Forums > General Discussion
Looking for new flat panel TV
Quantum:
--- Quote from: Synbios on September 03, 2007, 04:43:58 am ---I tried looking through the manual and I can't seem to find anything. Right now I have a DVI->HDMI cable going from my computer to the TV. My old setup was a S-video cable going to the trinitron.
Maybe it's because I'm running SD through HDMI that the TV is getting confused. I'm going to try and hookup a standard DVD player with S-video eventually and see what that looks like.
The LG makes the SD material look really fuzzy as you said. The trinitron was a lot sharper.
--- End quote ---
Hmm, I'd mess about with all the different cables you can and see if you reach a nice balance which doesn't require you pulling out a different cable every time you change the channel.
If LG have made the CRT well, you should be able to get standard definition looking just as good on it as your trinitron. I know someone who got a Samsung HD CRT and standard definition looks fine on it. But companies do tend to be a bit lazy about concentrating on anything but the best they can do.
TheNightWatchman:
--- Quote from: Quantum on September 01, 2007, 10:42:08 pm ---HD DVD is cheaper to make and has cheaper players, primarily uses higher quality codecs, supports Picture in Picture, has compulsory Ethernet port at the back of the HD DVD for firmware updates.
Blu-Ray has a lot of its movies in mpeg2, which is lower quality and negates its larger file size capacity. Also BD Java is being updated at the end of the year to such a specification that new Blu-Ray movies might not work on some old Blu-Ray players.
So far I'm well in to the HD DVD band camp.
I watch HD on my 19 inch computer monitor, so lol, I guess.
--- End quote ---
Blu-ray and HD DVD has almost equalled pricing now... by the end of the year they will be the same. Ok blu-ray has movies in mpeg2 but that's sure to be fixed in the future. All those things are problems NOW, if you think in terms of future... it's got to be:
Blu-ray Disc 25 GB (single layer) 50GB (dual layer)
HD DVD 15 GB (single layer) 30GB (dual layer)
Quantum:
--- Quote from: TheNightWatchman on September 03, 2007, 03:06:28 pm ---
--- Quote from: Quantum on September 01, 2007, 10:42:08 pm ---HD DVD is cheaper to make and has cheaper players, primarily uses higher quality codecs, supports Picture in Picture, has compulsory Ethernet port at the back of the HD DVD for firmware updates.
Blu-Ray has a lot of its movies in mpeg2, which is lower quality and negates its larger file size capacity. Also BD Java is being updated at the end of the year to such a specification that new Blu-Ray movies might not work on some old Blu-Ray players.
So far I'm well in to the HD DVD band camp.
I watch HD on my 19 inch computer monitor, so lol, I guess.
--- End quote ---
Blu-ray and HD DVD has almost equalled pricing now... by the end of the year they will be the same. Ok blu-ray has movies in mpeg2 but that's sure to be fixed in the future. All those things are problems NOW, if you think in terms of future... it's got to be:
Blu-ray Disc 25 GB (single layer) 50GB (dual layer)
HD DVD 15 GB (single layer) 30GB (dual layer)
--- End quote ---
Actually when it comes to really thinking in the future, Toshiba have announced they are looking to release a triple layer HD DVD, with 17 GBs per layer, totaling 51 GBs.
mpeg2 doesn't seem to be leaving Blu Ray any time soon, I still see loads of mpeg2 movies, long after the launch of Blu Ray, in fact 70% of the time I only see movies in VC-1 because they're exactly the same as the HD DVD version. I also keep up with the tech sites, prices will drop to the more reasonable sub $100 with HD DVD before Blu Ray, easily.
Changing BD Java specification isn't going to be a problem just for todays crowd. Bar Sony, I imagine studios won't be stupid enough to release a movie that can only be played on new players, even if most players can play it, people tend to prefer backwards compatibility so will probably forgo adding features. That's why mandatory Ethernet ports are a wise idea.
Anyway, season 1 of heroes on HD DVD would probably persuade me to buy HD DVD in I was in America.
Also, I don't know why you think that having 50GB is so important over having 30GB, the only thing it really matters for are T.V series and they've always been multiple disk. You can happily fit a full movie, very high bit rate, 1080p on 30GB, the only thing you might have to sacrifice is having many different audio tracks on the disk.
TheNightWatchman:
The reason I see it as a problem is the same reason people thought "who needs 8.5GB of data on a DVD?"
In the future 30GB won't be anywhere near enough. And 3 layers just defies the point doesn't it? Considering it's the same amount as a dual layer blu ray...
The future has definitely go to come down to the size. A few years ago DVD quality was great, now we want HD quality, pretty soon someone will want better quality and a HD DVD won't be able to provide it. Also from a film making perspective you don't have to compress your film as much to fit on a blu ray. This may seem silly at the moment sure, because HD DVD and Blu-ray are both so different from DVD that you can really tell the difference, but it won't be long until you play a HD DVD at maximum compression against a blu-ray disc at maximum compression and you will be able to tell the difference.
I really do not understand how this is even an issue with anyone. Blu-ray is indisputably the better medium, instead people are worrying about the price that it is right now, when next year the price of both will be probably around half what it is now. Ok you might say that HD DVD has some better features in its players... but if this 'cleverness' was but into the better medium, surely everyone would have a better output?
HD DVD almost saw its demise too, being outsold significantly by blu-ray, until they gave a multimillion dollar 'incentive' to Paramount so that they only will release on HD DVD.
I can just see (although I sincerely hope that it won't happen) a VHS vs Betamax war going the wrong way again.
Quantum:
Right, I probabily watch more HD stuff than anyone else on this site (though that said I don't have access to any HD channels so I can't just stick those on, though my understanding is a lot of content has essentially just been upscaled), so I feel the need to take apart your points one by one.
--- Quote from: TheNightWatchman on September 04, 2007, 01:11:54 am ---The reason I see it as a problem is the same reason people thought "who needs 8.5GB of data on a DVD?"
--- End quote ---
Who does need 8.5 GB of data on a DVD? I can deal with multiple disks, with my nice movie on 1 disk and crappy features on the other disk
--- Quote from: TheNightWatchman on September 04, 2007, 01:11:54 am ---In the future 30GB won't be anywhere near enough. And 3 layers just defies the point doesn't it? Considering it's the same amount as a dual layer blu ray...
--- End quote ---
Well actually 3 layers of 17GBs would be 1 GB more than 2 layers of 25GBs, so how that 'defies the point' I'm not sure. Why 30GBs won't be anywhere near enough? Not too sure about that either.
--- Quote from: TheNightWatchman on September 04, 2007, 01:11:54 am ---The future has definitely go to come down to the size. A few years ago DVD quality was great, now we want HD quality, pretty soon someone will want better quality and a HD DVD won't be able to provide it. Also from a film making perspective you don't have to compress your film as much to fit on a blu ray. This may seem silly at the moment sure, because HD DVD and Blu-ray are both so different from DVD that you can really tell the difference, but it won't be long until you play a HD DVD at maximum compression against a blu-ray disc at maximum compression and you will be able to tell the difference.
--- End quote ---
The future coming down to simple specs would mean the DS wouldn't have over double the world wide sales of the PSP, it would mean the Wii wasn't just about to catch up to the total world wide sales of the 360. Blu-Ray doesn't support better quality than 1080p, it's written in to the way Blu-Ray players work, so it doesn't work like that. If a better quality did come out that was widely supported, HD DVD is the only format out there where you can guarantee the players can update themselves for it. The highest quality codec takes the least amount of space for its quality, that is h.264.
I can tell the difference between an mpeg2 encoded Blu-Ray movie and a VC-1 encoded HD DVD. I took my little brother in to town a few months back, the first time I'd seen an HD Movie in the 'wild' on a real 1080p T.V, I gave it 1 look and said "I bet that's Blu Ray" and I chuckled when I looked down and saw a Samsung Blu Ray player.
The maths doesn't add up, there would be no reason to see a "maximum compression" Blu Ray or HD DVD, allowing for 1080p resolution, 24 bit colour depth, 24 fps, 5 GBs worth of audio, and 3 hours of move, you can have INSANE bit rates for h.264. So much so, it would have to be pretty poorly encoded for you to notice any difference between making the movie 25 GBs or 22 GBs.
--- Quote from: TheNightWatchman on September 04, 2007, 01:11:54 am ---I really do not understand how this is even an issue with anyone. Blu-ray is indisputably the better medium, instead people are worrying about the price that it is right now, when next year the price of both will be probably around half what it is now. Ok you might say that HD DVD has some better features in its players... but if this 'cleverness' was but into the better medium, surely everyone would have a better output?
--- End quote ---
It's not though, there are lots of technical superiorities of HD DVD, companies like Microsoft and Intel didn't choose to back it for company political reasons, they have stated if Blu-Ray wins they'll support that, but from a technical standpoint HD DVDs pros outweighs its cons. I don't even know what that last sentence means.
--- Quote from: TheNightWatchman on September 04, 2007, 01:11:54 am ---HD DVD almost saw its demise too, being outsold significantly by blu-ray, until they gave a multimillion dollar 'incentive' to Paramount so that they only will release on HD DVD.
I can just see (although I sincerely hope that it won't happen) a VHS vs Betamax war going the wrong way again.
--- End quote ---
HD DVD didn't almost see its demise at all. It was being outsold 2 to 1 in America alone for the last few moths (though the ratio has been decreasing month on month) and has only been doing so significantly better in America since the PS3. Now that's a little worrying for the Blu Ray camp in some respects, at this point including the PS3 the number of Blu Ray players outnumbers HD DVD players well over 7 to 1? Without any figures I don't want to assume to high a number but it could probably easily be 12+ to 1. Yet total Blu Ray sales are only 2 to 1 that of HD DVD in America. In other regions the gap is a hell of a lot thinner.
Before the PS3 the Blu Ray camp only had about a 1-3% sales advantage, and given most PS3 owners seem to only buy 1 Blu-Ray and decide they're not too impressed, the figure of Blu-Ray sales could drop a hell of a lot once almost all new PS3 owners already have seen a Blu-Ray on a mates PS3.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version