Anyone else clearing out their SD-DVDs? (1 Viewer)

[John H Ross]

Well... yes. There's always going to be something better. Whether smaller and/or more robust storage devices (e.g. smart cards) or higher density discs (HVD) or better mastering techniques or 4K resolution - or even some kind of 3D rendering. Hollywood will always be looking to find new ways of selling us the same films. The studio panic generated by this format war has shown us that their business would be at serious risk WITHOUT re-selling and re-selling! Give it 10 years or so (perhaps less if BD doesn't go mainstream).

So would you say a BD played via S-Video would look better than a DVD played over RGB scart on a 28" CRT?

Alternatively, does something like this work:
YUV-RGB-SCART - Component Yuv Rgb Scart Adapter - Only £6.99 at www.tvcables.co.uk

 

[Marc Colella]

I don't think that's the best idea for someone who doesn't own an HDTV.

Blu-Ray players and movies are supposed to drop in price, so why should they pay a premium for something they're not taking full advantage of now or in the very near future? Also, by the time they're ready to jump aboard maybe a profile 2.0 player will be available (if that matters to them).

In the meantime they can just rent DVDs instead of purchasing them if they don't want to "waste" their money on DVD titles that they're going to wind up double-dipping on BD. I wouldn't want to give the studios the satisfaction of continued double-dipping on both formats, especially since that's the whole reason HDM was born - to get people to buy the same titles over again.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Actually, as someone who owns an HD DVD player and a 16:9 SDTV (480i), I can vouch for DaViD's reasoning as being fairly sound. HD sources downsampled to 480i/p do look better than DVDs mastered from HD. I'm still going to wait on BD until I can get exactly what I want out of a player, but DaViD has a point.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

John,

using the same connection, a downsampled BD will look better than DVD. I have no idea if BD over S looks better than DVD over Scart.

I already said that my comments weren't addressing your particular issue of the region-free player you posted. Hardware is constantly changing, and already you can modify many current BD players with HDMI for region-free (there's a whole thread).

The two issues have nothing to do with each other. If you don't feel that 1080p software is more future-proof that than 480p software, there's not much to discuss.


Yep. Remarkable how fall below true "480p" quality our 480-SD DVD software actually is when you see maxed-out 480p from HD DVD/BD downsmapled on the fly.

 

[Dan M]

Yep. Remarkable how fall below true "480p" quality our 480-SD DVD software actually is when you see maxed-out 480p from HD DVD/BD downsmapled on the fly

I have to agree with this too. On my Infocus 4805 FP I noticed HDM look much, much better than SD material. And this is via component input. It may have only been downrezzed 480p but it looked very close to hi-def to me and alot better than sd dvd.

 

[Dan M]

I have to agree with this too. On my Infocus 4805 fp I noticed HDM look much, much better than SD material. And this is via component input. It may have only been downrezzed 480p but it looked very close to hi-def to me and alot better than sd dvd

 

[Zack Gibbs]

It makes sense though, If i've been watching Blu-ray and pop in a DVD, the most discernible lack in quality I notice is from the noise, compression artifacts, and color limitations of the format. The resolution is usually acceptable upscaled.

BTW I had to look up what SCART was. I've never seen this anywhere before, I see its only used in European electronics.

 

[troy evans]

I've come to think an image in 1080p downscaled to a tvs highest resolution is far superior to an image upscaled from 480p to a tvs highest resolution. It may not make sense to some, but, that's my thinking. In which case, everyone seeing improved image is right on the money here when watching on sd tvs. I started this thinking based on the fact that if you upscale to 720p that's what you get. However, if you downscale to 720p you get 768p on certain displays. To be fair, that more than likely doesn't have as much to do with it as much as there's just more information on a 1080p BD than a 480p dvd. Also, results may vary between different displays. Again, this is more of a thought I had rather than a proven fact.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

Technically 1080p as Bluray is capable of producing is no more "future proof" than 480p because Bluray already cannot produce an image that can meet the capabilities of today's common place higher end display devices than can be bought at BB and CC, as in it is actually already old video technology. That is not to say that given a choice 1080p isn't a better buy that 480p (it has 6x the resolution and a larger color space) and would be preferred but there is nothing in the Bluray spec (or HD-DVD's either) that requires or would be improved by future display technology. That is the reasonable definition of "future proof". HDM would require a spec that allows 1440p, at least 36-bit color (48-bit would be better) at full 4:4:4 resolution to be able to claim even partial "future-proof". Then we still have the issue of lossy video compression versus lossless.

It seems that many if not the majority of HTF members who have gotten into HDM and had large collections of DVDs are reducing their buying of HDM to only the movies they really want and will watch multiple times. I think that now we have had the experience of a media that effectively lasts forever (DVD), some have realized how easy it was to buy a bunch of movies that were watched only once or twice (or never) before they were available on a better format and that maybe they should have been a bit more selective on their movie purchases and used that money for something else. If you are going to buy a movie and the price is even remotely close then you should buy the 1080p version. However I wouldn't recommend buying every movie available on 1080p as funds become available with the notion that you will watch it enough times to be worth it before a better version comes out or that the current 1080p version is "good enough to be the last version you want/need to buy".

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Chuck,

that's the most confusing post I've read in a long time. I fail to see how an image that offeres 6X the resolution isn't more future-proof by definition given that all future displays will be easily able to reveal the full improvement of that 6-fold increase versus 480p.



I would say this, that just because a disc happens to be 1080p encoded doesn't necessarily mean that the video was mastered with full-fidelity to the source. Just like buying a DVD doesn't mean that the particular discs provides optimal quality. We will see "improved" 1080p Blu-ray discs replace sub-par discs over the next 20 years, just like we saw with DVD.

 

[Sean Laughter]

I don't have a large collection in comparison to some of you freaks here - only like 250 or so titles (and that counts TV seasons of a few shows as one title) - but I don't intend to do a wholesale purge of my collection. I'll just give away the DVD version of anything I deem worthy to be replaced by the Blu-Ray release.

Obviously, being "deemed worthy" involves some subjective and objecting metrics based on review of the Blu-Ray release, how much I like the film, etc.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

Definition: Future Proof
1. Something that is not obsolete tomorrow
2. Something that in a the future is at least as good as the best available in the future.

The key word in "future proof" is future. Given that Bluray 1080p can't even match the best that 1080p can offer today (4:4:4, deep color, and lossless(?) maybe), why would you claim it as "future proof". Bluray is only "The best prerecorded HDM we have" (and far sight better than 480p) not "The best prerecorded HDM given current display technology". Current displays can already show the limitations of Bluray 1080p and future displays will make it much more apparent especially given the video gaming push for higher and higher resolutions.

Your argument supports the notion that anything better than 480p is future proof. 1080p > 480p = future proof. All TVs in the future will also be able to reveal the full increase of a 720p format so is that "future proof" too?

My point is that without even having to increase resolution or buying a new display device, there will be better formats in the future. There is nothing "future" in Bluray other than it will be the only available format in the near to likely mid-term future.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

1080p on BD is *more* future-proof than 480p on SD DVD.

How's that? Semantics ok now?

:rolleyes

 

[Chuck Anstey]

You can't be more of something that you are not to begin with. 1 million times zero is still zero. Bluray 1080p is not "future proof" AT ALL because it isn't even "today proof". It is simply better than 480p and closer to the original negatives of the film and therefore should be preferred to DVD. In some cases it is better than the projected film that much of the public has reasonable access to.

Don't go whole hog buying tons of movies because you think that Bluray 1080p is as good as it gets. Ignoring the inevitable increase in resolution to 1440p and 2160p, it isn't even as good as 1080p gets now. One can hope that Bluray will come up with 100+ Gig discs and new players that iteratively allow improvements in the video specs to full 1080p and beyond (Bluray+) but are backwards compatible to today's 2.0 spec. New "Superbit" reissued titles would really be super because they go beyond what the original specifications allowed and you won't have to buy a new display to enjoy it. It would have been great if the specs were a bit more forward thinking and had video capabilities beyond what was available for displays and storage a few years ago when they were written but that ship sailed long ago. We now are on the iterative capability path and incremental video capabilities seems far more likely than yet another format in the next 7 years trying to supplant Bluray unless future storage requirements are too much for existing Bluray laser technology or an alternative storage medium becomes vastly cheaper.

Then again the general public may reject optical disc as the HDM of the future and instead want smaller and more portable compact flash type technology if it becomes practical in the next five years or so.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Chuck,

I don't know what your problem is. My mind (and that of most critical thinking HT enthusiasts) can handle the concept that 4:4:4 8K digital files are of higher quality than a VC-1/AVC-compressed/color-space-reduced 1080p derivative on a Blu-ray Disc, and *still* be able to fathom that the Blu-ray is "more future-proofed" than an even more-severely compromised SD DVD encode. if the "future proof" term is so severe for you, then let's pick another phrase that works, as by your description no product that could ever exist will satisfy your "future proof" terminology requirements. Your definition may be technically accurate in philosphical debate, but the working-definition of the term as it applies to home-video media seems to be within the parameters of what I've described. However, I'm happy to switch over to a term that makes us both happy. Put together a list that would satisfy you.



Agreed. Many of us pushed for things like constant-height 1080p encoding, 4:4:4 color space, and 1080p60 capability. However, that won't stop me from enjoying the stunning 1080p images that a well-authored BD can deliver.

 

[Mike Frezon]

It just strikes me as differing concepts of "future proof."

To me, there is nothing truly "future proof" in the realm of entertainment technology (or any technology, certainly). Anyone who doubts it need look no further back than the types of entertainment present during their own childhood.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

I presume with such nobel desires for video encoding that you're thrilled that the bandwidth-compromised format has now gone away? This round of the HDM saga is probably our last physical-media HD format to come our way. Perhaps a future downloading paradigm may provide the improved transparency you seek (and it very well may).

 

[Jari K]

So now we´re debating what´s "full proof" and what´s not? C´mon. Give it a rest.

 

[Jari K]

Probably not, but HDMI is the new "scart" now. It´ll the "nr.1" connection in the HT-world for many years to come from now. You could say that 1080p won´t go anywhere in any time soon and when it does - it´s time for it to move on anyway. So 1080p is future proof "enough".

Sure sure, "not all people have HDMI". That´s true and some people are using component (in HD). But if you only have scart and you want 1080p = forgetaboutit.

My advice is, that when people are starting to build a new HT-set-up, they should start from the TV/projector/etc. When you´ve that HDTV (or similar) with proper connections, it´s very easy to get that Blu-ray-player and start enjoying HD-films.

For me a TV-set or DVD/HD-player *without* HDMI is not even an option. At the moment I don´t have HDMI-receiver, but I´m working on it.. This year. And it´ll be 1.3!

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Fine, as long as they don't continue to invest in a 480p format that they'll turn around and wish they hadn't continued to purchase when they could have been investing in 1080p software instead.

Hardware changes frequently. But that software will be on your shelf for much longer than your TV/display. I recommend go HD as soon as you know it's where you're headed. At the very least, stop investing in SD when you know it's a title you'd rather own in 1080.