Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

All that extra space would be perfect for things like Grindhouse - you could have the theatrical film on one disc.

Epics on one disc. Multiple discs of extras like the Ben Hur, Gone With the Wind, and Wizard of Oz sets condensed to one disc.

That is what I want and at reasonable prices.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

I have no interest in web based stuff. Even if its good, its not forever. Five or ten years down the line i want to watch good extras, not "This page does not exist. If you feel this is an error please refresh this page."

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

That's exactly how I feel! Put the extras on the damn discs already!

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

If Universals usage of online features is any indication, then no thank you. Transformers HD-DVD seems to be the only one so far that has strayed into funner territory and it's just OK. I would not have missed it.
The idea of downloading commentary tracks is a interesting and possible option. Given it is on a stereo 192kbps or mono 96kbps (do we really need more?), it can easily be downloaded and use little space on the player. Can't schedule the actor or director in time to record? no worries. setting up a way to upload any ones commentary to the disc is not hard. They can even make some arrangement with RiffTrax on a pay-use basis.
Also consider downloading subtitles (which could have been a band-aid for the Stargate blu-ray debacle).

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

Man, wouldn't that just piss off the BD drummers if one of the chief reasons why BD is "better" than HD-DVD is wasted on useless interactivity features instead of striving for uncompressed audio and better video? I can hear it now.

When I do eventually pick up a BD player I want one with an ethernet port, not for the interactivity junk, but for firmware upgrades only.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

LOL. Well, it could be worse if there was only 30GB capacity on the disc. Really, I thought the studios wanted the same fluff no matter which format ultimately won out. Let's just hope they will at least produce high enough quality video/audio for the films themselves to push the point of diminishing returns regardless of what extra fluff they want to add.

But actually, I guess in that sense having whatever fluff be provided via the net is a good thing. At least then less of it will need to take up space on the disc itself.

_Man_

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

How is what Blu-ray is proposing any different than what HD DVD is proposing and has done? Why is the Blu-ray format being criticized for proposing web-based extras while HD DVD gets a pass? HD DVD has already started doing web based content and I sure don't here any complaining about that.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

The 51gb HD-Dvd/SD triple-decker will be with us shortly And hopefully they won't find a way to make web-features compulsory !

Space usage has been an issue before . On Sd , they told us to expect movie music soundtracks among the goodies coming our way along with multiple cuts of the film .

How many Dvd 18s in your collection ( apart from T2 ) ?? They never really tried too hard to perfect those discs did they ? And now they want to dump the format entirely and start over so Disney can load the front of their output with even more forced ads for crap

~M~

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

We would have music soundtracks, if they didnt have to pay for them. Cost to much for so few people who care, and probably own the score anyway. I dont mind a link like DVD already has, if you want to put a DVD in and go to a site, it doesnt take that much DVD space, so its cool for any HD or Blu, but dont use space for crap...i dont like the BS on DVD either. Give me good extras please. I even tired of commentaries. How many times can you hear, "oh here he comes, thru the door!", or, So and so was so good to work with." I pass on those type of commentaries.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

I usually prefer a solid documentary over a commentary track myself. I rarely want to sit through an entire movie just so I can listen to the commentary track. I'm more likely to skip to a specific scene for the commentary track if I thought there would be something interesting to know there.

_Man_

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

I'm happy with an informative audio commentary, a well made documentary either about the films historical importance, an important director/actor/DP/writer, the subject matter or source material. Throw in a few deleted scenes and it's gravy.

What I could care less about are behind the scenes HBO "making of" fluff pieces, PIP, pop up features during the film, games, web enabled features, my space share my favorite scenes crap, etc, etc.

What can they use all that space for? 1 Picture quality, 2 lossless audio (I do prefer PCM which takes up more space than TrueHD and DTSMA) 3. all the extras listed that I appreciate 4. MULTIPLE VERSIONS of the film (when applicable) via seamless branching and 5. what I'd really like to see is something that was dropped in the early days of DVD.........................Isolated music scores and with BD it could be lossless. I'm probably alone in this but I think that would be a very cool feature to have.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

The difference is the BD camp boasting they have almost twice the storage capacity as HD, yet do not currently use it and may continue not to use it for anything really useful to the film itself. Do I have a problem with Team HD brimming their discs with fluff? I don't watch it and don't care for it. Personally, I wish all studios would drop all the extras, making ofs, documentaries, 27 commentary tracks, deleted scenes, games, easter eggs, interactive menus, music videos, etc... from the discs themselves and put it all online so whoever wished to access it could do so and whoever did not could simply be rid of it. 99.9% of compatibility problems would go away immediately, guaranteed.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

This is what comes from having a game console as your most popular player.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

I guess Sony/BDA just can't win. Available standalones are not up-to-spec and gets bashed regularly because (or despite that) they can't do all the extra stuff that most HT enthusiasts don't want. The PS3 will be able to do all that stuff (and then some) after software updates, but it's just a lame-excuse-for-a-player "game console" and the BD format is a "gamer's format", so that's why they're gonna put all the extra fluff on BDs. NVM that it was originally the HDD studios that wanted all that extra fluff jammed into a small capacity format that actually grew bigger (but still is smaller) in part because of the BD challenger...

_Man_

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

What does this have to do with anything regarding web enabled features? HD DVD does not have a game console as a spearhead, but they still managed to create web features. The HD DVD camp also played up the web enabled content as a selling feature of the format. Having a game console as one of your players has nothing to do with whether web based interactive features are used on movies.

In fact, a lot of people here keep complaining that Blu-ray is an unfinished format because all of the features that are currently employed on HD DVD are only now becoming available on Blu-ray. There has been nothing but complaints about Blu-ray players not being 2.0 compliant and that they should have been 2.0 compliant right from the start. 2.0 compliance is all about web enabled content.

Now there are 2.0 compliant players coming out and it is just a bunch of bitching about "lame" interactive features and yet another cheap shot about the fact that a game console is presently the best all round Blu-ray player.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

Check out Sam Posten's reviews of many HD DVD titles.

I figured this capacity/ability/"functionality" would trend this direction from very early on. There's so much precedent for "content providers" mucking up a format's additional fidelity: FM has greater bandwidth than AM but most popular radio stations obviate that with hideously high amounts of compression; digital cable provided greater bandwidth for more fidelity, but execs like Preston Padden used it to "multiplex"--put a greater number of channels on the same frequency; CDs provided unprcedented signal-to-noise ratios and headroom but most pop recordings today are overly compressed and mastered way too loud for CD.

And I thoroughly expected some of this technology/capacity--especially Disney's advocacy of 50G--to be used for things that (supposedly) appeal to kids. Ken Graffeo has repeatedly referred to "studies" that told them that great AQ and PQ was not enough for HDM to be successful (I want to know who they surveyed). It would need "interactivity." That's why we're seeing so much gimmickry aimed at the "MySpace generation."

Agreed.

Oh I'm with you--there's a whole thread on this. But these died on SD DVD due to the composer guild argument that iso score tracks cannibalize CD sales.

Sort of like a SuperBit BD?

But ouch--this is too broad for my tastes. I can do without the fancy, Java-driven menus that take a bit of time to load (at least on first gen machines), making me feel like I'm at my computer waiting for it to boot . . . which I hate. But I like most of that other type of content, and want it on the disc please.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

Do you perhaps have some facts to to back this up, or is it just your "logo" talking here the "usual stuff"?

There are (over) 450 Blu-ray-titles in the US alone. I´m sure that there are releases "using" the space and then releases that doesn´t.

Basic issue could be, that e.g. Warner has done the same encode for both HD-formats (?), so in a way it´s the HD DVD that´s holding the BD back!

I take that 50gb anyday over 30gb. It´s the obvious choice for me (the idea that the format with 50gb would "fade away" doesn´t sound realistic). I don´t have problems with "51gb HD DVD" either, but I believe it when I see it..

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

Yeah, something like that.


Do you have any facts to back up that BD is using all 50 gigs of it's space for uncompressed audio and video? Not for extra fluff, but for uncompressed audio and video. If they were, they would truly have a valid "superior technology" claim, and would have won the HD format war from the beginning. I know HD puts useless stuff on the discs that eat up valuable real estate and I cannot control that, but at the same time, Team BD is doing the same thing.


Are the studios using the same encodes for both formats? Most likely. Is the 30g HD-DVD encode holding back the 50g BD encode? I don't think so. It's probably more cost efficient to use the same encode size for both formats, but if Sony wanted to pull ahead and win, they would have the studios use a 50g encode instead of the "inferior" 30g. Once again, it would have ensured a swift victory from the beginning. Instead, they claim to have a better format but don't (or can't) utilize it. I would take a 50g format over a 30g any day too, but not if the encode is the same and the extra 20g is wasted on non-essentials.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

No, not really, but my point was that I guess you have some facts since you said "yet do not currently use it and may continue not to use it"?

I don´t have any computer based BD-players/software, so I can´t check how much is used for the transfer, how much for audio, etc.

But, even if Blu-ray doesn´t use the full "potential capacity" of these 50 gb-discs in every release, it doesn´t mean that this won´t change in the future.


Look, this is ("superior this" and "superior that") what both formats have been using in the PR-talk and PR-talk can actually mean very little. I´ve read from the fans that "HD DVD is superior", so it just goes in both ways. It´s just part of the format war, that both camps call "their format" superior etc. Means very little.

But, BD has more "potential" with 50gb capacity/bandwidth, and AT THIS POINT in the format war, it´s better option for me than to stick with 30gb. Call me naive or something like that, but that´s how it´s for me. Sure, perhaps HD DVD can release that "51gb"-disc and all that, but at this point it doesn´t seem likely.


This is a tricky question and I don´t claim that I have the answers. I feel that at some cases that "30gb" might be holding Blu-ray back, but then in some cases not. Not sure..

But at least with Warner, we SHOULD see 50gb now (after May).. Let´s hope so. I can´t say for sure.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

Touchy, aren't we? This is all about perception, and if the flagship machine is primarily for playing videogames (and don't bother trying to tell me that it isn't, with a name like Playstation 3, not to mention the design esthetics), the fear that extra capacity will be "wasted" on kiddie features is very real for some people. My comment that "This is what comes from having a game console as your most popular player." is just that: a comment. It cuts both ways, in that some people on the HT front refuse to consider it as a piece of HT equipment, while those who own it will defend it to the ends of the earth. Likewise, because it is perceived as a game machine first, if "web-based interactivity" is going to get bashed, the PS3 will be the first machine to get blamed, while those who use it and know its capabilities will see this as unfair.

I draw an analogy to the boy who gets a pink bike for his birthday, but it's completely tricked out with the latest hardware. Some people will never see past the pink.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

This is where you lose me. When I think of Web-based interactivity, I immediately think of HD DVD. Why? Because they enabled it first. And to what end? So I can buy Star Trek merchandise over the Internet? Or recycled paper towels? See, I have all these impressions of Web-based interactivity and a game machine isn't the flagship player for HD DVD.

Let's be honest, the studios seem to care more about this Web-based interactivity for its revenue potential than most HD enthusiasts do because any worthwhile material they may add has the potential to disappear down the road. If the studios are driving it, it isn't going to matter which format flourishes, it will wind up there anyway.

Again, kiddie/"worthless" Web-based features aren't the sole province of any particular format. Disney, for example, is going to gear kiddie "value added" material in order to increase the sale of their discs and generate additional revenue. You sound as though this would all magically change if Disney was releasing on HD DVD and there was no PS3. Firstly, I doubt that very much. Secondly, you may now realize why Disney doesn't support HD DVD (i.e. no PS3, which attracts a youthful demographic that Disney covets).

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

LOL. There are perceptions, and then, there are such things as "flame-bait" even though you may want to spin it as otherwise.

_Man_

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on

I agree, and also think there should only be isolated scores when the bulk of the score isn't available otherwise (either the soundtrack is out of print or unavailable). That way, the enthusiast is getting something they don't already have.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

The capability for a feature is distinct from how it's utilized. Case in point: the angle feature for DVDs. We were promised all sorts of things like alternate cuts and all we got was multicamera porn. Not that that's a bad thing, but it's more a failure of imagination by the studios than it is a problem inherent in the feature of the spec.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

Exactly. For the most part, we are @ the mercy of the studios when it comes to special features. Sure, we can "vote with our wallets" for features like lossless audio, multiple soundtracks and meaningful behind the scenes material, but if the studios don't provide it to begin with, and others vote for "kid-friendly" interactivity, we are also @ the mercy of the majority. What do we do? We soldier on and make sure our concerns get heard. It's really all we can do.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

The biggest concern with BD quality is that the studios who've released HD DVD product might continue to apply a "good enough is good enough" attitude with BD rather than going for the best.

Web feature's aren't the problem: it's the studios who don't put optimal AV quality at the top of the list who are the problem. For whatever reason, those happen to be the same studios who do or have produced HD DVD.

100% of BD discs from Sony, Disney, MGM, and FOX provide lossless audio.

Only 27% of HD DVDs from Paramount, Universal, and Dreamworks do the same. Warner, which also catered to HD DVD encodes, was also inconsistent with their support of lossless audio (on both BD and HD DVD since they had a policy of not letting the BD be superior to its HD DVD companion).


BTW, Sony's Resident Evil Extinction has PIP. And it also has Dolby TrueHD lossless sound and a stunning unfiltered high-bit-rate 1080p AVC video encode. The nice thing about the increased bandwidth (bit-rate) of BD is that you can do both: have your web, PIP, and other bonus material and still have space left for high-bit-rate video and lossless audio: nothing has to be sacrificed for anything else. HD DVD's narrower bandwidth maintained the same give-take between optimal picture and sound and bonus-features we've had to live with on DVD. BD eliminates that give-take by providing ample bandwidth and bit-space for both to exist without etiher getting in the way of the other.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

It's gotta be AV quality AND supps. I can't join in any unqualified singing of Fox praises when they release BDs of major catalog titles such as Die Hard and Speed that have so few/none of the SD DVD's supps. Par put lossless on Top Gun . . . but no supps. There's plenty of criticism to go around so I can't agree with this notion that the HD DVD-producing studios are "the problem" when every studio doing HDM has examples of stellar AQ and PQ. One could argue that the issue of the inclusion (or not) of tangible supps is just as if not even more important than the theoretical issue of the purportedly improved AQ of lossless when we don't have ready access to the master audio stems to compare.

I'm not aware of anyone at WHV having said/confirmed this, so it's gratuitous to call it a "policy." It's an uneven practice you have observed on some titles and continue to self-servingly reify into a talking point.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

Paul,

WB insiders have been telling us for over a year that the studio, by policy, did not want to favor BD in their encodes, and so tried to "keep the bar even", even if more space was available unused on BD50. A year ago there were WB insiders who posted frequenty at AVS and I was told this directly by one very well respected compressist who worked with WB. Of course, the fact that they released some early HD DVDs with lossless but didn't provide it on the BD (Happy Feet) showed a favoring of HD DVD. We were told that this was a bit of a protest statement by WB for BD hardware not requiring TrueHD decoding... and it seems to have actually had an impact (it wasn't long afterwards that the PS3 got the update for TrueHD... and it wasn't long after that when WB began releasing lossless audio on BD).

In any case, these were real conversations with WB folks. Even the HD DVD folks at AVS knew about WB's policy of parity between the formats... it was pretty out in the open.



I agree that both bonus material and AV quality are important, *especially* when both can be provided without one compromising the other. However, I would never suggest that bonus material was on equal footing with the objective of AV transparency, though I do firmly support having both at all times.

Re: Interactivity - is that what we're going to waste the extra Blu Ray disc space on?

If what you're saying is an accurate recitation of the facts, then that's crappy on WHV's part.

Would you be so kind as to provide a supporting link to, say, a post by the compressionist you mention?

I think you mis-typed here: you meant "favoring of HD DVD," yes?

If you "support having both at all times," my issue is with your general lionizing of the BD-supporting studios when one of them often conspicuously doesn't do what you say you support. I DO place the issue of ported supps on equal footing with fidelity (and frankly, I think it's a specious dichotomy when BD50 easily allows both), and therefore don't think it's fair to broadly criticize the HD DVD-supporting studios when, for instance, WHV has been good at porting their 2-disc SD DVD SE's supps over to HDM.

My point is that just because you feel the fidelity issue is more important than the supps issue doesn't make the HD DVD studio fidelity criticism more objectively valid than BD studio supp criticism (especially given Fox' list price). It's a criticism that flows from a subjective preference that should not be presented as somehow rooted in one format's purported objective superiority over the other.