1. Create an account to join in the discussion. Once you register don't forget to enter our monthly drawings.

    Register to post on our forum.
  2. Home Theater Lounge will begin holding a live chat every Wednesday evening at 9pm Central. The goal is to get as many members online at the same time and just talk movies, music, and gear. You can join the chat by going to the Shoutbox app.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Dismiss Notice

HD DVD's space to blame for BR Blood Diamond PQ?

Discussion in 'Movie Lounge' started by Shane, Jun 10, 2007.

  1. Shane

    Shane Active Member

    There's a ruckus being started about how Warner is producing discs for both BR and HD and not optimizing the disc for each format meaning they are encoding the movie and such but limiting themselves to the size of a HD DVD 30 gig disc meaning 20 gigs of space is being unused on the BR disc.

    The current argument is that the low bitrate vc1 encode that Warner has done for Blood Diamond is an issue and looks quite poor on the BR version thus far.

    HT Spot did a review

    Quote from the reviewer:
    The others that are producing these films like Paramount is doing a different encode for each format.

    While I can't complain they used an uncompressed audio track and didn't screw the BR owners on the audio, I got to wonder if this is a bigger issue that needs to be addressed by Warner.

    It'll be quite interesting to see if it's just a poor encode for both formats or not.
  2. John F

    John F Active Member War Zone Member

    I preordered this on HD-DVD and I am very interested to see what all the grumbling is about.

    If it is as bad as they say, my initial reaction is that Warner "screwed up" on the encode.
  3. CJ

    CJ Well-Known Member Admin War Zone Member

    I saw it on SD. Don't know if it was before the HD-DVD came out or if I just missed the boat on this one being in HD.
  4. Steve Tannehill

    Steve Tannehill New Member War Zone Member Top Poster

    Haha hahah ha hahah ah ha hah.

    Blood Diamond gets a better transfer on HD DVD, and it's HD DVD's fault. I swear, some people have too much time on their hands.

    - Steve
  5. CJ

    CJ Well-Known Member Admin War Zone Member

    Could you clarify Steve? It sounds like people are griping that its crappy on BOTH and its because HD-DVD didn't have the space? Is this not the issue? It looks better on HD-DVD than BD? If so, then yes, that's an absurd argument that its HD-DVD's fault.
  6. Steve Tannehill

    Steve Tannehill New Member War Zone Member Top Poster

    Okay, I misread. My bad.

    I'm just getting very tired of the format war BS.

    - Steve
  7. Michael

    Michael Junior Geek

    Considering the track record of great video results on HD DVD, I doubt that the HD DVD format was the blocking issue.

    There was probably something else in play that we are not aware of... most likely a poor master or just a very poor encode.
  8. CJ

    CJ Well-Known Member Admin War Zone Member

    Who knows. I won't sound like a fanboi by saying it absolutely could not be HD-DVDs fault but the bottom line is, no one knows one way or the other and blaming HD-DVD is beyond silly.
  9. Dan S.

    Dan S. New Member

    Regardless of which format, the encode should be pristine. I haven't opened mine up yet, but I'm aprehensive based on comments I've read. If it's because of a lack of space on the HD-DVD I would be surprised since they have longer movies w/o such problems. Either way, it's too bad- Blood Diamond is visually impressive, I was hoping for a spectacular HD experience.
  10. Shane

    Shane Active Member

    It's quite possible it's HD's fault as the higher bit rate encode which in my experience produces the best PQ could have fixed the issue. If so then it's a space issue and indeed HD DVD's fault.

    To that statement it could also be a bad encode. Warner has some issues(like 1080I transfers) such as Full Metal Jacket so anything is possible.

    Everyone expects the HD DVD version to be the same but they might up the bitrate because they can but the lack of space issue on BR isn't an issue because they have 50 gigs and most of that is unused. Most people don't expect a different transfer because Warner's track record supports they just recycle the transfer on the other format and away they go.
  11. John F

    John F Active Member War Zone Member

    Have any professional movie encoders backed up this statement? I agree it is a very compelling argument that seems self evident. The POTC movie's on Blu-Ray seem to support this. But how much effort is actually put into an encode. For the POTC encodes, did they just flick a switch, did they work on it for 2 hours, 4 hours, 6 hours, 1 week? For theBlood Diamond encode, did they just flick a switch, spend 2 hours, 4 hours, ...? For King Kong, for the Fifth Element, for House of Flying Daggers, for Full Metal Jacket, for The 40 Year Old Virgin? Which is more important, a good person operating the encoder, reviewing the results, and tweaking it, or just a high bit rate? Or do the studios just want to flip a switch, so they can make as much money as possible?

    How did Flags of Our Fathers compare on BD versus HD-DVD? These were different encodes, one on BD-50, one on HD-30, so the BD-50 should have been significantly better?

    Sorry for all the questions,
  12. CJ

    CJ Well-Known Member Admin War Zone Member

    Almost anyone would argue that the process and people involved are more important than the bitrate. For every BD movie to be held up as an example of why it must be HD-DVDs fault, there is an equal number of pristine HD-DVD titles. And don't forget it was BD that was releasing poorly encoded files in the beginning. Maybe the HD-DVD fanboys should be up in arms that this encode must be BDs fault. The bottom line is this is all forum speculation. The MOST likely cause is that they dropped the ball on the transfer and it could be made to look equally better on both formats if they wanted.
  13. Steve Tannehill

    Steve Tannehill New Member War Zone Member Top Poster

    All those early, crappy, composite masters that went to DVD were laserdisc's fault. Yep. No doubt. Laserdisc is to blame for the lousy non-anamorphic DVD's which graced store shelves in 1997-1998.

    - Steve
  14. Shane

    Shane Active Member

    You are bringing up the most important issue that will likely come out of this. If you want pristine HD picture quality on a small platter(30 gig) and you have a difficult encode(like Blood Diamond appears to be), then a lazy encode won't cut it. I venture a guess it would be fine on BR because they could just crank up the bit rate and go to sleep.

    In the future when studios are putting time into these transfers, how much time do you think they will want to spend encoding the films?

    this assumes that a high bitrate is what we are speculating it to be.
  15. John F

    John F Active Member War Zone Member

    I do not feel comforable venturing a guess. That is why I would like to hear how long the encodes for POTC and King Kong took.

    The reviews for POTC and Apocalypto have been very good. Do you think all future reviews will be as good? Why not, all any studio company has to do is flip the switch, and a good encode is guarenteed.

    The pessimist in me says that once the war is over, the studios will just want to flip a switch; There will be compression artifacts, that J6p will not care about. What I would hope for is that they spend as much time as is necessary to get an encode like POTC or King Kong.

    Bit rate could very well be the magic bullet that will solve all encoding problems for next gen HD. I'm just not convinced it is.

    This seems like an opportunity for BR to win some converts: all they have to say is that future releases will look as good as POTC (something of which I am not currently convinced). How about a money back guarentee, if the user is unsatisifed with a transfer, they get their money back, no questions asked?
  16. CJ

    CJ Well-Known Member Admin War Zone Member

    Sure, I'd love to see that policy. ONE of the reasons you can't return software is they're afraid of people buying it, copying it and returning it. Well, since their DRM works so well, we can't copy it, I guess I can return it now right? :thinking:
  17. Michael

    Michael Junior Geek

    Obviously just flipping a switch is not a good solution. Just look at the lazy encodes when BD was first released.

    Everything I have read from insiders has said that the AAA titles get loads of attention from the compressionist. Does a higher bitrate make it easier? I can't imagine that not being the case, but there needs to be someone with a good eye and an understanding of how to use the available bandwidth behind the wheel.
  18. Shane

    Shane Active Member

    Universal's latest batch of titles seems to indicate this is true. I guess Breach wasn't a AAA title. It has some EE issues that shouldn't be present on a HD disc.
    They do so far. They won't win converts. Those that aren't buying BR now are not buying because of price or their dire hatred of Sony. They really don't need to unless HD DVD gives the BR group a reason to change.
  19. Michael

    Michael Junior Geek

    All the BD titles released since POTC look as good as POTC? :thinking:

    For sure, EE is still being used although the higher resolution makes it harder to spot.

    EDIT: I saw the halo effect on the AVC / BD screenshots of either Flags of our Father or Letters from Iwo Jima. I need to see if I can find the exact screenshot again on AVS.
  20. Michael

    Michael Junior Geek

    Here is a link to what I am talking about. It is more subtle then overdone EE, but I can see it on the AVC encode. Check out the "line" between the soldiers and the sky/horizon behind them. That looks like EE to me.

    I think the added resolution helps hide some of it, but it is there.


Share This Page