How many gigs are BDs and HD-DVDs?
 

The max space is 25-30 on an HD-DVD (I want to go with 25, pretty sure that's it) and 50 on a BD, but is there a site that shows how much of that most new releases actually use? I.e. Saw IV BD - how many gigs would that be?

Thanks! :D

Nearly all HD DVDs are 30GBs, some early releases are less. Most Blu-rays show the size of the disc on the back of the case, Saw IV is 25GB for example.

So some of the HD-DVDs might actually use more gigs than their Blu counterparts? :hscratch:

Use more....Maybe.

Most HD DVDs are 30GB.
Most Blu-rays (today) are 50GB.

However there are still some studios using only 25GB discs (Lionsgate), and some will use 50GB for any money, as they are being subsidized (getting them for free, or really cheap. See Disney, Fox, and now Warner Bros. I'm sure). Very few times does the movie really fill up the entire disc gig wise. There are a few examples where the extra place allows for audio codecs in different languages, but for the most part the extra 20GB is not needed. Some 50GB Movies still require 2 discs (Superbad, all the POTC). Most of the time the extra space is "padded" with useless files. I'm sure someone else can explain the whole process better, but there is no way a film like Robocop that has no special features needs a 50GB disc.

I am sure some might, but the space available is not the most critical factor in determining the quality of the release. A lot depends on the care that is taken to create the transfer, etc.

Of course, if BD is around in eight years, what they will be able to do will be far better than what either format is doing now. Try not to get too hung up in the tech specs of things, and read reviews from people you trust.

What, no mention of the mythical 51 GB HD DVD? Supposedly HD DVD has been working on a triple layer 51 GB disc, though I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

See here for a list of Blu-Ray specs:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=760714

And you need the extra space for lossless audio tracks/HD extras.

Okay, here:

HD DVD has a 3-layer 51GB disc which was approved for production back in September by the HD DVD Forum. No studios have chosen to release anything on them yet, though.

The Blu-ray counter is that they can apparently produce 4-layer discs (200GB total).

I've got them both beat, though. For the past three days I've been super-gluing all of the discs in my collection onto each other, and have so far come up with a 64TB monstrosity that . . . well, it won't play on any machines, but, MAN!! Does it hold a lot of information!!

This is AWESOME, THANKS!!! :D


And a 200gig disc :drool:

A 200GB will never see the light of day. Studios have no need for it.

But it's fun to ponder. I for one would love to have an entire tv series on one disc.

I agree, but J6P doesn't. Studies show that a 5 disc set and a 1 disc with the exact same content will see significantly better sales on the 5 disc.

Or think music collection... I have over 300 CDs, and also that monster Sony CD set and every time I get a new CD, I import it into iTunes and tuck the original away. Then I burn myself a copy on iTunes and use that at work and in my car. I've also purchased some TV shows and movies at iTunes. How cool would it be to just stick -one- DVD in and burn the whole collection? Then I can just stick that in a closet in case the hard drive crashes (as un-backed up iTunes downloads are lost forever).

Won't happen. There is more "value" in a multi-disc set vs. a single one. A multi-disc set will also stand out better on the shelves among the hundreds of thousands of other movies (if Blu-ray becomes the standard), and if the disc is defective it would be more expensive to replace that 1 200GB vs a 30/50GB one.

For storage...sure, it would be pretty cool. But I don't think we will ever see a need for a 200GB disc to hold a movie on it, ever. The biggest set to date, Blade Runner, is 3 HD DVDs/Blu-rays (30HD/25BR GB each) and 2 DVDs (5GB). Even then I bet those 3 HD/BR discs and 2 DVDs could be condensed down to 2 or 3 discs without issue.

The super deluxe Lord of the Rings: Trilogy as a singular, branching 10 hour movie experience with brand new recorded PIP commentary with 12 lossless audio tracks, and as a bonus, a totally frivolous PCM track! Additionally, a PIP IME that pops up when Gollum is on screen showing Serkis acting it, and a computer view of the motion process. YES! THATS IT!

I agree, though, 200gb won't be used for a while. Unless they really want to fit entire seasons on a single disc. And theres that entire thing about perceived value to the consumer.

:lol: You forgot MULTI PCM Language tracks for 100 different languages, because clearly that would be needed. And lots and lots of Java menus. Multi java menus in fact. So many that it would make the Samsung 1000 grow legs, find a gun, and shoot itself.

I agree, like I said it's fun to ponder. I see no realistic way it'll happen. I find your comment interesting on the sales being better with a 5 disc set. I'm not arguing as it may very well be true, but I thought the thing of the future was going to be downloads, VOD, and the like, so that people wouldn't be collecting physical media. I'm fine with a 1 disc 500 billion gig whatever, or a 5 disc set. As long as it's in some form of physal media.

Eventually physical media will slow down as VOD comes down the line. May be 1 year, 5 years, 10, 20 years..who knows. However J6P still sees more value in a 2 discs vs. 1 disc set. Its more bang for your buck.

They could sell the exact same movie, with the exact same special features, with the same cover, and have a 1 DISC and 2 DISC sticker on it, and the 2 DISC sticker set will sell better. Regardless if they ever watch any of the special features, its just a better deal to them.

You left out the part where the disc also physically resurrects Tolkien himself, so he can sit and watch the films with you.

I understand it's gonna call for yet another spec change for Blu-ray, but if they pull it off I think it'll be totally worthwhile.

51.67% of all currently released BDs are 50 GB dual layer BDs. 85.56% of currently released HD DVDs are 30 GB dual layer HD DVDs. Virtually all titles from major Blu-ray studios are being released on dual layer BDs now.

:lol: x 49872

Most, but not all. Saw IV for example released 2 weeks ago is on a 25GB disc.

Regardless, most of these movies do not require a 50GB disc at all, its just a talking point. Case in point are many Fox/MGM/Sony barebones catalog titles. They would fit just fine on a 25GB disc, but I'm sure the BDA is subsidizing the 50GB discs making them cheaper then the 25GB ones. I don't care either way as a I don't get a stiffy knowing its a 50Gb disc over a 25GB dsic :lol: As long as the transfer is nice.

Are you sure about that? The reviewer at HighDefForum claims that it is a BD-50. Other reviews on that site state the Saw's 1-3 are all BD-25, so I wouldn't be surprised if 4 was also. Still, it supposedly has close to an hour of HD extras. And it's one of the first 2.0 compliant discs.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1256/sawiv.html

That's one title from one (not really major) studio on BD25. Sounds like that meets PhantomStranger's qualified comment pretty well.

Besides, there are already examples (such as the new Harry Potter film) that have proven that the added space is far from just a talking point. Many of the special features on the HD DVD are in SD, while the same features on the BD are HD, thanks to the extra room.

Also, Warner has already publicly stated that the extra room will allow them to produce visually identical encodes with much less tedious effort being required, leading to more titles being released more quickly.

Err, your talking about a 40 minute documentary and 10 minutes of deleted scenes in HD. Don't confused "many" with 2, when those special features are already present in some shape or form on the HD DVD in SD (via PiP, something not possible on Blu-ray).

I won't comment on Warner and size as they still have not announced a single Blu-ray exclusive title 3 weeks after they went Blu only. Warner catalog titles have been so-so on both formats with only a few being really good.