AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Basically, the title says it all. Do the other's have their own version of 'Superbit" coming out? What is the name of the competition's "Superbit" compression scheme?


It would be a shame for them not to, as not all the great movies are from Columbia-TriStar!


Thanks,


Robert N.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
931 Posts
As others have posted before other production companies may have DVDs that already rival superbit bit rates in their standard releases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,639 Posts
rival and in many cases surpass.


what they don't have is a specially desgined and marketed logo on the jacket calling attention to it.


not meaning to jump on you Robert, but there are many, many titles out there ( some are even great movies) that have PQ ( although maybe not DTS) that will easily best some of the superbits.


look in the thread here for some suggestions
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,827 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by robtec88
If Sony/Columbia Tri-Star have Superbit, what's the competition have?
A clear conscience? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,441 Posts
For the heck of it I will name a couple of titles from other studios that equal or exceed in PQ and/or SQ some or all titles in Sony's SB line.


Fox: Moulin Rouge, The Siege (DTS)

Universal: Pitch Black, U-571

Warner: Driven, Thirteen Ghost

Disney: Pearl Harbor (directors cut), Tarzan

Artisan: Stargate (ultimate edition), Basic Instinct (special edition)

Dream Works: Gladiator, The Road to El Dorado

MGM: North by Northwest, This is Spinal Tap

New Line: FOTR (extended edition), Blade 2

Paramount: Jimmy Neutron, Vanilla Sky
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Originally posted by amillian:
Quote:
A clear conscience?
ROFL - That's funny but probably true!


I know there are a lot of really good transfers to DVD. I was just wondering if the "others" were looking to jump on the bandwagon. I know it's more of a marketing ploy from Columbia-TriStar but hey, MacDonalds doesn't sell the most hamburgers because they are the greatest burger. Far from it but they have a great marketing scheme.

Originally posted by ckolchak:
Quote:
not meaning to jump on you Robert, but there are many, many titles out there ( some are even great movies) that have PQ ( although maybe not DTS) that will easily best some of the superbits.
Don't worry, no offence taken. I have seen some movies these days (on DVD - not Superbit) that would leave you wondering if there is any room for improvement - the PQ and SQ are THAT good!:D


I was just wondering if the the other studio's were going to "play ball" until HD-DVD gets here.


Thanks for the replies,


Robert N.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,510 Posts
I've yet to see any disc from another studio that even matches Hollowman SB or 5th Element SB. Nothing in Williams' list has the same fine detail or visible *fine* film grain that Superbit often reveals.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,827 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Jesse S
I've yet to see any disc from another studio that even matches Hollowman SB or 5th Element SB. Nothing in Williams' list has the same fine detail or visible *fine* film grain that Superbit often reveals.
In the world of 2.35, try The Pledge or Training Day...two Warners titles that meet or beat any 2.35 SB title I have seen in my system. No one's knocking SB; we're just noting that it's not the be-all, end-all in PQ/SQ. SB is simply CTS doing what they should have done in the first place--delivering the best possible transfer without any marketing gimmicks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
976 Posts
Let's say this is like comparing apples to oranges. The only thing that is correct is to say that SB is better than non-SB for Sony/Columbia's titles. Because SB has not been applied to W-B titles, who can say that it is better? Fifth Element is largely cgi, mattes, models, etc. Training Day is good old 35 mm photography. Different object complexity, different color schemes.


W-B's mastering processes yield a more consistent picture than any other studio. LOTR FOTR is a great example, but they do a great job with many older films (Citizen Kane, Shop Around the Corner, etc.)


Universal is also catching up. You can see this in Red Dragon. The scene where Lecter is listening to Midsummer's Night Dream and sitting in an audience of hundreds of people is proof of this. More than 20 people in the FOV and not one of them is crushed or blurry.


In conclusion, most of the US studios are improving. The telecinists actually read the reviews in TPV, WSR, and even on this forum. What worries me is not the American companies, but the outfits in the far east. Such as Tai Seng. Name me one anamorphic dvd from this distributor that even approaches the quality of Resident Evil non-SB. You can't. Tai Seng rates a 1.25/5 for PQ. They suck. So many important films ruined by vhs-like transfers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,510 Posts
I watched the non-SB Resident Evil a few weeks ago, blacks were noisy and blocky. Compression artifacts all over the place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
931 Posts
yeah I really hate to buy SB Resident Evil since I already have it, but I hear really good things about the SB version.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,827 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Ollie W. Holmes
The only thing that is correct is to say that SB is better than non-SB for Sony/Columbia's titles.
You're preaching to the choir.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ollie W. Holmes
Because SB has not been applied to W-B titles, who can say that it is better?
That's my point: SB isn't something that's applied to a movie, it's simply marketing doublespeak for maximing the PQ through less filtering (which thus requires a higher bitrate to minimize associated MPEG2 compression artifacts) and adding a DTS track. Sony/CTS isn't doing anything that can't be done (and thankfully *is* being done) by other studios; Sony is, however, the only studio making a grand marketing campaign out of the fact that they screwed up the transfers the first time around so much that they felt the need to do new ones, which they know all us fanatics will buy. It's one thing for a studio to do a mea culpa and re-release an obviously poor transfer (e.g., doing an anamorphic transfer, adding DD5.1 in place of DPL or mono, etc.); it's quite another thing to have a studio give us a B+/A- transfer, only to release the A/A+ version a few months later. Sony/CTS is still applying too much EE to 2.35 SBs, so who knows, SuperDuperBits may be just around the corner.


We shouldn't judge a DVD transfer based on SuperBit this or that, we should judge it based on PQ and SQ. I think we're agreeing on this; I'm only posting this because all too many people still feel that SB is the be-all, end-all in DVDs. That's just not true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
The value of Superbit is that you know you're going to get good PQ and SQ. With other DVDs, sure, you *might* get a good presentation, but it's just as likely that there will be problems-- you don't know until you play it.

Here is another thread on the same issue.


--Matthew
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Thanks Matthew, for that link. That was a good read and that's what I would like to see from other studio's. It's all about the consistency! Sure, some DVD's that come out from other studio's could easily match (or beat) a SuperBit in terms of PQ and SQ but they lack the consistency of SuperBit transfers. At least with SuperBit, you know, to some degree, what you're getting - with the other studio's, one new movie could be 'stunning' and the next new one...crap!


Robert N.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,827 Posts



I'd feel a lot more love for Sony/CTS and their intentions with the SB program if they would either come clean with the overall strategy (which is painfully obvious) or at least display some consistency with its application.


If the SB program is about fixing the "wrongs" of the past in terms of what Sony/CTS did on earlier DVD releases, I can think of a lot of recent movies in the CTS vaults that could benefit more from SB treatment than Vertical Limit, A Knight's Tale, The Mask of Zorro, MIB, MIB2 or xXx (all of which had pretty decent transfers, of which the SB versions mainly just reduce the amplitude of the studio-induced EE).


What's that, you say? They only want to use SB for "big" films? Then why waste the effort on Johnny Mnemonic, Gattaca, The Big Hit, Anaconda, Snatch, The Dark Crystal, Labyrinth or Seven Years in Tibet?


Why wait so long between the original DVD releases and the SB releases for the "big" hits? For example, why wait 19 months to release the SB of Charlie's Angles? Oh, wait--isn't the SB release tied to the film release of the new Charlie's Angles movie to help pump up sales of a "new" DVD of an old movie?


Why release Panic Room and Adaptation only as SBs? Panic Room is somewhat understandable (very dark, prone to mosquito noise...which SB surely didn't cure), but Adaptation?!? If Adaptation "deserves" SB right off the bat, then why not most every new Sony/CTS release?


If Sony/CTS markets SB as "the highest quality picture and sound available" (trademarked, no less), then are we to assume that it's okay that their non-SB titles aren't the best they can be? And since Sony/CTS wants "consumers to have picture and sound with no limitations," is it safe to assume that every non-SB title will eventually be released as a SB? And am I wrong to question that half-rate DTS 5.1 is the "highest sound quality available" when full-rate DTS-ES 6.1 has been available as a codec for a few years?


Sorry, but even if the PQ and SQ of SB titles is better than most other studios (but looking at the whole SB catalog, I could argue that point without much effort), at least those other studios aren't jerking us all around with what titles "deserve" to get their best treatment. New Line's Infinifilm program has the same objectives as the SB program, and yet New Line doesn't feel the need to release new titles in non-Infinifilm first, then double dip on sales with the souped-up Infinifilm version down the road.




Excuse the rant--I just hate paying twice for something that I should only have to pay once for, and I hate people gladly lining up to praise a marketing program that is fundamentally nocent. That doesn't mean I won't line up like a lemming to buy SB titles, but it also doesn't mean that I have to enjoy doing so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
931 Posts
My biggest complaint is the lack of, IMHO, decent SB titles. There are only a handful I would buy and guess what I already own the non-SB versions of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,570 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by amillians



Why release Panic Room and Adaptation only as SBs? Panic Room is somewhat understandable (very dark, prone to mosquito noise...which SB surely didn't cure), but Adaptation?!? If Adaptation "deserves" SB right off the bat, then why not most every new Sony/CTS release?

I think that's the major flaw in the marketing strategy at this point. It's not too bright IMO to have a "really good" line and a "for the rest of you losers" line. Any title with even reasonably significant extras should be treated as a "Superbit Deluxe" title IMO, with the feature on one disk and extras on another, and they can drop the hard-core stance of no commentaries with the feature. Commentary tracks don't take much bit-budget, and second disks are cheap. By this criteria, Harry Potter, Lord Of The Rings and many releases qualify as Superbit-style sets.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top