Would D-VHS be another laserdisc? (1 Viewer)

[Hakan Powers]

Dan,

Let me rephrase what I said.. I mean that D-VHS/D-Theater might, in the short term, satisfy us videophiles with a pre-recorded HD movie carrier. This might (and I hope it does) give the studios some much needed time to sort out how to develop and market HD-DVD. MPEG-4 isn't the culprit per se, but I think it is in the best interest of us all that when HD-DVD comes it is not based on the DVD of today but instead comes on a new format with much larger storage capacity.

Another issue no one has raised is copyright legislation. The last thing the studios want to do is give the consumer HD material on a disc that is bound to be read by computers soon after launch. Digital copy protection methods get broken, it is only a matter of time. There will be no D-VHS decks in PCs.

D-theater is "good enough" while the studios and congress get the bills signed so we won't get any more napsters - once that is taken care of, the market is ready for HD-DVD.

 

[george kaplan]

I'll confine to comments to the following:

It's been claimed by some that the whole purpose of dvhs is to test the security of HD material against pirates. Logically, the more people who get into dvhs, the more incentive for pirates, and the higher chance that someone will crack the encryption.

Hence, it may be that if dvhs it too successful, hd-dvd will become a victim. If not enough people buy into dvhs to make it worthwhile for the pirates, maybe the companies will give us good hd-dvd.

Just a thought.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

22 years of releases, excellent studio support (sometimes through third parties), and no whiny little shits asking for pan-and-scan?

I could only hope.

 

[Jay Sylvester]

Hence, it may be that if dvhs it too successful, hd-dvd will become a victim. If not enough people buy into dvhs to make it worthwhile for the pirates, maybe the companies will give us good hd-dvd.

While I won't credit the MPAA with intelligence, I will say that they're probably not naive enough to think that just because D-VHS manages to avoid mass pirating that HD-DVD is in the clear.

Just as CD and DVD before it, HD-DVD will be playable on PCs once compatible drives become available. If it's on a disc that can be inserted into a computer, the encryption can be broken. They should know this by now.

And look at Warner. They're pushing for red laser MGEG-4 because they own patents and plants that will continue to feed their profit machine. They want nothing to do with a new standard--unless of course they manage to develop one so they can lease the manufacturing rights. If anything, they want D-VHS to fail so the average consumer never gets a taste for true hi-end A/V. Feed them crappy MPEG-4 HD-DVD, and they'll think it looks great compared to standard DVD simply because they don't know any better.

To the original point, I would love it if D-VHS were as successful as LD. There should always be a format around that caters to the enthusiast, free of the constraints brought on by mass acceptance and J6P influences. While profit is always a driving factor--even for enthusiast-oriented products--enthusiast formats tend to give enthusiasts what they want, while mass-market formats give the masses what they want.

That's why so many DVDs are modified to fit legacy screens.

I hope that D-VHS becomes popular enough to make it worthwhile for studios to continue supporting it with new titles, while remaining niche enough to satisfy hardcore movie buffs.

 

[Mattias_ka]

Based on my experience and on the experience of a couple friends with Sony Beta and Super-Beta players, I'd say tapes have about a twenty year and 100 to 200 viewings lifespan. After that the tape oxide is prone to flaking off. I suspect that D-Theater tapes will do at least as well.

I agree!! I have collected odd movies for over 12 years and me and some of my friends have or had over 2000 pre-recorded VHS's from the 78 to 83 and most of them are STILL in great shape, many like new and these tapes have been played a lot! Only the tapes that have not been cared about is not in good condition.
BUT, after mid-80 the tape quality was going down and mid-90's tapes are not in good condition. I can promise that my over 10 years older tapes will survive the newer, cheaper mid-90's tapes!

 

[Steve Phillips]

Ever noticed how those older VHS T-120s weighed a lot more? Does that have anything to do with why the newer tapes crap out so much faster?

 

[Mattias_ka]

Yes, the weight more than twice that todays tapes, and I think they was built much better than todays tapes. Think about it, they cost 7-8 times more than todays tapes.

 

[Charlie Essmeier]

Will D-VHS be another laserdisc?

Hmmmm...

Laserdisc was a format that introduced a previously unseen level of picture and sound quality to home video. Not only did it do that, but it maintained its position as the high quality home video format for twenty years. Laserdisc didn't catch on with the public like DVD did, but then laserdisc was never advertised like DVD has been. Even though laserdisc was introduced in 1978, you'll be hard pressed to find an advertisement for the medium in any mainstream publication after 1983. For some reason, the industry just quit advertising the format. That's a shame, since many people confused the format with the dramatically inferior CED disc format. Despite that, the format not only survived, but actually got better, offering improvements in sound and picture right up until the end of production, as anyone who owns a Pioneer X-9 player will gladly tell you.

That's a tall order for D-VHS to fill, although it's got a leg up on DVD already: it has introduced a huge improvement in picture quality to the marketplace that DVD couldn't possibly hope to deliver.

Anthing that improves picture quality by such a large margin is welcome in my home anytime.



Charlie

 

[Rob Tomlin]

It's been claimed by some that the whole purpose of dvhs is to test the security of HD material against pirates. Logically, the more people who get into dvhs, the more incentive for pirates, and the higher chance that someone will crack the encryption.

I don't really think that makes sense. Why would four major studios support a brand new format for the sole purpose of "testing" the security encryption? Especially since, if I recall correctly, the encryption being used for D-Theater may not even work for HD-DVD. Even if it did, it still would not make sense for studios to release HD movies on tape just to test the encryption system used. What do they gain by doing so?
If HD material can be copied from tape or a DVD really doesn't make any difference at all. It is still digital and HD, so, theoretically, a copy of an HD movie from tape or DVD would be of the same quality (assuming of course HD-DVD arrives with specs that equal D-Theater, which is probably assuming a lot).
Anyway, congratulations George, on actually making a D-VHS D-Theater post without claiming that VHS tape is the Antichrist!

 

[george kaplan]

I think you're a bit confused. I may have made some comparisons of dvhs to divx which was pushed by Dick Sharp who was doing the devil's work while CEO of Circuit City, but I never claimed that vhs tape was the antichrist, I just questioned it's durability.

 

[Jay Mitchosky]

I'm going to work backwards on this thread - post my thoughts and then see what others say (so as not to skew my opinion). I think that D-VHS has more longevity than LD as it is at so high a level of quality. 1080i at high bandwidth is a tough act to follow. Sure, the linear format of tape has its limitations. But in terms of straight A/V quality D-VHS will likely give up nothing to HD-DVD format when it is released. Depending on how the latter is developed - specifically whether potential bandwidth is restricted - it may even be superior. Laserdisc was a strong format in its day but clearly had a ways to go. Not so with D-VHS. One has to consider the point of diminishing returns. How much better can video get? And how much will it cost to achieve these incremental gains.

Once HD-DVD is released I doubt it would render your current D-VHS titles obsolete - ie. for A/V purposes would they necessarily need to be replaced. For non-linear access and extras certainly DVD will continue with those advantages. My opinion of course.

 

[Jan H]

After having attended the Widescreen Review D-VHS Movie Festival in Temecula this morning, I can unequivocally state that D-VHS is a superior format to DVD-Video. However, the degree to which it is superior is subjective, and the point of diminishing returns is definitely a factor in weighing its long-term value as a format. The difference between D-VHS and DVD is less marked than, for example, DVD and Laserdisc in 1997. D-VHS is ever so much sharper visually, though I, like a few others, found the color slightly oversaturated (to our untrained eyes). That being said, sonically, D-VHS is clearly the superior product. The floor rumbled and shook in a direct A/B with DD 5.1 material that the Dolby simply could not match. The higher bit rate made all the difference sonically. Grudgingly, I give D-VHS its due credit, though the idea that I have to rewind something again and will have 300 coasters on hand is not appealing. It is better, yes. But is it worth it? An open question.

 

[Andy_MT]

i haven't seen any new DVHS titles announced recently and laser's edge only stocks 4 titles. is that it then ? was that DVHS ?

 

[Rob Tomlin]

The difference between D-VHS and DVD is less marked than, for example, DVD and Laserdisc in 1997.

Like you said Jan, a lot of this is subjective. I would say that the difference between D-Theater and DVD is at least as big as the difference between Laserdisc and DVD, and probably closer to the difference between normal VHS tape and DVD.

Regarding the "oversaturation" of color: I think you are actually seeing what you were meant to see! One of the big advantages to the 1080i hi def transfers is a clear increase in color fidelity. Colors do appear more vibrant, but at the same time I always thought that they appeared to be natural, not oversaturated.

It is interesting that you would mention the superiority of the sound with D-Theater. Most people who have been to the D-Theater Festival comment that the sound is indeed good, but were usually more impressed with the video quality than the sound quality.

In any event, I too am disappointed that there have not been any recent announcements for more movie titles being released on D-Theater.

 

[Peter Overduin]

To answer the original question: No.

As noted, LD gave the consumer 20 years and thousands of titles. D-VHS is a tape format, to which the consumer will never return, especially given the regurgitation of titles that are already on DVD.

Even if hardware sinks to current VHS player levels, the consumer can see that tape formats do not offer the versatility of DVDs. The consumer also understands that the magnetic property of tape makes degradation a certainty.

I give it 36 months before it becomes the next BETA. LD lasted alot longer.

 

[Jeff_HR]

Sony's Betamax should have eaten VHS for lunch on the quality issue, but marketing problems hurt them & put the Betamax behind in a race that they could not catch up in. One of the reasons Lds stayed a niche product was that most people did not want to be bothered to expend the energy to get up out of their easy chair or sofa and perhaps change a disk, & that LDs could not record.

 

[CamiloCamacho]

I think it depends on the quality of HD-DVD. If it's a new disc with a lot more space avalaible than current DVD's, D-VHS will not be anything more than a niche format.

BUT if HD-DVD is only a 4.7/9 GigaBytes (as warner wants), believe me, D-VHS will kick out as a big format. (I'm in favor of Mpeg-4, but at 1/10 to 1/100 space than DVHS bandwitch, it cannot make miracles)

-* Mi desired format will be a High capacity disc (20+ gygabytes) using mpeg-4. No microsoft codecs please.