 
|
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 |
208.176.105.98
In Reply to: RE: you're hinting at one reason I'm impatient with studios like Warner playing both sides posted by Jazz Inmate on December 05, 2007 at 09:10:24
>>>Well, I've reviewed two Paramount titles and while I had no complaints about the video, both only contained DD 5.1 audio content. <<<
Paramount used DIFFERENT VIDEO encodes for BD and HD DVD some of their movies and people could not see a difference.
Try to focus here.
Jack
PS: Actually, HD DVD got better audio from Paramount than BD did for the same titles, but that's a separate issue.
Follow Ups:
> > Paramount used DIFFERENT VIDEO encodes for BD and HD DVD some of their movies and people could not see a difference. < <
> > Actually, HD DVD got better audio from Paramount than BD did for the same titles, but that's a separate issue. < <
Well, that right there, coupled with Paramount's decision to drop BD altogether, shows you how much the studio cared to deliver optimal BD content. It's hardly a scientific demonstration that BD is the same as HD DVD.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > > Well, that right there, coupled with Paramount's decision to drop BD altogether, shows you how much the studio cared to deliver optimal BD content < < <
Or, they decided BD wasn't worth the extra time and cost to them.
> > > It's hardly a scientific demonstration that BD is the same as HD DVD. < < <
I didn't say it was scientific. You implied if studios used different codecs/transfers for the different formats, BD would look better. I gave examples of that not being the case.
You have still failed to show BD's supposed "superiority" translates as a better picture.
Jack
> > I didn't say it was scientific. < <True, but you are constantly asking for "proof" from me while relying on specious evidence to support your own position.
> > You implied if studios used different codecs/transfers for the different formats, BD would look better. < <
Kind of, but what I said was that HD DVD content is more or less ported over to produce the BD content from studios dabbling in both formats. Or did you think Paramount was going back to the source material, breaking out the film and redigitizing it to produce separate content for both codecs. What makes you think they're different transfers?
> > I gave examples of that not being the case. < <
Not really. It's obviously sourced from the same transfer. You can't point to Paramount as a company that we can rely upon to see the advantages of Blu-ray. Not if you expect to be taken seriously, at any rate.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > > Or did you think Paramount was going back to the source material, breaking out the film and redigitizing it to produce separate content for both codecs. What makes you think they're different transfers? < < <
Let me make it simpler for you:
Same master, different compressions for each format using different codecs, not just ported over from HD DVD. NOTE: Masters are still far superior to either format, so that is not the limiting factor.
> > > You can't point to Paramount as a company that we can rely upon to see the advantages of Blu-ray. < < <
The problem is, you can't point to any company to see the "advantages" of BD even when they do treat the formats different. There just aren't any in practice.
Jack
> > The problem is, you can't point to any company to see the "advantages" of BD even when they do treat the formats different. There just aren't any in practice. < <
Of course there are and I can point to the 7.1 audio and PCM content on BD which would be physically impossible to release on HD DVD. Unfortunately, you refuse to admit these are advantages, but that doesn't mean increased capacity isn't an advantage--just means you can't admit it.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
we've been talking about video.
You wrote, "It's obvious that any content produced for HD DVD is simply ported over to Blu-ray with no emphasis on quality and that's not good."
I corrected you, giving examples.
Then you said, "Or did you think Paramount was going back to the source material, breaking out the film and redigitizing it to produce separate content for both codecs. What makes you think they're different transfers?"
Again, I corrected you.
> > > Unfortunately, you refuse to admit these are advantages, < < <
Just like you refuse to admit that the lack of region coding is an advantage to HD DVD. Different people have different priorities, but then, we've discussed that before and you refuse to admit that too.
Jack
The lack of region coding is something that the studios would need to address in HD DVD. They're not going to simply give up exclusivity in the regions where they have distribution rights. The only reason it's allowed to happen now is because the sales volume is pitifully small. If HD DVD takes off, which seems unlikely at this point, it would definitely get a region encoding spec. I fail to see how you could convince yourself otherwise.
I'm giving up on our conversation about Paramount's releases. There is just too much shoddy info to come to any reasonable conclusion. You say "people" have determined that the content looks the same. What people? You say both versions come from a master that is of superior quality. What makes you so sure? Or as you'd say to me: prove it. Bottom line: Paramount is the last company I would look to for indication about quality content. Its commitment to blu-ray is nonexistent as we've all seen very clearly.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > You have still failed to show BD's supposed "superiority" translates as a better picture. < <
There's no way he can do so. Jazz is using an older 1280x768 plasma, with component video connections. He couldn't see any superiority even if it was latent.
Jazz is just parroting Blu-boy propaganda.
Why am I not surprised?
Jack
Jazz keeps claiming all sorts of superiority for his chosen format of worship, but he has no real personal experience with its competitor, nor does he have any real personal experience with the full capabilities of his format of worship.
It's hilarious!
I've never claimed anything except the facts: that BD has 20 gigs greater capacity than HD DVD and that capacity is critical for high def AV content. That would lead any reasonable person to adopt Blu-ray over HD DVD. Being a reasonable person, I did just that. Why would I then want to waste my time and money on the inferior format?
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > That would lead any reasonable person to adopt Blu-ray over HD DVD. Being a reasonable person, < <You? A reasonable person? What a bunch of nonsense!
A reasonable person doesn't become a fanatical format cheerleader. A reasonable person doesn't try to claim that their choice of consumer technology gives them some sort of moral superiority. A reasonable person actually tries things out, and makes informed judgments, instead of declaring mindless loyalty and attacking anyone who doesn't mindlessly agree.
The thing that makes you so utterly ridiculous, such an absolute laughingstock, is that you are arguing from a position of total ignorance with people who actually own and use both formats. When your "facts" are dismissed, you start weaving fantasies. You remind me very much of a notorious DVD-Audio bigot who declared SACD to be technologically inferior, and an evil corporate plot, and spent several years attacking it and anyone he perceived to be an SACD supporter, despite having absolutely no meaningful personal experience with SACD. He always had a stock set of "facts" at hand, and when those didn't work, he invented fables and wove conspiracy theories too. The parallels are uncanny.
I will give you credit for your tenacity though. Most people who have made a fool of themselves as many times as you would eventually give up - but not you! Way to go, Jazz!
> > A reasonable person doesn't become a fanatical format cheerleader. < <A reasonable person doesn't pretend that capacity is an irrelevant consideration in HD media. Your position is unreasonable and in arguing against my position, you have become a fanatic.
> > A reasonable person doesn't try to claim that their choice of consumer technology gives them some sort of moral superiority. < <
It has nothing to do with morality. Where do you come up with this shit? It has to do with logic. My position is grounded in logic. Yours isn't.
> > A reasonable person actually tries things out, and makes informed judgments, instead of declaring mindless loyalty and attacking anyone who doesn't mindlessly agree. < <
Thanks. You have just made my point and argued against your position. Choosing the format with greater capacity is the informed decision. So is doing research and paying attention to industry insiders like Michael Bay who has this to say: "I see every frame of my films over a hundred times before it is ever released. I know the lighting conditions I shot it and the result on the DI. I know the range. I know what the final product should look like - Blu Ray suits my films better."
> > The thing that makes you so utterly ridiculous, such an absolute laughingstock, is that you are arguing from a position of total ignorance with people who actually own and use both formats. < <
I hope you're capable of self-analysis after reading comments by Bay and others and that you can properly identify yourself as ridiculous and a laughinstock. Or do you think Jack G and avsforum brainwash victims are more knowledgeable than industry insiders who actually deal with film on a daily basis?
> > When your "facts" are dismissed, you start weaving fantasies. < <
That sounds cute, racer, but the backbone of my position this entire time has been that BD provides 20 gigs more capacity than HD DVD, and that is a fact, and it cannot be dismissed. Are you really incapable of getting your head around that concept? It sure seems like you can't.
> > You remind me very much of a notorious DVD-Audio bigot who declared SACD to be technologically inferior, and an evil corporate plot, and spent several years attacking it and anyone he perceived to be an SACD supporter, despite having absolutely no meaningful personal experience with SACD. < <
I adopted SACD early and never adopted DVD-A, so if I remind you of a DVD-A bigot, you're confused. The fact is that YOU adopted DVD-A.
> > He always had a stock set of "facts" at hand, and when those didn't work, he invented fables and wove conspiracy theories too. The parallels are uncanny. < <
If you want to be an idiot and pretend I don't know what I'm talking about, that's your prerogative. But you might want to listen to insiders like Michael Bay: "What you don't understand is corporate politics. Microsoft wants both formats to fail so they can be heroes and make the world move to digital downloads. That is the dirty secret no one is talking about. That is why Microsoft is handing out $100 million dollar checks to studios just embrace the HD DVD and not the leading, and superior Blu Ray. They want confusion in the market until they perfect the digital downloads. Time will tell and you will see the truth."
Just go ahead and cover your ears while shouting "la la la la", racer. That's all you're really good for anymore.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > A reasonable person doesn't pretend that capacity is an irrelevant consideration in HD media. Your position is unreasonable and in arguing against my position, you have become a fanatic. < <
A reasonable person doesn't create a strawman and keep attacking it even after the strawman has been exposed. Jazz, no matter how many times you attempt to ascribe this "position" to me, you'll still be wrong. If you keep setting up a strawman and knocking him down, despite the fact that he clearly is a strawman, you make it appear that you have severe mental and emotional issues, and problems with reality.
> > It has nothing to do with morality. Where do you come up with this shit? It has to do with logic. My position is grounded in logic. Yours isn't. < <
Jazz, again this is what makes you look like you have severe issues. I came up with this "shit" from your posts! You have repeatedly stated that you believe Blu-ray is the only way, and that anyone who doesn't see things your way is not only foolish and wrong, they are impeding progress and aiding a corporation that is anti-consumer. There's nothing logical about that position. It is the position of a severely disturbed person.
> > I hope you're capable of self-analysis after reading comments by Bay < <
Jazz, I don't give a sh@t what some Hollywood director thinks about consumer technology. He doesn't live in my house, and he doesn't use my gear, and he doesn't dictate what movies I watch, so I really don't care about his opinion. I do realize that you care very much, because fan-boys desperately crave outside validation of their fanaticism. Congratulations on finding some.
> > You have just made my point and argued against your position. Choosing the format with greater capacity is the informed decision. < <
> > Jack G and avsforum brainwash victims < <
I wonder how you think I could have possibly argued against my own position, when it's obvious to everyone (except you) that you don't have a clue what my position is. Jazz, I don't go by what Jack G says, nor do I spend any time at avsforum. I own and use both formats. So how can anything you continually scream about me be true? The answer is that it can't - but you obviously need a nemesis to battle in your twisted little fantasy world.
> > the backbone of my position this entire time has been that BD provides 20 gigs more capacity than HD DVD, and that is a fact, and it cannot be dismissed. < <
Jazz - no one disagrees that BD can provide more capacity. No one. No one disagrees that the added capacity is a fact. No one dismisses this. No one. It's really sad that you have deluded yourself into believing that anyone does disagree. You've developed an entire universe of outrage around a completely bogus supposition. That's what I mean about "weaving fantasies." This has been explained to you several times, but you dismiss the explanations, and stick to your delusions.
> > I adopted SACD early and never adopted DVD-A, so if I remind you of a DVD-A bigot, you're confused. < <
Again, you read, but you do not comprehend. The point is, Jazz, that like you he is a single-minded cheerleader and devoted fan-boy for his format of worship.
> > The fact is that YOU adopted DVD-A. < <
Absolutely I did. There was hi-rez music that I wanted to listen to available only in that format, so I did what any REASONABLE person did - I "adopted" it. Just as I adopted SACD, and HD DVD, and Blu-ray. Unlike you, I am more interested in the content than the format. That's the approach reasonable people take. Lunatics and fanatics get caught up in the hype around a format.
> > If you want to be an idiot and pretend I don't know what I'm talking about, that's your prerogative. < <
Jazz, I don't have to pretend about anything. Your countless raving, foaming-at-the-mouth posts are self-incriminating evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.
Get help Jazz, before your illness causes you to harm yourself or others.
No, you are not more interested in content than format. If you were, you would not adopt every format out there simply because there are a handful of titles of interest to you.
The only way to ensure significant HD content is released on optical is for consumers and the industry to get behind one format--preferably the best one (which you seem woefully unprepared to evaluate).
Take a close look at what happened to SACD and DVD-A. There is a lesson you could learn from that, but you ignore it.
Save your silly "get help" and "i'm worried about you" lines. It makes you appear dopey.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > No, you are not more interested in content than format. If you were, you would not adopt every format out there simply because there are a handful of titles of interest to you. < <
It astonishes me that you wrote this in apparent seriousness. I've seen you contradict yourself in the same sentence before, but this one is truly a landmark. Unfreakingbelievable!
CD and DVD have more content than all other digital combined. If content was your main issue, you would never go beyond CD and DVD. So there is more to it than that. The fact that you can't acknowledge exactly your reasons for being an "equal opportunity adopter" is not terribly surprising. Do consider my point about SACD and DVD-A, though I know how strong the temptation is for you to ignore it.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
.
HD DVD is superior to what you can see with your system. In fact, both formats may be wasted on your system.
Talk about a waste of time and money...
Jack
> > HD DVD is superior to what you can see with your system. In fact, both formats may be wasted on your system. < <A silly statement unless you know how far from my screen I sit and factor in that and other considerations. I do get a better picture with blu-ray and HD broadcasts on the 6-yr old Pioneer than my buddy gets with his new 1080p Fujitsu. In fact he's planning to buy my plasma when I upgrade to the new Kuro model.
> > Talk about a waste of time and money. < <
I think not. My plasma was one of the best investments I've ever made, for sheer enjoyment factor for the past six years. No, it doesn't have the best resolution available anymore (for years it did), but other parameters, including contrast ratio, are still competitive or better than many other plasmas on the market. The new kuros do blow it away, though. I'll pull the trigger on one within the next few months.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
| 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 © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
