PIP on Blu-ray, will PS3 be upgradable to do it??? (1 Viewer)

[DaViD Boulet]

Exactly. WB is testing the waters with the Blu-ray crowd to see if they want it now sans-BDJ or later with BDJ with that title.

IMO, the real problem is Warner's shafting the BD crowd with audio that's inferior to what the HD DVD folks are getting on select titles (Happy Feet). Paramount just did that with Dream Girls: the HD DVD gets Dolby (plus) at 1500 kbps and the BD gets Dolby at 640 kbps. Both formats should have gotten Dolby TrueHD lossless... PERIOD.

 

[Duncan Harvey]

Has anyone been able to confirm whether the PiP in Dragons Lair is a true PiP or a pseudo PiP "burn in".

I have ordered the disc, but its yet to arrive here (UK).

I have two US PS3s so I hope that Sony do release new firmware to implement the 1.1 spec.

 

[Shane Martin]

It just shows the studios are milking the cow(so to speak) while favoring a format. I don't know if the term neutral is really true studio wise.

 

[Sanjay Gupta]

I have said this time and time again, Warner is HD-DVD's Trojan Horse and their 'neutrality' is a sham. To support my theory, let's look at some facts:

1. Warner owns several patents in the DVD format and thus by default have a direct stake in the HD-DVD format. In fact Warner was one of the primary and was an equal partner of Toshiba in developing the DVD format.

2. They were one of the strongest and most vocal supporters of HD-DVD in the begining and were actually listed as exclusive to HD-DVD.

3. One fine day all of a sudden Warner anounces it's support for Blu-Ray but does not withdraw support for HD-DVD.

4. When time comes to release titles, most titles are released on HD-DVD before they are released on Blu-Ray. In fact many titles released to HD-DVD long time back are yet to be released on Blu-Ray.

5. When they do finally release the titles on Blu-Ray, they release it with inferior sound and/or features.

6. At first in the case of new titles, they are released simultaneously to both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, but Blu-Ray repeatedly gets shafted with inferior audio.

7. When inspite of inferior audio, which by the way is due to no logical or technical reasons, the titles sell more copies on Blu-Ray, they decide to delay some releases on Blu-Ray and give HD-DVD first go at the market.

8. At a time when everything seems to be going in favor of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is taking a solid beating in software sales, Warner decides to release one of it's most marquee titles and guess what, only on HD-DVD. Can someone really justify Warner's decision to release 'Matrix' this early in the HD market when the customer base is so small that no significant gain or profit can be made? Seriously, look at this decision from the studio's persepective and not from a consumer's point of view. As a customer I would love to have all my favorite titles released on HD right away too, but as a business it really makes no sense for a studio to release any of it's marquee catalog titles at a time when the current market can only offer insignificant sales and no real profits. Considering their excuse for the delayed Blu-Ray version, what is the rush to release Matrix right now? Why can't they have waited a few months until they could have released both versions simultaneously? Would'nt the Christmas season, by then they would be in a position to release the Blu-Ray version simultaneously and also the customer base would have grown substantially, be a more appropriate time for the release of such a marquee title? Even Sony/Columbia studios, who have a direc and primary interest in Blu-Ray have so far not released any of their 'big' titles, obviously waiting for a more opportune time to do so.

9. Considering that most, if not all, early adopters of HD are Home Theater fans and thus have the knowledge and they do care about things like 'lossless' audio, Warners simultaneous release of substandard Blu-Ray versions is a blatant attempt to push up sales of the HD-DVD versions and it seems they have succeeded in doing so, with titles like 'Happy Feet'.

10. The final card to be played by Warner is their Total-HD discs. Which uses Blu-Ray as a crutch to give HD-DVD a bigger foothold in the market and the ace being that it neutralizes the biggest advantage, i.e. storage capacity, of Blu-Ray to further help push HD-DVD. For those that may not be aware, the data capacity of Blu-Ray will be reduced on Total-HD discs to that of HD-DVD as both sides will have the same capacity. Great, since you can't improve upon your format of choice, you simply pull down the other format to make the battlefield a little more even. The Blu-Ray group should refuse licensing for the Total-HD disc.

 

[Norman Matthews]

If it were really some insidious plan on Warners' part to push HD DVD sales, why in the world would they release on Blu-Ray at all? Any benefit they get from having an inferior Blu-Ray version on the market would be returned tenfold if they didn't release a Blu-Ray version at all. I can't find a lick of sense in your theory.

As an HD DVD owner, I look forward to the day Disney starts releasing on HD DVD in an effort to kill the format.

 

[Shane Martin]

$$$$$$$$

Warner isn't stupid. They ARE a business and businesses need to make money.

 

[PeterTHX]

It's true PiP with Java.

Question is why Digital Leisure can do it but Warner can't.

Like TrueHD I think Warner is dragging their heels on this. (At least they're finally offering TrueHD on Letters From Iwo Jima)

 

[Norman Matthews]

That would be incredibly short-sighted, if their main intent was ultimately to drive HD DVD to victory and reap the benefits of their stake in the format. Three major exclusives for one format versus two for the other would be much more likely to result in the outcome they want in order to increase their profits than the currently lopsided three-to-one fight. Long-term, their switch at the launch of the formats makes it less likely that their theorized goal would come to fruition.

 

[PeterTHX]

I think Warner was counting on more CE support for HD DVD.

That didn't materialize in 2005 so they went with Blu-ray as well.
Even Sony supported VHS after a while.

 

[Vincent_P]

I hate to break up this Warner hate-fest, but let's not forget that the first really good looking BD discs were from Warners and those Warner BDs were a big shot in the arm for the BD format after the initial Sony titles were so roundly criticized. If you BD guys want a studio to complain about, it should be Fox for their overpriced BDs, and the fact that in many cases it seems they are using rather old HD masters that aren't holding up to BD-level scrutiny.

Vincent

 

[Shane Martin]

I'll bet Warner interactivity is based on HD DVD's technology and they are trying to rewrite the code to fit BR's tech. Java and Microsoft is like oil and vinegar.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Quite so. But only for video.

Even Sony's early *horrible* looking BD titles had lossless PCM audio that sounded better than most anything on WB's discs (except for the few WB titles with lossless audio).

WB just doesn't seem to "get" sound. They insisted for ages that the 384 kbps datarate on DVD was "good enough" and wouldn't use the audibly-superior 448 datarate for DD. Now they seem to be pulling the same "good enough" stuff with the audio on HD.

I sincerely hope they "get" lossless audio... for BOTH formats. IMO, every title, regardless, deserves lossless audio. I only need to listen to the PCM tracks of my B&W movies on laserdisc (Wonderful Life) to demonstrate that regardless of the source-material, Lossless wins over lossy every time. EVERY time.

 

[Edwin-S]

OT, but I'm going to ask anyway. When you listen to the PCM tracks with the PS3 do you disable the rear surrounds and listen only as 2 channel stereo? I have been leaving the rear surrounds on. My receiver seems to interpret the PCM as a prologic stream and sends a signal to the rears. It sounds good to me, but I wonder if it is the proper way to be listening to these downfolded PCM tracks? Am I explaining this right?

 

[Sanjay Gupta]

I would have thought the 'Trojan Horse' analogy is quite self explanatory. But for those that might need a more clearer explanation, it is quite simple. Warner pretends to be neutral and therefore releases on both formats. But then due to their hidden agenda they shaft Blu-Ray with inferior aduio and features. Thus presenting HD-DVD in a better light and also showing false higher sales for HD-DVD over Blu-Ray versions. After all anyone with both formats will prefer to buy the version with the better audio and features. When all this fails to generate enough momentum for HD-DVD, they then start releasing their marquee titles only on HD-DVD, so much for neutrality. By continuing to release inferior & delayed Blu-Ray versions, they not only get revenues from the sale of Blu-Ray discs without really helping the Blu-Ray format but they are also able to keep themselves protected in the likely scenario that Blu-Ray wins the format war.

I wonder what your thoughts would be if Disney claimed neutrality and released on HD-DVD, but while they put lossless audio on the Blu-Ray versions, the HD-DVD versions only got lossy and obsolete DD5.1 sound. Also while they released their 'marquee' titles such as 'Toy Story' on Blu-Ray, an HD-DVD version is only promised for sometime in the future. I'd say that would be a good way for Disney to keep Blu-Ray ahead but still insulate itself incase Blu-Ray lost.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Are you talking about the 2.0 PCM over optical?

You can disable ProLogic processing on your recevier. What your receiver does with 2.0 stereo PCM has nothing to do with the PS3.

 

[Norman Matthews]

What you've described is not a trojan horse. No one is unwittingly exposing themselves to one thing because they've decided to accept another.

 

[Edwin-S]

Yes. It is the only way I can listen to the PCM track since the receiver is not equipped with HDMI. I'm curious whether everyone disables prologic processing on the receiver when listening to 2.0 stereo PCM over optical.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

The ProLogic II processing in my BK receiver is pretty good...almost as good as discrete 5.1 in many ways (stereo surround). However, if I don't need "surround sound" I'll listen to my PCM lossless in straight 2.0 stereo... the fidelity is astonishing without the additional DSP.

 

[PeterTHX]

Those of us with HDMI enabled receivers laugh at your 2.0 stereo!

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Had hoped that my tax return might help with some HT upgrades... alas... the tree in the back-yard that leans over the house is ready to take up the cash. :frowning: