 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.167.61.25
In Reply to: RE: why would anyone root for HD-DVD at the expense of Blu-Ray.... posted by panhead on June 07, 2007 at 17:09:43
"Format-neutral" studios releasing discs optimized for one format or the other, at the expense of the other format.
Follow Ups:
In a title on different formats with the picture quality and sound quality?
Can you give some examples? TIA!
What can happen is a studio will constrain a movie release to work within the constraints of a Blu-Ray single layer (25G) disc instead of allowing for the storage capacity of a dual layer (30G) HD-DVD disc. This might be done for economic reasons (only one set of video compression required). This forces the video bitrate to be slightly lower than needed for the HD-DVD release. Or a movie release will be designed to work within the constraints of HD-DVD (30G) instead allowing for the 50G DL Blu-ray disc capacity. Again, this forces the video bitrate to be significantly lower than than allowed by the larger capacity format.
It's a matter of debate how significant the differences are between low and high bitrate VC-1 and AVC encodes. There are those who will claim the Blu-Ray "Flags of Our Father" and "PRestige" relatively high bitrate AVC encodes are superior in PQ to the HD-DVD encodes using a lower bit rate VC1 encode. Another example I've read about is the Blu-Ray AVC encode for "Coming to America" is inferior to the HD-DVD VC1 encode of the same movie. The Blu-Ray is a single layer with 5G less space to play with so the encode has to be at a lower bitrate. Coincidence ? Maybe not a large sampling from which to draw (Premature?) conclusions, but time will tell with future releases of higher bitrate encodes on 50G discs.
Also, for whatever reason (storage/bandwidth constraints perhaps?), there are more Blu-Ray discs with uncompressed PCM tracks than for HD-DVD. On every disc I've ever done comparisons with, the uncompressed PCM is considerably better than their lossy DD counterparts. The 50G Blu-Ray discs give you a lot of flexibility video and audio bitrates that can't be duplicated with 30G HD-DVD discs.
BTW, I beleive Weinstein uses AVC on their movies, and they look very good from what I've seen.
Jack
....My current source can't decode either 5.1 TrueHD or DTS HD MA so having uncompressed PCM is highly desirable for my current setup. Since both HD formats are still evolving (particulary Blu-Ray), any current player is merely a stopgap from my perspective. Heck, I feel the itch to upgrade my display and my current pre/pro is 10+ years old.
As a general rule, movies that are on both formats look identical. Sometimes one will have better audio than the other, but for the most part, the same master and codec (encoding) is used for both. There are a few exceptions. Paramount used different codecs for some of their movies.
Jack
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
