Blu Ray / HD DVD Discussion Thread

[Tarzan.]

But the Platinum Edition will be re-released on what Blu-ray or HD-DVD?

[chamfer]

But the Platinum Edition will be re-released on what Blu-ray or HD-DVD?

Disney has only voiced support for Blu-ray. So unless they change their minds no Disney properties will be on HD-DVD. As far as I'm aware the only Disney movie that is in the works for Blu-ray is Dinosaur. I'm sure more will be announced, Dinosaur is just all that has surfaced. Although I hope Disney drops the platinum for the new format and just tries to make the best release possible for every movie they release on it. The inconsistancy in their releases is horrible just because one is more "popular" than the other.

There is a lot of complaining about prices, which I think is crazy. The prices are no different from when dvd first came out. By the time most consumers finally get around to buying a HDTV, which there really is not going to be any way of getting around, the prices will have fallen dramatically. No one will force you to re-buy any dvd, both formats are backwards compatible with all the current dvds.

To clear some points up that were said, you will not be able to play hd-dvd's nor blu-ray disc's in a normal dvd player. Also there could be the possibility that all the space on hd-dvd's or blu-ray disc's is not used, that is very likely....but it should be realized that High Definition data content requires all of that space. It's why this new HD format has been made, current dvd technology is not able to hold an entire HD movie; unless it was extremely compressed and had nothing else on the disc maybe it would fit. Now there would be a lot of space if they were to put a SD movie on a hd-dvd or a Blu-ray disc.....but who would buy that when they could just get the dvd.

Now as for which one is better hd-dvd or Blu-ray....well they are pretty similar, they are capable of doing pretty much the same stuff except Blu-ray will be able to hold a lot more data. The biggest advantage that each have right now is that HD-DVD is cheaper, and Blu-Ray has larger support from the movie industry.

[I am the Doctor]

Class316 wrote

I wouldn't call Blu-ray a winner at this point. MS supports hd-dvd.

Dual players will likely work better. For instance my DVD burner burns both DVD-R and DVD+R. That pretty much deemed the war irrelevant, though neither one became as big as CDR.

But it’s a lot different with something like Blu-ray and hd-dvd.

Who knows, they may end up like SACD and DVD-A.

Just my thought on the whole Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD debate:

This actually wouldn't surprise me one bit, Class316. The market for SACD and DVD-A (Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio) is more or less dead. It seems that most music lovers are satisfied with CDs and more importantly, their iPods and MP3s.

Video distribution could go the same way, with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sitting on shelves as most consumers pass it by, picking up regular DVDs and, eventually, downloading video content off the 'net. This will especially happen when more people have high speed connections and more legal downloadable content becomes available. This is what the Hollywood studios should be looking into, legal downloadable video.

[jamminjake245]

Dinosaur will be the first Disney DVD released. Weird how its CG, probably because it will look better than 2D. I wonder how a regular cartoon like Snow White will appear in high defination. What is the point of a cartoon though? "Oh wow, look how real the color looks!" Yeah, I can see the quote on the Bambi DVD:
"Never has the fire in Bambi or the bullet in his mother looked so real!"
-T.V Guide

[2099net]

To say there's not point in 2D animation being HD is wrong. Imagine how much more detail you can get in the backgrounds of Sleeping Beauty, or Snow White for that matter.

Colours have nothing to do with it, its all about detail. As long as the higher resolution is available on the source, as it is on Disney animation, there will be an improvement.

[semicharmedguy26]

what I am saying is that what I have read, Blu-Ray will have all sorts of capacity, but the studios won't be using it. You will be paying for a lot of unused space on a disc. Plus I, not being a techno-geek, could care less about five movies on a disc, or whatever, you only watch one movie at a time any way.

I still think that the true winner when it comes down to the regular consumer will be HD-DVD. Blue-Ray will be around like Beta was for a while and will fade into the distance. It won't go away because of the all the techo-people that think they have something special.

Its not necessarily about having 5 movies on a disc. Currently, the video you see on a dvd is compressed video from the original which means that you have already lost some quality in the image. more compression more image loss. By expanding the disc capacity from currently 8.5 GB to about 30-50, that allows for a lot LESS compress if not no compression at all, which is how you would get your HD image.

Blu-ray will not fade, although i do not think it fits in the home movie market, it fits very well in the computing market. the reason why geeks like me wont let it go away is not because we have "something special" it's because Blu-ray has a 50GB (huge for disposable storage media) worth of space to either backup files or to use as extra storage.

Us "techno-people," geeks if you will, know what to do with this upcoming technology while the non-techno-people just rely on hear-say and make up things.

[2099net]

what I am saying is that what I have read, Blu-Ray will have all sorts of capacity, but the studios won't be using it. You will be paying for a lot of unused space on a disc. Plus I, not being a techno-geek, could care less about five movies on a disc, or whatever, you only watch one movie at a time any way.

I still think that the true winner when it comes down to the regular consumer will be HD-DVD. Blue-Ray will be around like Beta was for a while and will fade into the distance. It won't go away because of the all the techo-people that think they have something special.

Its not necessarily about having 5 movies on a disc. Currently, the video you see on a dvd is compressed video from the original which means that you have already lost some quality in the image. more compression more image loss. By expanding the disc capacity from currently 8.5 GB to about 30-50, that allows for a lot LESS compress if not no compression at all, which is how you would get your HD image.

Blu-ray will not fade, although i do not think it fits in the home movie market, it fits very well in the computing market. the reason why geeks like me wont let it go away is not because we have "something special" its because Blu-ray has a 50GB (huge for disposable storage media) worth of space to either backup files or to use as extra storage.

Plus the higher resoultion means each frame will require lots more storage anyway. For example if you double a 1x1 image (1 unit of storage) to 2x2, the storage doesn't double, it quadruples (4 units of storage). So having a HD movie on a new next-gen DVD can easily take up 25-30GB alone.

There's space not used on current DVDs - not every DVD is packed to the gills with sound options and supplements. But there's no harm in having the storage space for the discs which do want to wow us with their extras.

[Pluto]

I think that blu ray will be better but the quality doesn't seems to change a lot...

[Tarzan.]

I am not sure if this format can be much better than the DVD because if you see for example the movie of Snow White it is all restored and I don't know how it can be better because it is a very old movie and I think that it can't be more restored.

[2099net]

I am not sure if this format can be much better than the DVD because if you see for example the movie of Snow White it is all restored and I don't know how it can be better because it is a very old movie and I think that it can't be more restored.

Because the original negatives (and the restoration) are at a higher resolution than DVD allows for. So there can be an improvement, even using the same restoration.

[yoda_four]

No means to offend, but my god, some of you have to go do some research before you start making left-field claims. Most in this thread have barely even a minimal comprehension of this stuff.

To begin with resolutions:

VHS=240i
DVD=480p
TV=480i/p
EDTV=480p, 720p
HDTV=480p, 720p, 1080i/p
HD-DVD=720p, 1080i
Blu-Ray=720p, 1080p

Make any sense? Those are lines of resolution. i stands for interlaced; p stands for progressive (go wikipedia them). Most who have a standard definition TV will get the max resolution out of a standard DVD. To get the max out of Blu-Ray, you will need the newest of TVs, those with 1080p. However, even if your HDTV does only 1080i, or 720p, the image will still be much better.

No, as for that image at the start of the thread. If you actually went to the origin site, you'll see they said that you can barely make out the difference on the picture, but IRL there's a huge jump in quality.

Let's take a look at the numbers: VHS VS. DVD = 240 lines of resolution. DVD VS. BR = 480 lines of resolution. So when people make the claim that the jump from tape to disc was a big difference and the HD jump is pitiful; those are false claims.

Also, to the poster who said "What has Disney released on Blu-Ray?", go to wikipedia and you'll find the list of future titles.

And, the person who said HD-DVDs will work out of existing players: nope. DVDs used in a HD/BR player will be upconverted. There was talk of studios making a hybrid disc with one side regular DVD and one side HD-DVD, but it's fallen to the sidelines; and besides that doesn't apply to Disney because they are making BRs, not HD-DVDs.

I could go much more in depth with the war and stuff, but I'm going to hold off for now. I highly suggest that everyone go get informed on this stuff: go to wikipedia!

[tarheelblue23]

There is definitely a difference in image quality from DVD to Blue Ray DVD, however the question is will people care enough to pay for the upgrade to the new DVD player? VHS was out for 20 years or so before DVD was introduced and it has still taken time to get everyone to convert to DVD. DVD players have only been out for about 6 years, so I cant image how long it will take everyone to change over to a new format. Beta was better than VHS, but nobody wanted to convert to it. I think your going to see similar results with HD DVD and Blue Ray. Take this for someone that works in the marketing field, just because it may be a better product doesnt mean everyone will buy it. I think the Blue Ray and HD DVD formats will take off very slowly until everyone has an HD TV.

[yoda_four]

There is definitely a difference in image quality from DVD to Blue Ray DVD, however the question is will people care enough to pay for the upgrade to the new DVD player? VHS was out for 20 years or so before DVD was introduced and it has still taken time to get everyone to convert to DVD. DVD players have only been out for about 6 years, so I cant image how long it will take everyone to change over to a new format. Beta was better than VHS, but nobody wanted to convert to it. I think your going to see similar results with HD DVD and Blue Ray. Take this for someone that works in the marketing field, just because it may be a better product doesnt mean everyone will buy it. I think the Blue Ray and HD DVD formats will take off very slowly until everyone has an HD TV.

I agree with you that these will be niche products for at least a few years.

However, you comments about Beta are way off. VHS and Beta were introduced at the same time and were the first viable home video option. Remember how you used to have to go to the theater every few years to rewatch Pinocchio?

As for Beta losing: That was Sony's own fault. They kept the format under tight control and didn't allow content companies to release many films under their Beta product. Also, of course, there was the money factor as well. I think Blu-ray will be different because they've got nearly everyone on their side supporting their product and costs will be kept in close proximity to that of HD-DVD. Sony does not want to lose this format war.

[tarheelblue23]

Its definitely going to be fun watching this format war. I just dont see 2 different formats(HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) being successful. Only one of these formats is going to survive. Thats unless there will be some sort of player that can play both types. Are both the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD going to be backwards compatible with DVD?

[jamminjake245]

Yes, both can play DVD.

[DarthPrime]

Microsoft is trying to get Java out of Blu-Ray. The article even says that Microsoft is not supporting Blu-Ray in the next version of Windows (Vista), and that they are planning a HD-DVD drive for the XBox 360.

I think leaving Blu-Ray support out of Windows will hurt Blu-Ray. If Blu-Ray does beat out HD-DVD then I see Microsoft releasing a patch to enable support. Same as a Blu-Ray drive for the 360. And I agree with the previous post that this year will be interesting watching these two formats.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6299483.html

[Isidour]

knows, because you could also buy a xbox360 and a blu-ray player or a Playstation 3 and a hd-dvd player, considering than most houses who have a xbox or a playstation have a dvd player

[Tarzan.]

A Blu-ray player or a hd-player can play a DVD? because remember that a DVD uses a red ray and a Blu-ray uses a blue ray or at least that's what I heard.

[DarthPrime]

A Blu-ray player or a hd-player can play a DVD? because remember that a DVD uses a red ray and a Blu-ray uses a blue ray or at least that's what I heard.

Both are backwards compatible with current DVDs, and will upconvert a DVD as well.

[deathie mouse]

and CD's use infrared lasers etc etc.

there will be tricolor lasers for blu-ray etc etc

just to refine yoda_four's numbers,
*whips out dethicalculator once again for truth justice and the film resolution way:

VHS = 480 x 320 = 153,600 pixels interlaced

(240 is the horizontal resolution, x 1.33 = 320)

DVD = 480 x 720 = 345,600 pixels interlaced

345600/153600 = 2.25

DVD vs VHS = 2.25x better



Blu-ray = 1080 x 1920 = 2,073,600 pixels progressive

2073600/345600 = 6
and
progressive image/interlaced image = 1.4142 (square root of two)


6 x 1.4142 = 8.5


Blu-ray vs DVD = 8.5x better

(interlaced images are filtered so they don't "twitter" or shimmer obnoxioulsly) (Yes Virginia most of your DVDs are fuzzzied at the factory )


Blu-ray can look as good as the negative the film image is photographed on. if done properly.

(and Sin City/Corpses Bride were photographed at 1080p)


just take a 768 x 1024 picture you have that looks amazing on your puter screen and shrink it to 264 x 352 and then blow that 264 x 352 picx back up to 768 x 1024 again. Compare the blown up and original.
DVD vs Blu. Discuss.



And Again: movies, all movies, even old SILENT movies if in good state, have more than enough resolution on the negative for Blu-ray.

i can't wait.

but not everybody needs to be an early adopter or wants film quality at home. Relax. enjoy your DVDs

They look nice at small, normal television viewing sizes

But i just want 2001 in my living room!