Title: 300 Blu Ray Vs. Hd Dvd

[TheForce]

System-
Toshiba A30 with 1.3v Firmware (Latest)
Samsung BD1400 with 1.2 v Firmware (Latest)
1080p60 HDMI BenQ W10000 on Matte white 92" wide screen
I own the HD DVD version, it came with the player. I rented the BluRay version from Blockbuster.
Sound DD5.1 Fiber Optic cable fed from player to receiver on both.


BlueRay version:

PQ or image quality: visual smooth quality with identical color as HD DVD. Picture is noticeable softer than HD DVD in side-by-side scene for scene throughout.

Features: Typical featurettes offering as seen on the SD disk.


HD DVD version:

PQ of HD DVD version offers more detail in particular a more obvious film grain and more defined skin pores, abrasions and flaws. Hair detail in darker parts seems to be better than BluRay version.

Features: Offers a game, blue screen PIP with interactive scenes, additional information detail on the production. Offers web access features.


Audio- identical sound quality to both. comparing DD5.1 and DD truHD available on both. PCM 5.1 extra on BluRay


Flaws or defects- With updated firmware I played both with no issues and all navigation was equally perfect on both

Time to load from tray in to first image-

HD DVD- 28 seconds

BluRay- 30 seconds



IMO- I give this title to HD DVD as you get more bang for the buck both in image quality and additional features and a more sophisticated application of the additional features such as the PIP.
Note- I was really surprised about the image quality. I would have expected it to be identical but the difference was obvious. And, after the award given to BluRay for best image quality, maybe the judges preferred a softer picture lacking resolution of detail in the BluRay version. While this may be desirable to some, I do believe it represents a lower resolution.
Also, the comments here are to be extrapolated to this title only for comparing the two formats. I hope others will not use this title evaluation to mean it is typical of all titles on both formats.

 

[nonrev]

I did notice alot of grain while viewing 300 on my A3. I guess the grain kept me mentally from seeing it as crystal clear. For comparison HP was very clear and really popped of the screen.

 

[vurbano]

300 has more grain than anything Ive ever seen IMO. To the point where its cartoonish at times.

 

[John Kotches]

Don:

How are you comparing TrueHD tracks when the players are only hooked up via Optical according to your post.

 

[John Kotches]

300 has more grain than anything Ive ever seen IMO. To the point where its cartoonish at times.

Since 300 is based on a graphic novel it should like a tad cartoonish at times...

Many of the shots that seem almost frozen in time are nearly identical to images from the graphic novel.

Cheers,

 

[diogen]

300 is Warner.
Warner does one encode for both formats.
Whatever differences in video can be seen are due to processing done in the player and/or TV or are imaginable.

Diogen.

 

[TheForce]

John- right- I said they were all equal in quality. as opposed to no audio on a particular setting. If a new codec were present, wouldn't my 5700 ignore it and not have any sound output?

I should have added- PCM 5.1 results in a single front mono channel. Again all audio in my present system is fiber fed from the players. I'm using a Denon 5700 which predates all these new codecs. I will also say that while not present on these Title 300 DVD's, some HD DVDs have DTS MA audio. When I select that in the disk menu I get DTS light on my Denon. With the expanded bandwidth of these new DVD's, the DD 5.1 and the DTS are equally good. On SD DVD's the audio quality was suffering and not up to the quality I have on earlier DVD's in DTS. DTS tech support explained that today, their bandwidth has been reduced and limits the dynamic range on most SD DVD's. One of the things I hope to study at CES is the cost benefit ratio of a new Receiver with up to date codecs and HDMI inputs. When you get to a certain level of hardware, making upgrades is very expensive.
I had considered hooking up the 5.1 analog outputs from one of the players to see what I get. Haven't had the time to play with that idea yet.

Forum observation- I have yet to read a user with state of the art equipment is saying True HD 5.1 is far superior to DD5.1 as it is on these DVD's. What I keep reading is users fascinated with the idea that a True HD light or DTS MA light comes on. I need more than that to make the move to a new receiver, such as that big ass Denon I drool over every CES visit to their booth. It a few grand I'd prefer to save for the D-BOX

 

[TheForce]

300 is Warner.
Warner does one encode for both formats.
Whatever differences in video can be seen are due to processing done in the player and/or TV or are imaginable.

Diogen.

Just a qualifier- How do you know this for fact? Are you working in that department of Warner that does this or do you just assume it is as you say?
I'm not questioning what you say but would just like some credibility to your claim. Now if I were doing the job, I would do it as you stated but I can't be certain Warner did. All I can say is that the visual is obviously more detailed with the HD DVD than the BluRay.

I want to review my settings in the player to see if there are any "detail" enhancements set but I don't recall any. If I find something, I post a correction here later.

I see Harry Potter is also out in BluRay so I may do a test on that title as well. HP does not have near the film grain on the HD DVD that 300 did.

 

[diogen]

Just a qualifier- How do you know this for fact? Are you working in that department of Warner that does this or do you just assume it is as you say?

No, I don't.
And I don't think Warner ever made an official statement confirming this.
But I'd have a really hard time to imagine them doing two encodes using the same codec at approximately the same bitrate for HD/BD...

I think it would be interesting to hear your comparison of Harry Potter Chamber of Secrets on both, HD and BD.

And then have a look at this:
AVS Forum - View Single Post - Has Warner started using format-specific encodes?

Blu-Ray m2ts file size (only movie, without extras) = 34632 MB
HD DVD  evo  file size (only movie, without extras) = 21422 MB

Here's what the [U][B]Blu-Ray[/B][/U] m2ts file contains:

4 AC3 tracks with 448kbps each   = 4 *   515 MB =  2060 MB
9 AC3 tracks with 640kbps each   = 9 *   736 MB =  6624 MB
1 16-bit PCM track               = 1 *  5304 MB =  5304 MB[B]
1 VC-1 video track               = 1 * 17731 MB = [U]17731 MB[/U][/B]
  summed up                                       31719 MB

Here's what the [U][B]HD DVD[/B][/U] evo files contain:

3 E-AC3 tracks with 448kbps each = 3 *   515 MB =  1545 MB
1 16-bit TrueHD track            = 1 *  1704 MB =  1704 MB[B]
1 VC-1 video track               = 1 * 17731 MB = [U]17731 MB[/U][/B]
  summed up                                       20980 MB

The video parts are identical up to 1MB!
What do you think are the chances them using different encodes?

Diogen.

 

[ONUOsFan]

But I'd have a really hard time to imagine them doing two encodes using the same codec at approximately the same bitrate for HD/BD...

:up

Seems like they'd be moving a lot faster away from being neutral if they had to do two versions of everything.

 

[vurbano]

Since 300 is based on a graphic novel it should like a tad cartoonish at times...

Many of the shots that seem almost frozen in time are nearly identical to images from the graphic novel.

Cheers,

Yes I think thats why they made the movie look like that. I think the narration is part of it too. For those with a Sammy that really want to see something unusual, just turn on Dynamic mode with DNie. LMAO the entire screen is nothing bot dots in some scenes.

 

[BlackHitachi]

Yes I think thats why they made the movie look like that. I think the narration is part of it too. For those with a Sammy that really want to see something unusual, just turn on Dynamic mode with DNie. LMAO the entire screen is nothing bot dots in some scenes.

I can vouch on the Sammy! DNie SUCKS!

 

[teamerickson]

Yes I think thats why they made the movie look like that. I think the narration is part of it too. For those with a Sammy that really want to see something unusual, just turn on Dynamic mode with DNie. LMAO the entire screen is nothing bot dots in some scenes.

Sammy TV, or Blu-ray player?

 

[ONUOsFan]

I can vouch on the Sammy! DNie SUCKS!

It's actually ok if you're watching a native SD program, but for HD, you're exactly right - it does suck.

Sammy TV, or Blu-ray player?

TV

 

[diogen]

Seems like they'd be moving a lot faster away from being neutral if they had to do two versions of everything.

Who knows...
They might have never become neutral to begin with...

Diogen.

 

[TheForce]

diogen-

Thanks for the docs on that. It would indeed seem that the video file is identical in raw form and as it is indexed on the disks. Therefore your theory that only the players output is affecting the image quality difference, at least on the tested title from your source confirm. I don't have two computer drives to compare file size. My only information was observation of the image on scree.

Re HP latest release. I just saw the HD DVD version this week and it was much softer than the 300 image. The HP on BluRay (rental)has been checked out. If they are close, the only way to see the difference is with both where I can switch back and forth.


Keep in mind that my main reason to look at 300 was due to an award given for best image quality using that title. I have no intention in doing a scientific study of all titles on both formats using double blind methods. They are what they are and I watch and enjoy the formats for the content and story, knowing I have the best possible home theater format to see these works. I'm not interested in any agenda of one format vs. the other. There are enough pros and cons on both for people to make up their own case.

For most people here, offering an opinion that favors BluRay will piss off the HD DVD crowd and one that favors HD DVD will piss off the BluRay crowd. I'm in a different camp. I just want to enjoy the widest variety of titles in HDTV. That requires both formats and I will use them as necessary. Therefore I will piss off both camps at different times. Frankly I don't care. I'm more interested in finding the truth than giving free fanboy support for different companies or insulting members of the forum because they have a different opinion than my own. I'll just resort to insults when someone asks for it by acting immature and childish. If the insults are really childish, I won't even respond.

In another thread, I announced another discovery supporting my BluRay player. It handles SD DVD's better than the Toshiba A30. Out of habit I was using the Toshiba for my SD DVD playback but as of last evening's discovery, I am switching to the Samsung player.

 

[BlackHitachi]

diogen-

Thanks for the docs on that. It would indeed seem that the video file is identical in raw form and as it is indexed on the disks. Therefore your theory that only the players output is affecting the image quality difference, at least on the tested title from your source confirm. I don't have two computer drives to compare file size. My only information was observation of the image on scree.

Re HP latest release. I just saw the HD DVD version this week and it was much softer than the 300 image. The HP on BluRay (rental)has been checked out. If they are close, the only way to see the difference is with both where I can switch back and forth.


Keep in mind that my main reason to look at 300 was due to an award given for best image quality using that title. I have no intention in doing a scientific study of all titles on both formats using double blind methods. They are what they are and I watch and enjoy the formats for the content and story, knowing I have the best possible home theater format to see these works. I'm not interested in any agenda of one format vs. the other. There are enough pros and cons on both for people to make up their own case.

For most people here, offering an opinion that favors BluRay will piss off the HD DVD crowd and one that favors HD DVD will piss off the BluRay crowd. I'm in a different camp. I just want to enjoy the widest variety of titles in HDTV. That requires both formats and I will use them as necessary. Therefore I will piss off both camps at different times. Frankly I don't care. I'm more interested in finding the truth than giving free fanboy support for different companies or insulting members of the forum because they have a different opinion than my own. I'll just resort to insults when someone asks for it by acting immature and childish. If the insults are really childish, I won't even respond.

In another thread, I announced another discovery supporting my BluRay player. It handles SD DVD's better than the Toshiba A30. Out of habit I was using the Toshiba for my SD DVD playback but as of last evening's discovery, I am switching to the Samsung player.

Very good post!! :up:up This is the best way and yes you will get it from both sides! Lets hope and pray all HD gets BETTER!!:

 

[diogen]

It would indeed seem that the video file is identical in raw form and as it is indexed on the disks...

A year or so ago, there was a Warner compressionist (hands-on guy, not manager) posting on AVS (cjplay).
Some dirty behind the scene maneuvering resulted in him stopping posting...
I think he confirmed the "two formats - one encode" issue. And at the moment neither side is questioning this anymore...

...I watch and enjoy the formats for the content and story...
...I'm not interested in any agenda of one format vs. the other. There are enough pros and cons on both for people to make up their own case.

Many on this forum won't agree with me, but so am I.
I'm just not into standalones and as soon as there was a reasonably priced dual format PC drive, I got one (Bourne release obviously played a role...).
http://www.satelliteguys.us/1157678-post8.html

...I announced another discovery supporting my BluRay player. It handles SD DVD's better than the Toshiba A30.

I believe this is a firmware issue... Many 3rd gen Toshiba owners seem to have the same problems.


Diogen.