HD-DVD / Blu-ray - what's coming your way... [Archive]

John Hodson

07-01-2005, 10:35

From the HTF:

Warner/New Line/HBO/etc. just announced 52 HD-DVD titles for release Q4 '05:

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2005/Jan/1106003.htm

ABOVE THE LAW
ALEXANDER
ANGELS IN AMERICA (HBO)
AUSTIN POWERS: INTERNATIONAL MAN OF MYSTERY (NEW LINE)
BATMAN BEGINS
BLADE (NEW LINE)
CATWOMAN
CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY
CONSTANTINE
CONTACT
DARK CITY (NEW LINE)
THE DUKES OF HAZZARD
ERASER
EXECUTIVE DECISION
FINAL DESTINATION (NEW LINE)
FRIDAY (NEW LINE)
FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON (HBO)
THE FUGITIVE
GOTHIKA
HARD TO KILL
HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE
HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS
HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN
HOUSE OF WAX (2005)
THE LAST SAMURAI
THE MASK (NEW LINE)
THE MATRIX
THE MATRIX RELOADED
THE MATRIX REVOLUTIONS
MAVERICK
MILLION DOLLAR BABY
THE MUSIC MAN
MYSTIC RIVER
NEXT OF KIN
NORTH BY NORTHWEST
OCEAN'S ELEVEN
OCEAN'S TWELVE
PASSENGER 57
THE PERFECT STORM
THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA (2004)
THE PLAYER (NEW LINE)
THE POLAR EXPRESS
RED PLANET
RUSH HOUR (NEW LINE)
SE7EN (NEW LINE)
SOLDIER
THE SOPRANOS (HBO)
SPAWN (NEW LINE)
SWORDFISH
TROY
UNDER SIEGE
U.S. MARSHALS
WILD WILD WEST

Paramount just announced 21 HD-DVD titles for Q4 '05:

http://www.mysan.de/international/article21498.html

THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE
SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS
ELIZABETHTOWN
COACH CARTER
ITALIAN JOB
SCHOOL OF ROCK
SKY CAPTAIN AND THE WORLD OF TOMORROW
FORREST GUMP
BRAVEHEART
GHOST
GREASE
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 2
BLACK RAIN
SAVE THE LAST DANCE
SLEEPY HOLLOW
U2 RATTLE & HUM
VANILLA SKY
LARA CROFT: TOMB RAIDER
STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT
WE WERE SOLDIERS

Universal just announced 16 HD-DVD titles, likely for Q1 '06:

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/s...02774126&EDATE=

THE BOURNE SUPREMACY
THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK
VAN HELSING
APOLLO 13
U-571
12 MONKEYS
DUNE
THE THING
END OF DAYS
BACKDRAFT
WATERWORLD
THE BONE COLLECTOR
SPY GAME
PITCH BLACK
CONAN THE BARBARIAN
DANTE'S PEAK

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 10:43

HD-DVD is going to win isn't it.

webslinger

07-01-2005, 10:45

Dear Mr Echo

07-01-2005, 10:47

It's like 1997 all over again!!!

webslinger - I don't think HD-DVD is going to be compulsory you know! :)

I got into DVD fairly early on and have invested too much money in it to upgrade straight away - I think this time around I'll sit back until the market has established itself and prices have fallen... and then I think I will only upgrade titles that I really need.

Soprano

07-01-2005, 10:49

HD-DVD is going to win isn't it.

No. My monkey* is on Blu-ray

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4153813.stm

*Yes. Monkey.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 10:49

I can see myself starting to buy some of these before I've even got something to play them on.

If blu-Ray doesn't release any titles to match these in the next year they'll be sunk.

John Hodson

07-01-2005, 10:50

It's like 1997 all over again!!!

I was thinking that; in 1997 I thought 'I'll give it a couple of years before I dive in' (I think it was about eight months). Right now I'm thinking that I'm perfectly happy with my 32" widescreen TV, and HD-DVD isn't going to make a scrap of difference on a screen that size...

Flimber

07-01-2005, 10:54

There is a dual-format disk available with both HD and normal versions on the same thing so if releases use that then upgrading would a bit more gradual than having to junk existing kit. If 'they' were truly savvy all future DVD releases would be dual-format...

Mike.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 10:56

will our existing DVD's be compliant with the new HD-DVD players? or will we now need two machines.

:(

No, existing DVDs will play on all of the next generation players. For a good many years I'd guess.

Harsin

07-01-2005, 11:03

Dear Mr Echo

07-01-2005, 11:04

Oh God... it will be "When is Star Wars coming out on HD-DVD?" time again won't it!

anephric

07-01-2005, 11:11

DVD/HD-DVD could become analagous to the VHS/LD markets... I can't see people upgrading from their perfectly adequate dvds anytime soon. And considering how pathetically HDTV has been pushed in this country...

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 11:15

Personally I don't see either of the new formats being a huge success outside of the home theatre enthusiast market. By the time Joe Public feels he needs to replace his DVD player there will probably be another format above and beyond Blu-Ray/HD-DVD.

I dunno, it doesn't get much better than HD quality. This really is the step we should have taken back in '97. But there was this iterim period of DVD on Standard def. Hi-Def, when it does take off I see being the TV standard for at least 20 years.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 11:16

anephric

07-01-2005, 11:19

Harsin

07-01-2005, 11:24

No one was ever convinced by laserdisc in big numbers. And the advantages were plain to see (albeit with irksome idiosyncracies).

Agreed and I would argue that the obvious advantages when comparing a laserdisc to VHS were more marketable to the average consumer than the differences between DVD and HI-DEF/Blu-Ray. You start talking about resolutions...etc to the man on the street and their eyes are going to glaze over. Hell, there's still a huge segment of the market that won't buy widescreen because they think it cuts off the top of people's heads.

No doubt a higher definition format will become the common standard eventually but I don't think for one moment that it's going to happen in the quick sudden wave that a lot of people have convinced themselves it will, in fact I think it will take years. And there's always another format on the horizon.

oxygenuk

07-01-2005, 11:33

at least bluray will be backwards compatible with dvd and the ps3 will have bluray playback so its all good

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 11:34

But then you've got to explain to Joe Punter why there was an 'interim' format (when it certainly wasn't marketed as such) and why he/she/it has to shell out for very expensive equipment indeed after buying God knows how many dvds...

No one was ever convinced by laserdisc in big numbers. And the advantages were plain to see (albeit with irksome idiosyncracies).

You're right, though. HD should have been pushed years ago (a la Japan) instead of pussyfooting around.

Laserdisc was barely around for three years in the UK when DVD came on the scene though, and virtually no video shops stocked laserdisc, and if they did it was only 20-30 titles. It certainly wasn't pushed or promoted like DVD was.

The only way I see HD taking off is when it becomes cheap, and that is when standard DVD took off anyway. When it's cheap people will take the plunge, and they can still play their current DVDs on it, and slowly buy new ones on the new format. A lot of people will get PS3s too, which is blu-ray.

Harsin:

And there's always another format on the horizon.

In media perhaps, but as a TV format HD will be the next thing for many years to come. TV formats don't usually change very often. We had SDTV for 40 years remember. HDTV has been at least a decade in the coming, and it's not going to vanish quickly once it arrives.

jeffstarr

07-01-2005, 11:39

Flimber

07-01-2005, 11:40

Laserdisc was barely around for three years in the UK when DVD came on the scene though...

If by "three" you mean more like "ten to twelve" then fine.

Mike.

bumfrog

07-01-2005, 11:41

at least bluray will be backwards compatible with dvd and the ps3 will have bluray playback so its all good

:lol: just like the emotion chip!

I'll believe it when it actually comes out as sony are renowned for making very spurious technical claims before the item actually comes out.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 11:43

If by "three" you mean more like "ten to twelve" then fine.

Mike.

Not mainstream in the uK. You couldn't get PAL laserdiscs until the 90s.

anephric

07-01-2005, 11:47

Yes: early laserdiscs were marketed as "videodiscs" and were around in the early '80s... the UK market picked up again (a tad) circa '95 when Pioneer started making noises because the US market was doing so well (comparatively).

Alan b

07-01-2005, 11:47

anephric

07-01-2005, 11:49

There were PAL LDs in the '80s: '90s players couldn't normally play them though because they only had analogue audio tracks and most newer players only supported digital.

JayX

07-01-2005, 11:53

I'm quite ******** off about this whole HD-DVD thing...having already shelled out a load to convert my best titles to DVD from VHS, I am now expected to do the same again to HD-DVD, then probably again in 2-3 years for the next format. Complete con.

yes, lets upscale an analogue image of around 250 odd lines to 1080, cos that'll look great. heck, converting vhs to dvd is overkill, a cvd encode would totally suffice.

also, dvhs/dtheater is already the laserdisc of the 2000s ;) whether you like it or not, HD is not going to go away, and one of the two formats of bluray and HDDVD are likely to make it. the fact DVD went mainstream was surprising, it was a format for movie lovers due to the inclusion of correct aspect ratios and audio tracks. the fact it broke thru is great, but HD probably won't, but it doesn't matter. those who want the best quality should have the right to buy it, so stop whinging. as stated before, you don't have to buy it. you probably didn't buy SVHS, VideoDisc or LaserDisc so if you don't want this, don't buy it.

i'm HDTV ready, so don't hold me back!

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 11:53

There were PAL LDs in the 80s: '90s players couldn't normally play them though because they only had analogue audio tracks and most newer players only supported digital.

Ok, I stand corrected, but there were not marketed as mainstream products. Outside of London you could only really buy them from specialist stores. It was 1994 before my local HMV got about 10 titles in stock. Most people thought they were LPs.

anephric

07-01-2005, 11:56

Derby had one specialist import LD store and three chains that stocked Pal LDs (Virgin, HMV, another I can't remember, may have been Choices).

But, yeah, they were elitist (although not originally designed to be such); I maintain that introducing another digital format so similar to and so soon after DVD is just going to fragment the market. It'll be high-end for years...

Harsin

07-01-2005, 11:59

yes, lets upscale an analogue image of around 250 odd lines to 1080, cos that'll look great. heck, converting vhs to dvd is overkill, a cvd encode would totally suffice.

also, dvhs/dtheater is already the laserdisc of the 2000s ;) whether you like it or not, HD is not going to go away, and one of the two formats of bluray and HDDVD are likely to make it. the fact DVD went mainstream was surprising, it was a format for movie lovers due to the inclusion of correct aspect ratios and audio tracks. the fact it broke thru is great, but HD probably won't, but it doesn't matter. those who want the best quality should have the right to buy it, so stop whinging. as stated before, you don't have to buy it. you probably didn't buy SVHS, VideoDisc or LaserDisc so if you don't want this, don't buy it.

i'm HDTV ready, so don't hold me back!

Erm I haven't actually seen anybody make an arguement that people who want this format shouldn't be allowed to buy it? :shrug:

The main point most of us is making is that HI-DEF won't suddenly become the new mainstream format overnight like a lot of Home Theatre sites seem to beleive. As Anepheric says it will be a high-end product for a good few years.

JayX

07-01-2005, 12:03

read webslingers post, "i am now expected"

nothing is expected to do anything. and HT forums are just kidding themselves, if we weren't 16x9 SDTV happy and we had HDTV a few years ago, then it probably would've been doing well by now.. but too many people have invested in expensive SD technology, so won't want to upgrade. their loss i guess :)

anephric

07-01-2005, 12:08

The main problem I have with this is...

there's no frickin' way I'm rebuying my dvd collection. It broke my heart to flog my LDs for pennies (after spending thousands) and there's simply no way I'm replacing hundreds of discs again, not so soon after being encouraged to do so by dvd-whoremongering studios. VHS had a life of 20 years (and is still going): Dvd's what? 7-8 before it's being sidelined...

At least 5-10 years before I consider that boulevard of broken dreams.

Michael Mackenzie

07-01-2005, 12:09

Can't wait for high-definition DVD personally (whether that's HD-DVD or BluRay). A number of titles in that list sound very appealing to me, and I'm all too aware of the limitations of standard DVD. My only hope is that they don't ruin HD with pointless filtering and edge enhancement in the way that they've done to DVD. Seeing some of Microsoft's HD Windows Media 9 trailers playing on my brother's HDTV has got me really excited to watch some actual films with that level of detail.

That said, fingers crossed that the obvious region coding problems are easily surmountable, as I don't see myself buying into a format that restricts me to buying titles from one specific region.

Harsin

07-01-2005, 12:14

read webslingers post, "i am now expected"

Apologies got my wires crossed. :doh:

anephric

07-01-2005, 12:15

You must have a fair few dvds knocking about the shop, Mr. Mackenzie: would you be prepared to start divesting yourself of them and immediately buying into HD-DVD titles at whatever larcenous sum they're likely to be trolled out at?

I just can't justify it: it only seems yesterday I was stroking my Criterion LD of The Killer and by now someone's prolly melted it into the world's most expensive and obsolescent ashtray.

Michael Mackenzie

07-01-2005, 12:25

You must have a fair few dvds knocking about the shop, Mr. Mackenzie: would you be prepared to start divesting yourself of them and immediately buying into HD-DVD titles at whatever larcenous sum they're likely to be trolled out at?At last count I have slightly over 300 DVDs (not counting multiple-title box sets). Of course I wouldn't start replacing every single one of them. I would probably restrict myself, initially at least, to only re-buying films that I really like and/or are currently only available with unsatisfactory presentations on DVD. From the list posted by John Hodson, I could see myself buying only two titles for definite (North by Northwest, Se7en), with a handful of others appealing to me but not being essential purchases.

This probably sounds a bit snobbish, but I personally hope that the new format(s) don't become mainstream, because at least that way releases stand a reasonable chance of being created for enthusiasts rather than being loaded to the gills with the kind of pointless EPK fluff and kids' games that you find on so many DVDs nowadays.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 12:26

I'd guess it will take 2-3 years after it's arrival to start making a real impact. Just like DVD did.

Lourdes

07-01-2005, 12:30

This seems a suitable place for this question. With HD formats are we still going to have the FPS divide or are they finally seeing sense and using the correct one?

Chorlton

07-01-2005, 12:34

I'll go with whoever Disney supports!!!!

Michael Mackenzie

07-01-2005, 12:35

I'll go with whoever Disney supports!!!!They've gone for BluRay.

Citysmith

07-01-2005, 12:36

HDTV bring it on!!!

My stance is that I will but the player and a few discs to put through my projector to really show it off. I will then tend to buy HD when new films come out and buy some classics, but no way am i replacing my 100's of DVDs that would be just too much

zantarous

07-01-2005, 12:40

There is already a very long thread about HD in the hardware forum http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=200410&page=1&pp=20

Almost everything that is being discussed here is in that thread apart from the list of titles.

Panavision

07-01-2005, 13:11

No one was ever convinced by laserdisc in big numbers. And the advantages were plain to see (albeit with irksome idiosyncracies).

It was the inital price which the general public didn't accept. Joe Blogg is not going to spend 100 quid on the Star Wars trilogy.

DeadKenny

07-01-2005, 13:13

No. My monkey* is on Blu-ray

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4153813.stm

BluRay is Betamax all over again :p

Oh God... it will be "When is Star Wars coming out on HD-DVD?" time again won't it!
Lucas wasn't even going to release it on DVD anyway as he wanted to release it only on HD-DVD. With all the pressure to release on DVD he ended up rush-releasing a sub-par set on DVD that still needs some work (especially on Episode IV), not that they're crap, but they're not as good as they should have been.

SimonI

07-01-2005, 13:19

My stance is that I will buy the player and a few discs to put through my projector to really show it off. I will then tend to buy HD when new films come out and buy some classics, but no way am i replacing my 100's of DVDs that would be just too much I'm sure that's the approach most of us here will take - after all, just because I have a couple of SACDs in my collection doesn't mean I'm going to ditch my thousand odd CDs. And like DVD-A and SACD, the next HD format is not going to be seen as a major step up that Joe Public will be interested in; I expect they will simply slowly replace SD setups and media as new hardware (all backward compatible) and firmware appear in the market.

Getting back to the list - surprising that the LOTR trilogy is not on the New Line list!

AndyH

07-01-2005, 13:40

I feel like I've gone back in time when I received the original press releases for the first R2 DVDs!

That and watching R1 Contact and The Fugitive through a projector before the first R2 discs had even landed.

My personal view, I won't leap to upgrade this time around. Because, unlike with VHS, I'll be happy to keep DVDs of titles I like. I will be upgrading for titles that I love.

Will be interesting to see what marketing techniques manage to move titles between the catagory of like and love :)

rubber duck

07-01-2005, 14:05

From the HTF:

Paramount just announced 21 HD-DVD titles for Q4 '05:

http://www.mysan.de/international/article21498.html

BLACK RAIN
Can we have an anamorphic DVD first please Paramount? :|

I only have a 32" TV at the moment so I am not likely to go HD untill I upgrade. For me it’s not like the leap VHS was to DVD. My VHS collection was mostly pan and scan, badly cut and took up way to much shelf space. I could not wait to replace it; I don’t feel that way about DVD yet... ;)

Michael Mackenzie

07-01-2005, 14:06

Remember the big hoopla that was made about alternate angles back in the early days of DVD? It will indeed be interesting to see what the PR monkeys dream up this time round.

SqueakyG

07-01-2005, 14:26

I'm quite ******** off about this whole HD-DVD thing...having already shelled out a load to convert my best titles to DVD from VHS, I am now expected to do the same again to HD-DVD, then probably again in 2-3 years for the next format. Complete con.

Unless you have a really impressive home cinema setup with a projector that puts a picture on your whole living room wall, HD isn't really necessary. Are you happy enough with the resolution of your current DVDs? If so, you can keep them -- they will all play on HD DVD players.

After maybe two years, once HD DVD players are affordable and shop shelves are filled with HD titles, you will be required to buy a HD player to play new films. So your DVD collection will eventually be a mixture of old regular-def discs and new hi-def releases. That's all.

Soprano

07-01-2005, 14:35

BluRay is Betamax all over again :p

So, its the higher quality of two? ;)

ho666es

07-01-2005, 14:41

BSkyB’s HDTV set-top decoder will be equipped with an HDMI (High-bandwidth Digital Multimedia Interface) as its primary means of connecting to an HD display.HDMI can also be connected to DVI equipped displays using a suitable adapter cable. It should be noted, however, that as most HDTV content will be protected by HDCP (High Definition Content Protection), most HDTV content will only be capable of being viewed via display devices which support HDCP carried over HDMI or DVI.

Does this mean that the projectors/plasmas bought now with 'only' dvi (I asume that they are without HDCP?) wont be able to display HD-TV and/or Blur-Ray/HD-DVD??

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 14:44

Worth pointing out that normal DVDs when upscaled to Hi-Def show a bit more detail than they do on standard displays. So it's not all doom and gloom.

JayX

07-01-2005, 14:52

(in reference to disney)They've gone for BluRay.

which is why i'm glad about the announcement about HD, as i'm purposely avoiding disney and their companies :) its mainly because of miramaxe, the company that hates movies.

and re: the sky question, yes. non HDCP tv's will not be able to view sky HD.

zantarous

07-01-2005, 15:12

I think a few things need pointing out here:

1) No one is making anyone upgrade, I certainly will not upgrade my whole collection just a few here and there like Star Wars and LOTR. Stuff like American Pie or Rush Hour I am happy to own on standard DVD.

2) Remember that whatever format you chose your existing DVD collection will be playable on the HD-DVD/Bluray machines.

3) There is every likely hood that Universal machines will appear as they have done with DVD-A and SACD hopefully killing the format war

4) Just because these studios (with the exception of WB) are releasing films on HD-DVD does not mean they will not release them on Bluray, if Bluray sells it would be sill to ignore that market, however as Sony own three major studios so unless Bluray does spectacularly bad don’t expect to see their own titles on HD-DVD.

5) While the uptake of HD will not be anywhere near as fast as DVD it is likely with the hype Sony, HD-DVD camp and SKY will help get the message out there and slowly over time this will become the dominate format.

ho666es

07-01-2005, 15:18

and re: the sky question, yes. non HDCP tv's will not be able to view sky HD.

If the same is the case with hd-dvd/blue-ray then all 'early adapters' that have an 'HD ready' (res-wise) tv/projector will not be able to use them. That is one huge bump in the road for hd...

zantarous

07-01-2005, 15:33

The HDCP compliant format is a SKY choice and nothing to do with HD-DVD or Bluray I would imagine they would have both component and DVI plus several analogue outputs

DeadKenny

07-01-2005, 15:54

So, its the higher quality of two? ;)
That old chestnut again :p

Nah, it's got more capacity, that's all :D

JayX

07-01-2005, 15:56

indeed, and sky aren't the only HD source out there. there's already several HD channels broadcast in europe ( http://www.euro1080.tv if you haven't seen it) and they work fine. in all honesty, as usual sky are just being arses. i can understand refusing to release a CAM for videocrypt, but HDCP? to protect *what* exactly? what exactly do sky show thats so damn special!? sports i can understand, but why should any protection system differ to what we have now, and.. well thats about it. virtually everything that'll be shown on sky HD will have been available on american tv before.. and yes, they're starting to implement HDCP but not everyone is. i doubt anybody will be upset they can't cap Britains Worst Pubs now.

when considering a potential specialist market, you don't go and snub a large percentage of those who are likely to uptake it!

DeadKenny

07-01-2005, 16:00

i can understand refusing to release a CAM for videocrypt, but HDCP? to protect *what* exactly? what exactly do sky show thats so damn special!? sports i can understand, but why should any protection system differ to what we have now, and.. well thats about it. virtually everything that'll be shown on sky HD will have been available on american tv before.. and yes, they're starting to implement HDCP but not everyone is. i doubt anybody will be upset they can't cap Britains Worst Pubs now.
Surely it's to stop people copying pay-per-view movies, just as they currently have protections in Sky+ that prevent you viewing such movies beyond a particular date, and why they use Macrovision on analogue outputs for those movies?

Plus there's a fair betting that Hollywood have insisted they use it.

zantarous

07-01-2005, 16:06

virtually everything that'll be shown on sky HD will have been available on american tv before.. and yes, they're starting to implement HDCP but not everyone is

So you would prefer it if SKY started by not having this and then implementing this at a latter stage causing you to upgrade again? As you pointing out the US are already doing it, it would only be a matter of time before SKY had to do it in future. Copyright protection is something Hollywood takes very seriously, I don’t think they would want HD like quality copies of their films floating around or copies of shows that can be sold in boxsets, protecting IP is of paramount importance to the studios.

Gizmo

07-01-2005, 16:10

I can see this being an incremental upgrade for myself. Like others, I've spent a lot already on my equipment and library of discs. But I have no hopes of it being anything but an enthusiasts market for years to come.

Imagine Joe Public going into Dixons in a year to get a new DVD player. "How about a new HD (or Blueray) player, Sir. It's like being at the Cinema". JP "But you said that about my last DVD player? What's different about it?" "Well, it has a far higher resolution picture, Sir". JP "eh?". "It looks much nicer, see this demo". JP "Ok, how much then, I quite fancy it". "£300 and it's yours". JP "Done". "Now, Sir, what TV would you like to go with it?". JP "Eh, I need a new telly as well? Stuff that!". :razz:

DVD, like CD, is good enough for the public. Can't see it changing soon.

pompeyfan

07-01-2005, 16:21

I can't see me taking the plunge for ages tbh.

I'm quite happy with the quality of DVD's and only watch on a 28" widescreen set or laptop anyway. I can see that HD-TV will be the way to go, but it won't be for me as I doub't I'd notice anything different on less than a 42" screen, and until they drop to the price of current 28" sets I wouldn't be interested or in the financial position to afford it (and even then they'd need to be LCD or Plasma sets due to space requirements).

AndyWilson

07-01-2005, 16:40

DVD-A and SACD are both "better" than CD but neither of those has exactly captured the public's imagination and I can't see any reason why hi-def DVD formats should be any more sucessful...

Panavision

07-01-2005, 16:44

Lucas wasn't even going to release it on DVD anyway as he wanted to release it only on HD-DVD. With all the pressure to release on DVD he ended up rush-releasing a sub-par set on DVD that still needs some work (especially on Episode IV), not that they're crap, but they're not as good as they should have been.

I don't think Lucas was waiting for HD-DVD; it wouldn't make financial sense to leap frog DVD and lose millions. I think he wanted to make changes to the films before releasing them on DVD.

anephric

07-01-2005, 16:46

I though his plan was always to complete the prequels and THEN release everything on dvd...

Not that it matters when it's emerging from GL's neckhole.

zantarous

07-01-2005, 16:57

DVD-A and SACD are both "better" than CD but neither of those has exactly captured the public's imagination and I can't see any reason why hi-def DVD formats should be any more sucessful...

People always say this but I think the DVD-A / SACD comparison is a bit different.

The problem with DVD-A and to an extent with SACD is the lack of being able to play them in your car or portable CD-Players. Now I don’t the about the rest of (apart from Deadkenny) but how many of you just put on a CD and just listen to the music, I only put on CD’s when I am on my PC working or surfing, when doing hose work or when we have guests over, all of this is for background listening. With DVD-A and SACD you have to sit in the sweet spot to get the full effect, with a film it is different chances are when you put it on you will give it your full attention. So you are left with buying music on a format that you can only listen to on your HT or buying one that can be played on all CD players, your not going to have that issue with film.

Now cue all the people how say "I always put on a CD and just sit there and listen to it"

DeadKenny

07-01-2005, 17:01

I don't think Lucas was waiting for HD-DVD; it wouldn't make financial sense to leap frog DVD and lose millions. I think he wanted to make changes to the films before releasing them on DVD.
I'm fairly sure I read a quote from him on the official starwars site, though it was a while back now, saying he wanted to wait for HD-DVD to release the next version of the trilogy.

In fact, here's an article from pre-Episode II which says just that...

http://www.hidef.com/hddvd.html

Episode I Producer Rick McCallum, who has recently become the "wingman" of high definition digital movies announced in an interview for German broadcaster n-tv, that Lucasfilm will wait for the next-generation high-definition DVD format (HD-DVDs - expected in the next two years) before releasing the Star Wars Saga (Episodes 4, 5, 6) on anything other than VHS or Laserdisc

anephric

07-01-2005, 17:02

Now cue all the people how say "I always put on a CD and just sit there and listen to it"

Well, obviously music enthusiasts do, in the same way that casual filmgoers can walk in and out of a film, natter through it etc but an enthusiast will be more focussed on the screen.

I know plenty of people that stick dvds on just to have something on the background and walk in and out while they're unpacking, washing up etc.

JohnMac

07-01-2005, 17:02

As long as the studios can't agree on which format to support I think both will be doomed to failure, in the short term at least. I think it is far too soon for HD; you've got to get a decent sized consumer base of people who are able to watch it and, TV broadcast support to encourage it before you can expect people to buy into this new format. Also, HD-DVD (like DVDs) will only ever be as good as the source material used (most of which pre-dates HD) and HD-DVD might actually accentuate imperfections in picture quality. DVD picture transfers vary in quality quite a lot, the same will also be true of any new format.

oxygenuk

07-01-2005, 17:04

Will i notice a fair change in picture quality with hddvd overr dvd as i just have a widescreen 50hz philips tv? also will hddvd support dts-hd

anephric

07-01-2005, 17:04

zantarous

07-01-2005, 17:11

Will i notice a fair change in picture quality with hddvd overr dvd as i just have a widescreen 50hz philips tv? also will hddvd support dts-hd

That will all depend on the how the film is transferred done from a nice HD master at properly then even output via the analogue out put on a HD player the picture will be better as it will not be as compressed as normal DVD.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 17:18

Blue-Ray and HD-DVD aside, HDTV when it arrives will be here to stay, however long it takes to be fully adopted. It won't 'fail' because it's going to pretty much be a world standard TV system and TV and film will be made using it. It's the future.

rainbird

07-01-2005, 17:22

Personally, I think HD-DVD will have about as much success as DVD-A and SACD, i.e., not very much. The central problem for consumers is that there simply won't be that much difference in the picture quality between a well encoded anamorphic DVD and its HD equivalent. That, more than anything else, will make the average punter scratch his head and then say 'I've already got great picture quality. Why should I spend all this cash for such a minimal improvement? Forget it.'

And that's the other problem; in order to get the best out of HD material almost your whole AV chain needs upgrading. What use is a SD 16:9 TV when you've got a format offering twice the resolution? You're going to need a plasma or a projector for that. I can't see people flocking to embrace those - they're too expensive and the returns, in the mind of the buyer, won't be perceived as justifying the cost.

The DVD community, such as it is, will doubtless have orgasms as it slavers over the technical quality of the first HD discs. But the real question we should be asking is 'will anyone outside of the DVD community actually care?' And for the vast majority of people out there I think the answer will be 'no.'

I don't think Lucas was waiting for HD-DVD; it wouldn't make financial sense to leap frog DVD and lose millions. I think he wanted to make changes to the films before releasing them on DVD.

Exactly. Although there was some suggestion by LFL that the release was sped up because of piracy concerns. I don't know how much truth to put in that but there's no question that SW LD bootlegs were being widely traded on the file-sharing networks so that could have played a part.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 17:27

I'm quite confident that packages will be sold for consumers, so they get everything they need.

Since the cost of living has changed over the years, there's a lot more home cinema enthusiasts than their used to be.

j_nolan

07-01-2005, 17:32

I'm really curious as the what region-coding will play in the whole thing. There's no way I'm limiting myself to more-than-likely inferior, R2 releases.

zantarous

07-01-2005, 17:35

I have seen people who have no clue about HT go into Dixon/Currys and buy all in one packages, both my neighbours went out about a surround system after demoing mine and they are as far being HT enthusiasts as possible. As thescrounger pointed out more the way people live has changed and more have disposable income now to buy high tech gadgets, who would have though W/S would have had such a high penetration when first launched in 91 or that PC with current processing power would be available for £6-700 with a flat panel?

oxygenuk

07-01-2005, 17:54

years to come plasma's and lcd's will also be as expensive as decent widescreens are today

DeadKenny

07-01-2005, 17:55

Episode I Producer Rick McCallum, who has recently become the "wingman" of high definition digital movies announced in an interview for German broadcaster n-tv, that Lucasfilm will wait for the next-generation high-definition DVD format (HD-DVDs - expected in the next two years) before releasing the Star Wars Saga (Episodes 4, 5, 6) on anything other than VHS or Laserdisc

So they'd've released it on an expensive, bulky, inferior, elitist format but not dvd? That was the plan?

Utter stupidity.
Indeed, though it didn't mean he wouldn't do a DVD version in the end, just that he was prepared to wait for a high-def format before releasing the original trilogy on anything other than VHS and laserdisc.

Though you could take the view that it would have been a big promotion for HD-DVD (and/or BluRay if they had decided to go for that in the end), as if the trilogy was only available on a high def format, it would make far more people want to upgrade.

As I understood it though Lucas's thinking was in having high-def quality from camera (through the HD cams he now uses) to the cinema and ultimately to the home.

I've also read in old articles that Lucas wanted to wait until the entire prequel trilogy was finished and he would then be in a position to do an ultimate boxed set on a blue laser DVD format. At the time it was unspecified which format it would be, or if it would be on multiple formats. Also it was not clear whether he would also do a DVD version as well. However it is clear that originally he wanted to wait for a high def format which would be established by the time Episode III was finished, rather than releasing DVDs early. In some articles back he's been quoted as saying he doesn't have the time to pay attention to DVDs. The idea was to spend time after Episode III making all the changes he wants for his ultimate set.

lyris

07-01-2005, 18:14

Can't wait for this!

If you don't want to rebuy your DVDs - then don't! It's as simple as that!

But personally I can't wait to get HD versions.

Please say it can output on Component video and I don't need to buy a new TV?

Feroze

07-01-2005, 18:23

I'm quite ******** off about this whole HD-DVD thing...having already shelled out a load to convert my best titles to DVD from VHS, I am now expected to do the same again to HD-DVD, then probably again in 2-3 years for the next format. Complete con.

I take it the HD-DVD discs need to be played on a HD-DVD player, which will end up costing around 700/800 £, and which will need to be played on a HD TV which will end up costing 2k and isnt even readily available in the UK as we stand. Complete Con.

will our existing DVD's be compliant with the new HD-DVD players? or will we now need two machines.

We are suckers arent we :(

This is part of the DVD evolution, just like any other technology it takes time for it to become better (Peformance Vs. Time).
When DVDs were first released onto the market they weren't great and they cost quite a bit, but over time it did get better and now we're going onto HD-DVD/Blu-Ray.
Whether either format will do well, who knows, we'll have to see how the market reacts to this.
I don't think it's a complete con for HD-DVD players costing so much, initially the prices will be high and this is mainly due to it being new technology as well as companies wanting to reimburse their R&D costs associated with it(which is millions if not billions), so they can continue onto better technologies for the future.
IMHO I'm not fussed about HD-DVD/Blu-Ray/HD-TV, at the end of the day I probably won't be able to afford any of these. Until the day comes when these things have become cheap there will be better stuff ;)
Already seen some demos of Dolby's next gen. surround sound audio (Dolby Digital Plus) for HD-DVD and it's good (7.1 channels and at around 5-6Mbps!),

f

lyris

07-01-2005, 18:28

I'm quite ******** off about this whole HD-DVD thing...having already shelled out a load to convert my best titles to DVD from VHS, I am now expected to do the same again to HD-DVD, then probably again in 2-3 years for the next format. Complete con.
Who said they "expected" you to do anything? Upgrading isn't a requirement. If you don't want the better quality then don't pay for it. What's the big deal?

The situation seems to be "Manufacturers are showing me something that I know will be better and I know I will want, but I can't afford it and don't want to sell my existing lower quality versions" - one of the sad facts of life in the technology world (I'm not going to be surprised if I'll have to buy a new TV after having an LCD with Component inputs only since September since this might only work on HDMI and DVI - it happens!)

BTW, 2-3 years for the next format is a bit unrealistic. Traditional DVD is about what, 8 years old, and shows no signs of dying out too soon.

GarethH

07-01-2005, 18:42

To be honest i'm not that bothered if it goes mainstream. I never owned a laser disc syste, but when I started getting into DVD buying in 1998 it felt like I had the upper hand over joe public. I remember looking at the laserdisc boxes and it looking really cool to own laserdisc stuff as they were more special.

I'll probably buy into Blu-ray or HD-DVD in 2006/2007.

lyris

07-01-2005, 18:44

Like Michael said I hope it doesn't go too mainstream. I'd love it if it stayed in the background like Laserdisc and away from the 14" Edge Enhancement squad, and standard DVD stayed the main format.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 19:24

Like Michael said I hope it doesn't go too mainstream. I'd love it if it stayed in the background like Laserdisc and away from the 14" Edge Enhancement squad, and standard DVD stayed the main format.

It's only likely to be specialist for a while, maybe a couple of years. As I said earlier HDTV is the future of TV. People forget that the two systems are not exclusive.

anephric

07-01-2005, 19:47

The situation seems to be "Manufacturers are showing me something that I know will be better and I know I will want, but I can't afford it and don't want to sell my existing lower quality versions" - one of the sad facts of life in the technology world (I'm not going to be surprised if I'll have to buy a new TV after having an LCD with Component inputs only since September since this might only work on HDMI and DVI - it happens!)

It's more like manufacturers waving a golden dvd carrot under your nose and saying 'this is the best thing ever, it's here to stay... oops, no, here comes a bigger, more expensive carrot that's here to stay yadda yadda yadda'.

I expect more life out of a format than 8 years.

camaj

07-01-2005, 20:29

What use is a SD 16:9 TV when you've got a format offering twice the resolution? You're going to need a plasma or a projector for that.

Why should I spend all this cash for such a minimal improvement? Forget it.'

They might say that, until they see it, then they'd realise that it's a huge improvement and they'd love to have it when they can afford it.

You won't need a Plasma or Projector either. An LCD, RPTV or even CRT display will do the job.

As for the list, looks good. I still haven't bought The Fugitive despite it being one of my favourite films. I waited ages for the SE to come out and I'll wait until there's a Blu-ray SE version.

I don't plan on rebuying any DVD's at first, only getting new things on Blu-ray and gradually upgrading a select few films. Also I'd only watch on a PC based setup (as I did for the first 6 years of my DVD ownership) before upgrading my TV.

I expect more life out of a format than 8 years.

So are you saying they shouldn't have released DVD and gone straight to HD discs? Or that they should hold off on HD discs? There are arguments against both.

DVD will still be around, it's not dead yet, just like VHS. Just think of all those cheap discs you'll be able to buy once people start flogging there collections on ebay?

Niceguygeoff

07-01-2005, 20:57

I won't be adopting either HD format when they first arrive - I'll leave that to the really dedicated HT enthusiasts. In the meantime, my DVHS deck (which sits atop my LaserDisc player ;) ) will give me all the HD goodness that I need, as regular DVDs also look very good on my current set-up.

What's niggling me the most about the rush to release movies on HD is that many films that have received substandard DVD treatment will possibly be refused a remastered DVD release and instead put straight onto HD (see the previous comment about Black Rain). If HD doesn't take hold as the studios think it will (Disney apparently rushed the remainder of their back catalogue onto DVD in order to sell them all again when HD hits, for example) then they'll be trying to cut costs any way they can, and stopping simultaneous HD/DVD re-releases will be a start. Then again, this arena may be where those *******ised hybrid discs will play a part in HD take-up. It's all so exciting to be able to watch this battle unfold before our eyes...

Desk

07-01-2005, 23:37

High Definition material hasn't got much of a presence yet in the UK, so I sometimes wonder just how many of the people who dismiss it have actually seen it.

I got my first look at HD a few weeks ago, on a Sagem DLP rear-projection screen running off a PC. I'd only read great things about HD, and, amazingly, the set-up managed to meet my unrealistic expectations.

If I understand correctly, standard PAL DVDs have 576 lines of horizontal resolution. The HD material I saw had 720. Blu-Ray DVD is going to offer 1080, progressive.

To my eyes, the difference between standard resolution DVD and a 720 HD image is akin to the difference between DVD and video.

If the upper potential of increasingly popular high definition displays continues to be demonstrated so effectively I don't see how any person who purchases one could continue to accept anything less.

And although hard as it may be to resist the quick and easy attraction of HD-DVD, I'll be holding out for the Blu-Ray format, and hoping others do the same.

I suspect that the computer market may help Blu-Ray win the battle between the formats, as it naturally offers much more storage capacity than its rival. Here's hoping the best format wins.

thescrounger

07-01-2005, 23:58

Do you need that extra storage? A two disc HD-DVD set would be 60GB.

Michael Mackenzie

08-01-2005, 00:08

Do you need that extra storage? A two disc HD-DVD set would be 60GB.We don't have any concrete information available as to how much space the new formats are actually going to take up. While 60GB is a lot by regular definition DVD standards, I'd be interested to see how long a film you could fit into 60GB at the highest quality with the next generation formats.

Desk

08-01-2005, 00:09

Do you need that extra storage? A two disc HD-DVD set would be 60GB.
If there's little or no cost difference to the consumer between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray then why not support the one that naturally sports the most capacity?

camaj

08-01-2005, 01:06

If there's little or no cost difference to the consumer between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray then why not support the one that naturally sports the most capacity?

Exactly! You can never have too much space only too little.

I sometimes wonder just how many of the people who dismiss it have actually seen it.

It certainly seems that way, especially when they say you need a plasma and or a 50" set or you won't notice the difference

thescrounger

08-01-2005, 01:23

True I suppose, I'd heard Bluray would be more expensive.

drush9999

08-01-2005, 02:22

It's interesting all this paranoia and speculation about new formats.

You can't compare DVD-->HD-DVD to VHS/LD-->DVD. The big reason being not only do you need a new player, but you need a new display too. Part of the original DVD's success was you could buy a player and plug it in your existing tv. HD displays are very expensive and will stay so for a long time yet.

It may be many years before HD is mainstream, and in the meantime studios will continue releasing on the mainstream format. They want to maximise their profits, so I'm pretty sure I'll be looking forward to many years yet of DVD collecting.

DVD became successful within 3 short years (I was an early adopter in '98). But the whole HD thing is going to take another decade imho.

sweetmate

08-01-2005, 03:02

DVD became successful within 3 short years (I was an early adopter in '98). But the whole HD thing is going to take another decade imho.
Agreed. Its not until HD-DVD and HDTV REPLACE DVD and SDTV, that it will take off. Until then it will be a much more expensive and elitist hobby that only freaks like us will be a part of.

DVD hit the mainstream because it reached a price point where it could replace vhs, same with 16:9 television over 4:3 (about 4 or 5 years ago), and it will be the same as plasma and lcd prices drop to where CRT prices were (starting to happen now). It will take a long long time before SKY HD costs the same as what Sky costs now, and it will be even longer before analog tv and SD digital tv are shut down and replaced with HD.

sammyjankis

08-01-2005, 05:11

This is the price we pay for enthusiasm over films and concurrently the means by which they're enjoyed. Shame - as the cost of buying all the stuff I already treasure on DVD will get stupid. I'm happy enough with 32" CRT, a moderate Pro Logic set-up and (ahem) a nice-enough multi-region Amazon DVD player.

Still - I'm sure when I win the lottery :oh-hum: HD will be the way forward...

am1001aa

08-01-2005, 08:21

I can see HD-DVD winning this war as the format for movies. A lot of the arguments about capacity are a bit of a smoke screen. Why can't special editions be released on
2x 25 gig hd-dvd disks etc? It'll be like the multidisk sets we buy now. I just can't really see the difference between 1x50 gig bluray and 2x25 Hd-dvd.

I read a post on the avs forums by the panasonic bluray guy and he said 12-15 bitrate is the optimum for video for the advanced codecs - basically both formats can handle that just fine. It'll be just that long movies like Lord of the Rings will be on 2 disks rather than one for bluray. Big deal.

I can see HD-DVD being able to sell hardware/software cheaper than Blu-ray in the first couple of years and that'll snag the consumers more. The cheaper high def format will win.

However, I can also see bluray ending up the choice for pc based backup hence the support of HP/dell etc. The big capacities eg 100 gig in development is more important for the pc market. Bluray can also be successful as a recording format for tv.

So both formats will have a future - but doing different things.

R-T-C

08-01-2005, 10:51

I take it that HD will play on a standard PC monitor?
I watch all my films via my PC, so its not so bad for me, since getting an HD or bluray DVD-ROM drive will be pretty useful anyhow. Although odds are that there will be a joint player soon enough. Unlike beta-max vs. VHS, a combined player should be quite achievable.

Anyhow, since most of my collection is Anchor Bay and Blue Underground, I doubt I will be offered any upgrades for some time.

It will be a pity to loose the '2-disc special editions' of films. Instead they will release new films in 'single disc', and 'single disc with more extras' formats.

EDIT: In fact, do we even know if these HD discs will be released in the UK?

DeadKenny

08-01-2005, 12:38

You might need a fairly powerful PC for HD. The current WM9 videos at 1080p resolution over on Microsoft's site require a 3Ghz PC. I tried them on my 2Ghz system and they struggled, skipping frequently.

If HD is done in MPEG-2 however you may be better off, especially if hardware MPEG-2 decoders can cope with HD resolutions, but even in software there's far less processing to do than with WM9.

It would be interesting to know what format these HD-DVD releases have actually gone for (as the public version of the WM9 codec is I believe part of the HD-DVD spec, similar with BluRay ?).

As for these discs in the UK... not at present I would have thought. There's no market for them. HD has been out for quite a few years in the US, whereas we haven't started any broadcasts yet, and HD TVs only exist in the guise of Plasma, LCDs and projectors mostly, and even then some of them don't have the right digital connectors that Sky and some DVD players will be using, and not all displays can handle all the HD resolutions.

We took the long route in the UK by going for SD widescreen TVs, which was great for widescreen, but means a longer route to market for HD. In the US widescreen TV *is* HD.

2006 can be considered the official UK launch of HD, and I suspect that will be the year we start seeing a limited number of UK HD-DVD releases. By 2008 I suspect things will pick up and we should know the answer to the whole HD-DVD vs BluRay thing.

As said earlier though, this has all been covered to death over in the what happens to us brits when High Def DVDs come out? (http://www.thedvdforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=200410) thread ;)

Grandmaster

08-01-2005, 12:53

I read a post on the avs forums by the panasonic bluray guy and he said 12-15 bitrate is the optimum for video for the advanced codecs - basically both formats can handle that just fine. It'll be just that long movies like Lord of the Rings will be on 2 disks rather than one for bluray. Big deal.

If the Panasonic guy is talking about 12mbps-15mbps as the optimum for video, HD-DVD should easily be able to manage Lord of the Rings.

There are many factors far more important than storage size - support from the movie studios and price point, for example.

I would be willing to wager that barely any one would be able to tell the difference between HD-DVD picture quality and BluRay in a side-by-side comparison running on identical displays.

DeadKenny

08-01-2005, 12:57

There are many factors far more important than storage size - support from the movie studios and price point, for example.
Not to mention manufacturing costs. HD-DVD apparently requires only a small cost in retooling existing DVD manufacturing plants for HD-DVD, whereas BluRay requires considerably higher investments.

Grandmaster

08-01-2005, 13:06

They might say that, until they see it, then they'd realise that it's a huge improvement and they'd love to have it when they can afford it.

You won't need a Plasma or Projector either. An LCD, RPTV or even CRT display will do the job.

You're quite the BluRay evangelist camaj, and I find your posts genuinely interesting - but at the end of the day right now all we can do is compare one set of specs to another, and as you know, specs are never the most important aspect behind whether a piece of consumer technology is going to be successful or not.

When you talk about a CRT display doing the job are you talking about the current technology sitting in someone's living room, or indeed bedroom? Like it or not, that is going to be the target display for at least 80% of the market.

In fact, presumably the HD boxes and DVHS kit available in the US now can interface with conventional CRTs, so I'm curious as to its performance as opposed to DVD. What you may gain in image clarity may be sacrificed all depending on the downsampling down to 480i, and if there is a framerate conversion to do as well, it could actually look pretty grim in motion depending on how good the scaler is within the box.

zantarous

08-01-2005, 13:11

No Camaj means HD ready CRT's that are doing the rounds in the US, last time I was there on my way back I grabbed a few HT magazines for the plane journey and read a few HD CRT reveiws and they were very positive.

Plus down scaling to a 480i should be no problem problems usually arise when you try to upscale.

Desk

08-01-2005, 13:11

Not to mention manufacturing costs. HD-DVD apparently requires only a small cost in retooling existing DVD manufacturing plants for HD-DVD, whereas BluRay requires considerably higher investments.
Naturally there are many as yet unpredictable factors that will determine which format, if either, dominates this arena.

However, all things being equal - in terms of studio support, cost to the consumer, availability of goods, etc. - wouldn't it make sense to hope that it's the format that offers the greatest technological advancement and increased performance at its basic purpose that does best?

kiran_mk2

08-01-2005, 13:22

Has anyone actually announced what format films will come in? Will it be 720p or 1080p?
Also bare in mind that although 15mpbs is quoted as being the optimum video size using modern codecs - this could mean mpeg4. If they stick with mpeg2, the desired bitrates could be much higher. The audio codecs are going to be more advanced aswell - the new Dolby multichannel codec will need 6mbps and then there are the lossless formats from Dolby and DTS aswell...

DeadKenny

08-01-2005, 13:25

However, all things being equal - in terms of studio support, cost to the consumer, availability of goods, etc. - wouldn't it make sense to hope that it's the format that offers the greatest technological advancement and increased performance at its basic purpose that does best?
Absolutely, but that didn't stop VHS winning over Betamax though in the end ;)

Personally I'll go with whatever delivers a top-notch HD image and is cheapest. I'm not fussed if films are released with 2 discs, so long as the 2nd is for extras. If HD-DVD's smaller capacity means a visibly poorer quality image due to higher compression and lower bitrates, then I'll go for BluRay, but I have doubts that it will be a visibly noticeable difference to most people. I'm sure we'll have people analysing zoomed in regions of the image to complain about a pixel being slightly wrong, just as we do with DVD, but to most I bet both formats will look stunning. I'm not really fussed if BluRay wins either, so long as it doesn't mean we end up paying more in the long run.

camaj

09-01-2005, 13:12

You're quite the BluRay evangelist camaj, and I find your posts genuinely interesting

Thanks, but I don't consider myself a Bluray evangelist, a HD evangelist perhaps.
Bluray is just the better platform for delivering HD. Not only that but I also believe that Bluray has the better chance of success (thankfully) regardless of how good it turns out to be,

Someone mentioned Bluray for PC's and recording and HD-DVD for watching films. I'm sure most people would only want one unit and since they already have a Bluray drive on their PC's they'd use that rather than buy a HD-DVD drive

HD films on a conventional TV are said to look better than the DVD equivilent.

For me studio support is a non-issue. If one format "wins" then all studios will support it eventually. Consumers should look at the format they prefer rather than the films announced unless they really really want a specific film now.

Cost is also another non-issue. Bluray will cost the same as HD-DVD once mass production starts. The initial cost might be higher but only by a bit and even then the BDA could subsidise them to bring them inline with the costs of HD-DVD's

Talking of PC's, HD will require a lot of processor power. However, I expect most PC solutions to have a decoder card as they did when DVD first launched. The card would have a TV-out cable too, which is good since most people aren't likely to have a HD compatible monitor.

PC monitors are good but they're not that good. If you're lucky you've got a TFT that's 720p or 1080p if you're very lucky. I don't think any support HDMI yet, although nothing's been announce on that issue by either format AFAIK

Mr Majestik

09-01-2005, 13:17

Whichever format the porn industry backs will be the winner....

DeadKenny

09-01-2005, 14:07

PC monitors are good but they're not that good. If you're lucky you've got a TFT that's 720p or 1080p if you're very lucky. I don't think any support HDMI yet, although nothing's been announce on that issue by either format AFAIK
Almost all PC monitors these days are by definition progressive scan, and will do resolutions at least at <strike>1080</strike> 720p.

However, I assume you mean taking a PC monitor and plugging it into a standalone player, in which case yes, most won't support the 720p and 1080p (or 'i') signals or HDMI (though many TFTs have DVI support).

If you're using a PC as a HTPC with a PC monitor, then you can quite happily do 1080p if the PC is powerful enough.

lyris

09-01-2005, 15:03

HDMI is backwards compatible with DVI - you can get an HDMI to DVI cable. So, I'm not sure about the comment about PC monitors being limited in that respect.

However they are of limited use for TV viewing compared to dedicated TFT TVs - they generally have poorer viewing angles, are obviously smaller, usually can't deinterlace video, and since they're designed to be run at an optimal resolution rather than handling a whole variety of sizes like a TV, not as much attention is taking to make sure the scaler is good. I've found the scaler in mine to be fine, but not as good as my TV.

camaj

09-01-2005, 17:18

Almost all PC monitors these days are by definition progressive scan, and will do resolutions at least at 1080.

If you look at the specs, you'll see that most TFT's are only 1024 x 768 and most people have CRT's that are less than 1600 x 1200

DeadKenny

09-01-2005, 18:40

If you look at the specs, you'll see that most TFT's are only 1024 x 768
"Most" TFTs are 1280x1024 these days apart from the low budget <17" ones, but true these won't be up to scratch for the 1920x1080 needed for 1080p (I always get the horizontal/vertical mixed up, so was thinking 1280x would be fine for 1080p :doh: ). They are fine though for 720p (1280x720).

camaj

09-01-2005, 22:01

"Most" TFTs are 1280x1024 these days apart from the low budget <17" ones

Most people buy the budget ones though. I know I would (if I didn't know better). Resolutions over 1080 are available but more expensive but still only a few hundred pounds

kiran_mk2

09-01-2005, 23:17

John Hodson

05-02-2005, 20:15

Disc prices! From the HTF:

Hollywood to sell HD DVD titles for US$19-29

TOKYO - Warner Bros Inc, Paramount Pictures Corp and Universal Studios will likely start selling HD DVD movie titles in Japan and the US in October for 2,000 yen to 3,000 yen (US$19-29).

The three major Hollywood movie studios, which back the HD DVD format, had already announced their plans to release a total of 89 HD DVD movie titles in the two nations. Most of these are expected to hit the market this year.

The generous pricing, which will put the differential between the HD DVD software and conventional DVD movie titles at no more than 1,000 yen, is believed to be aimed at aiding in HD DVD's fight against the rival Blu-ray Disc format. The HD DVD standard is being pushed by Toshiba Corp and others, while a separate group led by Sony Corp is rallying behind Blu-ray.

Thomas Lesinski, president of Paramount Pictures Worldwide Home Entertainment, said the differential between his company's HD DVD and conventional DVD movie titles would likely be around US$5-10. Since the firm's DVD movie software sells between US$15 and US$20, HD DVD titles will likely retail for 20-US$30.

Warner Bros and Universal Studios have yet to announce any decisions on pricing of HD DVD software, but their prices are expected to be in line with Paramount's.

rogeralpine

05-02-2005, 20:47

Presume these are RRP's - hopefully they'll be a lump less when some of the "discount" etailers get their hands on them.

I think it'll be a while longer before 1920*1080 panels become the norm - certainly here in europe. 2 to 3 years at least IMHO before we see sub 32" models at less than a grand.

thescrounger

05-02-2005, 20:50

Yeah, those prices seem very reasonable. Essentially about £15 each!

thescrounger

05-02-2005, 20:51

I think it'll be a while longer before 1920*1080 panels become the norm - certainly here in europe. 2 to 3 years at least IMHO before we see sub 32" models at less than a grand.

This year actually. Sumsung releasing an HDTV CRT for under a grand.

Hamburger3

05-02-2005, 21:32

If you have not yet heard, there is a battle going for which format will become the next generation DVD standard.

At first HD-DVD looked to be the front runner even though it offered the smallest increase of maximum storage capability (30GB) over standard DVD (9GB), but then Blu-Ray came around and decided to support WMV and so with its larger storage capacity (50GB – with future plans of 100GB discs) it appeared to take the lead – at least in performance.

Well HVD now appears ready to obliterate both of these formats, at least in regards to performance.

How so? Well to start HVD discs have already been demonstrated with 200GB storage capacity, with 1TB discs expected to be developed very shortly. (that is equivalent to 100 dual layer DVDs, 35 HD-DVDs, and 20 Blu-Ray DVDs) On top of its massive storage capacity, HVD also offers transfer speeds greater than 1GB per second – 40 times that of standard DVD. It doesn’t end there. There are already plans for a 4TB disc which would be enough storage capacity to have nearly 1000 movies in 480p, or about 200 movies in HD on one disc.

So what is HVD and how does it differ from the other optical discs?

HVD stands for Holographic Versatile Disc. The technology behind HVD is based on Optware's exclusive servo system and CHDSS (Collinear Holographic Data Storage System) which Hideyoshi Horimai, founder of Optware Corp., originally developed back in 1999.

Collinear holography uses a 532-nanometer green laser to read holographic data on a disc. The light from the laser is split into two beams. Data to be recorded is encoded onto one of the beams while the other beam is used as a reference. The two beams interfere with each other inside the disc's recording layer, thus creating a three-dimensional hologram composed of data fringes, and in this way data is stored.

HVD is the same size of a standard DVD (12cm):

If you look closely at the surface of a HVD disc you can see multiplexed holographic data patterns along the tracks:

The disc structure starts with a substrate with a preformatted pitted aluminum top layer. This is used to store servo data and is read by a red laser. This enables accurate tracking of the disc. A dichroic mirror is laid on top of that with a small gap between it and the next layer which is a photo polymer and where the data is recorded. The mirror reflects the green laser but is transparent to the red laser. In this way it is able to stop the scattering of light within the disc that would otherwise cause noise and deteriorate the signal quality. The last layer is a protective substrate.

Now for those that think this is only vaporware, make no mistake about it – this is a very real technology with working models being demonstrated over the last few months. The first demonstration of both a recording and playback of a HVD disc was back in August of last year.

To further emphasize how real this technology is, back in January the Ecma created a technical committee (TC44) to develop a standardization strategy for Holographic Information Storage (HIS) systems and HVD.

Just this week six major companies announced that they had formally created the HVD Alliance in order to advance the development of HVD and promote it throughout the marketplace.

The companies that currently make up the HVD Alliance are:
Optware

FujiFilm

CMC Magnetics

Nippon Paint

Pulstec Industrial

Toagosei
The following are six additional companies involved with the development of HVD:
Texas Instruments

Micron Technology

InPhase Technologies

Konica

Memory-Teck

Aprillis
In fact even Sony appears to be showing interest in HVD or some form of it. Back in July Sony placed an order from Optware for a holographic optical disc read/write equipment that uses Optware's patented collinear holographic system. Sony's blue laser diode with external cavity (for holographic data storage) will be used for the system's laser source. I have not yet herd anything on how that project is developing.

As for estimated costs, last year Optware suggested that they were going to initially offer HVD for enterprise and developmental applications for about $20,000 and about $100 per disc. They also said they expect to offer a consumer HVD product by 2007 for under $3,000.

thescrounger

05-02-2005, 23:42

HVD will never take off. By the time it's launched HD-DVD or Blu-Ray will have a hold of the market and it will be about as appealing to the general consumer as DVD -Audio is over Compact Discs for music.

rogeralpine

06-02-2005, 13:01

This year actually. Sumsung releasing an HDTV CRT for under a grand.

...I wasn't referring to CRT - hell, even my 22" PC Monitor with 2048 * 1536 res was only a 100 quid (albeit 2nd hand). CRT, as everyone knows, has size limitations - 40" and the thing is huge. Many ppl wanting HDTV will want a full HD flat panel or projector.

thescrounger

06-02-2005, 13:24

...I wasn't referring to CRT - hell, even my 22" PC Monitor with 2048 * 1536 res was only a 100 quid (albeit 2nd hand). CRT, as everyone knows, has size limitations - 40" and the thing is huge. Many ppl wanting HDTV will want a full HD flat panel or projector.

No, this is a new generation of CRT. Much smaller yet bigger! Do the research!

zantarous

06-02-2005, 18:44

Those new CTR look awesome and have much less bulk in the back, but I bet they still weigh a ton still my preffer it over other display types at the moment.

As for HVD this is all a pipe dream still and I read the exact same post at the HTF and agreed with the other posters that it was no threat to current HD media and would play a very small if any part in the upcoming battle.

sbooyee

06-02-2005, 22:08

Whats happening with regard to region coding for Blu-Ray / HD-DVD?

rogeralpine

07-02-2005, 11:56

No, this is a new generation of CRT. Much smaller yet bigger! Do the research!

....it's still CRT and subject to size limitations. 32" is the quoted size of Vixlim - no doubt they'll be able to manufacture larger screen sizes, but there's still going to be a size limit/price limit.

DeadKenny

07-02-2005, 12:49

Whats happening with regard to region coding for Blu-Ray / HD-DVD?
It hasn't been decided yet, but it's very unlikely they'll not do some form of region protection, and I suspect they'll enhance it so it's more complex than the current protection that's easy to defeat.

Though personally I'm hoping someone will rule protection racket systems like this illegal.

zantarous

07-02-2005, 12:54

The only thing that will worry me about the new region protection is if they decide to be uber militant and decide that it must be some form of online system like the T2 WM that needed authentication, sure there were ways round it (apparently) but it was very difficult.

DeadKenny

07-02-2005, 12:56

If they decide to use Windows Media, then they can use the DRM stuff that goes with it and that's still yet to be broken :oh-hum:

cm-9

07-02-2005, 18:49

Your information is a little out of date DeadKenny, from the rumour I heard. Nothing concrete seen at this point but just a tiny rumour has caused an uproar over at Microsoft's forum for content owners. Of course, it could all just be some very cunning 'viral anti-marketing' by a Microsoft competitor?

cm-9

07-02-2005, 18:57

all 17"~ TFTs are 1280x1024. LCD TVs are still only 1366x768, 1280x768 or 1280x720 though. There is one Sharp 45" 1080p display (with a £6k price tag), but I'd imagine that later this year, 1080p models will filter down the ranges and this time next year may even be standard - that's when I upgrade my PC screen from a 19" 1280x1024 DVI to a 22" widescreen 1080p model.

I know of one 26" true high-definition 1920x1080 LCD TV made by LG and costing around $2000 in the US, so probably around £1500 if you can find it here.

But I don't think it does that stupid 50Hz HDTV that Sky are trying to foist on us, at least not using the necessary HDMI or HDCP copy-protected digital input. In fact, I only know of one display (a Pioneer plasma screen costing around £3k) which currently accepts 50Hz copy-protected HDTV. I'm sure solutions to this compatibility problem will appear nearer the Sky launch date ... I'm working on one myself!

thescrounger

07-02-2005, 19:32

....it's still CRT and subject to size limitations. 32" is the quoted size of Vixlim - no doubt they'll be able to manufacture larger screen sizes, but there's still going to be a size limit/price limit.

Still be much cheaper for people to upgrade to a Hi-Def set over LCDs and Plasmas. That's the whole point, the price.

Spectre07

07-02-2005, 21:12

Not wanting to start another thread so thought this might be an appropriate place to ask the ollowing:

I was watching 'Click Online' the other day and they were doing a peice on DVDs, CD Roms and other storage and the commentator said that DVD's degrade over the years and the information held on them won't last forever. I seem to remember the same thing was said about CD's when they first came out but I've got some CD's which are nearly 20 years old and still play fine. However are DVD's different? Are they more fragile than CD's and will people's DVD collections become nothing more than a collection of colourfully packaged coasters?

zantarous

07-02-2005, 22:28

The truth is no one really knows I cannot see why pre-recorded DVD's shouldn't last a very long time if looked after, although there has been cases of DVD rot but I think this more down to a manufacturing defect of certain discs/manufacturers.

kiran_mk2

08-02-2005, 00:50

It's a danger that's amplified every time discs' capacities increase - maybe not for films - but certainly for data backup. an HD-DVD or BR disc will hold of a lot of data and one ill placed scratch could render it all useless.

As for degredation, I don't see why the discs shouldn't last in excess of 15-20 years at the very least.

DeadKenny

08-02-2005, 01:05

Yeah, it's data backup that's more of a concern. Though CDs are quoted with a long life span, that's okay for audio, but tests have proven many recordable CDs become unreadable after as few as 2 years, and even data backed up onto proper CDs (i.e. pressed) is subject to degredation in a short time. The same degredation happens with audio, just it's negligable to the playback given the error handling.

DVDs being more densly packed data, and with multiple-layers involved, are more risky. Plus when it comes to DVD video, the media files are read as a computer would read them, i.e. requires integrity, unlike with audio CDs which are read in a kind of analog manner (i.e. stream the bits and if some are missing, it's not too much of a problem).

Tape is still safer for data backups compared to CD/DVD.

mr.nick

08-02-2005, 09:16

Spectre07

08-02-2005, 21:03

It's a danger that's amplified every time discs' capacities increase - maybe not for films - but certainly for data backup. an HD-DVD or BR disc will hold of a lot of data and one ill placed scratch could render it all useless.
That's exactly the line the programme took. Information is stored on a disc in a continuous loop on a series of 'bumps and troughs'. DVD's store more information than CD's because the 'bumps and troughs' are more densly packed and the line they run along is thinner. This makes the DVD disc more sensitive to being damaged than a CD.

As for degredation, I don't see why the discs shouldn't last in excess of 15-20 years at the very least.Unless, apparently, you leave it on your car's dashboard in which case it'll degrade in a matter of days.

kiran_mk2

09-02-2005, 01:17

That's exactly the line the programme took. Information is stored on a disc in a continuous loop on a series of 'bumps and troughs'. DVD's store more information than CD's because the 'bumps and troughs' are more densly packed and the line they run along is thinner. This makes the DVD disc more sensitive to being damaged than a CD.

Unless, apparently, you leave it on your car's dashboard in which case it'll degrade in a matter of days.

Well it should be well known that the phthalocyanines in the disc dye are photosensitive and will degrade much faster in the light (especially on written discs). Apparently it's worse to leave them with the written-side down.

rbullivant

09-02-2005, 11:06

I hope that both formats do ok! Hopefully it'll bring down the prices of regular DVD! Look in a VHS sale in HMV, 3 top titles for £10! Hopefully that'll happen with DVD.

To be honest I'm not sure where the format war will go, blu-ray has the backing of PS3 so you've got 50 million units there already. But HD-DVD has DVD in the title, which people can associate easier with a higher quality DVD

Rik

Spectre07

09-02-2005, 16:52

Plus the blu-ray discs come in unsightly cartridges. Already a mark down in my book.

rua

09-02-2005, 20:32

the ps3/xbox2 thing could pretty much sway this contest. Which ever of those wins the console war will give there format a huge boost over there competitor.

It'll be interesting to see where this goes.

thescrounger

09-02-2005, 20:54

Spectre07

09-02-2005, 21:42

the ps3/xbox2 thing could pretty much sway this contest. Which ever of those wins the console war will give there format a huge boost over there competitor.The Console 'War' is very much like the Cold War...over.

rogeralpine

10-02-2005, 11:34

Still be much cheaper for people to upgrade to a Hi-Def set over LCDs and Plasmas. That's the whole point, the price.

Very true. Believe you can get "standard" CRT HDTV sets already though. Would prefer a "slimline" one of course.

Sick Boy

10-02-2005, 17:29

Just read in total film that the porn industry are supporting Blue-ray and the shear number of titles they release each year could swing it.

Might be total ****** though.

thescrounger

10-02-2005, 20:28

Just read in total film that the porn industry are supporting Blue-ray and the shear number of titles they release each year could swing it.

Might be total ****** though.

What, all the studios?

I'd imagine the porn industry would be the first to switch to HD-DVD if their bluray titles don't sell though.

John Hodson

21-11-2005, 21:10

Well, 2005 has come and nearly gone with no HD-DVDs, but rejoice (?), Blu-ray is off the blocks. From The Bits:

... first I wanted to jump in here early with a bit of HD format news. Sony Pictures said late on Friday that it has finally authored the first actual Blu-ray Disc title. And what might it be? Lawrence of Arabia? Spider-Man? No... it's Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle. Uhhh. Lackluster title though it may be, this is still a very important milestone, because it gives all those hardware manufacturers the chance to finally start testing their Blu-ray Disc players to see if its compatible with final product software. According to the story at Video Business, the 25GB disc also features full-resolution graphics and animation and dynamic menus." The disc does not, however, include the BD-Java interactive layer, which is still not ready for prime time.

platty

10-12-2005, 21:56

Seeing as my very loosely connected thread was closed????.....how did you know i have gone for a Toshiba 37" , John....???? are you a stalker ??? :eek:

John Hodson

11-12-2005, 00:53

No :D But that particular store has been pushing the Tosh; called 'em last week and they invited me in for a demo...Must. Resist. Temptation.

stefmcd

12-12-2005, 23:50

So when is the first disc actually coming out?
First true hi-def players?
I want to see something hi-def on y expensive new telly!
:(

thescrounger

13-12-2005, 00:11

Bluray is the one to watch now really.

DK_UK

13-12-2005, 02:03

stefmcd

13-12-2005, 14:27

Download some of the HD trailers if you want to sample HD.

Go for the X-Men 3 trailer, thats available in 1080p and 720p, personally, I can't tell any difference between 1080 and 720 on a 17inch screen.

My screen is 37 inches so I suppose it will be more obvious. THough I doubt my pc could play anything above 720.
:)

JOEY PINEAPPLES

13-12-2005, 15:01

This deal with blue ray cartridge. Not sure if its been shelved now.
Seems a good idea to me on a archive (re-edit) premise. Ive got almost decade old recordable sony minidiscs, which are still kicking out on time after alot of burnt CDs have bitten the dust. It obviously conceals the disc them from alot of foreign exposure. Aslong as you keep the little buggers out of direct sunlight they work fine.
But its still a bitter pill.. completely new format. Alot of DVD/Blueray combi sets in the next couple of years.

And Sony want this bad. Its revenge for Betamax..

thescrounger

13-12-2005, 15:05

This deal with blue ray cartridge. Not sure if its been shelved now.

It has indeed been shelved.

GarethH

13-12-2005, 15:15

It has indeed been shelved.

Yeah, they've created a scatchproof coating for both original and recordable discs. They always said the cartridge idea was for prototype models only.

JOEY PINEAPPLES

13-12-2005, 16:02

Yeah, they've created a scatchproof coating for both original and recordable discs.

Yeah, ill believe that magic when I see it.

Sounds like Mr Lundegaard's Tru-coat (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116282/) TM to me.

GarethH

13-12-2005, 17:40

Yeah, ill believe that magic when I see it.

Sounds like Mr Lundegaard's Tru-coat (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116282/) TM to me.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2005/12/13/bdrom_samples/

Btw, have you not seen TDK's Scatch Proof DVD-R's? I bought one and they are pretty good.

Niceguygeoff

13-12-2005, 20:47

Yeah, they've created a scatchproof coating for both original and recordable discs. They always said the cartridge idea was for prototype models only.

Blu-ray (cartridge-only version) has been out in Japan for a couple of years as a recording medium - hardly a prototype, more an earlier generation. But those who've bought Blu-ray already will be **** out of luck as the pre-recorded content will have myriad copy protection measures and potentially different compression codecs, so they probably won't play on existing machines.

It's interesting that initial Blu-ray releases will apparently use the older MPEG2 codec though, with Sony going for something they know and trust to ease us into the world of HD on disc. Fear not; MPEG2 looks sensational when given enough room to play with (DVHS looks superb) and I have no doubt that Blu-ray will do the business. It's a shame that Warner are insisting on that half-arsed 9GB red laser disc for their Blu-ray releases, but this was never gonna be a smooth ride.

camaj

26-12-2005, 03:11

There's no such thing as 9gb red laser Blu-ray discs. It's either 25GB or 50GB blue laser

Alot of DVD/Blueray combi sets in the next couple of years.

Blu-ray is backwards compatible so everything is a combi player

Prav

26-12-2005, 12:14

This is the HD roadmap in my household....

Spring / Summer: Buy Sony HDTV and Sky+ in HD in time for World Cup.
Autumn / Winter: Buy PS3 with blu ray and wait for some decent titles to be released e.g. King Kong / Star Wars / LOTR trilogy.

Simple!

GarethH

26-12-2005, 12:32

2006: Buy a PS3 and plug into my monitor
2007: Wait for true HDTV Plasmas to come out and buy one with a Blu-Ray Player.

chris21

26-12-2005, 12:34

tomos

26-12-2005, 13:35

i wont buy old stuff again since dvd is fine. but there is a BIG diff between some dvds and high def material. i have some films on high def and they look *much* better than dvds to me. even older stuff like jason and the argonauts/clash of the titans looks sweet - let alone new stuff like LOTR trilogy.

best quality high def mov i've seen is gladiator. the details and colour diff between that and the dvd was Huuuuuuuge. :)

GarethH

26-12-2005, 13:51

Personally I think anyone who doesn't consider DVD picture quality good enough is insane, and I fear for the sanity of people who are going to upgrade all their dvd's just to keep up with the jones'.

Seriously! I think they have serious issues that need to be discussed with professionals outside of these forums. Fair enough the gap between VHS and DVD was HUGE and 20 years coming. But to upgrade after 5-6 years? Mad as cheese.

Will you all be joining the HD-DVD forums and waiting for Star Wars?

DVD is good, but not good enough. 720P is not proper High Def in my view, but once 1080P is out, you'll think different. I'll obviously never rebuy all my collection, but def 5-10 titles I really want the HD versions of.

AndyWilson

26-12-2005, 14:27

One thing that has changed since this thread started is the introduction of UMD. Even assuming only one HD-DVD format, will the market really support all three formats - DVD, HD-DVD and UMD?

Darkman

26-12-2005, 14:38

The big selling point for me, and doesn't seem to have been mentioned, is that HD will be a global format. No more PAL vs NTSC nonsense.

tomos

26-12-2005, 14:44

but there will still be a diff - 50 v 60fps :( so there will still be a PAL speed up etc

jeffstarr

26-12-2005, 14:46

The big selling point for me, and doesn't seem to have been mentioned, is that HD will be a global format. No more PAL vs NTSC nonsense.

Hmm, that would be nice if everything was being done 24P, but I'm pretty sure we'll still have a PAL and NTSC in the form of 59.94I and 50I and 29.97P and 25P and then hopefully one day 50P etc.

Also, there will still be region encoding, and I'm guessing with DCMA-badness it will be illegal to try and circumvent it...

DK_UK

26-12-2005, 16:28

The fools, surely it would have made sense to adopt one video coding method so then they wouldn't have to make seperate PAL and NTSC (50 & 60hz) transfers?

PockyMonster

26-12-2005, 17:53

Weird that nobody else has mentioned owning a HDTV CRT in here. have had mine pretty much exactly a year now, cost barely more than a standard 28" WS and accepts a 1080i signal via component (scales to 900i, but thats expected). 480/576p also compatable, but no 720p alas. Its a nice set, gonna have to borrow an x360 to see if i wanna buy one in the new year, but i used to run HDTV movies from my pc into it. sure its not gonna have the same effect as a much larger set but its a very crisp picture, can't deny that.

Roy

26-12-2005, 19:59

I don't see any great pressure to upgrade.

There was a massive difference between VHS and DVD, the step up in changing the format was noticeable even to the most cynical.

Note that the same was true of vinyl to CD (ignoring the audiophiles, CD's didn't pop and crack like vinyl).

Most people have neither the kit nor the incentive to move to HD-DVD, there just isn't enough of a step-change between the formats.

am1001aa

26-12-2005, 20:24

I've seen plenty of high def stuff - and the overall opinion is that a lot depends on the source. If the source is good, high def look great. If the source is soft, then high def becomes a marginal improvement.

One thing I would recommend if you're not looking to go for HD-DVD/Bluray is to try post-processing of dvd. I've spent most of the afternoon setting it up and the improvement in dvd picture quality is good.

Link here has a nice tutorial

http://htpcnews.com/main.php?id=ffdshowdvd_1

Goblin

26-12-2005, 20:30

Personally I think anyone who doesn't consider DVD picture quality good enough is insane, and I fear for the sanity of people who are going to upgrade all their dvd's just to keep up with the jones'.

Seriously! I think they have serious issues that need to be discussed with professionals outside of these forums. Fair enough the gap between VHS and DVD was HUGE and 20 years coming. But to upgrade after 5-6 years? Mad as cheese.

Will you all be joining the HD-DVD forums and waiting for Star Wars?

I thought the same until I saw the King Kong HD Trailer on my new Dell LCD, it looked stunning! :eek: I can't wait for this new format to arrive.

thescrounger

26-12-2005, 20:42

thescrounger

26-12-2005, 20:45

I've seen plenty of high def stuff - and the overall opinion is that a lot depends on the source. If the source is good, high def look great. If the source is soft, then high def becomes a marginal improvement.

Probably why most of the Hi-Def demos I've seen have overcranked the edge enhancement and upped the saturation in a desperate bid to make joe public see a stark difference.

PockyMonster

26-12-2005, 21:06

Where did you get it from? What model is it?

its the JVC HV28p37, i thought it had been discontinued but empire seem to be stocking them again:

Empire Direct (http://www.thedvdforums.com/jump2.php?url=http://tracker.tradedoubler.com/click?p=137&a=60823&g=19373&url=http://www.empiredirect.co.uk/content/products/details/index~modelcode~JVC-HV28P37S.htm)

review of the 32" model: http://www.homecinemachoice.com/cgi-bin/displayreview.php?reviewid=3727

i always thought the D40 superceded, but not sure.

Spectre07

26-12-2005, 22:09

I can't see people in any great numbers ditching their DVD players and collections and upgrading to either of the new formats. It's not worth it unless you have a large display. The industry, in the early days, justified the new format saying people were going to start buying bigger display screens for their homes and needed the higher definition. So until 40+ inche plasma and LCD screens become essential household purchases, the new formats are not going to take off. That's why I think Blu-Ray will win out as Sony are getting it into peoples homes thru the 'back door', via PS3. People will think they're just buying a games console but imagine their surprise when they discover it's also a next gen DVD player as well. Sony will still have an uphill struggle convincing people to ditch their DVD collections and spend more money buying the same titles again.

chris21

27-12-2005, 00:57

Lets pretend I care. What would I need to go HD-DVD? HD-TV, New dvd player?

Darkman

27-12-2005, 01:57

The fools, surely it would have made sense to adopt one video coding method so then they wouldn't have to make seperate PAL and NTSC (50 & 60hz) transfers?
I was under the impression that with HD there is no PAL or NTSC - HD is a format all of its own.

haineshisway

27-12-2005, 08:41

So, they make this big huge announcement about all this stuff coming by end of 2005. Nothing comes. And they don't see fit to make another announcement saying WHY? No machines, no software, no nothing. Amazing.

jeffstarr

27-12-2005, 10:39

I was under the impression that with HD there is no PAL or NTSC - HD is a format all of its own.

If you look at the specs of this high-end HDCAM Deck:
http://bssc.sel.sony.com/BroadcastandBusiness/ProductPrint?id=79175
You can see that it offers various options for what are PAL and NTSC compatible framerates - 25P, 50I, 29.97P, 59.94I etc. HD is a resolution, in the same way as SD is, although with HD at least everyone gets the same resolution. Now, hopefully that means that films with be released 24P, so that everyone see's the same thing, but when it comes to local sourced footage, I think it may be still at a legacy framerate, which today makes it easier to convert an HD source to an SD source, if all you have to do is downscale, rather than downscale and framerate change.

So, they make this big huge announcement about all this stuff coming by end of 2005. Nothing comes. And they don't see fit to make another announcement saying WHY? No machines, no software, no nothing. Amazing.

It was a bluff, along with a bit of willy waving. They drew a line in the sand, and everyone chose a side to stand on, but when it came down to it, no-one was ready, so they quietly backed off.

As of September of this year, this was how things stood...

Authoring - HD DVD was further along that Blu-Ray, by virtue of the fact that it's basically DVD v2.0 (Or finally done correctly depending on your point of view)

Encoding - Still software based, hardware due Spring 2006.

Decoding - H264 software playback was 15fps, no news on Hardware Decoders, and it was hoped that Graphic Card manufacturers would be picking up the slack. Any everyone wonders with Sony are using MPEG-2 for their first disc...

Media - Production Samples only (although up to quad-layer 100GB Blu-Ray).

Recorders - Production Samples only - due end of 2005 allegedly...

Players - PC Mockups, with the exception of Sony's Japanese Blu-Ray box, which only shows what HD footage will look like!

Now, who knows what the state of affairs was / is behind closed doors, but that was what was being shown in public.

They were not ready, I don't think they're still ready - last I heard that hadn't fully approved the specs for either format yet, although both were said to be done by the end of 2005.

thescrounger

27-12-2005, 14:33

Well the PS3 will have a bluray drive...

Napoleon

27-12-2005, 15:23

Call me old fashioned,but i'm more interested in some fine films getting a decent release on the oh so humble dvd.'The Pope must Die','11 Harrowhouse',etc.HD-Dvd does not apply to those,like myself with a 36" crt or smaller.

Spectre07

27-12-2005, 15:53

I've had my 36"crt since June 1998. I'm hoping it will last another 5 yrs when I'm planning on replacing it with a 50" LCD which will be affordable by then. I'd say the next gen formats will also be more affordable. That's my plan.

PockyMonster

27-12-2005, 16:10

Well the PS3 will have a bluray drive...

ps3 is still vapourware with no set launch date tho... just "Spring". and after the PSP launch over here, i wouldn't trust sony to stick to that window. if blu-ray isn't ready, the ps3 aint gonna launch.

kiran_mk2

27-12-2005, 17:45

I agree that the PS3 launch will likely slip - last I heard they couldn't get anything approaching a decent yield for their Cell CPU - it cost Sony something like $150 to produce each Cell chip. Combine that with a likely cost of over $100 for a BluRay drve and befire you even get to the GPU, the system is already costing Sony $250 to make...

zantarous

28-12-2005, 02:56

HD-Dvd does not apply to those,like myself with a 36" crt or smaller.

I wish people would stop making statements like that before actually seeing HD in action, just today I was in Virgin and they had Xbox 360’s running on 17” LCDs in HD and it looked amazing compared to my cuz 40” in SD mode.

Most people have neither the kit nor the incentive to move to HD-DVD, there just isn't enough of a step-change between the formats.

Well look at this way DVD had double the lines of resolution of VHS HD had double that the difference if huge get yourself down to your local indy dealer and get a demonstration. Once you have seen stuff in HD SD looks a bit wobbly and crap.

can't see people in any great numbers ditching their DVD players and collections and upgrading to either of the new formats.

No one has to ditch their collection both Blu Ray and HD DVD have DVD play back built into their spec.

Napoleon

28-12-2005, 03:14

[QUOTE=zantarous]I wish people would stop making statements like that before actually seeing HD in action, just today I was in Virgin and they had Xbox 360’s running on 17” LCDs in HD and it looked amazing compared to my cuz 40” in SD mode.[QUOTE]

Of course a 17" display will look much better than a 40" display,let alone one displaying a HD source.My point which you seem to miss is that a 36" crt and below does not require a HD source to look awesome,a well mastered standard dvd absolutely does the job.Video recordings look quite acceptable on my 36" crt,i still use them for everyday recordings.They would be unacceptably poor on a 40" plus display.It's not exactly rocket science we are discussing.

It was my understanding that a HD player will be backwards compatible but Blu-Ray will not;time will tell on that one.

Scoob

28-12-2005, 10:12

well it looks like regions are still going to be present in the next generation of discs but a few changes have been made from DVD.

http://gamersreports.com/news/705/

Looks like Europe gets the bum deal as usual :(

Spectre07

28-12-2005, 10:16

No one has to ditch their collection both Blu Ray and HD DVD have DVD play back built into their spec.Fine if you just want to watch new films but most of the stuff coming out of hollywood today is crap. What if I want a HD copy of say Jaws, Back to the Future or Raiders of the Lost Ark? Or any number of back catalogue titles. There's no point in buying a HD player if you're going to watch DVD's on it, is there?

zantarous

28-12-2005, 12:11

Of course a 17" display will look much better than a 40" display,let alone one displaying a HD source.My point which you seem to miss is that a 36" crt and below does not require a HD source to look awesome,a well mastered standard dvd absolutely does the job.Video recordings look quite acceptable on my 36" crt,i still use them for everyday recordings.They would be unacceptably poor on a 40" plus display.It's not exactly rocket science we are discussing.

No you have completely missed my point; a lot of posters are grumbling that HD will not benefit smaller screens where I was pointing out that it would. I have a 36” Tosh and while DVD’s do look really good it is nothing compared to a large careen running HD the difference is far bigger then between VHS and DVD.

Fine if you just want to watch new films but most of the stuff coming out of hollywood today is crap. What if I want a HD copy of say Jaws, Back to the Future or Raiders of the Lost Ark? Or any number of back catalogue titles. There's no point in buying a HD player if you're going to watch DVD's on it, is there?

The above titles are once that you would get a lot of benefit from upgrading to HD, if you don’t want to upgrade then don’t know one is forcing you I have a large collection but apart from the titles you mentioned above and LOTR, SW and some Korean titles I don’t really want to upgrade the rest to HD. In your opinion Hollywood today may be crap but there are still plenty of good movies coming out and Hollywood is not the only movie producer in the world Asian films from India, Hong Kong, Korea and Japan also produce amazing films with transfers that are far better then what Hollywood is currently giving us.

Spectre07

28-12-2005, 15:32

No you have completely missed my point; a lot of posters are grumbling that HD will not benefit smaller screens where I was pointing out that it would.I think you've missed the point. I don't think any body said HD looks crap on small screens, just that you get a much better benefit from HD if you buy a bigger screen. I'm sure a DVD of FOTR looks amazing on a B&W screen you get the full benefit if you have a colour screen. So there's little point in upgrading to HD unless you have a larger screen, say 40+ inches.

if you don’t want to upgrade then don’t...That's not what I was saying. I don't think most people will ditch their recently bought DVD's to upgrade to the HD version. For most people it will not see the benefit of it and think it pointless to upgrade. It's the Compact Cassette vs DAT all over again.

tomos

28-12-2005, 15:42

why would people ditch their dvds? doesnt make sense. i'll keep my dvd's but the odd movie i really love, i'll get the hi-def version - if they dont screw it up like early days of dvd like goodfellas (flipper and poor pic).

thescrounger

28-12-2005, 15:46

Until the hardware comes down in price, you won't be able to play your HD film anywhere else but your main player and screen. Makes it seem even less tempting considering the cheapness and universal compatibility of normal DVDs.

tomos

28-12-2005, 15:49

i have a HCPC that i play HD material from through either my projector, or my dell 2405 monitor

Spectre07

28-12-2005, 15:50

[Quote] why would people ditch their dvds? doesnt make sense. i'll keep my dvd's but the odd movie i really love, i'll get the hi-def version [Quote]

Some people have got more than the 'odd' film they really love.

thescrounger

28-12-2005, 15:50

i have a HCPC that i play HD material from through either my projector, or my dell 2405 monitor

Does it work with bluray discs? That's the thing, these new formats wont work unless you have the player hardware. Unlike DVDs.

tomos

28-12-2005, 16:14

it will do when i get a blu-ray drive :D

zantarous

28-12-2005, 17:57

I think you've missed the point. I don't think any body said HD looks crap on small screens, just that you get a much better benefit from HD if you buy a bigger screen.

Have you actually seen HD running on a screen about 17" or 21"? The difference is as big as watching something in colour I can not stress to you that screen size does not really make that much of a difference. Just look at the difference on your PC if you run a game in low res and then up it, remember HD can go up to 1920x1280 that is a heck of a lot of detail. Plus if you go look in any local high street retailer HD screen are getting a big push right now and CRT's shelf space has dropped significantly.

camaj

29-12-2005, 19:03

I think you've missed the point.

I don't blame him if he is, you don't even seem to know what point you're making! At the very least you're confusing things

you get a much better benefit from HD if you buy a bigger screen. [..] So there's little point in upgrading to HD unless you have a larger screen, say 40+ inches.

You're saying two things here, one moment it's a bigger benefit (true) and the next there's no point bothering with smaller displays (false).

One of the seemingly persistant myths is that there's no point watching HD on a smaller display. That gets mixed up with the fact that the difference might be more apparent on a larger display. That's nothing to do with HD though only that SD (and any technology) looks worse as it's enlarged.

But just because HD looks much better on a 80" display because SD looks crap it doesn't follow that there's no or little benefit below that. The argument should be that there's no point in watching SD above xx"

Take VHS and DVD for example, would you say there's no point watching DVD on a 14" tv because I'm sure most of us have seen a VHS on one and while it looks better than on a 32" TV a DVD will still look miles better. It's common sense at the end of the day

these new formats wont work unless you have the player hardware. Unlike DVDs.

I don't know what you mean?? How will DVD work without a DVD player? HD is no different except you need a HD display.

Nothing comes. And they don't see fit to make another announcement saying WHY?

Say's who? They have made continual announcements. HD-DVD have made several announcements about dates slipping and they inevitably will make more as the date slips once again.

Blu-ray have said "early 2006" for a year if not more and they've narrowed it down to "spring 2006"

Both have been held up by the various negotiations and changes to the specs of their respective formats and the AACS specifications. As I said back in January, the HD-DVD group really jumped the gun by announcing launch titles a year in advance and it was basically a desperate PR stunt

Personally I think anyone who doesn't consider DVD picture quality good enough is insane, and I fear for the sanity of people who are going to upgrade all their dvd's just to keep up with the jones'.

I agree. But I don't think anyone is saying that! Of course DVD is good enough but it's not a patch on HD. And HD isn't perfect either but it's a lot closer than DVD is

will the market really support all three formats - DVD, HD-DVD and UMD?

I think so, yes. I would have said before that UMD would die a quick death but apparently there are people willing to pay £20 for a film they could buy for £10 and convert to Mp4 that would also work in their home DVD player.

Of course, you could argue that there will be two markets, home and portable. Some people will buy DVD's, some will buy BD's and some will buy UMD's and possible the "home" version also. Eventually people will just buy BD's and UMD's if they haven't worked out what a con they are.

BTW, there seemed to be a suggestion that old films wouldn't look as good in HD but that's not the case. While they wouldn't look as good as new films they would show an improvement over their DVD transfers. The same is true if you ran both prints in a cinema, the old film would still look worse but both would be better than a DVD transfer.

Don't take my word for it though, here's a first hand account of a Lawrance of Arabia blu-ray demonstration (http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=225543)

thescrounger

29-12-2005, 20:06

camaj

29-12-2005, 20:34

At the end of the day though, how much extra enjoyment are you really going to get from a HD-DVD over a normal one? And will the masses see this as unneeded upgrade only for people that need to get outside more?

A HD-DVD, I don't know but I'll enjoy a film on Blu-ray a lot more.

I think the masses are a lot more mature than that. No upgrade is needed but this isn't about need, it's about want. We didn't need DVD's but we wanted them. We'll want Blu-ray even if we don't need it

Roy

29-12-2005, 20:44

A HD-DVD, I don't know but I'll enjoy a film on Blu-ray a lot more.

I think the masses are a lot more mature than that. No upgrade is needed but this isn't about need, it's about want. We didn't need DVD's but we wanted them. We'll want Blu-ray even if we don't need it

Interesting analogy between "want" and "maturity" :D

I don't think you're right there to be honest, we didn't "need" DVD in the sense that we'd be dead without it of course, but we definitely needed it by comparison to tape.

Similarly we don't need HD against DVD because to my mind, HD fits a niche and doesn't provide enough substantive difference in the domestic setup.

thescrounger

29-12-2005, 20:53

A HD-DVD, I don't know but I'll enjoy a film on Blu-ray a lot more.

I think the masses are a lot more mature than that. No upgrade is needed but this isn't about need, it's about want. We didn't need DVD's but we wanted them. We'll want Blu-ray even if we don't need it

That's an interesting opinion. But people *did* need DVDs, they offered multiple soundtracks and subtitle tracks, films fitted onto a CD sized disc. Special features were an attractive feature. It also offered quality that unlike a tape would not wear out after playing it over and over. But how many of the masses would say that the improved picture quality was the main reason they bought a DVD player? Probably less then you imagine. And Bluray to them will be about as attractive as SACD is to me. In other words, not very.

zantarous

29-12-2005, 21:01

There is something strangely familiar about all of this.

JOEY PINEAPPLES

29-12-2005, 22:33

Will HD DVD suffer from the notorious noticable layer change?

Spectre07

29-12-2005, 23:32

You're saying two things here, one moment it's a bigger benefit (true) and the next there's no point bothering with smaller displays (false).No I didn't say anything like that.

I think the masses are a lot more mature than that.Which is why they won't be going for the next gen formats, by choice any how; 'the masses' won't see them as a big enough benefit and they'll become a niche format if their lucky. HD-DVD I think will not take off and die a premature death. Blu-Ray's future lies with Sony and it's ability to convince people to use their PS3's for watching films as well as playing games.

haineshisway

30-12-2005, 07:00

It's too soon. Just as it was too soon with DAT and mini-disc, after CDs had killed LPs so swiftly. The masses have taken to their DVDs, they've built libraries as they had with VHS. They will not care about a new format this soon - maybe in ten years, but not now. Cannot happen. So, all these formats, for the time being, will be niche, like laserdiscs or DAT or mini-disc. They may all, in fact, tank big time, because there are not enough people who will care. Not the kinds of numbers they'll need to make them successful. Yes, they'll get the geeks who have to have the latest and greatest, and that's it.

camaj

30-12-2005, 13:38

I don't think you're right there to be honest,we definitely needed it by comparison to tape.

How so? Clearly there was a step up between the two although I remember people saying that it wouldn't take off and that there was nothing wrong with VHS

Yes, comparitivly the step to HD is smaller because the "only" thing that's different is HD has amazing picture quality and sound quality. That said the various bodies seem to reckon that interactivity will play a massive part in the appeal.

I remember enjoying the editing game in Men In Black (I've edited films in the past) but it was very simplistic because DVD players are only able to perform clunky instruction. In blu-ray it's possible they'd be able to make a semi-function editing game and the sort of simple games you'd find on Sky interactive

Just as it was too soon with DAT and mini-disc

But they still haven't take of and never will because most people really can't tell the difference when it comes to sound quality or don't notice it.

The masses have taken to their DVDs, they've built libraries as they had with VHS.

And like VHS people will switch, having a collection won't be much of a barrier and unlike VHS, DVD's will play without the need for a dual format player.

They will not care about a new format this soon - maybe in ten years, but not now

Who's they?! There's a large variety of consumers when it comes to buying technology. There are people who have owned DVD players for 8 or 9 years and there are people who have just bought there first one. I'm sure that the early adopters of DVD will be the early adopters of Blu-ray and it'll be the late adopters of DVD that will wait 10 years.

In some ways it'll be in smaller numbers. On the other hand the PS3 gives us something the PS2 didn't, DVD playback at the formats launch. DVD launched in 1997 (98 here) and the PS3 wasn't available until 4 years later (3 here). People who were medium adopters of DVD will become early adopters by virtue of this. Perhaps this will negate the effects having to have a new TV will have on growth

BTW, be hasty in making exaggerated claims, you wouldn't want to have to eat your words so soon.

Roy

30-12-2005, 14:23

How so? Clearly there was a step up between the two although I remember people saying that it wouldn't take off and that there was nothing wrong with VHS

I know you're being rhetorical but... tape was vastly inferior to DVD in every measurable way. That simply isn't true of DVD and HD.

I didn't hear anyone say DVD wouldn't catch on, purely because the difference was so stark.

thescrounger

30-12-2005, 14:43

It will be interesting to see if it catches on or not. I think it will be a laserdisc situation for at least two years. Of course, if the formats don't sell. Studios will withdraw their investment. DVD is a safer moneymaker.

They may have to use the selling angle that your normal DVDs will look better if you buy a bluray/HD-DVD player. Then once you have it, inevitably start buying the HD discs.

Spectre07

30-12-2005, 15:08

But they still haven't take of and never will because most people really can't tell the difference when it comes to...quality or don't notice it..This the argument for why the new formats won't take off. Don't be surprised if that's what they'll be saying about HD DVD in the near future.

Roberto

30-12-2005, 15:58

There are people who have owned DVD players for 8 or 9 years and there are people who have just bought there first one. I'm sure that the early adopters of DVD will be the early adopters of Blu-ray and it'll be the late adopters of DVD that will wait 10 years.

And I can tell you right now that i will not be one of them. I was a very early adopter of DVD back in 97 because VHS was just so bad and it was amazing to have broadcast quality movies with DVD.

I have seen HD in action and yes, i admit that the quality is again amazing. But the jump from DVD to HD is not going to be as big as DVD as VHS. Think of it this way. All HD-DVD and Blue-Ray has to offer over DVD is better resolution and/or space. What DVD brought to the table over VHS was the following:

Never having to rewind a DVD
Menu systems so that you can jump to any bit of the movie
DTS/DD5.1 sound
multiple soundtracks and subtitle tracks
Director's Commentries and other extras
Better and slimmer packaging

And it's this that attracted alot of people to DVD, not picture quality believe it or not. DVD was more of a revolution, HD-DVD is just an evolution.

Personally i'm going to wait for a LEAST 2 years, by then the High Def TV's, players and media will have come down in price (Not to mention the format war would have been settled by then). Don't worry i fully intent in go HD eventually, just that i will not be an early adopter this time round. And i suspect most people will be the same. Hope that clears that up for some people here :)

Roy

30-12-2005, 16:45

BTW, be hasty in making exaggerated claims, you wouldn't want to have to eat your words so soon.

Wise words and very true, but if I was as wrong as you I'd kill myself :D :thumbs:

AndyWilson

30-12-2005, 17:47

If it was just DVD I'd suggest that HD would be as successful as MD if it was lucky, or as popular as DCC/DVD-A/SACD if not. The availability of HD through other media such as Sky and XBOX will have an affect though - if people have already got an HD compatible TV then they might consider HD DVD as well...

...or on the other hand Sony may well have shot themselves in the foot by confusing the market with UMD - which seems to be filling shop shelves a lot quicker than DVD did in its early days.

camaj

30-12-2005, 18:42

...or on the other hand Sony may well have shot themselves in the foot by confusing the market with UMD

How would that confuse people? I'm sure people don't walk out with a UMD when they go to buy a DVD (especially considering the price difference!)

if people have already got an HD compatible TV then they might consider HD DVD as well...

Well yes, HD is a triple pronged attack through TV, Pre-recorded media and gaming, you'd probably buy a HDTV in order to view one or more of those mediums

Blu-ray will be far more sucessful than Laserdisc (I only ever saw a Laserdisc for sale once) and Minidisc. In fact if you consider how popular Laserdisc was despite it's massive cost and large discs then Blu-ray is bound to be more successful because it's similarly different from the previous generation and far less expensive

I didn't hear anyone say DVD wouldn't catch on, purely because the difference was so stark.

I did, several times. I couldn't belive it either. But now I'm in the same situation although I believe the case is strong it's not as strong as DVD was.

Spectre07

30-12-2005, 19:34

Blu-ray will be far more sucessful than Laserdisc.Laserdisc was competing against tape a far more inferior medium and never took off. DVD just isn't as a starkly inferior medium to Blu-ray or HD DVD for the mass consumer to chuck out their DVD players and upgrade.

Blu-ray is bound to be more successful because it's similarly different from the previous generation and far less expensive.Blu-ray discs will be more expensive than DVD, another disincentive to jump to the new medium.

camaj

30-12-2005, 20:22

Blu-ray discs will be more expensive than DVD, another disincentive to jump to the new medium.

My point is that they'll be less expensive than laserdisc and will sell more as a result

DVD just isn't as a starkly inferior medium to Blu-ray

It's comparable to Laserdisc v VHS in terms of benefits but at a far more accessable price. I was really intreagued by Laserdisc until I saw the prices, thankfully DVD came along (hadn't heard anything about it before then) and solved the problem.

AndyWilson

30-12-2005, 20:28

How would that confuse people? I'm sure people don't walk out with a UMD when they go to buy a DVD (especially considering the price difference!)

It's the market rather than the "people" that will be confused. Studios will have to decide whether to release movies on DVD plus UMD or HD-DVD or all three. And that's assuming the HD format war is really dead. History shows multiple formats aren't good for sales. Just look at the audio market - has it ever managed to support 3 formats at once? Once CD was successful it was inevitable either MC or Vinyl would die as a mainstream format. As it happens they both did.

camaj

30-12-2005, 20:51

Once CD was successful it was inevitable either MC or Vinyl would die as a mainstream format. As it happens they both did.

The difference there is that they were all competing for the same market more or less. Tape started to take over quite a while before CD caught on, I bought tapes in the late 80's to mid-90's and then CD's from then on. Vinyl was pretty much already gone

I guess if you're looking for comparisons, DVD is like Vinyl, Blu-ray like CD and UMD like tape, although it isn't a neat fit. UMD will be a niche format and it isn't supported by everyone. DVD will start to fall to a point where it either disappears completly or it exists alongside for budget releases

Spectre07

30-12-2005, 23:37

The difference there is that they were all competing for the same market more or less. Tape started to take over quite a while before CD caught on, I bought tapes in the late 80's to mid-90's and then CD's from then on. Vinyl was pretty much already goneTape took off because of the Sony Walkman and it's imitators, the 'killer app' was music on the move. CD never blew tape out of the water; not even portable CD players were capable of hastening the demise of tape. What killed tape was that the music industry made a conscious effort not to support it but decided to only release albums on CD. Despite CD being a superior medium to tape the masses didn't jump on the band wagon and only did so because tape was no longer an alternative. People won't necessarily go for a new format just because of superior performance, there has to be a killer reason to move to a new format. I just don't think the new HD formats will provide a convincing enough argument over DVD for them to become a mass market item.

I guess if you're looking for comparisons, DVD is like Vinyl, Blu-ray like CD Some people argue Vinyl is just as good if not better than CD. ;)

JOEY PINEAPPLES

31-12-2005, 02:07

I do argue. Modern 180 gram vinyl sounds amazing. But CDs are more convient for people. Its all matter taste.

1.4 million records sold in the UK in the last 12 months.
CDs never killed Vinyl if anything it had a comeback over the last 10 years. If a little lop sided through the larger companies (EMI, Sony) pimping extremely expensive reissues. Its out lived Audio tape, Minidisc, and its always to be found at the back of a HMV.
Now the Mp3 is killing vinyl because its a fraction of the market, and ive noticed prices going up, Stores stagnating and some closing. Second-hand market is drying up from ebay overkill.

Anyway.. way off topic. If this next generation of Video disc can get by DVDs Layer change problem (Lets face it a dimple on the backside of Digital Verstile Disc) then I might take notice... and small thing to ask.

Roberto

31-12-2005, 07:21

I doAnyway.. way off topic. If this next generation of Video disc can get by DVDs Layer change problem (Lets face it a dimple on the backside of Digital Verstile Disc) then I might take notice... and small thing to ask.

That more to do with the players rather then the media, all they had to do was add a few Mb to the video memory buffer and problem solved. I have NEVER understood why manufactures don't do this.

JOEY PINEAPPLES

31-12-2005, 10:33

Exactly. And they havn't. a cheap 5MB storage space would resolve the problem.. but this could stunt the life of a player. More to go wrong
but its easy.. Lets take a gremilin out of the hands of the Player manufacturers and the software masters. Who frankly can't be trusted.
I do remember an expensive Denon machine about 4 years ago that was suppose rectify the problem. Don't know if they still do them.

zantarous

31-12-2005, 12:27

They can make layer disc changes quite unnoticeable on DVD look at Superbit tiles very well hidden, plus the production teams that put these things together need to think about when where and when they put the change in.

What killed tape was that the music industry made a conscious effort not to support it but decided to only release albums on CD

So studios could only support HD formats because they offer are greater copy content protection.

Spectre07

31-12-2005, 14:10

So studios could only support HD formats because they offer are greater copy content protection.They'd have to get HD players installed in the majority of households first. CD's were around for almost two decades before studios started to drop support for tape. CD's only really took off during the mid 80's when people started to replace their record collections with CD's. It still took the industry several more years before they were confident to drop their support for tape. I can't see the same thing happening with HD. It's easy to replace a record deck or tape deck with a CD Player. But with HD you'll have to replace the player and the display; ordinary consumers just aren't going to do that, at least not overnight.

thescrounger

31-12-2005, 16:55

I guess if you're looking for comparisons, DVD is like Vinyl, Blu-ray like CD

Nah, DVD is like CD and bluray is like SACD.

Steve1977

31-12-2005, 17:17

DVD is like a nice bacon sandwich. Blu-Ray is gluttony.

chris21

31-12-2005, 20:13

Maybe I'm just jealous because I'm not rich enough. If you can all hear about a new format and go out and pay £2000+ to get it, after spending years buying all your current DVD's, ( and still have enough money to eat) fair play to you.

zantarous

31-12-2005, 21:32

I wouldn’t say I am rich or well of but I do like technology, also helps that I don’t drink so don’t spend a £100 on a night out on booze like my mates do, and don’t go to the pub often so tend to spend money on other things.

Plus you don’t have to replace your TV if you buy a HD Player you can still watch down converted versions. But lets look at the flip side say if HD is a bit player is this not going to be in some ways a good thing for movie aficionados after all there are loads of posts on these forums that suggest that DVD has become far to main stream and that the studios don’t care about transfers and good quality extras which was something they did care about on LD so they could attract customers and justify the high price tag.

However as Camaj pointed out HD is a three pronged attack , TV, home movies and video games. I really can not see the SACD comparison as SACD was never really pushed by the high street retailers however they all seemed to have gotten behind HD almost all the big players have dedicated sets in their stores showing just what HD can do.

It will not happen over night but HD is the way forward.

thescrounger

31-12-2005, 22:13

It will not happen over night but HD is the way forward.

It is in theory.

camaj

01-01-2006, 22:47

If you can all hear about a new format and go out and pay £2000+ to get it,

Where did you get a figure like £2000 from :lol:

I guess if you wanted an 80" LCD screen you might be paying that much but sub £500 displays have been around for a while. Blu-ray players might be £500 at first and the xbox 360 is about £200. Of course new technology is always expensive to start off with. There were people buying DVD players for nearly £1000 at launch and now you can get them for 5% of that cost.

ordinary consumers just aren't going to do that, at least not overnight.

That's kind of obvious though! I've never heard anyone claiming it would happen overnight, but it will happen, probably slower than DVD but faster than VHS/CD

CD was slow to catch on but I think mainly because CD players were so expensive to start with. I got my first CD player in 1990 but I didn't really listen to CD's (but I'm not a music person). The thing that really made CD take off was the growth of CD-rom drives, then anyone with a PC or console could play CD's. In car CD players also became cheap enough to upgrade to.

Spectre07

01-01-2006, 23:03

That's kind of obvious though! I've never heard anyone claiming it would happen overnight, but it will happen, probably slower than DVD but faster than VHS.I don't think so. VHS was in it's twilight, it's time had come and was well past when DVD arrived. The market was ready for the next generation medium and boy did it deliver. DVD today is still in it's infancy, compared to VHS in 1997, the general public just aren't ready for a new format. It's got a lifespan of a decade or more by which time a new format will doubtless be developed which will offer something appreciably more.

thescrounger

01-01-2006, 23:09

A big draw might be to bring out models that record, SD as well as HD. I certainly recall hearing many people talking about not getting into DVD until you can record onto it.

Why spend a lot of money on a bluray *player*. Many people will wait until the recorders come out.

haineshisway

02-01-2006, 00:04

Where did you get a figure like £2000 from :lol:

I guess if you wanted an 80" LCD screen you might be paying that much but sub £500 displays have been around for a while. Blu-ray players might be £500 at first and the xbox 360 is about £200. Of course new technology is always expensive to start off with. There were people buying DVD players for nearly £1000 at launch and now you can get them for 5% of that cost.

That's kind of obvious though! I've never heard anyone claiming it would happen overnight, but it will happen, probably slower than DVD but faster than VHS/CD

CD was slow to catch on but I think mainly because CD players were so expensive to start with. I got my first CD player in 1990 but I didn't really listen to CD's (but I'm not a music person). The thing that really made CD take off was the growth of CD-rom drives, then anyone with a PC or console could play CD's. In car CD players also became cheap enough to upgrade to.

If you don't think CDs "took off" until 1990, you really don't have a clue, I'm afraid. CDs took off long before that - they took off and they killed the LP in just a few short years, just as DVD has killed VHS.

I'm sorry, I can no longer take any part of your argument seriously.

The two HD formats will not catch on with the public right now - it's too soon. It cannot happen. It will be a niche thing only - maybe in five to ten years (more likely the latter than the former) - only the technogeeks will have to have the "next big deal" - It's that simple, really. They'll rave about it, just like the early adopters of DAT and mini-disc raved about those formats, and just like laserphiles did for the entire lifespan of that product (which NEVER caught on in a mass-market way).

tomos

02-01-2006, 00:23

theres a diff between adding a new option like what you mentioned and replacing a format like from VHS>DVD>HDTV whether BD or HD-DVD.

the studios are pushing this ahead, and so are the movie studios. i mean if new movies are sold on dvd and a HD format at the same time, then in a few months time its out a little later on dvd (delaying it each time) then people will be pushed into taking this up

personally, i see HDTV being mainstream 2-3 years after the real release even if people dont have the tv by that point (just SD)

Spectre07

02-01-2006, 01:00

the studios are pushing this ahead, and so are the movie studios. i mean if new movies are sold on dvd and a HD format at the same time, then in a few months time its out a little later on dvd (delaying it each time) then people will be pushed into taking this upDo you really think, with millions of DVD players out there, companies are going to delay the ringing of cash tills in order to advance the new formats, because I don't.

mythuk

02-01-2006, 01:18

Why spend a lot of money on a bluray *player*. Many people will wait until the recorders come out.

I thought that about DVD at first, and I think people would think that of HD if DVD hadn't been so big. By now I think people have gotten used to having a recordable format (be it a PVR or still VHS) and a non recordable format in DVD.

zantarous

02-01-2006, 01:21

If you don't think CDs "took off" until 1990, you really don't have a clue, I'm afraid. CDs took off long before that - they took off and they killed the LP in just a few short years

Have to say I didn't know anyone in the 80's that had a CD player, my first player was the Sega Mega CD in 92.

Do you really think, with millions of DVD players out there, companies are going to delay the ringing of cash tills in order to advance the new formats, because I don't.

Sounds just like the tactics that are used by all console manufactures and they do it once every five years and that can be an investment from £200 - £300. I don’t think that HD will kill DVD instantly but I think that the consumer in today’s market place is far more tech savvy and with DVD sales in some parts of the world actually declining it may look as though DVD may have already hit its peak, weather that is down to global economics, P2P file sharing and piracy the manufactures and studios are going to be desperate to give consumers something new.

tomos

02-01-2006, 01:23

Do you really think, with millions of DVD players out there, companies are going to delay the ringing of cash tills in order to advance the new formats, because I don't.

no, they'll want to hear more ringing by selling new players, the same movies again on a different format, stop/limit importing from other regions (more money) and stop users copying disks (make more money) since there will be a new, tougher copy protection involved.

if by 'companies' you're referring to the dixons of the world, then what choice do they have?

they put dvds for sale with a small select group of HD-DVD disks that came out later than the film on dvd. 3 months later, the high def corner has grown and now films released at the same time on disk. 3 months later still, slightly bigger again, and now the film is out on high def first.

they wont fight the studios on this since they will make money of selling all new equip

haineshisway

02-01-2006, 01:44

Have to say I didn't know anyone in the 80's that had a CD player, my first player was the Sega Mega CD in 92.

Sounds just like the tactics that are used by all console manufactures and they do it once every five years and that can be an investment from £200 - £300. I don’t think that HD will kill DVD instantly but I think that the consumer in today’s market place is far more tech savvy and with DVD sales in some parts of the world actually declining it may look as though DVD may have already hit its peak, weather that is down to global economics, P2P file sharing and piracy the manufactures and studios are going to be desperate to give consumers something new.

I cannot believe you are serious. CDs began making their appearance in the early early 80s (I still have several CDs from 1982). A few short years later, LPs were on their way out, then dead. If you didn't have a CD player until the 90s, that would be the equivalent of someone not having a DVD player until 2007.

thescrounger

02-01-2006, 01:47

If you don't think CDs "took off" until 1990, you really don't have a clue, I'm afraid. CDs took off long before that - they took off and they killed the LP in just a few short years, just as DVD has killed VHS.

I don't personally know anybody that had a CD player before 1990.

haineshisway

02-01-2006, 01:48

no, they'll want to hear more ringing by selling new players, the same movies again on a different format, stop/limit importing from other regions (more money) and stop users copying disks (make more money) since there will be a new, tougher copy protection involved.

if by 'companies' you're referring to the dixons of the world, then what choice do they have?

they put dvds for sale with a small select group of HD-DVD disks that came out later than the film on dvd. 3 months later, the high def corner has grown and now films released at the same time on disk. 3 months later still, slightly bigger again, and now the film is out on high def first.

they wont fight the studios on this since they will make money of selling all new equip

History has proven you wrong. The public at large will not jump to a new format. A small segment will, as a small segment does - the public at large has just started building big libraries of movies on DVD and they are happy and satisfied, just as when they switched from LP to CD. Until iTunes and iPods, they tried to introduce other formats to audio - all failed miserably.

thescrounger

02-01-2006, 01:51

Bluray won't take off until you can buy a player in tescos for £100.

Assuming they aren't selling off discontinued stock. ;)

haineshisway

02-01-2006, 01:51

I don't personally know anybody that had a CD player before 1990.

Then I would have to say that you and the people you know were in the minority. As I said, that would be the equivalent of you not getting into DVD for another year or two. I had my first CD player in 1983. By the time I started my first record label in 1988, LPs were completely dead, so just what were you buying in 1988 if not CDs?

thescrounger

02-01-2006, 01:53

Then I would have to say that you and the people you know were in the minority. As I said, that would be the equivalent of you not getting into DVD for another year or two. I had my first CD player in 1983. By the time I started my first record label in 1988, LPs were completely dead, so just what were you buying in 1988 if not CDs?

Let me see, in 1988 I was 11 and had quite a few cassettes. None of my friends or people I knew in a school with 800 pupils had one.

Hmm. :thinking:

In fact, I don't recall seeing many in shops until around 1988. Perhaps this death of LP and tape had only happened in big cities by then?

Full Tense

02-01-2006, 01:58

I didn't have a CD player until 1994/1995. I listened to cassettes up to that point. Blimey you had your first cd player in 1983? I was 4.. grew up playing on the Commodore 64 using cassettes, and listening to cassettes.. never knowing about cds. lol I'm beginning to think my childhood was misspent! :D

DeadKenny

02-01-2006, 03:19

One thing that has changed since this thread started is the introduction of UMD. Even assuming only one HD-DVD format, will the market really support all three formats - DVD, HD-DVD and UMD?
UMD - just another failure format from Sony, like Betamax, SACD... and Blu-Ray :p

Seriously though, who's mad enough to pay rip-off Sony prices for UMD? :cuckoo:

Surely every kid who wants to play their movies on the PSP will find other means of getting movies onto it than buying UMD discs at rip-off prices (twice or more the price of a DVD and half the resolution :cuckoo: ).

The big selling point for me, and doesn't seem to have been mentioned, is that HD will be a global format. No more PAL vs NTSC nonsense.
Sadly regional formats still apply. PAL/NTSC lives on at least in terms of refresh rates (50 and 60Hz, or 24/25fps). Why on earth they are going to continue with 25fps for films is beyond me. This is the one chance they have of ditching that headache forever and it seems they are not going to take that chance :brickwall

On the subject of HD formats though in general, I don't believe for an instant that they'll suddenly replace DVD and I don't think anyone has to worry about that. HD in general will slowly creep into the home through new flat screen TVs and HD broadcasts. It will take years, but when people have an HD set-up they will decide for some important films they want an HD release (e.g. I'd want stuff like Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, every Kubrick film, etc in HD), but won't be desperate to bin all their DVDs just yet. At least that's the way I'll be looking at it.

As a basic comparison as formats go, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD only vary by capacity. There's nothing hugly amazing about Blu-Ray other than it in theory can hold a bit more than an HD-DVD disc. The big difference is in who's behind the formats, and for me it's seriously worrying having Sony behind Blu-Ray. To me it means huge costs due to Sony licencing costs and expense of the Blu-Ray production facilities, and added hassles in terms of insane copy and regional protection racket;) systems. If Blu-Ray discs are as hard to produce as PS2 discs then it will fail as the budget manufacturers will never have a chance (anyone who's noticed just how few PS2 magazines carry proper PS2 discs will know what I mean;)). HD-DVD is the format backed by the DVD Forum (not these forums ;)) who are behind DVD, and is a little more independent from studio control. Though studios are involved it's not controlled by one single studio at least.

At the end of the day though, whichever system is the least cost and the least hassle is the one that gets my vote.

And then consider this... HVD discs are around the corner which puts HD-DVD and Blu-Ray to shame (we're talking capacities of up to 800Gb!) ;)