 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Home Theater Discussion |
Page:
1... 42 43 44 45 46 ...168  Previous Next
|
|
HD DVD and Blu-ray |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 13,201 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lopek: Quote:
Quoting Ascended_Saiyan:
Quote:
Percentages are far from meaningless. That's kind of like saying there are two people racing around a track. The announcer says that one runner is 15 mins ahead of the next runner. Then, someone says that's meaningless...give it to me in total meters run by both runners so far.
Yes that makes my point perfectly.
The 15min figure is completely useless without a context. If the race is 24 hours long, then 15 mins is not that great a lead, if it is a 1 hour long race, it is huge. Context is crucial - and comparing percentages without volumes completely lacks context, so provides no useful info to prove a point. This sounds strangely familiar. I guess it is because I said something similar quite a while back.  Lopek is correct. Without knowing where the finish line is, it doesn't really matter who is in the lead. For all we know, as long as they are making money, HD DVD companies might be happy with 41% of 1% of the video market. A_S lives in a world where only one format can exist. Problem is, that world may not exist. For all we know, both formats will survive and the people who purchased 'dedicated' players will turn out to be the big losers. The smart money may be on the combo-players. Pure speculation? You bet...but it isn't out of the realm of possibilities. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | *GASP*  You guys failed to miss that A_S posted four (4) messages in a row without using the condescending tones he's famous for! Maybe there's hope for him yet... |
|   | Erik | | It's a strange world. |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 422 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
*GASP*
You guys failed to miss that A_S posted four (4) messages in a row without using the condescending tones he's famous for! We're used to it?  Speaking of space and such. Here's some informed responses/comments to a few of his recent "HD DVD attacks." He'll try and refute all of this, obviously... Sorry for the "blah blah blahing" in advance. - - - "In the last meeting, it moved to the next phase. (HD DVD) TL-51[GB] was officially accepted as a valid format to be standardized. --- >any problems with 2nd gen players playing the 51 gb TL discs?We can't quite answer this yet. It all depends on what the final spec stipulates. It is possible to make it backward compatible but that might make manufacturing more difficult. And there are some in-between options. --- >How come NO HD DVD movie has a 7.1 lossless track?There is just not much out there which has more than 5.1. If there is, accommodating it is easy because the extra channels use relatively little more data because not much is happening in them most of the time. But from what I can tell, delivering more than 5.1 to consumers has fallen out of favor in the last couple of years. Answer B: "The problem is that there aren't many 7.1 mixes out there. I don't know of any technical or practical reason why 7.1 wouldn't be used if there was was a 7.1 source. DD+ does 7.1 fine - there's no reason not to do 7.1 on HD DVD if the source is available. Even a TrueHD mix would need fewer bits per channel in 7.1 than 5.1 since the mix is probably not doing all eight full blast most of the time." >How come NO HD DVD title has a 24-bit lossless track?You know, I don't keep track of these things so I don't know if there are or aren't any. For DD+, the penalty in data rate is pretty small to use 24-bit so I thought some of the encodes were that way already. For lossless, 24-bit is a pain because the low-order bits are essentially noise. So the filter banks in the codec can't find a pattern in the stream to reduce the data rate. As a result the efficiency goes down and you wind up using more space than necessary. This is the reason I am not a fan of 24-bit lossless delivery. It wastes resources without improving fidelity. The right "word-length" here is probably 19-20 bits on best recorded material. And 16-bits for the rest. As I have commented before, TrueHD allows fine grain encoding of data so one does not have to jump from 16 to 24 just to get 3 more bits of real resolution. (A little bird just told me the following titles have 24-bit audio in HD DVD: Clerks II, Alpha Dog, NIN: Beside You in Time, End of Days, and Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas.) I don’t know if DTS lossless can do the same thing. If it can, it might be a better option as it is able to manage the peak rate much better than TrueHD in our experience. >To get the 250 minute LOTR ROTK EE on a 30 GB HD DVD disk they MUST use an average bit>rate no greater than 16 Mbps which MUST include both video and audio…That means no higher>than an average bitrate of 16Mbps (for video and audio combined) can be used to fit on a single>30GB HD DVD disc. This is not considering anything else that needs to be on the disc. This is just>the raw video and audio!This is actually pretty comfortable data rate believe it or not. Keep in mind that peak rate can almost 2X higher and that provides comfortable headroom. From memory, Matrix uses around the same amount and has achieved reference level review scores. And some of the clips in there were considered “codec killers.” (i.e. very difficult to compress). Mind you, this is not an easy encode where you fire the encoder and the next day ship the title. Care is needed to get the absolute best quality. Fortunately, while I can’t say much about LOTR in public, I can tell you that a ton of care is being applied to its encoding. And the results are very nice from what I hear. >I don't know about you, but I don't want to see how bad that will look. So to do this title justice>and with a lossless track (LOTR deserves no less), this would need to be on 2 discs."Per above, I think you will be impressed with the quality. I know the title will not get released unless it looks great. Given the fact that NL is taking its time with getting this title encoded, you don’t have to worry here. And their standards are quite high. We didn’t let you down with Matrix. I hope you trust us that we won’t mess with this symbol of home theater either . Answer B: "People have already been very happy with movies with bitrates well below 16 total, and our codec keeps getting more efficient. LOTR in particular shouldn't be that bad, as a relatively recent film, presumably with a DI, and in 2.35:1 aspect ratio, so you can save a lot of bits not encoding the letterboxing. Assuming a clean master, 12 Mbps would probably look great. And given how many huge LOTR fans there are on the VC-1 development team, we wouldn't sleep until it looked perfect! We did the math a while ago, and came up with something like 12.5 Mbps for video and 3.5 Mbps to provide lossless main audio and all the commentary tracks of the original 2-disc EE version. People toss around data rates like there's a magic number that needs to be hit, but it's extremely content specific." | | | Erik
"Has it ever occurred to you, man, that given the nature of all this new stuff, that, uh, instead of running around blaming me, that this whole thing might just be, not, you know, not just such a simple, but uh - you know?" -- The Dude, The Big Lebowski
 |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 254 |
| | Posted: | | | | Thanks Erik, its nice to read an informative, intelligent post with some useful info, in amongst all of that idiot's endless garbage. | | | | Last edited: by stefc |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,127 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
We all know that is what you want, but what you want doesn't equal what is right. Because the PS3 is more than just a 'game console', it should be kicking the crap out of a 'passing fad'. Who told you that? Fads are like matches. They burn quickly then burn out over a short period of time. What do you think takes more time to start and more time to burn out... - a huge pile of logs? - or a match? Whether the Wii is a fad or not is anyone's guess. But, from how things are starting to look on the games front, it's looking more like a fad. The end of next year should tell that tale. Quote:
I mean, it is a Blu-ray player and a game console. It's a media center. Quote:
Gamers and HiDef enthusiasts alike should be snatching it up right and left. Not yet. Think...PS2. It took quite a while to really start selling a lot of units. It definitely wasn't selling a lot of units in the first year. Quote:
But they aren't. Why? Because that's not the way it works with a higher end quality piece of equipment. Plus, the only 2 reasons the Xbox 360 sold 10 million unit were they had ZERO competition at the time and people were rebuying units after their 1st X360 and 3 month warranty ran out of steam. Quote:
My guess would be that people are looking at it as 'just a game console' and nothing more. As a 'game console', the Wii is just more fun. I think that's a bad guess. The Eye3 camera for the PS3 would allow for COMPLETE interactivity (both hands and feet). Fun indeed. But, like I said before, that is off topic. The Wii doesn't play HD DVDs or BDs. Hell, it can't even play DVDs. It should not be discussed in this thread. If you create another thread about consoles (and let me know you have created it), I will discuss it with you further. | | | To err is human...
-----------
473 Blu-ray Titles |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,127 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
*GASP*
You guys failed to miss that A_S posted four (4) messages in a row without using the condescending tones he's famous for!
Maybe there's hope for him yet... If no one attacks, no one gets attacked. My rule is simple. There is no mystery to it. My response were very relaxed for a long time on the other site we transitioned from. Certain people did not allow me to stay that way. So, if my responses have less sting to them, it's because others have calmed themselves. | | | To err is human...
-----------
473 Blu-ray Titles |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,127 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lopek: Quote:
Quoting Ascended_Saiyan:
Quote:
Percentages are far from meaningless. That's kind of like saying there are two people racing around a track. The announcer says that one runner is 15 mins ahead of the next runner. Then, someone says that's meaningless...give it to me in total meters run by both runners so far.
Yes that makes my point perfectly.
The 15min figure is completely useless without a context. If the race is 24 hours long, then 15 mins is not that great a lead, if it is a 1 hour long race, it is huge. Context is crucial - and comparing percentages without volumes completely lacks context, so provides no useful info to prove a point. Have you not considered that this race has no determined amount of time? It ends when it ends. In this race, the further you fall behind, the shorter the race becomes. HD DVD is falling further and further behind on EVERY continent. You can tell they are falling behind in North America because the SI percentage is widening. In other words, the percentages are very useful. | | | To err is human...
-----------
473 Blu-ray Titles |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,127 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Erik: Quote:
"In the last meeting, it moved to the next phase. (HD DVD) TL-51[GB] was officially accepted as a valid format to be standardized.
---
>any problems with 2nd gen players playing the 51 gb TL discs?
We can't quite answer this yet. It all depends on what the final spec stipulates. It is possible to make it backward compatible but that might make manufacturing more difficult. And there are some in-between options. Did you know that 45GB TL discs were approved some time ago? Where are they? Do you have any idea how much more money a 45GB or 51GB TL HD DVD disc would cost to manufacture? God forbid they EVER come as a combo disc! Quote:
>How come NO HD DVD movie has a 7.1 lossless track?
There is just not much out there which has more than 5.1. If there is, accommodating it is easy because the extra channels use relatively little more data because not much is happening in them most of the time. But from what I can tell, delivering more than 5.1 to consumers has fallen out of favor in the last couple of years.
Answer B: "The problem is that there aren't many 7.1 mixes out there. I don't know of any technical or practical reason why 7.1 wouldn't be used if there was was a 7.1 source. DD+ does 7.1 fine - there's no reason not to do 7.1 on HD DVD if the source is available. Even a TrueHD mix would need fewer bits per channel in 7.1 than 5.1 since the mix is probably not doing all eight full blast most of the time." So, that's the reason Blu-ray owners are enjoying this feature and HD DVD owners can't? Quote:
>How come NO HD DVD title has a 24-bit lossless track? You quoted me wrong. I said NO HD DVD movie has a 24-bit lossless track. There are a few short concerts that have them. Quote:
(A little bird just told me the following titles have 24-bit audio in HD DVD: Clerks II, Alpha Dog, NIN: Beside You in Time, End of Days, and Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas.) Only NIN: Beside You in Time out of what you have listed has a 24-bit audio track. I believe you listed some titles that I disproved some pages back. Quote:
>To get the 250 minute LOTR ROTK EE on a 30 GB HD DVD disk they MUST use an average bit
>rate no greater than 16 Mbps which MUST include both video and audio…That means no higher
>than an average bitrate of 16Mbps (for video and audio combined) can be used to fit on a single
>30GB HD DVD disc. This is not considering anything else that needs to be on the disc. This is just
>the raw video and audio!
This is actually pretty comfortable data rate believe it or not. Keep in mind that peak rate can almost 2X higher and that provides comfortable headroom. From memory, Matrix uses around the same amount and has achieved reference level review scores. And some of the clips in there were considered “codec killers.” (i.e. very difficult to compress).
Mind you, this is not an easy encode where you fire the encoder and the next day ship the title. Care is needed to get the absolute best quality. Fortunately, while I can’t say much about LOTR in public, I can tell you that a ton of care is being applied to its encoding. And the results are very nice from what I hear. So, they are saying it takes an crap load of time to try to get a decent picture out of LOTR on HD DVD compared to the much shorter time it takes to have a marvelous looking version on Blu-ray (and not with 7.1 lossless 24-bit sound), right? Quote:
Per above, I think you will be impressed with the quality. I know the title will not get released unless it looks great. Given the fact that NL is taking its time with getting this title encoded, you don’t have to worry here. And their standards are quite high. We didn’t let you down with Matrix. I hope you trust us that we won’t mess with this symbol of home theater either . Personally, without having the chance to have this in 7.1 lossless 24-bit sound, they ARE messing with this symbol of home theater. Most likely, Blu-ray would have to suck it up and live with HD DVD's video and audio encode port over. Like I said, they are messing with this symbol of home theater. Quote:
Answer B: "People have already been very happy with movies with bitrates well below 16 total, and our codec keeps getting more efficient. LOTR in particular shouldn't be that bad, as a relatively recent film, presumably with a DI, and in 2.35:1 aspect ratio, so you can save a lot of bits not encoding the letterboxing. I think he should put "some" in front of "people" in that first sentence. I say if it can be better, let it be better. With a higher bitrate encode, everyone can be happy. The people that can and the people that can't tell the difference would be happy. It's a win win situation. Quote:
Assuming a clean master, 12 Mbps would probably look great. And given how many huge LOTR fans there are on the VC-1 development team, we wouldn't sleep until it looked perfect! We did the math a while ago, and came up with something like 12.5 Mbps for video and 3.5 Mbps to provide lossless main audio and all the commentary tracks of the original 2-disc EE version. 16 Mbps for everything...I guess my math was correct on that, huh? Did he count the trailers (if any), the menu screen's video and audio, and a secondary audio track with that? Everyone doesn't have the ability to listen to a lossless soundtrack. NOW, what are you down to? Why go through all that? It's much easier to do it on Blu-ray and not worry about space. It for made for this stuff. Quote:
People toss around data rates like there's a magic number that needs to be hit, but it's extremely content specific." While this is true, my estimate of 16 Mbps for video and audio (everything) was right. Funny. | | | To err is human...
-----------
473 Blu-ray Titles |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,127 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting stefc: Quote:
Thanks Erik, its nice to read an informative, intelligent post with some useful info, in amongst all of that idiot's endless garbage. Are you projecting your self image, again? | | | To err is human...
-----------
473 Blu-ray Titles |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 460 |
| | Posted: | | | | Ascended_Saiyan Quote:
It's a media center. No it is not. The PS3 is a Blu-ray player and a gaming console. If it were a Media Centre I'd be able to play MP3s of it, watch my holiday photos, play CDs (well it probably does that), and go online and check my stocks, e-mail and browse the Invelos forum. Ascended_Saiyan Quote:
Because that's not the way it works with a higher end quality piece of equipment. Plus, the only 2 reasons the Xbox 360 sold 10 million unit were they had ZERO competition at the time and people were rebuying units after their 1st X360 and 3 month warranty ran out of steam. That is complete B.S. The XboX360 sold because it had great games on release. I can't say the same thing about the PS3. If they'd either had GT5 and/or a newer SSX I might have gotten a PS3 but the games available at the moment are not interesting enough. A mate of mine bought the XboX because A, he wanted one, and B because of certain games. He recently bought the WII too, he still hasn't got a PS3, because it is loads of fun. You know I also like to see Blu-ray succeeding, but since Fox isn't releasing anything at this moment (from what I rememeber since the beginning of this year) and Disney still isn't releasing the 'big' titles (The Jungle Book (Disney Classics), Pixar animation movies), only Pirates. And even though Miramax is Disney Company (or not anymore????) all the QT movies are Weinsteins, and therefor HD DVD. I think when QT titles, Kill Bill, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown et al. will be released on HD DVD the end for Blu-ray is there  I am still waiting, but from my point of view the BDA just isn't doing enough to 'push' the format... I agree totally where you write the higher the bitrate the better, but I am afraid that indeed people, or companies, will say that 16MBit is enough it'll be enough. The `Superbit` editions weren't a hit... | | | | Jean-Paul | | | | Last edited: by Zoeper |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 103 |
| | Posted: | | | | I keep seeing 7.1 one come up a lot lately. But is there a true discreet 7.1 MOVIE that has been released? I haven't seen one, but if there is I know someone here will know about it. The more channels the better, but 6.1 hasn'teven taken off, what makes 7.1 different?
Isn't the layout of a 7.1 speaker setup not really defined either? Wouldn't 8.1 make more sense? 3 in the front including center, 3 in the rear including center rear and 2 for mid point ( or 3/4). 7.1 usually has 2 at the mid point using one channel and adding a rear center or no rear center and 2 at the mid point?
just some thoughts... |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | 7.1 can simulate a rear speaker by pushing the same sounds out of the left/right rear speakers. The sounds reach the listener at with the same volume which tricks the mind into thinking it's coming from the rear.
JP_S: The PS3 has a web browser so you could browse the Invelos forums.
The PS3 isn't quite a media center yet, but it looks to be making steps in that direction. The last upgrade enabled it to detect my Orb server and I can stream music from it but I can't yet watch any videos through it. |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 254 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting graymadder: Quote:
But is there a true discreet 7.1 MOVIE that has been released? I haven't seen one, but if there is I know someone here will know about it. There has never been a 7.1 movie, and until there is a 7.1 CINEMA sound format, there never will be. There may eventually be a BD or HD DVD release with a 7.1 soundtrack, but that would be a remix for HT and not the original cinema mix. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 460 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
The PS3 has a web browser so you could browse the Invelos forums.
The PS3 isn't quite a media center yet, but it looks to be making steps in that direction. The last upgrade enabled it to detect my Orb server and I can stream music from it but I can't yet watch any videos through it. Okay, then I'll change my view on the PS3 not being a media centre. | | | | Jean-Paul |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 811 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ascended_Saiyan: Quote:
Quoting stefc:
Quote:
Thanks Erik, its nice to read an informative, intelligent post with some useful info, in amongst all of that idiot's endless garbage.
Are you projecting your self image, again? Damn, A-S, you really are and A S S  |
| | Erik | | It's a strange world. |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 422 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ascended_Saiyan: Quote:
Did you know that 45GB TL discs were approved some time ago? Where are they? Do you have any idea how much more money a 45GB or 51GB TL HD DVD disc would cost to manufacture? God forbid they EVER come as a combo disc! I believe you are talking... well, just talking right now, no knowledge of what you're saying. "It is definitely more challenging to produce TL-51. But no one better complain if they are coming from BD land . Because BD-50 is much more complicated still." And of course, the BD-50 manufacturing costs are legendary. Quote:
So, that's the reason Blu-ray owners are enjoying this feature and HD DVD owners can't? See stefc's comment on actual 7.1 content. Quote:
Only NIN: Beside You in Time out of what you have listed has a 24-bit audio track. I believe you listed some titles that I disproved some pages back. I didn't, and you didn't, nor do I have a reason to think you should know about these 'new' titles mentioned. I find it most interesting how you skipped the whole " 24-bit is a pain because the low-order bits are essentially noise" part of this... Quote:
So, they are saying it takes an crap load of time to try to get a decent picture out of LOTR on HD DVD compared to the much shorter time it takes to have a marvelous looking version on Blu-ray (and not with 7.1 lossless 24-bit sound), right? No, you just said that.  New Line demands quality PQ of these titles, regardless of format. They should, as their own SD releases were far from the perfect titles people go on about, IMHO... Quote:
Most likely, Blu-ray would have to suck it up and live with HD DVD's video and audio encode port over. Like I said, they are messing with this symbol of home theater. Sure, right. The opposite happens to be true, the still very-much-used BD-25s are guilty of: "Blood Diamond (US) 23,873,716,224 The Departed (US) 23,848,943,616 (Yep, those are the very same movies that were supposedly "mastered to HD DVD standards" according to some of our Blu friends; instead they seem to be mastered to BD25...) Quote:
While this is true, my estimate of 16 Mbps for video and audio (everything) was right. Funny. So you got one thing right -- maybe, kudos!  "Now go home and get your shine box!"  | | | Erik
"Has it ever occurred to you, man, that given the nature of all this new stuff, that, uh, instead of running around blaming me, that this whole thing might just be, not, you know, not just such a simple, but uh - you know?" -- The Dude, The Big Lebowski
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->General: General Home Theater Discussion |
Page:
1... 42 43 44 45 46 ...168 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |