New Blu-ray titles: Kingdom of Heaven 1st 50 gb dual layer - Page 6

ppltd · 09-29-2006, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

I already stated that the ability to better store TV series is a strong reason to adopt BD50.

And as long as we've got two formats that a year from now will be each competitively priced with virtually identical features and authoring quality... why *not* enjoy the one that doesn't force compromises with long films

Given that many folks would consider the LOTR sets available in HD reason enough to invest in HD hardware, I'm not sure that it's fair to say that those films aren't, in fact, worth basing a video format on.

I don't want an HD format that can't present the crowning-jewels of cinema (Ben-Hur, LOTR, 2001, Lawrence of Arabia...) without compromise. BD50, while still not perfect, will certainly require far fewer compromises.?

David, I have seen no proof that 30GB will be a limitation for films. The current high quality releases on a single layer, with special features, has fared quite well. Does any one have specifics that the extended version of LOTR will not fit on a doulbe layer HD-DVD disk without comprimise?

Quote:

The 1.5 x bandwidth of BD is also a very powerful reason to favor that format in the long-term. This would allow for multiple lossless sountracks, music-only tracks along side the feature film in 24/96 lossless, and other yet-to-emerge features that would not have space in the HD DVD bandwidth.

Even if BD and HD DVD had the same absolute storage capacity, the 1.5 x bandwidth of BD will allow that format to evolve/extend in quality and featuresets (like 3-D encoding which would require 2 simultaneous 1080p streams sharing the same bandwidth) over time. HD DVD is locked to "just a movie" right out of the gate.

For me, this is not an issue. I have yet to see anything that BR does better that HD. I have yet to see any features on BR that enhance viewing over what is being delivered by HD. None of these comments are meant to bash BR, as I will be getting on myself is Pioneer ever gets off the pot and releases their unit.

As far as the bandwidth issue, I guess we will see if, and that is a big if, the studios decide to use it. Up to this point, it is pretty much a mote point. Certainly if they decide to use it, it is going to come at a premium.

Thomas Eisenmann

DaViD Boulet · 09-29-2006, 11:27 AM

Quote:

David, I have seen no proof that 30GB will be a limitation for films. The current high quality releases on a single layer, with special features, has fared quite well. Does any one have specifics that the extended version of LOTR will not fit on a doulbe layer HD-DVD disk without comprimise?

Amir has stated at AVS that there wouldn't be enough bandwidth for more than one lossless soundtrack. That would mean that despite the studio's desire to provide a music-only track on the disc, they'd have to use lossy compression for either the music track or the feature film. BD could provide both in lossless.

The LOTR team wanted to provide a music-only track on DVD but had to remove it because of bandwidth limitations. I'm sure they're eager to provide the highest-quality experience that they can with HD formats... one reason why they're holding those titles back a few years to give the formats a chance to mature.

WB has already shown a strong interest in providing music-only tracks on their forthcoming BDs. One of them even has the music-only track losslessly encoded.

That's just one feature to speak of. But it's a very important feature to me and many other audiophiles.

I'm sure as time goes by the increased bandwidth will have other uses (like HD video commentary... also something that HD DVD can't provide due to the limiation in bandwidth).

Think outside the box. We haven't even begun to discover what we can do with these new HD formats. Back in 1996 very few HT enthuiasts had any idea what to expect with the incredible SE DVD sets we saw the DVD format provide years after its introduction.

Quote:

Up to this point, it is pretty much a mote point.

If you've been paying attention, you'd have realized we're not talking about the pathetic "launch" quality of BD. We're talking about what's in store from WB, Fox, and Disney now that they're about to show Sony how it's done.

Ed St. Clair · 09-29-2006, 12:53 PM

This disc flipping auguring is flipping weird!
Neither format can hold an entire season of a one hour show.
Are posters actual fighting over;
My format flips less than your format
???

If one format held an entire season of a show on one disc & the "other" format took three or more discs, maybe I could relate. What's even funnier, is there are no 50GB TV show disc to even watch, let alone fight over. What if 50GB TV show discs do come out, with more then one disc per season. Do the we don't want to flip crowd, flip on this 'feature' as well?
Flipping awful waste of time!

I hear the "Get Smart" SD DVD release, will be one of the smartest TV releases of the year. Wonder how long this takes to be release in HD?

Combo player have be said to make "The War" moot.
I don't buy that.
It would make the format war moot for the lucky consumer that could choose freely between format offerings.
However, the war would still rage with the waring formats over which titles would be released on which formats.

A better "moot", is the "all in one" disc solution to this boring war.
Any studio could release any of their content on a single disc with SD DVD, BD, & HD DVD. Allowing consumers to play the disc, on any of the three current digital disc players they choose.
War over!

Now...
back to the flipping war, I guess?!?!?!?!

dpippel · 09-29-2006, 01:40 PM

In the long run 20 extra gigabytes isn't going to make or break Blu-ray IMO, and I agree that the "flipper" argument is getting a bit silly.

DaViD Boulet · 09-29-2006, 01:49 PM

50 gigs offers 66% more storage than 30 gigs. I con't see how anyone can pretend that a 66% increase isn't significant.

If your boss offered you a 66% raise in your salary, I doubt we'd be hearing the same position of "no real increase" touted when making that bank deposit.

HD DVD is a very good format. And it can do a great many things very well. That doesn't mean that 50 gigs isn't a significant increase over 30.

dpippel · 09-29-2006, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

50 gigs offers 66% storage than 30 gigs. I con't see how anyone can pretend that a 66% increase isn't significant.

If your boss offered you a 66% raise in your salary, I doubt we'd be hearing the same position of "no real increase" touted when making that bank deposit.

HD DVD is a very good format. And it can do a great many things very well. That doesn't mean that 50 gigs isn't a significant increase over 30.

I didn't say it wasn't significant David, I said I didn't think that extra capacity is going to make or break Blu-ray.

DaViD Boulet · 09-29-2006, 02:50 PM

Got it.

I would agree with that. I don't think that any of the advantages I see with BD's potential will make or break the format.

But whatever market issues do make/break, I'll be happy to have that 50 gigs (and extra bandwidth) if BD makes it.

Ed St. Clair · 09-29-2006, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

50 gigs offers 66% more storage than 30 gigs. I con't see how anyone can pretend that a 66% increase isn't significant.

I guess people can "pretend that a 66% increase isn't significant",
because...
it hasn't been used yet. So really, there is no need to "pretend" about something that isn't real (yet).
HD DVD hoards can "pretend" 45GB disc are coming. That would mean BD unseen advantage, would only be 12% greater than HD DVD unseen advatage.
When 50GB disc make their debut & 45GB HD DVD are nowhere on the horizon,
then nobody will have to pretend about anything.
And reality will rule HD discs.
How refreshing!!!

EDit:
I just thought of something (amazing!!!);
When are BD backers going to stop pretending that a 20% increase isn't significant?
25GB vs. 30GB
Because they just keep saying 50GB is coming, 50GB is coming.
So what's the differance between the two waring formats???
(and yes, Tosh needs to get 45GB into the format for real, not just it can be done, to; it should be done)

MarekM · 09-29-2006, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed St. Clair

I guess people can "pretend that a 66% increase isn't significant",
because...
it hasn't been used yet. So really, there is no need to "pretend" about something that isn't real (yet).
HD DVD hoards can "pretend" 45GB disc are coming. That would mean BD unseen advantage, would only be <12% greater than HD DVD unseen advatage.
When 50GB disc make their debut & 45GB HD DVD are nowhere on the horizon,
then nobody will have to pretend about anything.
And reality will rule HD discs.
How refreshing!!!

yes, Ed, but it;s not like 50GB disc are year away....... they are around corner..., and 45GB hd-dvd disk are nowhere on the horizon at this moment...

Marek

Ed St. Clair · 09-29-2006, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarekM

yes, Ed, but it;s not like 50GB disc are year away....... they are around corner..., and 45GB hd-dvd disk are nowhere on the horizon at this moment...

That's why I posted;
"When 50GB disc make their debut & 45GB HD DVD are nowhere on the horizon,
then nobody will have to pretend about anything."
Sound familiar? ;-)