HD Streaming Anything Close to Blu-ray? No. - Page 3

I used to purchase Blu-Ray disc (never rented them) because the quality is untouchable today. I also recently purchased a Vudu box, and I gotta tell you, I am no longer purchasing Blu-Ray. I will only purchase discs that I know I am going to watch at least 1 more time and the first time I watch the title will either be in the movie theatres or on Vudu HDX. Vudu HDX is NOT a replacement for BluRay as I would obviously enjoy it more on BluRay but it is a GREAT substitute for me and I do not have to wait for it to come in the mail or go out and purchase the BluRay (of course i will if I LOVE the title).

The one thing that lacks in Vudu, is sound. I think they need to address this and make the box 1.3a compliant so it can stream 7.1. Some titles in HDX are not even 5.1 but stereo which is total crap IMO. But overall, Vudu is perfect for me because HDX is pretty damn close to BluRay and it is convenient to purchase HDX. Of course, I honestly do not look at cost per month for NetFlix or any other streaming VOD service out there. I care about quality AND convenince, that is my bottom line.

Will Vudu be around in 5 yr? I don't know. I recently purchased the box for $150 and I love it and I am sure I will get my satisfaction out of it before it dies (if it does, hope it doesnt).

So I guess, if you are like me and care for both quality and convenience you will love Vudu. If costs are a problem with you, then maybe Vudu is not for you as you can't compare a service like Netflicks and Vudu in terms of cost.

Exactly my point, then Vudu is probably not for you.

I am glad the rules also allow you to imply that I am "on thin ice".... oh wait. Hmmm...

Look... it is totally up to AVS to split forums up however they want. They also are allowed to moderate it however they like. My point is that the industry is shifting and you are seeing a sharp increase in discussion, plans and service for delivering content via streaming/internet. I am sure that AVS will wisely recognize this trend and allow for people to discuss here what is already happening in the marketplace.

Precisely!! I know I use Netflix on Demand primarily for television programs... and sometimes for movies that I kind of feel like watching on a hunch (or that my daughter wants to see). I watched the first two seasons of Weeds that way, some Voltron, the BBC "Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy" series and am really enjoying the old "Maverick" series. I have a crapload of Dr. Who queued up, but am not sure when I am going to get around to it.

I still don't have a Vudu, but should probably pick one up as it will be perfect for 2-3 times a month when I want to see a recent movie in high quality.

Same here. No more HD optical purchases.

I inquired about HDMI 1.3a for Vudu and was told "no plans" at Vudu last month. I guess a decent surround processor helps (Denon 3808ci) but it's still not lossless TrueHD or DTS-MA. But each $20 savings makes me forget that!

HD Streaming Anything Close to Blu-ray? Maybe, but not yet. Need to get the feed from Sat, not internet and there is at least one company working on that. And I say maybe as that one company has a way to go yet. I wish them luck.

Much of this discussion is a non-issue. It'll be 20 years before downloads are even close to BD quality and even scratch 4K. BD will have been replaced by then by a superior, 8K 3D, 60fps capable format, and then it'll be "Oh yeah, just you wait, downloads are gonna be 3D 8K 60fps capable in five years, you might as well save your money and wait til then."

I guess we are both on the same page in that the mods, admins and owners are capable of running the site and can take action as they see fit.


I am not complaining. I will comment that it is obvious that HD software on physical media and via streaming/downloaded delivery are natural peers. All you have to do is look at either forum to see that people are comparing and contrasting the relative benefits of each. Take a look above to see people defending physical media in the Download forum. The industry compares the two and I would expect that AVS will eventually have an area where the enthusiasts can have a place to discuss the various technologies.


When it comes to watching HD content (movies and television shows) at home there are two basic ways.... physical media and download/streaming off the internet. The two are competing in some ways and converging in other ways (streaming capabilities being added to BD players, etc). Everyone knows they are peer technologies. I can understand the admins may want to keep things separate to keep the peace, but the fact that they are both viable options for gettind HD content into homes means that discussions comparing them will naturally crop up. Heck.. you started this thread in the HDTV Software section, and the entire premise is comparing Blu-ray to HD via streaming/downloading!!

Please show me where I ever posted that HD streaming looks as good as Blu-ray. Take your time.....

I personally do not recall anyone saying that it looks "as good as"... but please feel free to link every post where someone states that. If you can come up with a dozen, I will stop posting in this thread.

The only thing I recall is discussions of studies or surveys where the mass consumer does not see a significant difference.



This is not the Blu-ray forum, but.... of course Blu-ray will have a life span, market penetration, etc. There are certainly disagreements about how long, expansive, etc.

It may be the pinnacle of quality for a long time, but that may be due primarily to consumer apathy about video quality. Downloading has a flexibility to be more dynamic with improvements. There is zero technical reason why an encode superior to any Blu-ray encode could not be created and distributed today... it just probably would not increase the value of the content to most consumers.


People should be able to share their opinion and post information about the industry and technology. Not all the news is peachy. Dialog should be encouraged. What should be unacceptable is ad hominem or other personal attacks (direct or insinuated). It is a pathetic display from an individual, and reflects poorly on AVS as a whole.


As far as general respect... I am sure you have seen where someone mentions that they like both quality and convenience. And that convenience does indeed trump the absolute highest quality, especially for some content. They are sometimes met with disparaging comments for daring to have differing values from another poster.

From what I have seen... most of the folks who enjoy and use the benefits of streaming and downloading are far more likely to also state that they understand why others might value video quality above all else (including price). It is generally those who use Blu-ray exclusively that have little tolerance for others expressing the benefits and their satisfaction with other offerings.

No need to wait 20 years. Vudu HDX is very close to BD with real lack only in sound, but considering how close it is today, I highly doubt we won't see HD audio in digital downloads next year. Vudu 2 box will most likely support it and considering how fast the industry is shifting towards download delivery method based on recent studio and software reports not only for movies but software and other services, it should come as no surprise.

Again, both sides are irrational. I see this on multiple forums and it makes no sense to me. People think they have some vested personal interest in the survival of BD or downloads - it has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever encountered. People act that by watching Vudu (or even posting about it) people are anti-BD or vice versa. And the idea that download supporters are somehow this conspiring contingent of ex HD-DVD supporters is paranoia. People that were interested in HD-DVD are likely some of the same people that are going to be interested in HD Downloads.

There is so little to this discussion it is frustrating it keeps coming up and generating posts.

Just watch the movies people.

bald

edit: I saw the posts above referencing HDX vs BD. BD is clearly better, but for many people, myself included, the HDX experience is close enough when I want to sacrifice some quality to watch the movie on short notice. I don't need to watch every film at 30mbit video and 5mbit audio.

This is exactly my view as well. I love the convenience of Vudu. I schedule movies I want to watch that I can live with in DD 5.1. Most comedies, dramas and similar really don't offer any significant improvement worth mentioning when it's in DTS-MA for example. On the other hand when I want to watch some really good movie that's really worth it or a major blockbuster I go Blu-ray just because the audio will be noticeably fuller.

My hopes are that eventually I'll switch completely to digital downloads and get HD audio as well but until we see that I'm fully enjoying both.

And for the record I didn't look at your posting history just to make sure you are not anti-Blu-ray

Of course its not as good as BR never was probably never will be but... Its very convienent and sometimes the quality is very good. With the Netflix for my Xbox I didn't have to pay anything. In fact I scaled back my service to the 8.99 plan. My kids love it and we constantly stream all kinds of movies (they are especially found of the 80's teen movies like Better Off Dead). Quality can be all over the board and they don't seem to mind (bugs me more but I am AV dork) and yes they can tell the difference its just not as important. That said I have seen some really nicely encoded titles like the Return of the King Ext edition about as good as the DVD and The Thing was is in a very nice 720p that was most definitely better than the DVD. I look at this way. I now have a 12000 movie library at my disposal for $100 a year with the ability to get new releases as well. Seems like a good deal to me. How can you knock the options.

Hmmm.

Just to put a stake in the ground, here's some widescreen film source 2K (2048x848) content with 14 Mbps peaks, including 5.1 audio.

http://silverlight.services.live.com...udio/video.wmv

I don't want to jump down the rabbit hole of defining "BD Quality" so I'll let y'all judge yourselves. From a specsmanship perspective, I'll point out that 2048 < 1920 . It plays fine for me in Vista on a Core 2 machine with a PureVideo HD NVidia card.

And here's a 1080p version with 8 Mbps peaks for another data point (and easier to play on lower-end machines):

http://silverlight.services.live.com...0p24/video.wmv

Thoughts?

In support that Netflix is gaining subscriber due to streaming... I used to be a Netflix subscriber when it first started and cancelled after several months. I recently tried streaming and was hooked. I intend to stay on it long term as long as they continue to add titles. Streaming is the future. Convenience and accessibility trumps quality of true HD. I just bought a Roku HD player that streams Netflix and have seen the future. I have canceled some of the premium movie channels on TWC.

I posted this on Roku forums...

In the 70s and 80s, true audiophile purists sought the best equipment but the market headed towards the convenience of CDs, which were not as high quality (to purists) as analog due to the fairly low bitrate. Generic Best Buy consumer audio equipment ruled in the end and high end audio stores shut down. Compressed music was a step further backwards meanwhile much better SACD (higher bitrate) never had a chance. When MP3 players came around, the masses (and most every audio nut) went towards convenience over sound quality.

While 1080p and higher will be pursued, I'd rather have streaming capability of the entire DVD library at 720p than highest possible quality. I also want the best quality to be pursued but w/out sacrificing convenience. Convenience of an entire library at your fingertips should indeed be a higher priority. When everyone has fairly cheap FIOS connections, maybe we'll get the best of both worlds.

For better or worse, the mass market is driven by convenience and accessibility, not quality.

Which looks better, the BD that you don't own and cannot access tonight or the HDX version that you can?

If I have friends over and they want to watch an HD movie should I tell them to come back next week or say OK, let's watch! That exact situation has happened to me on several occasions.

btw Wendell posted the article that said this about Vudu HDX...

We should thank him for pointing this out!

benwaggoner, the links didnt work for me.... and i would be interested in testing some streaming hd. (even though my connection is max 8mbit at home)

I'd tend to agree with a lot of the folks here that streaming is gaining momentum. I recently bought a TivoHD (Amazon unbox) and am now waiting for the new Panny BD players specifically because I want streaming . . .

I guess I'll get to do some "side by side" comparisons between BD titles and streaming when I get my new Panny BD players and i suspect (again, as most agree here) that BD quality is indeed better. The qualitative assessment will revolve around the convenience of downloading/streaming versus buying a BD at a store or online. As a DVD collector with 600+ discs, I'm starting to get to a place where owning a physical disc is no longer an advantage, but a point of indifference (would I like the physical media? sure. but storing them is starting to take up a lot of frickin space) and I suspect at some point will be a disadvantage (to me).

The point is this: we all have different value propositions. In my opinion, it is pretty clear that American tastes are heavily in favor of convenience not quality (online music downloads). For what I believe is the dominant market segment (basically everyone but videophiles) HDlite (i.e., HD-ish movie downloads or VOD) will be good enough at some point (not saying we're there . . .yet). I think one would have to be pretty blind or have a vested interest in not seeing this trend coming, but that's just my opinion. As with all things, YMMV.

There is also a difference between streaming and downloading ala VuDu HDX. You can still watch an HD movie with VuDu even if you only have 700kbs bandwidth. The reason is you can start the download before you watch the film.

That looks amazing for that bitrate! I have to admit the first one had framerate issues on my computer (but I did have Outlook, IE and iTunes open at the same time).

I connected via HDMI to my LCD TV, and the quality was just about as good as it gets from my viewing position. If I walked up to the screen, I could see some blocking.

What do you figure the file size would be for a typical 90 minute movie with 5.1 audio?

Can you try again? It seems like it's working to me.

Your best bet may be to paste the URL into WMP.

Yeah, there hasn't been a lot of tuning for 2K . The key is to have GPU hardware accelerated decode, which works best on Vista with a recent GPU and recent drivers.


Can you share where and with which clip? Also, not it's going to get scaled DOWN on HDMI, so the quality of the scaling algorithm will matter as well.


At 2K? That clip had an average around 6 Mbps, but a real movie would need a higher average. Maybe 6-10 GB? I don't have a full-length film in 2K source.

You're absolutely technically correct. I suspect, however, that to the average consumer streaming = downloading . . . at least to the extent to which they can click on "watch" and have the movie start shortly thereafter (i.e., the time it takes to pop some popcorn in the microwave and get a soft drink). I believe that services that can mask the fact that they're actually download services (i.e., things download for a while before the movie starts playing, does VuDu do this?) and as a result provide a noticeably higher quality experience for the viewer very well might just be in the "sweet spot".

I should point out that I like convenience as much as the next person, but my previous comment aside, am not a fan of download only media ownership (for example, my music collection is predominantly CDs that have been ripped to high VBR .mp3). However, if you take a look at virtually anyone under the age of 25-ish, in much the same way people of my generation remember but don't understand why the generation older than them are still so attached to their vinyl records, the youth of today really don't "get" us older types who want a physical disc for our music. Downloaded bits are the norm for them. This won't likely change any time soon. In fact, I believe it likely that this norm will migrate from music to video. Once a critical mass is reached, it won't matter what studios want, young consumers will expect it to be bits not physical media. My guess is that if you're under the age of 20-ish right now, the idea of physical media for video seems both silly and a hassle to you. Fast forward 10 years and put these 20 year olds in their prime consuming years, starting families, buying houses, etc. and that perspective will dominate the market.

I guess I don't see it so much as a technical question (how soon will really fast broadband or great encoding be here?) as a consumer norming question.

So, my best bet is less than 10 years. How's that for being specific? If your estimate of the aforementioned 20 year olds is younger, it'll be longer. If your estimate is older, it'll be shorter.

I replayed this again on my laptop screen and framerate was not an issue. It must have something to do with HDMI out to my LCD TV (1080p).



The 6-8 mbps clip. The confetti scene had issues, with the building on the left. Looks like the combination of the actual confetti and shadows from the confetti were too much for the bitrate. I also recall seeing it in the scene with torches when the smoke from the torches changed the shadows on the buildings behind the people.

I also noticed a fair amount of issues with color gradients throughout... particularly the scenes with motions. I recall my eyes being drawn to something not quite right with the color consistency of the scarves hanging from the fences in the foreground as the wedding party walked past.



The 2K encoding rocked. Absolutely amazing that you could possibly get a full length film with that quality in at 10 GB.

I personally believe the "sweet spot" is going to be an all-you-can-eat offering (like Netflix) that pre-caches movies to local storage. That way you always have your selection of active titles ready to watch at high quality.