Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Why I haven't taken the plunge -yet. My take on all this.


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
115 replies to this topic

#1 of 116 RAF

RAF

    Lead Actor

  • 7,062 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted May 13 2006 - 01:59 AM

People who know me are shocked by the fact that I haven't picked up an HD-DVD player yet. In fact, I've even received a few e-mails asking me when I'm going to post a review of my new player either here or on my HT web site. I would be the first to admit that I'm even a bit amazed myself that I didn't have one the first day the players were released but, upon reflection, I'm glad in a way that I've waited a bit. Please don't misunderstand. I'm definitely going to have a player in the next couple of months (maybe even two players!) and I'm not posting this here to put any damper on all the excitement being generated by the new machines. I'm always happy when people get enthused over some aspect of Home Theater and I applaud you. I'd just like to add a little personal perspective.

I'm reminded of what happened when DVD players were introduced in 1997. In fact, the HTF was started when a bunch of LD addicts saw an opportunity to introduce a new forum concurrently with the new technology because we believed that DVDs would revolutionize Home Theater. With a very large LD collection, my initial reaction was to say "I'm only going to buy new titles on DVD and not replace my LD titles" because it appeared to me that LD quality, while not quite as good as DVD, was still "O.K." to me. HTF owner, Ron Epstein, echoed these sentiments as did many other enthusiasts. Boy, were we mistaken!

What I failed to realize at the time was that
    [*]The quality of the early DVDs would improve remarkably over the next few years so that LD was no longer even close (except for DTS sound)[*]Another huge improvement that DVDs offered was its navigational features via menus and extras. True, you could go to "Chapter Stops" with LDs but it was kludgy at best, not to mention the limitations of side changes and multiple LDs for a movie longer than 2 hours. I still have my LDs thanks, in part, to new scaling techniques that have improved the picture a bit more and also because there are still a few titles that are only available in that format. But I will be the first to admit that my LD viewing sessions are now far and few between.
Now that HD discs have started to appear it seems as though the same arguments are cropping up all over again. While my initial reaction is to say that "I'm going to wait" it isn't really based on whether HD discs offer that much more clarity over SD discs. Without a doubt (and verified by several friends whose opinions I value and who have already pulled the trigger purchasing the early HD-DVD machines) the picture on the HD-DVDs is better - by far - than SDs. Add to the mix (no pun intended) the new sound formats and you have some major potential upgrades here. And also without a doubt I'm going to get a player sooner than later. But not just yet. There are a few things in play here that justify, to me, the wait (and anyone who knows me knows I'm usually the first kid on the block to get the new toys). For one thing, unlike the LD to DVD transition - this time there is a format war and all the lunacy that this brings. Secondly, the early HD-DVD players with their ridiculous start up times bring back memories of LD loading times, etc. Definitely not a step forward. And the lack of software is a bit ridiculous (probably a bit related to the format wars) considering the leap in picture quality and features. I know that all this will change over time, especially when Blu-ray is introduced and there is real competition for the buyer's dollars. Players will get faster and cheaper, titles will flood the market and we will reminisce fondly over the "old days" of SD DVDs.

Yes, I will get an HD player (probably even one of each format unless the "uber-machine" makes it to market that plays everything) but not this weekend. I'm not only positioned to be able to enjoy the full benefit of HD discs but, based on the output of the current HD-DVD players my viewing equipment exceeds what HD-DVD is providing. With a fully compliant 1080p input capable display (HP MD5880n) I really want to wait until the material provides 1080p content. Yes, I know that the 1080i output of the current players is better than the 1080i output of most other HD signal sources (HD television in its many flavors) and friends have told me "you've got to see how much better it is!" But the fact remains that in a month or two 1080p DVDs will be here whenever Blu-ray gets off its butt. I already have access to some 1080p content via WMVHD titles (ironically there are about as many WMVHD discs available at this writing as there are HD-DVD titles even though I know this will change) so I have seen the "future" of display imagery. 1080p into a 1080p capable set is even more impressive than full bandwidth 1080i into the same set. And I also am looking forward to what I consider to be one of the other breakthroughs (besides image quality) of the high capacity discs - the new menu options and overlay capabilities. To me, this is as significant a step forward in HT viewing as the transition from LD chapter stops to DVD Menus was a decade ago. Maybe even more so!

So I'm definitely not a Luddite regarding HD disc technology. I'll probably wait a month or so until Blu-ray is introduced because then things should really get interesting. Not only will I have my 1080p cake at that point but I'll be able to eat it!

Ain't technology grand? It never stops. Posted Image









RAF
[Demented Video Dude since 1997]
[Computer Maven since 1956]
["PITA" since 1942]
CLICK HERE to visit My HT HTF Rules and Regulations

#2 of 116 TedD

TedD

    Supporting Actor

  • 698 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 09 2001

Posted May 13 2006 - 02:39 AM

Quote:
my viewing equipment exceeds what HD-DVD is providing
Not meaning to start a fight here Posted Image BUT: Unless you have upgraded to a 1080 projector since your equipment list was last updated on your web site, you really don't have all the equipment to do even todays HD-DVD's justice.

A single chip 720 DLP, regardless of brand (or re-brand) is so far below the level of projector quality that you need to even begin to display the nuances of today's HD-DVD, that I am surprised you posted this. Wobulated 1080 DLP isn't real 1080 either in my book, and the PWM used to control the mirror duty cycle for any of the DLP projectors adds an additional layer of artifacts to darker scenes. This was not a serious issue with DVD due to the existing noise on backgrounds created by the highly compressed DVD MPEG encoding. But it's painfully obvious on HD-DVD which is capable of pristine solid backgrounds with no mosquito noise or other artifacts.

Todays HD-DVD'a ARE 1080P. Doing the processing that is required to convert 24 P to interlaced in the player and back to progressive in the projector is trivial and has no cost in image quality.

I have a Sony Qualia 004 projecting on a large constant height screen (5'x13') and there is no negative impact whatsoever when using 24 FPS sources and using either 24PsF or 60I and letting the projector deinterlace (and for that matter letting the projector IVTC) the signal.

I also have a HTPC, and the desktop or even a test pattern of alternating black and white lines is pristine when feeding the Qualia either 1080 24PsF or 1080 60I .

However, trying to feed HD-DVD to my Sharp 12000 reveals a totally different experience. In that scenario, the difference between upscaled DVD and HD-DVD are not at all striking.

All connections via DVI (PC) /HDMI (HD-DVD).

This is my experience so far with around 6 of the initial releases.

I am used to a very high quality DVD experience using the HTPC to upscale DVD to 1080, but the HD-DVD takes image quality to a new and much higher level using a 1080 projector, which BTW has not been modified to accept 1080 60P

Just my $.02.

Ted

#3 of 116 ChristopherDAC

ChristopherDAC

    Producer

  • 3,729 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 18 2004

Posted May 13 2006 - 03:11 AM

He says — in the message body — he's got a Hewlett-Packard MD5880n, which is a "wobulated" 1080p DLP rear-projector. I don't happen to think "wobulation" is such a good deal [or, in fact, DLP, after seeing your SXRD!], but on the other hand, it's one of a handful of things on the market which accepts 1080p input.

I have never had a LaserDisc take more than about five seconds to load, so I don't have any idea what the remark on "long load times" is supposed to mean. The side changes take a little while, but there aren't that many side breaks in my collection, so I don't care. [Y'know, Ted, I'd almost offer to buy that S9 if you don't think you're going to use it any more, but I decided a while back that I wasn't going to buy another LD player except for High Definition models.]

When DVD came out, I decided it was only a stopgap until a High Definition medium came along, so I ignored it and concentrated on the disc medium [LD] which had the back catalogue I wanted. Now I'm waiting for titles I want to be released on at least one of the HD media [my bet is on Blu-Ray, because Disney controls the Ghibli films]. I hope it won't be too long, either.

#4 of 116 Michael Osadciw

Michael Osadciw

    Screenwriter

  • 1,325 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 2003

Posted May 13 2006 - 12:41 PM

Well, I won't jump into the technicalities of it all, but I agree with Robert on waiting it out just a bit...given the array of choices we will have in just a few short months I can hold my wallet back for a short while.

But for those of you who must have HD now, then go for it. I've been very impressed with what I've seen so far.

Mike
Warner Bros. Blu-ray Reviewer
Anchor Bay/Starz Entertainment Blu-ray Reviewer

THX/ISF Professional Video Calibrator
HIGHEST FIDELITY CALIBRATIONS

#5 of 116 RAF

RAF

    Lead Actor

  • 7,062 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted May 13 2006 - 01:15 PM

Quote:
Unless you have upgraded to a 1080 projector since your equipment list was last updated on your web site, you really don't have all the equipment to do even todays HD-DVD's justice.

Ted,

You haven't been paying attention.Posted Image

I still have my 720p Runco CL-710 projector, but I recently added a HP MD5880n 1080p DLP RP monitor (58") to my HT and, since it is one of the few 1080p input capable units out there right now I most certainly have the capability to see 1080p in all its glory. In fact, I've been doing that for months with 1080p Output from my HTPC. There are at least as many WMVHD titles out there as HD-DVD titles right now, which I already stated. I also said this would not remain the case for long. The point is, I'm as well equipped as anyone to view 1080p today. You can read my review here on the forum of the HP unit. The next major RAF HT upgrade will be a 1080p projector. I predict they will be under $5K with two years.

Quote:
I don't happen to think "wobulation" is such a good deal

Christopher,

I'm not going to get into a debate with you over this and you are entitled to your opinion but I've seen both the SXRD technology and the "wobulated" HP and I rate them almost equal. True, I'd purchase a Sony Ruby if I was getting an FP now (I'm not) but to me the HP DLP is superior to the Sony SXRD RP set - especially since the RP version of the SONY doesn't accept 1080p input. I could have purchased either unit and I chose the HP over the SONY after seeing them both. Have you seen "wobulated" output? I've had discussions with people who talk about it as if it were a bad thing or somehow cheating. The fact of the matter is that the process happens quicker than the eye can see so that at any given moment the eye sees the full complement of dots. In fact, the process actually lessens any "screen door" effects (or whatever they call it in DLP land) because there is a nice blending of the points of light. Wobulation isn't really a half-baked process at all as some would let you believe. It is actually an ingenious application and it actually works.

In any event, this isn't a thread about debating "wobulation" but one to talk about HD hardware and our plans to take the plunge. The "wobulation" discussion should be in another place at another time. Unfortunately, these things tend to get unduly passionate and there are other forums where some people thrive on crossing swords with each other. I think most of you know what and where I'm talking about. And a lot of these so called "experts" are talking without ever having seen an HP in action but just pontificating after reading about it. Unfortunately, that's par for the course "over there."

Posted Image


RAF
[Demented Video Dude since 1997]
[Computer Maven since 1956]
["PITA" since 1942]
CLICK HERE to visit My HT HTF Rules and Regulations

#6 of 116 TedD

TedD

    Supporting Actor

  • 698 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 09 2001

Posted May 13 2006 - 02:41 PM

Doesn't change the fact that a 1080I transport doesn't degrade a film sourced HD-DVD. Don't believe me? Take a look: http://www.avsforum....ad.php?t=628237

My point is that the lack of a 1080P transport in the first generation HD-DVD player is not a valid reason not taking advantage of HD-DVD today.

You may have other reasons. That's fine. A 1080I transport mechanism is not going to impair the quality of todays 1080P encoded HD-DVD's, so it is not a valid reason for waiting.

Ted

#7 of 116 Glenn Overholt

Glenn Overholt

    Producer

  • 4,207 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted May 13 2006 - 03:37 PM

Ok, I won't quibble over the difference in seeing 1080i vs. 1080p, but what about the audio on these HD players? What do you get without an HDMI compliant receiver? (I have to assume here that no one has one yet, namly because the 1.3 specs aren't done with yet).

If I read the info on the HD players correctly, you can get 5.1 analog at best -but you'd have to have a receiver that was equipped that way, and most aren't, I think. (I'm waiting for 7.1)!

So, if you're stuck with using the same cables that we used for SD DVD, is it true that you can't get better sound?

Glenn

#8 of 116 RAF

RAF

    Lead Actor

  • 7,062 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted May 13 2006 - 04:36 PM

Granted, I realize that the material encoded on the current HD-DVD discs is in 1080p and that the "next" generation of HD-DVD players will pass that resolution through to the display devices. I also realize that the uncompressed 1080i looks darn good (especially when compared to the usually compressed 1080i that we are fed from HD content providers (cable and dish). No arguments there. However, I still question why the HD-DVD camp chose to release the first players with this 1080i limitation. I would tend to think that it was done to "beat" Blu-ray to market - especially since they tell us 1080p output is "coming soon." This first effort really looks like a rush to the finish line.

Whatever. Blu-ray with 1080p output will be here soon enough to warrant waiting a month or two. And I suspect that there will be many more titles available at launch time.

To say that there is no discernible difference between the look of 1080i and 1080p really begs the issue. I had to laugh when the reference to an AVS thread was posted here. I watch movies, not test patterns. While there are a lot of knowledgeable people who post there the signal to noise ratio over there is so bad that I take almost everything there with a grain of salt. 1080p, in my estimation, looks better than 1080i.

And to say that "wobulation" isn't 1080p "in your book" really distorts what this technology is all about. A lot has been written about the resultant resolution of this technique and it is a full 1080p. The 1920 spec is achieved by alternating the 960 fields, but so rapidly as to present the full 1920 points quicker than the human eye can possibly respond. In effect this means that even with wobulation you see a 1920 x 1080 image at all times. In fact the wobulation smooths out any "screen door" DLP effects and in side by side tests many people actually prefer the wobulated 1920x1080 image to the "discrete" 1920x1080 image because of this blending.

In my opinion you are using both sides of the argument to try to prove your point. On the one hand you champion 1080i as being "practically indistinguishable" from 1080p so 1080p output isn't really important. And on the other hand you claim that "wobulated" 1080p isn't as good as "real" 1080p because it doesn't have the same resolution. Which is it?

In any event, the 1080i/1080p/wobulated/not wobulated issue is secondary to me. They all provide great pictures. But I choose to wait for 1080p output since that gives me one less thing to worry about in the scaling chain since my display is fully 1080p compliant (at 24,30 and 60 Hz). That certainly is a "valid" reason for those of us who have displays which can handle 1080p input not to settle for 1080i input no matter what you claim. If the HD content is encoded on the disc in 1080p format then you are introducing two generations of scaling into the process which don't need to be there.

However, the real reason for my not rushing out to get the Toshiba has to do with a lot of other things I mentioned. The selection of software available doesn't really thrill me so a month or two wait won't matter. And the 45 second wait for a disc to start is really a step backwards. While one might think that 45 seconds isn't a big deal it quickly adds up when one watches a lot of movies as I do. I keep thinking about one of the finest LD players I ever owned (still have it) the Industrial Pioneer 8000. It could find any field on an LD in under .5 seconds. But in order to achieve this it took over a minute to spin up since it was effectively mapping the entire contents of an LD side before being ready to roll. Yes, it produced a great picture and almost instantaneous frames (essential for educational and commercial LD video applications) but that minute to get started really got old fast. Here's hoping the later HD disc players don't have agonizingly long start up times.

So, yes, I have the equipment to watch HD discs (beyond my HTPC) right now. I even have a pre/pro that accepts 5.1 analog inputs so I can get the benefit of the new sound formats - thus avoiding the HDMI merry-go-round for now. I'm sure by the time I replace the pre/pro the new one will be HDMI compliant. One of the many benefits of separates. But, no, I'm not rushing out to get the current Toshiba player. A lot better will come along very soon.
RAF
[Demented Video Dude since 1997]
[Computer Maven since 1956]
["PITA" since 1942]
CLICK HERE to visit My HT HTF Rules and Regulations

#9 of 116 Steve Schaffer

Steve Schaffer

    Producer

  • 3,759 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 15 1999

Posted May 13 2006 - 04:40 PM

Glenn,

Even most mid-low end receivers these days have 5.1/7.1 analog inputs. The current Toshiba players will decode DD+ tracks and output them thru the 5.1 analog outputs. You won't get 6.1 or 7.1 of course but you will get the unaltered DD+ 5.1 track. Some confusion exists over the DTSHD format, with the manual stating the player will only extract the core data. What his actually boils down to is that it will do unaltered DTSHD in 5.1, but won't do any matrixed information intended for 7.1.

If you use the optical or coaxial digital output terminal on the player, the player must mix the sound encoded on the disc with various disc-dependent player generated sounds. It decodes the DD+, mixes in the generated sounds and re-encodes the result which is output as full-bitrate DTS (the player has a built in DTS Encoder). Since all but a very few current dts dvds run at half bitrate, the resultant sound is still better than the vast majority of current sd dvds.

In short, with the current players you'll get the best sound using the players 5.1 analog outs into a receiver with 5.1 analog inputs (very common in the last few years). This sounds better than any sd dvd I've tried using my HD-A1 into an HK AVR-635.

The sound from the optical input on the 635, which is read as DTS is still better than standard dvd.

In my case the pq alone is enough of a reason, and I'm watching on a run of the mill 4 year old Sony crt based widescreen HD-capable rptv via component connections.

The extra detail and more vivid color, along with total lack of digital artifacting and edge enhancement make for a much more film like image.

Even local over-the-air HDTV from stations that are not muliticasting can't match what I've seen from HD-DVD, the new encoding schemes totally eliminate the motion artifacting that can show up in detailed scenes with lots of fast motion.

The only downside for me is that HD-DVD has me sorely tempted to upgrade my tv set as my present one lacks HDMI and I've been too spoiled to put up with downrezzed pictures if the studios ever impose the ICT flag.
Steve S.
I prefer not to push the subwoofers until they're properly run in.

#10 of 116 Stan Rozenfeld

Stan Rozenfeld

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 199 posts
  • Join Date: May 27 2000

Posted May 13 2006 - 06:46 PM

Robert,

Everyone has to make the decision when to jump in when it's convenient for them. I am happy to see a very positive attitude towards high def dvd. I've been reading too many negative remarks lately. HD DVD has transformed my experience of watching movies at home, so much so, that I am selling a good portion of my DVD collection in anticipation of getting these films in high def dvd in the near future.

And you're right, 15 titles in the first month is not enough to get too many people excited, even if a couple of those titles are truly outstanding. I am betting that they will be releasing a lot more in the coming months, and the floodgates should open in the fall. I like the idea that I already have an hd dvd player that I am happy with that can play all the titles as they are being released.

#11 of 116 Michael Cucka

Michael Cucka

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 150 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 08 1998

Posted May 13 2006 - 11:36 PM

Quote:
For one thing, unlike the LD to DVD transition - this time there is a format war and all the lunacy that this brings.

Ahhh, but back then, RAF, we had to contend with DIVX - I remember being bummed about all the FOX titles we were missing out early on...

Quote:
Secondly, the early HD-DVD players with their ridiculous start up times bring back memories of LD loading times, etc. Definitely not a step forward.

But heck, our first DVD players didn't even have DTS capability and many were rampant with glitches, particularly with layer changes - boy, we even had to contend with titles that were "flippers"...


Quote:
And the lack of software is a bit ridiculous (probably a bit related to the format wars) considering the leap in picture quality and features.

I remember heading out to Media Play and The Wiz all the time for what seemed an eternity when DVD was launched only to see the same titles week after week - Batman, Space Jam, Blade Runner, etc. Then, when internet sites like Steve's DVDResource appeared, you could track the dirth of new releases on one hand - and the entire DVD release catalog on one page!

No, I don't think things are very different now then they were for us early adopters back then - you do it for the pleasure of now - heck, I even have a complete catalog of D-VHS titles just so I could enjoy 1080i years ago...

Waiting for the dust to settle is very logical - but it's not very fun and it's certainly not why we all are here!!! Posted Image
Michael Cucka brucknerdoc@comcast.net

#12 of 116 Levesque

Levesque

    Supporting Actor

  • 587 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 21 2002

Posted May 14 2006 - 12:41 AM

So Robert.

After reading all that, using my Gennum VXP scaler doing true inverse-telecine and per-pixel motion adaptive de-interlacing with a 1080i source is not giving me true 1080p in your book?

I don't know, but the HD-A1 paired with my Gennum scaler (de-interlacing 1080i to 1080p), and this to a Sony Ruby, gives me unbelievable PQ. And it's 1080p today.

Also. I have a pre/pro with HDMI 1.1, and then I'm also fully enjoying the new HD audio formats w/o any loss.

#13 of 116 TedD

TedD

    Supporting Actor

  • 698 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 09 2001

Posted May 14 2006 - 02:38 AM

Quote:
two generations of scaling
You really shouldn't confuse scaling with deinterlacing. They are two totally different processes and have no relationship to one another. Scaling always carries the risk of degrading an image, weave deinterlacing of two fields comming from the same frame does not.

BTW, I believe the first BD player from Samsung is also limited to outputting 1080I.

In case you were referring to Sony's 1080 24PsF format, the transport data stream for PsF is also 2 interlaced fields.

Robert has decided to wait. That's fine and that's his perogitive. I was just trying to ensure that others reading this thread don't follow the same incorrect line of reasoning concerning the lack of 1080P transport standards today.

Have an enjoyable wait Posted Image.

Quote:
per-pixel motion adaptive de-interlacing
Gains you nothing over a simple weave when both fields come from the same film frame. This really shines when working from 30FPS video sources, though.

Ted

#14 of 116 RAF

RAF

    Lead Actor

  • 7,062 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted May 14 2006 - 05:02 AM

A couple of quick clarifications based on the dialogue here. In the first place, let's put this into perspective. I'm waiting a couple of months at the most, not a couple of years. I'm not one of those people still waiting for color television to be "perfected" before I trash my old Dumont set.

Posted Image

Secondly, my waiting for 1080p source material delivered through the player to my 1080p set without any scaling, deinterlacing, etc. in no way is an indictment of the beautiful picture from HD-DVDs even in the first generation players. Yes, the are encoded in 1080p, but the first players chose to change this to 1080i which means that there is some electrical intervention between the source and the display. In my opinion, a 1080p source should have a way to reach a 1080p display directly so that the only variables are the quality of the source material and the quality of the display. Any additional steps in the process, be it deinterlacing, interlacing, scaling (a poor choice of wording by me for this particular discussion) are just that - additional steps. And no matter how good the equipment (I'm using a DVDO VP-30 HP scaler that will soon have the latest deinterlacing chip installed for all my non-direct needs) there's still some intervention.

Quote:
After reading all that, using my Gennum VXP scaler doing true inverse-telecine and per-pixel motion adaptive de-interlacing with a 1080i source is not giving me true 1080p in your book?
Sorry, Lévesque, but in my opinion the answer is, "no." Technically speaking it is not "true" 1080p because the source is not 1080p. However, before you bite my head off let me explain that I am actually on your side here. Even though the 1080p is being "constructed" I have no doubt that it is probably indistiguishable to the native eye from "true" 1080p and I fully support the measures that you are taking with your equipment. In fact I do it myself and I'm fine with this. Maybe it's a question of semantics. To me, perhaps the word "true" should be changed to "original" and this would make my point clearer. Yes, a lot of this is splitting hairs since the noticeable differences in the processes may be hard to discern by the average and even the acutely aware individual - but it's still my choice to go for direct connections if I want to. It certainly is "valid" for me to want 1080p output from 1080p source material if that's my preference. In my long experience with electronics I've always taken the position that if you should start with as pure a source as possible and then take it from there if any improvements are to be applied. With SD DVDs this means trying to take the original 480i encoded on the DVD and working with that - using the best possible processors out there. The ideal situation is to take the 480i content from a digital source (HDMI or DVI or a player modified with SDI) and then scale it and deinterlace it to try to improve it for display. I'm not so naive as to think that a 480i source is going to magically look as good as 1080p native material (the old GIGO "Garbage In, Garbage Out" argument) but it can certainly look better with a little electronic help. And that's why if I have a 1080p set capable of displaying native 1080p input it's not unreasonable to want 1080p source materials like HD-DVD and Blu-ray to give me a direct path to the full data stream. To me, it's never a bad thing for the player to have the ability to pass through the natively encoded signal from a disc as an option so that processing become an entirely external thing. In this way as electronics improve you have the possibility of enhancing the image even more. If the signal path is forced to go through the player's electronics as the only option available you are stuck with the capability of the player. True, most players have a life span of probably a few years but this removes one more potential problem from the signal path.

So waiting a bit is not that big a deal for me. I know that a lot of you are excited because some of you, for the first time, are seeing the glory of full 1080i uncompressed video and what it can look like. If I need a full bandwidth 1080p "jones" I can pop a WMVHD disc into my HTPC and view 1080p images right now. I've done this for almost six months. But I fully understand the enthusiasm generated by HD source material. It's the future of video and it's here now. I just want it to be as good as it can be and if that means waiting a month or two for a 1080p output device then so be it.

Incidentally, can someone verify that the Toshiba units can output 480i via HDMI from SD DVDs? I've been waiting for the forthcoming OPPO unit that will provide this function so that I can take a native signal from SD (it's encoded in 480i) and then apply processing to that. This is, in my opinion, the best way to handle things be it SD DVDs or HD-DVDs and Blu-ray (an the gist of my position in this thread). If I can save the ~$200 that the OPPO would cost me and apply it to an HD-DVD player that would be like a $200 discount. Of course, come to think of it, if the Toshibas output native 480i over HDMI from SDs then all the other players probably do too so what I've actually done here is to talk myself out of the OPPO while writing this!

Posted Image Posted Image

It never ends, does it?




RAF
[Demented Video Dude since 1997]
[Computer Maven since 1956]
["PITA" since 1942]
CLICK HERE to visit My HT HTF Rules and Regulations

#15 of 116 RAF

RAF

    Lead Actor

  • 7,062 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted May 14 2006 - 05:29 AM

Quote:
so it is not a valid reason for waiting

Quote:
I was just trying to ensure that others reading this thread don't follow the same incorrect line of reasoning

TedD,

You started out your comments in this thread by incorrectly assuming that I was using a 720p display when, in fact, it was clear that I was talking about a 1080p device. You then questioned the validity of my position and followed this by accusing me of an incorrect line of reasoning. I respectfully disagree with both of these assertions. In fact I find them confrontational and insulting.

My reasons for waiting are quite valid as I've expressed elsewhere, and the fact that I stated that a 1080i transport does not deliver a 1080p signal cannot be explained away with one of those spurious "you can't see a difference so there is no difference" arguments. 1080i and 1080p are not the same and no amount of wordsmithing changes that.

I'm not surprised that you reference an AVS thread to support your position since that venue is known for its confrontational posturing. But here at the HTF we ask that you leave your attitude at the door and concentrate on meaningful discussion without attacking a poster's position on a personal basis. Feel free to contribute to any discussion as long as you follow forum guidelines. I'm hoping that I misinterpreted your comments and if so I apologize. If not, remember this forum does not tolerate personal attacks.

P.S. I trust that everyone understands that this standard applies to the treatment of all of our members and has nothing to do with the fact that I am a moderator. If anyone ever feels that they have been attacked they can inform the staff and appropriate action will be taken. That's why most of you notice that there aren't too many confrontational threads here compared to a lot of other sites.
RAF
[Demented Video Dude since 1997]
[Computer Maven since 1956]
["PITA" since 1942]
CLICK HERE to visit My HT HTF Rules and Regulations

#16 of 116 Levesque

Levesque

    Supporting Actor

  • 587 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 21 2002

Posted May 14 2006 - 05:40 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert A Fowkes
Incidentally, can someone verify that the Toshiba units can output 480i via HDMI from SD DVDs?

No. And it's a pretty stupid omission IMHO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert A Fowkes
I've been waiting for the forthcoming OPPO unit that will provide this function so that I can take a native signal from SD (it's encoded in 480i) and then apply processing to that.

The Oppo 970H will be pretty good, but the Mediatek is suffering from a couple of CUE problems... So you will need a good scaler to get rid of those... We never win, don't we!

BTW, Robert, we are on the same side! I'm enjoying 1080p right now in my dedicated HT room and I'm just sad that everybody, and you, don't. That's all. We are here today. And I'm SO impressed with the PQ of my video chain with the Toshiba HD player.

#17 of 116 Glenn Overholt

Glenn Overholt

    Producer

  • 4,207 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted May 14 2006 - 05:47 AM

Thanks for that info, Steve. There probably aren't any HD disks out with anything more than 5.1 anyway.

But even having 5.1 sound better begs buying something!

Glenn

#18 of 116 ChristopherDAC

ChristopherDAC

    Producer

  • 3,729 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 18 2004

Posted May 14 2006 - 08:57 AM

TedD has a point, though. I mean, it's possible to be a stickler for technical accuracy and annoy people who know what they said, but put it awkwardly.

1. The 1080i30 connexion on the HD DVD player is transmitting material originally encoded in 1080p24 format. A 1080p display is capable of reconstructing this back into the 1080p24 format, identical to the original. The 1080i connexion is thus transmitting 1080p content.

2. It is therefore incorrect to say that the HD DVD player is not capable of transmitting 1080p content, as opposed to a 1080p signal. If this statement is incorrect, then it is ipso facto not a valid reason for doing or not doing anything.

3. If you wanted to say that you didn't trust the deinterlacer in your 1080p television to properly reconstruct the 1080p content from the 1080i signal, or that [since the content on the discs is 1080p] that you don't see why you should have to use it, or that you paid good money for an input which would accept a 1080p signal and you want to get one, or a variety of other things which either are simple opinions or incorporate true statements of fact : any one of those would be a "valid reason". I think he was pretty clear on this.

Also, I'm the only person who has expressed doubt about a "wobbulated" display being all it's cracked up to be, and I am the kind of person who has been known to watch test patterns for entertainment. Posted Image

#19 of 116 RickER

RickER

    Producer

  • 5,130 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 04 2003
  • Real Name:Rick
  • LocationTulsa, Oklahoma

Posted May 14 2006 - 09:04 AM

I have to say i will be waiting on the HD DVD formats too. But like everyone else i have my reasons. A new house, new Tosh 50" Plasma, new home theater in the new house, and of course the expense of life. Even if the playing field was level for me...that Tosh HD player is just ugly in MY opinion. I also was not thrilled with the HD DVD list. The titles i own on regular DVD from the first HD titles listed look just fine on MY Plasma. Now when i am ready for a new DVD player i would like to see what Blue Ray or HD DVD have to offer. But, man, my GF and i have a hell of a house, and a nice but modest HT to enjoy.
Oh, by the way, i was one of those guys in late 96 and early 97 who saw DVD demos and thought it sucked! All the macro blocking and pixelating made me think my LD player had no worries. By mid 97 i saw the light, and the beauty of DVD, and never looked back. I am sure this will be the same, give me 6 months and i will see the second coming with DVD...but not today.

#20 of 116 Michael Osadciw

Michael Osadciw

    Screenwriter

  • 1,325 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 2003

Posted May 14 2006 - 10:57 AM

Re: converting a 1080p HD-DVD to 1080i for output, then taking 1080i at TV and converting to 1080p for display.

Quote:
If the HD content is encoded on the disc in 1080p format then you are introducing two generations of scaling into the process which don't need to be there.

AMEN, Robert!!

Mike
Warner Bros. Blu-ray Reviewer
Anchor Bay/Starz Entertainment Blu-ray Reviewer

THX/ISF Professional Video Calibrator
HIGHEST FIDELITY CALIBRATIONS


Back to Blu-ray, DVD, LD, Tivo, Satellite and Other Playback Devices



Forum Nav Content I Follow