Blu ray vs DVD (which is better?)

Thanks for the clarification Ced.

So I know that H.264 is supported by BD and HD-DVD hardware but is DivX-HD? I don't see it in the hardware specs. I'm also interested in Dfeyeant1's claims that H.264 is superior to VC-1 and would really like to see discs masterd with this so I can see for myself. I hope he gives us a heads up on thier releases..

I've also been reading some comments about the CBR MPEG2 encoded D-VHS tapes (at 28mbps but at 720p or 1080i only) used in D-Theater. This encoding they claim is superior to Sony/BD's VBR MPEG2 and takes up less space.

 

I'm not even supposed to tell anyone what we're doing here, so sorry I can't divulge my studio name. I've seen all the Sony titles, and I agree, they suck. Their pq is poor at best in comparison to our titles. I don't know if H.264 is necessarily superior, but I do know that with 25GBs we are able to encode at a much higher bit rate than if we had only 15GBs to work with. Everyone is talking about the multilayer deal, but it's currently a non-issue, at least until the format war comes to an end. I'm not too savy on some of the tech terms, but I do know that H.264 is aka mpeg4; isn't ACS an audio encoding? Come on, 25GBs!! What's the deal? The superior amount of space alone should make this an easy battle. What the hell are people thinking??

 

@Dfeyeant1:

That's too bad. BD's authored in h.264 would be a welcome piece of news for those who want to see better releases from the BluRay camp.

 

No, DivX-HD isn't supported by either next gen optical format. I think the only non-PC based system that plays DivX-HD files is the Philips DVP-5140.

Currently, Blu-ray hasn't mass produced any dual layer discs while HD-DVD has. That means blu-ray is limited to 25 GB and HD-DVD is limited to 30 GB. Also, I find that to many people are acting like the whole disc is used for video. This is not the case and has little relavance to the ability to encode high calibur video streams since there are more important factors. Some of those factors are; Quality of the transfer (if the source is film); Quality of the encoder; Quality and amount of audio streams; How much extra stuff is included; and the length of the movie.

Ced

 

The resident experts at AVS forums have discussed VC1 vs H.264 in numerous threads and have repeatedly chosen VC-1 as superior. I myself would like to see first hand.

I found out (also from AVS forums) that Japanese HD-DVD releases are in H.264/AVC. Since the current players and software have not implemented region coding (yet!) I'll order a few Japanese titles online and see for myself.

They've also stated the bitrates of the initial US titles - presumably VC-1:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=689467

 

@Dfeyeant1:

I think I know where you're working:

http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=17386

If this is where you work can you give us a heads up on your BD releases and maybe a discount on your upcoming BD player? (Just kidding!!!)


Added:

Here's a forum discussion on the status of Panasonic's H.264 decoder:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=699040

Another question - maybe for Ced:

Does anyone here think that BD50 releases - when they do come out - will cost more than current BD25's?

 

They will cost more to produce but I don't think sony would try to pass the cost to the consumer since HD-DVD's costs/prices are already lower.

Awsome! I can't wait to read your opinion on AVC vs. VC-1.

Ced

 

I've used h.264 (mainconcept software encoder) to encode some movies with lower bitrate (1500kbps) and I was not impressed by its effeciency. This was almost the same resolution as a DVD.

In terms of picture quality, it is crap, but compares to roughly a 2500kbps mpeg-2. I have yet to encode any videos for comparison between mpeg-2 and h.264, but I assume it is about the same as VC-1 only a tad slower.

As for the space on a disc, since they set a cap on the bitrates, a movie will fill roughly 11.25GB per hour.

This means that barely any movies will need more than 25GB for the actual movie. A movie like King Kong for instance, would require a larger disc and would need about 35GB at full bitrate.

@Dfeyeant1,

You wording of this sentence confuses me. If you hold everything constant and only change the resolution, the lower the resolution, the better the quality (of course it does not scale as a straight line, so there is a point where lowering the resolution will yield no visible increase in quality.

For instance, encode a few seconds at 8mbps at 720x480 resolution and the exact same thing again at 1920x1080 resolution and again at 8mbps. I am pretty sure the lower resolution will look quite a bit better than the HD one.

As for PQ in terms of resolution, PQ and resolution are two different things. In order to keep PQ constant, as you raise resolution, you have to raise the bitrate. I do not know exactly how it scales though.

 

first blu prety much has all ready won

first blue ray can read write hd format it just a licensing thing plus there more company going with the blue ray now sony being the bigest of course but that not real problem even microsoft who saporting hd is talking about puting a blu ray disk in there new xbox 360


the bennifits of blu ray r more then just hd video it can be exspanded well be on hd witch has become a selling point considering all hd realy is a new version of the dvd stander alot companys r seeing at as they will have to upgrade to somthing new with 10 years most likly blu rays based most likly y not now

ok here a list taking from the blu ray home site of movie studio releasing blu ray movie

Warner sony disney parmount loin gate mgm fox

but like i said if u realy want to get in to the techy stuff blu ray
would be a beter choice for your computer do to the fact that the same format that hd use blue ray can read and write so u see hd realy is out dated all ready cuz hd can not do blu ray it werid i know but true

 

@ MARLBOR,

You need to do more research.

Start here...
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/356526

Ced

 

lol and this y i hardly every write a comennt in forums

ok the orginal question is what one is better blu rays or hd wel blue rays

blu rau can do every thing that hd can even write in hd own format but hd can not do every thing blu rays can so blue ray is better

now as for who will win the war i dont realy know

blu rays has constantly been steeling suporter from hd such as disney who were orginaly going to back hd

the main selling point of hd is it cheaper



now as for research wel i been reading about blu ray and hd for almost five years now and been fowloing blue ray even longer like when it orginaly dam near 10 years came up with the idea of burring 3d hollowgram disk so i like to think i research some at least

i just gave my thoughts on the subject

 

No comment.Lol.

 

My point is that you have a bias toward Blu-ray because it simply has more storage. Your opinion is your own but spreading misconception doesn't help anyone.

Yes Blu-ray is better than DVD. But will it replace it?

Ced

 

wel i guess i should have taken hd feeling in to consideration
in making it feel less important

ok there nothing wrong with hd it is a decent format 13.5 gig is good enough for the average user an so forth

but i was trying to stick to orginal queston which was what is beter


and as for sprending what ever that big word of yours was around

i try to keep thing simple my self

but ok

blu ray

benfit
can take a stander
cdr cdrw
dvd dvd- dvd+ dvdrw

and in creases th amount of straoge u can place on them

test have show for a stander cdrw an cdr u can increse the amount stored from 700 strander to over a gig depending on brand and method use
test have also shown that blu ray can increse the storage of a stander dvdrw dvd- and dvd+ from 4.5 gb to 5.5 and some cases more depending on brand and method of writing used granted that just some test result not to say the advertising that

hd can not do any of that to my current knowledge i might be wrong havent read any thing about that

so i would say if u want to buy an optical drive for your system i go blu ray becuz it can do hd video plus in increase the amount stroge to your exsiting dvd and cd not limitin u to just blu ray disk for my more storage granted this only opinion

i would say that not a smal thing

and i wasnt aware i was trying to help people

people r smart enough to read for them self not listen to my bias opinion

i some how dont think that there r going to be million dollars lost becuz of me


and this havs been the wriedest thing ever i seen never have i had some 1 agree with me then tell me i a bias and not helping any 1

that is screwy

 

Dont waste your time Marlbor because anytime you support Blu-Ray in this forum your either Bias or dont know what your talking about.

 

I would not bother with either HD or Blu-Ray/BD. HVD is basically done with standardization as is other holographic-based media. DVD had a very short lifespan in the consumer marketplace (really, only about 4-5 years, for all intents and purposes, although the format is older). It's sort of a waste to re-purchase your DVD collection because you will have to re-purchase it again in HVD or another HM format.

 

@MARLBOR
the technology to put nearly 1.4gb of data onto a cdr isnt new, it might not use a blue laser but i saw a burner about a year ago that shortens the length of the pits on a disc so it could store twice as much data on it.

 

yeah i know what u r talking about

and it was done with blu ray

 

MARLBOR WTF are talking about seriously. Besides the glaring grammer mistakes that reside in your posts, do you even have a clue what you talking about? Just hearing myself think about what you have written gives me a head-ache.

 

I've seen some of the newest HDMV titles (other than Sony's crappily encoded DVDs on crack), which you may or may not know is BD's internal competing coding rival to JAVA. The HDMV lacks the fancy moving cursors/highlights and interactive menu animations, but it's much faster to produce and still much cooler than any DVD you've ever seen. I'm still hoping JAVA prevails because it will heighten the user experience, but I think it may be some time before the right authoring software is developed to make the process efficient enough. As for HD DVD, you have to be kidding me. Focus people! It's cheaper now because it's a more simple technology. If we hold out and choose Blu-ray, we actually have a chance for it lasting a decade or two. And in the first 2 years you know the disc and player cost will drop dramatically. Choosing HD DVD is taking baby steps into the future, and the next bigger better technology will just replace it that much sooner. Don't be the same stupid consumers that let the Betamax incident happen.