Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Gear-Fi: Non-Audio Gear and Gadgets › Will you rebuy your movie/TV collection in HD?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Will you rebuy your movie/TV collection in HD? - Page 2

post #16 of 60
Not an HD guy. Not a bad thought, but feels like it's going to be obsolete right when it's mainstream. Once computer monitor res catches up with television, then maybe CRT res will catch up with LCD? Maybe something will come out.
post #17 of 60
Not a priority--some things, maybe...eventually.

I'd rather buy music.
post #18 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherlen View Post
Not an HD guy. Not a bad thought, but feels like it's going to be obsolete right when it's mainstream. Once computer monitor res catches up with television, then maybe CRT res will catch up with LCD? Maybe something will come out.

Hmm, what exactly do you mean? PC displays have been capable of HD resolutions for years now. Some of the bigger PC CRT's are able to go well over 1920x1080. Not to mention endless LCD monitors that display very high resolutions, 1920x1200 and beyond.
post #19 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by brotherlen View Post
Not an HD guy. Not a bad thought, but feels like it's going to be obsolete right when it's mainstream. Once computer monitor res catches up with television, then maybe CRT res will catch up with LCD? Maybe something will come out.
generally computer monitors display go higher than tv actaully. for text and details display for example. Artists still prefer using crt to lcd you know, especially for the high response time. There are some lcd tv out there 42" and only 720p. This technology is going fast, there are LED, and now talks of SED which use cathode-ray like implementation which probably allows its refresh rate to be very good like CRT monitor. I guess in the future res will be higher and higher. I fear there will be no absolute standard for anything anymore with this rate of change. You have to jump sometimes but I think end of the 2008 is a good time. I predict the 52" 120hz Samsung LCD my family bought for $3k will be barely alittle more than $1k by then. It'll be so cheap for these big screen by than that it will be worth it to get a bigger screen anyway.

My opinion still holds true for not rebuying poorly mastered HD movies. Some movies/television companies still use mpeg2 encoding (dvd) today for 'HD' res. H264 is currently one of the best encoding technology, it can achieve up to 4096x2048@30fps and 960mbps (12MB/s). If I am going to jump to HD I gotta make sure it is legitamite, not like the Pink FLoyd's DSOTM SACD version. The difference has to be big enough to wow the eyes.

progo: Actaully I think wouldn't it be better? Most of the dvd today at ac-3 5.1 at 448kbps. Since HDMI cables are able to transfer DSD 1bit signal (DVDA/SACD) and 24/192,so maybe it will set the standard for the audio of the HD movies to be encoded in this format it should sound great. (not that I use Hdmi cables, and i really dont know much about the audio implementation of hd movies right now, I better read up on it).

The bottom line I am going to say is, that this entire HD thing is about DRM, that is the main reason why many people don't want to go that direction as well.
post #20 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrymx View Post
Artists still prefer using crt to lcd you know, especially for the high response time. There are some lcd tv out there 42" and only 720p. This technology is going fast, there are LED, and now talks of SED which use cathode-ray like implementation which probably allows its refresh rate to be very good like CRT monitor.
Response time has little to do with why artists choose CRT's. A good CRT will have near perfect black levels and can be calibrated to have near perfect color accuracy across the spectrum. This is why professional LCD's have seemingly poor response time, because the accuracy of the monitor is what is important.


Quote:
My opinion still holds true for not rebuying poorly mastered HD movies. Some movies/television companies still use mpeg2 encoding (dvd) today for 'HD' res. H264 is currently one of the best encoding technology, it can achieve up to 4096x2048@30fps and 960mbps (12MB/s).
This is why BluRay is kinda a crapshoot right now. HD-DVD had no real releases in MPEG2. Everything was VC-1 for the most part, with a handful of AVC titles. Though the quality of AVC vs VC-1 is debatable, especially at higher bitrates. Both are fine choices though, but MPEG2 is simply unacceptable.
post #21 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrymx View Post
no, but my opinion doesnt really matters.

i dont think the difference is worth it since lotr dvd look pretty darn good already upscaled on a 52". better off buy newer films in hd format and filmed/edit with the latest camera/technology. most of the re-hd stuff are generally popular titles, same goes with sacd. not all producing companies/artist can afford to do it. if it was everyone can be doing it, then sure.

I would think LoTR is one of the titles that really benefits from HD actually... you can see a comparison here:

Fellowship of the Ring - HD vs DVD

And I'm not sure where he got the HD version from, when they finally release the movie on Blueray, it should look even better I think. I like the zoomed in version of Gandalf, you can really see the difference there.


I don't have a HD player yet, and I doubt I will get one any time soon. I've got a fairly extensive DVD collection, and I really don't want to replace it all.
post #22 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redo View Post
This is why BluRay is kinda a crapshoot right now. HD-DVD had no real releases in MPEG2. Everything was VC-1 for the most part, with a handful of AVC titles. Though the quality of AVC vs VC-1 is debatable, especially at higher bitrates. Both are fine choices though, but MPEG2 is simply unacceptable.
MPEG2 was unnacceptable for Blu-Ray, you mean. MPEG2 is an older, less effecient lossy format over AVC or VC-1. It needs more disc space then MPEG4, and is one of the main reasons HD discs use newer codecs. Like it or not, MPEG2 is going to be around for quite some time to come: it's a universal format that studios use for archiving. As long as you don't have to sacrifice quality, it's a fine format.

As for AVC vs VC-1: there is no discernable difference with them....at least visually. They are both based on MPEG4. AVC is just backed by the MPEG group, while VC-1 is backed by Microsoft. Anecdotally, when I compress with these formats, though, I do find VC-1 takes up a tad less disc space.

Quote:
Originally Posted by terrymx View Post
Artists still prefer using crt to lcd you know, especially for the high response time.
Eh, Artists create images: they aren't concerned with response time the way gamers are. And with current LCD monitors, with the average time now being 5ms, that's not much of an issue even with gamers. The main reason CRTs are still used by some artists are the ease of color calibration as well as color fidelity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by terrymx View Post
progo: Actaully I think wouldn't it be better? Most of the dvd today at ac-3 5.1 at 448kbps. Since HDMI cables are able to transfer DSD 1bit signal (DVDA/SACD) and 24/192,so maybe it will set the standard for the audio of the HD movies to be encoded in this format it should sound great. (not that I use Hdmi cables, and i really dont know much about the audio implementation of hd movies right now, I better read up on it).
As with SACD or the video portion of an HD transfer, HD sound has the potential for better sound. I have seen a few HD movies that weren't any better then DVDs, visually. That's because the mastering was subpar. A few movies, like Blade Runner, have had a lot of processing and color correction to look leaps and bounds better in HD over SD. I notice that lossless audio tracks do sound different even when output to an older dolby digital reciever. In many instances, they sound better and more "life like" because of the care that went into the mastering. Since it's 24bit audio, it also has the potential for more detail. But of course, if the studio wants to up loudness and compress the sound....it's going to sound no different in 16bit or 24bit.
post #23 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrymx View Post
progo: Actaully I think wouldn't it be better? Most of the dvd today at ac-3 5.1 at 448kbps. Since HDMI cables are able to transfer DSD 1bit signal (DVDA/SACD) and 24/192,so maybe it will set the standard for the audio of the HD movies to be encoded in this format it should sound great. (not that I use Hdmi cables, and i really dont know much about the audio implementation of hd movies right now, I better read up on it).
True, like Davesrose said there might be some real enhancements .. but the cost of enhancing movie rig is more than this. The 448 kbps AC3 or 1.5Mbps DTS sounds pretty fancy already, so after some lottery win it might be possible to try the new generation out.
post #24 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by progo View Post
True, like Davesrose said there might be some real enhancements .. but the cost of enhancing movie rig is more than this.
Yeah....it's going to be some time before lossless is mainstream. My favorite A/V brand isn't offering recievers with TrueHD or DTS-HD MA yet. Add that to many HD players not being able to output multichannel lossless, and I figure I'll wait to consider upgrading my current rig. But the good thing about these tracks on movies is they're backwards compatible with DD or DTS....while not mantaining absolute 24bit audio, they still can sound pretty good on an older system.
post #25 of 60
Some interesting news

Blu-ray may have taken a commanding lead in the next-generation format war, but the group has a big problem looming: early supporters of the format will be left out in the cold when the Blu-ray Disc Association introduces BD Profile 2.0

Unlike HD DVD, which mandated features such as local storage, a second video and audio decoder for picture-in-picture, and a network connection from the very beginning,

the companies behind Blu-ray took a different approach. Initial hardware players lacked these capabilities in order to keep costs down.

None of the Profile 1.0 players can be upgraded to Profile 1.1, which was finalized recently, with the exception of the PlayStation 3 -- whose update arrived in mid-December. Likewise, Profile 2.0 is expected to arrive in October bringing Internet connectivity that Profile 1.1 players lack.

Representatives at the Blu-ray booth at CES told BetaNews that the PlayStation 3 is currently the only player they would recommend, due to upcoming changes to the platform. But Pioneer, Samsung, Panasonic and Sony have all been selling standalone Blu-ray players to customers.

In order to allay confusion, the BDA has adopted special labels that will be placed on Blu-ray movies. Those with a "Bonus View" sticker will require Profile 1.1 players, while those with "BD Live" will require Profile 2.0...


When BetaNews asked developers of BD Live whether they were concerned about a backlash from early adopters who supported the format from the beginning, we were told: "They knew what they were getting into..."

BDA President Andy Parsons echoed that sentiment at the Blu-ray press conference Monday, telling BetaNews that it's normal for new technology to change and older hardware to become obsolete. He added that early Blu-ray owners can continue to do everything they could in the beginning: watch movies in high-definition.

Still, the confusion will only likely further alienate existing and potential customers of the nascent format. One key Blu-ray developer told BetaNews that although he builds discs for studios including Fox and Lionsgate, he did not buy a Blu-ray player for personal use...
source





And some news from Toshiba:

Toshiba...today announced that it is stepping up its successful
marketing campaign for HD DVD as it experienced record-breaking unit sales
in the fourth quarter of 2007. Major initiatives, including joint
advertising campaigns with studios and extended pricing strategies will
begin in mid- January and are designed to spotlight the superior benefits
of HD DVD as well as the benefits HD DVD brings to a consumer's current DVD
library by upconverting standard DVDs via the HDMI(TM) output to near high
definition picture quality.

As Toshiba achieved the #1 sales volume in the next generation DVD
category with an approximately 50 percent market share in 2007, HD DVD is
proven to be the format of choice for consumers. Coupled with an 80 percent
plus market share of all next generation DVD equipped notebooks for the 4th
quarter 2007, the HD DVD format has already paved the way to a high
definition digital AV solution by eliminating the boundaries between the
consumer's living room and on the go.

HD DVD not only creates the ultimate high definition entertainment
experience, leveraging all of the promise of the format such as superior
audio/video performance, Web-enabled network capabilities and advanced
interactive features - it also has a high-level of compatibility with DVD.
With DVD upconversion via the HDMI output, HD DVD players instantly make a
movie lover's existing DVD library look better than ever.

"HD DVD is the best way to watch movies in high definition," said Jodi
Sally, Vice President of Marketing, Toshiba's Digital A/V Group. "Our HD
DVD players not only play back approximately 800 HD DVD titles available
worldwide and deliver an entirely new level of entertainment but also
enhance the picture quality to near high definition on legacy DVD titles by
all studios. In short, we added high def to DVD which already is the de
facto standard format created and approved by the DVD Forum that consists
of more than two hundred companies."

New Marketing Strategy for Mass Market Adoption

Taking the holiday season sales based on promotional prices into full
consideration, these new manufacturer's suggested retail prices (MSRP) are
designed to meet the potential demand for HD DVD players in the U.S.
market. Effective on January 13, 2008 the MSRP of the entry-model HD-A3
will be $149.99, the HD-A30, with 1080p output, $199.99, and the high-end
HD-A35, $299.99...

source



It'd be a dream if Toshiba can take a hold on the market after recent developments. BluRay is still a mess.
post #26 of 60
All I know is, if Saving Private Ryan ever comes out on Blu Ray, its mine.
post #27 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogo
The 448 kbps AC3 or 1.5Mbps DTS sounds pretty fancy already, so after some lottery win it might be possible to try the new generation out.
There are options for a modest budget like this and this. That's $350 for a BD player and $250 for a HD-DVD player with internal decoding and analog output of DTHD, DTS - HD/MA, if one has a receiver with 5.1 analog inputs. If they do not, consider one can pick up a compatible Receiver (5.1 analog in) for under a $100 new or used. Currently, I don't see much barrier of entry for a "mainstream" person to enjoy lossless audio soundtracks if one has already invested in speakers. If not, well the used market offers interesting budget friendly options, i.e. $500 for a servicable 5.1 speaker system. Content wise, 24 percent of HD-DVD's and 64 percent of BD's offer lossless soundtrack mixes via Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD, DTS-Master Audio, or Linear PCM.

My advice is to go sample the tracks in person with matched levels. Only then will you know for yourself. IME, the difference over lossy (Dolby Digital, DTS) is consistent enough to be excited about. But, that's an opinion like this:

Quote:
I notice that lossless audio tracks do sound different even when output to an older dolby digital reciever.
which contains a fallacy.

--

Redo, I've read in High-Def Digest that Profile 1.0 and 1.1 players will be able to play the movies off Profile 2.0 discs. Is there a reason to fear the opposite? That is my chief concern. I don't care about the additional features.
post #28 of 60
my parents got a hd dvd player, which is looking like itll loose, but ill only rent hds,

i will never buy a blu ray player, for myself

id need a new tv a blu ray player etc for it to be worth it, and i dont see that much improvement, id rather rent hd via download cause my laptop has a beyond hd screen, where it is more noticable

besides i hate everything sony, the playstion, their tvs, phones etc
i think they are all way over priced for what they do!
post #29 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by virometal View Post
which contains a fallacy.
.
What do you mean my quote contains a fallacy? I can play a TrueHD track via optical on an old reciever. When I switch between a TrueHD track and the Dolby Digital track, I hear a difference. How is what I'm listening to a fallacy??

I realize a TrueHD track would be down sampled on a receiver that has DD and DTS....but the studio has used different audio masters for the TrueHD track over the DD track....so the line levels and dynamics are different enough that you hear a different sound. I'm waiting out for Harman Kardon to come out with a TrueHD/DTS-HD MA amplifier before I get into true lossless. I also am not sure why some people include Linear PCM as lossless.....PCM is bit perfect and does not need an encoder/decoder to decompress the way TrueHD or DTS-HD needs. The main benefit of lossless is that it creates less overhead and allows extra channels.
post #30 of 60
Replacing your entire library is an expensive proposition, especially if it's in the 100s. But if I had the extra money, I probably would, though I'd invest more in Criterion Collection titles whenever they decide to put out hi-def discs. I only buy movies that I intend to watch repeatedly over time anyway. I won't be upset if Blu-Ray wins this battle, and will continue to use my HD-A3 as long as the support is there and wait for a wonderful hybrid player once it comes along.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Gear-Fi: Non-Audio Gear and Gadgets › Will you rebuy your movie/TV collection in HD?