bad encodes in the early days, I've never heard anyone say "Buy the _____ disc because it's better than the _____ disc." Usually both discs are almost exactly the same.

There are people that don't like the HD-DVD combo discs. Some have problems playing them, and some don't like to pay extra for the DVD side. But many of these are being rereleased on regular HD-DVD (without the DVD side). I have a feeling that combo discs won't be around much longer.

dwatts
09-27-2007, 07:47 AM
I'm sure they are in fact higher quality, have more extras, or have more soundtracks. How is that not superior again?

I'm sure they don't look any better. I don't know where you're getting your info, Dave. This is all sounding a big propeller-head - "the specs read better, it must be better!" In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Personally, I'd rather face reality. ;)

Region coded. Spec not firmed up with features already missing. Up to four minute boot time per disc. More expensive players. And no increase in picture quality. I'm not anti Blu-Ray, but it's certainly not bettering HD-DVD at the moment.

I'll leave it up to DVDBeaver, who have been comparing DVD release for quite some time:

So far, of those titles offered in both formats, there is virtually no difference in image quality even when different video codecs are utilized. (Sometimes, Paramount used different codecs for its HD and Blu-Ray titles. This is no longer relevant because Paramount and DreamWorks Animation are switching to HD-only.) Warner sent me about 15 titles in both formats and I've had a chance to compare visually and there is no difference that I can ascertain (Warner uses the same encode for titles with opposing new formats). A dual-layered HD-DVD is capable of holding about 5 hours of HD programming – far in excess of standard film times – if bonus features exceed this we may see them move to a 2nd disc as they do with SD. A dual-layered Blu-ray DVD can hold a whopping 9 hours of HD content. The latter is far more than I require to watch any of my favorite films and 1 film per disc is enough for me personally speaking.

I don't know how we got to confusing a feature check box over quality. Regardless, there simply is no quality difference at the moment. As I said, some early Blu-ray's actually looked worse, but it was an encoding issue. As always, the transfer and mastering will determine quality - as it does with DVD - not the extra capacity. Believe your eyes, not the propeller heads.

With higher disc capacity you are better able to utilize higher bitrates. Even with higher capacity HD-DVD can't go over 30.24 Mbit/s. PERIOD. This isn't an opinion. This is black and white facts.

Same here, this is techie stuff (common in the IT industry) that conveniently ignores the facts by stating something that is technically true and insisting therefore that 2 plus 2 equals 5. Actually, when you have those claiming that you can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a projected image, this supposed higher bitrate (which isn't being used) is a red herring. Still, people are free to choose what they want thank goodness. We all know that, over time, the capacity of these will increase.

ps: For computer usage, I'm eager for a blu-ray drive for sure!

Dave
09-27-2007, 05:41 PM
You guys may be right; I am only speculating.

But please point to a source that indicates blu-ray cannot have a higher bitrate than HD-DVD. If you put a 3 hour movie on HD-DVD and a 3 hour movie on blu-ray, the blu-ray can have higher bitrate.

Common sense tells me: More capacity = ability for higher bitrate. Whether it does or not, I don't know. But point to me a link that proves they have the same bitrate.

I know there are other factors - codec, etc. But if you were - hypothetically - to author the same print on both HD-DVD and blu-ray using the same codec, blu-ray could have a higher bitrate, which results in higher quality.

Side-by-side tests were done on superbit DVDs versus standard DVDs, clearing proving that higher bitrate resulted in a higher quality picture. While superbit is still only 8gb, more space was devoted to the picture presentation, allow for higher bitrate, allowing for superior picture. Wouldn't the same apply to blu-ray? If HD-DVD were 75gb, I would be saying the same thing.

Now, if HD-DVD and Blu-Ray do use the same bitrate, then I agree they are essentially equal on the quality front. Blu-Ray could still have other advantages, like more extras on and more audio tracks, etc.

X-human
09-27-2007, 06:50 PM
Warner priced 300 at $35 for HD-DVD and $30 for Blu-ray. You can't throw a generic pricing system on either format accept to say combo's are $5 more. Studio pricing is what it is. Regardless of the format, a studio's prices would be the same.

I wouldn't recommend buying HD-DVD now simply because there's a $200 MSRP player coming out soon, I'd wait to see how that sizes up. There were some good BR player sales in the summer, I'd wait for those to happen again during the holidays.

If someone owns one format, either HD-DVD or Blu-ray, I wouldn't recommend buying into the other format; "Going neutral" as it were. Whatever money you'd dump into a second player is better spent elsewhere. Prices are only going to come down, there's no rush. If the format war ends tomorrow and your player's on the losing side, it'll still play all your discs just as well.

Now, if HD-DVD and Blu-Ray do use the same bitrate, then I agree they are essentially equal on the quality front. Blu-Ray could still have other advantages, like more extras on and more audio tracks, etc.

True, on the same transfer. But Blu-ray players have a higher maximum bitrate:

Blu-ray 48.0 Mbit/s
HD-DVD 30.24 Mbit/s

When utilized Blu-ray can be better, which larger disc capacity can only help ensure. Sony, Disney, Fox, Lionsgate are all able to utilize Blu-ray. While Paramount and Warner discs look good, they're not nearly as good as Disney's discs. It never really dawned on my how great HD is until I saw Dead Man's Chest and could see the ocean horizon as crystal clear. Disney loves to push the bitrate to the max and it shows.

When people say the same movie on HD-DVD discs compared to Blu-ray discs look identical it's because they use the same transfer. Of course they're identical, since they've been set to the lowest common denominator IE HD-DVD. No one should dispute this.

What needs to be done to show this is taking the same master and transferring to each format to the best of their abilities. Which no company's going to do because it's twice the expense.

dwatts
09-27-2007, 06:59 PM
But please point to a source that indicates blu-ray cannot have a higher bitrate than HD-DVD. If you put a 3 hour movie on HD-DVD and a 3 hour movie on blu-ray, the blu-ray can have higher bitrate.


To operative word there is CAN. And the answer is, while it's possible, it just DOESN'T. Reading up on peoples experiences, I'm pretty sure no-one would see a difference quality wise even if they did.

Again, I'm talking about what is, not what might be.

I will also mention once again - some people doing testing on projected images are saying that they can't tell he difference in image quality between 1080i and 720i. I had a link somewhere of a large group of people that did the experiment. You have to take disc quality into account of course, but I found that interesting myself.

Of course - couple years down the road who knows - but then, HD will change by that time too..... I still think this is propeller head stuff - techie talk. The eyes might be lieing, but what the heck. :D

17thJuggalo
09-27-2007, 08:07 PM
Personally, I'd just stick with the one thats selling more. I'd be pissed if I invested into an HD-DVD collection then a year later no more are being made.

Reverenddave
09-27-2007, 08:26 PM
Personally, I'd just stick with the one thats selling more. I'd be pissed if I invested into an HD-DVD collection then a year later no more are being made.

I'm not sure that current selling trends are the best way to pick a winner.

First, neither format is selling like hotcakes. BR is currently selling more, but it's really just a drop in the ocean compared to SD-DVD.

Second, sales figures are fleeting. A year ago, HD-DVD was outselling BR. Today BR is outselling HD-DVD. Who knows which will be selling more in 6 months.

And finally, remember UMD? That was the hot new media back in 2005. Studios were pumping out titles. And now they can barely give them away.

I think this format war is going to last at least 2-3 years. And I wouldn't be surprised it both formats stick around for a long time.

dwatts
09-27-2007, 08:29 PM
Some pundits are predicting both will remain. Personally I don't care right now. Buying into something like this going into the Christmas season is bound to cost more. In the first quarter nxt year I might take the plunge. Prices will have eased, and maybe - just maybe - we'll know more about futures.

Reverenddave
09-27-2007, 08:40 PM
In regards to the bitrate of HD-DVD vs BR:

If you were to compare King Kong (HD-DVD) to POTC: Dead Man's Chest (Blu-Ray) on the same set-up, I doubt anyone would say that one is better than the other. Those are arguably the two reference discs for each format. King Kong is a 3+ hour movie on a single HD-DVD. Comparing those two movies, I don't see how anyone can say that the video on HD-DVD is inferior to Blu-Ray.

Dave
09-27-2007, 08:40 PM
To operative word there is CAN. And the answer is, while it's possible, it just DOESN'T. Reading up on peoples experiences, I'm pretty sure no-one would see a difference quality wise even if they did.

Again, I'm talking about what is, not what might be.

I will also mention once again - some people doing testing on projected images are saying that they can't tell he difference in image quality between 1080i and 720i. I had a link somewhere of a large group of people that did the experiment. You have to take disc quality into account of course, but I found that interesting myself.

Of course - couple years down the road who knows - but then, HD will change by that time too..... I still think this is propeller head stuff - techie talk. The eyes might be lieing, but what the heck. :D

That's right - what can be superior, and ultimately is superior of the two because of what it is capable of.

You are pretty sure no one would see the quality, huh? On my smaller HDTV, most wouldn't see a difference between a standard DVD and a high def DVD. Doesn't mean they are the same. The larger you go with the image, the more apparent the quality difference becomes. That is why we want the technically superior format; the one that is capable of displaying the best image.

dwatts
09-27-2007, 08:47 PM
--You are pretty sure no one would see the quality, huh? --

Actually I was repeating what I read elsewhere. I will dig out the link, see if I can find it. They were projecting hi-def images - it wasn't a TV. I can't say one way or the other, I wasn't there during the test, and I've not been able to compare myself. :(

I'll go see if I can find the link.

dwatts
09-27-2007, 08:59 PM
Here ya go - interesting read.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=767929&page=1

Dave
09-28-2007, 03:40 AM
Here ya go - interesting read.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=767929&page=1

LOL.

Where is HD-DVD or Blu-Ray mentioned in that link?

We're not debating 1080 vs 720 here, which is all your link is referring to.

dwatts
09-28-2007, 07:18 AM
*I* mentioned the 720 and 1080 thing earlier in the thread. Thought it would be good to post the link. And actually, you quoted it back at me. ;)

What's more - if they can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080 with that equipment, on that screen size - and you going to say a higher bitrate of Blu-Ray over HD-DVD is going to improve the image? I think not, because with what we currently have, people can't tell what are supposed to be major changes (leap in resolution here). As an upgrade choice, I think the link given is a fascinating read. :)

The capacity thing is propeller head stuff, and won't actually change anything. Just like the myth that a better bitrate gives you a better picture. I have a disc here, The Screaming Skull - it has an incredibly high bitrate - and it looks horrible. It's the codec, the transfer, the mastering, that ultimately decides. The bit rate thing is a red herring. It always has been. A higher bitrate might indicate a better picture, but it's not as though it automagically does. And even buying discs today because they have a bitrate doesn't mean you're getting a better picture (which is what matters, imo. I could care les about bit statistics when it comes to watching movies). :)

Where the links demoing/explaining how Blu-Ray and bitrates beat out HD-DVD. What can/could happen isn't relevent, unless you enjoy choosing a format for what it could do if you lived in some parrallel universe.

Reverenddave
09-28-2007, 08:08 AM
Here's something to keep in mind, for those on the fence or trying to decide which format will win the "war":

Even if there was only one format, and that format was perfect. All the studios were putting out movies in that format, and the prices were dropped to a more reasonable amount. It still wouldn't guarantee that this format will ever be more than a small fleeting niche. And there's absolutely no guarantee that it would reach DVD levels of widestream acceptance.

Check out this article on HD Ignorance:

http://www.homemediaretailing.com/news/html/breaking_article.cfm?sec_id=2&&article_ID=11257

Quite frankly, I don't see Joe Six Pack going for HD media. At least not for another 10 years or more. The transition from VHS to DVD was easy. It was just like upgrading your VCR. And the benefits of DVD over VHS were obvious. A huge advance in video/audio quality, lower prices and smaller shelf space made DVD much more desirable.

But the transition from DVD to HD is going to be more difficult. It requires upgrading your entire home theater and understanding the new technology. The improvements in video/audio are noticeable when watching side by side, but it's not a huge advancement. And the prices will probably never be lower than current DVD prices.

This HD stuff is fun for home theater nuts. But I doubt it will ever be more than a small/medium niche of hardcore fans.

Dave
09-29-2007, 01:20 PM
*I* mentioned the 720 and 1080 thing earlier in the thread. Thought it would be good to post the link. And actually, you quoted it back at me. ;)

What's more - if they can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080 with that equipment, on that screen size - and you going to say a higher bitrate of Blu-Ray over HD-DVD is going to improve the image? I think not, because with what we currently have, people can't tell what are supposed to be major changes (leap in resolution here). As an upgrade choice, I think the link given is a fascinating read. :)

The capacity thing is propeller head stuff, and won't actually change anything. Just like the myth that a better bitrate gives you a better picture. I have a disc here, The Screaming Skull - it has an incredibly high bitrate - and it looks horrible. It's the codec, the transfer, the mastering, that ultimately decides. The bit rate thing is a red herring. It always has been. A higher bitrate might indicate a better picture, but it's not as though it automagically does. And even buying discs today because they have a bitrate doesn't mean you're getting a better picture (which is what matters, imo. I could care les about bit statistics when it comes to watching movies). :)

Where the links demoing/explaining how Blu-Ray and bitrates beat out HD-DVD. What can/could happen isn't relevent, unless you enjoy choosing a format for what it could do if you lived in some parrallel universe.

If you continue to increase the size of the screen, you will get to a point where you can see a difference and that resolution and bitrate do in factor matter. This has been proven numerous times in the past. Do a google search for superbit comparisons and you can see for yourself.

The real question is how long it will take before larger screens become affordable enough. I can see myself having a nice HD setup in a few years, which is why I am preferring blu-ray.

dwatts
09-29-2007, 02:28 PM
Oh, of course. And we shouldn't forget that SD can handle large screens well. We have to realistic here about how home users will view these discs. For a year or so I had a screen that was 12 feet across at home (down to a little under 7 foot now). Standard DVD looked damn good on a 12 foot screen. Hi-Def no doubt looks better. I've no idea at what point SD starts to break down screen size wise - but it's larger than most home users will ever get to enjoy.

I'd have a 30 foot screen if I could - but it won't be this lifetime.

Grim
09-29-2007, 02:44 PM
The Dawn of the Dead on HD-DVD is only the remake, which is the censored version.

When you say censored you make it sound like its severely edited. You don't see some naked gal's boobs, thats it. Oooooooooohhhh. All the gore is still there.

othervoice1
09-29-2007, 03:43 PM
That's right - what can be superior, and ultimately is superior of the two because of what it is capable of.

Once again blu-ray is not utilizing its 50gb to have any advantage right on HD-DVD AAANNNNDDD HD-DVD now has 51GB so I guess using your arguement for what is better in the long run- I guess HD-DVD is better then so thanks for backing up HD-DVD with your arguement<:

Report: DVD Forum Approves 51GB HD DVD
Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 07:55 AM ET
Tags: Toshiba (all tags)

The 51GB HD DVD disc is apparently one step closer to becoming a reality.

According a published report from UK research firm Screen Digest, the DVD Forum (the international organization responsible for DVD standards) has approved a 51 GB single-sided triple-layer HD DVD disc for production.

First announced by Toshiba last January at CES, a 51GB HD DVD disc would up the format's current dual-layer maximum storage capacity by a cool 21GB, but more importantly, it would close the gap between HD DVD and Blu-ray. Blu-ray currently supports 50GB discs, which has been one of the primary tech advantages it holds over its rival.

The extension to the existing HD DVD standard was submitted by Toshiba in April and was said to be approved on August 31st.

rp108
09-29-2007, 05:17 PM
Buying into Blu-ray at this point is a big mistake. Blu-ray will soon be a PS3 format very similar to UMD for the PSP.

Two reasons not to support Blu-ray.

1. Paramount and Dreamworks at the end of August completely dropped support for Blu-ray and now supports HD DVD exclusivley. Almost a year of releasing on Blu-ray and they drop it? Obviously they know something the public doesn't and I am willing to bet more studios like Warner Bros will be following. So Blu-ray is losing studio support.

2. A Blu-ray machine today is obsolete. This is a fact. BD-J 1.0 (current machines) will not be able to play all the special features of future releases that are 1.1 or 2.0 compliant. So, when 1.1 becomes the norm, good luck accessing everything on the disc if you own a 1.0 machine. Here is a link of some people's frustation with 1.0 already for Blu-ray. This will only get worse as BD-J 1.1 and 2.0.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9gQG4OFgrpA


I could go on for days about this but I won't. HD DVD is definatley the way to go.

rp108
09-29-2007, 05:30 PM
That's right - what can be superior, and ultimately is superior of the two because of what it is capable of.


That is incorrect. 51 Triple Layer HD DVDs have been approved are in the works. So HD DVD will have 1 gb more than a Dual layer Blu-ray disc. And don't think that Blu-ray can even come close to getting a triple layer disc. BDA is having so much trouble now with manufacturing BD-50 that a triple layer is out of the question.

http://www.campaignhd.com/807_State_Of_BD.html

Read about the manufacturing problems.

Dave
09-29-2007, 08:00 PM
Buying into Blu-ray at this point is a big mistake. Blu-ray will soon be a PS3 format very similar to UMD for the PSP.

Two reasons not to support Blu-ray.

1. Paramount and Dreamworks at the end of August completely dropped support for Blu-ray and now supports HD DVD exclusivley. Almost a year of releasing on Blu-ray and they drop it? Obviously they know something the public doesn't and I am willing to bet more studios like Warner Bros will be following. So Blu-ray is losing studio support.

2. A Blu-ray machine today is obsolete. This is a fact. BD-J 1.0 (current machines) will not be able to play all the special features of future releases that are 1.1 or 2.0 compliant. So, when 1.1 becomes the norm, good luck accessing everything on the disc if you own a 1.0 machine. Here is a link of some people's frustation with 1.0 already for Blu-ray. This will only get worse as BD-J 1.1 and 2.0.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9gQG4OFgrpA


I could go on for days about this but I won't. HD DVD is definatley the way to go.

Owned! Not.

It's well known that members of the HD-DVD camp paid off Paramount to go exclusive. Paramount themselves even acknowledged this to an extent. I'm fine with this, actually. All is fair in love and war, and I'm not against them doing this. But you need to at least mention it as the reason. Don't just arbitrarily say Blu-Ray is losing support.

Agree with your consensus regarding BD-J. It's an unfortunate situation and it is a fault of Blu-Ray's. But I still give them the edge due to the extra space.

If HD-DVD is approved and it in fact becomes a reality that they can release 50gb discs, I'm all for them taking the crown. I don't really care one way or the other. I want the superior format to win, and to me it's about specs, which blu-ray has right now. Second to specs is studio support, which I'm still giving to blu-ray since they have Fox/MGM/Sony/Disney, plus the neutrals likes Warner and New Line. Losing Paramount was a big hit, but it only gives HD-DVD Universal and Paramount. Those are two huge libraries and two huge libraries I want access to, but they still don't compare to Fox/MGM/Sony/Disney. Especially MGM; they bring so much to the table. But even studio support isn't all that important to me because *if* a clear winner emerges, chances are most will eventually release onto the winning format.

Now if HD-DVD hits 50gb and blu-ray adds another layer, I'm all for blu-ray still. Someone mentioned that another layer won't have due to the problems with BD-50. I disagree. DVD-18 used to have problems and they did resolve them. DVD-18 never became too common because of expense, but technical issues can and will be resolved. Actually, as far as I know they *were* resolved on BD-50 and there are tons of BD-50 releases now, so I disagree on that point.

But as I said earlier in this thread, and I'll say it again, the only choice right now is both. If I were to adopt now, I would get both. But I'm not adopting now because A) there aren't enough titles out that I want, B) I'm not terribly interested in upgrading my DVD collection at the moment, and C) I have an HD satellite receiver with a channel dedicated to horror movies in high definition. Neither blu-ray or hd-dvd can match the choices on MonstersHD. While their specs may be superior to the stream I'm receiving, specs are only as good as the titles available.

Ash28M
09-29-2007, 08:40 PM
-
Totally agree the xtra capacity on blu ray isnt even being utilized right now and makes no difference in picture or audio quality- and as I said before HD-DVD now has approved a 51 gb disc so it is capable of now having larger capacity than blu-ray-

That's not true. 51 Gigs is the Max HD DVD can do right now in tests (and you need new player). BR has already proven to be able to get 200 Gigs on one side as it can be layered 8 times. BR just needs to be double layered to reach 50 Gigs.

othervoice1
09-29-2007, 09:46 PM
That's not true. 51 Gigs is the Max HD DVD can do right now in tests (and you need new player). BR has already proven to be able to get 200 Gigs on one side as it can be layered 8 times. BR just needs to be double layered to reach 50 Gigs.

Okay this thread is just starting to crack me up - anyone want to predict what HD-DVD and Blu Ray will be doing in the year 2030???? Both formats are great but I like HD-DVD more just personally while others on here like blu ray cuz they are both great - end of story- there is ton of info on the net for anyone that is trying to choose- but neither is better than the other in sound or picture right now and they are pretty split on studio support- I like the 1)Price and 2)Interactive Features and menus HD DVD is utilizing right now (yes I know blu ray has recently started some interactive features of their own) and 3) i like region free and 4)I owned an xbox 360 so the add on was really cheap- end of story part 2- the specs are a non factor right now on either side and the average consumer could care less what either MIGHT do in the future- beta was better than vhs but did the average consumer care? Im not saying either is better but its about price and what the average consumer (not the rich or tech geeks) like in features- if someone likes the studios like disney over paramount/dreamworks then they may want blu ray- if the want a ps3 they may want blu ray- if you have a xbxo 360 you may want to go hd dvd since its really cheap to add it on or standalone players being under 200 soon if you dont have much money- these are more of the type of things someone is looking for over nick picking specs and what one format MIGHT do in the future or be capable of years from now ect ect - I only brought up the 51 gb HD-DVD as and example of what HD DVD could or might do in teh future which is totally irrelevant and HD-DVD knows that right now price reigns over the xtra space since it isnt being utilized - I have no idea if HD-DVD or Blu-Ray is gonna win- stil think it is 50-50 with some experts saying they will coexist- I just wish they would have combo players come down in price and let em both thrive together so we can all watch whatever freakin movie we want to <:

Dave
09-29-2007, 09:54 PM
When you say censored you make it sound like its severely edited. You don't see some naked gal's boobs, thats it. Oooooooooohhhh. All the gore is still there.

Agreed. It is rather silly people make a fuss about a two second shot.

rp108
10-02-2007, 02:21 AM
You can give 100 reasons why Paramount/Dreamworks moved to HD DVD but in the end what is the truth? That Blu-ray is losing studio support, bottom line.

Blu-ray facts:
over 58% of Blu-ray discs are 25gb
over 48% of Blu-ray discs use last generation codec MPEG2
all current machines are BD-J 1.0 and will not be able to play all features from a Blu-ray disc BD-J 1.1 or BD-J 2.0
BDA does not require ethernet ports
BDA does not secondary video decoders or persistent storage
Current Blu-ray machines do not support high definiton audio such as TrueHD and DTS-HD:MA

So much for those specs ;)

Facts about studio support:
Blu-ray exclusives: 195
HD DVD exclusives: 187

So much for Blu-ray having more studio support ;)

Facts about HD DVD:
over 73% of HD DVDs are 30gb
over 96% of HD DVDs use advanced codec VC-1 and AVC
Every HD DVD machine is required to have a second video decoder to allow PIP.
Every HD DVD machine requires persistent storage.
Every HD DVD machine requires an ethernet support for ease of firmware updates.
Every HD DVD machine requires High Definition audio decoders for TrueHD.
HDi is completley finalized and will work with every HD DVD player made, unlike BD-J 1.0,1.1,and 2.0.

Did I mention HD DVD is cheaper than Blu-ray?

Like I said before, to invest in Blu-ray at this point is a big mistake. Especially when there is a cheaper, more complete, and superior format...HD DVD! :D

dwatts
10-02-2007, 06:57 AM
Add in Blu_ray has Region Coding, and stronger encryption....