1. Sign-up to become a member, and most of the ads you see will disappear. It only takes 30 seconds to sign up, so join the discussion today!
    Dismiss Notice

It's Official: HD DVD and Blu-ray Can Limit High Resolution To HDMI Only

Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Pete Lee, Jul 9, 2005.

  1. Glenn Overholt

    Glenn Overholt Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ah, the good old days when nothing changed. I still remember using the screw terminals on the back of TV's. The first time I saw a 75 ohm screw-on I just thought WTF?

    It just keeps on going though. How many here have looked at the back of TV sets to see if it accepeted component or not? I skipped composite. THINGS CHANGE - GET USED TO IT.

    I'd love to be able to buy a future-proof anything, but whatever it is, it will eventually get replaced by something better.

    I think it is super that I do not have to buy a new TV set to watch the next generation of movies. It might not get it in full resolution, but going back to component - no one here has cussed to themselves - or others - when they did find out that the TV in question only has composite. Yes, you will get a picture all right. It could look better, but you will have to pay up the arse for a TV that has component inputs.

    At least the studios were wise enough to bless us with players that will work now, and will work (look) even better when you do finally upgrade.

    Glenn
     
  2. Aaron_Brez

    Aaron_Brez Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2000
    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Anything's possible, but it becomes less and less likely with a large installed base of players. The players out there right now don't have the capability to shut down based on HDMI version, so if the software tried to include a "switch off" or "downrez" feature for different versions of HDMI, the players would ignore it.

    And if the software itself refused to play at all on "non-HDMI-1.x" equipment (i.e. it was formatted differently enough to not play on legacy equipment), the studios would massively lose sales since the entire installed base of players would no longer be customers.

    It's like DVD players: if they could, the studios would put out DVDs with a new, repaired CSS system, but they can't for pure business reasons: no one would buy such a disk because it wouldn't work on their player.

    Besides, though it may seem counterintuitive (since the consumer electronics companies would stand to make money), the CE companies have fought ICT as much as they could at every occasion (check out the OpenCable proceedings from the FCC, and if you can get ahold of the voting record in AACS... well, I know some folks who attend and who tell me what goes on, but they won't give me documents).

    CE companies don't want ICT because they know most customers don't make $multi-K purchases all that often and won't do it just to support a new interface (as is very obvious from this thread); they want all of their players to be interoperable with all the TVs out there because that means they will sell more players.

    (Some) content providers are the only ones who want ICT or any kind of interface limitation, and they held the content hostage in order to get the CE manufacturers to accept those terms in AACS. They tried to get the ability to shut down all component outputs entirely (again, see the OpenCable proceedings), but were rejected, so this was what they could get.

    The CE guys are no angels in this, as if they had some sort of real passion for providing "pure customer satisfaction" they'd have put their foot down, but they had little choice in the matter, from their perspective: if they didn't throw Hollywood a bone, they risked either 1) someone else doing it and eating the market or 2) disk-based formats being phased out entirely in favor of downloadables. Since they're businessmen and not a charity, they made what they considered to be the right financial decision.

    We'll see how it turns out for them. Doesn't look good, so far.
     
  3. Vader

    Vader Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 1999
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    610
    Real Name:
    Derek

    The difference here is that the display resolution was limited by what the display was capable of, and not by crippling the incoming signal to B/W on composite and allowing color only on component. I don't see anyone here who is lamenting the evolution of video. But when the powers that be cripple my equipment because of their own misdirected paranoia and greed, instead of letting my display do what it is capable of doing, well, that's a different story...
     
  4. Glenn Overholt

    Glenn Overholt Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Derek:

    Look at it this way. DVD has had a 'crippling' situation since it came out too. You can buy any DVD that has DD 5.1, but if you don't have a receiver that can decode it, and the speakers, the best you will probably get is stereo. Picture quality is immproved by each step up (composite, S-video and component) but again, we are limited by our equipment. A $10k projector will probably look better than any RPTV set out, just as a theater in a box will probably sound like crap when it is compared to a $10k or more audio set-up.

    I went though a strange situation regarding this. In early '97, I came into a couple of extra thousand dollars. I had an aging 2-channel, (at 20 watts per channel), stereo set. So, I went to a dealer and they had the first 5.1 sets in. I had a hard time believing that I could plug 6 speakers into this, and picked it right up. Ok, the dealer didn't tell me that I had to have a player that had a coax output, but I was ready.

    Today, people are buying TV's with a funny-looking HDMI socket on it. It doesn't do anything now, but when the HD players come out, they WILL be ready.

    Glenn
     
  5. Edwin-S

    Edwin-S Lead Actor
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2000
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    1,383
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Your multi-channel audio analogy doesn't cut it. In the case of 5.1 audio, people had to upgrade because their receivers did not have the decoding chips to access multi-channel audio.

    The situation is different with component-only HDTVs. The sets are capable of reproducing a high definition signal, but some studios are saying that they do not want the owners of those sets to be able to access the set's maximum capability.

    A better analogy would be one where the studios suddenly decided that 5.1 audio wouldn't be allowed to play via SPDIF....only via HDMI. Now you have a receiver that can reproduce the audio, but the studios say "no way, go out and buy a receiver with HDMI or no multichannel for you". Then they add "BTW we're shitting in the whole barrel of apples in the hope that we hit the two bad ones at the bottom of the barrel".
     
  6. Vader

    Vader Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 1999
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    610
    Real Name:
    Derek
    Glenn,

    That is my point. In all of the instances you cited, the limitation is what the equipment is capable of. In the case of down-rezzing over component, there is absolutely no technical limitaion that requires this (I would pay real money if someone could come up with a convincing one, too). Just as there is no technical limitation that dictates B/W over composite...

    Bingo!!!!!!
     
  7. Glenn Overholt

    Glenn Overholt Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What the studios will say is that your TV is not ready for viewing encrypted HD, or something like that.

    I agree that the whole thing stinks, but they seem to be 100% sure that doing this will stop the illegal copies.

    The only reason I'd like to talk to a studio is to make a deal with them - namely I'll buy into the new format, but when their encryption is broken, they have to give up and release everything with no restrictions. Whoever they had making the code can now go around and stop the pirates.

    I don't have a 1080p TV either, but what I do see is that I can get started with just a player and disks, and when I upgrade my TV and receiver, I'll get one that is encrypted HD ready! [​IMG]

    Glenn
     
  8. Joe Schwartz

    Joe Schwartz Second Unit

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    449
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're talking about HDTV sets, right? Can you cite any sales figures to support this claim?
     
  9. Juan C

    Juan C Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    450
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Okay, since it was me who gave the good news, now it's up to me to let you know:

    Apparently, the sunrise clause thing was a case of bad reporting. So in principle, early adopters are again SOL.
     
  10. Nathan A

    Nathan A Second Unit

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2001
    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    If "things change" so quickly, then why shouldn't I assume that by the time I can afford to upgrade my TV there will be another format to replace BR/HDDVD? It seems unreasonable for me to buy into BR/HDDVD anticipating that I'll get full HD in 5 years (the time I'll buy a new TV) if I'm expecting BR/HDDVD to be replaced within that timeframe (or not far from it). I'd rather skip BR/HDDVD altogether and upgrade everything in 5 years when their successor is released. Between now and then, I should save a fair amount of money by not buying a new player or (presumably) more expensive HD software.

    Bottom line- if someone's got a component-only set and is fine with down-rezzed video, then OK. But if they're buying into it because they're anticipating that they'll get full HD when they finally upgrade their TV, while at the same time thinking that BR/HDDVD will be outdated by the time they're able to upgrade, then I don't understand their reasoning.
     
  11. Ed St. Clair

    Ed St. Clair Producer

    Joined:
    May 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,320
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  12. Juan C

    Juan C Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    450
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  13. Ed St. Clair

    Ed St. Clair Producer

    Joined:
    May 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,320
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Correct, Juan.
    I am glad that thread was started.
    It still leaves this thread title giving the incorrect impression that only HD-DVD will require HDMI output for 1080i/p by stating; "It's Official: HD-DVD Is HDMI Only".
    Which I have always thought completely unfair to HD-DVD & the people who come to HTF to get info & make informed discissions regarding home theater.
    Just because HD-DVD was honest about this way back when, where for months BD was saying it would be up to the studio. Which of coarse, is now proven to be false.

    Maybe the two threads could have been combined at the time with the correct title being used.
     
  14. Aaron_Brez

    Aaron_Brez Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2000
    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Um... but it is up to the studio. Or at least, whether it will be full-rez or down-rez is up to the studio. It's not HDMI-only, at any rate. That's false for both systems.
     
  15. Jason Harbaugh

    Jason Harbaugh Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,968
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Isn't this still true?
     
  16. Paul.S

    Paul.S Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2000
    Messages:
    3,890
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Location:
    Hollywood, California
    Real Name:
    Paul

    I understand the comments, Ed, but I'd also like to think that the people you refer to would be savvy enough to note that this thread started in July 2005 and that there have been a ton of developments in hi def DVD circles since that time.

    -p
     
  17. Ed St. Clair

    Ed St. Clair Producer

    Joined:
    May 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,320
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    It has always been a sticky, so it's the first thing people, new & old to this site see. Also, you will not see the start date of the thread from the forum page or if you were to use the "first new post" button.
    Having said all that... ;-)
    Hope your absolutely correct that not one person took the thread title to mean BD would be outputting 1080i/p content over analog, while HD-DVD would not.
     
  18. Cees Alons

    Cees Alons Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 1997
    Messages:
    19,628
    Likes Received:
    405
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Cees Alons
    There will be a bit, set or not, on the disc that will prevent the high-res output over analog connections. The bit is called the ICT-bit.
    Studios can choose to set it or not set it on each individual release.

    Early players may, and modified players can choose to ignore the bit. The latter will be deemed unlicensed.


    Cees
     
  19. Ed St. Clair

    Ed St. Clair Producer

    Joined:
    May 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,320
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you, Cees!!!
    Is that for both formats?
     
  20. Cees Alons

    Cees Alons Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 1997
    Messages:
    19,628
    Likes Received:
    405
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Cees Alons

Share This Page