I just watched the Lady in the Water HD-DVD last night. Movie aside (wife liked it, I hated it) the HD picture was VERY disappointing. When the film was over I decided to flip the disk a bit and check some scenes to compare the DVD to HD DVD picture. On many scenes there appeared to be almost no improvement. On others, there was an improvement in quality and sharpness but it was negligible. If you weren't looking for it, you'd never see it.

I've noticed this on quite a few HD DVD films I rent/buy. I LOVE my HD-DVD player and use it all the time. But I can understand the lack of mass acceptance in HD DVD players in the market when so many films have such minor differences. Mind you, I only have a 32" 720p HD monitor. So maybe I'm missing out because I don't have a bigger screen or 1080p.

But it seems like for every HD DVD with fantastic video quality I watch (King Kong, Matrix movies) there are twice as many that disappoint (LITW, Dune, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, The Game, Superman Returns, Syriana, etc.). When I watch broadcast HDTV the picture is stunning and vastly superior to digital cable/dbs. Even my parents can see the difference and express amazement. But when I show them, my wife, most friends, etc. HD DVDs they just aren't that impressed over the difference of an upscaled DVD.

Oh well, guess I just need to buy a bigger 1080p display and only rent tier 1 level movies. :)

Are you running your HD DVD player at 720P?

If so, switch it to 1080i then watch a HD DVD.

I don't know what the hell you're talking about. First of all, you pick a movie, Lady in the Water - I have both the Blu Ray and HD DVD versions - encoded in VC-1 which was filmed a certain way which charitably could be described as 'drab' and use it as a reference for HD? It looked that way in the movie theatre. Please. Secondly, you mentioned some of these other movies: Kiss Kiss, Syriana, Dune, all of these most have stated and I agree are very good transfers and could easily beat anything you see on high def television. Third, you mentioned high def television as being stunning and 'vastly superior' to digital cable/dbs - all for you in 720p and yet uncharitably can't see the difference between regular cable/dbs and your HIGH DEF movie player? Something's not adding up here because if you're prepared to acknowledge that high def is better than standard defintion television and your HD DVD player is putting out a better picture by all measurements than your high def television (re absent the numerous over the air compression artifacts) and you describe it as "disappointiing" than either this post is bogus or some oither uncharitable notion could be ascribed to it.

It is true that bigger is better for high def. I have a 65" 1080p DLP and nothing put over the air or sd dvd comes close to what my HD DVD player displays.

...than either this post is bogus or some oither uncharitable notion could be ascribed to it.

Thanks for catching my secret motives HP. Look, I'm expressing my opinion. I don't have an agenda, sorry to disappoint you. No need to be an ass just because you disagree.

Boo, thanks for the advice, I'll give it a whirl.

What size tv do you have? Watching a HD-DVD on a projector every movie looks better then the DVD. at 92" you really can tell the difference.

What size tv do you have? Watching a HD-DVD on a projector every movie looks better then the DVD. at 92" you really can tell the difference.

That's what I'm thinking maingon, my TV may be too small to pick up the differences. I'm currently watching a 32" at a relatively close distance, but will be upgrading to a 52" at a bit farther distance.

You really need to buy a good HDTV. I have a fullHD display and I cannot bear DVDs anymore. They look out of focus and blurry to me. I can only watch HD DVDs now.

When I watch broadcast HDTV the picture is stunning and vastly superior to digital cable/dbs. Even my parents can see the difference and express amazement. But when I show them, my wife, most friends, etc. HD DVDs they just aren't that impressed over the difference of an upscaled DVD.



Broadcast HD is video which has an inherent advantage over film in terms of appearing more life-like mostly due to its high framerate. Even on SD, CNN will clearly look subjectively better than even the newest film on HBO.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is fantastic, I have no idea what you are talking about - it's one of Warner's best and only a 15gig!

Concerning resolution, I have a 360 hooked up to a Samsung 32in 768 lcd and an A1 hooked up to a Sony 46in 1080p LCD. 1080p is better yes, but the 768 clearly shows HD DVD's advantage over SD.

As to size, I don't buy into the "gotta be huge to appreciate" nonsense. It comes down to 1) resolution, 2) viewing distance, and 3) display technology & model

The big benefit for me is the fact that watching on a large screen TV (mine is a 62" DLP)...no matter what HD DVD you're watching and whatever quality, it effectively eliminates the DVD "Blur effect"...anything above that in terms of PQ is an added bonus.

The only one I own that I'm disappointed with the PQ is The Game, even though it's one of those movies that needs that "distance".

Personally, I thought Dune looked damn good, especially the colors.

My sig says it all, if I had a 1080p display, I guess I could better appreciate the thick halos in all their stunning glory that ruin this transfer.

Did you calibrate your 32" tv with a calibration disc like Avia or VE? Or even the THX optimizer screens on dvd's like Fight Club?

Because if not you probably have your contrast, brightness and sharpness set way too high. You may even have edge enhancement turned on on your TV (if the TV has it it's usually on by default but should be OFF)

I don't know what the hell you're talking about. First of all, you pick a movie, Lady in the Water - I have both the Blu Ray and HD DVD versions - encoded in VC-1 which was filmed a certain way which charitably could be described as 'drab' and use it as a reference for HD? It looked that way in the movie theatre. Please. Secondly, you mentioned some of these other movies: Kiss Kiss, Syriana, Dune, all of these most have stated and I agree are very good transfers and could easily beat anything you see on high def television. Third, you mentioned high def television as being stunning and 'vastly superior' to digital cable/dbs - all for you in 720p and yet uncharitably can't see the difference between regular cable/dbs and your HIGH DEF movie player? Something's not adding up here because if you're prepared to acknowledge that high def is better than standard defintion television and your HD DVD player is putting out a better picture by all measurements than your high def television (re absent the numerous over the air compression artifacts) and you describe it as "disappointiing" than either this post is bogus or some oither uncharitable notion could be ascribed to it.

It is true that bigger is better for high def. I have a 65" 1080p DLP and nothing put over the air or sd dvd comes close to what my HD DVD player displays.

No need to get so defensive about the format. Geez, the guy is expressing an opinion, based on his personal observation. I'm sure he'd like to get a better result, not attacked for seeing what he's seeing.

Anybody that has viewed any recorded content, in any format, knows that some material looks better than others. It is somewhat confusing that with the new hd formats coming out that some material that was designed to look bad is being issued, but that is the choice of the studios.

Not to be overly harsh, but you have to be the only person I know of that has BD and HD DVD versions of Lady in the Water. This says something right there.

As to size, I don't buy into the "gotta be huge to appreciate" nonsense. It comes down to 1) resolution, 2) viewing distance, and 3) display technology & model

I suppose if you watch a 32" TV from 12" then what you're saying is true. But size does matter when it comes to high resolution video. Hell, even VHS looks good on a 17" TV at a normal viewing distance. But low-rez video on a 100" projector screen simply grabs you and strangles you when compared to HD. There's even a huge difference between 720p and 1080p at these kinds of screen sizes. So the point isn't that you 'have' to have a large screen to appreciate HD... just that a large screen really, REALLY doesn't have any forgiveness when it comes to lower resolutions.

No need to get so defensive about the format. Geez, the guy is expressing an opinion, based on his personal observation. I'm sure he'd like to get a better result, not attacked for seeing what he's seeing.

Anybody that has viewed any recorded content, in any format, knows that some material looks better than others. It is somewhat confusing that with the new hd formats coming out that some material that was designed to look bad is being issued, but that is the choice of the studios.

Not to be overly harsh, but you have to be the only person I know of that has BD and HD DVD versions of Lady in the Water. This says something right there.

How long have you been posting on the internet? Can you actually ascribe pristine motives to everyone who posts? In addition I'm always suspicious when a thread is started with a title which begs the question as to motives. It's an invitation not to discuss but to question why someone begins a thread denigrating HD DVD. Please, don't be so naive as to accept in the time of this so-called war that there won't be fud purveyors claiming naivete and pure motives.

I subscribe to Google alerts. These types of headings usually end up in the HD DVD alert section a nice bit of propaganda for the masses who question the viability of HD DVD.

For me, if I have an honest inquiry I would title a thread less acrimoniously otherwise it's an invitation to question motives.

Not to be overly harsh, but you have to be the only person I know of that has BD and HD DVD versions of Lady in the Water. This says something right there.

What does it say?

Thanks for catching my secret motives HP. Look, I'm expressing my opinion. I don't have an agenda, sorry to disappoint you. No need to be an ass just because you disagree.

Boo, thanks for the advice, I'll give it a whirl.

I really have to disagree with your opinion. Overall I'm pretty pleased with most of the titles I have on HD DVD, with the exception of several Uni titles. If your criticism were limited to Uni I'd be forced to agree.

There are some titles that fail to impress at first, but remember film stocks were not always whath they are now, and HD has the potential to show this. Some of the softer titles still look better on a native 1080 display because the film grain structure is represented more accurately. While the film shows the limitations of the stock and lenses (as well as the DOP) there is still fine detail residing in the stock itself.

Aside from that, there are some titles that should have never been released the way they are (Perfect Storm, Traffic, etc.). The majority of titles are great though. Overall Blu-Ray still hasn't matched the average PQ of HD-DVD yet (although some titles are right there with it now), and after the blocky mess of digital cable the HD-DVD is a refreshing change.

It will only get better, but getting a larger display that is 1080p native will start to show more limitation of your SD discs, and the benefits of your HD titles.

Did you calibrate your 32" tv with a calibration disc like Avia or VE? Or even the THX optimizer screens on dvd's like Fight Club?

Because if not you probably have your contrast, brightness and sharpness set way too high. You may even have edge enhancement turned on on your TV (if the TV has it it's usually on by default but should be OFF)

I calibrated my tv using fight clubs optimizer and it made everything look like hell. Almost black and white instead of color. So i just put it on standard and turned DNIE off (i hate the clay face effect) and digital NR off and i think it looks better that way.

I suppose if you watch a 32" TV from 12" then what you're saying is true. But size does matter when it comes to high resolution video. Hell, even VHS looks good on a 17" TV at a normal viewing distance. But low-rez video on a 100" projector screen simply grabs you and strangles you when compared to HD. There's even a huge difference between 720p and 1080p at these kinds of screen sizes. So the point isn't that you 'have' to have a large screen to appreciate HD... just that a large screen really, REALLY doesn't have any forgiveness when it comes to lower resolutions.

Well I sit about 5ft from my primary display which is a KDL-46V2500. You're right about large screens and being forgiving though I also find any fixed-pixel HDTVs whatever the size to have a hard time w/ low-rez sources like VHS and SNES

All we can say is check your setup and try all options. I don't know how anyone on ourside trying to justify "how good it is" can be on a crusade to make sure everyone is happy and satisfied, just imposkible. Sure the bigger the screen the bigger the difference, it's mathematical fact. But even on smaller screens I can tell HD from not HD.

The worst HD DVD I have seen was N.L. Vacation and it was still ok and better compared to SD. Everything else has never disappointed me regardless of Tier ranking, note I haven't seen them all and not many on the low Tier end. But I don't know what to say to someone that isn't happy other then check over everything back and forth, I'm not sure how it can't be better, again science is forcing it's will here. I hate to make it personal and bring in "eyesight" that is something Sony would do.

Well, LITW is not a stunner PQ wise on HD DVD, but it is a significant step up from the DVD. Most of how the picture looks depends on how the master looks.

How long have you been posting on the internet? Can you actually ascribe pristine motives to everyone who posts? In addition I'm always suspicious when a thread is started with a title which begs the question as to motives. It's an invitation not to discuss but to question why someone begins a thread denigrating HD DVD. Please, don't be so naive as to accept in the time of this so-called war that there won't be fud purveyors claiming naivete and pure motives.

I subscribe to Google alerts. These types of headings usually end up in the HD DVD alert section a nice bit of propaganda for the masses who question the viability of HD DVD.

For me, if I have an honest inquiry I would title a thread less acrimoniously otherwise it's an invitation to question motives.

I have to agree with HP. The OP's title is inappropriately titled to say that HD DVD is a failure. What the person should have done is to title it "My HD DVD movies are not what I expected." But to flat out say that all HD DVD release have bad PQ, is wrong.

Enough of the senseless arguing.

Topic title changed.

But it seems like for every HD DVD with fantastic video quality I watch (King Kong, Matrix movies) there are twice as many that disappoint (LITW, Dune, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, The Game, Superman Returns, Syriana, etc.).

You should watch the following HD DVD movies: Batman Begins, V for Vendetta, The Mummy, The Mummy 2, Happy Feet, Serentiy, Poseidon, The Fast and the Furios: Tokyo Drift, and Letters from Iwo Jima.

Judge also be sure to add your review of Lady in the Water to the new section! Look up at the top where it says "AVS Forum Opens New Review Area!".

Thanks to those who offered advice and constructive feedback.

JS

How long have you been posting on the internet? Can you actually ascribe pristine motives to everyone who posts? In addition I'm always suspicious when a thread is started with a title which begs the question as to motives. It's an invitation not to discuss but to question why someone begins a thread denigrating HD DVD. Please, don't be so naive as to accept in the time of this so-called war that there won't be fud purveyors claiming naivete and pure motives.

I subscribe to Google alerts. These types of headings usually end up in the HD DVD alert section a nice bit of propaganda for the masses who question the viability of HD DVD.

For me, if I have an honest inquiry I would title a thread less acrimoniously otherwise it's an invitation to question motives.

Right after Al Gore finished inventing the Internet, I started posting - just to see if it worked. At first, it was just Al & I, but eventually it grew nicely.

What we're really discussing is how big a jump the HD formats are over other forms of content.

More than a fair number of people have expressed disappointment in the quality jump they are seeing. This applies to BD, HD-DVD and HDTV. Others were expecting their jaws to drop in awe, and that just didn't happen.

People that said "wow" in awe of the picture were right. Those that said "wow" in disaapointment were also right. They were expecting more than they got.

Personally, I can see a definite difference between SD and HD - in both the DVD and TV worlds. Bad content will always minimize this difference, regardless of the format used to present the content.

What does it say?

Your tastes differ from most. A drab transfer and bad story do not a night in heaven make.

Fortunately, you can purchase as many copies of as many movies that I don't care for as you'd like. In fact, I encourage it as it leaves more shelf space for the content I am interested in seeing.

I think his point was that the difference between SD TV and HDTV is more noticeable than difference between upconverted DVD and HD DVD. I agree with that.

But yes, 32 inch TV from more than a few feet will definitely be hard for anyone to make out the difference... This, unfortunately is the biggest weakness with HD-DVD and Blu-Ray...

I don't know what the hell you're talking about. First of all, you pick a movie, Lady in the Water - I have both the Blu Ray and HD DVD versions - encoded in VC-1 which was filmed a certain way which charitably could be described as 'drab' and use it as a reference for HD? It looked that way in the movie theatre. Please. Secondly, you mentioned some of these other movies: Kiss Kiss, Syriana, Dune, all of these most have stated and I agree are very good transfers and could easily beat anything you see on high def television. Third, you mentioned high def television as being stunning and 'vastly superior' to digital cable/dbs - all for you in 720p and yet uncharitably can't see the difference between regular cable/dbs and your HIGH DEF movie player? Something's not adding up here because if you're prepared to acknowledge that high def is better than standard defintion television and your HD DVD player is putting out a better picture by all measurements than your high def television (re absent the numerous over the air compression artifacts) and you describe it as "disappointiing" than either this post is bogus or some oither uncharitable notion could be ascribed to it.

It is true that bigger is better for high def. I have a 65" 1080p DLP and nothing put over the air or sd dvd comes close to what my HD DVD player displays.

I just watched this for the first time last night on my Panasonic AE1000U on a 100" screen and although I wasn't blown away by it, I found it to be a decent looking transfer. You have to take into consideration the way it was filmed, the muted colors, dark exteriors, etc. Not bad at all. The movie wasn't that good, though.

I just watched the Lady in the Water HD-DVD last night. Movie aside (wife liked it, I hated it) the HD picture was VERY disappointing. When the film was over I decided to flip the disk a bit and check some scenes to compare the DVD to HD DVD picture. On many scenes there appeared to be almost no improvement. On others, there was an improvement in quality and sharpness but it was negligible. If you weren't looking for it, you'd never see it.

I've noticed this on quite a few HD DVD films I rent/buy. I LOVE my HD-DVD player and use it all the time. But I can understand the lack of mass acceptance in HD DVD players in the market when so many films have such minor differences. Mind you, I only have a 32" 720p HD monitor. So maybe I'm missing out because I don't have a bigger screen or 1080p.

But it seems like for every HD DVD with fantastic video quality I watch (King Kong, Matrix movies) there are twice as many that disappoint (LITW, Dune, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, The Game, Superman Returns, Syriana, etc.). When I watch broadcast HDTV the picture is stunning and vastly superior to digital cable/dbs. Even my parents can see the difference and express amazement. But when I show them, my wife, most friends, etc. HD DVDs they just aren't that impressed over the difference of an upscaled DVD.

Oh well, guess I just need to buy a bigger 1080p display and only rent tier 1 level movies. :)
Actually this movie is a good as it could be in HD DVD. I saw it at the theater it was a very dull and dreary colored film. I think the HD DVD greatly improved that.

Hasn't the image quality of this movie already been discussed to death. The "I hate VC-1, I prefer wasted bitrate MPEG2" crowd has already spewed their vitriol about this movie and how much they hate MS/Toshiba/HD DVD etc.

I thought this was an anti-Warner thread too?

I calibrated my tv using fight clubs optimizer and it made everything look like hell. Almost black and white instead of color. So i just put it on standard and turned DNIE off (i hate the clay face effect) and digital NR off and i think it looks better that way.

Totally off topic FYI: Sounds like you're using a Samsung TV. I have a Samsung LNS-3251D and according to Home Theater Magazine calibration may not be needed on that model. They had the following to say in their review "...the Movie mode and Warm2 combination is the only pairing that brings you close to videophile standards for picture quality—very close, in fact. Our measurements revealed that the Movie/Warm2 combo tracks near 6,500 Kelvin across most of the range..."

Newer films do better in HD, but older films benefit as well. Expectations play a big part as well; I was simply amazed when watching The Thing on HD DVD, but the film is 25 years old and I had been watching the original DVD release for years. I think both of those factors lowered my expectations and contributed to my amazement. Conversely I was under whelmed by King Kong. It's a great HD DVD to be sure, but I had heard so much about the great PQ that I built up unrealistic expectations.

A larger screen will definitely contribute to your appreciation of HD DVDs. A 1080P display has 2,073,600 pixels and it only stands to reason that the details in those pixels will be more noticeable if those pixels are larger. I would imagine that the pixels on a 100 inch display are at least three times larger than the pixels on a 32 inch display.