Blu-Ray or HD DVD?

[Sayonara]

Which one will you choose? Have you picked a side yet? Maybe you have players for both?

 

There is some discussion at the moment about the various advantages of each format... slightly better quality on Blu-Ray, conventional DVD format on the flipside of some HD DVD movies, and so on. Let's hear your views

[insane_alien]

i own neither, probably won't get one for years either but bluray has the greater technical merits(higher capacity and throughput) and does seem to be winning the format war.

[blike]

I own neither, but my completely unsupportable hunch is that blue-ray will win out.

[Sayonara]

At the moment I have access to my housemate's PS3, so I don't need a Blu-Ray player.

 

I will probably buy an HD drive for my Xbox 360. What swung it was I just found out that Battlestar Galactica is coming out on HD

[bascule]

I have a PS3, but... I use it for games. I own one Blu-Ray movie, Spiderman 3, which came with the PS3, and I don't particularly care for it. No real plans on buying any Blu-Ray movies in the near future.

 

Why anyone would buy a standalone Blu-Ray player is beyond me...

[insane_alien]

i'm wanting one for my PC. dual layer writable bluray disk would be great for archiving.

[badchad]

As of late, HD-DVD has had some serious setbacks in this "war". It seems Blu-Ray is going to win.

 

I can wait another year or two to see who comes out on top.

[bascule]

Of course, who needs Blu-Ray when an upscaling television can accomplish largely the same thing with a DVD?

 

http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/techview/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10610923

[5614]

I voted for the wrong thing by mistake!

 

I voted that I want blu-ray. Well, when the blu-ray vs. HDDVD first started I was supporting blu-ray... but in this poll I'd say I want both, and it will remain that way until one or other wins or they become compatable with each other! Basically what I want is to be in with the majority and have the most popular technology, because in this case I believe that's the best position to be in.

 

In reality I won't get either though! Not until there's a clear market leader (or they're compatable)... I'm but a poor student! And I like PC gaming over PS3/360, so that rules those out.

[Klaynos]

Of course, who needs Blu-Ray when an upscaling television can accomplish largely the same thing with a DVD?

 

http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/techview/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10610923

 

The ps3 (and I therefore assume other players) will upscale a DVD... I'm impressed with it, I thought it'd be a silly gimmick, but it really works!

[Sayonara]

Excellent article Bascule, thanks for the linkage.

[Sigthror]

I believe there was a Scientific American article discussing the technical differences between Blu ray and HD. I think it was the July 07 issue?

[Pangloss]

I own a first-gen HD DVD player and several dozen titles, and will be buying a BR player this year. I have a home theater with an 8-foot screen and surround sound that I've spent a fairly ridiculous amount of money on, and I'm a nut about quality, so I want every ounce of sharpness and intensity I can muster. HD DVD has been a trip, but I clearly guessed wrong and Toshiba has lost.

 

 

Still, it was a good fight, and I'm 100% certain that Blu-Ray players wouldn't have dropped in price as fast as they have had it not been for this competition. Blu-Ray players today cost HALF what they cost a year ago.

 

(Amazon has the Samsung unit for $329, btw.)

[YT2095]

I don`t want either for the foreseeable future, I don`t watch TV enough to justify it really.

[blike]

I own a first-gen HD DVD player and several dozen titles, and will be buying a BR player this year. I have a home theater with an 8-foot screen and surround sound that I've spent a fairly ridiculous amount of money on

An 8-foot screen? I hate you.

[hermanntrude]

IMO it's probably worth hanging onto DVD for a while and waiting for the NEXT next level.

 

They're going to develop something bigger, and they're bound to want to make some extra cash meanwhile. If it's feasible, i'll wait till we have ulra-DVDs or whatever dumb name they come up with for them.

 

By the way my flash drive holds 2 Gb and doesnt get scratched to buggery every time i move it. It works nicely for me, since my computer is my only entertainment source (i dont own a TV and dont want to, since i download all my entertainment, commercial-free) and my computer is fairly old anyway.

[iNow]

By the way my flash drive holds 2 Gb and doesnt get scratched to buggery every time i move it. It works nicely for me, since my computer is my only entertainment source (i dont own a TV and dont want to, since i download all my entertainment, commercial-free) and my computer is fairly old anyway.

 

I think that's an important point. CDs... DVDs... they are storage media of the past. Digital memory devices are the way of the future because they are not subject to the same "environmental insults."

[badchad]

Of course, who needs Blu-Ray when an upscaling television can accomplish largely the same thing with a DVD?

 

http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/techview/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10610923

 

 

If you've ever actually seen it though, upscaling really doesn't work all that well. You just can't create more resolution where none existed in the first place.

[insane_alien]

indeed, a DVD on a fullHDTV still looks pixelated. not as much as with ordinary TV signals but still. fullHD looks frikkin awesome.

[bascule]

If you've ever actually seen it though, upscaling really doesn't work all that well.

 

Actually, on the contrary I find most people are surprised by how well upscaling actually works once they see it.

 

You just can't create more resolution where none existed in the first place.

 

The issue is a bit more nuanced than that. Motion compensation algorithms can create additional resolution by operating on a set of frames which represent motion in the scene. The process is far different than simple scaling algorithms that apply to still images.

[Pangloss]

I don`t want either for the foreseeable future, I don`t watch TV enough to justify it really.

 

This isn't about TV, it's about movies. /bonk

 

indeed, a DVD on a fullHDTV still looks pixelated. not as much as with ordinary TV signals but still. fullHD looks frikkin awesome.

 

Exactly. Most DVDs are encoded with anamorphic widescreen information, which does help somewhat, and more recent releases contain much higher digitization scan rates than early DVD releases, which look AWFUL when blown up onto my 8-foot projected screen. A good example of a very good-looking regular-DVD movie would be Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings series, which has still not come out in high definition, but looks quite nice on DVD because of a 4,000-line scan resolution when they went from film to digital. (I think it's slated for Blu-Ray release this year.<slobber>)

 

I actually own three copies of Clint Eastwood's "Unforgiven". The original release, which I think I bought around 1998, was one of the earliest DVD releases, and when projected on my screen it's kinda like watching a movie on the Internet with really poor bandwidth. Yick! So after getting the projector I bought a "special edition" DVD version, which looks quite reasonable, if a bit dim. And then I have the recent HD DVD release, which has amazing color, clarity, separation and intensity. I keep all three around just to show people these differences because not everyone can really appreciate HDTV until they see it in comparison on the same equipment.

 

Incidentally, sometimes the benefits of high definition can appear in unexpected places. I recently purchased the HD DVD version of one of my all-time favorites, Casablanca. I was FLOORED by the increased level of detail. Cigarette smoke floating about in mid-air! Definition in the shadows that I never knew was there! Stunning!

 

Old B&W movies is actually one of home theater's biggest attractions, IMO. You get a chance to see an old classic in the way it was intended to be seen -- LARGER than life, NOT smaller. You wouldn't think it would matter, but it really does. Other classics we watched recently on the big screen include Citizen Cane and The Searchers. The Searchers is a great example of this -- much of it was shot with the cameras looking UP at the actors, so John Wayne really looms over the audience. This effect is not only lost on the small screen, it's actually disorienting, because you're looking down at your TV which is then looking up at the actors -- like they're about to fall over or something. But translate that onto an 8-foot projected image, up on the wall, and suddenly it all makes sense. Ditto Lawrence of Arabia, or 2001 -- any movie like that benefits tremendously from a big, high-mounted image.

 

(I'll spare you all the projected-versus-backlight-is-more-like-film argument.)

[Atlas]

When it came to this subject on consoles a lot of my friends had the same response. "Does anyone remember BETA Max? .... I rest my case." But seriously the differences between the two can really only be noticed on the largest of screens in the homes of the more wealthy people. The general population is probably unable to tell the difference or afford a TV that could show the difference and I'll bet good money that newer more advanced technology will be released before BR has its day in the sun. My feeling is - why spend the money now when the next best thing is likely just around the corner.

[Pangloss]

I'm gonna have to disagree with you about the "only... wealthy people" point. A high-definition projector capable of throwing an 8-foot image at a brightness and color clarity more or less in the ballpark of a Plasma screen is typically an order of magnitude cheaper than the typical Plasma/LCD/DLP screen at a quarter of that size. Even adding in the cost of the screen leaves you far and away in a better price range. The only real down sides are room/wall space and room lighting issues (can't have a lot of other lights on in the room). In most cases those issues can be dealt with easily, so it's really just a matter of lack of consumer knowledge/interest. We're used to backlit TVs -- it's familiar and comfortable. Projection is something you do in a darkened theater.

 

I agree with you that on a 30-40" set most people can't tell much difference. But at 8' size anybody can tell the difference between regular-def DVD and Blu Ray/HD DVD. At a glance.

 

You could certainly make a case that typical college students or low-income families can't afford them, I agree with that. But HDTVs have outsold regular definition sets for almost two years now. The interest in HDTV is there. It's just that the knowledge is lagging behind. Just to show how crazy-stupid the typical consumer is, while HDTV outsells regular TV, only something like 10-20% of the number of people who buy HDTVs actually spring for HDTV service from their provider. Everyone else is watching stretch-o-vision, and wondering why their favorite heroes have all put on so much weight.

[bascule]

I agree with you that on a 30-40" set most people can't tell much difference. But at 8' size anybody can tell the difference between regular-def DVD and Blu Ray/HD DVD. At a glance.

 

I would disagree with that most people can tell the difference at a glance. There's a lot of criteria to consider, most notably the quality of DVD master as well as the quality of the source material. Some of the best mastering houses (Criterion) aren't yet producing HD releases of their content.

 

For a very small selection of movies, the difference is outright obvious (e.g. 1080p Blu-Ray release of Planet Earth). However, for most movies, I have my doubts the average joe can tell the difference.

 

Many people have asked me "Is this HD?" when I play movies on my projector. The answer is: yes, it is (thanks to the projector's upscaling), however the source material is not. Upscaling is enough to give noticeably improved picture quality.

 

I would really like to pit a Criterion master of a DVD on a system with a motion compensating upscaler against a non-Criterion master of a Blu-Ray disc of the same film, and gauge some opinions on which is higher quality.

[Severian]

I have a blu-ray on my pc, but I don't think I will bother for the TV. Even though I have a 42" plasma, I am not sure I could really tell the difference.