http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/FilmFest/article/253188

Q. And finally, are you optimistic about the future of movies? Will the greatest 20th-century art form last much longer into the 21st century?

A. "Is that a typo? Did you mean 22nd? The art form will endure, in more technical forms than ever. I'm looking forward to testing HiDef and Blu Ray DVDs, but I'm damned if I'll buy a machine until they settle their war. Why does Sony always seem to have the best format, and get bullied?"

So Roger's not buying a BR player. Great news!

Why does Sony always seem to have the best format, and get bullied?"

Because they don't have the best format, now go spread your FUD elsewhere Roger Ebert. :D

It's just another case of someone talking about things that they know nothing about.

Hmmm...with his health, he may never buy a HD Media player. Doesn't he have one foot in the grave already, anyway?

Sony gets bullied??? The man is serioiusly confused.. Sony and its minions in the BDA are the only bullies in town.

What does he know about taste.....He dated Oprah.

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

I am not being argumentative but each time someone makes this point someone rightfully so comes along and points out that in the end there is no difference in the look and sound of the best movies on each format.

If I take the best Blu-ray movie and the best HD DVD movie and compare them head to head which is going to look better?

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.


At last, someone with a balanced view - BD is technically superior while HD DVD has some commercial benefits & more advanced interactivity (for now).

The technical superiority of BD will always appeal to the film makers / critics (Spielberg/Ebert) while the near-term commercial benefits of HD DVD will appeal to the bean-counters annd more financially orientated studio execs i.e. Paramount.

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

quoted for truth.

I am not being argumentative but each time someone makes this point someone rightfully so comes along and points out that in the end there is no difference in the look and sound of the best movies on each format.

If I take the best Blu-ray movie and the best HD DVD movie and compare them head to head which is going to look better?

Then, tell me why Coming to America on HD DVD have Macroblock in a lot of places, while BR don't?

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.To be fair, with full respect to Kris, the Bluray format only has a "superiority" in one specific area - the higher bandwidth and space on disc, something that may soon be eclipsed by HD DVD anyway.

In all other areas, it is actually the HD DVD format that is superior to Bluray, such as: More codecs supported as standard by players; network support mandatory; much cheaper and easier to manufacture; more manufacturing lines installed; a single, standard player profile that is working and tested (and better); a powerful interactive language that is easier to program for; ...I could go on and on.

It's just another case of someone talking about things that they know nothing about.

Yeah, he didn't have all those charts explaining how HD-DVD is the more economically friendly format. He was probably just thinking of storage capacity and the bitrate. Silly critics and filmmakers.

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

QFT

QFT

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

Wouldn't you know, a respected someone with a comment about the superiority of BD and along comes all the HD-DVD goon squad to "refute" it.

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

There has not been one over-arching multi-movie piece of evidence that has shown this to be beneficial. Just because somebody says something is superior, or that theoretical maximums matter, doesn't mean they actually do matter. I can think of numerous cases in the computer world where theoretical numbers are published and in real-world performance, the item falls far short.

To name a few, USB, USB 2.0, Firewire, 802.11B/G/N, Rambus Memory, DDR memory.

Then you can look at the graphics buses. First we had ISA, then VLB, then PCI, moving on to AGP, AGP2/3/4/...infinity X, now PCI-E. However, through the whole AGP progression, not one piece of evidence showed that AGP had any actual differences in bandwidth of video performance. Sure, bandwidth doubled, tripled, went to 8-12x, but when people took infinity-x AGP card and put it into a lower slot, it all performed the same.

Why? Because theoretical limits are just that, theory. In practice they probably won't matter, unless you have the best of everything, like a 80" screen, 1080p, super calibrated, on an uber-player.

Fine, if you want to debate the margins, which matters to .01% of the population, go right ahead. You win in the $10k+ home theatre category. However, that doesn't mean jack for your format.

Now if he is so butt hurt about sony getting bullied but wont buy a player tell the war is settled then why doesn't he just buy his blu-ray player, he obviously likes sony so he should just do it instead of being soppy about it. I guess he is not a movie enthusiast just some lame guy.

Roger Ebert is a nice guy. You can disagree with his opinion as much as he is entitled to his.

That people here would wish ill of him over a stupid format war really is a testament to the worst aspects of it all and speaks volumes about the people driving the dialogue on this war today.

What next? Climbing up watertowers with sniper rifles? Geez, it's just entertainment dollars.

HDDVD is designed with only movies in mind. BD is a complete optical disc solution. Some of it's greatest strengths cant even be applied to movies.

Such as being designed as a recordable format right from the beginning.

HDDVD is crippled tech-wise in that regard.

But this entire debate is so 3-years-ago.

I don't think even the most fanatic of HD supporters would disagree that potentially BD (based on specs) can produce a higher quality picture. The problem is that those benefits only come into play on long movies or with multiple losseless, or uncompressed audio tracks.

It is great that we all are accolytes to the great altar of the highest possible fidelity here at AVS, and I will give BD the exalted position as having the potential to potentially deliver beyond what HD DVD can do in terms of fidelity under the special cases above. However, if HDM is to be a mainstream, mass adopted format, then practical economic considerations are in play. BD's achilles heel we all know is cost, and scalability. The reality is only a tiny percentage of a percentage of folks have the equipment or the environment to actually benefit from the modest theoretcal benefit of BD's extra potential. To steal a phrase from someone else on this forum, the BD advantage is a corner case, of a corner case when it is deployed in the field in the real world. The real world is place where value (price) usually trumps all else.

The man is nuts - the only credit I give him is that he wrote a positive review for "Blade 2" during its early theatrical release - when all the other critics were dumping on it all to hell (them probably having not even watched it, or watched it with both eyes open anyway).

Roger Ebert is a nice guy. You can disagree with his opinion as much as he is entitled to his.

That people here would wish ill of him over a stupid format war really is a testament to the worst aspects of it all and speaks volumes about the people driving the dialogue on this war today.

What next? Climbing up watertowers with sniper rifles? Geez, it's just entertainment dollars.

Roger Ebert is probably the best film-critic we have ever had or will ever have, he's a talented writer (with a Pulitzer to back it up), and highly revered.

That said he's an I'll man struggling after a stroke and cancer surgery's who by his own admission hasn't delved into the format this thread presumes he's endorsing. It's pretty sad to use his passing comment as some sort of ringing endorsment.

Also for what it's worth, his TV show is owned by Disney. I'm sure both formats would love his endorsement and have sent him copious players and disks. I think he ought to stay out of it, his reputation as a film critic far more important and outweighs his value as a format pundit.

Yeah, he didn't have all those charts explaining how HD-DVD is the more economically friendly format. He was probably just thinking of storage capacity and the bitrate. Silly critics and filmmakers.

He probably never watched one of the 70% of BD25 discs out there.

Ebert's a smart guy. In fact, a lot of smart guys prefer Blu-Ray. Don't try to attribute his comment to his health problems. The guy's just using his brain.

Damn! Now the fanboys are attacking Roger Ebert because he doesn't completely agree with them. Sheesh!

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

Can you point me to a BD with better PQ than Hot Fuzz on HD DVD? PotC, Crank, none look as good.

Can you point me to a BD with better PQ than Hot Fuzz on HD DVD? PotC, Crank, none look as good.
The new Fifth Element. It's every bit as good if not a wee bit better.

HDDVD is designed with only movies in mind. BD is a complete optical disc solution. Some of it's greatest strengths cant even be applied to movies.

Such as being designed as a recordable format right from the beginning.

HDDVD is crippled tech-wise in that regard.

But this entire debate is so 3-years-ago.

huh why ?

last i checked you can burn up to 30 gigs on a hd dvd . While its not 50 gigs like bluray that is still alot of space and with flash drives and hardrive space ever increasing the main use of these discs will be for media back up.

When cds came out the only other option was a zip disc at the price points cds hit. With dvd the only other options were cds. Now though you have thumb drives thta are up to 8 gigs and growing that can store more than enough files on them and a decent amount of media . You also have 500 gig drives out there for less than $130 usd and droping and 1tb drives are under $400 .

its seems to me that except for an easy way to record high def tv , home videos or movies bluray / hd dvd doesn't have a place as a data storage option.

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

And even that's a very temporary situation.

And even that's a very temporary situation.

Just wait, a lil longer, just you wait! BD won!

Ebert's a smart guy. In fact, a lot of smart guys prefer Blu-Ray. Don't try to attribute his comment to his health problems. The guy's just using his brain.

Spare us, are you and Ebert Mensa buddies now :rolleyes:?

Sony gets bullied??? The man is serioiusly confused.. Sony and its minions in the BDA are the only bullies in town.

No, no, he's right.
You have to understand that bullies are the biggest weaklings of all...they try to bull their way in, untill they find a person who is not intimidated by them, in this case Sony screwed up royally when they and their supporters hegded their bets against the baddest boy in all the land: Microsoft.:D

I don't know what the "bullied" quote is about (I think this demonstrates that Ebert hasn't been following the format war too closely), but a couple weeks ago Ebert delivered what I believe to be his first comment about the high def formats in a chat, in which he said "I haven't jumped either way. DVDs look great on my high-def projector. I'm waiting to see which format wins." What is interesting here is that he says that DVDs look great. I have a feeling he hasn't seen Casablanca, one of his all time favorite movies, displayed on a big screen in the HD DVD format. If he did, he might no longer think that DVDs look all that great. Ebert sounds like he is most resistant to having to buy two players. Maybe he should look at the new LG dual format player that was just announced.

Then, tell me why Coming to America on HD DVD have Macroblock in a lot of places, while BR don't?

He's still trying to figure out why anyone bought that movie on any format. :)

Blu-ray released a number of stinkers too. One title, does not a format make. :D

Gee, maybe Roger Ebert is more interested in the quality of the movies themselves, than whether the picture is clear enough to be able to count the number of pubic hairs shown in "Fight Club".

huh why ?

last i checked you can burn up to 30 gigs on a hd dvd . While its not 50 gigs like bluray that is still alot of space and with flash drives and hardrive space ever increasing the main use of these discs will be for media back up.

When cds came out the only other option was a zip disc at the price points cds hit. With dvd the only other options were cds. Now though you have thumb drives thta are up to 8 gigs and growing that can store more than enough files on them and a decent amount of media . You also have 500 gig drives out there for less than $130 usd and droping and 1tb drives are under $400 .

its seems to me that except for an easy way to record high def tv , home videos or movies bluray / hd dvd doesn't have a place as a data storage option.


again... welcome to 3 years ago.:rolleyes: All these discussions are old news. And if you would actually look up the technology, you would see the difference. This is about hddvd vs bd, nothing else.

I'm surprised Kris even posted in this thread. It only has to be like the 10 thousandth time he's said that. I'm sure he's just as bored of saying the same things over and over as I am.

All you have to do is search.

The new Fifth Element. It's every bit as good if not a wee bit better.

You wouldn't have a remastered Fifth Element if it wasn't for HD DVD.

May be he'll mention this in his show/articles and see if it makes an impact on HDM :eek:

You wouldn't have a remastered Fifth Element if it wasn't for HD DVD.

By that logic HD DVD would be the eqivilent of 720p HD Lite downloads on xbox live if it weren't for blu-ray.

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact. HD DVD's strength is their interactivity (HDi), hardware pricepoint, and lower production costs.

Sony BetaMax video recorders were also supposed to have better electronics as well. I owned both Beta and VHS machines for years and I couldn't discern any difference in picture quality. I think Blu-ray is going down the same historical path as Beta did...to a slow death. Perhaps Sony executives should listen a little less to their engineers and a little more to the engineer's wives.:rolleyes:

Sony BetaMax video recorders were also supposed to have better electronics as well. I owned both Beta and VHS machines for years and I couldn't discern any difference in picture quality. I think Blu-ray is going down the same historical path as Beta did...to a slow death. Perhaps Sony executives should listen a little less to their engineers and a little more to the engineer's wives.:rolleyes:

I think it's not the engineers faults but the marketing team. I'm an engineer and it's well know that engineering always tell marketing and management the advantages and disadvantages of a design vs the competition but marketing (followed by management) skews the facts to make it look better than it really is.

By that logic HD DVD would be the eqivilent of 720p HD Lite downloads on xbox live if it weren't for blu-ray.

No by that logic HD DVD came out BEFORE Blu-ray and wiith stellar encodes that forced the competition to stop using Mpeg-2 and creating titles like the oft lamented "House of Flying Artifacts"

I've heard alot that Hitler was a nice guy socially, i'm sure he would have been sympathetic to Sony also.

Bleep !!! Godwin's Law, you lose the argument

It's just another case of someone talking about things that they know nothing about.

But if he said Toshiba was gettting bullied, I suppose you'd praise his smarts.

You fanboys are hilarious..

Sony BetaMax video recorders were also supposed to have better electronics as well. I owned both Beta and VHS machines for years and I couldn't discern any difference in picture quality. I think Blu-ray is going down the same historical path as Beta did...to a slow death. Perhaps Sony executives should listen a little less to their engineers and a little more to the engineer's wives.:rolleyes:

quoted for truth

The HD DVD camp should send him a free player and a few movies...LOL.

Sony gets bullied??? The man is serioiusly confused.. Sony and its minions in the BDA are the only bullies in town.

He might be right, in the sense Fox could have bullied Sony into allowing BD+.

Sony BetaMax video recorders were also supposed to have better electronics as well. I owned both Beta and VHS machines for years and I couldn't discern any difference in picture quality. I think Blu-ray is going down the same historical path as Beta did...to a slow death. Perhaps Sony executives should listen a little less to their engineers and a little more to the engineer's wives.:rolleyes:


I do have to say that Beta was much better looking than VHS, the colour especially is much better on beta.

However I firmly believe HD-DVD is the better format. The advantages of BD are meaningless in the real world and the disadvantages are woeful.

No one in the industry likes BD. Its badly implimented , overly complicated and expensive to produce. We're all just hoping it dies sooner than later , and to be honest its been that way since the realisation that pressing BD50s was a process akin to turning lead into gold ...or vice versa perhaps more appropriately.

Sure BD has a smidgeon more capacity and bandwidth. So does D5 but that's not a viable home format either.

You wouldn't have a remastered Fifth Element if it wasn't for HD DVD.Obviously, you didn't see the first release.

I do have to say that Beta was much better looking than VHS, the colour especially is much better on beta.

However I firmly believe HD-DVD is the better format. The advantages of BD are meaningless in the real world and the disadvantages are woeful.

No one in the industry likes BD. Its badly implimented , overly complicated and expensive to produce. We're all just hoping it dies sooner than later , and to be honest its been that way since the realisation that pressing BD50s was a process akin to turning lead into gold ...or vice versa perhaps more appropriately.

Sure BD has a smidgeon more capacity and bandwidth. So does D5 but that's not a viable home format either.

Ouch!

No one in the industry likes BD. Its badly implimented , overly complicated and expensive to produce. We're all just hoping it dies sooner than later , and to be honest its been that way since the realisation that pressing BD50s was a process akin to turning lead into gold ...or vice versa perhaps more appropriately.

Which industry would that be? :D

The new Fifth Element. It's every bit as good if not a wee bit better.

Oh! That's it. I'm off to get a BD player then. $200-$300 more for something a wee bit better is DEFINITELY the smart choice.

How could I have been so stupid to go with HD-DVD. Stupid cost savings. I've been missing out on a "wee bit better" all this time. Doh!

There has not been one over-arching multi-movie piece of evidence that has shown this to be beneficial.

Are you trying to say just because there isn't a clear cut example which takes advantage of BD's superiour bandwidth and space, there never will be?

To be fair, with full respect to Kris, the Bluray format only has a "superiority" in one specific area - the higher bandwidth and space on disc, something that may soon be eclipsed by HD DVD anyway.

In all other areas, it is actually the HD DVD format that is superior to Bluray, such as: More codecs supported as standard by players; network support mandatory; much cheaper and easier to manufacture; more manufacturing lines installed; a single, standard player profile that is working and tested (and better); a powerful interactive language that is easier to program for; ...I could go on and on.

rdjam,

Higher bandwidth and space is way more important than anything else if you are an audio and videophile who wants the best quality possible. It is a no brainer to choose Blu-Ray since it will surpass HD-DVD in interactivity as well since studio's can use the extra space and bandwidth to pack more goodies onto the disc without compromising the audio and video quality.. As for your working and tested format that is "better" as you put it has a much harder time not freezing and hiccupping while playing discs (combo's especially) vs my PS3 which is flawless at that and never skips a beat. Not to mention much slower than the PS3 as well..

You can say what you like, however where it counts, Blu-Ray tops HD-DVD at the moment in all categories but the interactivity which it will surpass way before the TL51 advantage you dream of ever becomes a reality. I do hope TL51 comes true and that it is more stable than the combo discs as well as being fully compatible with all current gen players. However that is wishful thinking at best. What will you be saying if TL51 can't be played on your current player, since you've been saying all along nobody should buy a Blu-Ray player because it might not be able to be updated to the latest specs? Seems to me you would be hypocritical and make up some excuse on Toshiba's behalf instead of being just as upset as you are against Sony..

Would you be saying "30GB is enough, I don't need to buy a new HD-DVD player just to play those stinking TL51's", once you discover that is exactly what you will have to do to be able to enjoy all those future titles?

I've heard alot that Hitler was a nice guy socially, i'm sure he would have been sympathetic to Sony also.


Actually he's partial to Microsoft:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYvZnTFpip0

rdjam,

Higher bandwidth and space is way more important than anything else if you are an audio and videophile who wants the best quality possible. It is a no brainer to choose Blu-Ray since it will surpass HD-DVD in interactivity as well since studio's can use the extra space and bandwidth to pack more goodies onto the disc without compromising the audio and video quality.. As for your working and tested format that is "better" as you put it has a much harder time not freezing and hiccupping while playing discs (combo's especially) vs my PS3 which is flawless at that and never skips a beat. Not to mention much slower than the PS3 as well..

You can say what you like, however where it counts, Blu-Ray tops HD-DVD at the moment in all categories but the interactivity which it will surpass way before the TL51 advantage you dream of ever becomes a reality. I do hope TL51 comes true and that it is more stable than the combo discs as well as being fully compatible with all current gen players. However that is wishful thinking at best. What will you be saying if TL51 can't be played on your current player, since you've been saying all along nobody should buy a Blu-Ray player because it might not be able to be updated to the latest specs? Seems to me you would be hypocritical and make up some excuse on Toshiba's behalf instead of being just as upset as you are against Sony..

Would you be saying "30GB is enough, I don't need to buy a new HD-DVD player just to play those stinking TL51's", once you discover that is exactly what you will have to do to be able to enjoy all those future titles?

Supermans,

Wake up. It's time to go to school. My A2 hasn't skipped any beats. I have yet to experience a single combo with ANY problems. Bandwidth and space are only a pipe dream when the "other guys" use proven technology. When BDA can scientifically prove their theories, we will all take notice. Until then, I will enjoy consistently Superior picture quality, interactivity, studio support, and pricing from HD DVD. I have yet to see a single BDA title that surpasses HD DVD in PQ and AQ (I have friends that own blur-ray and have watched many titles so don't go there). Why again would you pay more for the same quality? How's that 1.1 spec coming along? I hope you enjoy Transformers on SD.

PS I'm waiting for BDA to put out a player with a finalized spec at the right price point. I look forward to enjoying all the HD titles on both formats.

I don't see bandwidth making a difference for home theater. Computers, sure. But on the HT front we've already got more than enough examples of HD-DVD's with both perfect 1080p picture and lossless audio. Bandwidth is clearly not an issue there. Capacity is debatable, but then how hard is to make a 2-disc set and place the extras on disc 2? Hell, studios love that it justifies them charging more for the 2-disc deluxe edition!

And it's not like either format will be around when it's time to transition to a new television format.

As for TL51 discs, they won't be needed for quite some time, so that's a non-issue. There aren't even many BD-50's being used. 30GB is more than enough space.
I view TL51's as more of a way of telling the fan boys to shut up about the capacity advantage b/c HD-DVD now owns it. It just isn't important. I'm almost surprised they didn't taget the size at 50.1, price-is-right style.

I don't see bandwidth making a difference for home theater. Computers, sure. But on the HT front we've already got more than enough examples of HD-DVD's with both perfect 1080p picture and lossless audio. Bandwidth is clearly not an issue there.

As for TL51 discs, they won't be needed for quite some time, so that's a non-issue. There aren't even many BD-50's being used. 30GB is more than enough space.
HD-DVD: The Look and Sound of Good Enough
I view TL51's as more of a way of telling the fan boys to shut up about the capacity advantage b/c HD-DVD now owns it. It just isn't important.
Why should we shut up? Despite HDDVD's fanbase absolute refusal to accept it - capacity and bandwidth are important. You know, I say this over and over, but I can't believe we are having these types of discussion. It's like someone offering you the choice between a 200hp or a 600hp Lamborghini. A HDDVD guy would take the 200hp and reply, "you would never use all that horsepower". A BD guy would go for the 600hp and would respond back, "Sure, I may not use all that horsepower, but at least I know it's there when I need it."

HD-DVD: The Look and Sound of Good Enough

Why should we shut up? Despite HDDVD's fanbase absolute refusal to accept it - capacity and bandwidth are important. You know, I say this over and over, but I can't believe we are having these types of discussion. It's like someone offering you the choice between a 200hp or a 600hp Lamborghini. A HDDVD supporter would take the 200hp and reply, "you would never need all that horsepower". A BD supporter would go for the 600hp and would respond back, "Sure, I may not need all that horsepower, but at least I know it's there when I need it."

Actually BD isn't good enough. D5 is really what we want or better yet 4k Dcinema material and 16bit displays. Actually a 600hp Lambo isn't enough either you really want to have an F16 or maybe even the space shuttle.

Actually lets all just go to the theatre instead and watch a play as then bandwidth and capacity aren't an issue.

Actually BD isn't good enough. D5 is really what we want or better yet 4k Dcinema material and 16bit displays.
I would love to have a 4k display. Next year, I planning on getting a RED Digital Cinema camera. 4k baby!!! I am going to let them work out the kinks first.

I would love to have a 4k display. Next year, I planning on getting a RED Digital Cinema camera. 4k baby!!! I am going to let them work out the kinks first.


Why on earth do you want one of them? Do you have any idea what 4k looks like relative to 2k or 1080p? You are going to be very disappointed if all you plan to do is use it as a glorified video camera. You'll have to wait longer than a year unless you've put down a deposit.

The whole 12bit linear for supposedly 11stops thing also worries me. They must be hiding quantisation in noise which totally defeats the point of a grainless camera.

Also you'll need professional lenses to make shooting larger than 2k worthwhile ( I'd argue you need them to do 2k well enough for pro standards). The rebadged canon lenses RED sell are not quite good enough.

I suspect spending a few thousand to hire a decent selection of lenses every time you take the camera out will prove tiring after a while.

You might as well buy a formula one car to go shopping in.

Why should we shut up? Despite HDDVD's fanbase absolute refusal to accept it - capacity and bandwidth are important. You know, I say this over and over, but I can't believe we are having these types of discussion. It's like someone offering you the choice between a 200hp or a 600hp Lamborghini. A HDDVD guy would take the 200hp and reply, "you would never use all that horsepower". A BD guy would go for the 600hp and would respond back, "Sure, I may not use all that horsepower, but at least I know it's there when I need it."

But why has HD DVD the best looking movies? Hot Fuzz, King Kong... Why is Blu-ray NOT able to deliver a better quality with all the capacity and bandwidth? Because it is NOT important!

Blu-ray: The look and sound of FUD.

Why on earth do you want one of them? Do you have any idea what 4k looks like relative to 2k or 1080p? You are going to be very disappointed if all you plan to do is use it as a glorified video camera. You'll have to wait longer than a year unless you've put down a deposit.

The whole 12bit linear for supposedly 11stops thing also worries me. They must be hiding quantisation in noise which totally defeats the point of a grainless camera.

Also you'll need professional lenses to make shooting larger than 2k worthwhile ( I'd argue you need them to do 2k well enough for pro standards). The rebadged canon lenses RED sell are not quite good enough.

I suspect spending a few thousand to hire a decent selection of lenses every time you take the camera out will prove tiring after a while.

You might as well buy a formula one car to go shopping in.
I've put down a deposit on the RED, but I won't see it well into next year. It's a bit pricey and overkill to be using it for home movies of your dog playing in the backyard. It will be used for professional applications. You are probably right about the Red lenses. I don't think they will be up to the task.

But why has HD DVD the best looking movies? Hot Fuzz, King Kong... Why is Blu-ray NOT able to deliver a better quality with all the capacity and bandwidth? Because it is NOT important!

Blu-ray: The look and sound of FUD.

HDDVD has the best looking movies? BD NOT able to deliver?

Wow! Obviously, you have not seen too many blu-ray movies (or got a crappy display device).

PS I'm waiting for BDA to put out a player with a finalized spec at the right price point. I look forward to enjoying all the HD titles on both formats.

So if TL51 becomes the next standard and suddenly your HD-DVD becomes obsolete because it won't be able to play any of those new and better discs. It would seem HD-DVD is the one with "finalized specs" problems... At least all blu-ray players will be able to play every disc's main feature. It would be hypocritical for you in the future not to be even more fuming and upset at Toshiba if they make you purchase another player to be fully compatible so that you will be able to play the new TL51's..

So if TL51 becomes the next standard and suddenly your HD-DVD becomes obsolete because it won't be able to play any of those new and better discs. It would seem HD-DVD is the one with "finalized specs" problems... At least all blu-ray players will be able to play every disc's main feature. It would be hypocritical for you in the future not to be even more fuming and upset at Toshiba if they make you purchase another player to be fully compatible so that you will be able to play the new TL51's..

Hey Supe . . .how's the shoulder?

Good use of the Strawman argument. The TL51 does not exist as a product. You cannot buy it, there are no movies announced on it.

Hey Supe . . .how's the shoulder?

Good use of the Strawman argument. The TL51 does not exist as a product. You cannot buy it, there are no movies announced on it.

Shoulders getting better :) Thanks for asking..

Lee,

Same question I posed above goes to you as well...I'll re-post it below...

So if TL51 becomes the next standard and suddenly your HD-DVD becomes obsolete because it won't be able to play any of those new and better discs. It would seem HD-DVD is the one with "finalized specs" problems... At least all blu-ray players will be able to play every disc's main feature. It would be hypocritical for you in the future not to be even more fuming and upset at Toshiba if they make you purchase another player to be fully compatible so that you will be able to play the new TL51's..

Shoulders getting better :) Thanks for asking..

Lee,

Same question I posed above goes to you as well...I'll re-post it below...

So if TL51 becomes the next standard and suddenly your HD-DVD becomes obsolete because it won't be able to play any of those new and better discs. It would seem HD-DVD is the one with "finalized specs" problems... At least all blu-ray players will be able to play every disc's main feature. It would be hypocritical for you in the future not to be even more fuming and upset at Toshiba if they make you purchase another player to be fully compatible so that you will be able to play the new TL51's..

You are trying to setup a scenerio where a "new standard" will obsolete all existing players. I do not think that Toshiba will do such a thing. It would mean you couldn't see the movie at all.

Yes we have had additions to formats like DD5.1 and DTS that orphaned people from these improvements. But there was always a DD 2.0 to fall back on so you could see and hear the movie.

Once agin I say the TL51 is a "paper tiger" just to rattle BD's cage. The only use that I see of a TL HD DVD will be the TL Twin Disc and we will have to wait until October to see what was discussed at the next HD DVD Conference where an update is scheduled for it (9/29/07). If you remember the TL51 thread - the TL51 was not even on the agenda - ONLY the TL Twin was.

It's like me asking you what would happen if the 100 GB QL BD was put into use and all existing BD players including the PS3 could not read it.

What Manufacturer would do such a thing?

You are trying to setup a scenerio where a "new standard" will obsolete all existing players. I do not think that Toshiba will do such a thing. It would mean you couldn't see the movie at all.

Yes we have had additions to formats like DD5.1 and DTS that orphaned people from these improvements. But there was always a DD 2.0 to fall back on so you could see and hear the movie.

Once agin I say the TL51 is a "paper tiger" just to rattle BD's cage. The only use that I see of a TL HD DVD will be the TL Twin Disc and we will have to wait until October to see what was discussed at the next HD DVD Conference where an update is scheduled for it (9/29/07). If you remember the TL51 thread - the TL51 was not even on the agenda - ONLY the TL Twin was.

It's like me asking you what would happen if the 100 GB QL BD was put into use and all existing BD players including the PS3 could not read it.

What Manufacturer would do such a thing?

Avoid my question all you want. It will come back to bite you when the time comes.

Avoid my question all you want. It will come back to bite you when the time comes.

I am not avoiding it. I just don't feel your "what if" has any merit to it - that's all.

Please provide me with a past history case where this has happened.

I am not avoiding it. I just don't feel your "what if" has any merit to it - that's all.

Please provide me with a past history case where this has happened.

Of course you are avoiding it. You know the answer will either make you hypocritical if you choose to side with Toshiba in this case, or make you have to do a complete 180 degrees and be as upset at Toshiba for going against everything you've been saying and supporting since you joined this forum which is that they have a standard since day one. You continuously say BD specs are incomplete and that is the main reason HD-DVD is superior. However if TL51's come into fruition and they are not compatible with all current generation players...All of your arguments against Blu-Ray's incomplete specs mean nothing.. Considering the track record "combo discs" have, it is only logical that TL51's would be even harder to get working properly on current hardware if it is possible at all.

Of course you are avoiding it. You know the answer will either make you hypocritical if you choose to side with Toshiba in this case, or make you have to do a complete 180 degrees and be as upset at Toshiba for going against everything you've been saying and supporting since you joined this forum which is that they have a standard since day one. You continuously say BD specs are incomplete and that is the main reason HD-DVD is superior. However if TL51's come into fruition and they are not compatible with all current generation players...All of your arguments against Blu-Ray's incomplete specs mean nothing.. Considering the track record "combo discs" have, it is only logical that TL51's would be even harder to get working properly on current hardware if it is possible at all.

But you are using a "what if" which is 100% speculation. I am using a 100% reality based statement/question in the discussion of Profiles. We already know for a fact that IME and IF's will not work on 1.0 players. No "what if" about it.

Until such time that the TL51 ever appears it cannot be used as an example of anything. It was a lab experiment that served a purpose. It has not even been presented to the HD DVD Forum for acceptance as far as we know.

You continue to throw this red herring/strawman argument up to HD DVD supporters trying to give it merit when it has none.

Just like the failed BD Hybrid that married BD with DVD ala Twin Format. It was shown but never made available to the public.

Just more vaporware.

But you are using a "what if" which is 100% speculation. I am using a 100% reality based statement/question in the discussion of Profiles. We already know for a fact that IME and IF's will not work on 1.0 players. No "what if" about it.

Until such time that the TL51 ever appears it cannot be used as an example of anything. It was a lab experiment that served a purpose. It has not even been presented to the HD DVD Forum for acceptance as far as we know.

You continue to throw this red herring/strawman argument up to HD DVD supporters trying to give it merit when it has none.

Just like the failed BD Hybrid that married BD with DVD ala Twin Format. It was shown but never made available to the public.

Just more vaporware.

Amuse me then and answer my "What if?" scenario instead of dodging the question..

I've put down a deposit on the RED, but I won't see it well into next year. It's a bit pricey and overkill to be using it for home movies of your dog playing in the backyard. It will be used for professional applications. You are probably right about the Red lenses. I don't think they will be up to the task.

Well your pro activities can't be all that urgent if you are prepared to wait for over a year. The Dalsa is better. Personally I'd just hire an Arri and shoot on 35mm. Scanning is comparatively cheap and the difference between 2k and 4k is zilch to anyone but an expert.

Unless you are shooting a blockbuster you'd have a far easier life with a decent 1080i/p camera.

Amuse me then and answer my "What if?" scenario instead of dodging the question..

I am not dodging the question. I have answered it now for the 3rd time. This is my stance. I am not moving away from it.

For me to answer you question as sheer speculation would mean that I would have to see things totally different than I see them today. I am 56 - I can't do that, just like I can't run a marathon.

Supe - maybe this is a debate/discussion/game that you enjoy getting involved in. Your right - you are who you are. Your opinion is yours and you may express it anytime you desire to.

But you have to find someone who also enjoys what you enjoy. It isn't me. Maybe someone else will jump in and "take over" because you and I have reached an impass - a roadblock. But it was nice that we had it in a respectful, civil manner.:)

I can see we have a few members that don't have children. :)

What if dogs had elephant ears?

What if the earth was inside out?

If the sun was purple, would we still be able to see that car driving by with the triple decker spoiler on the back and his mother's coffee can duct taped to the exhaust?

If the quote from Ebert is accurate, I find it a bit silly. What do we know about this guy? He loves movies, has money, and has a dedicated home theater. And I'm supposed to believe that he'd sooner watch standard-def DVDs on his projection screen than to pay $1000 for a combo player? If so, he's of questionable intelligence.

If the quote from Ebert is accurate, I find it a bit silly. What do we know about this guy? He loves movies, has money, and has a dedicated home theater. And I'm supposed to believe that he'd sooner watch standard-def DVDs on his projection screen than to pay $1000 for a combo player? If so, he's of questionable intelligence.

Exactly. That's the larger issue here. Here is someone that should have been an early adopter, but chooses to sit on the sidelines because of the ongoing uncertantity in the choice of a standard Hi-Def format. Unfortunately, you see this type of attitute both among people of his stature and by many here at AVS. Why not just pick one, or both if you have the means, and enjoy movies in HD? I really don't get the logic of these types of people who will only jump in only when its settled. They are only denying themselves a lot of movie viewing pleasure. If you like movies and have a large HDTV then DVD IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH!

From a technical ability in regards to picture and sound, Sony does have the better technology. Whether you prefer HD DVD or not, the increased bandwidth capability (HD DVD's biggest issue IMHO) and higher capacity of Blu-ray make it an obvious fact.

There'd be fewer arguments and more debate if people stopped spouting opinion as 'obvious fact'.

Virtually every review I've seen of dual format releases says the PQ is identical.

Virtually every comment about bandwidth is blown out of the water by HD DVDs with high PQ ratings, high SQ ratings and PinP, all running side-by-side.

Nothing 'obvious' about it.

Steve W

There'd be fewer arguments and more debate if people stopped spouting opinion as 'obvious fact'.

Virtually every review I've seen of dual format releases says the PQ is identical.

Virtually every comment about bandwidth is blown out of the water by HD DVDs with high PQ ratings, high SQ ratings and PinP, all running side-by-side.

Nothing 'obvious' about it.

Steve W
Then why wasn't there room for lossless audio on Blades Of Glory on HD-DVD while the BD has PCM? Why is the audio on the BD of The Prestige far superior to the HD-DVD? Why is the higher bitrate Flags Of Our Father superior on BD?

I could go on and on but bandwidth does make a difference.

To be fair, with full respect to Kris, the Bluray format only has a "superiority" in one specific area - the higher bandwidth and space on disc, something that may soon be eclipsed by HD DVD anyway.

In all other areas, it is actually the HD DVD format that is superior to Bluray, such as: More codecs supported as standard by players; network support mandatory; much cheaper and easier to manufacture; more manufacturing lines installed; a single, standard player profile that is working and tested (and better); a powerful interactive language that is easier to program for; ...I could go on and on.

If the space on the disc does get expanded. Is your player going to play it?
BTW I am totally neutral. Just want someone to win fast.

So if TL51 becomes the next standard and suddenly your HD-DVD becomes obsolete because it won't be able to play any of those new and better discs. It would seem HD-DVD is the one with "finalized specs" problems... At least all blu-ray players will be able to play every disc's main feature. It would be hypocritical for you in the future not to be even more fuming and upset at Toshiba if they make you purchase another player to be fully compatible so that you will be able to play the new TL51's..

if if if if

give it a rest already

bluray is the one without finalized specs and they continue to cheat consumers by not revealing profiles. Sony is putting out a player in Oct. that is not 1.1 compatible, and the freakin deadline is oct.31.

HD-DVD does just fine with 30 gb and the average joe will never be able to tell the difference between an hd-dvd encode and a bluray encode. Both look good - hddvd is cheaper to manufacture and more reliable. Don't bring up the combos are $30 crap, because Fox and Disney are cleaning your clock with $40 msrps on misframed titles with java that no player (except the ps3) can handle.

Then why wasn't there room for lossless audio on Blades Of Glory on HD-DVD while the BD has PCM? Why is the audio on the BD of The Prestige far superior to the HD-DVD? Why is the higher bitrate Flags Of Our Father superior on BD?

I could go on and on but bandwidth does make a difference.

Batman Begins, at 134 minutes, and Troy, at 163 minutes, BOTH offered Dolby TruHD 5.1 encoing on HD DVD, so what exactly is your point in claiming that Blades Of Glory at a whopping 93 minutes couldn't fit lossless audio? Or a 125-minute film like The Prestige, for that matter? Did you ever think that these decisions are based on cost-effectiveness and not space limitation? Every time an HD DVD release doesn't offer lossless audio, the BD camp likes to make ridiculous claims that it's due to capacity. Not the fact that studios make decisions based on cost, and on what's important to the consumer -- and lossless audio is hardly a major factor for most HT consumers.

As for comparisons between the formats, you're actually making the claim that Flags is noticeably superior on BD?!? Based on the screenshot comparisons on this very forum, any minute differences were so indiscernable that it would be pointless to make that claim. (Though the audio on the HD DVD version is superior offering an upgraded Dolby Digital 5.1-Plus track@1.5 Mbps). PQ, however, is virtually identical in every detail. What about Coming To America, which had a VERY NOTICEABLE PQ advantage on the VC1 HD DVD version than the BD AVC version?

Both formats have had their share of duds for software. Which format had to remaster its first title already? That would be Sony with the Fifth Element. And you can all thank the existence of HD DVD for the quick turn-around in PQ that BD had. For every lackluster release like Universal's In Good Company, Blu-Ray has its own bomb such as National Lampoon's Van Wilder. To claim any discernable differences between these formats based on capacity is simply fanboy BS.

BD looks better then HD DVD on papper. But not in reality.

The bandwith bd speced were after mpeg2+pcm, not vc1, avc, dts ma, trueHD.

All it has done is giving bd superior bandwith, not superior pq and aq.

As a video encoding enthusiast it always amuses me when I see people say bitrate doesn't matter. It really shows ignorance, but I can see why they do it. Personally I wouldn't give anyone who said bitrate doesn't matter a second look. If they cant get the mechanics behind that, I have a hard time believing they can walk and chew gum.

Supermans:

Since you love hypothetical scenarios:

What if the PS3 can't be upgraded to 1.1? What if movies made for 1.1 can't be played on 1.0 profile players...at all? What if BD's production problems are never solved? What if the problems with BD-J are insurmountable and you continue to get a trickle of interactive titles...many of which continue to be problematic?

By the way, Blu-Ray's bit-rate is also insufficient. Obviously, we need a player with 1000x the bit-rate--which will directly translate into 1000x the quality. Common sense, right?

What if threads had an automatic locking feature after two days of inactivity?

As a video encoding enthusiast it always amuses me when I see people say bitrate doesn't matter. It really shows ignorance, but I can see why they do it. Personally I wouldn't give anyone who said bitrate doesn't matter a second look. If they cant get the mechanics behind that, I have a hard time believing they can walk and chew gum.


How much bitrate do you need to have? 50mbs 100mbs 200mbs?

If HD DVD had 48mbs and BD had 58mbs, some would still claim HD is bitstarved.

The only thing people should care about is the PQ and AQ, bandwith isnt the viewers problem, its is the compressionist problem.

As a video encoding enthusiast it always amuses me when I see people say bitrate doesn't matter. It really shows ignorance, but I can see why they do it. Personally I wouldn't give anyone who said bitrate doesn't matter a second look. If they cant get the mechanics behind that, I have a hard time believing they can walk and chew gum.

Show me something Blu-Ray has achieved with PQ that HD DVD hasn't equaled, and then you may call me ignorant. Until that time, you come off as being very patronizing, especially considering the fact that HD DVD has led the way in just about every area in the HD arena and continues to do so.

When bit-rate differences equal real-life improvements in PQ, then you'll have an arguement. I care about the PQ of the film -- not the bit-meter on the player's display. Blu-Ray has yet to offer something HD DVD didn't equal or best.

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/FilmFest/article/253188

Q. And finally, are you optimistic about the future of movies? Will the greatest 20th-century art form last much longer into the 21st century?

A. "Is that a typo? Did you mean 22nd? The art form will endure, in more technical forms than ever. I'm looking forward to testing HiDef and Blu Ray DVDs, but I'm damned if I'll buy a machine until they settle their war. Why does Sony always seem to have the best format, and get bullied?"

I respect Roger for his movie critiques. However, in this instance he's just a high profile person that's woefully misinformed.

BTW I wonder if he would feel the same way if he were critiquing a BD and his player would not allow him to access the whole disc? ;)

I respect Roger for his movie critiques. However, in this instance he's just a high profile person that's woefully misinformed.

BTW I wonder if he would feel the same way if he were critiquing a BD and his player would not allow him to access the whole disc? ;)Maybe, he is critiquing the movie and doesn't give a damned about the elongated explainations from Directors and Producers, whoever is in the extra's. He critiques the movie only, because that is what his audience is interested in. I imagine that his take on movies, formats, etc., are much more refined that yours or mine.

Maybe, he is critiquing the movie and doesn't give a damned about the elongated explainations from Directors and Producers, whoever is in the extra's. He critiques the movie only, because that is what his audience is interested in. I imagine that his take on movies, formats, etc., are much more refined that yours or mine.

While I'll agree that his take on movies is most likely more refined than mine. I dismiss outright the notion that his take on formats is more refined than mine. One only has to take a reasoned approach when reading his comment "Why does Sony always seem to have the best format, and get bullied?" Perhaps Roger's meds has gotten the best of him.

Maybe, he is critiquing the movie and doesn't give a damned about the elongated explainations from Directors and Producers, whoever is in the extra's. He critiques the movie only, because that is what his audience is interested in. I imagine that his take on movies, formats, etc., are much more refined that yours or mine.

While I'll agree that his take on movies is most likely more refined than mine. I dismiss outright the notion that his take on formats is more refined than mine. One only has to take a reasoned approach when reading his comment "Why does Sony always seem to have the best format, and get bullied?" Perhaps Roger's meds has gotten the best of him, or his illness prevents him from staying current and informed on the format war.

While I'll agree that his take on movies is most likely more refined than mine. I dismiss outright the notion that his take on formats is more refined than mine. One only has to take a reasoned approach when reading his comment "Why does Sony always seem to have the best format, and get bullied?" Perhaps Roger's meds has gotten the best of him, or his illness prevents him from staying current and informed on the format war.
In his circles, he has the best of everything, technical, financial and insider information, to boot. We could only hope to have his connections, someday. You don't rise to the top, in a syndicated program, especially movie oriented, without knowing Directors, Producers, technical engineers and studio presidents. He has likely talked audio/visual with many of the top minds in Hollywood.

Critics and other press people know nothing about formats..they're not into technology.

If anything, they are J6P's.

Critics and other press people know nothing about formats..they're not into technology.

If anything, they are J6P's.

Yeah, sure... Just look at the crappy HT he had in 2005 (http://www2.oprah.com/foodhome/home/spaces/spaces_20050509_rebert.jhtml). Real J6P-like. :rolleyes:

Why is it that many of the non-technical authorities Ebert, Speilberg, Coppola, Scott, Bay, etc. are behind Blu, but HD-DVD seems only to be evangelized by rabid technologists?

2l

Why should we shut up? Despite HDDVD's fanbase absolute refusal to accept it - capacity and bandwidth are important. You know, I say this over and over, but I can't believe we are having these types of discussion. It's like someone offering you the choice between a 200hp or a 600hp Lamborghini. A HDDVD guy would take the 200hp and reply, "you would never use all that horsepower". A BD guy would go for the 600hp and would respond back, "Sure, I may not use all that horsepower, but at least I know it's there when I need it."

First of all, the bit rate of BD is NOT triple that of HD DVD as is in your HP example.

Secondly, yes the BD fan would take the car with more power. The HD DVD fan would actually be smart enough to find out which car PERFORMS BETTER!!

I have one customers car with 1100HP and another with 800HP. Guess which one beats the other every time?

I have beaten MANY cars that had WAAY more power than me and will continue to do so.

I don't race cars on paper and I don't appreciate movies on paper either. Apparently alot of other people agree or else the original BD release of Fifth Element would never have been remastered since it was superior to the DVD..........on paper anyways.