"In fact, I think most of the up-scaled DVDs look terrible after getting used to HD material."

Just to clarify for those who haven't had the opportunity to compare for themselves:

if you're watching both in 1080p on a 100" front projection screen, and both are live content (not animated), there will be a substantial difference.

With a really good scaler (even the one in Sony's now $75 uprezzing DVD player) and a good SD DVD, it will not be unbearable by a long stretch.

If you're watching both on say a 32" 720p LCD, the difference will sometimes not be great at all. It will frequently just depend on the content.

Can someone explain why it is a huge deal if one studio (Warner) pulls out? I don't fully understand. Is Warner the primary studio releasing movies?

I also don't understand why any studio would quit supporting all ways (formats) to release its product. If it costs a bit more for multiple format releases, charge a bit more.

This is certain to continue for years longer, there are just too many players of both formats to just call it quits. However, DVHS, JVCs HD format did manage to quickly die due to no JVC support.

Im heavily into HD-DVD. If things eventually go Blu-Ray studio wise, I will just start copying from Blu-Ray to HD-DVD format discs. Can probably even make a few bucks doing it since there are still over a million HD-DVD players out there.

Im heavily into HD-DVD. If things eventually go Blu-Ray studio wise, I will just start copying from Blu-Ray to HD-DVD format discs.

A-you *can't* copy from BD to HD DVD, not legally.
B-It's not that things will "eventually" go Blu-ray, they already are. HD DVD is quietly going the way of LaserDisc.
C-It takes multiple studios supporting formats, and it is too expensive to support an "almost-ran" format like HD DVD. HD DVD has been dead twice before, and this time there was no Bill Gates to save it. There is no gold in those hills, and no point in attempting to keep digging for it. Virtually all but one major studio and most small studios support BD. When Warner walked away, when Paramount said they wouldn't renew...it leaves nothing. Dreamworks can't support the format on its own.
D-How are you going to burn those pirated HD DVD movies?

Im heavily into HD-DVD. If things eventually go Blu-Ray studio wise, I will just start copying from Blu-Ray to HD-DVD format discs. Can probably even make a few bucks doing it since there are still over a million HD-DVD players out there.That's funny!!!! But, lets say you could bypass the copy protection and write to the EVO format (hd-dvd), then Big Problem# 2 is it will not FIT on a HD-DVD disc.
Problem# 3 - You should know the answer.

Just another advantage Blu-Ray has over HD-DVD, each disc holds 10gigs more on a single layer.
HD-DVD single layer = 15gig
Blu-Ray single layer = 25gig
HD-DVD DL = 30gig
Blu-Ray DL = 50gig

Craftech, I'm familiar with a limited studied that concluded the optical vertical \ horizontal resolution for "TV" viewing was in around 750-790 lines for an average viewer, but this study was flawed for many reasons, one being of a fix viewing angle and distance, display settings, etc, plus this study was funded by the 720p group in the early days of battling 720 vs 1080 displays. But the eye is very trainable, detail is controlled by the environment, Imax vs. theater ----- sitting first-class or in the jumpseat ----

Keep in mind that the resolution is per square inch. It is not across the entire screen. A bigger screen isn't going to show a greater difference between 720p and 1080p irrespective of bandwidth. By next year at the end of February the FCC will have sold off the analog bandwidth to the cell phone companies and the broadcasters will be switching to digital because they can cram more into less bandwidth. It only comes in two flavors. 720p and 1080i and NOT 1080p. Why isn't the FCC pushing 1080p? Simple. Takes up too much bandwidth and the broadcasters can make more money if they give you less and charge you more. More of the anti-consumer mentality in corporate America fostered by guess which party's legislation over the last six years. Will movies all be shot from now on with 1080p cameras exclusively at a few hundred thousand dollars a camera so that we can all reap the delusional benefits of 1080p on the discs. Unlikely. Will the television producers do it? Unlikely. That would involve promoting competition, something we seem to be completely against in this country. Our moto - monopoly is good. Good for everyone. and then we make up reasons as to why we should like it and how it is really "helping us", and send out the fan boys to tout specs no one will ever realize. Maybe you will see a visible difference with gaming systems in the near future. ?
And by the way, not all the inputs on the back of the panels or projectors are capable of 1080p either.

John

Of course, someone asked about 1080p vs 1080i claiming there is a noticeable difference and I couldn't find my last post on it. I can go into more detail, but simply put here is why it makes no visible difference despite the hype used to sell certain products:

Most Television shows and virtually all movies are shot at 24 Fps on film or a 24 Fps HD camera.

All televisions have a refresh rate of 60 times per second. When they display 24 fps content they have to double the first frame, triple the second, and double the third using the familiar 3:2 pulldown sequence. (don't know why it wasn't called 2:3). None of the new frames have NEW information, they are just doubles and triples of the same stuff. That is why people who say there is a difference between deinterlaced 1080i and direct 1080p in terms of visual quality don't know what they are talking about. It doesn't matter whether the player deinterlaces it or the set does it, it's all duplicate information and thus not really "upscaled" and conversions are taking place sometimes in more than one place with scalers of varying quality using sources of varying quality to muddy it.

John

Keep in mind that the resolution is per square inch. It is not across the entire screen.

I am not sure what you are saying here, but it sounds terribly wrong. The resolution we are talking about, 720 vs 1080, is not per square inch, it is the total available resolution for the screen.

bigger screen isn't going to show a greater difference between 720p and 1080p

Yes, it is.

the broadcasters will be switching to digital because they can cram more into less bandwidth. It only comes in two flavors. 720p and 1080i and NOT 1080p

This is incorrect. The move to digital has nothing to do with HD, and the majority of the content sent over the new digital connections in 2009 will be standard definition content, it will not be 720 nor will it be 1080 i or p.

Why isn't the FCC pushing 1080p? Simple. Takes up too much bandwidth and the broadcasters can make more money if they give you less and charge you more.

This isn't even close to being an accurate description of anything at all. The FCC is pushing digital broadcast, not a video format. Most broadcast HD today is, as far as i know, in a format similar to HDV, that is 1440 by 720p or 1080i. As far as I know.

More of the anti-consumer mentality in corporate America fostered by guess which party's legislation over the last six years.

This is a ludicrous statement. Please don't make this into a partisan thing, this has nothing at all to do with politics, and no, there is no anti-consumer mentality in corporate America, if it was then Corporate America would be suicidal. It is not.

Will movies all be shot from now on with 1080p cameras exclusively at a few hundred thousand dollars a camera

Excuse me?!? but what are you talking about here? You know this is 2007 right.

Will the television producers do it? Unlikely. That would involve promoting competition

You are joking right? Do you really mean that the TV producers of the world and the movie producers of the world have decided not to shoot in 1080p HD (they haven't even decided not to do it) so as to limit competition? How on earth would that limit competition?

And by the way, not all the inputs on the back of the panels or projectors are capable of 1080p either.

If your TV or projector is capable of supporting 1080p, and it has an HDMI connector, then it has a 1080p capable input. What more do you want? Can you give me a link to a TV or a projector that has a 1080p capable screen but that does not have 1080p capable inputs? Why on earth would anyone make such a thing?

Honestly John, what was this post about? Either I misunderstood almost everything you wrote in this post, or you wrote it as some sort of irony/sarcasm. Alternatively, you just posted a ton of opinion that varies from completely wrong to so far off the mark it is "not even wrong".

While some HD movies impress us all, most don't

I don't think there is anyone who claims that all HD content released has been good. Some of it is very bad indeed. Again, this is why you have review sites to check out before buying. I only buy HD content when I know the PQ/AQ is worth it.

Some really awful ones that come to mind are Fifth Element (BD)

As I indicated in another posting (regarding price of HD equipment), you need to update your information. The awful PQ of Fifth Element was a source of much criticism, and it has been re-released in a re-mastered version which has very good, but not reference, PQ. I own FE in (remastered) HD and SD. The difference is significant.

Take a look at The HD DVD User's PQ & AQ Reference Thread!. This has widespread participation. Look at the top tier and count the number of animations that fall into that category

A lot of movies released on HD has been animated stuff from the likes of Disney etc. This is not a bad thing, why does it matter to you? The quality of animated stuff like Ice Age on HD is fantastic. This is not a huge surprise since this was created digitally from the get go. Now, to imply that there is mainly animated stuff in the higher quality layers of HD is disingenuous at best. The best HD movies are not HD, and among the top tiers of HD movies in PQ, animated films is far, very far, from being the majority.

We see ZERO difference between upscaled SD animations and HD animations. It's a joke.

This is a statement I find quite interesting, and I am beginning to wonder. I am a big fan of Ice Age and I have both on DVD and the second on Blu (the first hasn't been released yet). I can therefore compare them.

Are you saying above that "we" can not see a difference between the two? Who are these "we"? Is it you and your family? If so, what are you watching this on? Are you sure your set is configured correctly?

The PQ difference between SD Ice Age and HD Ice age is massive. No competition.

As I said - Hi-Def is a big disappointment because of an industry that is taking advantage of the consumer

How so? In what way?

Who decided that we all needed to buy these discs instead of renting them like we all used to do?

You did. You are the master of your own life and you are the ones that makes decisions in it. If you feel that you are forced to make decisions you do not want to make, then call the police.

Apit:

Craftech:

Ah, but here we have the explanation. You are watching this on an older 720p projector. Sorry to burst your bubble here, but... yes there is. Also, depending on the quality of your projector and (not the least) the screen you are projecting against, the difference can be significant.

If you watch the movie "Planet Earth" from the BBC, the images are just absolutely breathtaking.

A great big Amen to that. PE is an excellent opportunity to check out HD, in more ways than one in fact. You can use it to test your eye sight and your equipment too. How do you say?

Well, some parts of Planet Earth are shot in, and mixed in, standard def and then up-rezzed to HD. On my 1080p TV it is immediately visible when you move from HD content to up-rezzed SD content. Go through the Shallow Seas segment and see for your self. Some of the under-water stuff is SD and some of it is HD, and the jumping shark segment was shot in SD. The move from one to the other is immediately visible and for me a jarring experience. It almost put me off PE, but the rest of the footage makes up for it.

All televisions have a refresh rate of 60 times per second.

Man you are posting a lot of bad information today Craftech. Google for "120Hz TV" and for "72Hz TV" and get enlightened.

Answers:

A. If I own the title, I can produce a backup for my personal use. What format I use is entirely up to me. There may be a legality challege to this common sense approach, but I do not/have not seen a studio testing it.
B. As a HD-DVD user, I don't agree, but I don't fully follow the "War", I just buy, view, burn, use and enjoy HD-DVDs. I have not had a hard time finding new releases in retail stores or online. As I said before, both formats have gone to far just to stop producing either one.
C. I understand what you are saying, time will tell how/when this works out.
D. HD movies are nothing more than a VC-1 codec file on the disc, nothing special. The menu & features are another story. I have young children and have been making backup copies of movies for years because they don't last long. The same process and software I have always used works exactly the same on Blu-Ray/HD-DVD. I made my HD-DVD drive back in 2006 from an old X-Box 360 using instructions you can find anywhere online. Reads the VC-1 file(s) to hard drive where you can render to whatever you want. Im usually compressing them to DL-DVD size, movie only, and burning them using ULead. It's easy. I admit I have not done any Blu-Ray yet, but it's the same deal.

_____________________________________________________

A-you *can't* copy from BD to HD DVD, not legally.
B-It's not that things will "eventually" go Blu-ray, they already are. HD DVD is quietly going the way of LaserDisc.
C-It takes multiple studios supporting formats, and it is too expensive to support an "almost-ran" format like HD DVD. HD DVD has been dead twice before, and this time there was no Bill Gates to save it. There is no gold in those hills, and no point in attempting to keep digging for it. Virtually all but one major studio and most small studios support BD. When Warner walked away, when Paramount said they wouldn't renew...it leaves nothing. Dreamworks can't support the format on its own.
D-How are you going to burn those pirated HD DVD movies?

Double post deleted.

All televisions have a refresh rate of 60 times per second.
etc.
=============
In response to your three posts let me clarify something. I'll answer the past post by saying (yes) to the new technology, but in the case of frame rate vs refresh rate calculations, repeated frames are not considered separate frames since the information in the repeated frames is all identical. It is when you move to a frame with different information that you have to count it as a new frame so don't get bogged down with the numbers.

As far as the comment about "Man you are posting a lot of bad information today Craftech", I am going to avoid going back over the tech stuff I stated and arguing each of them for two reasons:

1. It violates my argument that subjective evaluations don't bear out the specs touted and that people are spending too much time arguing specs they are never going to see visually or audibly.

2. I refuse to invite a flame war with you as what happened between you and Blink. So count me out of that. It goes against my nature.

In answer to this:

John: We see ZERO difference between upscaled SD animations and HD animations. It's a joke.

Terje: This is a statement I find quite interesting, and I am beginning to wonder. I am a big fan of Ice Age and I have both on DVD and the second on Blu (the first hasn't been released yet). I can therefore compare them.

Are you saying above that "we" can not see a difference between the two? Who are these "we"? Is it you and your family? If so, what are you watching this on? Are you sure your set is configured correctly?

John: Please go back and read my posts. I explained who "we" are.

John

1. The copy protection has been broken for quite awhile, it's not even an issue. Just look at all the bittorrents of HD movies available.

2. All the movies Im seeing are not even filling up the single sided disc they are on. The compression in VC-1 rocks.

3. With some creativity and no advanced menu, you can get a single sided HD-DVD disc content on a DL-DVD disc in some cases. It's obviously still in VC-1 format, so only a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player can handle it.

___________________________________________________

That's funny!!!! But, lets say you could bypass the copy protection and write to the EVO format (hd-dvd), then Big Problem# 2 is it will not FIT on a HD-DVD disc.
Problem# 3 - You should know the answer.

Just another advantage Blu-Ray has over HD-DVD, each disc holds 10gigs more on a single layer.
HD-DVD single layer = 15gig
Blu-Ray single layer = 25gig
HD-DVD DL = 30gig
Blu-Ray DL = 50gig

but in the case of frame rate vs refresh rate calculations, repeated frames are not considered separate frames

Well, nobody ever said. I just corrected your misinformation.

Please note - I am not trying to initiate a flame war here, not at all. I am just disagreeing with some of your opinions and correcting some of your errors. The last few posts you wrote had some rather odd information in them, and I am just trying to make sure we are not misunderstanding each other.

As an example, you seemed to claim that HD resolution was per square inch, which is incorrect, and you claimed that HD cameras typically cost multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars, which is also incorrect at this stage. RED, for example, will set you back somewhere around $50K (depending on a lot), and it is quite a capable camera.

So, back to your reply to my posts, you said:

It violates my argument that subjective evaluations don't bear out the specs touted and that people are spending too much time arguing specs they are never going to see visually or audibly.

I am sorry, but I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Can you elaborate please?

Please go back and read my posts. I explained who "we" are.

Actually, no, you haven't. If "we" are you and your family, then this is understandable and also easy to explain. You see, if "we" in this case can not see the difference between an upscaled version of the Ice Age DVD and the HD version, then "we" are watching it on equipment that is either not showing HD properly, is faulty or is mis-configured. The difference between the up-scaled version and the HD version is significant. Now, of course, it could also be explained to vision problems. Again, I am not trying to flame you here, but the statement simply isn't in line with what anyone who wants to pop down to Circuit City and try this out for them selves can see right there.

If we means "just about everybody" or "a group that we tested" then you are simply wrong.