***Official Blue Laser Software Disc. Thread*** (f/k/a "Hi-Def DVDs by Christmas?") (1 Viewer)

[AaronP]

i haven't read the rest of the thread yet, however, along with being able to have HD resolution, the huge size of these discs should allow for a lot less compression in the movie too. Great for picture quality fans, not so great for people who rip movies to DIVX.

 

[Peter Kline]

Better color, better blacks, better shadow detail and more film-like.. Closer to silver-based fim but not quite yet.

 

[GlennH]

Watching a reference quality DVD using a Progressive Scan player with my HDTV looks pretty darn good. Makes me wonder just how much better HD-DVD would look.

Depends on the quality of the source material, but judging from the comments of people who have compared HD broadcasts of movies to their DVD counterparts there is a noticeable difference. You could also see what the various websites like DVDFile and thedigitalbits said about that recent HD-VHS press event. I think they had some side-by-side comparisons there too.

 

[VicRuiz]

The difference really doesn't come through as clearly on screenshots, but here are some anyway from Gladiator (a reference DVD transfer):
DVD version:

HDTV version:

Even in screenshots you can see a clear difference.

 

[RobertR]

Actually, Vic, it was pointed out in another thread that those screen shots are only simulations. The actual DVD has more detail than the lower screen shot, and the HD has still more detail.

 

[VicRuiz]

They were? Well, I'll be damned! Can you point me to that thread, please?

Still, even if the shots are simulated, the quantification of the jump in quality still applies.

 

[Jeffrey Forner]

Does this mean I have to buy Star Wars again?

 

[Daniel L]

Look at it this way, if Lucas holds out long enough you won't have to buy it 2 more times.
Daniel L

 

[John Haghighi]

HD + uncompresed audio=
F M D
This is not Foot Mouth Disease. It's been around for a while and it's time to learn about why it's a better option for storage...
Here is another shameless link
Link Removed

 

[Joe Cole]

So what about the audio formats using the new HD-DVD technologies? Will SACD and DVD-A be history soon?

So should I not buy the new Sony XA777ES now? But wait? For now long?

Like many here it looks to me like FMHD-DVD is the way to go.

 

[Bryant Frazer]

This is not Foot Mouth Disease. It's been around for a while and it's time to learn about why it's a better option for storage...

FMD has been around for a while, but nobody has yet suggested a way to manufacture the discs practically and economically. For now, the company is in need of funding, and there was little buzz about FMD at the REPLItech show last week -- where the people who actually make optical discs get together to talk shop.

The DVD Forum companies, on the other hand, are hardly in need of start-up funds and are, in fact, the ones who will decide what the next-generation DVD standard actually is -- so I find it likely that their blue-laser proposal will come out on top.

-bf-

 

[DaViD Boulet]

The DVD Forum companies, on the other hand, are hardly in need of

start-up funds and are, in fact, the ones who will decide what the

next-generation DVD standard actually is -- so I find it likely that

their blue-laser proposal will come out on top.

The hold-up with FMD is more fated in corporate politics than in technical obstacles. The Blue-laser camp has had an agenda for some years and has never paid any heed to the developments on the FMD front, which would only compete with their own R&D interests.

Blue-laser will probably become the next technolgy for a disc-carrier, but not because it's the "right" thing, but because the guys in charge want it because it will make them more money and help them recoup their investment costs in a technology that only offers incremental gains.

-dave

 

[Jeff Kleist]

some form of HD DVD format is likely to come out sooner than we think. The reason is the HDTV broadcast law. All TV stations must broadcast an HDTV signal by the year 2006. The problem is the HDTV numbers are still not up there yet. I surmise the reason is not enough content.

No, the reason is the $1000+ Price tag

When 27" HD Monitors are under $500, and you can get a 20" for $250-300, THEN it will start to get popular

What most of us forget, and I will quote our own Big Disc Cat on this "TV is furniture" to J6P. They want a little 20" box to stick on a table in the corner. They don't care about screen size, they don't care about calibration, they don't want a 50" Rear Projection set cluttering up their living room. Sad but true. And until there is a low priced digital set that fits this criteria, they will continue not to care.

Also, the law only mandates a digital signal, NOT HD by 2006, and they will only shut off the analog when either 2006 hits, OR 85% of the US has a digital TV, whichever comes LAST. Gee, so it'll be another 10-20 years before the analog gets killed.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

What most of us forget, and I will quote our own Big Disc Cat on this "TV is furniture" to J6P. They want a little 20" box to stick on a table in the corner. They don't care about screen size, they don't care about calibration, they don't want a 50" Rear Projection set cluttering up their living room. Sad but true. And until there is a low priced digital set that fits this criteria, they will continue not to care.

To continue to put this in perspective, I saw some sales stats a while back that I (unfortunately) did not save.
Not only did direct-view sets outsell projections sets by some enormous amount (10 to 1? 20 to 1?), if you look at the top ten best-selling sets in the country, there is not one model over 27 inches. Do not let the floorspace at Best Buy fool you, even a 32" TV only dreams of selling as well as the 19" models.
These stats were for SD and HD models all lumped together. The one good thing was that 8 or 9 of the top ten RPTVs were HD-capable, so I'd say the 'regular' RPTVs will disappear in the next 2 years.

 

[VicRuiz]

Actually, It's not as cut and dry as that. The statute literally reads "until 85% of households can receive a digital signal". There is no mention of having the equipment to receive, only that the signal is there to be received. Technically, as soon as 85% of all OTA stations are in the air digitally, that requirement would be met. The FCC would be well within its mandate if it were to interpret it that way. Now, will they? That's the 70 billion dollar question.

 

[Bryant Frazer]

The hold-up with FMD is more fated in corporate politics than in technical obstacles.

If you say so. The replication engineers I've spoken to expressed a great deal of skepticism that FMD can be replicated in the kind of factory setting that mass-production requires. There are undoubtedly political problems with the Forum companies, but it's telling that, despite its old relationship with Toolex and its more recent one with WAMO, Constellation 3D has yet to deliver a workable scheme for replicating FMD discs. The executives have told me that making the discs shouldn't be much harder than making current DVDs, but again, replicators I've asked are pessimistic.

Then again, I remember replicators telling me that DVD-18 would never be a popular DVD format because it was just too hard to make -- but, wait a minute, that turned out to be true.

On the other hand, progress continues to be made on the blue-laser front. At REPLItech, Optical Disc Corporation said it had figured out a way to record a 35GB DVD using UV lasers, rather than the electron beam that had been demonstrated several years ago by Nimbus Technology and Engineering (now owned by Technicolor). There have been no comparable announcements of equipment being devised to make FMD discs, which leads me to believe that the barriers are indeed technical as well as political.

-bf-

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Actually, It's not as cut and dry as that. The statute literally reads "until 85% of households can receive a digital signal". There is no mention of having the equipment to receive, only that the signal is there to be received. Technically, as soon as 85% of all OTA stations are in the air digitally, that requirement would be met. The FCC would be well within its mandate if it were to interpret it that way. Now, will they? That's the 70 billion dollar question.

Anybody who thinks this will happen, I ask you this.
You want to put your money where your mouth is?
From: http://www.fcc.gov/mmb/prd/dtv/
"Specific conditions which would extend the transition period include the failure of one or more of the largest TV stations in a market to begin broadcasting digital TV signals through no fault of their own, or fewer than 85% of the TV households in a market are able to receive digital TV signals off the air either with a digital TV set or with an analog set equipped with a converter box or by subscription to a cable-type service that carries the DTV stations in the market."
Wagers, anyone?
Not that it will happen at 85% anyway. They'll change their mind after various advocates of the poor start to figure out what is going on. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson haven't even figured any of this out yet.

 

[VicRuiz]

That's my point exactly. It doesn't say anything about actually having the equipment to receive the signal. It says able to receive. Once all the stations in your market are broadcasting a digital signal, and all the cable systems are carrying it, aren't you able to receive the signal even if you choose not to do it? I'm not saying that's how the FCC will define it, I'm saying it's perfectly possible to be defined that way. Any minimally competent debater (or lawyer) can make a reasonable case for either side of the argument.

 

[Dan Brecher]

I pretty much agree the studios wont take to mainstream HD-DVD distribution any time soon. I'd also point out, looking at the bigger global picture, is the that many countries outside the US (such as Jolly old England) have no intention whatsoever to adopt HDTV as standard. Do studios really want something they can market in the US alone?

Now, forgive me if this has been brought up on the previous pages. I don't see this happening, but let's say the studios took to BlueRay or FMD in a laserdisc style approach, and by that I mean at first offer it up to a niche market. Would you buy into it?

The few studios in support of D-Theater on D-VHS seem happy to admit they are aiming at a niche market who are willing to pay so much for a machine and some $40 a pop for a 1080i 5.1 transfer of a movie (on tape no less). Their approach here really kind of reminds me of the old LD days, but its an idea that could be far better exploited with HD-DVD given the restrictions of D-VHS.

So again, lets say they studios decide to offer HD-DVD within the next two years to a niche market who would pay $40/50 for an HD movie release (with extras) in a world where the minimum price for the players would be say $700/800. Accepting this and the fact that eventually when HDTV becomes a more mainstream product and prices of software and hardware for HD-DVD fall to what we pay for standard DVD now... WOULD YOU BUY IT say in 2003/2004 under those conditions? As an LD owner, heck I probably would. Essentialy the studios could push HD-DVD as they intend to push DVHS.

Dan (UK)

 

[Adam Tyner]

WOULD YOU BUY IT say in 2003/2004 under those conditions?

If it could be assumed that a similar format wouldn't supercede it within the space of a couple of years, then yes. I don't think I could resist the itch, though my trademark impulse buying would come to a screeching halt.