English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > News

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 20 February 2008, 20:59   #81
Galahad/FLT
Going nowhere

Galahad/FLT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 44
Posts: 6,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul_s View Post
A lot of the Blu-ray releases are also missing extras that were prominent on the original DVD releases too... and paying upto 25 per disc is daylight robbery for any HD disc imo. Just wait, they'll have 'special edition Blu-ray' discs with the added extras in a year or so to maximise profits.

I see no point in it tbh for films. Standard DVD is cheap, cheerful, looks crisp, clear (Anchor Bay releases tend to be brilliant) and sound wise are fine to my ears with a decent set of cans on my head

Another gimmick and not really a quantum leap in picture/sound.

There will also be far less releases of older DVD releases too onto the Blu-Ray format and there's not a cat in hells chance I'm going to replace all my DVDs

I'm waiting for the day when Isolinear optical chips are released with 2.15 kiloquads of data storage
I'm in agreement here, i junked most of my video collection to get DVD's instead, and I have a HD TV, but i'm not interested in buying the same film with better picture quality for twice the price.

Coupled with the fact that a lot of films in HD are going to look crap as the deficiencies in some of the special effects are all too clear to see.

From what I can gather , Terminator 2 looks quite bad in HD.

HD is too soon, DVD still has plenty of life in it, and thats part of Blu-Rays problems right there, most people will think "I'm not spending silly money on a player and a TV and the discs just for better picture quality", because for some films, the "better quality" will actually look worse because DVD's lower resolution is kinder to older effects.
Galahad/FLT is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 20 February 2008, 21:40   #82
Ian
HIGH FIVE!!

Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Derby
Age: 39
Posts: 1,898
T2 looks quite bad on normal TV now, the effects haven't aged well.

The more blu-ray sells, the cheaper it will get.

DVDs didn't come out at less than a tenner each either.
Ian is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 21:43   #83
Anubis
Maj. Voodoo

Anubis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: #DrainTwitterSpam
Age: 45
Posts: 2,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by demoniac View Post
There is a significant difference in picture quality. I was watching Blade Runner BD on 2 of my friend's TVs. One was a LCD that the picture quality looked better than the theatre screening, and the other was a projection TV that matched the theatre's quality. Overall, I saw enough of a quality jump between the DVD and HD format to think about accelerating my purchase of the new format.
Try to use DVD player with upconverter for 1080.

HD picture is clearer, but not that much that my ol' eye can spot all the differences. (that's why I don't complain with DivX )

@Paul_s - you got it all right girl!

@Ian - paid 5 US $ for special extended edition T2 DVD last summer.
Anubis is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 21:55   #84
Ian
HIGH FIVE!!

Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Derby
Age: 39
Posts: 1,898
If you cannot see the difference you must be blind

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...71&postcount=5

Look at some of the images in the links and tell me again you cannot really see the difference.

Sure if you watch a blu-ray and then the DVD version after you might not notice, but side by side and you can tell a mile off.

Even old films look significatly better in HD than SD.
Ian is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 22:28   #85
MazinKaesar
Super Robot Pilot
MazinKaesar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Modena (Italy)
Age: 42
Posts: 848
Send a message via MSN to MazinKaesar Send a message via Yahoo to MazinKaesar
Not only BD wins over HD-DVD, but Sony decrared that in any movies in BD format you will find too a low-res version, ready to be transfered in a Memory Stick Duo and played with a PSP.

EDIT: I ever thinked that BD would win, and thank you to PS3. PS3 comes with as a "cheap" BD player other than a console. Many people bought it for both functions.

Last edited by MazinKaesar; 20 February 2008 at 22:34.
MazinKaesar is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 22:53   #86
Unch
Registered User
Unch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cambridge
Age: 35
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian View Post
If you cannot see the difference you must be blind

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...71&postcount=5

Look at some of the images in the links and tell me again you cannot really see the difference.
Still images aren't necessarily the best way to compare lossy video. Lord knows that single DVD frames from scenes that look crisp and clear can look awful. You just have to pause a DVD to see that.

Quote:
Sure if you watch a blu-ray and then the DVD version after you might not notice, but side by side and you can tell a mile off.
Yes, well people do tend to watch two versions of the same film at the same time.

It's a bit like MP3s. If you were to flick between a CD version and an MP3 version of the same song, the MP3 sounds really bad. But listen to it by itself and most people can't tell the difference.

I agree with those who have said that HD disc formats were launched way too early.
Unch is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 22:57   #87
Anubis
Maj. Voodoo

Anubis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: #DrainTwitterSpam
Age: 45
Posts: 2,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian View Post
If you cannot see the difference you must be blind

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...71&postcount=5

Look at some of the images in the links and tell me again you cannot really see the difference.

Sure if you watch a blu-ray and then the DVD version after you might not notice, but side by side and you can tell a mile off.

Even old films look significatly better in HD than SD.
You have to really try to focus to see the difference, and only you'll see them when you have screen next to each other.

IMHO, DVD blurred version looks better, as you got more focus on what's going on instead of this BD detail insanity.

Just take a look at first screen of blade runner and tell me which version looks more realistic, BD or DVD. IMHO DVD looks better.

And just because Sony fucked up with Lik-Sang I hope Sony will fail and get out of console business and Ian will become Nintendo-gay-boy.
Anubis is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 23:05   #88
DamienD
Global Moderator

DamienD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London / Sydney
Age: 41
Posts: 9,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anubis View Post
And just because Sony fucked up with Lik-Sang I hope Sony will fail
That really pissed me off as well

I used to buy quite a bit of stuff from Lik-Sang
DamienD is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 23:31   #89
Anubis
Maj. Voodoo

Anubis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: #DrainTwitterSpam
Age: 45
Posts: 2,284
This seems to be interesting...

Quote:
Last year, about 32 million DVD players were sold in the U.S.; of those, only 4%, or 1.5 million, were high-definition DVD players. Blu-ray Disc players accounted for 578,000 of that number, and HD DVD accounted for 370,000, according to Adams Media Research Inc. That's almost a 2-to-1 ratio. After Warner Bros. pulled its support of HD DVD last month, the percentage of Blu-ray to HD DVD sales skyrocketed. Blu-ray accounted for 93% of high-def DVD hardware sales in North America in the week after Warner Bros.'s announcement -- although the overall number was small: 21,770 players. Multiply those sales out over the full year, and you're still looking at just over 1 million high-def players sold.
After the news broke yesterday that HD DVD was about to raise the white flag, geek news site Slashdot.com put up an impromptu poll for its readers, asking, "Now That Blu-ray Has Won ...?"
  • I'll Get A Player By Summer
  • I'll Get A Player By the End of the Year
  • Still Not Convinced HD is Worth It
  • Holding Out For Downloads
  • I Want My HD DVD
  • My Media Is In CowboyNeal's Hands
Almost half of the 28,000 respondents at the time of this story's publishing said they still aren't convinced that high-definition DVD is worth the upgrade from traditional DVD technology. The next biggest group of respondents said they are still waiting for high-definition downloads. Geeks tend to be early adopters of technology, so this poll could be very telling.

Source: ComputerWorld.com
Anubis is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 23:43   #90
P-J
EAB veteran... Honest!
P-J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Warwickshire, England
Age: 37
Posts: 1,144
Send a message via MSN to P-J
Quote:
Originally Posted by demoniac View Post
There is a significant difference in picture quality. I was watching Blade Runner BD on 2 of my friend's TVs. One was a LCD that the picture quality looked better than the theatre screening, and the other was a projection TV that matched the theatre's quality. Overall, I saw enough of a quality jump between the DVD and HD format to think about accelerating my purchase of the new format.
It didn't make the storyline or acting any better.
P-J is offline  
Old 20 February 2008, 23:53   #91
demoniac
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: -
Posts: 1,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by P-J View Post
It didn't make the storyline or acting any better.
With that logic, there's no reason for people to move on from VHS or mono for audio.
demoniac is offline  
Old 21 February 2008, 01:17   #92
exoticaga
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 446
Maybe Toshiba lost out because they had other plans.

Either way both corps have their problems and bad customer and service relations.

At least now we can move on with high capacity media. Roll on the third party manufactures, who will make this available and cheap enough for us all to buy.

Lets hope the media doesn't turn out as exspensive as dvd dual layer media is. If so it will be a great set back, with little sales.

If hardware and media is cheap and plentiful it will be bought buy everyone.

I see another few years yet before i buy into it. I need the prices that are the current dvd hardware and media as is now. I'm more for many hardware recorder drives for pcs and loads of media blank disks, while only one or two hardware recorder drives for the home is needed.

The industry needs get their brains in gear. With cheaper hardware and media will equal vast instant profit turnover.
exoticaga is offline  
Old 21 February 2008, 11:15   #93
P-J
EAB veteran... Honest!
P-J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Warwickshire, England
Age: 37
Posts: 1,144
Send a message via MSN to P-J
Quote:
Originally Posted by demoniac View Post
With that logic, there's no reason for people to move on from VHS or mono for audio.
Yes there was. There were huge (tangible) benefits for even the most hardened techophobe.

As far as I can see this just offers a better picture. Most of it is a case of the emperor's new clothes for techies who only know the advantages of one format over another because they know how the format works. I mean some of the claims on here of a higher bitrate or menus that aren't pre-encoded being of any interest to joe public are truly hilarious.

As far as I'm concerned, we're now in to audiophile and videophile territory. Good luck with your 'superb' picture!
P-J is offline  
Old 22 February 2008, 12:38   #94
Mick_AKA
crusader of light

Mick_AKA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Stone, Staffordshire.
Posts: 1,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unch View Post
It's not exactly a quantum leap like CDs were over vinyl
I lack the motivation at this time of the morning to write twenty paragraphs about what a load of shit that statement is.
Mick_AKA is offline  
Old 22 February 2008, 13:24   #95
Charlie
. . Mouse . .
Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nowhere
Age: 49
Posts: 1,792
Feel the Passion!
This thread has lasted longer than I expected...
FWIW:
I guess I may eventually buy a blu-ray player but this is ONLY going to happen when a significant proportion of films I want are no-longer released on DVD. And that assumes in 5-10 years time there isn't a MUCH more worthy 'upgrade'.
Why?
-Sony - at the risk of being a misery I'm too p*ssed to support them these days.
-DRM - another monkey on my back. It's a freedom-related issue that doesn't just relate to films...
and:
-Why bother?
Well done DivX's look more than good enough on my projector, never mind DVD quality being 'better' than that.
Too many of my favorite films look WORSE in HD.
I know b-r is an improvement over DVD but I'm never going to notice without a side-by-side comparison.
I'll also have to upgrade ALL my stuff to take advantage of it. (not going to happen any time soon)
Oh, yes. Why do I want yet another d*mn box cluttering my house (unless it's a retro box ) when I'm already migrating all my media to the HDDs on my 'media server'..?

Did I mention money yet?

For me I just don't see the point.
Charlie is offline  
Old 22 February 2008, 14:12   #96
Ian
HIGH FIVE!!

Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Derby
Age: 39
Posts: 1,898
I bet when DVD came out there were similar whinges from moaning old gits

DVD was out for ages before people decided they wanted it.

It's going to be the same this time. People don't like change even when it's good for them.

Trust me, if you have an LCD HDTV you will notice how much better HD content looks than SD. You can see every flaw in the compression. When I first watched a DVD on it I thought my TV must be broke it was that bad. It wasn't until I searched on the internet that I found out it was normal.

If you have a HD TV, you need HD content. It's a simple as that.
Ian is offline  
Old 22 February 2008, 15:28   #97
seuden
uber cool demi god

seuden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Kent/England
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian View Post
If you have a HD TV, you need HD content. It's a simple as that.
You're gonna think I'm attacking you now but I'm honestly not, standard definition looks awesome on my HD TV, which btw is a Sony Bravia KDL-40V2000. Yes if you're sitting a metre away from the screen there are noticeable artefacts but who sits a metre away from a 40" tv?
seuden is offline  
Old 22 February 2008, 15:39   #98
webhead
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: swindon
Posts: 148
bull

well blue ray won what a surprise ,but unfortunatly i beleive the wqy to go is on micro mmc cards m,this would cut packaging down to size as i thought we supposed to be helping the enviroment these days.

and i beleive that al this extra packaging and size of things are a waste of time,we only need a HD micro card player .
webhead is offline  
Old 22 February 2008, 16:12   #99
Ian
HIGH FIVE!!

Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Derby
Age: 39
Posts: 1,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by seuden View Post
You're gonna think I'm attacking you now but I'm honestly not, standard definition looks awesome on my HD TV, which btw is a Sony Bravia KDL-40V2000. Yes if you're sitting a metre away from the screen there are noticeable artefacts but who sits a metre away from a 40" tv?
Maybe it does, Bravias are good sets, but it still isn't going to look anywhere near as good as HD content does.

I can understand you putting up with content that isn't as good while the prices are in the high "new technology" bracket, but I ask you, just how quickly did you jump on the DVD bandwagon? Did you buy one of the first DVDs for the same price Blu-Ray players sell for or did you wait...

First DVD player we had in our house was my PS2.

There is a huge quality difference between DVD and HD (far greater than the difference between VHS and DVD). Fine if people don't like the fact Sony "won", just say that, but don't start with HD isn't needed, that much of a difference or other such crap because the more HDTVs that are sold the more people aren't going to want DVDs to play on them.
Ian is offline  
Old 22 February 2008, 16:54   #100
NLS
Ancient User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: GREECE
Age: 43
Posts: 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by seuden View Post
You're gonna think I'm attacking you now but I'm honestly not, standard definition looks awesome on my HD TV
Are you sure you have ever seen HD content?

There is now reason why SD wouldn't look "awesome" (for SD standards) on an HD set... but seeing HD on HD is a complete other story.

They are not even close (contrary to what people say about distances etc.).

Watch something HD for 10 min. and then immediately go back to SD (even a good quality DVD)... everything will look blurry.

Yes we got used to blurriness all those years, but that doesn't make it "reality".
NLS is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Want to start ray-tracing watertonian support.Apps 48 27 January 2014 10:38
Re-used pictures (stupid thread :) psygnosis wins Chain support.Games 4 09 May 2007 10:43
Digital Leisure to Bring 'Dragon's Lair' to Blu-ray Dizzy Retrogaming General Discussion 5 27 March 2007 01:20
GP32 BLU amiga emulation Gluttony New to Emulation or Amiga scene 3 28 August 2005 16:47
Who dares wins Mad Mark request.Old Rare Games 4 28 February 2003 14:15

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:59.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.66165 seconds with 11 queries