High Definition & Blue Ray Technologies are a scam. Don't be fooled.

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


But logically speaking, wouldn't a higher capacity mean more data can be fitted with lower compression and higher bitrate?




posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
But logically speaking, wouldn't a higher capacity mean more data can be fitted with lower compression and higher bitrate?

Not in regards to the movies because a full length HD movie will fit easily on a HD-DVD with plenty of room to spare without any additional compression. Since the only advantage to blueray is a higher storage capacity, they can fit more special features onto the disk but the compression levels for the movie will be the same for both formats.



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Beachcoma
 


In theory but there becomes a point where you cannot see an increase in quality with an increase in bit rate.



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


Not here it cant, you have to subscribe to sky and then pay them again for HD.

I refuse to do it until a free service becomes available. I havent even window shopped for an HD TV yet because of that and waiting for the format war to have a winner.



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist
ah, but the DRM has been cracked! In fact, I've been downloading most of my movies in 720p lately


In fact, both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray were cracked almost a year ago. (jan 2006)

gizmodo.com...
www.engadget.com...


Isnt that only on a per film basis, they have to be individually cracked and theres no 3rd party software like DVD shrink where you can back up your own films?



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Man, there's so much bad info in this thread. For those not especially tech savvy, or maybe for someone who dabbles all the way to the true technophiles, you should head over to avsforum.com and peruse their boards. FWIW, the OP would be quickly schooled over there in regards to the actual topic at hand.

Somebody lock this thread down now before it gets any more convoluted.

Oh, and Merry Christmas!

[edit on 12/25/07 by surfinguru]



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
[Not here it cant, you have to subscribe to sky and then pay them again for HD.

Sorry, I did not notice you were located in England.
Do you mean that they don't broadcast the same free analog signals in digital and HD over-the-air which can be picked up with an antenna?



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Okay thanks, both of you for the clarification.

Here's an interesting graph comparing the search trends for the two formats:



Source: Google Trends (yeah... I'm really bored...)

Your prediction may be right, 4thDoctorWhoFan. While Blue-Ray is selling more discs, people seem to prefer HD (or at least are looking for info about it more).

Still, the article I linked in the paragraph above says that right now the biggest competition comes from standard definition DVDs.


"It's a battle of press releases right now," said Josh Martin, an analyst with the Yankee Group. No matter what the two camps say, most consumers won't buy a high-def disc player until one format has emerged as the clear winner, he says.

Observers say most consumers will stick with standard-definition DVDs at least through 2008.

"People are put off by the format war," said J.P. Gownder, an analyst with Forrester Research. (NASDAQ:FORR) "It's hurting adoption for both next-gen formats."


[edit on 25-12-2007 by Beachcoma]



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Maybe I got cookie crumbs for brains, but I always thought that film had better resolution than the tv set could replicate with it's pixels. that was why movies looked better on a movie screen than on a tv screen. they decided that since tv had cought up to the resolution of film with the advent of the HD tech that they decided it would be a good idea to exploit that. I'd rather see a less grainy higher resolution version of blade runner than what ever my zenith tv from 1987 could crank out. even if it's not technically super duper hd.

I suppose the software to read or interprit the HD version was not compatable with the old DVD system so they had to put them on HD formats. I don't think its a blatant scam. misleading a little maybe but then again so is all the horsepower ratings on everybodys car. you really think your infinity cranks out 350 hp?!

just my guess. I've noticed a difference between non HD and HD films from way back in the day. I'm sure it's no where as good as something filmed using real HD cameras. but wait havent we had really high resolution film and cameras for decades now for uses other than for movies?

I guess a connousiuer of film can readily tell the difference. but really it's just nit picking. I could go on all day about how crappy mp3's sound to the trained ear. and even all the sonic pitfalls of recorded crap put onto cd (which there are a ton of) but in the end i'd rather just enjoy the music. or movie in this case.



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


Weve had widescreen digital for about 10 years, thats free but SD. I have had a widescreen SD TV for about 8 years now.

Hopefully the take up will really increase next summer when we finally have both free HD and a free PVR to use on satellite.



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
Maybe I got cookie crumbs for brains, but I always thought that film had better resolution than the tv set could replicate with it's pixels. that was why movies looked better on a movie screen than on a tv screen.


Youre exactly right, they wont be the same degradation that happens when a film is converted to DVD.

A film will always look better on HD DVD unless its taken from a low resolution source.



posted on Dec, 25 2007 @ 11:37 PM
link   
[edit on 25-12-2007 by ChocoTaco369]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer

Originally posted by scientist
ah, but the DRM has been cracked! In fact, I've been downloading most of my movies in 720p lately


In fact, both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray were cracked almost a year ago. (jan 2006)

gizmodo.com...
www.engadget.com...


Isnt that only on a per film basis, they have to be individually cracked and theres no 3rd party software like DVD shrink where you can back up your own films?


well obviously, the companies are being very hush hush about everything, but there are multiple ways to crack both formats already. The biggest news is software called "AACS Keys" that will extract all the volume keys for a Blu-Ray, or HD-DVD. It is a per movie key, but the software can extract it, just like DVDs were cracked. There are also plenty of online lists with the keys posted to lots of movies (and the lists grow every day).

There are also ways of bypassing the encryption entirely, and brute force methods have been shown to work as well (and it's nothing compares to a REAL encryption).

check out more info here:

forum.doom9.org...



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Duplicating copyright works is illegal.

Time to close up shop mods wouldn't want to appear to be
supporting or condoning federal crimes, or promoting
the appearance of double standards.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Legalizer
Duplicating copyright works is illegal.



Depends on what country you live in, you do know the the US laws dont apply worldwide?



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
I would have to disagree with you on this point.
I would buy HD-DVD over Blueray. HD-DVD IMO has slightly better picture quality and is a lot cheaper than blueray. The only advantage blueray has is the storage capacity as it can hold more info but this is irrelevant in regards to picture quality.


HD-DVD does not have a better picture quality than Blue-Ray. Where the hell are you getting this information? The ONLY differnce between blue-ray and HD-DVD is the cost, and the laser used to read the storage format.

Blue ray wins in this area as it can store more data compared to HD-DVD. In fact twice as much data can be stored.

If anything, Blue-ray would have a bettter picture quality over HD-DVD due to its larger storage size.

Take a look at xbox 360 vs sony ps3.
xbox360 uses HD-DVD and can only show up the max resolution of 1080i, and normally uses 720i/p.
Where as ps3 uses blue ray and shines with its 1080p.

PS3, aka blue ray has better picture quality.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:03 AM
link   
I have over 100+ HD media on each format(hd-dvd*blu-ray). Personally, the picture is almost always going to be clearer/more contrast-color/better sound than any standard dvd(sd-dvd) could offer. In some cases such as cartoons and U2 rattle and hum, That's Entertainment 1-3, you might be better off with the sd-dvd IMO. Quite a bit of re-issues of (older)catalogue titles come with supplements that were not previously available.

I have had more software problems with the bluray side, such as Fox movies not playing for over a month, but both look/sound considerably better than any sd-dvd. Firmware comes eventually to update profiles on your player(varies) so the blu-rays could play. I have the BH100(plays both) and have yet to have any problem with sound/picture playback on hd-dvds'. Blu-rays however, has copy protection(BD+) and the studios are constantly changing keys and passwords which is why probably movies won't play as often on different blu-ray players vs. hd-dvd players. All and all, I don't buy sd-dvds' anymore and do appreciate the ability to watch both blu-rays and hd-dvds. They are several steps up!

I would imagine the person claiming when babysitting the HD doesn't look as good as normal SD... you are not watching a movie on a player and probably watching hd channels(doubtful) or sd channels instead. Are they hooked up with hdmi, s-video, component/composite cables? What resolution; 480p, 720p, 1080i or p? I'd ask the owners for the info? There is a difference.

[edit on 12-26-07 by pacman]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by jedimiller Having taken 5 film courses, I think gives my points more valid? I think so. I am not talking about the HDTV's.


Not necessarily.
With the net, the world is smaller, your talking to people that probably have more experience then you do. (i.e. finished film course and have real world application and knowledge in the matter. Not that it detracts from your knowledge, but the comment you made did seem to be conceited/arrogant, or rather reflects the potential for you to write what could be seen as a biased post.)

Again, its all preference (depending on what angle you want to take on this whole film/digital debate.) Some will die and love film, and I do respect that.
Others will start and remain digital.

Im sure you have heard and red about the Red 4k digital film camera.
Yes I used film in there to make a point.
As you stated there is not digital film...but see, we cannot hold on to words so tightly and worship them as idols, so to speak. We much adapt and allow them to adapt to the time and to where they point. (the finger pointing to the moon is not the moon.)

Sure its easy to be defensive over being misunderstood and even being talked down to as you pointed out in the post. No problem, dont take comments seriously, not worth your energy. Communication is a tricky thing... especially in writing where you cannot 'feel' the emotion the person has with what is being said.

I believe your point is that old films will never match the quality of HD.
This may well be true. The question is do they go beyond regular dvd in quality.
In that since, HD is nice to offer a higher spectrum to watch the old films in a higher quality than available before. - Now if you expect 'toto' from the wizard of oz to be HD...then it may not happen.


As for film vs. digital...it really is down to the preference, and as I said, if you have the money for film transfers, then go for it. HD gives you flexibility and cheaper cost.
(well, depending on how you look at it.)

While we are at it, we could go into how all HD is not HD. (consumer cameras vs. the pros.)

At the end, there is something for everyone. Thanks for your post.


Peace

dAlen



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaRAGE
HD-DVD does not have a better picture quality than Blue-Ray. Where the hell are you getting this information?

There is no need to get bent out of shape here. Geesh! Do you work for Sony or something?

I have compared both and to my eyes I find that HD-DVD looks slightly better. There are also articles out there which state the same thing.


The ONLY differnce between blue-ray and HD-DVD is the cost, and the laser used to read the storage format.

And the way the data is processed and written to the disk.


If anything, Blue-ray would have a bettter picture quality over HD-DVD due to its larger storage size.

Irrelevant!
The storage capacity has nothing to do with picture quality because there is more than enough room on a HD-DVD to hold any HD movie without any extra compression. In fact, there is plenty of room to spare. Yes, blueray has a larger storage capacity, but it does not relate to picture quality. You will be able to get more 'special features'.


Take a look at xbox 360 vs sony ps3.
xbox360 uses HD-DVD and can only show up the max resolution of 1080i, and normally uses 720i/p.
Where as ps3 uses blue ray and shines with its 1080p.

Umm.....this has nothing to do with the Xbox using the HD-DVD.

This would be a fault with the inner workings of the Xbox and not the HD-DVD player. You do realize HD-DVD can play 1080p right?


PS3, aka blue ray has better picture quality.

I don't know because I don't have both to compare. But IF the PS3 does have better picture quality, it has nothing to do with the dvd player. It has to do with the processing power within the unit.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by dAlen
Not that it detracts from your knowledge, but the comment you made did seem to be conceited/arrogant, or rather reflects the potential for you to write what could be seen as a biased post.





well, thank you alen, and I'm sorry if my post came off as arrogant. sometimes I do that. but look, i'm here to learn too. I've already said, I don't know everything and everyword i've said has been broken down and used against me. it's like ATS court here. in the end, I suppose it doesn't matter..I like film and I would like to make my own film, using film not digitial cameras..I i know it's easier for filmakers today to do that..but I like the challenge..

now, reading the thread and learning from it has been good. So, if I have to get a DVD I will have no choice but to get HD or BR..and from what I hear BR is better. so when they stop making the regular dvd's I won't have a choice but to buy blue ray movies. About the player, sounds too expensive right now, and I don't want to get the ps3. im a nintendo guy. and if, in the near future the star wars movies are released in blue ray i'll be the first one to buy them.





new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join