Blu-ray expects to reveal launch details in Jan - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 01:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
We don't like the compromise that Sony made and are voicing our displeasure about it ... because it looks like the compromise can adversly affect the quality. Remember ... we are videophiles.
If you are going to purchase a HD-DVD player, then why do you care even a little what Sony does?
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 01:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
c.kingsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 202
You made the claim and now the burden of proof lies with you. You can disagree with this all you want, but it is the cornerstone of logical debate. Pick up a book on philosophy or critical thinking 101 and you easily will find as much in the first chapter regarding debate. I'm not arguing with you that film source matters. Of course it does. But, it is not the only factor to consider. Both the source and the encoding scheme matter, it isn't an either-or situation. You can build a car with the fastest engine known to man, but if you don't have the proper driveline, you'll never deliver that power to the wheels.

I take issue with your wild assertions, such as: "people are anti-bluray because they feel HD DVD is more crackable," and "the use of advanced codecs will require HD DVD to compromise on source material." You can't just make claims and expect people to believe them as fact. The burden of proof lies with you!
c.kingsley is offline  
post #93 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 02:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley
You made the claim and now the burden of proof lies with you.
I have never said ONLY, I said "most important." I provided proof: Don't believe me, go check out your DVD collection and tell me there is no difference in the video quality!! In my collection some movies look great (for DVD) while others look so so.

Quote:
I take issue with your wild assertions, such as: "people are anti-bluray because they feel HD DVD is more crackable," and "the use of advanced codecs will require HD DVD to compromise on source material." You can't just make claims and expect people to believe them as fact. The burden of proof lies with you!
I acknowledged up-front "Impossible to Prove". You can take it or leave it!! Do you have proof that people are not copying borrowed or rented DVD's. Do you have proof they will not do the same to HD disc if the CP is cracked?
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
post #94 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 02:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland
If you are going to purchase a HD-DVD player, then why do you care even a little what Sony does?
Where did I say I'm going to purchase HD-DVD player ? Either show me the quote or apologize.

Edit : Why did you not answer other portions ? Don't have answers ... ?
nataraj is offline  
post #95 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 02:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland
I have never said ONLY, I said "most important." I provided proof: Don't believe me, go check out your DVD collection and tell me there is no difference in the video quality!! In my collection some movies look great (for DVD) while others look so so.
Here is the "proof" that encoding matters. See movies taken from the same source and shown on analog TV, directv, dishnetwork, cable (and different channels), dvd.

Now, where is the proof that source is the "most important". Or for that matter what constitutes "most important". How do you quantify importance that we can objectively determine what is most important ?

You are an engr right, lets get objective here ;)

Quote:
I acknowledged up-front "Impossible to Prove". You can take it or leave it!! Do you have proof that people are not copying borrowed or rented DVD's. Do you have proof they will not do the same to HD disc if the CP is cracked?
Its common knowledge that people are ripping DVDs and may do the same once HD discs are cracked.

That has nothing to do with your assertion that we who are saying sony should use advanced codecs instead of mpeg2 are saying so because we want to rip hd discs once they are cracked.

BTW, if that is all we cared, why should it matter to use if mpeg2 or vc1 is used ? Its not like they can't be transcoded or storage is very expensive or even that vc1 discs will have less bytes than mpeg2.
nataraj is offline  
post #96 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 02:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Where did I say I'm going to purchase HD-DVD player ? Either show me the quote or apologize.
If: Supposing that - Should it happen that - On condition that
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
post #97 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 02:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
If they can afford to do it all right off the bat then great, but that seems highly unlikely.
Apparently other studios are using newer codecs ... so, obviously it is quite possible.
In very small numbers and with modern films perhaps, but then they have the luxury of waiting and testing the waters. Sony is the only studio with a large stake in the format battle, so they would be wise to release a substantial number of movies straight up, to try and bolster their electronics division's position. That makes their use of MPEG2 at first a very sensible option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley
You made the claim and now the burden of proof lies with you.
Nope. The original claims were made by those suggesting Sony had made a mistake in using MPEG2 for their initial releases. The burden of proof is on them.

Quote:
I'm not arguing with you that film source matters. Of course it does. But, it is not the only factor to consider. Both the source and the encoding scheme matter, it isn't an either-or situation.
The problem seems to be that you are arguing a hypothetical, while Wendell and myself are discussing the practicalities. In a land of unlimited money, time, and personnel it probably isn't an either/or situation. Back in the real world (and rolling out any significant number of titles) it quickly becomes one.
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #98 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 02:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Here is the "proof" that encoding matters. See movies taken from the same source and shown on analog TV, directv, dishnetwork, cable (and different channels), dvd.

Now, where is the proof that source is the "most important". Or for that matter what constitutes "most important". How do you quantify importance that we can objectively determine what is most important ?

You are an engr right, lets get objective here ;)
For a man demanding proof you certainly don't offer much yourself. "See movies taken from the same source and shown on analog TV, directv, dishnetwork, cable (and different channels), dvd." :o

Those are all different mediums. We are talking about the use of codecs on one medium, what are you talking about!?! There are different requirements and a variety of limiting factors across those mediums, so the comparison is frankly pointless. For a more interesting comparison see this comparison of Dune DVD releases - note that both use the same codec (MPEG2) and the higher quality release even has a lower average bit rate. For a multitude of other comparisons check out DVD Beaver .
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #99 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 02:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
For a man demanding proof you certainly don't offer much yourself. "See movies taken from the same source and shown on analog TV, directv, dishnetwork, cable (and different channels), dvd." :o
Thats why the use of "proof" instead of proof.

I've already stated my opinion about what is "most important" if you care to read earlier posts.

Quote:
How much does the height contribute to the area of a rectangle ?

The errors that mastering and encoding introduce are additive (though encoding can hide some of mastering errors, I guess). So, you want the best of both ...
nataraj is offline  
post #100 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 03:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
You are an engr right, lets get objective here ;)
If you read the AVS Official AVS D-Theater Rating Topic then you may see my point. If you do not, then I do not think there is a need to continue as I have failed to communicate information effectively.
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
post #101 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 03:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This sort of thing really isn't worth getting angry about. It's not as if Sony have been or will be the only ones to release special editions, collector's editions, ultimate editions, and live-the-movie editions. All the studios are probably gonna start playing that game all over again.

Personally I'm more interested in actually seeing something tangible happen. Announcing a date for an announcement is pathetic. Though I guess they thought there would be an HD-DVD launch to try and pre-empt...
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #102 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 03:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
c.kingsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
The problem seems to be that you are arguing a hypothetical, while Wendell and myself are discussing the practicalities. In a land of unlimited money, time, and personnel it probably isn't an either/or situation. Back in the real world (and rolling out any significant number of titles) it quickly becomes one.
This is called a red herring. Quit trying to divert attention from the issue. What am I arguing that is hypothetical? I'm debunking the assertion that source material is the only important factor. The source material and the encoding go hand in hand. You can take the best source in the world and encode it at a low bitrate, 10 - 12Mbps MPEG-2 and it will still look poor. Sony's decision to use MPEG-2 is a mistake. I already stated yesterday that given the same amount of space (25Gb) VC-1 or H.264 will provide better PQ than MPEG-2. This means that Sony has negated their clear advantage over HD DVD, which was 50Gb disks. If you have a disk which is twice the size, but uses an outdated codec that requires twice the bandwidth to produce equal PQ, then there is no longer an advantage. And this is assuming, of course, that DL Blu-ray materializes in the future.

Considering that companies such as Tektronix produce real-time MPEG-4 encoders and MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 transcoders right now, I don't see the time constraint issues with producing a movie in MPEG-4. With the right hardware it doesn't take that long to encode an entire film in VC-1 or H.264. Maybe Sony has most of their movie catalog sitting on the shelf in MPEG-2 1080p masters? I don't know. But, regardless of their reasons for choosing MPEG-2, it is still less than ideal. MPEG-4 is more efficient and that is good for you, me, and everyone else that will be buying into next generation optical.
c.kingsley is offline  
post #103 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 03:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland
If you read the AVS Official AVS D-Theater Rating Topic then you may see my point. If you do not, then I do not think there is a need to continue as I have failed to communicate information effectively.
Do you or do you not accept that both source & encoding affect quality ?

Quote:
FWIW, I have a Dish 811, Dish 6000, JVC D-VHS D-Theater, PBS HD direct satellite feed, two MIT MDP-120 tuner cards - all displayed on a 52 X 92 Da-Lite screen via a JVC DLA-HX1U D-ILA video projector. Professional equipment was referenced a few post back. I do not claim to be a good video engineer. I only received one Emmy for video in 34 years of television production and broadcasting.
There is no need to drop model numbers etc. Nobody is doubting you have experience as a video engr. But as they say "only the knowledgeable know how little they know". If you are humble rather than arrogant you will earn more respect. Afterall a lot of us here are highly educated ...

edit : Don't you think we should be able to make out that you are a highly experienced video engr by your posts rather than you trying to prove your expertise by listing the equipment you have / have used ? Afterall we are not discussing about these equipments ....
nataraj is offline  
post #104 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 04:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley
What am I arguing that is hypothetical? I'm debunking the assertion that source material is the only important factor.
Nowhere have I claimed that source material is the only important factor, just that it is the most important factor.

Quote:
The source material and the encoding go hand in hand. You can take the best source in the world and encode it at a low bitrate, 10 - 12Mbps MPEG-2 and it will still look poor. Sony's decision to use MPEG-2 is a mistake. I already stated yesterday that given the same amount of space (25Gb) VC-1 or H.264 will provide better PQ than MPEG-2. This means that Sony has negated their clear advantage over HD DVD, which was 50Gb disks. If you have a disk which is twice the size, but uses an outdated codec that requires twice the bandwidth to produce equal PQ, then there is no longer an advantage. And this is assuming, of course, that DL Blu-ray materializes in the future.
For some reason you have to come up with unlikely figures to try and make your point. Why is that I wonder? 10 - 12Mbps MPEG-2? Plucked out of thin air I take it? A more realistic scenario is that Sony spend the majority of their money cleaning up the prints, then encode using MPEG2 VBR at around 18-20 Mbps. Perfect? No. Better than just spending all the dosh on adapting a new codec for use and neglecting the prints? Almost certainly.

According to the information I've seen MPEG2 achieves transparency (virtually) at about 25Mbps for CBR and possibly as low as 21Mbps for VBR. VC-1 and AVC sit somewhere around the 16Mbps mark. If the movie is encoded in MPEG2 at 25Mbps and fits on the disc then, no, encoding in VC-1 at 35Mbps is not gonna make it look noticably different, it'll just waste space. So simply encoding in VC-1 or AVC will not automatically give better results. And dreaming that the Studios' money is limitless to improve the PQ in every area simultaneously is rather silly.


Quote:
Considering that companies such as Tektronix produce real-time MPEG-4 encoders and MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 transcoders right now, I don't see the time constraint issues with producing a movie in MPEG-4. With the right hardware it doesn't take that long to encode an entire film in VC-1 or H.264.
Real time MPEG-4 huh? I'm guessing this is the early version of Main Profile which is actually less impressive than MPEG2 in some tests. The more advanced HP and even the later iterations of MP are not at that stage yet from what I've been told. The simple ability to do something doesn't mean that it can be done well, cheaply or efficiently of course. Learning to encode with new codecs will likely be an expensive and testing process, and imagining that it won't be is just wishful thinking.
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #105 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 04:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
The simple ability to do something doesn't mean that it can be done well, cheaply or efficiently of course. Learning to encode with new codecs will likely be an expensive and testing process, and imagining that it won't be is just wishful thinking.
Isn't this exactly the opposite of whole BluRay logic ?
nataraj is offline  
post #106 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 05:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Do you or do you not accept that both source & encoding affect quality?
Always have.

According to Amirm of Microsoft, all the HD-DVD titles will be encoded with VC-1. For those that want only VC-1 the solution seems simple to me. Get a HD-DVD player and there will be no need to be concerned about MPEG-2. Is there anything wrong with this approach?

Quote:
There is no need to drop model numbers etc. Nobody is doubting you have experience as a video engr. But as they say "only the knowledgeable know how little they know". If you are humble rather than arrogant you will earn more respect. Afterall a lot of us here are highly educated ...

edit : Don't you think we should be able to make out that you are a highly experienced video engr by your posts rather than you trying to prove your expertise by listing the equipment you have / have used ? Afterall we are not discussing about these equipments ....
Deleted from post!!
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
post #107 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 05:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Do you or do you not accept that both source & encoding affect quality?
Always have.
Assuming that to mean you do accept that both osurce & encoding affect quality ... Then, what are we arguing about ? :D

Quote:
For those that want only VC-1 the solution seems simple to me. Get a HD-DVD player and there will be no need to be concerned about MPEG-2. Is there anything wrong with this approach?
I don't think we are saying we want only VC-1. We are just asking why is Sony blowing away BD's USP of higher space (on a single layer) by using an older codec ?

I don't know why you are so defensive about Sony's decision. I would completely understand if your position was "I wish they got newer codec ... but I can live with it since I don't think its a big deal". But you seem to be downright angry with people who seem to think otherwise ...
nataraj is offline  
post #108 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 06:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
why is Sony blowing away BD's USP of higher space (on a single layer) by using an older codec?
This has been answered many times.

Quote:
For those that want only VC-1 the solution seems simple to me. Get a HD-DVD player and there will be no need to be concerned about MPEG-2. Is there anything wrong with this approach?
You did not answer my question!!
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
post #109 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 07:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland
You did not answer my question!!
You haven't answered several of mine !

Quote:
For those that want only VC-1 the solution seems simple to me. Get a HD-DVD player and there will be no need to be concerned about MPEG-2. Is there anything wrong with this approach?
The approach is ... take it or leave it. An arrogant approach that has landed Sony is the red.

I beleive a lot of hue&cry from consumers can change corporate behaviour and I intend to scream as much as possible to that effect. Is there anything wrong with this approach? ;)
nataraj is offline  
post #110 of 160 Old 12-02-2005, 11:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Is there anything wrong with this approach? ;)
If it works for you then it works for me.

In the meantime I will watch and enjoy my D-VHS D-Theater tapes or PBS HD feeds direct from satellite or one of the 19 HD channels from Dish Network or some of the OTA HD programming from CBS. Sometime in the near future I hope to watch programming via Blu-ray Disc.

I wish you all the best in whatever it takes to make you happy!!
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
post #111 of 160 Old 12-03-2005, 12:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JET99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Note that BETA was technically better than VHS, but VHS won.

Practical and excellent can win over less practical and better than excellent

There is alot of pent-up demand for HD discs and I think if Tosihiba's HD-DVD moves out early with 90 plus titles they will be strong for yearsl

Personally I will buy both fomats at launch, as all it comes down to is having one extra player - and pobably duel format players will arrive at some point anyways
JET99 is offline  
post #112 of 160 Old 12-03-2005, 12:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by JET99
Note that BETA was technically better than VHS, but VHS won.
That is true for the consumer format (Betamax) in the USA.

Some trivia: Betamax was a strong format in several other countries and was only recently (~2 to 3 years) decommissioned by Sony.

Now, you probably did not realize it, but you most likely have been watching a lot of video via the Beta cassette for many, many years. As in Betacam, Betacam SP, Betacam Digital and HDCam.
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
post #113 of 160 Old 12-03-2005, 01:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
There are still some areas where BetaCams are still in use. Great PQ but pretty heavy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Isn't this exactly the opposite of whole BluRay logic ?
And "Blu Ray Logic" is...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JET99
There is alot of pent-up demand for HD discs and I think if Tosihiba's HD-DVD moves out early with 90 plus titles they will be strong for years.
Agreed. Which is why it's so surprising that HD-DVD hasn't launched yet. Getting into the marketplace early should be their greatest weapon.
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #114 of 160 Old 12-03-2005, 02:10 AM
Senior Member
 
DanielTS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
Which is why it's so surprising that HD-DVD hasn't launched yet.
AACS isn't quite finished.
DanielTS is offline  
post #115 of 160 Old 12-03-2005, 09:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 17,629
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 356 Post(s)
Liked: 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielTS
AACS isn't quite finished.
Actually AACS is finished. The license is what is not ready and people can not ship a product without a license...

Amir

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #116 of 160 Old 12-03-2005, 05:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jimbo Moran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Tulsa,Ok.
Posts: 1,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
Actually AACS is finished. The license is what is not ready and people can not ship a product without a license...

Amir
Isn't that like a 14 year old that owns an automoile? They can wash it every day, even sit in the drivers seat yelling "Vrooom Vrooom" but without a license no one will ever see that pretty convertible on the streets. :D

Jimbo--------Bomb's Away
Jimbo Moran is offline  
post #117 of 160 Old 12-04-2005, 12:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Milpitas, CA, USA
Posts: 2,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley
If you have a disk which is twice the size, but uses an outdated codec that requires twice the bandwidth to produce equal PQ, then there is no longer an advantage.
Today. Nothing prevents anyone from using VC-1 or AVC at any time once encoding tools are in place. Could be next month for all we know.

Quote:
Considering that companies such as Tektronix produce real-time MPEG-4 encoders and MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 transcoders right now, I don't see the time constraint issues with producing a movie in MPEG-4. With the right hardware it doesn't take that long to encode an entire film in VC-1 or H.264.
The video quality of real-time encoders leave a lot to be desired.

Keith Jack
Sigma Designs
BD, IPTV, HDTV decoder supplier
Blog: http://www.keithjack.net
kjack is offline  
post #118 of 160 Old 12-04-2005, 07:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
trbarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Gainesville FL USA
Posts: 10,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have sort of another problem with either BD or HD-DVD coming out at first with only MPEG-2. New players & codecs tend to have bugs at first. And while I consider myself an early adopter I am usually not THE FIRST. I typically like to read about what experiences knowledgable members of this and other forums have had with whatever new toy I'm contemplating. And I mean actual purchasers, not quotes from press releases.

But both BD and HD-DVD camps are claiming that eventually they will be shipping movies in all of MPEG-2, AVC, and VC1. So, for any given new player, it would be nice to be able to read reviews of that new player about whether it has bugs playing any/all of those formats.

It would be scary to buy a player targeted supposedly at advanced codecs but only have MPEG-2 discs on the market, since that's all the reviewers could write about. I'd be scared that if the player didn't really handle some of the more advanced features then I could be stuck with a door stop once VC1 or AVC encoded discs arrived.

So I certainly hope both camps release in advanced formats from the beginning just so we can test the darn things before buying.

A good parallel here might be Firewire/5C. It supposedly has provision for passing advanced codecs but in practice has sort of gotten itself locked into MPEG-2 just because of all the firewire TV sets out there that can't handle anything else. I wouldn't want that to also happen to a HD disc player that cost early adopter big $$$'s.

- Tom

edit: Thinking about the above I realize I would also be scared to buy a system that supposedly could play dual layer discs if only single layer were available for review and testing. That presents another similar problem. Generally I guess it is unsettling to buy a player when the folks making it say they are going to change ("improve") the media soon.

Why don't we power our electric cars from greener, cheaper Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors?

Tom Barry - Find my video filters at www.trbarry.com
trbarry is offline  
post #119 of 160 Old 12-04-2005, 11:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by c.kingsley
If you have a disk which is twice the size, but uses an outdated codec that requires twice the bandwidth to produce equal PQ, then there is no longer an advantage.
there is only one error in your math. The films video is only one (most likely the biggest but still only one) of the components on the disk, there is security, there is audio, there is extras, menus. So there is still an advantage


Let's look at it in real life. Let's say a movie is 10 GB VC1 = 20GB MPEG-2. if you have 5GB extras (that is small) then 15GB =25GB

if >5GB, let's say 7GB 8GB VC-1= 16GB M2 so 15GB = 23GB so with the 2 extra GB it could mean go with better codec or go with more extras or come out with something the same and leave that 2GB unused.

Obviously <5GB the opposite happens.

On the other hand none of these numbers mean anything, because it is easy to say 2X but it is not absolute (i.e. sometimes it might be 1x while others 3x or what have you) and no one knows what the NFV (none film video) portion will be to say if BR still hgas a capacity advantage or not. (but just in case anyone thinks 5GB is exagerated, just think 3 high quality audio tracks some extras and all the security overhead and it is really not that much)
AnthonyP is offline  
post #120 of 160 Old 12-04-2005, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyP
On the other hand none of these numbers mean anything, because it is easy to say 2X but it is not absolute (i.e. sometimes it might be 1x while others 3x or what have you) and no one knows what the NFV (none film video) portion will be to say if BR still hgas a capacity advantage or not. (but just in case anyone thinks 5GB is exagerated, just think 3 high quality audio tracks some extras and all the security overhead and it is really not that much)
Assume the higher capacity disk also uses better codec and see how it changes the numbers ... :D
nataraj is offline  
Closed Thread Blu-ray Players

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off