High Def DVD vs Diminishing Returns

[t951]

So, the audiophile/mirage thread got me thinking.

Are HD DVD's (both BluRay and HD DVD) worth it. The difference from cassette to CD and VHS to DVD was huge. Not just with picture quality, but with convenience. Does that exist with this new format?

And why do they think I will pay double for it? It's the same movie?! If it was a buck or two more, fine..but 29.99 versus 14.99.....they are high!

My wife and I haven't crossed over, and truthfully probably will not until prices are down and a standard is picked.

What have you guys done? What are your thoughts?

t.

[TechnoViking]

If you do it right...yes.

The trouble is, most people don't, including the stores that demo the displays. Many of them are running component video cables, and low-res content.

The first time I actually saw a high-end 50" display running at 1080P using HDMI, I got it. Until then, it made no sense to me either.

[Mule]

+1

[nostatic]

all depends on the source material. One advantage to HD and HDMI interface is one cable for video and audio with lossless audio formats. The problem is that there isn't really content out there yet to take advantage of the technology. But it will.

I am happy with the upscaling of my Oppo, but I can see artifacts. There is no substitute for pixels and data (this is with a 1080p display). I've run an xbox 360 through my display and it is jaw dropping gorgeous.

[john70t]

Didn't the FCC recently force all/small stations to become Hi-def compatible to the tune of mega-bucks? If so, why?

[beepbeep]

I'm watching one of my favorite movies (Blade Runner) in 1080p on my 42-inch LCD.

I would say yes. It's worth it. As long as you use HDMI and HD content...the quality is stunning! You can actually see the film grain.

[berettafan]

i'm not sold yet. i watched some football on a neighbors giant screen lcd and during busy, fast scenes it seemed like you could see some blur. not sure if that's artifacts or what but i was not impressed. it's neat to see a giant screen but i'm not dropping car money on a tv.

maybe big tube xbr's will get into the 3 digit range and i'll go that route.

[cstreit]

[QUOTE=berettafan;3632407]i'm not sold yet. i watched some football on a neighbors giant screen lcd and during busy, fast scenes it seemed like you could see some blur. [QUOTE]

That's why I bought a Plasma, none such problem.

There is a HUGE difference between HD and regular TV, but as far as the DVD's go, not so much. (I'm running component cables since Comcast can't get their HDMI output to standard yet)

[DanL911sc]

Originally Posted by beepbeep

I'm watching one of my favorite movies (Blade Runner) in 1080p on my 42-inch LCD.

I would say yes. It's worth it. As long as you use HDMI and HD content...the quality is stunning! You can actually see the film grain.

+1

There is certainly a difference between normal, over-the-air HDTV or even cable/satellite HDTV, and Blu-ray. All the movies I've seen on Blu-ray have been amazing. The film grain is visible, so you know your experience is even better than at the theater. And the compression artifacts of air/cable/satellite are gone, so action sequences are even better.

Of course, make sure you use HDMI and a good 1080p HDTV.

[HelmetHead]

Originally Posted by john70t

Didn't the FCC recently force all/small stations to become Hi-def compatible to the tune of mega-bucks? If so, why?

Sit down in front of a 62" DLP and go from a 480p broadcast (like normal over the air television) and then switch to a 1080 i or p broadcast like Discovery HD theater...its like going from a black and white to a color television. Its more obvious with big screens versus 19-30 inch screens.

I have HD cable thru comcast with a cable card in my Mitsubishi DLP and my set has a built in HD tuner, I can get 10-12 HD over the air channels with the old clothes line antenna the PO left bolted to the chimney.... The over the air HD signal is actually better in some instances.

I just wish that the content providers would standardize on one freakin screen size...its annoying as heck when you're watching a HD channel with black bars on either side of a 4:3 aspect broadcast....Wide is almost always better (women being the only exception )

Helmethead

[Moses]

XBox 360's Forza on a 1080p screen is fantastic.

[idontknow]

Originally Posted by john70t

Didn't the FCC recently force all/small stations to become Hi-def compatible to the tune of mega-bucks? If so, why?

The FCC only mandated stations change transmitting from analog to digital signals. There was no requirement that they become Hi Def compatible.

This may help.
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/digitaltv.html

Snipped:
"Congress mandated the conversion to all-digital television broadcasting, also known as the digital television (DTV) transition, because all-digital broadcasting will free up frequencies for public safety communications (such as police, fire, and emergency rescue). Also, digital is a more efficient transmission technology that allows broadcast stations to offer improved picture and sound quality, as well as offer more programming options for consumers through multiple broadcast streams (multicasting)"

[t951]

Ok, so..unless I mis-read....only one person above thinks it is black&white vs. color.

I just am having time justifying it to myself (and I am easy when it comes to justifying electronic purchases).

I surmise that there is a difference, but I am wondering at the "bang for the buck" ratio....seems low.

What do you recommend as "THE MOVIE" that highlights the true difference?

[john70t]

It's a paranoid thought, sure enough, but it still would be a very small step for digital t.v.'s to output "packet checks"/etc... whenever any media is played through them(such as home DVDs).

That's a bit too big-brother'ish for my castle.
I wonder if there are any existing laws banning output capability on the legislative table-before the cat escapes.

[cab83_750]

I was (and possibly still in) video- and audio-phile crap. I have a 50" plasma. Discovery and NatGeo channels are awesome.

There is a difference between regular DVD and HD DVD, but I did not get the uuuuuh, aaaaah. This is my first time that I will wait for the 'format change price' to stabilize before I jump into the bandwagon.



Oh, and I work for 20th Centry Fox. The format adopted was Blu-Ray (I think as the Lot Store has our films in this format); I still do not know who will win: BR or HD

[rouxroux]

It will be "all marketing"...remember Beta vs. VHS?

[campbellcj]

FWIW I have a high-end Denon DVD player that upscales to 1080i and I think it looks fantastic with good-quality standard DVD material. Display is a 52" Sony XBR3 LCD. I may pick up a PS3 sometime, but mainly for gaming as I'm in no hurry to jump into the BluRay/HD fray.

[gr8fl4porsche]

I also have an upscaling Denon DVD. While the pic quality is light years better the the progressive scanning player it replaced, it is definitely not HD quality. Cartoons have the best picture quality but it is not 1080p. I have not hooked up a HD DVD to see the difference but I imagine the quality would be an improvement - probably not night and day, but to me it would be an upgrade.

FWIW - I just had my Denon DVD repaired after about 8 months of use. They replaced the laser and drawer mechanism under warranty. Works great now but has lowered my faith in a once very impressive company for the amount of cash outlay.

[Mule]

Pic quality is extremely good. Downside is disk cost. For me to pay $30 for a movie, it would have to be my ex wife getting hit by a train.

[Wickd89]

People rage about the improved quality but who really cares.

When we go to the cinema, the quality is OK and no one complains.
Digital films are better but nothing compared to what people expect at home.

Most old films are cleaned up and are already better than the original versions we grew up watching in theaters and on tv.

I think people are just getting a little spoiled to say "you must move to HD or blue ray."

I agree DVD was a great improvement from tapes, but this jump is not for me. Give me the cheap version....