Hi-Def Formats Have Failed and the PS3 is a Game Machine

[bapenguin]

Audioholics (http://www.audioholics.com/news/editorials/10reasonsHDDVDsfailed.php) has a great article up titled, 10 Reasons why High Definition DVD Formats have Already Failed. The article even talks about how the PS3 is a game machine first and a Blu-Ray player second and that it will not help push the Blu-Ray format.5. Playstation3 Cannot Save the World
We have consistently heard it said that the Playstation3 will “jump start” the market by flooding it with millions of gaming systems capable of handling Blu-ray Disc software. The problem with this theory is that the PS3 is not being marketed as a home theater component and, if current installations prove the rule, most will not be situated in the average consumer’s living room. The result is that the PS3 will primarily be a *gasp* gaming system. Maybe I have a more traditional group of parents in my association of friends, but, taking into account #4 above, I do not think that Blu-ray will make any major leaps forward in market penetration as a home video format – at least not anytime soon.

History is bearing this out, as the HTPC market, though driven hard by such manufacturers as Microsoft, Dell and HP, has struggled to find a place in the living room. Nearly every gaming system of the past: PS2, Xbox, and even the legendary 3DO system have been touted as “set-top boxes” but in reality find themselves situated in more “gaming-centric” environments playing… you guessed it, games.

This article pretty much nails everything I've been saying for the past year. On top of that it talks about HD-DVD's failure with shoddy hardware as well as lack of content. It all comes down to consumer benefits...and there's very few in the next-gen DVD front.

[Kamalot]

It sounds like the PS3 is a machine poised to fight on multiple battlefronts at the same time. It tries to be an HD movie player, a game machine, an iTunes-like client and more.

We see how well the PSP fared when trying to be everything to everybody.

[Mrbunchypants]

And thats why I'm going to wait untill the dust settles befor buying a hd/bluray dvd player.

Side note: I did read that the HD writes are like 3.5G's..... WOW!!! :eek:
So I guess I might be waiting a while. :D

[Doctor Setebos]

My favorite point is number 3:#3 HD DVD and Blu-ray are NOT Quantum Leaps in Technology
Consumers came over in droves when CDs were released back in 1982. The new format offered not only a new digital media, but also a way to instantly access tracks across an entire “album”. Convenience, not technology, drove this format to almost instant consumer adoption. Fast forward a bit to 1997 when the first DVD player was released. Again, convenience, not technology, drove people to the market en masse. Unlike VHS tapes, the new DVD format was smaller, easily navigated and would not wear down over time like existing tape-based formats. Heck, the concept of a shiny plastic disc was new – and quite frankly, it was the coolest thing to hit the technological shelf since solid state technology. In comparison, the high definition DVD formats, save the color of the business side of the disc, look exactly the same… and consumer confusion will surely follow.I and many, many other consumers have regular TVs with regular DVD players, and have absolutely no reason to switch to HD just yet. Until the entertainment industry gives us sufficient reason to, we just can't see the benefit yet.

[Atorak]

I'd love to see what a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player looks like on my 1080p set......but I'm not dropping the cash necessary to do so. Even for a PS3........which apparently plays games now?

[Roc Ingersol]

Number 3 and Number 6 echo what I've been saying:

It's not VHS vs Beta. It's S-VHS vs ED-Beta

Consumers just don't care.

[Abednigo]

My favorite point is number 3:I and many, many other consumers have regular TVs with regular DVD players, and have absolutely no reason to switch to HD just yet. Until the entertainment industry gives us sufficient reason to, we just can't see the benefit yet.

I concur. I rather enjoy my regular 27" Sony Wega. My parents have a huge HD widescreen TV, but they never use it for anything HD, and when I'm visiting, I don't either.

[Johan]

That's a really well-reasoned, articulate article...the only problem I have with it is that a good portion of it is opinion, and it's so hard to guage exactly what consumers will actually go for in the future. Sony is right when they say they'll sell out all their systems, EVEN IF THERE WERE NO GAMES (the arrogance...and the truth), and I'm not sure that I agree with the article when it says that this won't really drive the BluRay format; I think it very well could do just that

However, I'm quite happy with my present-day DVD, and won't be upgrading at all.

[Zeal]

The inevitable failure of Blu-ray is music to my ears, and there's no longer any doubts in my mind...

This is the death of physical media.

[Mr.Green]

You mean high definition won't make hollywood's brain dead bullshit any better? :cool:

[Deadend]

I think, I am just going to download movies in their proper resolution, as these new format wars are crap.

[Rakael]

I read this earlier and have to agree with everything he said.

[NoName]

I'd love to see what a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player looks like on my 1080p set......but I'm not dropping the cash necessary to do so. Even for a PS3........which apparently plays games now?
Hehe, thats pretty much my thoughts. Though I am interested in finding a DVD with a HD movie to play through my computer just to see how a HD movie in 1080p would look on my TV (outside of the clips from microsofts website).

[Atorak]

You mean high definition won't make hollywood's brain dead bullshit any better? :cool:

Ha! This should put YOU back in your place!


Friday, June 23rd, 2006 - Source: www.Sony.com - Five Additional Titles Added to the Blu-Ray Library, Summer 2006:

1. Gigli starring Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez
2. Just My Luck starring Lindsay Lohan
3. Glitter starring Mariah Carey
4. Garfield's A Tale of Two Kitties starring Garfield the Cat
5. Star Wars: Episode VII - Return to the Glory Hole starring Carrie Fisher

[Doctor Setebos]

1. Gigli starring Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez
2. Just My Luck starring Lindsay Lohan
3. Glitter starring Mariah Carey
4. Garfield's A Tale of Two Kitties starring Garfield the Cat
5. Star Wars: Episode VII - Return to the Glory Hole starring Carrie Fisher

You know, I kinda figured SW7 would be a straight-to-video release. :D

[Worldcrafter]

My favorite point is number 3
Yeah, I think that one rings very true for me. The jump from cassette tapes and VHS tapes to discs made a lot of sense to me. I didn't have a large collection of either type of tape, discs are much easier to store, and since CDs and DVDs are the same size, I didn't have to have two sets of ways to store them. The quality was a huge jump, the media didn't degrade so fast, it added new features (not having to rewind for 5 minutes to start a movie thank god), and the technology because ubiquitous pretty fast (CDs in your car, computer, home, etc (now the same for DVDs)).

My main problem with these new formats is I don't feel like I need an upgrade. All my movies on DVD still look impressive. A slight upgrade in image quality is all well and good, but that's not going to get me to dump all that cash on a completely new setup to support it. Maybe if the discs offered a new feature I couldn't live without, such as a disc that can't be scratched, or a guarentee there won't be previews on any of the discs, or an area of the disc that saves your favorite settings for the movie (language and subtitles for example), then I might be interested. But an increase in quality and the promise of extra room for more commentary and trailers I won't watch just doesn't do it for me.

So that's what's going on in the back of my mind when I say, the only thing that will sell me on the PS3 are the games. I could care less about Blu-Ray.

[antoniogaud]

I've been DYING to post this for a few days, but the topic didn't come out until now!

My friend Eirik and I have been scouting all the local electronics shops to test and compare the new HD-DVD and BluRay players. We went to Best Buy and Circuit City as well as other higher-end electronics shops (Tweeter). After seeing all the players on a variety of TVs (plasma, rear-projection, tube HD) I am ready to announce my verdict on the new format.

Ready?

Meh.

I could not discern any substantial difference between the new players and stardard DVDs. I could see a difference, but it wasn't as pronounced as I was expecting. Being a loyal Comcast HD customer, I love watching movies on HBO-HD and the other HD channels. I expected that the new DVD formats would at least look as ggod as what I get on cable.

I was sorely dissappointed.

I just couldn't see a significant difference. One store even had a split-screen demo showing a scene with one side in HD and the other SD and it still didn't impress me. BluRay in particular had a very 'so is this it?' effect on me. I am not saying this to bash Sony because BluRay is(was) the main reason I want(ed) a PS3.

I was watching House of Flying Daggers on the new Samsung player optimized with Samsung's highest quality HD set - HDMI set at 1080p - a promotional display set up by Samsung. The video quality was really no different than that of a typical DVD. In fact, we passed the (very understated) display several times not knowing it was the display we were looking for.

Nobody would know it was HD if they didn't know what BluRay was, trust me... nobody.

The action scenes in particular were surprisingly bad with ghosting and artifacting so intense that I actually laughed. I asked the vendor if the movie was damaged, and he said it was brand new and had only been played once before.

After seeing a few more BluRay movies at different stores (on a Wega and Toshiba TV) as well as HD-DVD displays, I am convinced that neither format is worth investing in at this time.

To say I was disappointed is an understatement as my wife ws actually encouraging me to buy one, and I don't get a license to spend money like that very often. Drats!

[Rook34]

Return to Glory Hole, eh? Starring Carrie Fisher? Sounds like a good name and idea for a porno.. :D

Though I like the idea of physical media dying off as other posts have stated before, there is something to be said for physically owning something. As I've said in the past, print will never die for the same reason. Media will never completely go away, either.

I honestly don't think either format will catch on though. The industry isn't yet ready for it. AS a whole we've finally all merged to DVD for crying out loud. VCR only JUST died (they stopped all VCR production of movies about 3 months ago). DVD is just too widely accepted right now wo warrant sitching to a ne format just yet. And if consumers can't tell the difference, even on high end plasma and LCD screens, then where's the benefit, even if it's only marginal? It's simply not worth it. I can't wait to see how this November is going to fare for Sony; not because I ant to see them fail, I want to see how the world is going to react to their shenanigans, hype, marketing muscle, and Blu-Ray.

[NonSoft]

I'm not sure what the people in this thread complaining about a 'marginal' increase in image quality, or no discernable difference are watching. If you have a good HDTV and everything is setup correctly there should be an obvious difference between DVD and either HD format. The movies that have been released so far aren't even accurate representations of what the formats are capable of.

That being said, I can't imagine a scenario in which both of these formats don't die a terrible death. If they were able to agree on one standard and go with that they may have been able to capture a decent market made up mainly of audio/video enthusiasts and perhaps even broke into a bit of the mainstream market. However, since they weren't able to decide on one standard I would be surprised if they even captured the majority of the enthusiast market.

[antoniogaud]

I'm not sure what the people in this thread complaining about a 'marginal' increase in image quality, or no discernable difference are watching. If you have a good HDTV and everything is setup correctly there should be an obvious difference between DVD and either HD format. The movies that have been released so far aren't even accurate representations of what the formats are capable of.

Have you seen the displays for yourself?

To a 'T' each store said that not only do customers not see a difference, even the sales people don't understand whta the big deal is about.

Also what do you mean the movies aren't 'accurate presentations'? They are movies. What else are they supposed to represent? if movie studios don't put their best movies out at release when the format is being scrutinized closely, when will they put them out?

[Atorak]

Plus, with all the upconverting receivers, processors, cable boxes, and DVD players out there, movies can still be upconverted to look pretty damn impressive on even the highest-end HDTVs. I think that the TV technology is advancing so quickly at this time that it seems a little premature to release the "next generation media" to the public.

Moreover, at this particular time, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD AREN'T the most impressive thing out there! Has anyone heard anything about Ultra HD? This is just an example of the dozens of new technologies right on the horizon...

The Ultra HD experience – get this – allows for 4,320 scanning lines, and 7680 X 4320 pixels, which compares to the standard HDTV’s 1080 lines and 1920 X 1080. On the audio front, there are 22.2 channels of sound, in a three-layer setup … 22.2 friggin’ channels. Nine channels comprise the top layer, 10 channels in the middle orbit and 5 on the floor.

And, here’s the bad news, it’s amazing … like real life, but better … even compared with the best HDTV I’ve seen. Individual faces popped out from crowds, and we in the audience felt as if we were in the stands watching the basketball game and sumo-wrestling match. A wind-swept field of sunflowers approached those painted by Van Gogh in intensity and vibrancy.

All one needed to know about the sound could be heard in the dribbling of the basketball in the Nets game. Again, it was as if we were in the Jack Nicholson seats at Staples Center … precise, punchy and hypnotic.

Granted, this display was provided on a rather large screen in 16 X 9 aspect. The hostess said it was the same size as Da Vinci’s “The Last Supper,” which also was photographed for the product reel. Anyone who’s going to spend the bucks required for the Ultra experience, however, isn’t likely to waste them on a standard-sized set.

So, there, you’ve been warned. Ultra HDTV is right around the corner, whether we need it or not, and before the vast majority of American consumers have even had a chance to show off their new HDTVs to the neighbors. -- GD

[drakkarim]

i likewise still use the same tv i got back in college (27" magnavox) in 1995. it was even a demo unit from the floor, still works fine. i suppose it'll have to die sooner or later, but quite frankly, with the quality of content on cable these days, i really haven't decided whether i'd buy a new 1080 unit or if i'd just cancel my cable bill ($40/month) and say 'screw it'.

i watch all my movies/dvd's on my SXGA projector/computer or laptop.

[Karmakin]

Even if someone were to give me a HD player, I doubt I'd use it that much. I might pick up a few movies for it, but nothing crazy. The reason why?

I have 3 DVD players. One for each TV. I like being able to look through my movie collection, (I have close to 100), picking out a movie, and bringing it to where I want to watch it and then watch it. If I want some noise in the background when I'm doing something else, I often throw on a movie.

Until HD players are sub-100, there's no way, even if I had HD screens throughout my house (I don't even have one), that I'll be switching up. And even then it'll be difficult to justify.

[wg8170]

I was watching House of Flying Daggers on the new Samsung player optimized with Samsung's highest quality HD set - HDMI set at 1080p - a promotional display set up by Samsung. The video quality was really no different than that of a typical DVD. In fact, we passed the (very understated) display several times not knowing it was the display we were looking for.

Nobody would know it was HD if they didn't know what BluRay was, trust me... nobody.

The action scenes in particular were surprisingly bad with ghosting and artifacting so intense that I actually laughed. I asked the vendor if the movie was damaged, and he said it was brand new and had only been played once before.

It's funny. My buddy and I just got back from Circuit City and we had the EXACT same experience. They were showing HoFD and we saw the same ghosting/artifacting. We both were like: "This is it?" To say we were unimpressed is an understatement.

Don't get me wrong, I finally have my HDTV and I appreciate any HD content that I can get (so much so that watching SD now is almost painful), but this was just not that impressive. I agree with antoniogaud that NOBODY could tell the difference unless you specifially told them. Hell, even we had to do double-takes to make sure it was actually Blue-Ray.

At least I don't feel pressure to run out and drop a wad on one of these new players. :)

All this will become a moot point anyway, once Netflix or someone else comes up with a viable business model for electronic delivery of movies for temporary viewing.

-wg

[Paranoia]

Its really hard to tell the difference between HD movies & DVD movies, especially if you're sitting about 10 feet from the tv set.

[snugglebearofdeath]

Just yesterday I saw, right in front of me, the new Sony Vaio laptop with the blueray player. I work at a law firm and one of the big wig partners had just purchased it - $3,500 - yikes . It was playing a complilation of movie clips in blueray format. I guess a preview type thing. It honestly looked - to me - no different than a regular dvd playing on a high def tv; nice but absolutely nothing about it 'wowed' me.

I agree - this whole "high def dvd" thing is a huge scam. I hope blueray & hd-dvd crashes and burns for the single purpose of proving to these companies that we aren't quite as stupid as they think we are.

[TDub301]

Ya, I think the bottom line is that the cost is not worth the jump (or should I say, short hop?). Paying so much money for the player and each movie (of which the library is extremely limited to choose from) just doesn't seem smart to me when I have no problem with how my DVDs look now on regular tvs. On top of that, the visuals are not much better, some people can't even notice the difference. Why spend so much for something that puts the concept of "unnecessary" on a high pedestal above it?

[Swat]

All this obsession over image quality is overlooking one of the most important features of your living room - sound. I started off with a decent Home Theater in a Box, but then an audiophile friend of mine turned me on to Paradigm Reference speakers and a good amp. Believe me when I say, this videophile (me) is a complete convert to the audio side of the fence. Having good (yes, expensive) speakers adds that extra layer of depth that makes the experience that much more virtual. I literally had to replay all my favorite CD's and watch my favorite movies again there was that much of a difference.

480p DVD to 720p/1080i HD wasn't near the leap for me that going from a standard HTIB to an excellent audio system was. I'd spend $2,000+ in an instant on audio equipment then dumping it into the HD or BR format.

Plus, with all the dish networks and HD over cable - who's in a rush? PVR's can record quite a bit of HD movies, and there's no discs to fool with. We already have the HD era if we want it, and we don't have to whore ourselves out to dying formats.

So yeah.. if you are a videophile like me, please for the love of god explore the audio realm for a moment - it's a whole new world, and it makes ALL your media (CD, DVD, HD, GAMING) much more realistic.

[crashedout]

The article has some good points. I expected a better release after the delays...the BR transfers are horrible and the HD-DVD's are more expensive than promised. Hd properly setup is a large difference, but the key being properly setup. I suspect a lot of people have never seen it or really cannot see it. I can see a huge difference and I am holding off until there is a universal player and/or a clear victor. I remember hearing a lot of arguments against DVD in the beginning. It took a while for that format to take off, even given its noticeable increase in quality and convenience.

What I don't understand is how a lot of console gamers play on old tv's. Every time there is an HD related thread here, people chime in that I still use my old TV and like it. Why? Unless you had a high-end, flat SD tv with component inputs I just don't get it. PC gamers upgrade all the time to get better visuals, why don't console players? SD tv's are not that much and can make a huge difference if the quality of even the most basic console. If money is tight I got it but otherwise I really don't understand.

[Kamalot]

DVD
UMD
Bluray

These companies want nothing more than for you to buy your movies all over again. Think of it... They don't have to make any new product. Just take the movies, put them on a new disc and charge you $30+ for it all over again.

I'll pass

[holysin]

Good article, but for me it is sad to read it. It is unfortunate that there is a format war while the public isn´t all that interested in the formats. You might think it´s too expensive, you don´t have a TV for it, there aren´t enough movies, etc. But thats all temporary, soon the movies and players will be cheaper, you´ll have a TV for it and there´ll be lots of releases.
I´ll have to disagree with reason number 3 though. There is a significant improvement in quality. The higher resolution does wonders to movies. But, just like with DVDs, the quality of the final product depends on, among other things, how well they did that transfer from film to HD. Also, the shaper the image is, the better. But not every movie was filmed with a perfect focus, and blurry in HD wont look that much better than blurry in DVD.

However, even if the movie is a little blurry, you´ll still be able to notice it. For example, here´s some caps I took from the movie Contact, both from the dvd version (852x480) and from HDTV (1080i). Yes, I know 1080p is better, but lets go with 1080i just for the hell of it.
This first scene is a little blurry: (DVD) http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v92/holysin/HiDef/contact480b.jpg
When you go HD, it´s still blurry: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v92/holysin/HiDef/contact1080b.jpg
But the higher resolution gives you a LOT more detail. You can better see the expressions on people´s face. Granted, you can´t read their names... Maybe in the future :)

Another scene (DVD): http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v92/holysin/HiDef/contact480a.jpg
(1080i) http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v92/holysin/HiDef/contact1080a.jpg

Looking at these pictures I remember how disapointed I was when I first saw a DVD movie on a pc monitor. I was expection to see the movie in a perfect form, I wanted very frame of it to look like a high-res picture, but what I saw was just decent, although a little blurry.
The videos in 1080p I´ve seen on my PC achieve that. Each frame looks like a 1920x1440 picture, and it´s wonderful. My dream now is a format with as many "resolution lines" as the human eye, lol.

By the way, does anyone know the name of that camera they used in Gladiator and Saving Private Ryan (wasnt the only one on Ryan though)? I believe it is one that films at a huge framerate, and manages to get a better focus when there´s movement. Maybe that´d be better for HD movies, I don´t know...

[Paranoia]

Great comparison of HD & DVD

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcompare/term2.htm

[antoniogaud]

I've seen the DVD to HD-DVD comparisons before. I've had cable-HD for a month now. INCREDIBLE.

When I went to see BluRay and HD-DVD at the store... NOT INCREDIBLE.

Specs and perfect optimal settings don't sell systems, what the product looks like in the 'real' world does and unfortunately, what is out now isn't that much better than DVD.

Go to Best-Buy or Circuit City and see for yourself. Better yet, ask people who walk by the displays... meh.

[oldjadedgamer]

At the Sony Style store in San Francisco, they have the Sony Blu-Ray player set up. Yes, the same player that has been delayed until October. The guy said it was shipped from Japan just for that store.

They had it set up on a Sony 1080p TV and I couldn't tell the difference either. They even had a preview where they did the exact same movie and on one side of the screen was DVD and the other side was Blu-Ray and I could barely tell the difference. There was a difference but not a $1000 dollar difference.

Everything was a tiny bit more clean and sharper but I was really shocked to see how similar it looked. I walked by the display twice not knowing what it was before I had to ask someone where the Blu-Ray player was.

At the price they are asking, it needs to totally blow your socks off the first time you see it. You shouldn't have to be explained why you need it, if it's a really good product, it will sell itself. I have to agree that the format is dead before it even starts.

[Zeal]

This is why phyical high-definition mediums will fail.

It's also funny how everything I've seen on HBO-HD looks better than HD-DVD and Blu-ray.

[antoniogaud]

Everything on HBO looks LEAGUES better than what the players showcase. While this might not always be the case, I am confused as to why this is. As we speak I am watching the original Island of Dr. Moreau on HBO-HD and to say it looks clear is an understatement > it looks almost lifelike.

BluRay/HD-DVD not lifelike. I will go to store again on way out to see for myself one more time. Maybe I was imaging something yesterday...

[Jack B]

This nails what I've been saying for a long time. Especially #3, "HD DVD and Blu-ray are NOT Quantum Leaps in Technology"
and #10, "Broadband and IPTV to Compete?".

Is he right? I don't know for sure, but I do get tired of people saying the format war will be won and it will be hands down won by Blu-Ray. I don't even know if it will be won at all. I think physical media is running out of time as a viable format. DVD's could be the last physical format we see until it's all digital download.

I get all my HD content from Comcast On-Demand or via HBO, Showtime, Discovery Channel, INHD1 and 2, ESPN ect.

My cable set top box is also a DVR, so I record in HD and watch later. So, whether it's HD streaming or download, it's coming and quickly.

DVD's are not ready to be thrown away yet. They may last for a long long time to come.

[holysin]

This nails what I've been saying for a long time. Especially #3 and #10.

Is he right? I don't know for sure, but I do get tired of people saying the format war will be won and it will be hands down won by Blu-Ray. I don't even know if it will be won at all. I think physical media is running out of time as a viable format. DVD's could be the last physical format we see until it's all digital download.

I get all my HD content from Comcast On-Demand or via HBO, Showtime, Discovery Channel, INHD1 and 2, ESPN ect.

My cable set top box is also a DVR, so I record in HD and watch later. So, whether it's HD streaming or download, it's coming and quickly.

DVD's are not ready to be thrown away yet. They may last for a long long time to come.

Interesting... I wonder why that is... Bad transfers? Bad players? Bad tvs or bad cables?

the 1080i caps I posted were from HBO HD

[snugglebearofdeath]

Yup. To me the cable HD service with my hdtv is leagues ahead of the blueray and hd-dvd I've seen.

In my experience with the cable hd offerings when something is actually filmed with high def equipment AND broadcast using high def technology the results are much better than something that is simply filmed using standard methods then broadcast using high def technology.

[Jack B]

Yup. To me the cable HD service with my hdtv is leagues ahead of the blueray and hd-dvd I've seen.

In my experience with the cable hd offerings when something is actually filmed with high def equipment AND broadcast using high def technology the results are much better than something that is simply filmed using standard methods then broadcast using high def technology.

Yes, I've seen a wide range of quality in HD broadcasts. HBO, Showtime, INHD1, IND2, and Discovery are typically the best.

Some of the broadcast channels are spotty at at times. ESPN is great in the studios, but their feeds for different events or clips can vary in quality.

Recording movies and some sports can be excellent quality. I suppose it could always be better. I'll have to check out the difference side by side in some stores.

Then, again for me, I rarely rent of use DVD's anyway. It's 95% HD cable for me.

[CannibalKid]

Meh, I'm much more interested in On Demand stuff these days instead of higher quality stuff. I watch about 6 shows, and see about the same number of movies a year. I would much prefer to just DL them straight from my cable provider on hardware that already own. Media is old news, DigiDistro is future. Unless they start making a Blu-Ray/HDDVD player that gives BJs or something, I'm not going to be impressed.

[sol740]

Wow, we got outselves some tidy little HD h8rs up in here ! Seriously though, Hi-def is fantastic and it makes 480i and 480p look like garbage. Particularly on large displays. Ofcourse I still love DVD's and am not ready to buy a hi-def player until the war is over. I am hoping by that time, we will have done away with physical media and will have moved to streaming on demand, or downloadable content. I am one of the lucky few who have a fiber-optic to the home internet connection though, so pulling 12mbps down and 6mbps up helps. Eventually internet speeds on average will rise high enough to support faster, larger downloads. I jumped the bandwagon early on Hi-def though and wish I wouldn't have because I had to upgrade a couple years later. I won't do the same with the new Hi-def disc format. I am, however, rooting for HD-DVD. It sounds like a DVD, just hi-def ... wow, simple. Blu-ray sounds like what a retard alien names his spaceship. Two of my friends have upgraded to Hi-Def just because they saw what the 360 can do in HD. And because the super bowl on a 100" screen running in 720p is gorgeous.

[Steele Johnson]

all you guys who say you can't see the difference between sd and hd are high or something. You should be looking into buying some glasses, not more electronics.

[Okamura_Takashi]

I recently bought an HDTV and with that jump watching HD broadcasts has opened my eyes. It's amazing how much better everything looks. I am thoroughly enjoying the World Cup. :)

However, the funniest thing is that before buying my HDTV I thought it would be a snowball's chance in hell that I would buy a PS3, but now that Blu-ray drive looks appealing for the price.

[the1bullet]

Even with a very nice TV, these new HD formats probably aren't worth it. I picked up a 61" HD TV about a year ago and can tell you that at this size SD (even digital cable) looks like junk... much worse than it would on a normal 32" TV. Having said that, standard DVDs still look very good to me. Yes, I can tell a difference between the quality of a DVD movie and one that I've DVRd off of HBO-HD. But it's nothing I'd spend a lot of money on.

[antoniogaud]

No one - no one - is saying that they cant tell the difference between HD and SD. What we are saying is that we cant tell the difference between DVD and BLURAY and/or HD DVD.

I still haven't seen anyone defend the new formats on this thread - probably because you can't. if you've SEEN THEM IN PERSON you'll kinow that the HD quality you get from BLURAY and HD-DVD is nowhere near HBO-HD.

[Okamura_Takashi]

No one - no one - is saying that they cant tell the difference between HD and SD. What we are saying is that we cant tell the difference between DVD and BLURAY and/or HD DVD.

I still haven't seen anyone defend the new formats on this thread - probably because you can't. if you've SEEN THEM IN PERSON you'll kinow that the HD quality you get from BLURAY and HD-DVD is nowhere near HBO-HD.

I kinda see what you're saying. However, unless HBO is using some super-secret magical video codec, the quality of HD formats should be the same. Especially since the Blu-ray discs out now supposedly use MPEG-2 which is what HBO-HD most likely uses.

From personal experience, I've only seen Biohazard being played on the Toshiba HD-DVD player at a store and from what I saw, it looked really nice. However, my recently purchased HDD/DVD player upconverts DVDs and I was just comparing one DVD upconverted and non-upconverted (through S-Video on another player) and the upconverted DVD looked nice on my HD TV.

I will definitely buy a HD-DVD/Blu-ray if Lord of the Rings is released for it... That would be my breaking point. ;)

[NonSoft]

No one - no one - is saying that they cant tell the difference between HD and SD. What we are saying is that we cant tell the difference between DVD and BLURAY and/or HD DVD.

I still haven't seen anyone defend the new formats on this thread - probably because you can't. if you've SEEN THEM IN PERSON you'll kinow that the HD quality you get from BLURAY and HD-DVD is nowhere near HBO-HD.

Even with an upconverter DVD player you can't compete with HD (or Blu-Ray) image quality. I'm sorry, but if you can't tell the difference then you either saw it on a very poor setup(s) or you don't have a very discerning eye. I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, it is just the truth.

I'm not trying to defend these new formats. As I stated before I think they will both fail for a myriad of reasons. However, saying that there is no discernable difference in quality between DVD and either of these formats is just silly. I haven't seen every movie released so far, but if there aren't any out that can compete with HBO-HD at the moment, I don't imagine it will be long before there are. Many of the movies we are seeing now were just quick transfers done without really taking full advantage of the new found space.

Again, I don't care to defend either format but make no mistake about it, there is a huge difference in image quality if setup properly.

[nemyhlovecraft]

Even with an upconverter DVD player you can't compete with HD (or Blu-Ray) image quality. I'm sorry, but if you can't tell the difference then you either saw it on a very poor setup(s) or you don't have a very discerning eye. I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, it is just the truth.

But see what you're saying? A "discerning eye"? If the formats were as good as claimed why would you need a "discerning eye"? Why wouldn't it be obvious to everyone how good these formats are?

In truth, one of the main problems with HD movies is going to be the fact that film stock is still analog and still varies greatly in its percieved "resolution". As you can see with some of the T2 shots which were linked to back a page or two, no matter how you remaster the film the sharpness of the actual movie is reliant on the how good the film stock was back then and it can never be improved beyond that.

One of the reasons I bet people aren't seeing a huge difference between DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-ray are that the films weren't shot with HD formats in mind. How long will it be until movie studios begin to push that on directors?

On another less serious note: I think the names of these new HD storage media are stupid. Blu-ray sounds like some 50's attempt at sounding futuristic, and HD-DVD has too many "D"s and just confuses the name DVD ( doesn't it now mean Digital Versatile Disc, to tout its features as a legitimate storage medium for any data? ).

[antoniogaud]

I have a pretty discerning eye... trust me. Its just that they don't look SIGNIFICANTLY different. As nemyhlovecraft said, the differences should be obvious - and they are FAR from it. Most people couldn't tell the difference.

I keep asking this but, have you seen the displays yourself? We're not talking HBO-HD quality here.

[themulf]

I am all for HD now that I have a 42 inch HDTV. The HD Cable channles look amazing (depending on the movie, as some had better film, scale better, or differnt compression). There is a obvious visual difference. Now it is only 720p, of course its not the biggest jump, but it is something. People will buy the xbox 360, ps3 or wii in time, as it will be there only choice. Like a trojan horse, once the consumer knows of the quality difference between 480 to 720 - 1080 they will want to make the jump.
The problem now is that Best Buy, and stores like them are showing these TV's with horrid image quality. I think they are upscaling standard TV or DVD's.... :rolleyes:

[Kamalot]

One of the reasons I bet people aren't seeing a huge difference between DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-ray are that the films weren't shot with HD formats in mind. How long will it be until movie studios begin to push that on directors?
If a movie is shot on film, it is a much higher 'resolution' than even 1080.

[Royal Fool]

I don't see the benefit in HD right now... costs too much for too little gain (IMO), not enough space in my current setup and it simply doesn't interest me that much.

[trip1eX]

Decent article, but a couple points.

1st the guy didn't mention one of the biggest hurdles to hi-def and that's that folks have to buy a hi-def tv in the first place. That's another hurdle dvds didn't have to overcome.

Second, it's a bit early in the game. We're still in the pre-season here folks. Cds and dvds took a long while to get started. give it another couple years.

[antoniogaud]

Heh. My wife didn't believe me when I said that BluRay/HD-DVD wasn't that good, so I t ook her out to see it today and the first thing she said, "this isn't the BluRay display is it?" When I showed her the BluRay player and went to the movie's title menu, she laughed and said, "Well, that's that then... totally not worth $100, let alone a $1000."

I should note that before she saw it, she was dying to get an HD dvd player.

I think her (and my) reactions will be typical.

[sol740]

IMHO the larger a HD display you have. The more you'll want the higher res formats. 480p looks fucking incredible on a 15-32 inch display, but get much bigger and you'll notice the quality dip.

[Bubby]

If a movie is shot on film, it is a much higher 'resolution' than even 1080.

First comment in this thread where the poster actually knows what he is talking about.

[Jack B]

Decent article, but a couple points.

1st the guy didn't mention one of the biggest hurdles to hi-def and that's that folks have to buy a hi-def tv in the first place. That's another hurdle dvds didn't have to overcome.

Second, it's a bit early in the game. We're still in the pre-season here folks. Cds and dvds took a long while to get started. give it another couple years.

Trip1ex, Good point.

I didn't notice he didn't say that, but it's a big one. DVD's worked on every single TV in every household.

Blu-Ray and HD-DVD only work on a small percentage. Now and likely into the future standard TV's will outnumber HD-TV's for years to come. That's also an important consideration.

[Siraris]

Decent article, but a couple points.

1st the guy didn't mention one of the biggest hurdles to hi-def and that's that folks have to buy a hi-def tv in the first place. That's another hurdle dvds didn't have to overcome.

Second, it's a bit early in the game. We're still in the pre-season here folks. Cds and dvds took a long while to get started. give it another couple years.

You're right on the TV front, but hi-def TV's are SO MUCH cheaper than they used to be. You can get a 62" DLP 1080 from Mitsubishi for $2600 bucks now. $2600! I paid $1000 less for a 42" DLP that only does 1080i, and that was only a year and a half ago. Sony also announced 7 new 1080p TV's coming out this fall in the $2500 range.

The future is going to really hinge on HDTV adoption, but the predictions are that HDTV's will take 89% of the sales for this year, leaving Analogue only 11% (that's for just this one year, not 89 overall). I know when I first saw HD, I was blown away, and it's a pleasure to watch almost anything in HD. The craziest part of it is that it hasn't worn off and I've been watching HD shows for over 2 years now. Usually with increased quality in products, I get used to them and they don't wow me as much as time goes on, but HDTV still feels new to me. It's kind of like high-speed internet.

It's all very early, and to be honest, I trust the majority of the biggest CE companies on the planet over some guys opinion on a website. They are the people who drive this technology, they know if consumers will purchase it or not.

[Jack B]

The future is going to really hinge on HDTV adoption, but the predictions are that HDTV's will take 89% of the sales for this year, leaving Analogue only 11% (that's for just this one year, not 89 overall).

Interesting. Do you have a link to the 89% predictions. Thanks.

[NonSoft]

Heh. My wife didn't believe me when I said that BluRay/HD-DVD wasn't that good, so I t ook her out to see it today and the first thing she said, "this isn't the BluRay display is it?" When I showed her the BluRay player and went to the movie's title menu, she laughed and said, "Well, that's that then... totally not worth $100, let alone a $1000."

I should note that before she saw it, she was dying to get an HD dvd player.

I think her (and my) reactions will be typical.

Where are these places that you go that have such poor setups?

They really shouldn't be allowed to put anything on display if they can't even make BR and HD-DVD look good. If the majority of the people viewing these displays are that underwhelmed by the peformance then there is almost definitely something wrong with their setup or the source.

As I said before, I have seen both in person and while I don't plan on investing in either format at the moment (or more likely ever since I imagine both will fail miserably) there is most definitely a very distinct difference in image quality.

[NonSoft]

The future is going to really hinge on HDTV adoption, but the predictions are that HDTV's will take 89% of the sales for this year, leaving Analogue only 11% (that's for just this one year, not 89 overall).


Are we talking about worldwide, or a specific country? 89% seems incredibly high.

According to this article they are predicting that HDTV sales will only account for 71% of yearly TV sales by 2010 in the US.

http://www.audioholics.com/news/pressreleases/HDTVsalesinUS2010.php

[antoniogaud]

Where are these places that you go that have such poor setups?

New Jersey: Best Buy, Circuit City and Tweeter.

They may somehow all be 'bad' setups, but those stores are exactly the ones that most people will visit to see BluRay and HD-DVD.

[Jack B]

Are we talking about worldwide, or a specific country? 89% seems incredibly high.

According to this article they are predicting that HDTV sales will only account for 71% of yearly TV sales by 2010 in the US.

http://www.audioholics.com/news/pressreleases/HDTVsalesinUS2010.php

Thanks Nonsoft. I appreciate you finding that URL for 70% in 2010. 89% for this year seems like it is way off.

Perhaps Siraris has another URL, that show 89% in the year 2006 instead of 70% in the year 2010.

Or maybe not. When posters use numbers as facts, I always appreciate seeing it backed up with a URL or two. Thanks again.

[nemyhlovecraft]

If a movie is shot on film, it is a much higher 'resolution' than even 1080.

I understand that, which is kind of the point. Film stock is analog and quality of picture is based on quality and density of emulsion. HD content we have seen on TV is generally shot digitally specifically for HD. What you get is a product where none of the data in the original footage needed to be compressed away. With film, however, data is discarded left and right to get it onto a digital medium. Movies studios or DVD producers obviously have rigs with sophisticated compression software to process the film onto DVD.

So, that leads me to this question:
Have the movies which have come out in HD-DVD been processed on new software that scans and processes with 720p or 1080p in mind?

I think that perhaps movies will reach the point where they are scanned and processed at the maximum resolution that the human eye can distinguish, and that it will produce a glorious picture which makes the original film proud, but how much time and money will need to be spent to get to that point. For instance, why would a movie studio make a HD-DVD version of a movie on higher cost software on a higher cost video processing farm, when they could just use the same processing software and output at a higher resolution? Especially when only an Nth of a percent of consumers have actually adopted the technology, and they're more likely to rush out and buy some content they may even already own just to validate their hardware purchase?

[sol740]

Not that I care too much, but the 89% mark is based off of projected sales.

http://www.cesweb.org/press/news/rd_release_detail.asp?id=10913

[Siraris]

Not that I care too much, but the 89% mark is based off of projected sales.

http://www.cesweb.org/press/news/rd_release_detail.asp?id=10913

Thanks for that sol, I was looking for that article. I couldnt' remember it was from CES.

[NonSoft]

Not that I care too much, but the 89% mark is based off of projected sales.

http://www.cesweb.org/press/news/rd_release_detail.asp?id=10913


Interesting. The two articles are only a couple of months apart, but the numbers are incredibly far off.

Only time will tell for certain I suppose.

[Jack B]

Originally Posted by sol740
Not that I care too much, but the 89% mark is based off of projected sales.

http://www.cesweb.org/press/news/rd...il.asp?id=10913 According to sales projections issued yesterday by CEA, HDTV sets will outsell analog sets by 89 percent in 2006, reaching total unit sales of 15.9 million and contributing to over $23 billion in total DTV revenue.

That article is wrong. HDTV's will not outsell standard TV's next year.

I've seen actuals before that support Non-Soft's numbers.

The CEA above claims 15.9 million HDTV units in 2006. That's only about 8% of the projected 2006 US TV unit sales. A far cry from 89% more...

Click here for US TV UNIT SALES - See Page 27 for the US Specific Unit Sales (http://www.displaysearch.com/free/cea_video_div_mtg_101805.pdf)
2005 187.8m
2006 190.9m
2007 193.5m

[The Vidiot]

In truth, one of the main problems with HD movies is going to be the fact that film stock is still analog and still varies greatly in its percieved "resolution". As you can see with some of the T2 shots which were linked to back a page or two, no matter how you remaster the film the sharpness of the actual movie is reliant on the how good the film stock was back then and it can never be improved beyond that.

One of the reasons I bet people aren't seeing a huge difference between DVD and HD-DVD/Blu-ray are that the films weren't shot with HD formats in mind. How long will it be until movie studios begin to push that on directors?
Forgive me for being blunt, but you have no idea what you’re talking about. First of all, the various T2 shots showed the differences in transfers, and had nothing to do with the resolution of the original film stock. Secondly, analog or not, film still has a much, MUCH higher resolution than any HD resolution. Films don’t need to be shot “with HD formats in mind,” simply because film is already a much higher resolution than any HD format. To imply that film is somehow inferior to HD (because it is analog) is just plain ignorant.

[nemyhlovecraft]

Forgive me for being blunt, but you have no idea what you’re talking about. First of all, the various T2 shots showed the differences in transfers, and had nothing to do with the resolution of the original film stock. Secondly, analog or not, film still has a much, MUCH higher resolution than any HD resolution. Films don’t need to be shot “with HD formats in mind,” simply because film is already a much higher resolution than any HD format. To imply that film is somehow inferior to HD (because it is analog) is just plain ignorant.

If you read my post above that wasn't my implication at all. I love how people on message boards like to assume you're an idiot and point it out just because it an anonymous venue.

[Zeal]

I love when people attempt to explain shit and just flat out fail.

[sol740]

Lets just be happy in saying we are all, for the most part, more than informed about the buying decisions we make for our homes. More so than Joe Average Consumer. That said, that is exactly who needs to buy into HD. I myself, have convinced several of my friends to buy HD sets, not because they cared about analog film to digital coversion, but because it just looks plain better. Its like this awesome sexually transmitted disease. The kind you can't, and don't want to get rid of. And every time those boils fester you can feel the sweet, sweet burning of SUCCESS !

[antoniogaud]

I will again ask - have you guys SEEN the HD-DVD and BLURAY displays at the stores yet? If you have, odds are that you will be as dissappointed as I was (am).