This is a little weird....if BD has all this space advantage, why is POTC on 2 discs?

This is a little weird....if BD has all this space advantage, why is POTC on 2 discs?

It's a long movie that is certain to be packed with extras.

World Trade Center is BD50 and on two discs.

This is a little weird....if BD has all this space advantage, why is POTC on 2 discs?


Because there is more than 50 GIG of content?

Maxxed VC-1 video bitrate and PCM audio like Casanova. The second disc is a 25gb for HD extras and interactive games.

This is going to be happening more and more. It just looks better to the consumer to get 2 discs instead of 1, regardless of the size.

Maxxed VC-1 video bitrate and PCM audio like Casanova. The second disc is a 25gb for HD extras and interactive games.
I sure hope that this is the case...

It's a long movie that is certain to be packed with extras.

World Trade Center is BD50 and on two discs.

Didn't know that about WTC....As for the consumer wanting two discs, I think thats bull. I want only one disc. I for sure will be tossing out the extras disc.

I don't keep my movies in the cases, I put them in a sleeve booklet....I have no use for the extra disk.

I also think some of the time it is a perception tactic. We can charge $24.99 for the one disc set and $29.99 for the 2 disc set. It only costs a two bucks more and we make an extra three dollars.

VC1 does NOT need 50 gigs of space for the movie. If the bitrate is that high, it is either a waste of space, or incompetence on the part of the encoders.

Personally, I like a 2 disc set. But I never bought the argument the BD 50 was so superior to HD 30 and would not require a 2nd disc for extras.

VC1 does NOT need 50 gigs of space for the movie. If the bitrate is that high, it is either a waste of space, or incompetence on the part of the encoders.

Personally, I like a 2 disc set. But I never bought the argument the BD 50 was so superior to HD 30 and would not require a 2nd disc for extras.

At this early stages of both formats, studios will play around with many things. Whether VC-1 needs 30mbs+ video encodes, I don't know. But I picked up Casanova which is BY FAR the highest VC-1 bitrate I've ever seen and the picture is stunning!!

Moral of this story: I don't care if they use 8mbps- 35 VC-1; if the PQ is top notch then that's all I care about.

VC1 does NOT need 50 gigs of space for the movie. If the bitrate is that high, it is either a waste of space, or incompetence on the part of the encoders.

Personally, I like a 2 disc set. But I never bought the argument the BD 50 was so superior to HD 30 and would not require a 2nd disc for extras.

If 30GB is enough for everything why didn't King Kong has lossless audio and use seamless branching to deliver the theatrical and extended editions? Why was HD51 announced?

Sounds unlikely but at least from what I was told cjr1 is right!

The model of 2 disc as being the "premium version" has been astablished with dvd and cusomers request it.
I don't know if this is also the case with POTC (I asked about WTC) and I was told that consumers (and I speak about the mass!) expect to get a 2. disc with the extras. Consumers are used to pay more for the special edition of dvd's and I was told that consumers better accept the higher price if its looks more like the special edition.
You don't have to agree and its my preference neither. But thats what I was told.

Sounds unlikely but at least from what I was told cjr1 is right!

The model of 2 disc as being the "premium version" has been astablished with dvd and cusomers request it.
I don't know if this is also the case with POTC (I asked about WTC) and I was told that consumers (and I speak about the mass!) expect to get a 2. disc with the extras. Consumers are used to pay more for the special edition of dvd's and I was told that consumers better accept the higher price if its looks more like the special edition.
You don't have to agree and its my preference neither. But thats what I was told.

Thats just crazy. I much rather have ONE disc than fiddle around with multiple discs . The worse experience in watching movies at home is getting up off the couch to switch discs. Consumers buy the movies they want to see. For the most part, they don't care about the extras.

If 30GB is enough for everything why didn't King Kong has lossless audio and use seamless branching to deliver the theatrical and extended editions? Why was HD51 announced?


So far, Universal hasn't done lossless audio on any of their releases (that I can remember) As for the extended, I don't think it had anything to do with disc space, I think it was just a matter of Universal following the same path that has been followed for Peter Jackson movies...release the Theatrical and then the extended.


In fact, the version of Lord of the Rings (for both formats) will be theatrical and not extended. That's just how they've done things in the past.

As for the OP question, I agree with others who think they feel they can charge more for two discs instead of one. This way instead of seeing a Blu Ray disc for $25, they see a two disc set for $25 and they say "See, Blu Ray is priced the same" (not literally of course)

In all actuality, I don't know why they are doing it, only that I'll buy it and love watching it on my PS3

If 30GB is enough for everything why didn't King Kong has lossless audio and use seamless branching to deliver the theatrical and extended editions? Why was HD51 announced?


The answer to your first question is posted above. As to HD51...same reason as BD 200....BS and marketing. I would NOT want HD 51 as it would cause compatability problems for a format that is just getting started and has its share of issues.

I'm not an expert on seamless branching....but would space really matter there?

For anyone who questions VC1 at "lower" bitrates....see batman Begins on HD DVD. It is still my reference standard and I am waiting for a BD title to rival it. I pre-ordered POTC 1 & 2 as well as Casino Royale....so I am hopefull for thosse three.

IS Potc confirmed VC1 to begin with....I hadn't seen that announcement yet....but I sure hope it is.

So far, Universal hasn't done lossless audio on any of their releases (that I can remember) As for the extended, I don't think it had anything to do with disc space, I think it was just a matter of Universal following the same path that has been followed for Peter Jackson movies...release the Theatrical and then the extended.


In fact, the version of Lord of the Rings (for both formats) will be theatrical and not extended. That's just how they've done things in the past.

As for the OP question, I agree with others who think they feel they can charge more for two discs instead of one. This way instead of seeing a Blu Ray disc for $25, they see a two disc set for $25 and they say "See, Blu Ray is priced the same" (not literally of course)

In all actuality, I don't know why they are doing it, only that I'll buy it and love watching it on my PS3

Here is the thread of HD DVD disc sizes:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=750870

Tell me how the other 50 minutes of high definition footage on a King Kong: EE would fit on an HD30 without impacting PQ.

Why would i complain about getting 2 for the price of 1? :D

This is a must-have collection for sure...cannot wait to see this in HD!!!!!

I'm not an expert on seamless branching....but would space really matter there?


Not such much as bandwidth. HD DVD is limited to 36 Mbps, Blu-ray specifies a transfer rate of 54 Mbps.

people were complaining about 25 GB disc releases, now people are complaining about 75GB releases... fact of life is that people complain...

Yup, people like the OP. I smell an HD DVD fanboy... hopefully I'm wrong.

When I see a BD25 release these days, I can't help it but think I am being cheated. Am I so wrong? I want BD50/AVC MPEG-4/PCM track titles ...anything short is just a downer.

It certainly is a selling point.

If they do this transfer correctly my pants are going to shoot off and fly around the room. Bought a PS3 the day they announced the date of this title.

Here is the thread of HD DVD disc sizes:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=750870

Tell me how the other 50 minutes of high definition footage on a King Kong: EE would fit on an HD30 without impacting PQ.

This is why I thought that it would be a LONG time before Universal figures out a way to release the extended edition of King Kong on HD-DVD.

Personally, I was very disappointed when I saw how much space King Kong's video takes up on the HD-DVD disc. This means no room for lossless audio (even TrueHD), or the extra 30-50 minutes of extra footage.

I actually held off on buying the current release in hopes that Universal would release a super-duper hi-def editon with the works. Now I have no idea how long I have to wait :( .

Speaking in terms of pure logic, all of this would be remedied if Universal were to support Blu-ray. A BD-50 disc has more than enough room for the extra footage, a high average bitrate, and lossless audio to boot. Chuck in another BD-50 with all of the extras and Peter Jackson's diaries, an you've got a mighty attractive package.

I think this idea is so good that it deserves its own thread :) .

This is why I thought that it would be a LONG time before Universal figures out a way to release the extended edition of King Kong on HD-DVD.

Personally, I was very disappointed when I saw how much space King Kong's video takes up on the HD-DVD disc. This means no room for lossless audio (even TrueHD), or the extra 30-50 minutes of extra footage.

I totally agree that it would be hard or impossible to fit King Kong Extended Edition on an HD DVD w/o quality loss... much less with lossless audio.

But it would be really easy to fit it on *2* HD DVDs. They've been doing that with SD DVD for years.

I agree that BD's 50GB disc *could* be a big advantage... but the BDA seems determined to waste it. I was *really* looking forward to purchasing Kingdom of Heaven EE on the much vaunted BD50... and then it was released with essentially no extras at all. They even took out the great overture at the beginning! Apparently they spent all that extra space on MPEG-2 and uncompressed PCM. ACK! So far I've stuck with the 4-disc SD DVD specifically becuase of this reason. This is a trend that's happening more and more with BD titles I look forward to. Man BD is driving me nuts....

Question: If you're not cramming movies into 25 GB and using a single layer BD, why would you not use up the entire 50 gb space on a dual layer BD?

Seems like encoding a 39 gb and a 49 gb movie cost them the same amount of money.

Apparently they spent all that extra space on MPEG-2 and uncompressed PCM. ACK! So far I've stuck with the 4-disc SD DVD specifically becuase if this reason. This is a trend that's happening more and more with BD titles I look forward to. Man BD is driving me nuts....
Actually, Kingdom of Heaven uses DTS-HD MA.

But yes, it is frustrating.

Because Disney is going to make sure that PotC utilizes EVERYTHING High Def has to offer. What does it matter on the number of discs anyway? As long as teh quality is top notch, I can care less.

If 30GB is enough for everything why didn't King Kong has lossless audio and use seamless branching to deliver the theatrical and extended editions? Why was HD51 announced?


I can't believe this is still even an issue now that HD51 has been announced. Ofcourse space does matter..Having two discs for marketing purposes is fine with me as long as one of those discs contains 50GB worth of the highest audio and video quality possible. I laugh when I read people still try and make the argument why 50GB is not needed or 30Gb is enough..

Actually, Kingdom of Heaven uses DTS-HD MA.

But yes, it is frustrating.

Ahh - Thanks for the correction Gekkou!

Hmm... not sure if this makes it better or worse.

It's *great* that Fox is using DTS-HD MA (best idea IMO since it implicitly offers a 1.5Mb DTS core track), but does the MPEG-2 encode take up the *entire* 50GB? If so, what a sad, sad state of affairs...

Ahh - Thanks for the correction Gekkou!No problem.

Hmm... not sure if this makes it better or worse.

It's *great* that Fox is using DTS-HD MA (best idea IMO since it implicitly offers a 1.5Mb DTS core track), but does the MPEG-2 encode take up the *entire* 50GB? If so, what a sad, sad state of affairs...
According to the A/V specifications thread, it clocks in at 41,902,393,344 bytes for the video.

Ahh - Thanks for the correction Gekkou!

Hmm... not sure if this makes it better or worse.

It's *great* that Fox is using DTS-HD MA (best idea IMO since it implicitly offers a 1.5Mb DTS core track), but does the MPEG-2 encode take up the *entire* 50GB? If so, what a sad, sad state of affairs...

KoH takes over 44GB (42GB for the movie) per the Blu-Ray A/V Specifications thread here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=760714

No problem.


According to the A/V specifications thread, it clocks in at 44,355,645,106 bytes.

Yep. That's just under 42 GBs. That leaves 7-8 Gigs of NOTHING!!!

The could've put an entire Dual-layer DVD's worth of extras, but nope. They could've even encoded all the extras in AVC to save space if they were in hi-def, let alone the actual feature.

Like I always say...just plain perplexing.

Hopefully future releases won't suffer the same fate.

as long as i dont have to switch discs in the middle of the movie, who cares? most people like myself dont really care about the extras

Here is the thread of HD DVD disc sizes:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=750870

Tell me how the other 50 minutes of high definition footage on a King Kong: EE would fit on an HD30 without impacting PQ.




I don't know, I never mentioned how or if they could do it, I only answered a question based on history of releases. They follow a certain path with Peter Jackson movies, the release the theatrical and then the extended and Universal hasn't done any lossless or even True HD on any of their releases. See, that's history, if I wanted to speculate on how they would do it, I would probably bone up on the technical knowledge needed to present that argument. But, since I'm not interested in that aspect of this "war", I'll just go back to enjoying movies on both formats :)

Thats just crazy. I much rather have ONE disc than fiddle around with multiple discs . The worse experience in watching movies at home is getting up off the couch to switch discs. Consumers buy the movies they want to see. For the most part, they don't care about the extras.

I also would like just one disc, but with nothing but the move, menu, and audio streams at the highest bitrate possible. I, for one, could care less about extras, but I think most people out there buying DVD's do expect and want this anymore. Even if they never watch the stuff, it's a mind game. If people didn't buy the movies because of extras, the studios would not be including them. That being said, I would rather see 2 disc sets, one with the movie maxxed out and the other just with extras. The greatest sin a studio can commit is to compromise the movie A/V quality to make room for extras.

Universal hasn't done any lossless or even True HD on any of their releases.

Fear and Loathing and End Of Days have TrueHD, but overall Universal (and HD-DVD in general) have been lacking in the lossless audio department

I don't care what the movie is encoded in as long as it look great and isn't spread across 2 discs. A second disc for extras is perfectly fine with me.

I only caught the tail-end of the movie broadcast on ABC several months back, but it looked very good for broadcast HD. I cannot wait to see it on BluRay. Plus, I haven't seen the second one yet, so I can't wait for May 22.

Fear and Loathing and End Of Days have TrueHD, but overall Universal (and HD-DVD in general) have been lacking in the lossless audio department


I don't have those two, so I stand corrected...

Didn't know that about WTC....As for the consumer wanting two discs, I think thats bull. I want only one disc. I for sure will be tossing out the extras disc.

I don't keep my movies in the cases, I put them in a sleeve booklet....I have no use for the extra disk.

I haven't tried it with Blu-ray, but DVDs look really cool if you cook them for a few seconds in the microwave. :cool:

Give them more space to waste. Give them 200gb discs and they will still waste it all and make 2 disc versions.

It's all about the psychological effect and it completely removes any rational argument that 50 gb discs are needed in the first place.

Give them more space to waste. Give them 200gb discs and they will still waste it all and make 2 disc versions.

It's all about the psychological effect and it completely removes any rational argument that 50 gb discs are needed in the first place.

I personally don't mind a movie split across 2 discs... especially if it's a long one like King Kong EE or LOTR EE. If the whole movie could all fit on a single BD50 it is an advantage, but in my book a very small one. So long as most regular theater-length features fit on a single disc w/ optimum audio & video quality, then I'm fine by it.

I agree w/ dvdmonster though. I definitley think there is this notion of "perceived value" in the consumer marketplace. Remember the double-wide 2-disc "Alpha" DVD cases several years back. Companies somtimes chose those because it makes it *look* like your getting more value for your money, a more deluxe package. Likewise, I also believe that many BD releases may, in the future be released as 2-disc sets, even if all the data could fit on a single disc. I would bet if I went through my movie collection right now, there are probably even several 2-disc SD DVD sets where everything could fit on a single DVD.

Didn't know that about WTC....As for the consumer wanting two discs, I think thats bull. I want only one disc. I for sure will be tossing out the extras disc.

I don't keep my movies in the cases, I put them in a sleeve booklet....I have no use for the extra disk.

Right, but you're falling into the trap of thinking you are the average consumer. By what you've just stated, you've proven that you aren't.

I haven't tried it with Blu-ray, but DVDs look really cool if you cook them for a few seconds in the microwave. :cool:

Not to be a spoil sport, but that can ruin your microwave (will certainly decrease it's output power) as well as potentially leaking heavy metals from the disc.

/Ask me about the Compaq NT server support group microwaving Smart Start CDs incident.
//The smell of burnt popcorn will cover the smell of ANYTHING. :D

It's a long movie that is certain to be packed with extras.

World Trade Center is BD50 and on two discs.

WTC is 50GB and on 2 discs because they decided to use MPEG2. If Paramount had used AVC it could have been 1 disc.

The mindset of the studios is that the average consumer (J6P) sees more value in a 2-disc set, and they will accept paying a higher price than if all of the same content was on one disc. I'm sure this is why Disney is doing it since they have been using AVC and VC-1 more often than MPEG2 lately.

A dumb question maybe but what the heck is POTC? I have read all the posts and still can't figure it out.

Anyone? Sorry.

Edit.... Nevermind. Pirates of the Caribbean.

A dumb question maybe but what the heck is POTC? I have read all the posts and still can't figure it out.

Anyone? Sorry.

Edit.... Nevermind. Pirates of the Caribbean.


Yep..Pirates :) POTC was Passion of the Christ for quite some time too...

I am also in the disliking of 2nd disk, maybe they will be more useful as my kids get older.

Currently I just have an extra disk that I never use, that occasionally gets confused for the movie, which it isn't.

I use a big book with sleeves and 2nd discs for me are a hassle.

I do understand the perceived value part of this, and I am going to buy PotC at release no matter how many disks come with it.

One thing, about the 'uselessness of bd-50' mentioned earlier. Just because it is coming with two disks doesn't mean it isn't using BD-50 to our advantage. Not switching DVDs in the middle of a movie is crucial, and if you have a movie that is 42gb (KoH) that to me makes BD-50 very valuable.

I am also in the disliking of 2nd disk, maybe they will be more useful as my kids get older.

Currently I just have an extra disk that I never use, that occasionally gets confused for the movie, which it isn't.

I use a big book with sleeves and 2nd discs for me are a hassle.

I do understand the perceived value part of this, and I am going to buy PotC at release no matter how many disks come with it.

One thing, about the 'uselessness of bd-50' mentioned earlier. Just because it is coming with two disks doesn't mean it isn't using BD-50 to our advantage. Not switching DVDs in the middle of a movie is crucial, and if you have a movie that is 42gb (KoH) that to me makes BD-50 very valuable.


The extra 20GB of space is very valuable for numerous reasons.. That is why HD-DVD51 was announced not too long ago because they know this to be true as well. It is beyond me how HD-DVD fanboys can keep on arguing over and over why 30Gb is enough on every post here on the forum.