[ink]

Originally Posted by icruise 

I don't see anybody bitching about how the Xbox 360 costs $500 if you want wireless. $700 if you want HD-DVD and wireless, and you've still only got a 20GB hard disk (and no card reader, if that means anything to you). And yet these same people act like Sony is committing war crimes with its pricing strategy.

Good points; I hadn't thought about it that way. The closest ethernet port is upstairs and on the other side of the house from my home theater system -- so I'd have to fork over for the 802.11.

I'll probably end up with a PS3 to replace my PS2 once a good game comes out. That, the built-in wireless, and the PS2 compatibility seals the deal for me. A Wii replaced my GCN.

I was considering the 360, but after adding it all up it doesn't make much sense. That, and the original X-Box didn't have many exclusive titles that interested me anyway (and neither does the 360 so far).

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Not really. The original aspect ratio was 1.85:1, which is very similar to 16:9. The 4:3 release on DVD is open matte. Now, that's what Kubrick wanted for VHS/DVD, but it's not the original intent for the theatres

BTW, I'm reading that the quality of FMJ on Blu-ray is OK, but is actually slightly worse than the HD DVD version. It suffers from the same original source being just OK, but it also suffers from the use of MPEG2 on BD25. (The HD DVD is VC-1 on HD30.)

Kubrick Questions Finally Answered - An In Depth Talk with Leon Vitali

One of the areas of greatest debate in the DVD community is about aspect ratios. The two films that people talk about the most in terms of aspect ratio are Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut, maybe because those are the ones that have been seen theatrical by the DVD buying audience. But people will go through kind of frame by frame and say "In the trailer of Eyes Wide Shut, you can see a sign on the street that you can't see on the full frame video. You can see an extra character…" So how do you address the differences between the theatrical releases of Eyes Wide Shut and of Full Metal Jacket in the DVD releases?

The original video release of Full Metal Jacket was in the supervised hands and owned by Stanley. The thing about Stanley, he was a photographer. That's how he started. He had a still photographer's eye. So when he composed a picture through the camera, he was setting up for what he saw through the camera - the full picture. That was very important to him. It really was. It was an instinct that never ever left him. What he wanted the videos to reflect was how he shot the film through the camera, what was on the original neg and what his composition when he was shooting it was. That's why Full Metal Jacket is in full frame. If people looked, okay? What you get on the video that you didn't get in the theatrical because of the 185 masking, was what Stanley was invisioning. You assume these soldiers in the world that they're in. And he uses wide angle uses to shoot. I mean an 18 millimeter lens was the commonest one. He used 24 sometimes. Wide angle lenses. It was important to him the relationship between things. You can see in Full Metal Jacket how small the people were in relation to this huge landscape.

The thing with Eyes Wide Shot, it was how he saw the thing through the camera and how he set it up. That's what he wanted to reflect in his videos. He did not like 1.85:1. You lose 27% of the picture on 1.85. Stanley was a purist. This was one of the ways it was manifested.

If full frame was so important why didn't Kubrick release them theatrically that way?

After Barry Lyndon, more and more theaters were showing films 1.85 or in Cinemascope even if it wasn't shot that way. He had no control. He couldn't go around every cinema and say "You show this film in 1.66" as you could with Clockwork Orange, because then the projectors had 1.66 mask. With multi-plexes things are different and so they only show a film in 1.85 or in 2.21, the Cinemascope. You know? You cannot put a mask in 1.66 as it should be for Clockwork Orange. You can't put a 1.77 in as it should be for Barry Lyndon and that's what Stanley understood with The Shining onwards. He realized that his films we're going to be shown in 1.85 whether he liked it or not. You can't tell all the theaters now how to show your movies. They say it's 1.85, that's it. Stanley realized that masking for 1.85 would far outweigh having 1.66 projected at 1.85. We did a re-release of Clockwork in the U.K. and it's 1.66. It's composed for 1.66. It's shot in 1.66, and the whole shebang. Well, you know, they had to screen it in 1.85. I can't tell you how much it hurt that film.

That must have been awful.

It's horrible. It's horrible. It's heartbreaking. I mean, it's heartbreaking. You realize that when we got to The Shining, this was after the release of Barry Lyndon, this is how it was all being done. He realized that the best thing he could do is to at least do it so that he understood that beside the 1.85 frame line, they were going to have the composition that he would want you to see. From The Shining and Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut, Stanley had marks on the camera lens so he could see where the 1.85 lines. He composed his shots for 1.66, which is the full screen, but he wouldn't be hurt by going to 1.85 if he had to do it.

So he did the reverse of what most directors do, who look at the 'TV Safe Area', Stanley looked at the '1.85 Safe Area'.

Absolutely. Absolutely.

But with the DVD technology, with the fact that studios often put out films in both wide screen and full frame, why not put out both versions? Considering that when you look at the theatrical experience of these films, which the film existed in this format, why not put it out the way it was theatrically on one side and the way that Kubrick wanted it on the other?

Well, I can only say this, that Stanley always insisted that the video transfers were done the way he shot them through the camera. That's point one. Point two had Stanley been alive, I could maybe have said to him "Well, why can't we do exactly as you suggested?" Right? But he isn't. I can't make that kind of decision, nor can anybody else. You have to be, one of a better word without sounding pretentious, you have to be true to what you know somebody wanted. Unless they tell you something else. That's just the way it was. The way it is. I can't make that kind of decision, nor can anybody else. Stanley's desire, Stanley's wish was really what I had to go by.

[MaxPower2k3]

As that same site says, at least with The Shining, Kubrick shot full-frame but acknowledged that it would be shown at 1.85:1 in theaters, and so shot with that in mind.

[Eug Wanker]

So in other words, he would have preferred 4:3, but shot 4:3 with 1.85:1 matte in mind for his later movies... including Full Metal Jacket.

I suspect this is one reason why Warner is releasing his movies in 16:9 now.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

about that rev B xbox I was hoping for:

The second Xbox 360 (with HDMI): introducing "Zephyr" - Joystiq

Video of HDMI Xbox 360 in action

Unfortunately, they didn't show the config screen, or comment on optical out.

[Hawkeye_a]

Something tells me a HDMI and HD-DVD equiped XBox360 is on the cards for Christmas 2007.

PS>> DH, you can commence with the bitching about hardware upgrades anytime.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Something tells me a HDMI and HD-DVD equiped XBox360 is on the cards for Christmas 2006.

Somehow I don't think so.

[butterfly0fdoom]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Somehow I don't think so.

For some reason, I agree.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Something tells me a HDMI and HD-DVD equiped XBox360 is on the cards for Christmas 2006.

PS>> DH, you can commence with the bitching about hardware upgrades anytime.

About what? They are not releasing a beastly first gen with marjor missing items etc. They are just adding HDMI 2 years later? Big whoop.

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Video of HDMI Xbox 360 in action

Unfortunately, they didn't show the config screen, or comment on optical out.

Until it's actually released, I'm gonna go with it being a mod.

The video shows Xbox mod site swag. Would someone really "in the know" do that?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by screamingFit 

Until it's actually released, I'm gonna go with it being a mod.

The video shows Xbox mod site swag. Would someone really "in the know" do that?

Looks decently legit to me. The monitor is plugged into the XBox's HDMI port, and the controller was plugged into the XBox.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by screamingFit 

Until it's actually released, I'm gonna go with it being a mod.

The video shows Xbox mod site swag. Would someone really "in the know" do that?

It's basically impossible to add HDMI as a mod.

A fake is a possibility, but a mod isn't.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Somehow I don't think so.

fixinated

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

About what? They are not releasing a beastly first gen with marjor missing items etc. They are just adding HDMI 2 years later? Big whoop.

In other words, when Microsoft upgrades it's hardware with something that should have been there from the begining, there's no problem. but when Nintendo does it it's a hanes crime....gotcha.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

In other words, when Microsoft upgrades it's hardware with something that should have been there from the begining, there's no problem. but when Nintendo does it it's a hanes crime....gotcha.

Not sure what you mean, but HD support isn't get added to the Wii any time soon.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

fixinated



In other words, when Microsoft upgrades it's hardware with something that should have been there from the begining, there's no problem. but when Nintendo does it it's a hanes crime....gotcha.

Ya exact same thing.

[Hawkeye_a]

Nah not really the same thing. cause one company's name is Nintendo, which makes their upgrades and redesigns "bad", and the other company is "Microsoft", which makes it alright to you.

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Not sure what you mean, but HD support isn't get added to the Wii any time soon.

Wasnt talking about HD. im just pointing out how someone bitched so much when Nintendo upgraded it's GBA and DS hardware with brighter screens and better form factors, but when Microsoft upgrades it's hardware, it seems to be okay with him. just pointing out another one of his *unbiased* opinions on gaming, and how he totally ripps on one company in particular.

I dont mind when companys upgrade their hardware at all, in fact i think it's a good thing that HDMI is going to be adde o the XB360.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Wasnt talking about HD. im just pointing out how someone bitched so much when Nintendo upgraded it's GBA and DS hardware with brighter screens and better form factors, but when Microsoft upgrades it's hardware, it seems to be okay with him. just pointing out another one of his *unbiased* opinions on gaming, and how he totally ripps on one company in particular.

KO!

[Eug Wanker]

Sony Ships 1M PS3s in North America

In an important early look at the pivotal holiday sales season, Sony Corp. said it met its goal of shipping 1 million PlayStation 3 consoles to North America in 2006 despite ongoing production problems with the still hard-to-find video game system.

The figure is about half of Sony's stated goal of 2 million PS3s globally by the end of 2006. The company did not disclose a global tally in the announcement, made at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.

I had guessed that Sony wouldn't be able to ship that many in 2006.

[ort888]

Is HDMI really any better? Sure, it will be nice once al of my stuff supports it, but for now, I'm more then happy with 1080i over component cables.

Heck, it can already do 1080p over component, so what's the big deal?

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Is HDMI really any better? Sure, it will be nice once al of my stuff supports it, but for now, I'm more then happy with 1080i over component cables.

Heck, it can already do 1080p over component, so what's the big deal?

Think VGA vs DVI on computers.

VGA clarity can be great, but often it isn't, esp. when you're talking very high resolutions such as 1920x1080.
DVI always has perfect clarity. Mind you, that's assuming there 1:1 pixel mapping. (Some TV sets overscan on HDMI.)

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Sony Ships 1M PS3s in North America

Sony Corp. said it met its goal of shipping 1 million PlayStation 3 consoles to North America in 2006.

The figure is about half of Sony's stated goal of 2 million PS3s globally by the end of 2006. The company did not disclose a global tally in the announcement

I had guessed that Sony wouldn't be able to ship that many in 2006.

You guessed what? They haven't announced the numbers yet.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

You guessed what? They haven't announced the numbers yet.

Did you not read my post?

I had guessed it would be less than 1 million in 2006, but I was wrong. Sony sez they did ship 1 million in 2006.

"Sony Corp. said it met its goal of shipping 1 million PlayStation 3 consoles to North America in 2006."

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Think VGA vs DVI on computers.

VGA clarity can be great, but often it isn't, esp. when you're talking very high resolutions such as 1920x1080.
DVI always has perfect clarity. Mind you, that's assuming there 1:1 pixel mapping. (Some TV sets overscan on HDMI.)

But the Xbox is already optimized to pump out the correct number of pixels over the component cables. I still don't understand why HDMI would make it look any better then it already does.

I understand that it's going to be the standard soon, but as of right now, I'm not sure I see a benefit. Sure, I'd rather have it then not, but it doesn't seem worth making a big fuss over getting.

[Mrjinglesusa]

For HD movies, you need HDMI to be able to output at 1080p. For gaming, it's not necessary and will provide no benefit over component cables. Unless, of course, you like to use one cable for both audio and video.

[ort888]

Well, I plan on getting a standalone player, and my receiver doesn't have HDMI sooo... it really doesn't matter to me.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by ort888 

But the Xbox is already optimized to pump out the correct number of pixels over the component cables. I still don't understand why HDMI would make it look any better then it already does.

I understand that it's going to be the standard soon, but as of right now, I'm not sure I see a benefit. Sure, I'd rather have it then not, but it doesn't seem worth making a big fuss over getting.

Because analogue sources don't guarantee proper pixel alignment. There are other issues as well, including stuff like ghosting.

[pyrite]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

Because analogue sources don't guarantee proper pixel alignment. There are other issues as well, including stuff like ghosting.

.. which can be reduced by using good quality cables, like the ones M$ ships with Xbox360 Premium, to the point where the difference is incredibly minimal, if noticeable at all. I personally don't think it's an issue, i'd never consider upgrading or complaining about the current config. component looks fantastic, as does VGA

[icruise]

Yeah, I'll have to say that my Xbox 360 and PS3 look fantastic with normal component cables. It's probably a good idea for Microsoft to add HDMI just because it's the future and not having it makes them look a little behind the PS3, but I don't see why anyone would go to the trouble of selling their current system and getting a new one just for that.

The speculation about hard disk size is interesting. 20GB is not even close to being enough if you want to take advantage of Microsoft's HD video downloads, but it's not too bad if you just using it for gaming. If MS does release a system with 120GB standard (seems like overkill, but who knows?) then Sony would probably be forced to do something similar.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Yeah, I'll have to say that my Xbox 360 and PS3 look fantastic with normal component cables. It's probably a good idea for Microsoft to add HDMI just because it's the future and not having it makes them look a little behind the PS3, but I don't see why anyone would go to the trouble of selling their current system and getting a new one just for that.

As soon as the HDMI 360 is available, there will be a bazillion component-only 360s on eBhey.

Originally Posted by pyrite 

.. which can be reduced by using good quality cables, like the ones M$ ships with Xbox360 Premium, to the point where the difference is incredibly minimal, if noticeable at all. I personally don't think it's an issue, i'd never consider upgrading or complaining about the current config. component looks fantastic, as does VGA

That assumes you have an excellent TV as well.

Good quality cables guarantee nothing. Specifically, I've sometimes gotten ghosting with my Xbox 360 Premium, using the included component cables.

DVI and HDMI both guarantee perfect pixel alignment (on TVs that don't have to overscan), even on crappy TVs.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

As soon as the HDMI 360 is available, there will be a bazillion component-only 360s on eBhey.

That may very well be true. All I was saying was that I don't see the point of doing so.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by icruise 

That may very well be true. All I was saying was that I don't see the point of doing so.

I DEFINITELY see the reason for doing so.

Unless I get a new TV, it won't affect me, but it will affect a LOT of people out there.

Would you buy a Mac Pro today if it supported only VGA and not DVI? I sure as hell wouldn't, even if my monitor looked great with VGA. Luckily, Apple knows this, and doesn't even bother releasing ANY Mac these days that without DVI support.

[icruise]

PS3 Launch Outsells Xbox 360 Launch - Kotaku

Apparently the Xbox 360 only sold 600,000 units in the US from launch to the first week in January, while the PS3 sold 1,000,000 units. (Although Joystiq says that the Xbox sold 900,000 so I'm not sure who to believe.) That's surprising news, given all the doom and gloom on the net about the PS3. The units we see in stores may in fact be mostly due to increased supply and not a lack of demand.

[Dakar²]

Either way, maybe a good sign considering the heftier price tag on the PS3.

[pyrite]

wow.. that goes against everything iv heard about the PS3 launch.. maybe things aren't so bad for sony after all?

[Weezer]

[icruise]

Unless "plenty" means "a few hundred thousand" I'd say this is still relevant news, don't you?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Unless "plenty" means "a few hundred thousand" I'd say this is still relevant news, don't you?

When I was out looking for TV's yesterday, everyone had PS3's. No Wii's still. Circuit City even had a sign up saying No Wii's Available.

[icruise]

So? Nobody is saying that the PS3 is selling better than the Wii. The point is that it seems to be doing better than the Internet pundits thought.

[Dark Helmet]

No way am I going to upgrade to the HDMI Xbox. I have it hooked up with component but when I test it on other devices using HDMI I can hardly see the difference between it and component.

The biggest thing for me with HDMI is that it is one neat cable and eventually it will also carry all my sound sources.

[pyrite]

exactamondo DH, component is still hot
id like to know if the slight ghosting i get on my 32" Sony Bravia LCD has anything to do with component.. but in terms of clarity i see no difference between *good* component cables and HDMI

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by icruise 

PS3 Launch Outsells Xbox 360 Launch - Kotaku

Cover your eyes GoMac!

This is also interesting:
"That makes the Playstation 3 the fastest selling home console Sony has ever launched."

[Dakar²]

Post anything positive about the PS3 and goMac immediately comes in "I see them in stock!!!"

[Hawkeye_a]

Doesnt Sony only releases number of items *shipped* (including in transit, in warehouses,etc) and never sold (end users) ?

So unless they sold every PS3 they shipped, the number cant be right, right ?

On a similar note.....Amazon is still sold out of Wiis. what gives ?

[Kenneth]

Originally Posted by goMac 

When I was out looking for TV's yesterday, everyone had PS3's. No Wii's still. Circuit City even had a sign up saying No Wii's Available.

I saw the 3 Wii available at Target (Bellevue/Factoria) before noon today.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Doesnt Sony only releases number of items *shipped* (including in transit, in warehouses,etc) and never sold (end users) ?

So unless they sold every PS3 they shipped, the number cant be right, right ?

I think they are using "sold" to mean "sold into the retail channel" which does basically mean "shipped." But unless I am mistaken, this is standard procedure, and also what MS does for the Xbox 360.

[pyrite]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Doesnt Sony only releases number of items *shipped* (including in transit, in warehouses,etc) and never sold (end users) ?

i also recall this being correct

[Dark Helmet]

Here is what I think MS should do to keep up the XBox hype.

By mid year they should start leaking something about an upgraded Xbox. Later they can announce a BLACK XBOX 360 with Built in HD-DVD, HDMI and wireless. 120 hard drive and Halo 3. They can call it the 360HD Model or something and it can also have a slightly refined design or slimmer.

ALL games will still be in DVD but this model is sleek, sexier and has the convenience of a built in HD drive.

One this will push HD-DVD more and give the 360 some renewed hype.

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Doesnt Sony only releases number of items *shipped* (including in transit, in warehouses,etc) and never sold (end users) ?

It says so right in the press release:

"Sony Computer Entertainment America (SCEA) today announced that more than one million units of its recently launched PLAYSTATION®3 (PS3™) computer entertainment system have been sold in to the retail channel in North America."

[- - e r i k - -]

… meaning the number is fairly meaningless.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

Here is what I think MS should do to keep up the XBox hype.

By mid year they should start leaking something about an upgraded Xbox. Later they can announce a BLACK XBOX 360 with Built in HD-DVD, HDMI and wireless. 120 hard drive and Halo 3. They can call it the 360HD Model or something and it can also have a slightly refined design or slimmer.

ALL games will still be in DVD but this model is sleek, sexier and has the convenience of a built in HD drive.

One this will push HD-DVD more and give the 360 some renewed hype.

I agree. a HDDVD alternative to the BR-DVD player from Sony would help. also... a smaller unit would be awesome....announce it with the price drop on current models.

And yes, games would continue to be published ONLY on DVD-DL (i think M$ should be able to control that)...and the HD-DVD feature would be for movies only.

A lingering grip to me would be not being able to use it as a complete media box with my Mac.

It would be pretty surprising if we get a HD-DVD iTV box from Apple.... with HDMI...and as big as a Mac Mini (if not smaller). that would solve all my problems right there.