Originally Posted by rwduke /forum/post/0
Excellent point. We are in this hobby because we want hi-definition. Who wants image or audio quality sacrificed for extras that most people will never watch anyway?
Audio and video quality should trump any extras. Give us the best possible video and audio and the rest is gravy. If it doesn't fit, leave it off.
Originally Posted by MitchR /forum/post/0
You're talking Paramount, no wonder then, it's every bit as bad as Warner, in fact, they are the only studios releasing BD movies without HD sound, how ironic!
Originally Posted by tauheel05 /forum/post/0
Like the title says. Let's not screw up future releases, like '300.'
We want high bitrate video (AVC or VC-1) AND Lossless sound.
Originally Posted by bdizzle /forum/post/0
so you decided to make an official plea to warner on avs? hmmm maybe i should make an official plea to the whitehouse to get out of the war on espn.com......
Originally Posted by davwin /forum/post/0
Having said that though, of the different encodes between the 2 formats I've personally seen (World's Fastest Indian, Black Rain and MI: 3) none have had any noticable effect on picture/sound quality. I know that we've all probably read reviews (or seen for yourselves) different encodes that did show differences - with some favoring HD-DVD and some favoring Blu Ray. But, given the great majority of cross-platform titles, this would seem to be a waste of time for the studios.
My personal feeling is not to encourage the studios to do different encodes simply to fill respective disc space but, to do a better encode for both formats and quite frankly - To release more movies
Originally Posted by Colmino /forum/post/0
Three pages and nobody's brought up the specs. Alright.
Let's say Warner (or whoever) finds whatever wasteful solution they can to utilize all 8mbps possible for the audio, and also utilizes all 40mbps possible for video. On a dual-layer disc, they will have to have no less than 140 minutes (two hours, 20 minutes) of video to use up the whole disc. This is a maximized scenario, and assumes that the Blu-ray spec allows for a 40mbps VC-1/AVC stream to be decoded - I frankly don't know if it does. (We'll ignore MPEG2 since it's safe to stop pretending that it was ever a defendable codec for HD media.)
Most movies aren't this long. So unless there's oodles of bonus content waiting to fill the gaps for every movie, people had better get used to Blu-ray discs that aren't fully utilized. If the Blu-ray spec had allowed for better bitrates, there'd be reason to raise an eyebrow over underutilized media.
Originally Posted by oink /forum/post/0
Any studio or AV CE corporation that DIDN'T wish to monitor the responses or opinions of their products by early adopters couldn't last long IMO.
AVS is a barometer that is invaluable to these companies.
How are they to know if the products they produce have a broader future with consumers at large?
I believe many forum members would be shocked if they knew how closely AVS is scrutinized by commercial interests.
Think about it...(you marketing people know what I mean).