High Definition DVD: What is Holding You Back? (4 Viewers)

[Bryant Trew]

That's just dumb, and consumers are much smarter these days. These guys need to come up with compelling reasons to upgrade, plain and simple. I'm now on my third "reference quality" DVD player, and I see no point in getting rid of it until it breaks.

I can make it real simple for you - you can make HD 10x the resolution of SD-DVD, and my enjoyment of the film simply doesn't scale anywhere as much. Is a 1080i/p film 2x+ more entertaining than my 480p version? Nope. So what then is the reason to upgrade? A crap film in SD is a crap film in HD Plain and simple.

VHS >>> LD = excellent picture for 32-50" TVs, no degradation from repeated viewings, no humidity problems, amazing sound.

LD >>> DVD = superb/excellent/great picture for 50-70" TVs, compact size, massive content extras, greater library, more sound options.

DVD >>> HD = potential for reference quality picture on 70+" TVs, not as meaningful on smaller screens, better sound, perhaps not as meaningful on lower end systems, and... and... and...

 

[Shaw]

.........BINGO!!!

and as for the internet/ethernet connection, I recently read that it would be the first generation players on the market that did NOT have the connection. Believe me, after all the problems with music donwloads, the movie industry is gearing up for catching video pirates.

"Caveat Emptor"

threerandot

 

[MarkHastings]

You want to know a great reason for not getting into HD? Just take a look at the threads in the HD section.

It sounds like a giant can of worms that is best left unopened.

 

[Walter Kittel]

Bryant - You forgot to list color performance that NTSC sources such as VHS, LD, and DVD simply can't touch in your DVD >>> HD item, which is available on all compatible systems regardless of display area.

Mark - It is a great can of worms.

- Walter.

 

[ChristopherDAC]

If you want to put numbers to the improvement, you can look at the CCIR grading scale. Now, this is all from memory, so there may be a few errors.

Briefly put, whatever cirterion you're evaluating, such a naturalness, attractiveness, &c., is scored on a scale of 0 to 5. 0 is "no picture, unrecongnizable, or otherwise totally unsatisfactory", 1 is "very unsatisfactory", 2 is "somewhat unsatisfactory", 3 is "somewhat satisfactory", 4 is "very satisfactory", and 5 is "completely satisfactory". You poll as large a group of people as you can.

The NTSC studio standard generally runs between 2.5 and 3.5 in whatever criteria you grade it on. The studio HD standard grades 4.5 to 5, across the board.
In order to bump NTSC up toward the 3-4 range with maybe the occasional 4.5, you have to provide it with the High Definition surround sound system, format it into the wide High Definition aspect ratio, and scale it into High Definition scanrates. The thing is, a lot of people are doing at least 2 out of the last-mentioned 3 things with DVD, and no small number seem to be doing the third as well. Basically, what they're watching has all the key characteristics of High Definition except for its central feature, the increased picture detail!

 

[MarkHastings]

I'm sure it is. But my HD cable is satisfying my HD lust right now, so with that in place, I want to wait until the floor is solid before stepping into HD players. It just doesn't sound worth the frustration at this immediate point in time.

 

[Ross Waite]

My delay is for two reasons:

1) The obvious lack of a unified format. I don't want to choose the "wrong" format and find myself disenfranchised later on.

2) While the studios are currently playing nice by allowing HD over component outputs, I'm concerned that this will be short-lived. My 57" HD-capable widescreen set does not have digital inputs and I will NOT be replacing this display for several years. Even IF there was a single unified format, I would not want to make this kind of investment only to find it rendered useless due to HDMI (or lack thereof).

I don't think there is any question that HD is the way to go. I just wish my situation was such that I could afford to gamble away or make the necessary upgrades to meet the HD requirements.

-Ross

 

[Brian*Rch]

What's holding me back?

Apple Computer's World Wide Developer's Conference in August.

That's when the world's only computer maker/movie mogul will announce his professional line of Intel-based workstations.

And when he announces, "And one more thing ..." I will be wondering , "Will it be Blu-Ray?" Will he put Blu-Ray on his new line of computers now, and if so, what will the pricing be?

I've read many of these posts, and I wonder are people viewing this new product with the old betamax/VHS paradigm? Are you viewing the DVD as a "Digital Video Disc" (a misnomer), or by its rightful name, "Digital Versatile Disc?" A quick scan of worldwide PC unit sales versus DVD video player sales shows PC sales as roughly double the volume of DVD players. I own one DVD player for my TV, two DVD player/recorders for my Apple G4 home workstation, and a DVD player for my laptop. My wife has a DVD player on her laptop, as well.

Unit costs on the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD players will be driven down more by PC sales than home video player sales. This may extend the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray battle, because makers of both players will enjoy economies of scale that Beta/VHS makers never enjoyed. On the PC side of the equation, though is the fact that Blu-Ray holds more data. In that arena, cost-per-gig of storage rules, and there Blu-Ray appears like it will dominate.

I read recently that an electronics analyst and totaled up the costs of electronics in the $500 HD-DVD players and found these players are being sold for less than the cost of their parts. I wish I still had the link, but I saw it a few weeks before joining this forum. You should be able to google it still.

I purchase my electronic equipment on a dollars-per-year basis. The major media center purchase is made every 10 years or so, computers every three. Both have been put off a bit because of 1) the transition to HD and 2) Apple Computer's transition to Intel. Somewhere in the middle of those two points is Apple Computer's very heavy investment in HDTV post-production tools. While there are Apple home PC's and laptops that will work with this software, Jobs has waited until August to introduce his real workhorse, and why did he wait? Was it Blu-Ray?

What else am I going to store my HDTV productions on?

So in the next four months I will enjoy a double witching hour purchasing home office equipment that is media driven, and a home entertainment center.

In three years, Steve Jobs owned 80% of the on-line digital music business. His lo-res players sent SACD the way of beta. And he didn't even own a record company.

He just sold Pixar in exchange for a seat on Disney's board. In a year or two, when he's giving away Blu-Ray versions of Cinderella and Finding Nemo with every Happy Meal sold at Micky-Ds, how many of you will tell the wife and kids you're holding out until the war is settled?

Sure, that's over the top, but in many ways not too far. From what I've read in the financial papers, the movie industry has seen what Jobs did to music distribution, and they don't want him owning 80% share of movie distribution. Tapes and Discs are no longer the sole method of getting on-demand content into a home. I never spent a single Wendesday watching any episode of "Lost." I just saw half the season in one afternoon on my laptop. Maybe by the time the format war for discs is settled, my video library will be stored on a server farm in Cupertino California?

I'm new to the high-end theatre thing, and joined the forum to learn a few things. Currently my planned setup is a home office/edit bay and media room combination. My mind could change, but if everything goes as planned, then I'll have a Mactel Mac Pro tower with a 30" Apple monitor 15' from a Sony Sony KDS-R60XBR1. HD Video on disc played by the computer's Blu-Ray drive.

Brian

 

[MarkHastings]

Brian, when DVD burners (for computers) first came out, they were all DVD-ROM. Now DVD-ROM is more of a specialty item. DVD+-RW have taken over.

So I can't say that PC sales will determine which format will be the overall winner.

 

[Brian*Rch]

Here's a link that Toshiba is selling their HD-DVD players well below cost of manufacture.

I mentioned it earlier, and thought that an article on what a company is doing to push sales would be relevant in a thread on what it would take to get somebody to buy.

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/rsstory/51512.html

Brian

 

[Joe D]

1. HDMI Confusion

My TV has component and DVI inputs, will the lack of HDMI leave me out in the cold in the future?

2. Format War

Who knows who will win this one?

3. Price

4. Software Selection

5. TV Size

My 48" screen looks great with "good" quality DVD's, in the future I'd like to get a projector but that is easily 4+ years away.

6. Overall confusion

It seems that every HD or BR thread I read is filled with conflicting opinions, doubts, and a disarray of ideas which just lead me to be confused.

 

[Nick Zbu]

I just can't see the practical use for such a technology now. While I would love to have my movies clearer, I have neither the money or the will to part with money on a technology that will make movies more clear or decrease the discs that could be used for TV boxsets. While I love that technology is increasing to make movie watching better day after day, I don't watch a lot of recent stuff. Most of my DVDs are of older shows and movies where the more definition you have, the more imperfections are shown.

On top of this, any HDTV I can afford is woefully underpowered. They can't even get 1080i and on top of this, the players are expensive. My problem is twofold: I don't see how the technology could really help me in most cases and I'm not willing to throw away a grand and a half just so I can see movies more clearly and the imperfections in source material of the greater part of my DVD collection. One day I'll changeover, but that day will come when the technology works and it works for me. Otherwise, I'll just sit back and enjoy what I have right now.

 

[Matthew Metoyer]

A couple things I feel I should mention up front. I tried both toshiba's in my home and at a friends store on a CRT 1080i, DLP 1080p and 720p sets, all over 57" diagonal. I compared them to a Pioneer Elite DV-45 with SDI and a DVDO HD+, and a Toshiba up-converting DVD player over HDMI.
Our first impression was that SD was better! We checked the forums for other first impressions and thought maybe we had a problem in our setup, due to the glowing reviews. We eventually determined that the toshiba down-converter at 720p sucks. Strike one.
Once we had them at 1080i things improved but not enough for us to recommend it to customers. We noticed slight improvements in color accuracy and sharpness. I remember similar improvements after adding the SDI mod. Of course all this is over component cables because we had HDMI issues on all three TVs - Strike two.
And finally there is Strike three - user friendliness. Both remotes are terrible! Long power up and load times. The (stupid) FBI & HD promo - I've already bought it, why do I need a sales pitch before each movie!? Where is the lossless audio - we were amazed that DD+ is output as DTS!
We are still waiting on Toshiba to fix the HDMI issues. (Maybe it's a plot by Toshiba against Samsung TV owners?) I've since returned the HD-A1 and my friend still has the HD-XA1, though he hasn't touched it in over two weeks.
We both agree that we will not buy/recommend either format until:
1) Load/power up times approach current dvd's.
2) HDMI issues are gone.
3) Image transfers are consistently great, not just good (and titles worth watching repeatedly).
4) At least some extra features in high def!
5) One format!
All this for no more than $700 for a top-level player, $20-25 for catalog titles and $25-30 for new releases.
Is that too much to ask of these GREEDY manufacturers/studios? If it is then SD is doing just fine for me. Thanks for letting me vent!

 

[Lew Crippen]

deleted

 

[MarkHastings]

Can of worms

 

[Jerome Grate]

I hope it won't get lost here (I'll have to remember my thread #) anyway I've seen both together at J&R in NYC, third time for HD-DVD and first time for the Samsung BD. Side by side comparison,? I wish, unfortunately the clerk, she reached behind the Toshiba HD-A1 HD-DVD player and pulled out the HDMI cable, (at least it was hooked up correctly) and placed it into the Samsung. The t.v. was a 37 inch 1080p Westinghouse t.v.
Toshiba had the demo disc with the split screen indicating "standard definition (simulated)" on the right of the screen and HD on the left. Now I've seen this demo twice already but today I paid close attention and stayed and watched it for a little bit longer than previous times. The detail I must say was prominent, jawdropping, no but still a significant difference. The best scene that told it all was the book scene, I could read the words on the pages literally and the gold pen was clearly an interesting take and displayed great detail as to the textured feel of the pen. This picture I rated a 10 out of 10 because of the incredible detail.

Now to the Samsung BD. The demo was a disc of trailers, Ultraviolet, 50 Blind Dates and xXx.

Ultraviolet, had beautiful, bold and vibrant colors, but I found the texture a little soft, the clothing on the characters were lacking a little detail, but still a somewhat stunning picture. The action sequence forced me to do a blind purchase of the movie (hope it looks well on the 318).

50 Blind dates, that picture was great. Fleshtones were just so real and I'm impressed when I can see the acne of the actor's face and Adam Sandler had it all. Colors again were vibrant and the color eye on Schroeder was profound.

xXx, I thought was a disappointment, I don't know if the trailer was purposely tailored that way but there were some scenes in the trailer that produced heavy, heavy graining. I haven't seen xXx on the 318 yet but after Ultraviolet tonight, I'm popping it in.

So what's holding me back, I must say HD-DVD is looking very attractive right now, more movies and a pricetag that I can handle. BD for $1,000, no way, especially after what I saw today. I have 5.1 inputs on my HK so I would take advantage of the higher rez sound but it's just too, too early. The only thing that's an issue is the sound for me, which would require me to get a new receiver capable of the 7.1 input HD-DVD will have later. My t.v. does 1080i and not 1080p via HDMI so 1080p is not an issue for me and as far as video is concern it doesn't really matter if one jumps in now or later if the video is going to look the same now and later on a 1080i RPTV.

 

[Martino]

Why not - several reasons?

I already replaced my VCR with a Laser Disk player...then the laser disk player with a combo Laser Disk/Gen1 DVD player....then with a newer DVD player....along the way, I held on to laser disks that were not available on DVD, only to seem them slowly come available....and have an old copy that now just takes up space.

I have a 56" projection TV I received as a gift from my company for completing 5 years of service (...free TV...) that does not accept the new cables, but still works great...don't want to replace it

So having gone through gen1 player problems. (remember going to forms to read if the movie I was about to buy would work on my player - "Disk X doesn't work on my player/freezes/skips...ect...)

Being around for the whole Beta vs VHS format war...and having a Father who chose Beta....and not being able to rent any movies because no one caried these...I don't want to be on the losing end and end up having to buy two players...

 

[Bryan Ri]

One simple thing:

I'm still satisfied with the standard products I have.

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

1. Format war. I don't trust buying into an expensive new technology that has yet to be accustomed, and could very well become phased out within the next two years.

2. I have zero interest in the titles being added. I could care less about CGI blockbusters and recent Hollywood popcorn tripe like the American Pie films on HD-DVD. When I start to see some regularity and consistency in the type of releases being announced and coming out, I will reconsider my stance. I want to feel a sense of security that my investment in the technology will not be limited to a few catalogue titles a year. When I begin seeing classic film crossing over, as well as new wave and foreign titles, I will seriously consider buying into a format.

3. I'm not happy with the pattern of releases. For instance, just recently a wonderful box set of John Wayne and John Ford films were released. It was a very nice and elegant comprehensive package of terrific cinema at an affordable cost. Appealing from the content right down to the physical presentation. Yet in Hi-Def, all we saw was The Searchers... WHY? What sort of motivation is that to draw HT enthusiasts to a supposedly superior hardware, with an apparently inferior product? Should we be expected to not only double-dip, but now have that transcend formats so that consumers are not only purchasing a movie in Standard Def, but HD-DVD as well?? That seems ridiculous, but it is still the only way one could have purchased all of the films released. I am also not confident in packaged films. We've yet to see a crossover market in boxsets which have proved highly successful with Standard DVD. When a film is available as part of a comprehensive themed set, why would I be persuaded to purchase it individually? I wouldn't.

4. BACK CATALOGUE. There are dozens of catalogue titles continually being issued each month. We now have a library of thousands of these films on DVD. When I begin to see the lesser acknowledged back catalogue films start to pour over to HD-DVD, I will reconsider. B films, midnight movies, 60's/70's cinema, less familiar noir titles, silents, etc.

5. The packaging is horrendous. Is that really the best you can come up with to distinguish the new technology? Slim cases with full-sized poster art and a simple outer slip identifying them (at least until the format becomes familiar to on a mainstream commercial level) would have sufficed. These red and blue awkward sized cases with half covers and giant logos is horrendous. It should be known by now that like any other hobby be it record collecting, film prints, comic books, etc. we expect to see quality control to our benefit. We are paying for a package that represents an artistic product of which we consider meaningful. We want to see said item treated by the studios with the same respect and not as a marketing tag. There are elegant ways of doing things. It's not eccentric or unbelievable that something as widely assumed insignificant as aethetic would be important to the collector. Since the studios seem to like to approach everything from a selling and marketing standpoint, they should be the first to recignize this. But it often seems that they just aren't listening. This has NOT played any role in my decision to not support HD-DVD at this time, it's just an extra supporting aspect that's made the decision that much easier.


Basically, studios should understand what the consumers want by now. They see what we demand from DVD. Offer us the same, only with the extra resolution of High Definition, and we will eventually follow. I'm still waiting for that offer to be made. As it stands, Standard DVD seems to be the more friendly and accomodating format. This coming from a devout HT and film enthusiast.

You cannot sell a product on technology alone. That is the equivalent to a shiny new sportscar that doesn't drive. When HD-DVD is given a tune-up and an engine to run on.. i.e. a library of available films that would attract us as did DVD to the format, and mirroring the context of release (box package, features, etc) of the Standard Def titles currently available and coming out... there will be a stong following to adapt to the better technology.

As it stands, the better technology is a weaker option.

 

[PaulT]

1) Format War
Got burned on SACD/DVDA as I started with a Std DVD player, then an SACD player plus DVDA player, then Universal.
2) Content Control
I buy it, I should be able to watch/copy at the highest resolution - I am not renting this movie, I own it. No downresing if I don't have HDMI capability.
3) Software
These things are PC's in a box and with the first generation units, well, it seems they really suck.
4) Content
The studios really didn't give much thought to the first bunch of releases.
5) Price
Bottom of my list, if I really wanted it, I would pay for it.