View Full Version : Bluray gaining ground...
Found a couple of articles that are interesting...
from highdefdigest.com:
With the studio having thrown its weight behind Blu-ray, Warner Home Entertainment President Kevin Tsujihara says plans are underway to introduce its first Profile 1.1 compliant titles to the market.
Although Profile 1.1 hardware is now readily available, and several Blu-ray-supporting studios have already produced titles with Profile 1.1-enabled features, Warner has yet to utilize the technology on any of its Blu-ray releases.
That appears to be on the verge of changing, however, following Warner's seismic shift late last week to Blu-ray exclusivity. Speaking with High-Def Digest, Tsujishara stated that the studio is preparing several Profile 1.1 titles --specifically the library of nearly a dozen Warner titles previously released on HD DVD that used that format's HDi technology to deliver the studio's "In Movie Experience" picture-in-picture video commentary and other interactive features.
"We held off releasing them on Blu-ray because we wanted to be able to have the full interactivity," said Tsujishara. "At this point in time, we're still working out all the kinks [with the technology], but they will be released soon.
Two titles specifically cited by Tsujishara as being prepped for Blu-ray release were 'Batman Begins,' and the blockbuster 'Matrix' trilogy, although he stopped short of naming actual street dates."
AND:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/10/universal-hd-dvd-exclusivity-contract-has-expired-sits-non-rene/
Universal HD DVD exclusivity contract has expired, sits non-renewed
Posted Jan 10th 2008 12:39PM by Steven Kim
Filed under: HDTV, Home Entertainment
More news from the format war today, and it isn't good for the red camp. Daily Variety has confirmed that Universal's agreement to stick with HD DVD has ended and has not been renewed. Additionally, Paramount has an escape clause in its contract that can be exercised following Warner's departure from the (now dwindling) HD DVD ranks. The article highlights various ongoing commitments both companies have to the format, but we've heard these kind of promises before from studios. It's feeling like a party where everyone leaves at once; nobody wants to be the first out the door, but everyone's looking in that direction.
David
01-11-2008, 10:36 AM
I dont even know what Bluray is, so.....
Damn, that got moved fast. :p Sorry!
Excellent, now I don't have to bother with getting an HD DVD player.
Nick Chapman
01-11-2008, 10:42 AM
I have both, and think that they are pretty close for video. But for audio, I perfer HD DVD, and if I have a choice I'll choose HD DVD for that reason.
I have both, and think that they are pretty close for video. But for audio, I perfer HD DVD, and if I have a choice I'll choose HD DVD for that reason.
Got any TrueHD audio stuff (equipment or material)? I think I want to go that route with my next (hopefully soon) big receiver purchase.
Nick Chapman
01-11-2008, 11:08 AM
Got any TrueHD audio stuff (equipment or material)? I think I want to go that route with my next (hopefully soon) big receiver purchase.
Yes I do. Although I don't know which titles are TrueHD. I have my system set up where it picks that option first if it's avaliable. I know I have a few TrueHD titles, just no sure which ones :o
Slowhand
01-11-2008, 11:09 AM
I have both, and think that they are pretty close for video. But for audio, I perfer HD DVD, and if I have a choice I'll choose HD DVD for that reason.
Isn't bluray supposed to be better for audio because of the increased capacity to store more native, uncompressed sound?
<--regurgitation of what I've heard before. I have no clue about any of it.
Nick Chapman
01-11-2008, 11:11 AM
Isn't bluray supposed to be better for audio because of the increased capacity to store more native, uncompressed sound?
<--regurgitation of what I've heard before. I have no clue about any of it.
Supposed to be, but my ears tell me different. The channel sepperation with HD DVD is amazing!
Yes I do. Although I don't know which titles are TrueHD. I have my system set up where it picks that option first if it's avaliable. I know I have a few TrueHD titles, just no sure which ones :o
Supposedly that's the next big thing in audio, right? I see it on the back of some movies every now and then, but I don't have a receiver currently that will do it. I'm guessing you haven't really notcied a difference?
Nick Chapman
01-11-2008, 11:16 AM
Supposedly that's the next big thing in audio, right? I see it on the back of some movies every now and then, but I don't have a receiver currently that will do it. I'm guessing you haven't really notcied a difference?
Yes, there is a difference. It's not huge, but it's there.
Best way I know to describe it is natural sounding. Nothing is forced. Probably doen;t make sense. You'd just have to hear it for yourself.
Yellowstang
01-11-2008, 12:14 PM
Supposed to be, but my ears tell me different. The channel sepperation with HD DVD is amazing!
I think it depends on the movie actually. I have both, and some HD seem really good and some Blu Ray seem really good.
livinglegend_86
01-11-2008, 12:18 PM
AbecX is smiling somewhere...
--->wharz be abecX..???>>??>? ¯\(º_o)/¯
White_lightning
01-11-2008, 01:17 PM
i think the audio will change.. currently single layer blue rays support what 27gig? with a much much higher capacity DL ? quality is space.. so logicaly its just time before the much bigger BR disk eclipses what ever sound advantage HD has.
Nick Chapman
01-11-2008, 01:28 PM
i think the audio will change.. currently single layer blue rays support what 27gig? with a much much higher capacity DL ? quality is space.. so logicaly its just time before the much bigger BR disk eclipses what ever sound advantage HD has.
You know how long people have been saying that? When(if?) they do it, I'll be a happy camper. Meanwhile, they are producing millions of copies of movies that will be inferior?
White_lightning
01-11-2008, 01:30 PM
its not always the inferior product that fails.. Beta max had higher image quality theyn VHS... TONS of beta max movies where sold.... and VHS won.
Nick Chapman
01-11-2008, 01:40 PM
its not always the inferior product that fails.. Beta max had higher image quality theyn VHS... TONS of beta max movies where sold.... and VHS won.
Beta didn't have the capacity to hold an entire full lenth movie.
kangol
01-11-2008, 01:52 PM
Beta didn't have the capacity to hold an entire full lenth movie.
Some Beta tapes could hold 5 hours.
White_lightning
01-11-2008, 02:13 PM
Beta didn't have the capacity to hold an entire full lenth movie.
um.. i was going to say. we owned a betamax for several years and watched every movie released on it.. it could hold them, the problem was because the quality was higher then VHS.
ClockwrkOrangeS4
01-11-2008, 06:19 PM
The problem with betamax was support. Sony led the way and no other manufacturers followed.
The blu-ray vs. HD DVD issue reminds me when DVDs and DVD players first hit the market. There were only a few manufacturers making the discs, and a few manufacturers making the players because each was afraid to commit to cranking out products that didn't have the player (or media) to be used.
I think I still have my beta player somewhere. :o
Nick Chapman
01-13-2008, 06:41 AM
Some Beta tapes could hold 5 hours.
um.. i was going to say. we owned a betamax for several years and watched every movie released on it.. it could hold them, the problem was because the quality was higher then VHS.
When Beta was introduced, it could only handle 1 hour of recording(not enough for a full lenth movie). VHS was at 2 hours(full lenth movie). Then RCA bumped up the game to introduce a 4 hour VHS recording time. Beta then introduced Beta II which could record up to 2 hours max. Eventually, Beta introduced Beta III which could record up to 5 hours, but by that time VHS was at 10 hours, so it was too late. They had already lost the war when VHS went to 4 hours.
Back then, the people wanted longer recording times. And support from the manufactures followed VHS because it was always ahead of the game in it's ability to record longer.
10 hours on 1 VHS tape was $5
10 hours on Beta III would cost you $10, because you had to buy 2-5 hour tapes.
So yes, Beta could record up to 5 hours. But not when the format war was going on. By the time Beta got to 5 hours, the format war was already over and VHS had won. When it was introduced to the public, it could not hold a full lenth movie.
Nick
White_lightning
01-13-2008, 09:14 AM
When Beta was introduced, it could only handle 1 hour of recording(not enough for a full lenth movie). VHS was at 2 hours(full lenth movie). Then RCA bumped up the game to introduce a 4 hour VHS recording time. Beta then introduced Beta II which could record up to 2 hours max. Eventually, Beta introduced Beta III which could record up to 5 hours, but by that time VHS was at 10 hours, so it was too late. They had already lost the war when VHS went to 4 hours.
Back then, the people wanted longer recording times. And support from the manufactures followed VHS because it was always ahead of the game in it's ability to record longer.
10 hours on 1 VHS tape was $5
10 hours on Beta III would cost you $10, because you had to buy 2-5 hour tapes.
So yes, Beta could record up to 5 hours. But not when the format war was going on. By the time Beta got to 5 hours, the format war was already over and VHS had won. When it was introduced to the public, it could not hold a full lenth movie.
Nick
yup:) so i was right:)
i never said when it could do it.. i just said it could do it..
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.