HD/Blu-Ray Talks Break Down :( Blu-Ray wins? [merged]
05-17-05, 10:34 PM
#76
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
Most of us forget that Blu-Ray versions will not apply to many of the titles we currently own becase HD versions weren't filmed in the first place.
As others have mentioned, I think you're confused about resolutions and what "HD" really means. It is ultimately just a higher resolution format -- but one that is not as high resolution as film. Therefore, a HUGE number of titles in our collections will benefit from this.
05-18-05, 01:08 AM
#78
Originally Posted by bboisvert
As others have mentioned, I think you're confused about resolutions and what "HD" really means. It is ultimately just a higher resolution format -- but one that is not as high resolution as film. Therefore, a HUGE number of titles in our collections will benefit from this.
I think it's a great technology, no doubt about it, but I really don't have much faith in the movie studios faithfully putting out every single title which will be superior in definition to the regular DVD versions.
Hopefully, I'm wrong. Until then, I'll probably purchase only a few titles which have been proven to be superior in quality. For those that don't get reviewed and fly under the radar and go directly to the shelves of retailers, I'm not buying a single one unless I can rent the sucker and see for myself.
05-18-05, 01:24 AM
#79
Originally Posted by JayHM
Okay, I assume you know the difference between video and film, right? Something doesn't need to be "filmed" in HD, because 35mm film captures far more detail than even HD DVDs will be capable of.
So yes, it most certainly WILL apply to almost all titles in your collection (with the exception of certain TV shows).
So yes, it most certainly WILL apply to almost all titles in your collection (with the exception of certain TV shows).
Resolution is not the only factor in a movie. You could have a 500GB film conversion of Cleopatra, and it would more than likely still look the same as a two-disc 8.5GB version. This is what I'm talking about. For films made since the 1980's, you have inferior quality prints to begin with (inferior meaning compared to today's movies which were filmed entirey in the digital domain).
Now, there might be exceptions on some movies I am not aware of, but overall, film quality is not as great as some of you seem to imply. In order for it to be so, you would have to run the film prints through rigorous processors, taking out the minute artifacts and grains that are naturally apparent in the film. This is certainly NOT going to happen for your most of your films. The movie studies are way too lazy to do it, not to mention there will be critics and directors who won't like it or permit it because it will "ruin" the integrity of the intended film.
So, when we talk of resolution (and pixels), that's a digital thing. Film is an analog thing. I can put a shitload of analog material on a ton of media, and market it as "super-duper high resolution" and it will still look like crap.
The same is true for 35mm film cameras and digital cameras. Digital cameras by nature, do not have the "grainyness" that film cameras have. You don't need a "higher resolution" to capture a superior clean image and have it look better than the full-size film print.
Last edited by DVD Polizei; 05-18-05 at 01:29 AM.
05-18-05, 01:32 AM
#80
Cool New Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
Resolution is not the only factor in a movie. You could have a 500GB film conversion of Cleopatra, and it would more than likely still look the same as a two-disc 8.5GB version. This is what I'm talking about.
For films made since the 1980's, you have inferior quality prints to begin with (inferior meaning compared to today's movies which were filmed entirey in the digital domain).
Now, there might be exceptions on some movies I am not aware of, but overall, film quality is not as great as some of you seem to imply. In order for it to be so, you would have to run the film prints through rigorous processors, taking out the minute artifacts and grains that are naturally apparent in the film.
Last edited by JayHM; 02-17-06 at 04:06 AM.
05-18-05, 01:51 AM
#81
What I am saying, is that if you think Blu-Ray will give you a better picture on all of your movies, you're wrong. For many movies, of course it will. But for many as well, you won't see a difference.
Btw, how large are the HD transfers from 35mm? In terms of hard drive space.
And you misunderstood me--or I'm not getting my point across. I did not mean to imply that ALL movies today are filmed digitally. I was stating a comparison of movies made in the 80's compared to movies made today. Yes, they aren't digital, but I was comparing them to today's movies which are. For example, comparing the print from Iceman to a movie shot today in digital. I suppose I could've added today's film prints as well because the film is much higher in quality than it was, but my point is and was, that movies made decades ago will not be as great as some believe.
I guess we'll just have to see it when a title comes out which was released 20 years or more ago.
Anyway, I may have not conveyed my points across in the way I wanted to. I am really excited about the Blu-Ray format, but I am concerned the movie studios will take advantage of the consumer once again, release some great titles in the beginning, but thereafter see a decline in the quality of releases.
Btw, how large are the HD transfers from 35mm? In terms of hard drive space.
And you misunderstood me--or I'm not getting my point across. I did not mean to imply that ALL movies today are filmed digitally. I was stating a comparison of movies made in the 80's compared to movies made today. Yes, they aren't digital, but I was comparing them to today's movies which are. For example, comparing the print from Iceman to a movie shot today in digital. I suppose I could've added today's film prints as well because the film is much higher in quality than it was, but my point is and was, that movies made decades ago will not be as great as some believe.
I guess we'll just have to see it when a title comes out which was released 20 years or more ago.
Anyway, I may have not conveyed my points across in the way I wanted to. I am really excited about the Blu-Ray format, but I am concerned the movie studios will take advantage of the consumer once again, release some great titles in the beginning, but thereafter see a decline in the quality of releases.
Last edited by DVD Polizei; 05-18-05 at 02:21 AM.
05-18-05, 03:29 AM
#82
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Berlin
Posts: 3,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sony and Panasonic has Blue Ray player and recorder for 2 years and no buyer.With Toshiba launch date coming soon, and the DVD's muich cheaper than Blu Ray makes it a better option.
If they can fit all that you want in a HD-DVD then I would really like it to win,as the new format will be almost the same price as current DVD's.
If Blu Ray comes out then we have to pay more for fuctions that we will never really use,cause Sony and other companies will try to launch 3 or for different versions of a same film over a period of time.
If they can fit all that you want in a HD-DVD then I would really like it to win,as the new format will be almost the same price as current DVD's.
If Blu Ray comes out then we have to pay more for fuctions that we will never really use,cause Sony and other companies will try to launch 3 or for different versions of a same film over a period of time.
05-18-05, 05:24 AM
#83
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Easton, PA
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
What I am saying, is that if you think Blu-Ray will give you a better picture on all of your movies, you're wrong. For many movies, of course it will. But for many as well, you won't see a difference.
Btw, how large are the HD transfers from 35mm? In terms of hard drive space.
And you misunderstood me--or I'm not getting my point across. I did not mean to imply that ALL movies today are filmed digitally. I was stating a comparison of movies made in the 80's compared to movies made today. Yes, they aren't digital, but I was comparing them to today's movies which are. For example, comparing the print from Iceman to a movie shot today in digital. I suppose I could've added today's film prints as well because the film is much higher in quality than it was, but my point is and was, that movies made decades ago will not be as great as some believe.
I guess we'll just have to see it when a title comes out which was released 20 years or more ago.
Anyway, I may have not conveyed my points across in the way I wanted to. I am really excited about the Blu-Ray format, but I am concerned the movie studios will take advantage of the consumer once again, release some great titles in the beginning, but thereafter see a decline in the quality of releases.
Btw, how large are the HD transfers from 35mm? In terms of hard drive space.
And you misunderstood me--or I'm not getting my point across. I did not mean to imply that ALL movies today are filmed digitally. I was stating a comparison of movies made in the 80's compared to movies made today. Yes, they aren't digital, but I was comparing them to today's movies which are. For example, comparing the print from Iceman to a movie shot today in digital. I suppose I could've added today's film prints as well because the film is much higher in quality than it was, but my point is and was, that movies made decades ago will not be as great as some believe.
I guess we'll just have to see it when a title comes out which was released 20 years or more ago.
Anyway, I may have not conveyed my points across in the way I wanted to. I am really excited about the Blu-Ray format, but I am concerned the movie studios will take advantage of the consumer once again, release some great titles in the beginning, but thereafter see a decline in the quality of releases.
Let's try another way of explaining it. I'll use Casablanca as an example. It was shot on film which as we said has a higher resolution than even HD DVD. When you watched your VHS copy you thought it looked better than you've ever seen it on TV. Then it was released again on DVD and again it looked better than VHS. When it's released again on HD DVD it will look better still. Why? Because each advancement in media is capable of showing more of what was on the the original film elements than the previous format due to them outputting at a higher resolution and the authoring of each format has also increased. VHS was output at what 240i, DVD at 480i or p and HD is 720p or 1080i. Film is higher than HD but HD brings us closer to seeing what is originally on the film including the film grain.
Digital films are adding in grain through software so that it looks like film and not video but not because film is lower in resolution. Digital filming doesn't have natural grain but it does have compression artifacts a a real problem in shooting in low light situations. For an example of that just look at the Star Wars Ep 2 scene of Anikan and Padme talking near the fireplace.
05-18-05, 05:32 AM
#84
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ive seen older movies in high definition such as The Manchurian Candidate on HDNet movies and several others, and they all look MUCH better than their DVD counterpart. So if youre saying they might not looks as good as we expect, sure, youre right, but if you are saying they just wont look that good at all, I beg to differ.
05-18-05, 07:14 AM
#85
DVD Talk Godfather
I'm really surprised at some of the near-nonsense being spouted here in regards to these new formats. First off, 35mm film still has greater resolution than any HD format that we have currently. Project a new 35mm in theatres, then project an HD broadcast and you will be able to tell the difference. You might not be able to tell in a small 51" TV, but you will see the difference at 30'.
ANY image, no matter if it is a motion picture, a photograph, a picture on a webpage, or a magazine photo, has two basic components: "image quality" and resolution --- I use quotes because it's not a technical term. Image quality is subjective, but it includes such things as color depth, lack of compression artifacts, etc. That's why I have VHS tapes which look better than some DVDs I have. There's better "image quality" in the transfer.
As far as resolution, any increase in resolution will help a better transfer look good. Even if the source material is old and in poor shape (for example, Cleopatra), a higher resolution will result in a sharper image.
Let's say that you're doing a transfer of the seminal 1974 action flick Bulldozer!. Here is the 35mm film:
Certainly not pristine quality, but we can see what we can do. In the old days, when this was transfered to VHS, the picture quality was awful:
As we moved onto DVD, we got better resolution:
And now with new higher-definition (higher resolution) formats, we will have an even-better looking Bulldozer! we can all enjoy:
None of these get close to what it might look like if it was filmed today, but then again we're limited by the original source material.
This is a very odd and not altogether technically thorough example, but I hope it helps to clear some things up.
ANY image, no matter if it is a motion picture, a photograph, a picture on a webpage, or a magazine photo, has two basic components: "image quality" and resolution --- I use quotes because it's not a technical term. Image quality is subjective, but it includes such things as color depth, lack of compression artifacts, etc. That's why I have VHS tapes which look better than some DVDs I have. There's better "image quality" in the transfer.
As far as resolution, any increase in resolution will help a better transfer look good. Even if the source material is old and in poor shape (for example, Cleopatra), a higher resolution will result in a sharper image.
Let's say that you're doing a transfer of the seminal 1974 action flick Bulldozer!. Here is the 35mm film:
Certainly not pristine quality, but we can see what we can do. In the old days, when this was transfered to VHS, the picture quality was awful:
As we moved onto DVD, we got better resolution:
And now with new higher-definition (higher resolution) formats, we will have an even-better looking Bulldozer! we can all enjoy:
None of these get close to what it might look like if it was filmed today, but then again we're limited by the original source material.
This is a very odd and not altogether technically thorough example, but I hope it helps to clear some things up.
05-18-05, 07:15 AM
#86
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DthRdrX
Two things. First, I'd say that it doesn't matter if X-box sells more units than Sony. I'd guess that if Sony could sell 50% of the numbers the PS2 did it's first year, 25% of them with a BR drive, it would be a huge success. That's a lot more BR drives in consumer's hands rather than HD-dvd.
Secondly, regarding the X-box, it appears software will once again be lacking at launch anyway. Halo 3 will not make it until the day the PS3 comes out.
Secondly, regarding the X-box, it appears software will once again be lacking at launch anyway. Halo 3 will not make it until the day the PS3 comes out.
Of course Sony fanboys can't see past the little PS logos tattoed on their eyeballs to see that the future is not set.
05-18-05, 07:23 AM
#87
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
Some of you are really going to be surprised when you get that "HD DVD" version and play it. Digital recordings far surpass film because the lack of grain and artifacts. In fact, when filming digital, directors have to put the "grain" back into the movie via filters so that viewers aren't put off by the resolution. You see, it's a known process to add artifical grain to the latest films because otherwise, it looks like a live television broadcast. However, more and more of us are beginning to get used to the look, and don't mind it as much.
Resolution is not the only factor in a movie. You could have a 500GB film conversion of Cleopatra, and it would more than likely still look the same as a two-disc 8.5GB version. This is what I'm talking about. For films made since the 1980's, you have inferior quality prints to begin with (inferior meaning compared to today's movies which were filmed entirey in the digital domain).
Now, there might be exceptions on some movies I am not aware of, but overall, film quality is not as great as some of you seem to imply. In order for it to be so, you would have to run the film prints through rigorous processors, taking out the minute artifacts and grains that are naturally apparent in the film. This is certainly NOT going to happen for your most of your films. The movie studies are way too lazy to do it, not to mention there will be critics and directors who won't like it or permit it because it will "ruin" the integrity of the intended film.
So, when we talk of resolution (and pixels), that's a digital thing. Film is an analog thing. I can put a shitload of analog material on a ton of media, and market it as "super-duper high resolution" and it will still look like crap.
The same is true for 35mm film cameras and digital cameras. Digital cameras by nature, do not have the "grainyness" that film cameras have. You don't need a "higher resolution" to capture a superior clean image and have it look better than the full-size film print.
Resolution is not the only factor in a movie. You could have a 500GB film conversion of Cleopatra, and it would more than likely still look the same as a two-disc 8.5GB version. This is what I'm talking about. For films made since the 1980's, you have inferior quality prints to begin with (inferior meaning compared to today's movies which were filmed entirey in the digital domain).
Now, there might be exceptions on some movies I am not aware of, but overall, film quality is not as great as some of you seem to imply. In order for it to be so, you would have to run the film prints through rigorous processors, taking out the minute artifacts and grains that are naturally apparent in the film. This is certainly NOT going to happen for your most of your films. The movie studies are way too lazy to do it, not to mention there will be critics and directors who won't like it or permit it because it will "ruin" the integrity of the intended film.
So, when we talk of resolution (and pixels), that's a digital thing. Film is an analog thing. I can put a shitload of analog material on a ton of media, and market it as "super-duper high resolution" and it will still look like crap.
The same is true for 35mm film cameras and digital cameras. Digital cameras by nature, do not have the "grainyness" that film cameras have. You don't need a "higher resolution" to capture a superior clean image and have it look better than the full-size film print.
Every That is E V E R Y single solitary piece of film ever recorded in the history of mankind has the POTENTIAL to look far better and clearer than it is being presented on NTSC video. If a restoration is handled correctly, and the film is transferred to digital properly, then the resulting HD or BR DVD will 100000000% of the time look better than the SD DVD. There is really no comparison.
Will compnaies fuck up HD/BR DVDs? Yup. That is a fuck up of the company though not an inherent drawback to the format.
05-18-05, 07:34 AM
#88
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Qui Gon Jim
You could very well be right. BUT I think that way too many people (mostly Sony fanboys) are just assuming that the PS3 will be the dominant machine for the next gen of VG consoles, and that is VERY VERY debatable. MS is going to have a big lead this time, and they are coming off of some very favorable opinions with their target audience. If MS can make Sony look like an also-ran like Sony did to Sega, then there could be a shift.
Of course Sony fanboys can't see past the little PS logos tattoed on their eyeballs to see that the future is not set.
Of course Sony fanboys can't see past the little PS logos tattoed on their eyeballs to see that the future is not set.
Last edited by DthRdrX; 05-18-05 at 07:37 AM.
05-18-05, 07:37 AM
#89
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Kumar J
Sony and Panasonic has Blue Ray player and recorder for 2 years and no buyer.With Toshiba launch date coming soon, and the DVD's muich cheaper than Blu Ray makes it a better option.
If they can fit all that you want in a HD-DVD then I would really like it to win,as the new format will be almost the same price as current DVD's.
If Blu Ray comes out then we have to pay more for fuctions that we will never really use,cause Sony and other companies will try to launch 3 or for different versions of a same film over a period of time.
If they can fit all that you want in a HD-DVD then I would really like it to win,as the new format will be almost the same price as current DVD's.
If Blu Ray comes out then we have to pay more for fuctions that we will never really use,cause Sony and other companies will try to launch 3 or for different versions of a same film over a period of time.
HD-dvd cheaper than BR? Nonsense. Pricing is still just theory at this point.
And Warner-Universal-Paramount won't release the same films multiple times?
05-18-05, 08:04 AM
#90
Suspended
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Josh Z
#1) Even though there are a couple of players compatible with WM9, they won't play the T2 disc or some of the other WM9 titles, because those discs require an internet connection to decrypt their Digital Rights Management. They are only playable on a computer.
but I like to learn these things.
Originally Posted by Josh Z
#2) WM9 is a different format than DVD. This is not debatable. Just because there are a couple of DVD players that are compatible with WM9 does not make them the same format. That would be like saying that because your DVD player is compatible with CDs, that CDs and DVDs must be the same format. It's backwards-logic and it is incorrect.
Last edited by boe; 05-18-05 at 09:33 AM.
05-18-05, 09:03 AM
#91
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Qui Gon Jim
You could very well be right. BUT I think that way too many people (mostly Sony fanboys) are just assuming that the PS3 will be the dominant machine for the next gen of VG consoles, and that is VERY VERY debatable. MS is going to have a big lead this time, and they are coming off of some very favorable opinions with their target audience. If MS can make Sony look like an also-ran like Sony did to Sega, then there could be a shift.
Of course Sony fanboys can't see past the little PS logos tattoed on their eyeballs to see that the future is not set.
Of course Sony fanboys can't see past the little PS logos tattoed on their eyeballs to see that the future is not set.
05-18-05, 11:06 AM
#92
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
And now they are going to talk again.
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/050517/3/21408.html
Sony, Toshiba presidents to meet on new DVD format
By Kunihiko Kichise and Nathan Layne
TOKYO (Reuters) – The presidents of Japanese electronics giants Sony Toshiba and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. will meet to try to break a stalemate in talks over a unified format for next-generation DVD technology, a source close to the matter said on Tuesday.
Sony and Toshiba, leading rival camps, have waged a three-year battle to have their new technology standards adopted by the industry. The winner will have pole position in the multi-billion-dollar markets for DVD players, PC drives and optical discs.
The high-level talks offer new hope for negotiations that appeared to have reached an impasse.
A senior Toshiba official was quoted by the Nihon Keizai Shimbun on Monday as saying one format based on Sony technology would be "extremely difficult".
Both sides still believe one standard is the best scenario, knowing that a prolonged format battle like the one between VHS and Betamax two decades ago would likely discourage consumers from shifting to advanced discs and stifle the industry's growth.
"We continue to believe in the merits of establishing one format but discussions up until now have not been able to produce an agreement," said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "So the talks will be taken to a higher level."
The source said it had not been decided whether Toshiba would send its current president, Tadashi Okamura, or incoming president Atsutoshi Nishida.
Likewise, it is not clear whether Sony will be represented by Ryoji Chubachi, who is scheduled to become president in June, or current president Kunitake Ando.
Kunio Nakamura, president of Panasonic products maker Matsushita, will likely attend the talks, the source said.
"The exact timing and place of the meeting has not yet been decided. It will be held when a time that fits the schedules of all three company heads is found," the source said.
UNDER PRESSURE
Officials from Toshiba, which backs a new DVD technology called HD-DVD, and Sony and Matsushita, which support a rival standard known as Blu-ray, began meeting earlier this year to try and establish a format incorporating technology from both sides.
The negotiations have been leaning towards unifying the formats based on the Blu-ray disc structure.
But Toshiba continues to maintain that adopting the HD DVD structure would be more cost efficient because it is closer to the current DVD.
Toshiba has also been under pressure from parts makers and film studios in the HD DVD camp not to give in.
Just last week Toshiba announced that it had developed a triple-layer HD DVD disc with data capacity of 45 gigabytes, 50 percent more than a previously unveiled version and enough to hold 12 hours of high-definition movies.
Warner Home Video and Universal Studios Home Entertainment both issued statements endorsing Toshiba's new disc.
The announcements were seen as a move to help steer talks more in favour of the HD DVD side.
In addition to Sony and Matsushita, Blu-ray members also include computer giant Dell Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Philips Electronics NV.
HD DVD technology is also backed by NEC Corp., Sanyo Electric Co. Ltd. and several other firms.
In Blu-ray, a layer to hold data is put on the surface of a substrate and covered by thin protective layers. In HD-DVD discs, a memory layer is sandwiched between two substrates.
At the core of both formats are blue lasers, which have a shorter wavelength than the red lasers used in current DVD equipment, allowing discs to store data at the higher densities needed for high-definition movies and television.
The outcome of the meeting between the presidents of Sony, Toshiba and Matsushita could have a significant impact on future product launches.
A move towards unification could actually lead to a delay in the introduction of next-generation devices.
Toshiba has already unveiled plans to launch HD DVD players in the last quarter of 2005 while Sony announced plans this week to introduce its new PlayStation video game console in the spring of 2006 equipped with a Blu-ray disc drive.
By Kunihiko Kichise and Nathan Layne
TOKYO (Reuters) – The presidents of Japanese electronics giants Sony Toshiba and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. will meet to try to break a stalemate in talks over a unified format for next-generation DVD technology, a source close to the matter said on Tuesday.
Sony and Toshiba, leading rival camps, have waged a three-year battle to have their new technology standards adopted by the industry. The winner will have pole position in the multi-billion-dollar markets for DVD players, PC drives and optical discs.
The high-level talks offer new hope for negotiations that appeared to have reached an impasse.
A senior Toshiba official was quoted by the Nihon Keizai Shimbun on Monday as saying one format based on Sony technology would be "extremely difficult".
Both sides still believe one standard is the best scenario, knowing that a prolonged format battle like the one between VHS and Betamax two decades ago would likely discourage consumers from shifting to advanced discs and stifle the industry's growth.
"We continue to believe in the merits of establishing one format but discussions up until now have not been able to produce an agreement," said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "So the talks will be taken to a higher level."
The source said it had not been decided whether Toshiba would send its current president, Tadashi Okamura, or incoming president Atsutoshi Nishida.
Likewise, it is not clear whether Sony will be represented by Ryoji Chubachi, who is scheduled to become president in June, or current president Kunitake Ando.
Kunio Nakamura, president of Panasonic products maker Matsushita, will likely attend the talks, the source said.
"The exact timing and place of the meeting has not yet been decided. It will be held when a time that fits the schedules of all three company heads is found," the source said.
UNDER PRESSURE
Officials from Toshiba, which backs a new DVD technology called HD-DVD, and Sony and Matsushita, which support a rival standard known as Blu-ray, began meeting earlier this year to try and establish a format incorporating technology from both sides.
The negotiations have been leaning towards unifying the formats based on the Blu-ray disc structure.
But Toshiba continues to maintain that adopting the HD DVD structure would be more cost efficient because it is closer to the current DVD.
Toshiba has also been under pressure from parts makers and film studios in the HD DVD camp not to give in.
Just last week Toshiba announced that it had developed a triple-layer HD DVD disc with data capacity of 45 gigabytes, 50 percent more than a previously unveiled version and enough to hold 12 hours of high-definition movies.
Warner Home Video and Universal Studios Home Entertainment both issued statements endorsing Toshiba's new disc.
The announcements were seen as a move to help steer talks more in favour of the HD DVD side.
In addition to Sony and Matsushita, Blu-ray members also include computer giant Dell Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Philips Electronics NV.
HD DVD technology is also backed by NEC Corp., Sanyo Electric Co. Ltd. and several other firms.
In Blu-ray, a layer to hold data is put on the surface of a substrate and covered by thin protective layers. In HD-DVD discs, a memory layer is sandwiched between two substrates.
At the core of both formats are blue lasers, which have a shorter wavelength than the red lasers used in current DVD equipment, allowing discs to store data at the higher densities needed for high-definition movies and television.
The outcome of the meeting between the presidents of Sony, Toshiba and Matsushita could have a significant impact on future product launches.
A move towards unification could actually lead to a delay in the introduction of next-generation devices.
Toshiba has already unveiled plans to launch HD DVD players in the last quarter of 2005 while Sony announced plans this week to introduce its new PlayStation video game console in the spring of 2006 equipped with a Blu-ray disc drive.
(pulls up a chair to see how this latest round of talks will turn out...)
05-18-05, 12:01 PM
#95
DVD Talk Legend
Heres a quick summary:
For over a week we had many reports saying a deal was close and they were working on an agreement. Knowing Sony wanted to have a deal before the 16th, Toshiba pulled the usual business fast one, holding out at the last moment to get more. Sony told them to screw off and threw out the PS3 as they planned. One day after the PS3 debut Toshiba wants to enter serious talks again ....
They need to throw Warner's influence off their back and do what's best for their company.
For over a week we had many reports saying a deal was close and they were working on an agreement. Knowing Sony wanted to have a deal before the 16th, Toshiba pulled the usual business fast one, holding out at the last moment to get more. Sony told them to screw off and threw out the PS3 as they planned. One day after the PS3 debut Toshiba wants to enter serious talks again ....
They need to throw Warner's influence off their back and do what's best for their company.
05-18-05, 12:20 PM
#96
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Al_Tahoe
Wow, what an insulting and ignorant post! Not sure why you hate Playstation so much... but since it is completely off-topic it really doesn't matter. What matters is that even if X-box 360 sells 100 million units and PS3 only sells 10 million units - that's 10 million additional Blu-Ray players in people's homes and ZERO additional HD-DVD players in people's homes.
See, here is a classic Sony fanboy. Where, in any of my post, did I ever say "I don't like Playstation"? I didn't, because I don't. The point I was making and you illustrated it beautifully, is that Sony serves the Kool-Aid and the mindless fanboys drink it and regurigitate it. You felt I was zinging Sony and like a knight in shining blue and black armor you zoom to her defense! Sigh! What a hero!
I am realistic about these things. I don't hate PS2 or XBox (even though I don't have one) or GCN. I was merely pointing out that when people say there will be 10000000 million PS3 sold with BR drives, that they may be wrong if MS plays their cards right. But then agin, I might be wrong and Sony could brutalize their competition.
We'll see at the end of next year who's the leader.
Also, while I agree about the math, I would say that 80% of the people do NOT use the current PS2 as a DVD player or at least a primary player. They are in their kids rooms or on their gaming setups. In a perfect world your estimates compute, but in actuality relatively few PS3s will be utilized for their DVD playback capabilities.
BTW: DthRdrX, I was not implying that I thought you were Sony's bitch, just making an observation. Sorry if there was any confusion.
05-18-05, 12:22 PM
#97
Cool New Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
I guess we'll just have to see it when a title comes out which was released 20 years or more ago.
Digital film masters are scanned at 4K resolution (4096 x 3112, as opposed to 720 x 480 of DVDs). 35mm film, even if it was shot fifty years ago, still retains MUCH more definition and detail than standard definition NTSC ever could. Lowry Digital, which specializes in digital restoration of old movies, scans all their masters at 4K because anything less would not resolve the amount of detail present in the original 35mm film element. That's four times the resolution of HD!
And it's funny that Cleopatra was brought up as an example, given that it was actually shot on 65mm, as were many of the big event pictures of the day, and therefore retains even more detail. If you really want to see the difference between film and HD, watch a movie that was shot on 65mm in HD. And then watch it projected on the big screen. There is no comparison.
Last edited by JayHM; 05-18-05 at 12:27 PM.
05-19-05, 10:12 AM
#98
Suspended
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-19-05, 11:15 AM
#99
Retired
Originally Posted by Qui Gon Jim
I am realistic about these things. I don't hate PS2 or XBox (even though I don't have one) or GCN. I was merely pointing out that when people say there will be 10000000 million PS3 sold with BR drives, that they may be wrong if MS plays their cards right. But then agin, I might be wrong and Sony could brutalize their competition.
We'll see at the end of next year who's the leader.
We'll see at the end of next year who's the leader.
People buy on brandname and Playstation=Videogames now. PS1 killed the competition. PS2 killed the competion even having terrible games for the first year it was out, as people bought it b/c it was the next Playstation. So there's no reason to expect the PS3 won't sell just as well. The E3 show was this week, and the PS3 hype definitely overshadowed MS and Nintendo in coverage unfortunately.
Originally Posted by Qui Gon Jim
Also, while I agree about the math, I would say that 80% of the people do NOT use the current PS2 as a DVD player or at least a primary player. They are in their kids rooms or on their gaming setups. In a perfect world your estimates compute, but in actuality relatively few PS3s will be utilized for their DVD playback capabilities.
And you're wrong about them being in their kids rooms. A lot of the game market is the 18-30 year olds, many of whom are single and have their consoles set up in there main TV. Quite a few used the PS2 as a DVD player when it first came out. It saved them from having to drop $200-300 on a DVD player when they could just get the new Playstation and have a new game system and a DVD player for $300.
It will be similar with Blu-ray, and the main point people are making is the studios in a couple years will look and see however many PS3s have been sold, and know that there are at least that many blu-ray players in homes. And it's certain that PS3's alone will outnumber HD-DVD players if they even put them out.
05-19-05, 12:02 PM
#100
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Qui Gon Jim
BTW: DthRdrX, I was not implying that I thought you were Sony's bitch, just making an observation. Sorry if there was any confusion.
I didn't buy either the PS1 or PS2 as I'm an old school Nintendo freak. The success Sony has had in the console market is staggering to me however.