Studios start to weigh in on high-def DVD (1 Viewer)

[DaViD Boulet]

Dave,

I'm not suggesting that money isn't at the root of Warner's push for their proposal. In fact, we all know that's why they are pushing this compromised solution so hard.

My point (which your statements do not address) is that we shouldn't say "everything is fine" if it turns out that their video compression actually can muster a decent HD picture out of 5 mbps...because there are other areas of DVD that need to be addressed that are just as important. I keep reading phrases like "maybe Warner will pull it off with their compression algorithm" as though this somehow makes everything "ok". It doesn't.

We shouldn't let a studio establish a new format that is inherently compromised (in many ways, not just picture quality) from the start that then simply serves to confuse the market and delay or negate the potential for a format that would truly realize the audio/videophile's demands. At the very least, we shouldn't just roll over and accept it without a fight and we certainly shouldn't have any arguments among ourselves about the importance of an HD medium that can deliver high-quality 1080P Video, 24/192 resolution multi-channel Audio, and plenty of extras all at the same time.

-dave

 

[Todd Hochard]

It is truly tiresome to continuously be painted as a champion of mediocrity. Really.

It should offer a substantial increase in audio quality (giving us the option for multiple audio tracks of 24/192 7 channel sound, for instance) without forcing a compromise in an unfiltered 1080P encoded image nor causing the disc producer to have to sacrifice auido commentary, outtakes, deleted scenes, documentaries etc.

At the end of the day, when you are by yourself, with no cause or petition to champion, do you REALLY think the studios are going to give you unfiltered 1080p, with uncompressed 24/192 7 channel sound? I mean, REALLY?? I've heard all the "hey, you have to ask" tired cliches, but do you REALLY think that's what we'll get on HD-DVD? Why not just ask for the D5, and demand players in the $1000 range???
Really. In the end, I'm guessing it'll be Blu-Ray, or some such, with VBR peaking at 36Mbps, 1080i, same as D-VHS, with next-gen DD or dts.
Which is too bad, but I suppose I'm just too much of a realist.:rolleyes
Todd

 

[David Susilo]

I agree with you Todd. I personally want what David Boulet wants. I have to, however, see the reality of the business. There are requests that will definitely be turn down and there are requests that may be taken into consideration.

The fact of the matter is that the studio wants something cheap to produce and next year to release. Given the situation, we can only hope for the studio to come up with better compression for video.

 

[John_Berger]

Quote:

They are going to want to cut costs to be as profitable as possible, which generally entails using existing material as much as possible. You can just about be assured that if Blu-Ray DVDs can be made with a machine that has the same physical design as red-laser DVDs, Warner will use that same design. Sure, they might need to manufacture more of those machines, but if they can save money by utilizing a current design (thereby saving money from not engineering a new machine) they'll do it. Any reasonable business would.
But you're right that unless someone comes on here who works for Specialty Records/WEA Manufacturing and says otherwise, they could very well not be ready for the next jump in technology. Then again, they also might be.
**sigh** The mountain out of molehill syndrome dost exist, it seems.
Of course, for all we know, tomorrow someone could develop some kind of goofy lavender/mauve dual laser design that stores 200 GB on a 3" CD thereby making this whole discussion moot.

 

[Jason_Els]

At the end of the day, when you are by yourself, with no cause or petition to champion, do you REALLY think the studios are going to give you unfiltered 1080p, with uncompressed 24/192 7 channel sound? I mean, REALLY?? I've heard all the "hey, you have to ask" tired cliches, but do you REALLY think that's what we'll get on HD-DVD? Why not just ask for the D5, and demand players in the $1000 range???

Well yeah, why not? Supply and demand. Once HDTV reaches critical mass people will being asking why they have to tolerate a format that doesn't even approach half their set's capability. Look at how DVD has superseded VHS is only 5 years. People love the quality, convenience, and extras available in the format to the point that VHS is on its deathbed. DVD has meant huge amounts of money to studios and manufacturers. In case it doesn't sound familiar, studios were paranoid of DVD. I remember one studio rep saying that DVDs, "are essentially reference quality." No, they're not. They will hem and haw and whine and have hissy fits but ultimately they won't be able to deny the power of HD-DVD. If Warner gets its way with this half-assed compromise it, like D-VHS will be short-lived. The point where true HD-DVD will come is when HDTVs become common. Their greed will overwhelm their fears just as it did with VHS and DVD.

And if you recall, the first DVD players were $1000. The first VHS players were even more than that. It's the nature of the new format beast.

 

[John_Berger]

The point where true HD-DVD will come is when HDTVs become common.

Sadly, that probably will be quite some time away, probably no less than 5-10 years, as the general public will most likely only get HD when their existing TVs die and it's time to get a new one.
Now, that of course does have the benefit of giving 5-10 years to research and develop new ways of increasing the efficiency of compression techniques as well as increasing the capacity of optical media.
Who knows? Maybe the next generation of HD entertainment won't even be a disc! (No, I am NOT talking about tape!! Put those pitchforks down! )

 

[Mark_Wilson]

I'd 'settle' for 640k DD/1.5mb DTS and for the 2.0 track PCM only. None of that 192kb DD crap.

 

[Todd Hochard]

And if you recall, the first DVD players were $1000.

Not quite. Several were in the $599 (retail) range. Panasonic offered the A100 at this price, right at the beginning (Spring '97). I bought my first player (Denon DVD-2000) in the Summer for $550 (Internet vendor). DVD was pushed for mass-market from the beginning, unlike DVHS.

And, read more closely- I'm NOT arguing against HD-DVD by any stretch. I'm arguing that the 1080p/7 Channel uncompressed request is over-the-top, and unlikely to be considered. "2G" DD@2048, possible dts@4096, with 1080i is probably the best it'll get.
Do the math- 24/192 is 4.6Mbps PER CHANNEL uncompressed, or 32.26Mbps for seven uncompressed channels. Let's say MLP cuts that in half to 16Mbps. Given the Blu-Ray has already spec'd to 36Mbps max transfer rate, that's 40% of available bandwidth for ONE audio track. Keep in mind, that on current DVD, ALL tracks are streamed off, then selected, cutting bandwidth for video further. That leaves a MAX of 20Mbps for video, which is BARELY (not really, below D-VHS) enough for 1080 interlaced, and won't be close for adequate 1080p (unless done at 24 frames- doubtful, since current DVD isn't- for reasons unknown to me- it's a good idea). Certainly not enough for good 1080p/30 or 60.
This is my point. Within the constraints of Blu-Ray, with its 36Mbps peak rate, and 50GB dual-layer capacity (about the same as a DVHS tape, BTW), the demands cannot work. They could if a new compression algorithm was used for video, but I have my doubts on that also. MPEG-2 may stay, since it "goes" with the rest of currently available HD.

Wait for FMD?? Great idea, but 3D Constellation doesn't have what it takes to get it off the ground in a big way, for the studios, IMO. Japan's "done deal" (Blu-Ray specs) is here.

Again, I'd like the better specs, but they don't seem to be happening.

Todd

 

[John_Berger]

Given the QC on a bunch of WAMO RSDL titles, I'm inclined to assume in the negative. They're a corporation. Maximize profits=minimum necessary

But that also means minimum preparedness for future changes, and the "catch-up" game can often be more expensive than the money saved by using the minimum necessary.

 

[Jason_Els]

Yes, Blu-Ray is not the answer either. Multi-layer holographic storage using blue or ultraviolet LEDs is. Ten years down the road this is not an unreasonable option, particularly if there are no moving parts. If this is what HD-DVD will be then I'm all for it.

I guess I'm debating the format vs. time frame. What we will get are stop-gaps no matter which format is adopted now. I do, however, believe that HDTV adoption rates will determine that pace. Let's hope it takes a much shorter time than the adoption of color.

 

[Terrell]

I do agree there is no hurry. Just waint, and develop HD-DVD format that will last as long as possible. That way, it has the best chance to succeed. Something that's nothing more than a stop-gap probably won't succeed.

But if they are determined, I guess it might as well be Blu-Ray. But you're right. Take the time, even if we have to wait another 3-5 years.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Yes, Blu-Ray is not the answer either. Multi-layer holographic storage using blue or ultraviolet LEDs is. Ten years down the road this is not an unreasonable option, particularly if there are no moving parts. If this is what HD-DVD will be then I'm all for it.

Ahhh. The voice of reason
There's naturally nothing forcing the studios to give us the ideal HD format. But the more steadfastly we demand high-quality the more likely they are to meet us closer to our goal than where they would have taken us had we asked for nothing.
Don't be afraid to bargain here people. Ask for 24/192 MLP sound. You just might get 648 kbps DD or full-bit-rate DTS rather than 348 kbps DD as a result.
As far as unfiltered 1080P goes...that absolutely should be our goal. 20 years ago the studios swore they'd never release any format has high-quality as DVD. Then they did.
-dave

 

[John_Berger]

There's naturally nothing forcing the studios to give us the ideal HD format. But the more steadfastly we demand high-quality the more likely they are to meet us closer to our goal than where they would have taken us had we asked for nothing.

I just don't understand the rush. I mean, DVD is only a few years old. Okay, so HDTV is now giving us the irrestible desire to utilize 1,080 lines of resolution. But - damn it - we just suffered (comparatively) through 20 years of magnetic tapes, rewinding, breakages, tapes getting caught in the mechanism, poor quality, low resolution, stereo-only sound and so forth.
Here we are only about 5 years into DVD and we're screaming for the next generation already, complaining that what we have is just no good because of what it *could* be! Progressive scan is only - what - 2 years old if that? And now **that's** not good enough either!
Now we have bitching going on about audio bit rates, video bit rates, different compression algorithms, and so forth like what we have now is just so-o-o-o inferior. Well, I don't know about the rest of you, but compared to what we've had to endure for the past 20+ years, DVD at 480p with DD 5.1 is a God-send for me and I am in **no** rush to have to redo my home theater setup **AGAIN**.
DVD was a quantum leap over VHS. If that means having to wait for another five years+ for the next quantum leap to true HD-DVD, so be it. I don't want the studios to weigh in on HD-DVD if their next "version" is just a stop gap. Get it done and get it done RIGHT -- even if that means that I have to wait another five years.
[END RANT]

 

[DaViD Boulet]

I just don't understand the rush. I mean, DVD is only a few years old. Okay, so HDTV is now giving us the irrestible desire to utilize 1,080 lines of resolution. But - damn it - we just suffered (comparatively) through 20 years of magnetic tapes, rewinding, breakages, tapes getting caught in the mechanism, poor quality, low resolution, stereo-only sound and so forth.

John,

we're not in any rush to get HD-DVD either. Have you been reading the posts...most of them (mine included) are from the perspective that it would be beter to wait longer and get a better HD product.

Warner is the entity that is "rushing" to push a compromised HD-DVD solution to the market too soon. If there's any sense of urgency on the part of some HTFrs, it's to STOP the adoption of this premature format to give technology some time to evolve so when we do get optical HD software, it will be done right.

The point is that demanding a high-quality no-compromise solution will force a delay in the introduction of an HD-format but will ensure that it's the one we want. If we don't demand something better, then Warner will steamroll their format into the market place regardless.

-dave

 

[John_Berger]

Have you been reading the posts...most of them (mine included) are from the perspective that it would be beter to wait longer and get a better HD product.

I might be reading too much into some of the posts, of course. But I think it's clear that they're starting to get pressure from the HD community in general to give us something beyond 480p and give it to us ASAP. I fear that with that kind of pressure, they're going to be more apt to give us a crappy solution just to shut us up. (Does anyone familiar with PC gaming remember the "Ultima: Ascension" disaster?)

I'm more disturbed not so much by what is being said in this thread but more by the fact that they're already looking for the newest format. Not that doing so is necessarily bad since looking to the future is always a good thing, but these studios need to know that we don't want a stop gap - we want a quantum leap.

Neither Blu-Ray nor MPEG-4 are going to do it. They're both just variations on a theme. And if getting mediocre HD-DVD with Blu-Ray is the next option, I'll stick with 480p DVD until we get a real difference.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

I'm more disturbed not so much by what is being said in this thread but more by the fact that they're already looking for the newest format. Not that doing so is necessarily bad since looking to the future is always a good thing, but these studios need to know that we don't want a stop gap - we want a quantum leap.

I agree with you there. That's why I'm trying to rally the true believers to the notion that 1080P (unfiltered for interlaced aliasing) and 24/192 multi-channel sound isn't something that's "too good" for us audio/videophiles. It really should be the MINIMUM standard for the future format for our movies.
Blue Laser *might* get us there to a degree, but I'd rather wait longer for a high-density 3-D optical technology (like FMD or holographic storage) that makes these storage and bandwidth limitations that even blue laser must address a moot topic.
-dave

 

[Arneh]

I know I'm new here, but I've been following the DVD scene ever since it started. Although not perfect, it is still fine for some people. Now there's D-VHS, offering true 1080i HDTV quality with a great DD5.1 track to compliment it, however tape is not practical.

However, there is a way to solve all these problems without needing to produce any blue laser technology. However stupid this might sound, it could work.

Okay, take current red laser technology with 9.4 gb dual layers, and instead of putting current 8Mbps video onto the disc, transfer the movie in 1080i or 1080p at 28.2 Mbps with a full rate DTS track and a higher quality DD 5.1EX and split the movie over 3 dvd discs. Each dvd would hold 45 mins. of the movie, then create a player to handle that high a bitrate, but make the player have the capacity to hold 6 discs, on two differnt 3-dvd circle trays. On the first tray, you would insert discs 1, 3, 5, if there were that many discs. Then on tray 2 you would insert discs 2,4,6 if there were that many discs. Then for each tray, let it have it's own red laser to read the dvds. So after the 45 mins of the first dvd, the 2nd laser for the 2nd tray kicks in and plays the 2nd disc without any noticable delay. And it goes on to the third disc with the 1st laser of the 1st tray kicking in and playing the 3rd disc, and it goes on till the max 6 discs. Therefore, one doesn't have to change any discs, or stop to play another disc. The movie would automatically continue with no delay, as only the first disc would contain menus, the other discs that contain the movie would be the movie, no menus, that continue from disc 1, and if someone wanted, they could watch the movie from disc 2 or 3 because they would just start automatically when the disc is inserted.

This could be incorporated into current red laser dvd plants. Although it would increases the amount of discs per movie, at least you would have current red laser technology with a viable 1080i or 1080p video with a full DTS track.

What's your view on this type of format?

-Arneh

 

[Terrell]

Personally, I'm in favor of the highest quality DD EX track, moreso than I am DTS. But you do make a good point. The only problem there is switch discs is not all that fun, especially when you don't have to do that with most DVDs today. I'm not sure I'd like to have to go back to the days of laserdisc where you're into a film, and then all of a sudden, the dreaded changing side, or changing discs altogether. For some films that require it, that's fine. But I would not relish having all DVDs like that.

 

[Arneh]

But you see, you wouldn't know discs have been changed, cause the player would have 2 red laser readers, one for each 3-disc revolving tray, and it would just automatically switch when one disc is finished with.

All the discs in a set would be Single side, dual layer.

Let's say the first disc is about to finish, then before it does, the 2nd disc which is on the 2nd revolving tray is paused and in the right place (automatically set to play by the player) to play as soon as the 1st disc finishes. So therefore, it would be seamless in a way. There might be a 10 milisecond hiccup but I think with current technology going forward so fast, such a thing like this should not be impossible with no hiccup, just a full seamless multi-dvd HDTV movie. It would make both the consumer and the multibillion dollar movie companies happy. Since you are just sticking with the Mpeg2 codec, but adding 1080i or p quality and bitrate with the best soundtrack there is to offer, it would be a major step forward. No actual physical differences, but a difference in the bitrate and the sound on a red laser disc. Beats having mpeg4 codec by Warner Brothers on one single 9.4 gb dvd that is supposed to offer HDTV quality.

Bascially, the ability of a dvd player to have two 3-disc revolving trays and with a dvd reader for each tray, and the movie seamlessly switching between each disc, as tray 1 would have discs 1, 3, and 5 of the movie set. And so for the movie to move seamlessly, the 2nd tray would have to have discs 2, 4, and 6. Therefore, presto you got 1080i or 1080p with a full rate DTS track or a high quality DD 5.1 EX track on 3-6 9.4 gb dvds playing seamlessly together, without any interaction by the viewer except for the beginning on disc 1, selecting the play button. Calculating bitrates, each 9.4 gb disc should be able to hold around 45 mins of video with one full rate high quality audio track. Not sure if two tracks would be possible, maybe at the compromise of video quality you could have 2 or 3 different audio tracks, such as full rate DTS and DD 5.1 EX on one disc, though I doubt it.

Refer to my above post for information on the video bitrate of the HDTV red laser dvd and other relevant information.

-Arneh

 

[Andy_MT]

Arneh, that's certainly a creative idea, but it would never, never, never happen. it's just not practical. can you imagine how joe public would react to having a movie on 3+ discs. and not forgetting the logistics involved in producing every movie on 3+ discs.

maybe the number of layers on a disc could be increased from the current maximum of two.