Hi!
Japanese Disney announced today 2 new releases.
First film in narnia series will be two disc release with 5.1 PCM, and Coyte Ugly.

And this is one of the intersting things that CUgly will have both versions, but it looks like there will be no seamless branching, two different encodes because it's first (in my head) Disney blu-ray not with PCM, but with TrueHD 6.1 (yep, 6).

Two Encodes=Low Space=TrueHD.

Guess US releases will look the same.

Hm. And news has american version of images....
so it's 99% will be the same.

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20080213/wds1.jpg
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20080213/wds2.jpg

Enchanted will also have Dolby True-HD in America.
Some sites reported it being PCM but it is not.
Confirmation from the Disney website :

Feature
Video: 1080p High Definition/2.35:1/1.85:1 Storybook Beginning

Audio: English Dolby TrueHD (48 kHz/24-bit)
English, French, Spanish 5.1 Dolby Digital

Subtitles: English SDH, French, Spanish

http://disney.go.com/disneyvideos/bluray/

Thanks for the info but these 2 are boring films.

insert whoopee cushion noises here

hm. so disney goes truehd, finally.

Two titles I want very much.


I also like to state I really like what Disney is doing on BD. Presenting all cuts on a single edition is the best extra I can have.

All studios should do this.

Two titles I want very much.


I also like to state I really like what Disney is doing on BD. Presenting all cuts on a single edition is the best extra I can have.

All studios should do this.

Yeah Disney is always a breath of fresh air in comparison to the barebone releases with inferior cuts that Fox always puts out.

Yeah Disney is always a breath of fresh air in comparison to the barebones, inferior cut releases that Fox always puts out.

I am quite happy when Fox gives us NO extras and superlative PQ on what I care about, the actual movie. I would much rather have that than have inferior PQ on the movie because so much space on the disc is needed for all those extras.

I am quite happy when Fox gives us NO extras and superlative PQ on what I care about, the actual movie. I would much rather have that than have inferior PQ on the movie because so much space on the disc is needed for all those extras.

I agree. Although your kidding yourself if you think they couldn't give us the same great PQ with extras. BD-50 provides plenty of space. Especially for standard-def extras.

I agree. Although your kidding yourself if you think they couldn't give us the same great PQ with extras. BD-50 provides plenty of space. Especially for standard-def extras.

For high profile releases like the POTC movies and Spiderman 3 the extras are on separate discs. This suggests to me that in cases where the market appeal of the movie isn't judged to warrant a separate disc for extras, including lots of extras on the same disc as the movie risks compromising the PQ of the movie. And what is the appeal of SD extras anyway?

For high profile releases like the POTC movies and Spiderman 3 the extras are on separate discs.

Yes of course. Those particular movies have their extras in high-definition. It takes up quite a lot of space in comparison to SD extra's. Putting them on a sperate disc makes sense.

This suggests to me that in cases where the market appeal of the movie isn't judged to warrant a separate disc for extras, including lots of extras on the same disc as the movie risks compromising the PQ of the movie.

PQ and AQ should always be first priority I don't doubt that. Keep in mind though, many of these barebone releases aren't using all the available space just for the encode. There is usually quite a lot of space left over that isn't being utilized for anything. Adding in extras after the encode is created and put to disk isn't hurting the quality.

And what is the appeal of SD extras anyway?

The content. ;)

Sure, in a perfect world I would love all extras in high-definition. But realistically I understand thats not always feasible. At the very least we should have the extras in some way, shape or form.

PQ and AQ should always be first priority I don't doubt that. Keep in mind though, many of these barebone releases aren't using all the available space just for the encode. There is usually quite a lot of space left over that isn't being utilized for anything. Adding in extras after the encode is created and put to disk isn't hurting the quality.





I have been unable to find specific information in the bit content threads on the recent Fox releases I think look so outstanding. Have you seen that data on the releases where you think there was plenty of unused space available for extras?

I have been unable to find specific information in the bit content threads on the recent Fox releases I think look so outstanding. Have you seen that data on the releases where you think there was plenty of unused space available for extras?

Yes. Very few releases have come close to using all 50gb of a dual-layer Blu-ray Disc. Especially barebone releases.

Again, in the perfect world I would love to see studios dedicate every last byte for the main feature. Then using a seperate BD-50 for nothing but high-def extras. Maxing out the bitrate to a constant 40 Mbps on both discs.

Again, in the perfect world I would love to see studios dedicate every last byte for the main feature. Then using a seperate BD-50 for nothing but high-def extras. Maxing out the bitrate to a constant 40 Mbps on both discs.

You'll get no argument from me on any of that. But in the imperfect world we actually live in I can live without the extras. ;)

You'll get no argument from me on any of that. But in the imperfect world we actually live in I can live without the extras. ;)

So can I. Although it also doesn't change the fact that studios are being lazy. ;)

I am quite happy when Fox gives us NO extras and superlative PQ on what I care about, the actual movie. I would much rather have that than have inferior PQ on the movie because so much space on the disc is needed for all those extras.

Yes...because 8gb is so much to spare when you have 50 to work with. :rolleyes:

just ask "man on fire."

Yes...because 8gb is so much to spare when you have 50 to work with. :rolleyes:

just ask "man on fire."

So why is it then that Sony is giving us bitrates in the mid 20's at best with the resulting compromise of PQ for the movie itself but ample extras whereas Fox is giving us at least sometimes bitrates in the mid 30's with the resulting expected outstanding PQ and no extras?

So why is it then that Sony is giving us bitrates in the mid 20's at best with the resulting compromise of PQ for the movie itself but ample extras whereas Fox is giving us at least sometimes bitrates in the mid 30's with the resulting expected outstanding PQ and no extras?

Thats speaks more for the studio then the technical feasibility.

28 Weeks Later for example has plenty of extras (most in high-def even) and has bitrates in the 30's - sometimes very high 30's.

So why is it then that Sony is giving us bitrates in the mid 20's at best with the resulting compromise of PQ for the movie itself but ample extras whereas Fox is giving us at least sometimes bitrates in the mid 30's with the resulting expected outstanding PQ and no extras?

Ask the studios. They're the ones not using up the full 50gb. Don't blame it on the extras. That's too "easy."

Ask the studios. They're the ones not using up the full 50gb. Don't blame it on the extras. That's too "easy."

It's been suggested that using the maximum theoretical capacity of the 50gb disc has an adverse effect on replication yields. I don't know whether that is true, but it sounds plausible.

I expect that at least some of the studios will cut corners.

My concern is that one of the corners they may cut is giving us the best PQ on the movie itself in order to satisfy those of you who keep complaining so loudly about the absence of extras.

Do you really value the extras more than the movie?

Do you really value the extras more than the movie?

Thats hardly the issue. I have yet to see anybody in this thread make any hint as to extras being more important than the main feature. Id think the vast majority of people here on AVS have PQ and AQ as the top priority.

If anything the issue is the "total package". If space is left on a disc then why not have the studios use it for extras?

If there is anything I don't personally understand, its why you are so determined to defend a studio that fails to do its part to provide the supplements already available on various standard DVD's. Quite simply I want to know - why is it that you have such a hatred of extra features?

Thats hardly the issue. I have yet to see anybody in this thread make any hint as to extras being more important than the main feature. Id think the vast majority of people here on AVS have PQ and AQ as the top priority.

If anything the issue is the "total package". If space is left on a disc then why not have the studios use it for extras?

If there is anything I don't personally understand, its why you are so determined to defend a studio that fails to do its part to provide the supplements already available on various standard DVD's. Quite simply I want to know - why is it that you have such a hatred of extra features?

I don't hate extras. I hate the possility that the inclusion of extras may have the consequence that the PQ of the movie itself may not be as good as if the extras were not included.

I am defending Fox because they have given me by far the best PQ that I have seen so far from any studio, and outstanding PQ is what I mainly want from high def discs.

Are these positions really so hard to understand?

Thats hardly the issue. I have yet to see anybody in this thread make any hint as to extras being more important than the main feature. Id think the vast majority of people here on AVS have PQ and AQ as the top priority.

If anything the issue is the "total package". If space is left on a disc then why not have the studios use it for extras?

If there is anything I don't personally understand, its why you are so determined to defend a studio that fails to do its part to provide the supplements already available on various standard DVD's. Quite simply I want to know - why is it that you have such a hatred of extra features?

What I hate is hearing people constantly whine about "extras". If every future release lacked extras, I would not care a bit.

I don't hate extras. I hate the possility that the inclusion of extras may have the consequence that the PQ of the movie itself may not be as good as if the extras were not included.

I am defending Fox because they have given me by far the best PQ that I have seen so far from any studio, and outstanding PQ is what I mainly want from high def discs.

Are these positions really so hard to understand?

Is our positions really that hard to understand? Why is it that you continually accuse us of favoring extras over PQ? I think its quite obvious that isn't our stance.

The bit about Fox having the best PQ is debatable. There have been quite a few barebone Fox titles that not many would consider anything close to reference material. Even in comparison to releases by other studios that *do* have extras included.

In fact, most of the greatest releases by Fox do have extras. Such as Cast Away, The Day After Tomorrow, Fantastic Four: The Rise of the Silver Surfer, Ice Age: The Meltdown, Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Rescue Dawn, The Simpsons Movie, Sunshine, etc.

I don't hate extras. I hate the possility that the inclusion of extras may have the consequence that the PQ of the movie itself may not be as good as if the extras were not included.

I am defending Fox because they have given me by far the best PQ that I have seen so far from any studio, and outstanding PQ is what I mainly want from high def discs.

Are these positions really so hard to understand?

You (nor does anyone else) have ANY evidence that extras have ever affected the quality of the main feature.

What I hate is hearing people constantly whine about "extras". If every future release lacked extras, I would not care a bit.

Good for you. Some of us care about quality AND value.

What I hate is hearing people constantly whine about "extras". If every future release lacked extras, I would not care a bit.

Same here.

Another piece of "evidence": Becoming Jane, just out from Disney, outstanding PQ, bitrates consistently in the mid 30's, two hour movie, the extras are as follows: 19 minutes of deleted scenes (SD); a 16 minute making of featurette (SD); one audio commentary; pop-up factoids.

The extras whiners will probably complain about the lack of extras. I celebrate the movie's superlative PQ.

You (nor does anyone else) have ANY evidence that extras have ever affected the quality of the main feature.




Just as no one has any "evidence" that HD DVD's limited bandwidth and disc capacity had any negative effect on PQ.

The extras whiners will probably complain about the lack of extras. I celebrate the movie's superlative PQ.

Why do you call us "whiners?" Why the negativity?

I only "complain" if there are extras left off of a release.

There is plenty of evidence that a packed release can have great quality. Why you'd bother to pick on people/extras that don't affect you, i'll never know. Kinda like straight people that complain that gay marriage will affect theirs.

Enjoy the movie and stop complaining. You don't like extras, don't watch them. Leave those of us who want extras alone.

Why do you call us "whiners?" Why the negativity?

I only "complain" if there are extras left off of a release.

There is plenty of evidence that a packed release can have great quality. Why you'd bother to pick on people/extras that don't affect you, i'll never know. Kinda like straight people that complain that gay marriage will affect theirs.

Enjoy the movie and stop complaining. You don't like extras, don't watch them. Leave those of us who want extras alone.

Extras "affect me" if the inclusion of extras causes the PQ of the movie to suffer. You think that never happens. I fear that it does happen. Obviously, we disagree.

Extras "affect me" if the inclusion of extras causes the PQ of the movie to suffer. You think that never happens. I fear that it does happen. Obviously, we disagree.

Examples? Where have you had an issue?

I can't prove a negative so this is up to you.

"Put up or shut up."

Examples? Where have you had an issue?

I can't prove a negative so this is up to you.

"Put up or shut up."

Across the Universe. Well over 90 minutes of HD extras plus a movie that is over two hours long, and the PQ of the movie suffers in my opinion. The movie's video bitrate is generally in the mid 20's, sometimes lower, and the PQ never has the sharpness I see on the best recent Fox releases, or the detail I see on Disney's very recent Becoming Jane. The close-ups of faces never look sharp; the broad landscape shots (say the college campus near the beginning) look wholly inadequate in detail, particularly when compared to the absolutely gorgeous landscape shots in Becoming Jane.

Sorry patrick. I politely disagree. Only few FOX titles have excellent PQ while the rest are MPEG-2 encoded on BD-25 or have lackluster video encodes with lousy BD+. In-fact FOX stepped up the plate only post Paramount announcement else they would have remained dismal for a prolonged period. With so much space Studios can easily squeeze adequate extras that are available or launch 2 disc special editions.

Sorry patrick. I politely disagree. Only few FOX titles have excellent PQ while the rest are MPEG-2 encoded on BD-25 or have lackluster video encodes with lousy BD+. In-fact FOX stepped up the plate only post Paramount announcement else they would have remained dismal for a prolonged period. With so much space Studios can easily squeeze adequate extras that are available or launch 2 disc special editions.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. My claims about Fox's outstanding PQ relate ONLY to their post-hiatus releases. I agree that their earlier releases generally had fairly mediocre PQ.

Sony made the decision to release Across the Universe on a single disc, and as noted in my previous post the movie's PQ suffered in my opinion as a result.

Across the Universe seems to have received mixed reviews (similar to Stardust). Sony has been doing stunning job with 90% of the transfers. This one seems to be yet another YMMV title. Let's put this title on the back burner and look forward for featured packed releases similar to CE3K.

Across the Universe seems to have received mixed reviews (similar to Stardust). Sony has been doing stunning job with 90% of the transfers. This one seems to be yet another YMMV title. Let's put this title on the back burner and look forward for featured packed releases similar to CE3K.

I very much hope that you are right that this release is just an aberration for Sony. My concern is that it suggests a judgment by Sony that this level of PQ is adequate and that bitrates in the 20's are sufficient.

Blu-ray movies can only look as good as the source its based on. Wall Street is the perfect example. That particular movie will never look good no matter what you do with it. You can give just the movie itself a BD-50 and max out the bitrate to a constant 40 Mbps and it just won't look sharp.

Hell, the current release on Blu-ray has an AVC encode that does go into the 30's. Yet all reviews and opinions on the look of the title have been negative.