Romero's movies in Blu-ray

[UndeadGuyX]

i saw an interview with the director of bladerunner and he said to up it to hi def,they had to do the usual that they do to films and they distorted it a few times to the point there was no picture to try to raise it to 1080. so effectively they killed a copy of the movie a few times LOL i still say superbit coulda made it as a format if the prices woulda dropped That doesn't make sense. Film resolution is higher than that of 1080p high-def anyways. What the high-def versions are doing is bringing you closer to seeing what is already there.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Both formats have their strengths and weaknesses. Please explain to me why you consider Blu-ray an inferior format to HD DVD. A. Blu-Ray requires a completely different transfer process that uses the old mpeg 2 codec, which is pointless when VC-1 has proven to be the better lossless format. It required the manufacturing of new equipment ot make Blu-Rays discs when HD_DVD equipment is just DVD equipment modified to do HD_DVD (Cost saving). Blu-Ray transfers are grainier and darker for some reason whereas HD-DVD doesn't seem to have this issue, and on a final note, the surround sound on HD-DVD is uncompressed whereas Blu-ray was still using the compressed DD sound format.

[UndeadGuyX]

A. Blu-Ray requires a completely different transfer process that uses the old mpeg 2 codec, which is pointless when VC-1 has proven to be the better lossless format. Actually, Blu-ray supports all three major codecs, MPEG-2, AVC MPEG-4, and of course VC-1. You don't even have to take my word for it. You can see for yourself just how many movies are encoded in something other than MPEG-2. http://blu-raystats.com/ Blu-Ray transfers are grainier and darker for some reason whereas HD-DVD doesn't seem to have this issue Really? Where exactly did you hear this? One thing I can tell you is this. If your Blu-ray movies are darker than your HD DVD's then check your cables and connections. If it's "grainier" it could be the particular movie. Film grain is more apparent in some movies than others. the surround sound on HD-DVD is uncompressed whereas Blu-ray was still using the compressed DD sound format. Actually there are more Blu-ray movies with an uncompressed/lossless soundtrack than HD DVD. Remember, PCM, DTS-HD Master Audio, and Dolby TrueHD are all lossless. Again, refer to the website I linked to earlier in this post. The majority of HD DVD's use Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) encoding. AKA: A lossy sound format - same as standard Dolby Digital (DD). The reason why DD+ was implemented into HD DVD in the first place (in comparison to DD) was due to the way HD DVD structures audio data in packets. The only way to offer advanced capabilities (higher quality sound and option for more channels) was to adopt a different codec than DD, which was locked at 5.1 and 448 kbps, same as DVD. DD+ was specifically designed to address HD DVD's structure -- the DD+ coding frames become progressively shorter (from 6 to 3 or 2) to allow more of them to pass thru the framing structure in a given time, thereby raising the data thruput. Blu-ray, on the other hand, has no such packet constraint. That allows DD to be used in its full 6-block frame for maximum coding efficiency (efficiency drops slightly as the frame size is reduced), and to use its full 640 kbps capability for the very first time on optical media, thereby bringing higher quality. Given distinctly different circumstances, Dolby was able to adapt its coding technologies to bring improved quality and more channels to both formats. The goal was not to make the end results different, but the same in spite of the situation.

[acealive1]

That doesn't make sense. Film resolution is higher than that of 1080p high-def anyways. What the high-def versions are doing is bringing you closer to seeing what is already there. ok listen one more time.... they were trying to get a HD print from the original 35mm negative of blade runner. they had to digitally fix the picture as the movie is a quarter century old. they can only upgrade the picture so much before they destroy it

[DjfunkmasterG]

Actually, Blu-ray supports all three major codecs, MPEG-2, AVC MPEG-4, and of course VC-1. You don't even have to take my word for it. You can see for yourself just how many movies are encoded in something other than MPEG-2. http://blu-raystats.com/ Really? Where exactly did you hear this? One thing I can tell you is this. If your Blu-ray movies are darker than your HD DVD's then check your cables and connections. If it's "grainier" it could be the particular movie. Film grain is more apparent in some movies than others. Actually there are more Blu-ray movies with an uncompressed/lossless soundtrack than HD DVD. Remember, PCM, DTS-HD Master Audio, and Dolby TrueHD are all lossless. Again, refer to the website I linked to earlier in this post. The majority of HD DVD's use Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) encoding. AKA: A lossy sound format - same as standard Dolby Digital (DD). The reason why DD+ was implemented into HD DVD in the first place (in comparison to DD) was due to the way HD DVD structures audio data in packets. The only way to offer advanced capabilities (higher quality sound and option for more channels) was to adopt a different codec than DD, which was locked at 5.1 and 448 kbps, same as DVD. DD+ was specifically designed to address HD DVD's structure -- the DD+ coding frames become progressively shorter (from 6 to 3 or 2) to allow more of them to pass thru the framing structure in a given time, thereby raising the data thruput. Blu-ray, on the other hand, has no such packet constraint. That allows DD to be used in its full 6-block frame for maximum coding efficiency (efficiency drops slightly as the frame size is reduced), and to use its full 640 kbps capability for the very first time on optical media, thereby bringing higher quality. Given distinctly different circumstances, Dolby was able to adapt its coding technologies to bring improved quality and more channels to both formats. The goal was not to make the end results different, but the same in spite of the situation. Actually Blu-Ray does not offer the lossless codec or descrambler in their low rent player. In order to get DTS-HD or uncompressed Dolby Digital in the blu-ray player you have spend $800-$1000 for the player, whereas Toshiba offers it in their $300 player. I have an HD-A20 and my Neighbor has the HD-A2 both players offer the lossless sound of Dolby Digital and DTS-HD if the DVD's are so equipped. Another reason why Blu-Ray will lose.... They refused to do porn. WHich was Sony's downfall with the Beta format. Instead of embracing an industry that does $5 billion a year in business, they chose to shun it once again. Lets also talk about blu-Rays 50gb DVD that won't play on first gen players, not too mention the fact Sony refused to equip their players with an ethernet port so the players could be connected to the internet to allow downloading of updated firmware... Toshiba embraced this technology and has equipped every player from 2nd gen forward.

[UndeadGuyX]

Actually Blu-Ray does not offer the lossless codec or descrambler in their low rent player. In order to get DTS-HD or uncompressed Dolby Digital in the blu-ray player you have spend $800-$1000 for the player, whereas Toshiba offers it in their $300 player. I have an HD-A20 and my Neighbor has the HD-A2 both players offer the lossless sound of Dolby Digital and DTS-HD if the DVD's are so equipped. Uncompressed PCM audio (which the vast majority of Blu-ray movies utilize) does not require decoding as it is raw, unencoded, audio data. It is also worth mentioning that the PS3 and standalone Blu-ray players have the ability to decode Dolby TrueHD audio and convert it to PCM anyway. Another reason why Blu-Ray will lose.... They refused to do porn. WHich was Sony's downfall with the Beta format. Instead of embracing an industry that does $5 billion a year in business, they chose to shun it once again. Your going on old info and rumors. Blu-ray does indeed do porn. http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/news/show/437 You can actually get porn on Blu-ray *right now* by going to such websites as Adult DVD Empire. Lets also talk about blu-Rays 50gb DVD that won't play on first gen players, Actually, 50gb dual layer discs do play on first-gen players. They are reliable enough that about 50% of all Blu-ray movies are 50gb discs. (again, refer to Blu-rayStats.com) All that was needed was a firmware update for certain players. Which brings me to... Sony refused to equip their players with an ethernet port so the players could be connected to the internet to allow downloading of updated firmware Yes, but having an ethernet port is not the only way of updating the firmware on a player. You can also download it and burn it to a CD. http://www.blu-ray.com/software/software.php BTW, the Samsung BD-P1200 Blu-ray player includes an ethernet port. ok listen one more time.... they were trying to get a HD print from the original 35mm negative of blade runner. they had to digitally fix the picture as the movie is a quarter century old. they can only upgrade the picture so much before they destroy it I don't think you understand the whole concept of making a new master for a film. Think of it as a scanner that you may have sitting next to your desktop computer. When you make a master your basically scanning the film negative and making a copy. There is no alteration to the original negative. Also keep in mind that the Blade Runner Blu-ray and HD DVD boxsets will not only include the "Final Cut" with the cleaned-up effects but also the Theatrical Cut, Director's Cut, and Workprint copy.

[Andy]

To be honest DJ from what ive heard, blu-ray is walking all over HD-DVD

[UndeadGuyX]

To be honest DJ from what ive heard, blu-ray is walking all over HD-DVD Both sides like to tout sales figures in their own ways. Make it seem like their format is the one that is winning. Now don't get me wrong. I own both formats and enjoy them very much. It's just that the info DJ is giving out is mostly wrong. Not that he's not entitled to enjoy HD DVD or anything.

[DubiousComforts]

Here are some screencaps comparing the resolution of VHS, DVD, and HD. I did these quickly with Power DVD, which isn't the best method for taking screencaps, but you get the idea. I kept the file sizes reasonable so that the page wouldn't take too long to load. The 16:9 widescreen cap is from the Anchor Bay Divimax DVD. The difference in quality between anamorphic (16:9) and letterboxed video should immediately become apparent. VHS (letterboxed) DVD (letterboxed) DVD (16:9 widescreen) HDTV The HD cap has been resized from 1920x1088 to less than 50% of its original size for side-by-side comparison with the 16:9 widescreen DVD, and also because it's way to big to post in a forum. The actual image is linked below. Although the Divimax DVD has better colors than the previous letterboxed DVD, the contrast is off when compared to the HD example. The HD cap may look a little washed out in comparison, but it's more accurate and has better detail. You can more clearly see the button on Dr. Tongue's shirt just below the title.

[DjfunkmasterG]

To be honest DJ from what ive heard, blu-ray is walking all over HD-DVD Yes, but Blu_ray has more exclusive content. At the moment they have: Fox Disney Sony Pictures Columbia So when you have Pixar and Pirates films, Casino Royale, and the other big franchise films set to one format, Blu-Ray, it is easy to see why they would outsell HD-DVD... they aren't available on HD-DVD. Wanna see how well they would do? Offer them in both formats, otherwise Blu_ray cannot claim to be the better format based on sales... they just have a bigger catalog. Of course BR did get screwed with Transformers, as I understand it, that is HD-DVD exclusive. Like I said to Undead dude in PM... It matters not to me who wins because who ever is the perm format we all will buy it because it isn't blu-ray vs. HD_DVD to many... it is who has the more kick ass DVD collection and home theater layout.

[C5NOTLD]

It is just ridiculous though that history has to repeat itself over and over: vhs vs beta, laser vs dvd, HD vs blu-ray. The studios should have settled on one format and they all could have won big right away rather than splitting the market. I'm waiting until next year for the combo player. What I really want is a combo player that is also a recorder. In the meantime I picked up a xbox360 hd player today at best buy in a pretty good deal ($179 including King Kong, $79 Heroes dvd set free which I'll probably sell on ebay and add some other hd dvds to collection, and 5 mail in hd dvds). Among the hd dvds I also bought today: Land of the Dead.

[Danny]

dude, heroes came free?, swish, over ehre its 99 for a player and nothing more at gamestation, dont go in game myself, the clerks are ****ing vampires. allways friggin' sweeping down on you all "ex-cuuse moy, iz zer anyzing i can elp you wiz?"*continues grumbling*.....

[C5NOTLD]

QUOTE=hellsing;117089]dude, heroes came free?, .....[/QUOTE] Yeah - Heroes was free as was King Kong and 5 mail in dvds plus the player for $179. Then I noticed in the back of the Best Buy ad they said 2 free HD dvds with the purchase of "any" HD player. So I took my receipt back in and the 360 player qualifies so I picked up two more HD dvds free.