AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
61 - 80 of 89 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,752 Posts

Quote:
Has anyone here else actually seen the BD? This is an awful lot of commotion over a single review.

Yeah, I've had the BD since last Friday. Yeah, it doesn't look that great. But, a few people have a little more perspective than most of the vultures in this forum...

Quote:
Well the dvd release also suffered from the same problems with the first half of the film but got better in the 2nd half.
Quote:
It is simply amazing how many people on AVS continue to rant on and one and come to conclusions with no factual basis whatsoever. The DVD looks like crap too.

Yeah, I watched the DVD when it was released earlier this year. Yeah, it looks like ass also. But you don't think anyone here is going to make the connection that this may very well be a case of a video transfer of a film that just doesn't look that good? Of course not, so why should I bother with them. Hopefully, the folks at Warner either won't see this crap, or will know enough to just consider the source.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,093 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by plazman /forum/post/0


Matter of fact is that no title on 50 GB BD disk looks better than the 30 GB HD DVD version. Even the titles for Paramount that are supposed to be done by Sony...Even the Studio Canal titles look better than their BD counterpart.


There are plenty of mediocre 50 GB BD titles out there. So how does one explain that? Doesn't Click! have a higher bit rate than Batman Begins or King Kong?


Looks like bit rate isn't a good prediction for PQ.


As they say, proof is in the taste of the pudding not the recipe

There's a lot of opinios that point otherwise. MI-3, WTC and others.


Even Kris Deering said so for WTC on his review.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,566 Posts
I guess waiting a month later for the HD-DVD version may not be bad afterall!



Not that this is apples to apples here, but looks like Sony is getting a taste of their own medicine on shoddy transfers. I remember when the Xbox was getting crappy ports of a PS2 game when the Xbox was the superior platform. Again, not apples to apples, but same rule applies here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,737 Posts
One bad review and immediately it must be a bad encode and HD DVD's fault. Lovely.


I wonder if people around these parts have even been following the work that Xylon has been doing comparing the formats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
630 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Rein /forum/post/0


I guess waiting a month later for the HD-DVD version may not be bad afterall!



Not that this is apples to apples here, but looks like Sony is getting a taste of their own medicine on shoddy transfers. I remember when the Xbox was getting crappy ports of a PS2 game when the Xbox was the superior platform. Again, not apples to apples, but same rule applies here.


Warner giving both formats a bad transfer was done to spite Sony. Ok....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,059 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by plazman /forum/post/0


Matter of fact is that no title on 50 GB BD disk looks better than the 30 GB HD DVD version. Even the titles for Paramount that are supposed to be done by Sony...Even the Studio Canal titles look better than their BD counterpart.


There are plenty of mediocre 50 GB BD titles out there. So how does one explain that? Doesn't Click! have a higher bit rate than Batman Begins or King Kong?


Looks like bit rate isn't a good prediction for PQ.


As they say, proof is in the taste of the pudding not the recipe

SSSShhhhhh! Making too much sense for this forum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,059 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexBC /forum/post/0


There's a lot of opinios that point otherwise. MI-3, WTC and others.


Even Kris Deering said so for WTC on his review.


Almost all opinions state they look the same. I've heard more swing to the HD-DVD side than the Blu-Ray side. HD-DVD is capable of the same picture Blu-Ray is capable of. Just look at King Kong or The Matrix.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,847 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLion /forum/post/0


I still think this ( http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0&page=1&pp=30 ) is the appropriate place to discuss this "dual format" issue once and for all.

Lion,

Thanks for the link as I had completely missed it.


Good stuff there.

You demonstrate yourself as a leader, once again.



P.S.

Lol, just how many MS employees (identified and anonymous) are posting on that thread now ?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,749 Posts
I watched BD last night. I had been looking forward to this title and was expecting a good quality transfer. I was somewhat disappointed but it wasn't awful. The times I checked the bit rates were mostly in the 20's, ranging anywhere from the low teens to the mid 30's. To me the transfer just looked soft.


I watched Apocalypto the night before and it looked and sounded much better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,231 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilstinky /forum/post/0


SSSShhhhhh! Making too much sense for this forum.


The proof is in the taste of the pudding..And recipe has proven to have a lot to do with it when in good hands.
In this case the "good hands" is Buena Vista which is Disney for those folks new to the forum. I've compared numerous times the best non-animated movie on both formats..King Kong vs POTC DMC...And hands down POTC DMC is above and beyond King Kong in High Def video quality not to mention sound as well. At thsi point in time I don't believe HD-DVD has the specs or the encoders capable of producing quality at POTC DMC level. Blood Diamond is probably on par with the Fifth Element Blu-Ray in quality. Yet at this late a stage in the game, that type of low quality is uncalled for on either format. If Warner had done a blind automatic re-encode using AVC or even VC-1 at double the bitrate...I'm sure they could have achieved better results than the bit-starved mess they made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,231 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilstinky /forum/post/0


Almost all opinions state they look the same. I've heard more swing to the HD-DVD side than the Blu-Ray side. HD-DVD is capable of the same picture Blu-Ray is capable of. Just look at King Kong or The Matrix.

Read above post.. just swicth your name with plazman and it applies to you as well..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,416 Posts
I've read Matrix is excellent picture quality, save some minor touches of compression artifacting here and there....but it's WB, probably the best you'll get. Personally, I'd rather not have any compression artifacting on my movie (read Pirates films).


What, the Blood Diamond DVD looked like crap too? That doesn't surprise me considering everyone said the Superman Returns DVD looked like crap. You usually get near-perfection or a compression-artifact-filled mess from WB, regardless of the format: DVD, HD DVD, or Blu-ray it appears. Bad master? Possibly. But just as likely, shoddy encoding on both the DVD and HD formats. And yeah, if they aim to squeeze a hell of a lot of extras onto one HD DVD (I'm guessing the film itself isn't a shortie), the bitrate will be low for the feature and, yeah, you can blame being limited by the HD DVD spec...in part anyway. They could have planned a 2-disc HD DVD. HD DVD's MIME is SD, so that by itself shouldn't take THAT much space.


While some posters seemed to get the wrong idea and didn't even read the thread, I'll be the first to inject some true conspiracy fears into the thread, to appease the bloodthirsty (no pun intended).


This is the first time WB released soemthing first on BD. This could have proven there'd be a lot of sales without the MIME features, BUT they release a subpar version of the film. Sales will suffer because of scathing reviews, so they can say "see, people are waiting for the MIME features! Let's withhold MORE titles!"


And if they really want to rub salt into the wound they could re-encode the video for the HD DVD release and have it look better, so they and the HD DVD fanboys can crow, "see, our format is better." Perhaps they'll re-encode and do a 2-disc HD DVD release (I assume there are special features other than just the MIME features) so they can up that bitrate. If anyone asks why HD DVD gets 2 discs they can just say, "it's only fair; there was more space on that BD-50 (that we didn't use). We're completely neutral"


MUWHAHAHAHAHA!


So, there conspiracy theory junkies!


Now we get to sit back and watch the cliffhanger resolve itself.


Will WB release a visibly superior release of Blood Diamond on HD DVD?! Tune in next time...


Personally, I hope they don't, because it's dirty pool in the format war. Then again, it sucks that more people than necessary get stuck with anything subpar. Unless they want to release a remastered BD too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,059 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermans /forum/post/0


The proof is in the taste of the pudding..And recipe has proven to have a lot to do with it when in good hands.
In this case the "good hands" is Buena Vista which is Disney for those folks new to the forum. I've compared numerous times the best non-animated movie on both formats..King Kong vs POTC DMC...And hands down POTC DMC is above and beyond King Kong in High Def video quality not to mention sound as well. At thsi point in time I don't believe HD-DVD has the specs or the encoders capable of producing quality at POTC DMC level. Blood Diamond is probably on par with the Fifth Element Blu-Ray in quality. Yet at this late a stage in the game, that type of low quality is uncalled for on either format. If Warner had done a blind automatic re-encode using AVC or even VC-1 at double the bitrate...I'm sure they could have achieved better results than the bit-starved mess they made.

Guess what. If POTC was on HD-DVD it would look the same just like the Matrix will be the same on Blu-Ray.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
34,841 Posts
Penton-Man,


Maybe you and other insiders can shed some light on this issue for us...


Is it more costly for the studios to use nearly all of the capacity of an optical disk with higher bit-rate video (after the audio tracks, extras, etc. are laid down)?

If so, approx. how much?


I believe us early-adopters need to put more pressure on studios to use as much of the capacity on the disk as possible.

Low encodes are NOT acceptable IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,059 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermans /forum/post/0


Read above post.. just swicth your name with plazman and it applies to you as well..

That was a response to me. WAKE UP! Please understand that HD-DVD is capable of just as good of picture as Blu-Ray. Anybody who owns both and doesn't drink the BD koolaid realizes this. Well at least once Blu-Ray gots its act together and starting putting out quality transfers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,024 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilstinky /forum/post/0


That was a response to me. WAKE UP! Please understand that HD-DVD is capable of just as good of picture as Blu-Ray. Anybody who owns both and doesn't drink the BD koolaid realizes this. Well at least once Blu-Ray gots its act together and starting putting out quality transfers.

Question for you, do you believe that increasing (to almost 2x) the bitrate on this encoding would have increased the PQ?


That is what we are talking about here, using the extra space (~20gb) for higher bitrate encodes.


BTW, I completely agree that there are great looking titles on both formats, and will continue to be, even if Warner encodes seperately for BD and HD DVD (which I don't see happening).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,055 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randall Morton /forum/post/0


I watched BD last night. I had been looking forward to this title and was expecting a good quality transfer. I was somewhat disappointed but it wasn't awful. The times I checked the bit rates were mostly in the 20's, ranging anywhere from the low teens to the mid 30's. To me the transfer just looked soft.


I watched Apocalypto the night before and it looked and sounded much better.

So much for this 7.9 Mbps nonsense..The audio alone is close to 5.0Mbps, does the PS3 bitrate meter display the video bitrate, or the total bitrate?
 
61 - 80 of 89 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top