Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Eug Wanker · Dec 5, 2006 , 06:15 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

Funny thing is the immediate titles I want like Miami Vice and BSG are universal on HD-DVD. Hopefully things will change though

I want Hero, which is Atlantis Alliance in Canada (HD DVD), and Sony in the US (Blu-ray), which probably means we won't get it on either format any time soon.

Mind you I already have 2 different DVDs of it.

Dark Helmet · Dec 5, 2006 , 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

I want Hero, which is Atlantis Alliance in Canada (HD DVD), and Sony in the US (Blu-ray), which probably means we won't get it on either format any time soon.

Mind you I already have 2 different DVDs of it.

Ya that's a cool movie, I'm gonna get it for sure as the colours are amazing.

Rumor · Dec 5, 2006 , 06:41 PM

So is House of Flying Daggers.

Dark Helmet · Dec 5, 2006 , 07:29 PM

Originally Posted by Rumor

So is House of Flying Daggers.

I thought I would love it but I was so bored I shut it off after 40 minutes.

Eug · Dec 5, 2006 , 08:30 PM

I didn't like House of Flying Daggers that much either. I liked the dance scene, but the rest of the movie was just so-so IMO.

It's supposed to be pretty a bad transfer on Blu-ray too.

I'll start with a couple of good things. The Blu-ray has lovely colors that run deeper and sparkle better than any previous home video edition. Also, in direct comparison to the Sony DVD, the new disc has much less edge enhancement (though minor halos do still pop up in some places) and better detail in certain textures like clothing fabric, hair, or on-screen text such as the opening prologue. I've owned many copies of this movie from different parts of the world, and of them I'd have to admit that this is perhaps the best it's looked by some very moderate degree. That will do it for the good stuff.

Here's the problem: although this disc is an improvement over the comparable (mediocre) DVD, it's quite awful by High Definition standards. It looks essentially like the DVD should have looked, not like an HD disc should look. In fact, I'd go so far as to say this is the worst HD image I've ever seen. The picture is distractingly soft. As mentioned, certain textures like clothing look decent in close-up (by DVD standards, at least), but wide shots lose definition and the actors' faces look waxy if not outright blurry. It's true that if you check the same shots on the DVD, they're also soft on that disc, but the problem was less obvious on the lower-resolution medium and stands out in stark clarity here. There is no detail at all in things like skin pores or complexion as you'll see in the best High Definition sources. I'll concede that the movie may have a deliberately soft photographic style, but the disc goes too far and looks excessively filtered and compressed. The image is often dupey and flat, with no sense of depth. Compression noise and image shimmer are problematic in scenes with high levels of detail; for example, keep an eye on the beaded curtains in the background of wide shots inside the Peony Pavilion. Film grain is poorly compressed and looks noisy as hell, especially during the bamboo forest scene. To put it bluntly, this disc is a disaster.

mitchell_pgh · Dec 5, 2006 , 08:40 PM

Just wait for the "Blu-Ray/HD DVD Collector's Extreme Director's Unlimited Cut" for most of the current movies coming out.

Arg... I'm not buying either format. I'll rent when/if I buy a system. In fact, I'm thinking of selling all my DVDs minus 3-4...

Dark Helmet · Dec 6, 2006 , 02:56 PM

Someone else mentioned the whole fitting season on one disk advantage:

Blu-ray is pretty much a waste of time... - PS3 Fanboy

Dakar² · Dec 6, 2006 , 03:04 PM

People are going to have trouble getting over the mental hill of paying $100 for one disc.

alligator · Dec 7, 2006 , 07:45 AM

It is the player price that will determines who wins. Unless Blu-Ray gets some cheaper players, HD-DVD will win.

Dark Helmet · Dec 7, 2006 , 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by alligator

It is the player price that will determines who wins. Unless Blu-Ray gets some cheaper players, HD-DVD will win.

They are pretty close in price unless you want the first HD-DVD player which is dirt cheap but ****.

jokell82 · Dec 7, 2006 , 12:44 PM

So we can close this thread now, because it appears HD-DVD has won:
Optical HD Battle May Be Over: HD-DVD Wins - Talk Back - Digital Trends

Eug Wanker · Dec 7, 2006 , 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

They are pretty close in price unless you want the first HD-DVD player which is dirt cheap but ****.

The second generation Toshiba HD-A2 HD DVD player is supposed to be pretty good.
It's out now, with a street price of US$399 ($499 MSRP), including 3 free HD DVDs.

Dark Helmet · Dec 7, 2006 , 01:57 PM

[quote=Eug Wanker;3232305]
Geez, you can pretty much get a 20 Gig PS3 for only a bit more and it obvious offers a ton more for the extra cost.

Gossamer · Dec 7, 2006 , 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by jokell82

So we can close this thread now, because it appears HD-DVD has won:
Optical HD Battle May Be Over: HD-DVD Wins - Talk Back - Digital Trends

First paragraph of the article:

Nearly a year and a half ago I wrote a column saying that Blu-Ray wins or nothing does. This showcases the reality of doing predictions because while the analysis held up, events did not pan out as anticipated and by any current measure HD-DVD will end this year with a decisive win.

This is the part where I compare how long HD has been out and how long Blu-ray has been out and how it would be ridiculous to expect anything else. I'll be back in a couple years when I can get either drive at a reasonable price.

Dark Helmet · Dec 7, 2006 , 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by Gossamer

First paragraph of the article:

This is the part where I compare how long HD has been out and how long Blu-ray has been out and how it would be ridiculous to expect anything else. I'll be back in a couple years when I can get either drive at a reasonable price.

I know really. Blu-Ray has been out for less time than HD-DVD and for the bleeding edge crew with ONE player and some disks that weren't encoded properly. Now that the sony player has shipped and more importantly the PS3 the well encoded titles are rolling out and some beat HD-DVD in price and quality.

It will be this time next year before we can have a real idea on how well either is doing.

Eug Wanker · Dec 7, 2006 , 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

Geez, you can pretty much get a 20 Gig PS3 for only a bit more and it obvious offers a ton more for the extra cost.

Where, eBhey?

Anyways, it's becoming more and more clear that this format war isn't going to be won with consoles. Yes the consoles do matter, but it's the standalones that are going to be the primary players for most people.

Dark Helmet · Dec 7, 2006 , 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Where, eBhey?

If you like and are in a rush.

When the supplies are good though and people walk into stores and see "HD-DVD player and nothing" else sitting next to a "PS3 with lots of other stuff for cheaper than it costs to make" they might be swayed.

Eug Wanker · Dec 7, 2006 , 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

If you like and are in a rush.

When the supplies are good though and people walk into stores and see "HD-DVD player and nothing" else sitting next to a "PS3 with lots of other stuff for cheaper than it costs to make" they might be swayed.

You mean the PS3 that plays Blu-ray at 480p when set to 720p?
You mean the PS3 that doesn't come with a remote?
You mean the PS3 that doesn't work with universal IR remotes?
You mean the PS3 that costs a minimum of $499, despite the above limitations?

Yeah, by all reports the PS3 has great image quality (at 1080), but Sony really screwed up its implementation for basic playback as a standalone, and its price tag certainly doesn't help its cause.