DaViD Boulet
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 1999
- Messages
- 8,826
This is not an HD DVD versus BD debate. Both formats can and do use VC-1 and AVC video compression CODECs. Both are "advanced video" codecs and their use is studio-dependent since they both can acheive high quality and similar bit-rates.
However, Dan Ramer had noticed a trend that many AVC titles, on average look better than many WB VC-1 titles. The problem, of course, is that it's nearly impossible to know for sure what the original uncompressed master would have looked like to know how faithful the compression is being.
But in this review of Shrek three, there's a clue. He noticed that the special features looked better than the feature film... and only then did he check to see what video codecs were being used in each case:
http://www.dvdfile.com/index.php?opt...=6382&Itemid=3
Now, this still doesn't offer conclusive evidence that the lesser-quality of the feature film is due to VC-1. It's possible that it was slightly filtered to aid in compression. I offer up an example of a film I reviewed here at HTF: The Incredibles on DVD. In that case, the feature film and bonus material was all compressed with MPEG2... yet the clips of the film in the bonus material was NOTICABLY sharper and more detailed than the feature film...which showed that the film had been "filtered" despite all its high praise. It's possible that's what we're seeing here with Shrek 3 as well, though the different video codecs being used in these two cases does invite some questions.
However, Dan Ramer had noticed a trend that many AVC titles, on average look better than many WB VC-1 titles. The problem, of course, is that it's nearly impossible to know for sure what the original uncompressed master would have looked like to know how faithful the compression is being.
But in this review of Shrek three, there's a clue. He noticed that the special features looked better than the feature film... and only then did he check to see what video codecs were being used in each case:
http://www.dvdfile.com/index.php?opt...=6382&Itemid=3
Now, this still doesn't offer conclusive evidence that the lesser-quality of the feature film is due to VC-1. It's possible that it was slightly filtered to aid in compression. I offer up an example of a film I reviewed here at HTF: The Incredibles on DVD. In that case, the feature film and bonus material was all compressed with MPEG2... yet the clips of the film in the bonus material was NOTICABLY sharper and more detailed than the feature film...which showed that the film had been "filtered" despite all its high praise. It's possible that's what we're seeing here with Shrek 3 as well, though the different video codecs being used in these two cases does invite some questions.