I just got back into hd-dvd again. and it will go back.

I'm gamer, so I had a ps3 since lanuch, and a handfull of disks. personally I like blu-ray as a better technology... But This is not a hd-dvd vs blu-ray debate.

HDM looks goot. but heck, even at times it just a better upscaple. I got in one on of the man deals this week. and was wathching heros and matrix.

heros looks very disapontingly like a unspace tv series. heck... 24 on dvd appears similar looking.

matrix looks good.

But heres the but... upscaling looks really good. And my setup is not bad, a sony 50"srxd, denon 604 with pcm hdmi sound...

maybe its because i'm used to it. bu tthe WOW is not their anymore. and while HD disks almost always look better. Its sad to say upscaling is close.

You can get into all the techincal stuff, frame by frame look at times. But just watching a movie. 90% of its story. the other 10% is the audio/video.

Good audio/video will make a good story better, but a bad story wont be saved.


as for the A3. I used to have an a2.. both very capable players esspically for the price. But.. ughh. I'm sorry.. I hate the boot times. I know all the excuses... just go get a drink. use the bathroom etc...

But to me, its annoying. I expect some reponse when i turn the thing on. It comes on and says welcome for 30+ seconds before anything happens.. from memory it appears to load the disk faster then the a2. But the time to even opening the drive is so freaking long. Its bound to turn off people.

I upscale alot as over 90% of my Movie collection if DVD, but I can see significant distortions from upscaling as opposed to BD, you going to get a finer image from upscaling but BD as it's true Hi-def format is a has a very fine image, needless to say you might not be able to see much if any difference between HD and DVD (upscaled) but I can, and I'm starting to convert my movie collection over to BD.

the WOW factor will go away I remember when I first saw DVD when I was used to VHS, I thought DVD was a perfect video format, well a year or 2 ago I bought the DVD of one of those "flawless" movies and I enjoyed it but I had adapted, I expected that video quality so the WOW factor was lost.

Some HD looks better than others but from what I've seen all of it looks better than upscaled DVD. You mentioned The Matrix, that didn't wow you? Those are three of the best PQ discs out there IMO.

the matrix looks very clean.

but its not wow idk. like I said, i might be getting jaded. since 90% of all my tv viewing is also in hd.

Its a different discussion but some tv progarms need better low light cameras because i'm starting to see noise.



my overall kind of point was. That even though the stuff looks good. For alot of everyday people. I.E. people like my finace. They dont see a difference... or care too 90% of the time

IHMO Why HDM is going to stall

My speculations/reasons:

1. Has to compete with HD "OTA"

2. Has to compete with $99 and below priced HDMI UP DVD players that promise 1080P

3. Has to compete with DVD - HDM is an evolutionary change from DVD while DVD was a revoulutionary change over VHS.

4. The Format War.

If there is one thing I agree about all this it is that a bad movie is a bad movie and a great movie is a great movie. I have a whack of movies I have PVR'd in SD from my satellite and I can still get into them big time.

HDM would be great to have for a lot of the classics I love though. This silly "war" is keeping me on the sidelines for now until one emerges or dual format players come along in the $500 price range.

37 seconds...

Very few people care about picture quality. I was watching a movie recently and the picture was terrible compared to what it should have been, lots of noise & color banding, then it occurred to me the tv was in the wrong picture mode, switched it, and everything looked much better. The other person I was watching it with said there was nothing wrong with the previous picture, didn't really even see an improvement.

Or, like last night probably my favorite movie, The Godfather, was on A&E and I stayed in my bedroom watching the analog cable version instead of going out to the hdtv and watching the A&EHD channel. Still a great movie and enjoyable watch, and I was content with the analog cable version on a crappy Apex tv.

You may have been disappointed in the HD version of The Godfather on A&E. I have seen the SD DVD versions and all 3 Godfathers are very grainy, so I can't see the HD version looking any better--it may in fact look worse because of all the grain.

My speculations/reasons:

1. Has to compete with HD "OTA"

2. Has to compete with $99 and below priced HDMI UP DVD players that promise 1080P

3. Has to compete with DVD - HDM is an evolutionary change from DVD while DVD was a revoulutionary change over VHS.

4. The Format War.

5. It's too late in the evening and one's too tired to notice the fine details, you just want the stuff - DVD still has the stuff.

I just got back into hd-dvd again. and it will go back.

I'm gamer, so I had a ps3 since lanuch, and a handfull of disks. personally I like blu-ray as a better technology... But This is not a hd-dvd vs blu-ray debate.

HDM looks goot. but heck, even at times it just a better upscaple. I got in one on of the man deals this week. and was wathching heros and matrix.

heros looks very disapontingly like a unspace tv series. heck... 24 on dvd appears similar looking.

matrix looks good.

But heres the but... upscaling looks really good. And my setup is not bad, a sony 50"srxd, denon 604 with pcm hdmi sound...

maybe its because i'm used to it. bu tthe WOW is not their anymore. and while HD disks almost always look better. Its sad to say upscaling is close.

You can get into all the techincal stuff, frame by frame look at times. But just watching a movie. 90% of its story. the other 10% is the audio/video.

Good audio/video will make a good story better, but a bad story wont be saved.


as for the A3. I used to have an a2.. both very capable players esspically for the price. But.. ughh. I'm sorry.. I hate the boot times. I know all the excuses... just go get a drink. use the bathroom etc...

But to me, its annoying. I expect some reponse when i turn the thing on. It comes on and says welcome for 30+ seconds before anything happens.. from memory it appears to load the disk faster then the a2. But the time to even opening the drive is so freaking long. Its bound to turn off people.

Huh?

BTW we can see your post history ;)

Huh?

BTW we can see your post history ;)

i said I was a blu-ray fan boy.

I still give hd-dvd a try. I tryed with the addon. I tried with the a2, now the a3.

IMHO a boot time before I can even put in a disk time of close to 40secs is absurd. I can almost get my pc with windows to boot that fast.

as for picture quality. Its a wash people.

HDM already HAS stalled... been stalled for a while now.

My speculations/reasons:

1. Has to compete with HD "OTA"

2. Has to compete with $99 and below priced HDMI UP DVD players that promise 1080P

3. Has to compete with DVD - HDM is an evolutionary change from DVD while DVD was a revoulutionary change over VHS.

4. The Format War.



+1

*chuckle, I remember when people said the same thing about DVD, it had to compete with VHS, you couldn't record with it etc. etc.... I'm sorry, people will buy into HD when it drops in price enough, People are getting HDTV's by the droves and that will only continue to climb, I don't know what people you guys hang around but I have random friends who aren't geeks at all and the first thing they say when they See HD DVD/BD on my system or any of my friends systems that have them, is WOW!! I hate my tv now.

*chuckle, I remember when people said the same thing about DVD, it had to compete with VHS, you couldn't record with it etc. etc.... I'm sorry, people will buy into HD when it drops in price enough, People are getting HDTV's by the droves and that will only continue to climb, I don't know what people you guys hang around but I have random friends who aren't geeks at all and the first thing they say when they See HD DVD/BD on my system or any of my friends systems that have them, is WOW!! I hate my tv now.

But the real world numbers do not support your theory. Less than 20% of people who own an HDTV are actually watching HD on their HDTV.

HDTV is not 1 or 2 years old. It became available almost 10 years ago.

People in general just don't care about PQ. And the numbers bear this out . . from HD "OTA"

*chuckle, I remember when people said the same thing about DVD, it had to compete with VHS, you couldn't record with it etc. etc.... I'm sorry, people will buy into HD when it drops in price enough, People are getting HDTV's by the droves and that will only continue to climb, I don't know what people you guys hang around but I have random friends who aren't geeks at all and the first thing they say when they See HD DVD/BD on my system or any of my friends systems that have them, is WOW!! I hate my tv now.

The OP has a point. And I have to wonder if we're making a mistake comparing HD DVD/BD to VHS-DVD.

I have to wonder if it's not more appropriate to compare HD to Laserdisc. And the public was never ready for Laserdisc, the technology just lingered in a very small nich market until DVD came about.

It's going to be an uphill battle for both formats, that's for sure.

The OP has a point. And I have to wonder if we're making a mistake comparing HD DVD/BD to VHS-DVD.

I have to wonder if it's not more appropriate to compare HD to Laserdisc. And the public was never ready for Laserdisc, the technology just lingered in a very small nich market until DVD came about.

It's going to be an uphill battle for both formats, that's for sure.

In reality you really can't compare DVD to HDM becuase you did not need a special TV to view the increase in PQ. Same with LD.

HDM is unique because of this and is one of the many reasons why HDM is being adopted so slowly.

Add to that the fact that in the past the media was hands down better (PQ) then other video systems like OTA and CBL or SAT. Now we see HD on HD"OTA" and when shot with HD-CAM it looks much better as far as PQ then a movie does due to the way movies are supposed to look.

So anyone with little or no knowledge goes to BB or CC or WM and sees the lastest movie playing in HD and thinks . . . "what is all the fuss . . That doesn't look as good as the Ball Games, or Nascar or Discovery HD Theater that I see every day."

We know why this is . . but the average person has a much more simplified view . . their eyes tell them this is so and as a matter of fact - it is.

HDM is definitely facing an uphill battle. Obviously HDM looks nicer than DVD, but the question is really whether or not that difference is enough for mainstream consumers to jump in. Remember, average consumers will see a significant improvement in PQ when they hook up a DVD player (they already have) to the new HDTV they just bought replacing their SDTV on DVDs they already own, compared with what they saw before on their SDTV.

In order to get into HDM for small/large improvement in PQ (AQ probably does not really matter), they not only have to buy new players, but also new much more expensive HDM discs.

I guess the improvement in PQ of recent SD DVDs is working against HDM adoption, they make SD DVDs look so much nicer.

Thanks for this thread. The format war is like choosing a frame for a masterpiece. Don't distract from the picture or painting by the mounting.

I am looking for the best presentation of SD medium. Standard DVD play on all HD formats, including the India and China newcomers, is considerably better than virtually all of theSD players. For me, color purity and beauty is the important issue. All the HD players improve the color issue IMHO. Resolution is less of an issue also then because the color information of the larger areas is beautiful. If you find a good SD player with great color, please let me know.

Your entire DVD collection is improved with the HD or BD player. Most SD rental movies play well, without glitches or stoppages. Same with library movies. Clean them first before playing. I hate an interruption during play; I will not forgive that issue. It is a deal breaker. Rental HD movies are almost always a problem. Media cost is lower with SD. SD media is much more availabile for rent or purchase.

...IMHO. Resolution is less of an issue also then because the color information of the larger areas is beautiful. If you find a good SD player with great color, please let me know...
Colors do jump out at you with HD video. ATSC uses 4:2:0 while NTSC uses 4:1:1 color sampling.

However, HDM actually shares same color space as SD DVD (8 bit 4:2:0), that's why the difference is much smaller, if any. I don't really see much color difference in movies I have.

It's not the players, it's the source/format that decide the colors.

The general population of J6Ps are content with mp3 music. Therefore, most of them will be content with standard definition dvd, especially so after they look at the pricetag difference if they really want to enjoy movies from all studios with hdmi audio and 1080p24.

HDM will remain a niche.

i have been thinking this way for awhile now, my dad has been going to get a PS3 then not for a month now. I brought over my PS3 and showed him some movies on his new 60 inch Samsug DLP set and he was so? I do not see a huge difference.

I used to be involved in a HDTV group that started on Long Island back in 98, i helped people pick out HDTVs and put up antennas for them. these people spent huge amounts of money to get HD.

i remember getting a HiPix card when they first came out and getting one station with my old antenna. it was a PBS station doing a test loop of the PBS demo, i had a 22 inch ilyamma CRT that could show HD on it and was amazed!

sadly there are few HD channels that will ever compare to the full bitrate PBS demo that i saw then. most are HD lite even my beloved VOOM channels do not look that great any more.

Now we have HD disks and i was hoping to recapture the WOW feeling i got looking at those PBS demos, but it has not happened yet.

now i am a blu-ray owner, because of my irrational dislike for anything MS is involved with. that and i was going to get a PS3 no matter what anyway, BUT if another format or HD downloading come along that can get me that picture i remember i will jump ship fast.

LAST (and more OT ) is that i do NOT see a huge uptake in HDTV, it is not the HD part that is selling new TVs it is the huge love of flat Panels that is driving people to buy Digital TVs. It is the only thing that explains why so few even have a HD source for there HD sets.

In reality you really can't compare DVD to HDM becuase you did not need a special TV to view the increase in PQ. Same with LD.

HDM is unique because of this and is one of the many reasons why HDM is being adopted so slowly.

Add to that the fact that in the past the media was hands down better (PQ) then other video systems like OTA and CBL or SAT. Now we see HD on HD"OTA" and when shot with HD-CAM it looks much better as far as PQ then a movie does due to the way movies are supposed to look.

So anyone with little or no knowledge goes to BB or CC or WM and sees the lastest movie playing in HD and thinks . . . "what is all the fuss . . That doesn't look as good as the Ball Games, or Nascar or Discovery HD Theater that I see every day."

We know why this is . . but the average person has a much more simplified view . . their eyes tell them this is so and as a matter of fact - it is.

I was originally of the opinion that 1 format would let HDM coast to mass adoption, but watching what has happened over the past months and leaerning what I have learned, I am of the opinion that 1 format would help, but HDM has much larger problems than a format "war".

I was originally of the opinion that 1 format would let HDM coast to mass adoption, but watching what has happened over the past months and leaerning what I have learned, I am of the opinion that 1 format would help, but HDM has much larger problems than a format "war".

Also, when people like my neighbor who bought a $2500 HDTV buys SD DVD to play his movies on instead of BR to play on his son's PS3, that tells me alot. I even made him buy CR to compare and he laughed at the difference.

*shrug*

My speculations/reasons:

1. Has to compete with HD "OTA"

2. Has to compete with $99 and below priced HDMI UP DVD players that promise 1080P

3. Has to compete with DVD - HDM is an evolutionary change from DVD while DVD was a revoulutionary change over VHS.

4. The Format War.

This sums it up!

My speculations/reasons:

1. Has to compete with HD "OTA"

2. Has to compete with $99 and below priced HDMI UP DVD players that promise 1080P

3. Has to compete with DVD - HDM is an evolutionary change from DVD while DVD was a revoulutionary change over VHS.

4. The Format War.


5. Microsoft and Apple battle for downloadable high def distribution at 720p with DD 448k audio. J6P watches it and is amazed. He doesn't have to buy anything (already has a 360 for example) and doesn't have to return it to the store. Doesn't have to pay outrageous prices for the player or discs (already owns a 360). Microsoft wins the format war. Finally pulls support from HD DVD leaving Toshiba and Universal to pay the cheque while Blu-ray becomes a niche format like Laserdisc. Microsoft sends a "Thank you" card to Toshiba for the format war.

"It is as though a thousand videophiles cried out in terror... and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened."

5. Microsoft and Apple battle for downloadable high def distribution at 720p with DD 448k audio. J6P watches it and is amazed.....

ummm, I thought J6p didn't notice quality and that DVD was enough???? at least according to everyone in this thread. So how is 720p material going to wow him??

Colors do jump out at you with HD video. ATSC uses 4:2:0 while NTSC uses 4:1:1 color sampling.

However, HDM actually shares same color space as SD DVD (8 bit 4:2:0), that's why the difference is much smaller, if any. I don't really see much color difference in movies I have.

It's not the players, it's the source/format that decide the colors.
Wesley5: What do the numbers (4:2:0) mean in your message? I notice a subtle but noticeable color improvement with the HD player over a SD player. The colors are more 'majestic' and more shade variations show up. I admit that some SD players like the Philips 5982 are very good also.

Wesley5: What do the numbers (4:2:0) mean in your message? I notice a subtle but noticeable color improvement with the HD player over a SD player. The colors are more 'majestic' and more shade variations show up. I admit that some SD players like the Philips 5982 are very good also.
It's the way color information is sampled, because they can not fit all color info, so they have to reduce it, 4:2:0 or 4:1:1 mean different ways to reduce color info (do a wiki search).

Colors do improve for movies, but probably due to better equipment/source. When I compared same movies (Troy, King Kong, Planet Earth) between SD and HD DVD, color improvement is small, the difference is much smaller than that of HD vs. SD video. This observation is consistent with the fact that both SD DVD and HDM use same color sampling method, presumably same amount color information, obviously HDM contains more pixels, but color range for each pixel is similar.

Similar discussion here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=930054

5. Microsoft and Apple battle for downloadable high def distribution at 720p with DD 448k audio. J6P watches it and is amazed. He doesn't have to buy anything (already has a 360 for example) and doesn't have to return it to the store. Doesn't have to pay outrageous prices for the player or discs (already owns a 360). Microsoft wins the format war. Finally pulls support from HD DVD leaving Toshiba and Universal to pay the cheque while Blu-ray becomes a niche format like Laserdisc. Microsoft sends a "Thank you" card to Toshiba for the format war.

"It is as though a thousand videophiles cried out in terror... and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened."


Are you studying drama?:D If not you should . . .you are darn good at it!

I have friends over essentially HDM demos only now. They see that it looks way better than anything on a screen that they have ever seen in their lives...spread the word.

Art

You really have bad eyes if you think dvd is= to hdm. I have a 22 inch lcd and I can see a pretty huge difference.

HDTV is not 1 or 2 years old. It became available almost 10 years ago.
Exactly! High definition has floundered for a decade... D-VHS, MUSE (in Japan)... and has only taken flight because of affordable flat-panel displays. Which leads to my reason why HDM may stall...

We are not in a high-definition revolution, we are in a flat-panel revolution!

Many people are buying HDTVs for the form-factor, not the picture quality. The contrast and color gamet of CRT HDTVs is superior to that of LCD HDTVs (or even a good CRT SDTV), yet most people are buying LCD HDTVs.

Exactly! High definition has floundered for a decade... D-VHS, MUSE (in Japan)... and has only taken flight because of affordable flat-panel displays. Which leads to my reason why HDM may stall...

We are not in a high-definition revolution, we are in a flat-panel revolution!

Many people are buying HDTVs for the form-factor, not the picture quality. The contrast and color gamet of CRT HDTVs is superior to that of LCD HDTVs (or even a good CRT SDTV), yet most people are buying LCD HDTVs.

Absolutely. They love the George Jetson . . Hang on the wall TV. The fact they call it an HDTV means nothing to them.

Absolutely. They love the George Jetson . . Hang on the wall TV. The fact they call it an HDTV means nothing to them.

Who are "they" and "them"? And what percentage of the population demographic wise do they consist of?

Perceptually, PQ is much more discernible than AQ, which is why the SACD/DVD-A formats really can't be compared. Additionally, their introduction required a 5.1 system at a time when fewer households had 5.1 systems than people now own HD capable TVs. And who would want to spend $500 for a fancy DVD player at that time? I suspect more people even today own more HDTVs than 5.1 systems that those audio formats would make a difference on.

If PQ didn't matter, people would be happy driving their new flat panels with VHS, but this is not the case. These are selling not *just* because of form factor, but because of the demo HD material shown in the stores. People gather around and go: "ohh, aww!". The fact that subscriptions and adoptions of HD cable/satellite boxes continue to increase relative to HDTV sales should tell you this. Obviously, regular cable isn't good enough once they bring their new "form factor" home.

Or tell the couple in their early 60's who I met browsing the HD DVDs at Best Buy looking to double dip for 2001 A Space Odyssey that PQ doesn't matter to them. Interestingly, I asked them if they bought Transformers when it came out. They said "No, we don't watch those kind of movies" with a smile.

But the real world numbers do not support your theory. Less than 20% of people who own an HDTV are actually watching HD on their HDTV.

HDTV is not 1 or 2 years old. It became available almost 10 years ago.

People in general just don't care about PQ. And the numbers bear this out . . from HD "OTA"

I find it amusing when people predict new technology will fail. People DO care about picture quality, but its worth varies from individual to individual. Cost is the underlying factor. The cheaper it becomes, the greater the adoption rate will be.

BTW, I don't believe the percentages reporting that only 20% of HDTV owners are using an HD source. Every single person I know who owns an HDTV has an HD cable box, or OTA antenna.

Art

In all things, the consumer wants Quality, Convenience, Service and Price.

DVD offered all of those things versus VHS- higher quality (easily evident on ANY TV), convenience (no rewinding, chapter skips, etc.), service (longer life expectancy) and price (anyone remember VHS pricing on release date prior to DVD?).

HDM offers one of those only: quality. And, that is only if you know how to take advantage of it by setting up audio and video properly. It will be a long, hard road to HDM acceptance unless the studios drop DVD support.

I find it amusing when people predict new technology will fail. People DO care about picture quality, but its worth varies from individual to individual. Cost is the underlying factor. The cheaper it becomes, the greater the adoption rate will be.

BTW, I don't believe the percentages reporting that only 20% of HDTV owners are using an HD source. Every single person I know who owns an HDTV has an HD cable box, or OTA antenna.

Art

You seem to have misunderstood my post. I never said HDTV will fail - it's adoption is very slow - that is all.

The %'s come from the NPD Group - not me.