What's new

DVD ETC. MAGAZINE ASKS: DVD versus D-VHS? (1 Viewer)

Mark_Mac

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 26, 2001
Messages
91
Thanks for posting those comparison shots. The Gladiator difference is indeed amazing, but the Fellowship of the Ring difference is much more subtle. IMO.
Lars_J
The big difference is in the size. Just look at the HD examples at their true resolution. Look at all the detail in those pictures and they have been highly compressed with photoshop. The actual captures look like pictures from my digital camera. I made a update on my page with the DVD examples at 1920x1080, the video noise is easy to see on the new examples.
http://www.geocities.com/sircash13/DVDvrsDVHS.html
 

Lars_J

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
200
Mark_Mac - Is there any chance you could post the images with as little JPEG compression as possible?
Also, I looked at your HTML source, and notice a big No-no. You are just using the browser to upscale the same image DVD images to HD-res. This does not make for a good comparison, for two reasons:
1. Browser resizing of images can yield varying levels of quality, depending on the broswer and its settings.
2. Since you are already using a compressed JPEG image as source, this will definately exaggerate JPEG compression artifacts, making the DVD transfer appear worse than it really is. It becomes really difficult to see difference between video noise, DVD compression artifacts, or plain old JPEG image compression artifacts.
A better comparison would be to take your DVD screen-cap, resize it to HD, and then save it as JPEG, with the highest quality setting. And it would be even better if you used loss-less compression, like PNG.
 

Troy LaMont

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
849
the same handful of people who have bought into the format swarm to repeatedly defend their purchase and disparage DVD.
...and the same handful of naysayers swarm to repeatedly tell us that it's TAPE although they admit that it's a superior format visually and sonically.:rolleyes
If it bothers you that much then participate in a thread that you have a real interest in, obviously D-Theater/D-VHS is not you're cup of tea.
No one is defending any purchases that I'm aware of. Outside of the fact that you can playback D-Theater 1080i HD encoded movies, you can record HD in all it's incarnations and if the need calls for it, you can record a days worth of regular VHS/S-VHS and MiniDV to boot. Well worth it's weight in gold for an under $800 purchase. I doubt very seriously if HD-DVD hits that price range during it's first year out. (IMO)
Troy
 

Paul McElligott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
Messages
2,598
Real Name
Paul McElligott
I doubt very seriously if HD-DVD hits that price range during it's first year out. (IMO)
Actually, I expect the prices for the first HD-DVD players to start somewhat lower than DVHS and drop like a rock in the first year, for this reason:
Five or so years from now, the potential market for HD-DVD (those with HDTV sets) will be much larger. The prices for HDTV sets will be much lower. Assuming they get the copy-protection issues hammered out, HD-DVD will probably have wider studio support right out of the gate.
Of course, I'll probably wait for the inevitable DVHS/HD-DVD combo player. :D
 

Bob Black

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jan 16, 1999
Messages
238
If it bothers you that much then participate in a thread that you have a real interest in, obviously D-Theater/D-VHS is not you're cup of tea.
Actually, this thread was titled "DVD vs. D-VHS", so I think both opinions are supposed to be presented here!

And I also stated that purchasing the D-Theater VCR made sense for anyone looking to record hi-def material NOW - I just re-affirm my opinion that it isn't a very sound investment for those of us interested in a hi-def, pre-recorded library. Most members of this forum agree that tape is a backward media for home theater due to its limitations. I also frequent the AVS Forum, where I have read several posts from a number of people who own hi-def players relating their problems associated with these decks (ie. video-head problems, improper aspect ratios or full-screen ONLY versions of films on their HD pay-channels, inconsistent video images or drop-offs, etc.)

So let me ask a direct question to all the supporters of this format. I own a Dwin CRT projector capable of 1080i playback, and a hi-def 16x9 58" Toshiba television. I also own a Dishnet satellite dish (Dish 5000) and three receivers. What exactly would I need to get from Dishnet (in terms of hardware) to allow me to receive hi-def programming through my system? I was under the impression that I would need a second dish, which I do not want! And what about the impending merger between Dishnet and DirectTV? Will the hardware be changing after this happens? And what about connections necessary between the receiver/line doubler? My doubler has 2 component inputs, 2 S-Video inputs and composite inputs. If hi-def is easily attainable, I might be interested in upgrading my satellite equipment (although I am still not interested in D-Theater)
 

Allen Longcor

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Messages
549
Well after finally getting around to reading everyone else's opinion I'll go ahead and share my own thoughts.

DVD vs D-VHS. I think that everyone can agree that D-VHS is superior in the visual quality department. The degree to which it is superior is up for debate, but 1080i is certainly going to be better than 480p. Not that much has been said about the quality of the dolby digital sound versus DVD so who knows.

Would I purchase a D-VHS machine in the future? No. I currently don't have an HDTV capable set so it would obviously be a complete waste for me. If I did have one would I get one? I would get one only to record current HD content broadcasts. The current selection of pre-recorded titles is to me not worth it. I am also wary of how long a tape would last before signs of wear and tear would show. I think that this is only a stepping stone to the inevitable coming of HD-DVD.

For those that want Hi-Def now this is a great product. I dont think anyone sees this as the next big format, but it will certainly bridge the gap of time before HD shows up on DVD. When HD-DVD finally shows up people can convert all those D-VHS tapes over and not miss a beat. I think it is a doomed product, but if I had the money and the system to use it why not go for it? It's certainly the best out there right now.
 

Josh Lowe

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 19, 2002
Messages
1,063
not many very compelling arguments here. seems to mostly consist of a lot of repetitious statements that were undoubtedly used by VHS proponents to disparage the early adopters of the laserdisc and DVD formats. kind of ironic that now DVD proponents are using the arguments once made against them, and have somehow talked themselves into believing them.. short memories i guess!

oh and "it's tape".. funny, but i don't know of many people in the world of audio slamming DAT for being a tape format.. what's the difference?

And what about the impending merger between Dishnet and DirectTV? Will the hardware be changing after this happens?
The FCC killed that merger weeks ago.
 

george kaplan

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2001
Messages
13,063
Huh? Sorry, but I don't understand this. The primary argument of myself and many others is anti-tape because of durability issues. How the anti-tape argument was ever used against laserdisc and dvd (both of which I was big proponents of) is beyond me.
I will agree that it's very repetitious though. DVHS has higher (initial) video quality than dvd and (arguably) less durability than dvd. Given that, you either like DVHS or you don't. Ad infinitum. :)
 

Wayne Bundrick

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 17, 1999
Messages
2,358
To further add to the "But It's Tape" argument...

It's not just that tape, being a thin strip covered with a thin layer of rust, unspooled and pulled and stretched and wrapped around a rapidly spinning drum and respooled, is going to deteriorate over time, indeed it can spontaneously deteriorate as it sits on the shelf if a vacuum cleaner passes by (think stray magnetic fields from the motor)... Yes, deterioration does happen, but maybe not as quickly as a lot of you fear. I guess the counterpoint is that DVDs can rot too, although my Contact DVD still plays perfectly.

If you want to see why I'm no fan of VHS and its progeny, just take the cover off your old (out of warranty, of course) VCR and take a look inside. Look at the number of gears, levers, belts, and other moving parts. If you're not afraid of the exposed power supply, plug the VCR in and insert a tape and watch what happens. If they could add a frightened squirrel running on a treadmill then Rube Goldberg would be proud. Okay, I'm getting the point and that point is: If just one of these moving parts should break, or even if it's just slightly misaligned, it can chew a tape right in the middle of your favorite scene and turn the rest of the tape into a birdsnest. There are as many ways to damage a tape as there are moving parts in the mechanism required to play it. And it's not just the moving parts inside the deck, it could be one of the moving parts in the cassette shell (I count 9, not including the 800 feet of tape), such as the spring-loaded lever that locks the spools.

Compare that with optical disc formats. The player has only a few moving parts. The spindle, the lens servo, and the drawer mechanism, plus the spinning disc itself. Changers have more moving parts but still not nearly as many as a VCR. There are far fewer ways that a disc can be physically damaged by a player.

I like to collect movies, and I like high definition. But I don't want to collect high definition movies on a format that is as fragile as tape.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2001
Messages
16
I actually had a DVD player chew up a disc once. No kidding.

But on the lighter side some of these arguments are very similar to:

1) I had a friend whose car broke down. So I refuse to buy a car.

2) My sister's TV set went on the fritz. So I refuse to buy a TV.

And the list goes on and on. The folks who are phobic about tape (and you know who you are) don't need to justify your dislike of tape to anyone. No one, and I mean no one, is holding a gun to your head or holding your wallet hostage.

If you really believe that tapes wear out after a relatively small number of plays, or that VCRs eat tapes like they are going out of style then that's fine too. If you don't like the selection of D-Theater tapes or can't stand what is on HD SAT or find those choices too limiting then pass. Stay with your DVDs and enjoy them and wait however long it will ultimately take for HD DVD to come to market.

In the meantime those who can get past the tape issue are enjoying the best picture available--and doing so now. I don't know why that is so controversial.

--Jerome
 

Rob Tomlin

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2000
Messages
4,506
I will agree that it's very repetitious though. DVHS has higher (initial) video quality than dvd and (arguably) less durability than dvd. Given that, you either like DVHS or you don't. Ad infinitum.
Yes, George, and you keep adding to that "ad infinitum" don't you! :p)
 

Paul McElligott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
Messages
2,598
Real Name
Paul McElligott
If you want to see why I'm no fan of VHS and its progeny, just take the cover off your old (out of warranty, of course) VCR and take a look inside. Look at the number of gears, levers, belts, and other moving parts. If you're not afraid of the exposed power supply, plug the VCR in and insert a tape and watch what happens. If they could add a frightened squirrel running on a treadmill then Rube Goldberg would be proud.
Exactly my concern. I would probably buy a DVHS if, and only if, a Tivo-like solution for HD is not available when I finally buy a HD set.
 

Wayne Bundrick

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 17, 1999
Messages
2,358
1) I had a friend whose car broke down. So I refuse to buy a car.
I wouldn't refuse to buy a car, but I might refuse to buy the same model of car my friend has. I might refuse to buy even the same brand of car my friend has. But there are several companies making cars and they all have their own unique designs with varying degrees of reliability.

On the other hand, there's only one VHS. Sure there are differences in the machinery of each manufacturer's decks, but they are all designed to accomodate the very same VHS cassette. They all have to open the same flap, unlock the same reels, and thread the same tape around the drum. The design is about 30 years old and very much showing its age compared to newer tape formats that have been designed with genuine concern for putting less stress on the tape and less risk of mechanical malfunction and causing tape damage.

I'm not entirely against tape. I back up data on tape on a regular basis. But if I had to put my trust in one tape format, or choose one for collecting movies, it would not be in VHS. I'd be more supportive of a high definition video tape format if it was a newer and more durable design rather than just milking a few more dollars from old cash cow patents.
 

John Knowles

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 17, 1999
Messages
174
Location
Twin Cities, MN
Real Name
John
I just had to pipe in here regarding the statement made about DAT tape being a good example of a rotary head tape format. While DAT can work well and sound good (for what it is), I know a number of people who have used DAT over a period of years in the broadcast realm (using pro decks) who have little faith in the format since it's so prone to mechanical failure. And people involved in archival work seem to be the last ones to trust it as a long-term storage solution as it can cease to play back at all after it's degraded somewhat (the same can happen to an optical format too...). I'm sure there are those who swear by and trust DAT, but that's what I've been hearing.
 

Jason Harbaugh

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2001
Messages
2,968
If HD-DVD comes out without the option of being recordable (ala dvd in the early days) do you think that D-VHS and HD-DVD could/will co-exist in the same way that VHS and DVD do now? One being available to record over the air shows while the other is aimed at prerecorded material.

There tends to be two groups of people that want a high def format. Those that want it to record HD material and the others that just want prerecorded movies in HD. (of course you can want both). I personally am only interested in prerecorded movies and have no interest in recording over the air broadcasts. After really digging deep that is probably the main reason why I'll never have a D-VHS deck in my house and stick with DVD until HD-DVD.

What happens if HD-DVD comes out of the door being recordable? Would that be the final nail in the D-VHS coffin, assuming that the HD-DVD format is all that we are hoping it will be?
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2002
Messages
31
I have no doubt that DVHS is significanly higher quality and more detailed than DVD. I do have one question for you guys though. A lot of the DVHS proponents mention poor DVD quality (EE, poor transfers, etc) as a reason that DVHS is superior. What I was wondering is what makes you think DVHS won't have those same problems? Those are problems at the studio and decision-making level, not the technology level. Are you just presuming that because it is the "enthusiast" format, that studios will choose not to add EE, and will take extra effort to make a high quality transfer? Or do you think that the higher resolution will naturally make those problems less visible? Or something else?

I'm not trying to debase your arguments, I'm genuinely curious why you guys are using that as an advantage of the DVHS format, when the format itself has nothing to do (as far as I can figure) with these types of artifacts being present
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2001
Messages
16
On the other hand, there's only one VHS. Sure there are differences in the machinery of each manufacturer's decks, but they are all designed to accomodate the very same VHS cassette. They all have to open the same flap, unlock the same reels, and thread the same tape around the drum. The design is about 30 years old and very much showing its age compared to newer tape formats that have been designed with genuine concern for putting less stress on the tape and less risk of mechanical malfunction and causing tape damage.
Wayne,

You are completely missing my point.

Anyone that paranoid about tape (anyone who would go to the trouble of building a chronicle of everything that happens to a tape when it is played is paranoid) should stay as far away from it as possible. Sure, a lot of things can go wrong with a lot products.

I can enjoy a good glass of wine, too. And I sure as heck don't want to know what happens from the vine to the bottle.

No one wants you guys to loose sleep over worrying about whether or not your tapes are rotting on the shelf or what might happen the next time you put a tape in the deck.

--Jerome
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,716
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top