Early scans of the
boxes from some of the first flicks to be released on HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc are starting to show up, and it looks
like at least some of the first releases will ship in 1080p. DVDActive has shots of the boxes from several HD DVD
movies, including "Million Dollar Baby" and "The Last Samurai," and they're listed as being in
1080p. No word yet if this is an across-the-board thing, or whether the early BD titles are also 1080p (DVDActive only
has the fronts of the BD boxes). But this is sure to be good news for anyone planning to build a collection of discs;
at least you won't have to toss them when you can finally buy a 1080p-capable player. Of course, that doesn't mean you
won't still be chucking your discs before you have a chance to watch them in true 1080p glory. After all, there is that
pesky format war going on ...
[Via
HD Beat]
posted Apr 13th 2006 2:44PM
Still, this is no reason to change my beloved and well-aged TV set... It's still a child, you know.
Crud, and I was gonna take advantage of the falling prices of large screen HDTV.
Sweet that studios are putting out 1080p already!!
Wasn't this expected? I'm not so sure what the big deal is...
HD-DVD support a variety of resolutions to encode discs in but if you're talking movies the dominant resolution will be 1080p/24 because that translates from film the easiest. The confusion surrounding 1080i is regarding the output of the players which is maximum 1080i as of today.
archie40z:
The big deal is that all of the HD-DVD players we know about right now offer 1080i output only. 1080p discs both confirm that HD-DVD supports that format (we kinda knew it did; it's in the spec, but that doesn't mean anyone was gonna use it) but it also means that you won't have a bunch of obsolete discs in a few years like a lot of people did when they bought early non-anamorphic DVD's. It's at least some amount of insurance against double-dipping.
Which is not to say there won't be "special editions" of these early films later on. But at least the picture quality won't really be an issue.
I'm glad to see they're including 16x9 as well as 2.4:1 aspect ratios on one disc. I hate buying a DVD, watching it on my widescreen TV, and still seeing black bars because of the 2.4:1 aspect ratio.
Total tv newb here....whats the current DVD standard? 720?
KL:
The current DVD standard is either 640x480p for fullscreen movies, or 720x480p for widescreen movies.
Hmmm...the only way I see blu-ray overtaking HDDVD now is if they can find a way to advertise (and actually get people interested in) how much more they can put on a BD than a HDDVD...more extra features and interactivity might make the difference...
And of course if you know NOTHING of either format, and you are a retarded consumer..if your favorite color is red, you'll naturally gravitate towards HDDVD. But if your favorite color is Blue, you'll probably check out the Blu rays first.
Personally my favorite color is blue...which is the ONLY reason I prefer blu-rays.(joke...ha ha..:)
On a side note, why couldn't they have come out with good movies for their respective media launches.
Examples..
Blu-ray would have a HUGE advantage in initial interest if they put the entire Star Wars series on Blu-ray...but no they have...HUTCH, yea!!
HDDVD would have a HUGE advantage in interest if they put all of the Lord of the Rings movies on HDDVD.
um, what's the point of having 1080p feed HDDVD and BluRay when the movie wasnt shot in HD anamorphic or 16 by 9 1080p? directors like M. night shamalan (spelling) have already said they want to stick to analog. filming, so even if i get 1080p from say, family guy season 1 , it was still made in a 480p 4:3 screen. i just dont get the point. can someone explain to me nicely? unless they go back and REMAKE everything in 1080p, i dont see why i have to update my gilmore gilrsi 1080p (other than the fact that it might get rid of some artifacts, and yes i realise my plethroa of taste in video)
Format war or no, it's nice to see the studios giving us what we want. Who cares if we can't play 1080p movies yet...I'm just glad they're available.
jon, movies shot on film are not shot at any "resolution"...they are shot on 35mm film and then digitized at whatever resolution is desired. So movies digitized at 1080 will look better than those digitized at 720. For Golden Girls and your other favorites shot on video, it's probably a different story...someone else can probably explain if there will be any benefits.
It will probably be 1080p at 24 frames per second, which is actually lower in bandwidth than 1080i (30 fps).
My big concern over this is how will the players output the signal. The right way to do it would be to play the original 24 fps movie, but I fear that players might use 3:2 pulldown to make a 1080i signal of it.
How do they broadcast HD movies on HDTV right now? 1080p24 or 1080i60?
By the way, the DVD format is 720x480i60 in NTSC land and 720x576p25 in PAL countries. At least that's how most movies are done anyways.
are you sure am ? i thought i read that atleast all the new star wars movies are filmed digitally.
thomas_h: yeah, some movies are shot on HD video, like the new Star Wars movies and Spy Kids and so on. I have no idea what res those are shot at. My point was just, as I said, "movies shot on film" are not shot at a particular resolution -- the concept of resolution as its being used here doesn't apply when you're talking about film. It's like saying "I have a 10 megapixel 35 mm camera." It's apples and oranges.
Yo homies.
jon: the comment above mine (by "am") is correct for most films. They are shot on film, and transferred & colour corrected to video. Also, some of the better looking shows and almost all made-for-tv movies or mini-series, are also shot on film. These will all look exceptional when they are released in the 1080p format HD discs.
So to directly answer your question, Gilmore Girls is shot on film (super 16mm) and it will benefit greatly from HD release because the post-production is already done in HD, so they have the content ready to go when the format war is over. The main reason many television programs are currently shooting on film, or mastering them in HD, is for the forward compatibility with HD broadcasts, HDDVD, or Blu-Ray Discs.
The truth is, current HD broadcasts are not as good as they should be. Many broadcasters sacrifice visual quality (by compressing the HD) so that they can fit more channels within their bandwidth. Once the 1080p video hits the shelves, people will see true HD quality and hopefully that will force the broadcasters to stop being so stingey.
Some films however, have been shot on video in the old standard resolution (720x480i in North America), and others like the latest Star Wars films were shot on proprietary HD video. Everything will be viewable once 'up-converted' to HD, however the standard definition stuff will not gain any quality, and in fact usually looks worse on the HD Television sets because it details the flaws in the image more obviously.
Lucas was looking to shoot on HD before Episode 1, but the technology wasn't there yet, so he shot on film. Star Wars Episod 2 was shot on the Sony CineAlta F900 HD camera at 1080p 4:2:2 sampling. Episode 3 used a newer camera, the Sony CineAlta F950 at 1080p 4:4:4 sampling (uncompressed). Not the best HD cameras (if anyone knows HD), but good, only good.
I say boycott them.
http://bluraysucks.com/boycott
so if whole 1080p movies fit on an HD-DVD disc....whats the point of more storage space on Blu-Ray????
it would seem kinda pointless to me.
especially since larger hard drives can be had for cheaper than a blu-ray burner will be when they come out.....its obviously not a good idea to use for back-up storage.
and people say blu-rays going to win????? whats the advantage of it?
Its not whats best, but the most well known. The more hype each has the more people will buy it. You're 1 person thats boycotting it and maybe a few hundred more, but still there are probably millions of people that don't even visit this site and/or read what some people's comments are. Either way, people are going to buy the cheaper ones, the only company you'll see profiting is companys that are making Blu-Ray/HD-DVD combo players.
No offense ment to anyone running and/or participating in these "boycott" sites, I'm all for awareness, but know that both formats are going to be released regardless and I that whoever has the best marketing will win (as much as I'd like to see BD succeed I have a feeling HD has more going for it). I'm still ticked at the fact that that both camps had the chance to come together, got talks going, but that they both had heads that were too inflated to compromise on either front. That will no doubt come back to hurt everyone involved, and if HD does indeed come out on top, Sony will be hit hard (hopefully PS3 will be able to bring in as much profit for them in the long run as PS1/2 did... they seem to be doing good with TV sales too).
to Mike:
More storage space per disc = less physical physical storage space in the home, or studio, or store. Think about fitting 3 times as many episodes of a TV show box set on a disc. That'd be pretty sweet considering how much space those boxes can take up. A few people might want the nice large box sets, but I think the smaller elegant looking ones will be more desirable - based on the fact that the old multiple-vhs-sets looked horrendous and took up far too much space. For consumers, smaller is almost always better if the product is of equal or greater quality.
Less frequency changing discs would be a convenience for the consumer as well. This is especially advantageous for Sony's PS3 considering that developers creating true HD content will need all the storage space they can get, and gamers (being lazy by nature :-P) will NOT enjoy having a message in the game saying "please insert disc 2 (or 3 or 4)".
When it comes to movies, you could fit extended lord of the rings all on one disc. It's cheaper to make that one disc, and probably in the long run, cheaper to buy.
I personally hate SONY's affinity for creating proprietary formats (although BETA was and still is far superior to VHS, just look at a D-Beta broadcast master, or HD Beta master. It's that standard to this day). Atrac3 was bullshit, and Bluray has me on the fence... although I kind of think Sony should get this one after the injustice of the whole VHS/Beta fiasco - the consumer truly lost out in that battle.
the only reason, why i thought bluray and hddvd will be cool was >DOLBY TRUE HD< - i thought: yeah finally lossless audio! but now it gets me down, seeing that most of the nextgen dvd will have dolby digital plus! WHAT A SHAME! so it will be the same as with dts, only a few dvd´s will have Dolby TRUE HD. :-( after dying formats like SACD and DVD-A i had so much hope in trueHD. i could cry all over it :-(
Lovely, I'm in the UK and all HDTVs in our shops labelled (HD-Ready) do not support 1080p but only up to 1080i.
Nice kick in the teeth for early "adopters" since there is absolutely no HD media to watch over here yet, they will have spent a lot of money only to now be told it is not full HD compatible.
This is not the way to make HDTV roll-out popular, I hope there is going to be a consumer backlash.
And the fact that HD-DVD supports 1080p does not mean it is going to look as good as 1080p on Blu-Ray, more storage means less compression which means more visual information and (if done properly) less visual artefacts.
I've just watched Serenity in standard DVD format on my SD Panasonic plasma and it was fantastic! Did it suck because it wasn't in Super duper smellovision 3D? No. Did the black girl not look totally hot because I couldn't see her in hi def? No! (She did look hot, as usual.
What's my point? A good film is still worth watching no matter how many pixels it has.
To "Geezer":
I don't know about formats that much, so I'm gonna accept what you said, but regarding Apple's DRM strategy I can't really agree with you. Why do you think Apple are "the real assholes"? Do you think like that because they use DRM? If so, tell me please what other possibilities they have. They can't just ignore every anti piracy mechanisms in their music, no major label would ever accept that! Just look at the current situation with BD and HD DVD, isn't the technology ready for market for a couple of time? I think the biggest problem in the development or better marketing of the technology is the non satisfying copyright mechanism. They are absolutely stuck with inventing a non crackable copy protection in order to slow down the whole marketing process.
I can't give you a 100% guarantee about that, but when reading articles about that everything points in this direction I think.
To "I'm no Luddite":
I think it's not right to say that. You are acting as if SD was just a crappy and lousy format and HD was a hundred times better. Both formats are just great. I am able to watch a film in SD on my ray tube TV with DTS sound and I am absolutely satisfied because it's an amazing quality. HD is just another step in this direction, but you can't compare the switch from SD to HD with the step from VHS to DVD. DVD delivers you several languages, subtitles, choosable bonus features and so on, VHS just had the film in a single language without everything and after watching it very often in lousy quality too.
What I meant is that HD is just another step in the direction of pure home entertainment. I'm gonna do that step for sure, but I can't tell you when, but if we are stuck on the thought "a good film is good no matter how many pixels it has" we would still be stuck with black/white films and I guess nobody would appreciate that by now.
Well, if HD-DVD wins, at least I'm glad that the movies will come in 1080p. Good news.
But ey... the special features will come in SD?
What the hell? Why? Capacity problems?
massimiliano: "And the fact that HD-DVD supports 1080p does not mean it is going to look as good as 1080p on Blu-Ray, more storage means less compression which means more visual information and (if done properly) less visual artefacts."
Not necessarily. The first HD-DVD discs use MPEG-4 and can hold four hours of content per 15GB layer. The first Blu-ray discs will use MPEG-2 and can hold four hours of content on each 25GB layer.
Blu-ray won't have any practical storage advantage over HD-DVD until Blu-ray starts rolling out their four-layer 100GB discs.
Hi, I´ve a question, is there a BIG diference between 1080i and 1080p on a 42 inches HDTV??? Thanks!!! :)
Just so you all know, there is alot of word going around that HD-DVD is the better go, one its cheaper, 2 its more versatile, and 3, well not sure, but its out there. Anywas the thing is blu-ray 50gb and hddvd 45gb... um thats 5gigs of difference nothing to make the difference.... and why would thye want to put special features in 1080p thats just stupid if you ask me, it has nothing to do with storage capacity, I can almost garauntee that Blu-ray will be the same.
HD-DVD for the win! I hope.