Comparison: Hi-Def DVD vr Standard DVD

Ron-P

http://www.cornbread.org/FOTRCompare/index.html

Impressive. Most notably the colors and sharpness / detail.

Schris22

i see the difference. But shouldn't there be even more. I know he used high quality jpeg compression. When I take some pics in raw format and use the largest type of quality from photoshop the pics are still few megs big. These are just 300kb. Though my pictures have a much higher resolution. I still notice a difference. Not quite artifacting but subtle areas of small detail.

so basically theres more.. b/c of compression but i get the jist of the improvment

Thanks,

Chris

Toxis

We finally got our Toshiba HD DVD player on demo at work. Mildly impressed. Sure it looks really good but for some reason, I was expecting it to look better than say a 3910 or 5910 running reg dvd's. I can't say that it's any better than that. Like I've always said, I'll be waiting!!!

Emlyn

Toxis wrote:

We finally got our Toshiba HD DVD player on demo at work. Mildly impressed. Sure it looks really good but for some reason, I was expecting it to look better than say a 3910 or 5910 running reg dvd's. I can't say that it's any better than that. Like I've always said, I'll be waiting!!!

What program material is being used with the Toshiba? Are there HD-DVD's available for it yet?

Gaara

Toxis,

Is yours having lots of glitches while playing? We got ours on Friday and already we have had it lock up three times, the video dissapeared twice, and we lost the audio three times. This is from when we hooked it up Friday to Sunday, I haven't worked since. Overall I wasn't that impressed, it looked good but I wasn't really wowed. We have it hooked up to a Toshiba 56MX195 via HDMI.

Emlyn,

The unit we have is supplied with a demo disc that is roughly 25 mins long. The first three mins is comparing standard def to HD, which IMHO is useless since the standard def doesn't even look like DVD quality. A fair comparison would have been DVD quality vs. HDDVD quality, but ohwell. The last 22mins or so is trailers, there is a trailer for: Dukes of Hazard, The Corpse Bride, Serenity, King Kong, The Interprator...thats all I can remember.

Jared

BIZILL

put that shootout on my 65" and you'll see a difference, i guarantee it! but i too, will be waiting...

Toxis

Gaara wrote:

Toxis,

Is yours having lots of glitches while playing? We got ours on Friday and already we have had it lock up three times, the video dissapeared twice, and we lost the audio three times. This is from when we hooked it up Friday to Sunday, I haven't worked since. Overall I wasn't that impressed, it looked good but I wasn't really wowed. We have it hooked up to a Toshiba 56MX195 via HDMI.

I haven't heard of a single problem yet but we have it locked so it only shows the comparison part. Ours is on the 62MX195 via hdmi and I'm with you... NOT IMPRESSED! Not to mention the comparison part is 480i vs 1080i. I thought HD DVD was going to be 1080p, guess not. The only explanation I can think of is that they can't run a progressive signal on half screen and interlaced on the other.

We've been talking about the debate here at work and a couple things came up that were interesting. HDMI from what we've read cannot carry a 1080p signal and the only cable that can is firewire. Problem with firewire is that it cannot be coded with HDCP. So where does that leave the industry? All these TV's are coming out with 1080p (sure none can really accept a 1080p signal) yet I doubt the industry will go firewire due to the lack of copyright protection. Soooooooooo now what?

peteran

Those frames don't look any better than when I'm using my 2910, that is why I'm not going to by into HDDVD just yet, I'm just going to wait until the dusts settles between the 2 camps. I give it 2 years and by that time the technology would have improved (2nd generation players).

fireshoes

Toxis wrote:

I haven't heard of a single problem yet but we have it locked so it only shows the comparison part. Ours is on the 62MX195 via hdmi and I'm with you... NOT IMPRESSED! Not to mention the comparison part is 480i vs 1080i. I thought HD DVD was going to be 1080p, guess not. The only explanation I can think of is that they can't run a progressive signal on half screen and interlaced on the other.

We've been talking about the debate here at work and a couple things came up that were interesting. HDMI from what we've read cannot carry a 1080p signal and the only cable that can is firewire. Problem with firewire is that it cannot be coded with HDCP. So where does that leave the industry? All these TV's are coming out with 1080p (sure none can really accept a 1080p signal) yet I doubt the industry will go firewire due to the lack of copyright protection. Soooooooooo now what?

You answered your own question about the HD DVD not being 1080p. The current HDMI spec doesn't support 1080p output, so they could only do 1080i. The HD DVD discs ARE 1080p, and once the the HDMI spec is updated to include 1080p output, the next generation of players will output it.

TheReaper

If you want another comparison, these are screen shots taken on my computer from the T2 WMV-HD and T2 DVD. Complete with jpeg mangling, which probably simulates the mangling by my crt based HDRPTV. Note, these are live screen shots (this is a mug pause), at the resolution I see them (not resized images). Also note, wmv-hd is highly compressed.

PolkThug

Toxis wrote:

We finally got our Toshiba HD DVD player on demo at work. Mildly impressed. Sure it looks really good but for some reason, I was expecting it to look better than say a 3910 or 5910 running reg dvd's. I can't say that it's any better than that. Like I've always said, I'll be waiting!!!

Not suprised, I'll be waiting too, to see what Denon will come up with for HD DVD.

Shizelbs

Very impressive. I'll admit though that the most prominent emotion I am feeling is anger towards having to, likely, replace the better part of my DVD collection to accomidate HD.

Its the sound that matters.... the sound is what matters... the sound is what matters.... the sound is what matters.

Seriously though, I've felt FOTR and the other two to be reference material, both in PQ and SQ. It makes the difference that much more impressive. Just think how great the images can be once Hollywood ONLY films in HD.

begbie

What do you guys think about of Lucas's Star Wars? Especially the prequels? Will they be significantly improved upon even though it was mostly created in the digital realm?

bknauss

Why would anyone expect current DVDs to look much better on a HD-DVD player than a high end upconverting DVD player? Its doing the same thing.

I'm confused about what the guy in the original link is doing. Is he capturing the DVD stream and also the stream from an HD-DVD? Or is he upconverting the original DVD? Just lots of big question marks there. Its not like doing a good ol' blind listening comparison between two pairs of speakers.

I, too, am not overly impressed with HD-DVD or Blu Ray right now. I got a chance to see both at CES, and its not a big difference. The big problem right now is that not all movies are being filmed in HD, so you're just polishing some big piles of poo with some of these movies. And I'm fairly sure there are no 1080p cameras out there right now, so what's the point of worrying about 1080p output? Sure, it'll upconvert once the HDMI standard committee get's off their rears, but you're again polishing poo.

That's my 2 cents. I'll be getting an HD-DVD player around the time they come out, but mostly because of needing an upconverting DVD player and I'd like to listen to the uncompressed audio in surround sound. And Netflix having HD-DVD movies won't hurt either.

begbie

Correct me if i'm wrong but I was reading through Hometheater mag and the editor said even old film stock (films of yesteryears) are considered on par with High definition picture quality.


It was in response to someone writing in and asking how he was able to view a movie more than 30 years old in such High Definition p.q. on the HD movie channel.

aaharvel

if you want to see how far DVD technology can go I suggest you buy the SUPERBIT of Panic Room.

Meeks32

I believe standard film has much more resolution than DVD & even HD-DVD, so thinking that watching movies that are a few years old in HD will be like "polishing a ****" is wrong.

Dennis Gardner

Film is basically like audio master tapes, its what you do after wards that makes the finished product better.

HD only matters if you have big enough screen to notice the resolution. HD is to movie buffs as SACD is to music buffs. The system must be resolute enough to notice the improvement.

The differences seen in the pictures on my computer monitor were noticable at this size, but if I put them on my 8 foot screen from 10 feet away, I would have seen it as a night and day difference. All problems with HD will be worked out in time and standards will set in stone and when the average TV is 40 inch or bigger, the general population still won't care, but they will like it
not because its better, but because its bigger. The SUV effect in too prominent in our country.

adam2434

Hopefully, HD-DVD or Blu Ray will be able to deliver a picture that's as good as movies presented on HD Net Movies. The film to 1080i transfer they do is vastly superior to standard DVDs on my upconverting DVD player. Granted, I'm using a projector with a 100" screen, and source resolution becomes more critical as you move up in screen size.

The 1080i HD Net Movies (depending on the quality of the original filming of course) look almost "perfect" to my eyes, very smooth and film-like, but detailed at the same time.

Mastering a film to HD resolution has similar benefits to mastering analog audio to higher resolution digital formats like DVD-A and SACD. You get "more" of what was in the original recording and fewer compression artifacts. However, just like with higher resolution digital audio, you need a certain level of associated equipment for the benefits to be apparent - screen size in the case of HD.

For example, playing SACDs or DVD-As through a boombox is probably not going to be an improvement over CD, maybe even mp3. Similarly, a HD-DVD may not be a significant improvement over standard DVD on a 20" TV.

I'm really looking forward to high res DVD, once the format war settles down and players get to the sub $300 mark.

adam2434

Dennis, we were thinking the same thing at the same time.

Dennis Gardner

adam2434 wrote:

Dennis, we were thinking the same thing at the same time.

Cool.

I just wish the fight over the adequate resolution would get over itself and realize that even if we end up with a standard HD (oxymoron intended) resolution, someone is going to find a way to come out with Super HD as a marketing ploy that may or may not improve on the normal use of HD as we know it.

There is a sweet spot for 4-5 foot TV or 8-10 foot PJ screens in most people homes today and the resolutuion needs to be enough for that to be truly enjoyable, but any more is overkill. Enough is enough. I don't think I really want to see that stupid gecko with the accent at any higher resolution.

adam2434

Dennis Gardner wrote:

There is a sweet spot for 4-5 foot TV or 8-10 foot PJ screens in most people homes today and the resolutuion needs to be enough for that to be truly enjoyable, but any more is overkill. Enough is enough. I don't think I really want to see that stupid gecko with the accent at any higher resolution.

Yep, agree. I'd be plenty happy with a high res DVD format at 720p or 1080i, giving as good a picture as broadcast material at those resolutions. Heck, that's as high as my PJ will do anyway and they look fantastic. 1080p or higher - nah, I not going to jump on that bandwagon anytime soon.

dholmes

Settle some confusion for me, to get a 1080p picture your proj-tv will have to support that right? Is there any out there (projectors) that do? thanks

adam2434

dholmes wrote:

Settle some confusion for me, to get a 1080p picture your proj-tv will have to support that right? Is there any out there (projectors) that do? thanks

Yes, to view at full 1080p resolution, your display would have to have that resolution. There are some 1080p projectors, but they're pretty pricey right now - the ones I've seen are $6K and up. Give it a couple years, and they'll probably be at $2K or less. However, who knows if there will even be any 1080p source material by then (or whether it will even be a significant improvement over 1080i).

bknauss

aaharvel wrote:

if you want to see how far DVD technology can go I suggest you buy the SUPERBIT of Panic Room.

Ugh, one of those movies that is technically great, but the movie itself was blah. I find that a lot with the Superbit movies

bknauss

Meeks32 wrote:

I believe standard film has much more resolution than DVD & even HD-DVD, so thinking that watching movies that are a few years old in HD will be like "polishing a ****" is wrong.

Good catch... I was generalizing too much. But how many movies lately have been made using film? I think very few, if any, but I'm not a film expert!

mrbigbluelight

What is "the deal" on superbit ?

unc2701

bknauss wrote:

Good catch... I was generalizing too much. But how many movies lately have been made using film? I think very few, if any, but I'm not a film expert!

Uhhh... damn near all of them use film. Use of DV cameras has been very limited- mostly indie films. Lucas & others have been pushing for all digital distribution, but only a few films have been recorded that way & they all use cameras with resolutions well beyond 1080. Also, for digitally enhanced shots (or any rendered shots) they have to do the resolution waaaaay beyond 1080. It has to be sharp enough that people aren't going to notice pixels on a 50 foot screen. So- there might be few indie films that won't get anything from HD, but just about anything pre Canon XL-1 and post Star Wars Episode 1 work just fine.

Early B.

I'm not lookiing forward to HD-DVD or any other similar format. Today's picture quality is already as good as it needs to be. I don't want to see the pimples on Charlize's cheeks or age spots on Barbara Bush's forehead. That's too much information and sort of distracting. Just like in audio, too much detail is not a good thing.

BIZILL

i'm calling bs on that one. my 65" is begging for everything to be broadcast in hd. be it broadcast or hd-dvd, so long as it's hd. period and bottom line.

BIZILL

case in point, i've enjoyed some **** in hd widescreen via spice networks and dtv. side by side comparison with standard digital satellite vs hd and you could see minute vericose veins and stretchmarks on certain lovely ladies on the hd feed. hidden in the standard format. bottom line.

oh, yeah, and also certain hair/skin follicles from shaving.