Studios start to weigh in on high-def DVD (1 Viewer)

[David Susilo]

Uhmmm, Microsoft codec is Corona, not MPEG-4. But yes, considering Microsoft's track record, I'll try to stay away from anything Microsoft (like THAT's possible )

 

[Dan Ramer]

David and Brian, when we have a statement from industry folks who advocate the red laser technology indicating that 'We can get a pretty good picture with a bit rate of 5 MB', this is a cause of concern. Pretty good isn't good enough. We want a great picture. So I don't care what CODEC is used, nor do I specifically care what the bit rate will be, as long as the quality is superb. But in my experience, no CODEC can produce the quality of ATSC MPEG-2 19.2 Mbit/sec at a bit rate of 5 Mbits/sec. And please recall that JVC's D-VHS system exceeds ATSC performance.

Marshall's petition (above) takes the right approach, calling for quality that exceeds what we've experienced with existing HD sources.

Marshall, I found your petition's failure to mention an expectation of unconstrained component video outputs a serious omission. In fact, I'm a bit baffled that there has been so little reaction to the risk I described of losing unconstrained component video outputs on future HD-DVD players. Does that mean that there are very few owners on the forum of HD-ready displays or projectors that are limited to component video inputs?

Dan

 

[David Susilo]

What the news didn't say but implied is that 5Mbps USING THE CURRENT CODEC is pretty good. At least that's how I interpret the statement.

With regards to your experience that no codec at 5Mbps can equal MPEG2 - 20Mbps is true, but again, it's true using the USING CURRENTLY AVAILABLE codec.

Red laser with only 5Mbps with FUTURE codec MAY work and it will ensure a lower price point and earlier release date in contrast to blue-ray technology.

Therefore, I find that the petition is moot since we do not know what kind of codec that Warner is going to use. IF they are DEFINITELY going to use MPEG-4, then I'll sign the petition. However, if they use Corona (something that I've never witness) or some other future codec, all these argument about "no codec can't deliver pure HD at 5Mbps" is a waste of time.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

People People,
please visit the existing thread on the topic of HD-DVD
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...threadid=62073
and help us determine a MEANINGFUL way to address this issue.
1. Sign the petition.
2. Contact the studios.
3. Get other enthusiasts who give a darn to do the same.
We don't want a crappy HD-DVD that just scrapes by with sqeezing a 2-hour movie on a disc with "acceptable" quality with no room for DTS or extras.
We want TRASPARENT 1080P encoding and compression. We want TRASPARENT 24/192 7.1 sound capability (MLP lossless compression). We want 8 languages and commentary and 3 hours of un-interrupted viewing pleasure.
Sign the petition. Help us determine how to win this battle.

 

[David Susilo]

Well, as much as I want a pure HD-DVD, without knowing the exact codec they are using, there is no way I'm going to sign AGAINST their version of HD-DVD.

Should the petition is FOR pure HD-DVD, then it's a different story.

(or are we talking about two different petitions?)

 

[Todd Hochard]

I think we have to allow for the fact that compression algorithms get better. I think we have to remember that 10-15 years ago, if someone told you that High-Def TV was going to be compressed 100:1, and still look good, you would've called them an idiot.
If I can get something that looks as good as DVHS on red laser, I'll take it. I'm not terribly optimistic that it'll get done to that level, but if it does, BRAVO!

We want TRASPARENT 1080P encoding and compression. We want TRASPARENT 24/192 7.1 sound capability (MLP lossless compression). We want 8 languages and commentary and 3 hours of un-interrupted viewing pleasure.

I'm not sure that's a very realistic goal. Why not ask the studios what's keeping them from offering this??

Based on what's out there now for disc and compression technology, I think Blu-Ray with wavelet compression is where it's at. FMD doesn't have the appropriate backing to ever have legs, IMO.

Todd

 

[David Susilo]

Actually, there is a way to make the HD-DVD less-copyable: make it 7" in diameter (approx. 24Gb for dual-layer disc)

For the HD video spec: use a better codec than Corona but maximize the bandwidth

For un-interrupted playing capability, install the minimum of 64Mb video-buffer to overcome layer-change and seamless branching delays. (there is no mention of video buffer on the current DVD spec)

Keep red-laser to lowering the production cost

... as long as they keep the 5" physical size, it will always be playable on a PC drive and it will still be copyable with relative ease.

 

[John_Berger]

make it 7" in diameter (approx. 24Gb for dual-layer disc)

**whistling** I can just hear those who think a PC is better than a set-top box forming a lynch mob to come after you.
The problem with that is that human nature assumes that bigger does not necessarily mean better when it comes to technology. The more we can pack into something that is no bigger than what we have, people are going to be more acceptable to that.
I fully agree that increasing the size would yield more data and the possibility for more throughput. But then the argument can be made about "Why stop at seven? Let's go back to laserdisc size which would store how many umpteen gigs of data with a MASSIVE throughput!"
Since the dawn of the electronic age, smaller is generally considered to be better. Whether that's true or not is certainly open to debate. I think that human nature will automatically reject a larger disc as though it's some kind of technological throwback.
As I also mentioned, a lot of people have become spoiled by DVD players in their PCs. A 7" HD-DVD drive clearly will not fit onto a standard PC slot without going external. Again, that will be a hinderance to its broad acceptance, not a benefit.
The next generation of DVDs needs to be a quantum leap over what we currently have. To use existing technology to create a new DVD standard would like going from Windows 98 to Windows 98 Second Edition.

 

[Marshall Alsup]

Marshall, I found your petition's failure to mention an expectation of unconstrained component video outputs a serious omission. In fact, I'm a bit baffled that there has been so little reaction to the risk I described of losing unconstrained component video outputs on future HD-DVD players. Does that mean that there are very few owners on the forum of HD-ready displays or projectors that are limited to component video inputs?

Well actually, I didn't author the petition. It was done by ChrisA. I dont even understand all the technical stuf in it yet, but I'm learning
All I can say thus far is screw a lesser quality product when from what I gather blu-ray is ready to go, and has been shown to be better!
-Marshall

 

[David Susilo]

My "wanting" of the 7" format is only to curb the so-called piracy. The other reason of 7" format is because the public used to accept the 7" disc size so it's easier to go back to that. 12" disc size will just be overkill. 10" was never accepted (CD Video of the LD era).

As a side effect of using 7" disc, more storage space can be achieved.

 

[Dan Ramer]

My apologies to ChrisA for missing the important detail of his authorship.

Marshall, I am also guilty of throwing around numbers rather than describing the risks of image constraint in English.

HDTV approaches the resolution and detail of 35mm film; DVD is pretty good, but doesn't even come close. So we salivate over the prospect of high definition optical discs that will bring us that much closer to the theatrical experience. But while this thread ponders the impact of various methods to compress the video, the studios would like to reduce the resolution at the component video outputs of HD-DVD players to that of today's DVD. Worse yet, they would like component video outputs eliminated. No one yet owns an HDTV-capable display that can accept and de-encrypt the proposed digital bit stream; we await product.

So if the studios have their way, all current owners of HD-ready displays and projectors might find themselves unable to see high definition without starting over and buying new. Over four million HD-ready display devices might have to be thrown away. Outrageous. Simply outrageous.

Dan

 

[David Susilo]

Sadly, it seems to be the way to go. Soon the 4-million HD display will have to start over.
Sony already start using DVI for their displays, Toshiba will too starting with their fall line-up. Mitsubishi will be next.
... and I just bought my second HD display... sigh :frowning:

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

My "wanting" of the 7" format is only to curb the so-called piracy.

There are too many HTPC users. So if they go 7", that just means that companies will come out with a 7" disc peripherial drive, which plugs in through say USB-2 or FireWire. And then you're back to square one with the piracy issue.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Based on what's out there now for disc and compression technology, I think Blu-Ray with wavelet compression is where it's at. FMD doesn't have the appropriate backing to ever have legs, IMO.

I guess we shouldn't tell the studios not to release P/S only titles for fear that they won't release them at all? I guess we shouldn't try to raise the bar as high as we can with our demand for a high-quality product?
The lack of vision here is frightening. HD-DVD WILL happen. If a studio is trying to shove a compromised format on us we absolutely SHOULD be against it. DVD succeeded because it was a well-conceived product that had unified backing. If Warner releases their inferior HD-DVD product, and then Sony releases their own blue-laser, we'll enter into a VHS/BETA war all over again which will hurt HD altogether.
And don't kid yourselves about the mysteries of compression and the miracles being done with bit-rates...I'm all for compression, but HD will *never* look transparent on a large display at these data-rates. At besides, even if it did, you still have a compromised medium that can only offer you the choice of a few inferior-sounding audio formats with no extras because of lack of space/bandwidth.
Tell the studios the way it should be. SHOULD be.

 

[John_Berger]

My "wanting" of the 7" format is only to curb the so-called piracy.

I'm glad that you put the "so-called" in there. Without taking the thread off-track, piracy is not as much of an issue as the studios would like us to think, in my opinion. They want us to think that every download equals one lost sale. I know a lot of people at work who downloaded the LotR movie off the Internet or got it from someone who downloaded the movie and then proceeded to buy the DVD yesterday.
If the studios delay HD-DVD due to the potential for piracy, then it is clear that they have their priorities in the wrong place. I'm not saying that piracy should not be on the priority list at all, but it should not be a resounding factor.
Hell, even Warner has realized that it's not worth the aggravation and removed the Macrovision copy protection from the Harry Potter DVD. Then again, isn't Warner the one that wants to retain the red laser? :rolleyes

 

[Jeff Kleist]

Bottom line

Whatever way they copy protect the format, Asian pirates will bust it in a month, and have presses running full-steam in 2

And I wouldn't suggest trying to up your region coding either, look at Sony's disaster where chipping allows you to play boots but not legit imports, thereby ENCOURAGING piracy

 

[Craig Robertson]

I'm sure they wouldn't be as stupid to prevent firewire-componenent converters.

the DMCA already criminalizes their use.

 

[Todd Hochard]

but HD will *never* look transparent on a large display at these data-rates.

Never say never. You think we are up against absolute limits with compression technology, but I don't- not yet. Better compression (meaning tighter, as well as cleaner) requires more complex algorithms, with more processing power. Both are either being developed, or already have been.

Again, I'm not for red-laser. I am AGAINST making what the studios may see as unrealistic demands from fist-pounding zealots, that can easily be brushed aside. If the petition is THAT important, then getting one of US on the HD-DVD Forum that SETS the standard is probably equally important.

Todd

 

[Terrell]

I am AGAINST making what the studios may see as unrealistic demands from fist-pounding zealots, that can easily be brushed aside.

I don't think it's too much to ask for the studios to give us true HD-DVD, rather than some watered-down version that causes us to have to purchase many of the same movies over and over again. Red-laser is not it, as it doesn't meet the minimum requirements for true hi-def. Warner just wants to use red-laser not because it's the better format, but because they can needlessly squeeze more money out of the consumer. That's the only reason they're pushing it. These people don't really care about giving us the best format. What they care about is bleeding us to death by giving us a couple of minor improvements before giving us what can be considered real HD-DVD. At least Blu-Ray meets the minimum criteria for hi-definition. And I'm not saying it's perfect. But it seems pretty much cut and dry to me, that it's a far better choice if the only other alternative at this point is red-laser. And if they can deliver something even better than Blu-Ray within the next 5 years, I say postpone it until you can bring it to the market.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Never say never.

Todd,
read the rest of my comments. We already have dual-laser DVD with an average bit-rate of 4.7 mbps for a 2-hour movie. Right now we have to decide if we want to optimize picture or sound, or sacrifice extras. You want full bit-rate DTS? Ok...you get a softer looking picture. Or you don't have room for commentary. Or you want two 5.1 DD 448 language tracks? No deleted scenes then.
HDDVD using red-laser with an average rate of 5 mbps would still have the same limitations.
Don't you want something better? I have dozens of laserdiscs with 2.0 PCM 16/44.1 audio that absolutely put many 5.1 DD DVDs to shame!!!! That's right...prologic from PCM blows away most 5.1 DD soundtracks. Why should I have to live with this compromise on my future HD-DVD medium? Why not have a chance to have a *real* audiophile/videophile format that, by it's very nature, does not force compromises in a/v quality?
Bottom Line: even if Warner can manage a decent image (however doubtful) with the average 5 mbps data-rate, using existing DVD storage technology will perpetuate all the other limitations of our current DVD-format.
No thanks. I'd rather wait another year and go with holographic 3-D storage technology and have unfiltered 1080P images with 7 channel 24/192 audio in 10 languages. Who cares what color the laser is.
-dave