"Blu-ray Disc" vs. "HD DVD": Neither Is Winning

[Elie]

Elie,

1080p is not ready for primetime; it's a marketing ploy at this point in history.

The United States broadcast standard is ATSC.

Take a close look at the numbers in this table:

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ISSUES/what_is_ATSC.html

It is critical to note that there is no 1080p @ 60 frames per second for the United States broadcasting system.

The United States broadcast system currently supports 1080p at a mere 30 and 24 frames per second.

So, Elie, I would submit that you also suffer from "pixel-envy."

Wake up; you're chasing a ghost.



Jerry Jones
http://www.jonesgroup.net

Jerry, I am not talking about broadcast, I don't care about it what so ever.

The point I am trying to make is that Blu-Ray now the winner will not go the way of disco as you keep pointing out. Broadcast will have two means to provide content to home viewers...
1) Digital TV, via either Satelite or cable. both supporting up to 720p
2) IP based solutions example IP-TV, again support up to 720P
So either of these delivery methods is ok for TV, they may eventually go 1080i if compression get's better over the years, but people will live with 720p for now and it's fine.

Now... If I want to watch an HD movie, there is no way in hell I am going to either download a movie at 720p from a provider or wait for my TV company to view it at 720p any time soon, if I have the hardware (Blu-ray + 1080P LCD set + kick ass audio surround system) I am going to buy or rent a blu-ray movie and watch it at the best res AND audio quality I can possibly get, you got it...1080p.

1080P is not as you claim, a marketing hype, it's real I have seen it, I have even seen 4Kx2K video from a 4K camera played back on a $20,000 LCD at NAB, and let me tell you that was amazing.
I recommend that everyone who loves movies at the best quality to go and buy 1080P TV's and a Blu Ray player because that's the only way asside from HD-DVD players to get full 1080p.

Blu-ray media will be for people wanting to have a good archive of movies, who like to collect special editions etc. while Apple TV is a good choice for people who want to watch the daily news or the odd movie on TMN, however when it comes time to watch a movie with family and friends, the prefered choice will be Blu-Ray.

Regards,
Elie

[Jerry Jones]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

The movie industry has embraced 1080p24 (24 frames per second; no 60 frames per second) as a mastering format in both native 24p form and in 24PsF form. ... A new high-definition progressive scan format is not available for picture creation, but is currently being developed to operate at 1080p at 50 or 60 frames per second.[2][6] This format will require a whole new range of studio equipment including cameras, storage, edit and contribution links as it has doubled the data rate of current 50 or 60 fields interlaced 1920 × 1080 from 1.485 Gbit/s to nominally 3 Gbit/s. It is unable to be broadcast in a compressed transmission to legacy MPEG-2 based HD receivers. This format will improve final pictures because of the benefits of "oversampling" and removal of interlacing artifacts.

Also this...

http://hometheater.about.com/od/televisionbasics/qt/1080ppitfall.htm

Most TVs with 1080p capability execute this function by upscaling 480p, 720p, and 1080i input sources to 1080p for display on the screen. In essence, the 1080p function on your TV may be done with internal scaling or processing only and not be able to accept 1080p external source.

Also this...

http://www.cedmagazine.com/here-comes-1080p-maybe.aspx

But for now, there is no 1080p programming. There is 1080i and 720p programming—all the HD broadcasts are one or the other, depending on the broadcaster. So the 1080p display upconverts the 1080i or 720p picture by using some kind of software interpolation or line doubling. What's the likelihood of broadcasters ever delivering 1080p pictures? Pretty slim. It's hard enough to fit a 1080i picture into a 6 MHz wide broadcast channel, which can carry a payload of up to 19 Mbps. With a picture content of double 1080i, a 1080p signal just won't fit. Or at least, it won't fit using MPEG-2 picture coding. It might fit using AVC or VC-1 advanced picture coding, but broadcasters don't have any plans to do that.

So, Elie, you and Mark think that 1080p @ 60 frames per second isn't important; you're willing to settle for 1080 acquired at 24 frames per second.

That seems to be a "crippled 1080p" format.

CHALLENGE

Provide one link -- just one -- to any Blu-ray title containing video that was truly acquired using 1920 x 1080 pixels AT A FULL 60 PROGRESSIVE FRAMES PER SECOND.

You can't because that Blu-ray title does not exist.

You're both suffering from pixel-envy.

And you've bought into the most common 1080p myth.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

1080p -- currently -- is a marketing ploy.

Are you content with 1080p acquired at a mere 24 frames per second?

Yes or no?

Or are you attempting to convince me that 1080p is acquired at a full 60 frames per second? If so, prove it. Post a link to where that's being done in Hollywood.

It's that simple, Elie.

C'mon. As the saying goes... "Put up or shut up."

Prove your point.

I will say it again:

There is virtually no 60 frames per second 1080p acquisition.

1080p acquisition is limited to 24 frames per second or 30 frames per second.

What you seem to be thinking as higher resolution is actually a compromise when it comes to frame rate.

I do not believe that sacrificing the frame rate is a good thing.

That's why 720p at a FULL 60 FRAMES PER SECOND is -- in reality -- the superior format.

Remember, we're talking about *moving* pictures and not still pictures.

Consequently, 1920 x 1080 pixels at a crippled frame rate is not going to capture action as well as 1280 x 720 pixels at a full 60 frames per second.

I emphasize that we're talking about *moving* pictures.

Frame rate *matters.*



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Tjalfe]

funny, whenever cornered, you completely change your argument

[Apulo]

Yes, and he conveniently forgets facts such as the 24p framerate of movies. All movies are shot at 24p, everything at 60Hz has been transcoded by 3:2 resulting in judder.

In other words, gimme 24p anytime

[Jerry Jones]

The crippled frame rate of movies -- 24 frames per second -- originates from the fact movies have been shot on analog media... film.

Other than that peculiar historical fact, there's really no basis for using a crippled 24 frame-per-second rate for *video.*

True 1080p video should be 60 frames-per-second.... just as true 720p should be 60 frames-per-second.

So take your pick.

A 1080p resolution movie with a crippled frame rate?

Or a 720p resolution movie with a full 60 frames per second.

Those are the two choices facing buyers today.

Those high-priced 1080p high definition TVs look pretty good; we've all seen them in stores.

But if you know what true 1080p really involves, then you also know that what you are seeing in the stores is not true 1080p.

Of course, those suffering from pixel-envy don't care; they just like that 1080p marketing phrase. It makes them feel good.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

By the way, HDTVs in the U.S. feature 60Hz refresh rates.

If we had true, 60 frames-per-second 1080p, then we would have...

1. Cameras that acquire 1080p at 60 frames-per-second;
2. Recording devices that record 1080p at 60 frames-per-second;
3. Editing systems that edit/output 1080p at 60 frames-per-second;
4. HDTV sets that display at 60Hz refresh rates.

What happens now is that Hollywood...

1. Acquires 1080p at 24 frames-per-second;
2. Much of the material -- due to technical reasons -- winds up being distributed as 1080i at 60 fields (not frames) per second;
3. 1080p TVs then accept the dumbed down 1080 signal and upscale/process the input to display an artificial 1080p.

That is how it is done. And the consumer buys it.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

I predict we're going to see a never-ending parade of consumer video devices that will trumpet the 1080p marketing ploy.

JVC, for example.

They're getting ready to sell a new camcorder model... the new Everio GZ-HD6.

JVC is touting this camcorder as a 1080/60p camcorder.

But even that is fake.

http://gizmodo.com/349998/everio-gz+hd6-is-first-consumer-hdd-camera-to-output-1080p-using-chip-tricks-says-jvc

Despite recording in MPEG-2 1080i, the camera uses a conversion engine to fire out a 1080/60p signal through HDMI to your HDTV. This is, according to JVC, a world first.

So that's just conversion being done artificially in the camera.

Don't hold your breath.

Go to the Panasonic Web site and look at Panasonic's top-of-the-line professional cameras:

http://www.panasonic.com/business/provideo/cat_camcorders.asp

Try to find one professional-level, top-of-the-line Panasonic camera that shoots and records 1080p at 60 frames-per-second.

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelList?storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&catGroupId=14569

The top-of-the-line, $48,000 Panasonic AJ-HPX3000's supported formats:

24p, 25p, 30p, 50i, 60i formats

Note the absence of a true 1080/60p format.

Some individuals in this thread have criticized my enthusiasm for high definition video downloads as "unrealistic" and that it won't happen for a "long time" -- yet -- they simultaneously trumpet 1080p at a time in history when there is no true 1080/60p production > distribution > display!

Strikes me as a bit hypocritical.

High definition downloads are happening now; 1080/60p isn't.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Brian Ellis]

And if you had 1080p at 60 fps, the bandwidth required, even compressed, that it would take you two weeks to download a Hollywood epic. Easier to buy a BR (or HD-DVD) disc. You can't have it all ways, can you? Actually, with HDTVs, the framerate is not even material: it DID matter with CRT TVs, but the refresh rate of LCDs is always the same, about 75 fps.

You talk yourself into a corner each time, forcing you to weasel out of it.

[Jerry Jones]

Brian,

Again... show me one production camera model that acquires -- acquires -- 1080p at 60 frames-per-second *and* records 1080p at 60 frames-per-second.

(You can't, Brian, because it doesn't exist.)

Blu-ray Disc cannot distribute a video format that does not exist.

Blu-ray Discs, currently, feature 1080p material acquired at a crippled 24 frames-per-second.

So... do you want crippled 1080/24p?

Or do you want 720p acquired at a full 60 frames-per-second?

Brian, double-check your Hz refresh rate figure for HDTV displays in the United States.

You need to do that.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

Easier to buy a BR (or HD-DVD) disc.

[Jerry Jones]

REFRESH RATES

http://hometheater.about.com/od/televisionbasics/qt/framevsrefresh.htm

The most common refresh rate for today's Televisions are 60hz for NTSC-based systems and 50hz for PAL-based systems. However, with the introduction of some Blu-ray Disc and HD-DVD players that can actually output a 24 frame per second video signal, instead of the traditional 30 frame per second video signal, new refresh rates are being implemented by some television display makers to accommodate these signals in the correct mathematical ratio.

If you have a TV with a 120hz refresh rate that is 1080p/24 compatible (1920 pixels across the screen vs 1080 pixels down the screen, with a 24 frame per second rate). The TV ends up displaying 24 separate frames every second, but repeats each frame according to the refresh rate of the TV. In the case of 120hz each frame would be displayed 5 times within each 24th of a second.

In other words, even with higher refresh rates, there are still only 24 separate frames displayed every second, but they may need to be displayed multiple times, depending on the refresh rate.

To display 24 frames per second on a TV with a 120hz refresh rate, each frame is repeated 5 times every 24th of a second.

To display 24 frames per second on a TV with a 72hz refresh rate, each frame is repeated 3 times every 24th of a second.

To display 30 frames per second on a TV with a 60 hz refresh rate, each frame is repeated 2 times every 30th of a second.

To display 25 frames per second on a TV with a 50 hz refresh rate (PAL Countries), each frame is repeated 2 times every 25th of a second.

To display 25 frames per second on a TV with a 100 hz refresh rate (PAL Countries), each frame is repeated 4 times every 25th of a second.

NOTE: The above explanation is with pure frame rates - if the television is also required to do a 24 frame per second to 30 frame per second or vice versa frame rate conversion, then you also have to deal with 3:2 or 2:3 Pulldown as well, which adds more math to the equation. The 3:2 pulldown function can also be performed by a DVD player, or other source device, before the signal reaches the television.

How TVs Handle 1080p/24

If a TV is 1080p/60 or 1080p/30 - only compatible, it would not accept the 1080p/24 input. Currently, only Blu-ray Discs and HD-DVD discs are the main sources of 1080p/24 material. However, most Blu-ray Disc and HD-DVD players convert the outgoing signal to either 1080p/60 or 1080i/30 so that the information can be processed by a TV properly for screen display if it is not compatible with 1080p/24.

Since nobody can provide me with a link to an "HD DVD" or "Blu-ray Disc" title that features material that was acquired, recorded, edited and distributed in a true 1080/60p format, then I think that makes it pretty safe to assume that both "HD DVD" and "Blu-ray Disc" are as dead as DISC-o.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Panasonic announces brand new $6000 AG-HMC150.

http://gizmodo.com/357336/panasonic-ag+hmc150-shoots-on-sdhc

No 1080/60p.

True 1080p acquisition just isn't going to happen anytime soon, which -- of course -- adds credence to the idea that "HD DVD" and "Blu-ray Disc" are as dead as DISC-o.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[paulw]

R.I.P. HD DVD: Toshiba reportedly ends the war

True?? I hope not.

http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9873848-1.html?tag=nefd.top

[Jerry Jones]

It's true.

However, it's also true for "Blu-ray Disc."

They're both going down because consumers know deep down inside that "HD DVD" and "Blu-ray Disc" are as dead as DISC-o.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Jerry Jones]

Apple TV supports 1280 x 720 @ 24 frames per second (H.264).

Apple TV also supports 960 x 540 @ 30 frames per second (H.264).

I just did another test using AVCHD 1440 x 1080 clips recorded by a high definition Sony HDR-UX1:

http://news.sel.sony.com/en/image_library/images/small/consumer/digital_imaging/camcorders/high_definition/detail?archive=0&asset_id=23553

I used the Apple TV output templates of the "MPEG Streamclip" program:

http://www.squared5.com/

The 24 frames-per-second video at 1280 x 720 exhibited nice sharpness, but motion wasn't quite right... a bit jerky... I presume due to the low frame rate.

I can see why Apple included the 960 x 540 @ 30 frames per second option.

The 960 x 540 option makes motion look much better although it's not quite as sharp.

Still, it's somewhat better than DVD resolution and looks pretty good!

AVCHD camcorder owners will love the Apple TV.

It makes the display of camcorder clips a snap.

I've been able to wirelessly stream both the 1280 x 720 and 960 x 540 H.264 -- without a glitch -- using my 802.11g wireless network... so far.

Will be doing more clip conversions as my tests continue.



Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net