Now Jack Ryan suffers from HD-DVD's small size...

[chicagofilms]

'Jack Ryan' Special Edition HD DVD Not So Special? | High-Def Digest

They couldn't fit any of the advertised extras on the new Jack Ryan collection? Or maybe it's just a huge blunder. Either way, not a good way to launch such an excellent series.

 

[chicagofilms]

Just curious, if anyone has these, can they tell how much space is being used on the discs? If they're close to 30GB, they couldn't do it due to space limitations, if it's much less, than it's probably a production issue.

 

[meStevo]

It's a huge blunder till blame is placed on size limitation... yay more Blu-FUD.

Also to blame for this mixup:

Earth is round
Sun is warm
War in Iraq

 

[navychop]

'till blame is placed on size limitation? You mean like with Transformers?

 

[meStevo]

'till blame is placed on size limitation? You mean like with Transformers?

If Transformers said on the back of the box that it was in 8 languages of uncompressed audio with 15 commentaries, this would be the same thing.

(from the article) The packaging of the this set lists features, while the discs are starting with no features, no alternate audio, despite the special edition featureset on the back.

This is a production problem until the manufacturer blames something else... and even if they do, its STILL a production problem due to the misleading packaging.

Construing it as something else at this point is FUD, and why the forum has been more at each other's throats lately.

Maybe they omitted the features because the war is over and HDDVD has won and no gimmicks are needed to get people to buy good movies. I should make a new thread with that as my title!

 

[chicagofilms]

Maybe they omitted the features because the war is over and HDDVD has won and no gimmicks are needed to get people to buy good movies.

Lol!

So then they won't be needing the overhyped HD-I.

But like I said, it's one or the other. It will be interesting to see how much space is being used on these discs, that should tell us more.

From the forum posts I've read so far, the discs menus are not authored for or point to any extras. So it looks like they were authored with no intention of extras on these discs.

FUD? It's a total FUBAR of a release no mater how you look at it.
Fear = that more compromised discs are to come
Uncertainty = in the formats claims of superiority
Doubt = things will improve with 40% less space than BD

 

[vurbano]

'till blame is placed on size limitation? You mean like with Transformers?

Give it up. The professional reviews are 5/5 for AQ on transformers.

 

[chicagofilms]

Just curious, I know you can watch an HD-DVD on a PC with an Xbox drive. Does it display like a regular disc? Will it show up in windows with size info?

 

[navychop]

January 2008 will be very interesting.

Results for '07, especially 4Q. New hardware. New movie release schedules. And maybe an announcement or two.

 

[teamerickson]

'Jack Ryan' Special Edition HD DVD Not So Special? | High-Def Digest

They couldn't fit any of the advertised extras on the new Jack Ryan collection? Or maybe it's just a huge blunder. Either way, not a good way to launch such an excellent series.

So how do you get things left out because of disc limitations out of that article? Oh, I see, you're making things up just like the blue group does. You'll probably change your story later also. Just like the blue group does.

 

[navychop]

Give it up. The professional reviews are 5/5 for AQ on transformers.

Yeah. When HD-DVD (or should I play your game and start calling it HD-DUD?) makes a major release without HD audio, suddenly HD audio doesn't matter. Good ole DD 5.1 is good enough. What's next, HD video doesn't matter, either?

Are Dolby and DTS fools for introducing higher definition audio formats when nobody cares or can tell the difference? I don't think so. I suspect they have invested their millions based on good business plans.

HD-DVD has always been about "good enough" and it's limitations are beginning to show. Early adopters care about quality, not cheap. And maybe that's why Blu-ray outsells HD DVD around 2 to 1. And does HD DVD have even that much market share anywhere else in the world?

 

[teamerickson]

Maybe they should stop adding all those extras nobody (Ok, a few) wants? Aren't you one Navy that said you don't care about most extras? Yes, I would rather have TrueHD, but I'd rather the movie itself (i.e. Transformers). Who knows, maybe Transformers will be the movie that get's everything going kind of like how Topgun got everyone crazy for surround sound. Speaking of Transformers, I've got to go watch it.

 

[JoeSp]

Man, these HD-DVD discs are SO INEXPENSIVE to make and to master a HD-DVD movie that Paramount FORGOT the EXTRAS?? Or is it that the HD-DVD format is so superior that the HD-DVD players CAN'T FIND the extras?

Man!! The more Paramount and Dreamworks keep delivering to HD-DVD the more that $150 Million looks like it came from SONY!!!! :haha:river:haha:river:haha:river

Please STOP IT -- I'm about to fall out of my chair!!

 

[teamerickson]

Man, these HD-DVD discs are SO INEXPENSIVE to make and to master a HD-DVD movie that Paramount FORGOT the EXTRAS?? Or is it that the HD-DVD format is so superior that the HD-DVD players CAN'T FIND the extras?

Man!! The more Paramount and Dreamworks keep delivering to HD-DVD the more that $150 Million looks like it came from SONY!!!! :haha:river:haha:river:haha:river

Please STOP IT -- I'm about to fall out of my chair!!

What was that? I couldn't hear you over your PS3!

 

[diogen]

...If they're close to 30GB, they couldn't do it due to space limitations, if it's much less, than it's probably a production issue.

HD DVD doesn't have a storage limitation issue!
Or more accurately: the biggest problem HD DVD has is bandwidth limitation, storage limitation is peanuts in comparison to that.

When encoding a movie, a decision is made how many soundtracks it will include, talking heads (PiP), subtitles, etc. That cuts into the the total bandwidth available on HD DVD disc (~36Mbps). Because all this has to be loaded at once during playback (it sucks, but it's true, for both formats). That leaves a certain amount of bandwidth to the video stream itself (and that is peak bandwidth!).
And then the encoding starts within those constraints. If you are left with 15Mbps for video (peak!) it will be ~7GB/h, i.e. 2h movie will take under 15GB. If it wouldn't be for audio, you can get away with a single layer HD DVD!

All this math was done before HD DVD was introduced as a format. The amount of thought put into it was an order of magnitude above what BD did (MPEG-2 & PCM). WMV HD (predecessor of VC-1) was tested and proven to be up to the task.

From time to time you hit the case where every last bit can be put to good use: 3h+ King Kong would be such an example.

VC-1 developers work on dynamic allocation of bandwidth (sharing between video and audio streams) but no updates were mentioned in the last few months. Network connection will be used extensively (if HD survives) to download any number of additional soundtracks/subtitles/PiP and store them in persistent memory (bandwidth limitation doesn't apply to it!).

Bottom line: with very very few exceptions VC-1 (dominating codec for HD DVD) has no problem to fit the movie into allocated space and being as transparent to master as it gets. It is when you want to accomodate those "Give me lossless or death! In 10 languages!" clinical patients you run into problems.

And now watch as the Blu herd chokes on the first sentence in this post and comes back with smart-ass comments like "Ohhh... A real nerve has been hit!".

Diogen.

 

[JoeSp]

OHHH. Now it is a BANDWITH limitation?? The Superior Format has Bandwith limitations! It is NOT the 30GB of storage but the LOW peak bandwith that's the problem???

Lets see HD-DVD tops out at 36Mbps while BluRay tops out at 48 Mbps with a 40GB peak for Video! Of course lets compare BD's use of MPEG-2 and a Uncompressed PCM track and not the current use of AVC-Mpeg4 and a Uncompressed PCM track (which most of the BD movies are done in now) to prove our point? And what point might that be?

That HD-DVD is inferior to BluRay!!:shocked:shocked

Why Thank-You Diogen:

You have now explained the missing lossless audio codec from Transformers and the missing Extras from the Jack Ryan Collection!! Are you sure you are not getting paid from Sony?

 

[diogen]

OHHH. Now it is a BANDWITH limitation??

It always was. It's just the Blu herd's attention deficit disorder prevented them from learning it. And they will forget it by tomorrow...

You have now explained the missing lossless audio codec from Transformers and the missing Extras from the Jack Ryan Collection!!

How about this:
They wanted to give you a chance to come back from your hiatus screaming
so nobody reminds you how many layers of egg on your face you have...
Makes you feel better?

Diogen.

 

[chicagofilms]

So how do you get things left out because of disc limitations out of that article? Oh, I see, you're making things up just like the blue group does. You'll probably change your story later also. Just like the blue group does.

Huh? I was asking the question. Hence the "?" at the end.

Either it was a limitation issue or a production blunder. The extras are simply not there, I didn't make it up THEY ARE NOT THERE!

And no, I won't change my story. Unless HD is so great they can make the extras magically appear on the discs.

 

[teamerickson]

Huh? I was asking the question. Hence the "?" at the end.

Either it was a limitation issue or a production blunder. The extras are simply not there, I didn't make it up THEY ARE NOT THERE!

And no, I won't change my story. Unless HD is so great they can make the extras magically appear on the discs.

Here's your title.

" Now Jack Ryan suffers from HD-DVD's small size... "

I don't see a question mark, it's a statement to cause an uproar. The title is misleading.

So you're guessing it's either a disc limitation issue or they forgot to include the extras. Do you have any proof that it could be a limitation issue or is it just a blue hunch? I really doubt they would list included extras and just throw in the towel because the extras wouldn't fit. No doubt it's a blunder, but not the blunder you may be hoping for.

 

[CochiseGuy]

Huh? I was asking the question. Hence the "?" at the end.

How convenient! You didn't seem to be asking a question in the thread title -
"Now Jack Ryan suffers from HD-DVD's small size..."

That's just pure FUD, straight and simple. Frankly, I'm surprised at you, but this week of The Transformers HD DVD seems to be bringing out the worst of BD shills all over the 'net. :

I don't know what the cause of the missing extra features is anymore than you do. But, when I see HighDefDigest giving 5 Star PQ, 4.5 Star Audio Quality to the 121 minute film "Hot Fuzz" containing over 18 hours of special features on the same 30GB HD DVD disc containing the film, I feel very safe in eliminating space limitations as the cause.

Besides, I thought extras didn't matter to BD fans? Fox seems perfectly happy churning out films like Robocop at only 102 Minutes long without a single extra, nada, zip - and asking $39.95 a pop for it! With only 3 star PQ, and that highly touted lossless PCM audio getting only 3 1/2 stars - compared to 5 star audio for that "crappy" DD+ audio on Transformers.