post #31 of 42
10/10/08 at 6:47pm
Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
|
Originally Posted by Jason Seaver
I can't begin to understand the logic where Lionsgate is a better studio than Warner because they release an order of magnitude fewer movies, even if they do have a couple extra rear channels.
|
|
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
Again I think Warner's lossy audio choices have more to do with the fact that some of their releases are by necessity BD25, which really isn't Warner's fault.
Doug |
|
Originally Posted by Ron-P
Look at the Blu-ray of Doomsday, reference quality 1080p image and a HD-DTS Master Audio 5.1 track.
|
|
Originally Posted by CraigF
So what is the WB reason for not having so much access to BD50? Because they were later getting into the BD game, did other studios have much of the BD50 replication already under contract?
|
|
Originally Posted by Ron-P
What's the average space used by a 2hr film and a lossless track?
|
|
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
Universal's release of The Thing on blu-ray has been criticized because the picture quality supposedly isn't as good as the HD DVD was. It has DTS master audio and is on a BD25. Universal had to lower the bit rate to be able to include the lossless audio, and apparently it shows in the image quality, at least according to some. I haven't actually seen the disc myself.
Doug |