Beyond Blu-Ray Already?
Tom Martin -- Thu, 10/30/2008 - 14:06
A new format?
http://www.avguide.com/news/2008/10/29/the-next-hi-def-video-standard/
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
I thought the next big thing was 4k?
Sheepherder
Shenandoah Valley, VA
Seems like Blu-ray is gaining a hold, with players now at $299, and good ones, at that.
Cable and satellite want us to do downloads, and my Comcast offers a lot of HD choices, "On Demand", a lot of free stuff, and a lot of films, older ones free, newer ones a charge.
I am going to watch "Journey To The Center Of The Earth", tonight in HD for $5.99, a dollar more than my $4.99 DVD at Blockbuster.
Toshiba has a new system which touts DVD's to be upconverted to look "almost like HD". The first offering is a cheap piece of junk which, at $150, is not anything I would consider, as a lot of video issues, and operational quirks, the video issues due to cheap, inferior processing.
If they'd do it right, an interesting idea.
They are upset, it seems, about their losing the "war".
We'll see how this pans out.
I think I am going to buy the Panasonic BD-55 player which, by all accounts is a great player, doing it all, and well, to boot.
Mike
VinylGuy
I haven't yet seen a DVD player whose upconversion looks anything like HD.
Elswhere on this Forum someone posited that anything over a million pixels is overkill because the eye can't resolve that level of detail. On my 92" wide screen, the difference between one million and two million pixels (the latter is 1920 x 1080) is striking.
For average-sized home screens and viewing distances.....
I made this claim after reading a peer-reviewed paper that I'm now struggling to locate. So, this could be wrong. But I'm still not sure that Blu-ray is better than DVD - across-the-board. Most of the gains in resolution are being made by the *displays*, not the encoded input signal.
JPH
Say what?
One look at SDTV and HDTV on an HD display and you know that academic study is worthless.
I must agree with Lear. I have a 42" plasma in the bedroom and I can instantly tell the difference between SD and HD. It's not a matter of detecting a difference; the SD looks overtly fuzzy by comparison.
I agree - for displays. But how much of that gain is due to 1080 ? Or is most of the gain to 720 ? And for the source format, is Blu-ray really better than a top-flight DVD player, across-the-board ? And if it is, how *much* better is it ?
JPH
Yes, Blu-ray really is that much better than DVD. At more than 6 times the resolution, and faster data bit rate, how could it not be? One wonders if you've actually seen a decent Blu-ray on a 1080p display...
Unless, of course, the DVDs are using those new super high density bits--which give more than one bit of resolution per bit--like those CDs with "20-bit resolution" you keep wittering on about. :roll:
This isn't the appropriate place for discussion on CD. But for what it's worth, read the Meridian 518 review in Stereophile (ca. 1996) and see what happens to 16-bit CDs after processing. There *is* more resolution - but via noise-shaping, not intrinsically in the CD format. As far as our ear-brain is concerned, we're listening to 19 bits of resolution. Meridian, Sony, Apogee and Lexicon claim they're doing it and Stereophile reviewed (one) of these pro units. Even mastering great Roger Nichols confirmed this technique in a piece on his website (in the archived section, "The definition of high"). I'm not making this up.
I mean, why don't the "hi-rez" audio formats sound better than all-out CD ? Because there's a limit to quality...and CD, with a little studio wizardry, might be enough after all.
But back to Blu-ray, my thinking is based on what happened to CD players - they got a lot better. The same could be true of DVD players. Then, I'm a student of history and it has shown to me that people don't buy for quality. Betamax, Laserdisc and SACD all saw an early grave due to this. (SACD, by the way, *is* better than your street-priced CD player but the high-end aspect of it is the one now in question).
Any new thing has to be just that - new - be totally different, offer more convenience, etc. And as I've stated elsewhere on this forum - Blu-ray would make it *if* it didn't have to compete w/ DVD. And DVD could disappear totally - meaning Blu-ray might make it after all.........
JPH
...and then for some reading. These articles are against 1080p - not Blu-ray. But the major reason for getting Blu-ray is to realize 1080 display's potential. So, I'm playing devil's advocate - I really don't have a horse in this race.......
Long article:
http://www.bluesky-web.com/numbers-mean-little.htm
Medium-sized:
Google-type "The case against 1080p CNET". It won't load directly from here.
Shortest:
http://www.electronichouse.com/article/expert_interview_720p_vs_1080p
I read the long and the short articles. Thanks for the links. The long article says resolution isn't everything, articulated in the form "720p can be better than 1080i or at least as good". The shorter article says that in the real world of displays, 720p may be a better choice, dollar for dollar than 1080p (because of the engineering tradeoffs involved in hitting some cost targets). Note that with 720p displays, 1080p will have to be downconverted, but that downconversion can generally be done with fewer artifacts than upconversion.
Both points seem reasonable. But neither article suggests that a) source doesn't matter or b) that all other things being equal higher resolution isn't better, or c) that 720p isn't better than 480p. Since we need Blu-ray for 720p or 1080p, I don't see these as arguments that Blu-ray benefits are inconsequential.
I agree. The question I brought up was hi-rez in general....
But is Blu-ray a huge leap over DVD...for the average size screen and viewing distance ? That's my other question. I will be buying my first Blu-ray player this weekend - I stand corrected to those who said I should have tried it before criticizing it. I was simply stirring up a science-based debate over the (needed) source format and display.
JPH
I don't think Blu-ray is a huge leap. I think it is noticeably better. HDTV is a huge leap over SDTV.
Where Blu-ray makes a difference I wouldn't be without is on larger screens.
if your wondering about tv resolution. Let me say that 270p on a 32in, well I can still see individual pixels and color errors. SO I think 1080p may help that but not on a big size TV. I got a bigger one downstairs thst is pretty good and 1080p but it still doesn't meet my videophile standards. I am waiting for something near as good as eyesight. I am guessing once 9,000,000p is created I will be content for a while. still try to get as high a resolution as possible for you. But if you can lower your standards long enough to enjoy a movie, even upcon dvd is ok (?). I want super HD!!!!