3 U.S. film studios to release 89 films on HD DVD in late 2005

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
30 gigs is enough for movie storage, probably can't tell the difference between 30 gigs disc and a 50 gig disc since both have a max bitrate of 36mbps.

HD-DVD burners will burn 20 gigs on a single layer versus BluRay at 23-27 gigs. Both have dual layer but it won't be a factor since dual layer still isn't popular on DVD since it cost more and is slower.

This is completely untrue. Currently Blu-ray supports 40mpbs maximum for the video stream alone. (see page 17) with a maximum combined bitrate of 54mpbs for audio+sound+overhead (see page 6) for video/movie applications.

Blu-ray home page for technical white papers

Obviously things like max bitrate can change between now and the release date. It might come back down to 36mpbs, but I find that highly unlikely.

The doc you link to says:

Capacity related items
Total capacity SL (DL) [GB] 23.3 & 25.0 ( 46.6 & 50.0)
User bit rate [Mb/s] 35.965
Channel bit rate [Mb/s] 66.000
Shortest pit length [nm] 160.0(23.3GB) 149.0 (25GB)
Linear velocity @ 1x [m/s] 5.280(23.3GB) 4.917(25GB)
Track pitch [µm] 0.32

--->Page 29<-----


Don't see 40 anywhere ?

Capacity 23.3??25??27GB
(single layer)
Wave length of the laser 405nm
Aperture of the objective lens 0.85
Data transfer rate 36Mbps
Diameter of the disc 120mm
Thickness of the disc 1.2mm
Diameter of the center hole 15mm
Recording method Phase change
Signal modulation 1-7PP
Data track Groove recording
Addressing method Wobble
Visual data MPEG-2 video
Audio data AC3??MPEG-1-?? Layer2??Others
multiplex method MPEG-2 Transport Stream

Page 21 from this: http://www.blu-raydisc.com/ass...aydiscformat-12834.pdf

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

36mbps is the data rate at 1x rotational speed. The current specs seem to imply that video/movie presentations will be done at 1.5x the base speed, or 54mbps. Look at page 17 in the table labeled "Video", figure 3-3. There is a line for max bitrate for the video stream. It's currently listed at 40mbps.

If you also look at page 6 of the second whitepaper it lists:

3: Data rate
For high-definition movies a much higher data rate is needed than for standard definition.
With the BD format choices for NA and wavelength we have been able to realize a format
with 5X higher data rate while only doubling the rotation rate of DVD.
The following numbers offer a comparison:

Data bit length: 111.75 nm (25GB) (267 nm for DVD)
Linear velocity: 7.367 m/s (Movie application) (3.49 m/s for DVD).
User data transfer rate: 53.948 Mbit/s (Movie application) (10.08 Mbps for DVD)

The BD system allows the potential for future higher speed drives.

 

[NightCrawler]

I see the 40 not that 36 versus 40 is that great that one could detect it and it's for mpeg 2.

In the real world we will probably see this:

HomeTheatre: 23-50 gig versus 15-30 gig ( 99% of the Best Buy/Circuit City types won't know the difference ).

Computer: 23-27 gig versus 20 gig single layer ( I still doubt dual layer will be a factor here in the first year or two ).

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
I see the 40 not that 36 versus 40 is that great that one could detect it and it's for mpeg 2.

You're still missing the point. 40mbps is for the video stream only. That leaves another 14mbps for the audio (combined 54mbps). With HD DVD, you're limited to 36mbps maximum for video and audio combined.

There is no guarantee consumers will see any movies encoded at the maximum bitrate for either format. The potential is there and it's just another hardware limitation of HD DVD.

In the real world we will probably see this:

HomeTheatre: 23-50 gig versus 15-30 gig ( 99% of the Best Buy/Circuit City types won't know the difference ).

BB/CC types won't be the first people buying into the format. The geeks with money to burn will be the early adopters, and if they had an ounce of common sense, they would back the superior technology.

Computer: 23-27 gig versus 20 gig single layer ( I still doubt dual layer will be a factor here in the first year or two ).

Won't be a factor in what respect? The very first Blu-ray recorders coming out later this year will be capable of writing to dual layer discs. Basically, HD DVD loses in capacity in both the home theater and computer environments, yet you continue to support it. Because of a theoretical price difference that nobody knows?

 

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
I see the 40 not that 36 versus 40 is that great that one could detect it and it's for mpeg 2.

You're still missing the point. 40mbps is for the video stream only. That leaves another 14mbps for the audio (combined 54mbps). With HD DVD, you're limited to 36mbps maximum for video and audio combined.

There is no guarantee consumers will see any movies encoded at the maximum bitrate for either format. The potential is there and it's just another hardware limitation of HD DVD.

Find me the info where it says that ?????

Pretty sure that 36 mbps is for video only not a combination of video+audio.

Don't have any white paper for HD-DVD.

 

[0roo0roo]

look, the more capacity the better. all the sweet features dvd shoulda been able to do.. seamless branching etc require more space. put the ceiling so low and u will get screwed with low res special features...all the audio tracks eating up space etc. when dvd first came out.. 8gb was huge..now its not huge at all with all the features they've been adding to disks. format needs room to grow... rather not have to have silly "superbit" dvd type stuff where they leave off special features to get the picture right. that kinda sacrifice is silly. hddvd is penny wise pound foolish. a jump to a new format u'll be stuck with for years better be a significant jump.. hddvd falls short. and believing companies will pass on "savings" from hddvd? lol..thats so sadly niave. u get r@ped for all u got either way for a while until stuff comes down naturally.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Gothgar
this is going to suck, they are going to have both HD-DVD's and Blu-Ray, this is going to drive up the price of everything, until one drops out...

They'll just end up selling players that support both formats...

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Gothgar
this is going to suck, they are going to have both HD-DVD's and Blu-Ray, this is going to drive up the price of everything, until one drops out...

They'll just end up selling players that support both formats...

yep, my prediction as well. I still say BlueRay has an uphill battle ahead, though.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
Find me the info where it says that ?????

Pretty sure that 36 mbps is for video only not a combination of video+audio.

Don't have any white paper for HD-DVD.

I've linked technical sheets directly from Blu-raydisc.com saying that the combined bitrate for video and movie applications is 54mbps. I have seen nothing from the HD DVD group saying it would be above the 1x speed of 36mbps for the combined audio and video and I can't even find the damn HD DVD home page to look for whitepapers. I've been there before, but it doesn't show up on Google or Dogpile and I cannot remember the name.

I have not seen anything from any source saying HD DVD would be above 36mbps total for movie applications (video+audio). Until I read otherwise, Blu-ray has a 50% data rate advantage.

 

[Muadib]

HD DVD is mediocre simply because of it's capacity. DD+ is superior to what, exactly? Blu-ray has LPCM support, which is an uncompressed audio stream and a bit-for-bit copy of the original master. Certainly no guarantee that content providers will use LPCM, but at least Blu-ray has the storage capacity to actually use it. Can't say the same for HD DVD. If you want something more comparable to DD+, Blu-ray also has DTS++ support.

I'm not familiar with LPCM so I can't comment, but HD DVD has DTS++ support too.

Ok you expect the discs to be cheaper at retail, but you have absolutely no proof - only conjecture based on comments made from disc producers saying that HD DVD discs are barely more expensive than DVD production. You don't expect a premium on the discs due to them being a "new technology" - if only for marketing purposes?

I expect them initially to cost more than standard DVD disks, of course, but I
also expect HD DVD disk to be cheaper than Blu-ray disk.

Not needed for you. Too much space is never enough. How can anybody browsing a nerd forum have the balls to say that 30GB is "enough." What about movies 3hrs or longer, like the LOTR trilogy or the Extended Edition? What about television programming that is filmed in high definition? You don't want more episodes per disc? What about movie extras filmed in HD? What about extra storage capacity as a backup medium (i.e. PC users)?

Thats why I said in an earlier post that I see Blu-ray destined to be a computer product. HP &amp; Dell have already jumped on the Blu-ray bandwagon. Microsoft hasn't yet though.
As far as wanting more episodes per disc, I could care less. I had a laser disc player, and remember when you had to flip the disk halfway through the movie. There were also a few early DVD disks that had to be flipped, but that didn't stop them from selling.

You're preaching to the wrong choir though, because Hollywood is going to be the determing factor in this war, and so far they're in the HD DVD camp. Here's a list of movies expected to be out in time for the HD DVD release in the US:
From Universal

The Bourne Supremacy
The Chronicles of Riddick
Van Helsing
Apollo 13
U-571
12 Monkeys
Dune
The Thing
End Of Days
Backdraft
Waterworld
The Bone Collector
Spy Game
Pitch Black
Conan The Barbarian
Dante?s Peak

From Paramount Home Video

The Manchurian Candidate
Spongebob Squarepants
Elizabethtown
Coach Carter
Italian Job
School of Rock
Sky Captain and The World of Tomorrow
Forrest Gump
Braveheart
Ghost
Grease
Mission Impossible 2
Black Rain
Save the Last Dance
Sleepy Hollow
U2 Rattle &amp; Hum
Vanilla Sky
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider
Star Trek: First Contact
We Were Soldiers

From Warner Home Video

Above the Law
Alexander
Angels in America (HBO)
Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery (New Line)
Batman Begins
Blade (New Line)
Catwoman
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Constantine
Contact
Dark City (New Line)
The Dukes of Hazzard
Eraser
Executive Decision
Final Destination (New Line)
Friday (New Line)
From the Earth to the Moon (HBO)
The Fugitive
Gothika
Hard to Kill
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer?s Stone
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
House of Wax (2005)
The Last Samurai
The Mask (New Line)
The Matrix
The Matrix Reloaded
The Matrix Revolutions
Maverick
Million Dollar Baby
The Music Man
Mystic River
Next of Kin
North by Northwest
Ocean?s Eleven
Ocean?s Twelve
Passenger 57

There is no list for Blu-ray. So far theres not one film. Oh sure, Disney said they would support it, but they left the door open for HD DVD too.

 

[0roo0roo]

well actually those studios didn't agree to be hddvd only.

 

[NightCrawler]

From what I've read 132 minutes will fit on a 15 gig disk at a data rate of 15mbps, this is just a little below OTA high def which is 19 mbps max. I really don't hear to many people complaining that 19 mbps is to little although I'm sure there are some.

For 30mbps you would then need the 30 gigs dual layer ROM to fit the same 132 minutes. Will the doubling of the data rate be visual noticable ?

Also all this talk is for mpeg-2 which is over ten years old now. Newer codecs being included will lower the data rate needed.

 

[Muadib]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
well actually those studios didn't agree to be hddvd only.

True, and I don't expect any studio except for maybe Sony, to. But, for now they haven't said that they would support Blu-ray either, and that's big!

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Muadib
I'm not familiar with LPCM so I can't comment, but HD DVD has DTS++ support too.

You had a laser disc player and don't know anything about LPCM? LD supported LPCM back in the day as well and it was (and still is) considered an excellent audio codec for its perfect bit-for-bit uncompressed data stream. The downside is obviously it requires high bit rates since it isn't compressed to hell and back like the standard Dolby and DTS codecs.

I expect them initially to cost more than standard DVD disks, of course, but I
also expect HD DVD disk to be cheaper than Blu-ray disk.

Enlighten me. How much cheaper?

Thats why I said in an earlier post that I see Blu-ray destined to be a computer product. HP &amp; Dell have already jumped on the Blu-ray bandwagon. Microsoft hasn't yet though.
As far as wanting more episodes per disc, I could care less. I had a laser disc player, and remember when you had to flip the disk halfway through the movie. There were also a few early DVD disks that had to be flipped, but that didn't stop them from selling.

The size and inconvenience of the LD format made it doomed from the start. The masses didn't like having to mess with flipping the discs halfway through the movie. Fortunately, quite a few people cared enough for the DVD forum to get dual layered discs to market to help prevent this problem.

Having to flip the disc halfway is not acceptable for a next generation format. Hell, even the stutter most DVD players exhibit when switching layers is annoying and should be fixed.

Announcing support is one thing. Getting product to market is something else. You said yourself you expect the various content providers to release to both formats and I expect the very same. With the exception of Columbia Tri Star for Blu-ray and Time Warner for HD DVD, I expect most of the studios to release to both platforms.

 

[Muadib]

You had a laser disc player and don't know anything about LPCM? LD supported LPCM back in the day as well and it was (and still is) considered an excellent audio codec for its perfect bit-for-bit uncompressed data stream. The downside is obviously it requires high bit rates since it isn't compressed to hell and back like the standard Dolby and DTS codecs.

Yeah, I got my ld player about a year before DVD when a local store was going out of business. I knew nothing about them, but a friend couldn't stop saying how great a deal it was so I got it. Dolby digital was called ac3 then, and had not been out very long.

Enlighten me. How much cheaper?

Hard to say because I haven't seen anything stating the actual cost to produce a Blu-ray disc. I just read that it's costly.

The size and inconvenience of the LD format made it doomed from the start. The masses didn't like having to mess with flipping the discs halfway through the movie. Fortunately, quite a few people cared enough for the DVD forum to get dual layered discs to market to help prevent this problem.

I think the cost of the disk had quite a bit to do with it too. I found it hard to justify buying discs when the average price was double the cost of VHS. I was lucky though, because I had a video store that rented ld disks, and every now then then he had a sale on them. Places that rented them were pretty rare.

Announcing support is one thing. Getting product to market is something else. You said yourself you expect the various content providers to release to both formats and I expect the very same. With the exception of Columbia Tri Star for Blu-ray and Time Warner for HD DVD, I expect most of the studios to release to both platforms.

I don't see a problem with the studios getting HD DVD product out as they are already set to do so now. Blu-ray is a different matter though because the setup cost to the studios is said to be high. I fully expect the studios who have already said that they will support HD DVD to play the wait and see game with Blu-ray. By the time they get around to selling product for Blu-ray, HD DVD will be the standard.

 

[arod]

If anybody here was at CES2005 a few days ago you would know HD-DVD has their sh!t together and blueray doesnt have anything yet.

Unless blueray gets going and very quick they wont win....

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Muadib
Hard to say because I haven't seen anything stating the actual cost to produce a Blu-ray disc. I just read that it's costly.

That was kinda my point. You're basing your opinion on the fact that you expect HD DVD discs to be cheaper. No matter what the initial cost, disc prices will fall the first years on the market, but the storage limitation will not change. Nobody knows how expensive the discs will even be, so why base your opinion on this now?

I don't see a problem with the studios getting HD DVD product out as they are already set to do so now. Blu-ray is a different matter though because the setup cost to the studios is said to be high. I fully expect the studios who have already said that they will support HD DVD to play the wait and see game with Blu-ray. By the time they get around to selling product for Blu-ray, HD DVD will be the standard.

The setup costs will hit the disc manufacturers first and foremost, like CinRam and Memory Tech. The price given to the content studios will depend entirely on the yields and pressing time. The v1.1 specifications for BD-ROM discs will help yields considerably, if the comments are to be believed.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: arod
If anybody here was at CES2005 a few days ago you would know HD-DVD has their sh!t together and blueray doesnt have anything yet.

Unless blueray gets going and very quick they wont win....

I couldn't make it out to CES, but what gave you that impression? Here is Watch.impress's coverage for Blu-ray and their coverage for HD DVD

By some accounts, their presentation on the show floor could have been better, but Blu-ray had considerably more hardware on display than HD DVD, including media center PCs from HP and DELL and a number of prototype stand-alone. From the Watch.impress coverage I see stand-alone Blu-ray players and IDE drives from Panasonic, Pioneer, Sony, Phillips, JVC, LG, and Samsung.

 

[0roo0roo]

yea that didn't jive since bluray outdid hd dvd at last years ces...

 

[imthebadguy]

while im all for HD DVDs i really dont think they will become mainstream because dvd has just got to that place where everyone has a player....and for people to get all new equipment is not really something i see happening...

 

[Wag]

Dolby Digital Plus isn't lossless. Anyone you know going to set-up 13.1 speakers in their living rooms? Not many.

I'd rather have Lossless 5.1 than DD+.

Other than that, I can't use either format unless they allow component output. I have a nice HD monitor and I don't intend on paying $1k to downrez to 480p. I have HD Cable and DVHS, why would I settle for less?

 

[arod]

I want 13.1.... have 7.1 now only need a few more for 13

the real problem would be finding a receiver that supports 13.1

 

[Muadib]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Muadib
Hard to say because I haven't seen anything stating the actual cost to produce a Blu-ray disc. I just read that it's costly.

That was kinda my point. You're basing your opinion on the fact that you expect HD DVD discs to be cheaper. No matter what the initial cost, disc prices will fall the first years on the market, but the storage limitation will not change. Nobody knows how expensive the discs will even be, so why base your opinion on this now?

I don't see a problem with the studios getting HD DVD product out as they are already set to do so now. Blu-ray is a different matter though because the setup cost to the studios is said to be high. I fully expect the studios who have already said that they will support HD DVD to play the wait and see game with Blu-ray. By the time they get around to selling product for Blu-ray, HD DVD will be the standard.

The setup costs will hit the disc manufacturers first and foremost, like CinRam and Memory Tech. The price given to the content studios will depend entirely on the yields and pressing time. The v1.1 specifications for BD-ROM discs will help yields considerably, if the comments are to be believed.

I'm basing my opinion on cost because it really the only factor that I think matters. Don't get me wrong, I understand why you feel size matters, but I don't think it does in this case. Cost matters though, bigtime! I think it's going to be what decides this war. Even the porn industry is concerned about the cost.

 

[Muadib]

Originally posted by: Wag
Dolby Digital Plus isn't lossless. Anyone you know going to set-up 13.1 speakers in their living rooms? Not many.

I'd rather have Lossless 5.1 than DD+.

Other than that, I can't use either format unless they allow component output. I have a nice HD monitor and I don't intend on paying $1k to downrez to 480p. I have HD Cable and DVHS, why would I settle for less?

DTS ++ is lossless, and both formats support it.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: Muadib

Originally posted by: Wag
Dolby Digital Plus isn't lossless. Anyone you know going to set-up 13.1 speakers in their living rooms? Not many.

I'd rather have Lossless 5.1 than DD+.

Other than that, I can't use either format unless they allow component output. I have a nice HD monitor and I don't intend on paying $1k to downrez to 480p. I have HD Cable and DVHS, why would I settle for less?

DTS ++ is lossless, and both formats support it.

Just a clarification DTS++ is natively lossy and has an optional lossless extension, but this extension is currently optional for HD DVD and I believe mandatory for Blu-ray (see page 7). Optional support for any feature will seriously hinder it's adoption rate as many content providers won't utilize a codec that isn't guaranteed to be in every player.