Login:
Password:
Lost Password?
Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Toshiba: DVD Forum Hasn't Yet Approved Final 51 GB HD DVD After All

By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews

September 13, 2007, 4:55 PM

In a statement to BetaNews this afternoon, a Toshiba spokesperson said that only a preliminary version of Toshiba's 51 GB three-layer, single-sided HD DVD format had been approved by the DVD Forum, caretaker of HD DVD.

As it turned out, and as Toshiba's spokespersons may have only just now realized, the DVD Forum signed off on a preliminary specification, which may have been confused for the final specification because its version number is 1.9.

"We understand that the preliminary version (1.9) of the physical specifications for the triple-layer 51 GB HD DVD-ROM disc has been approved," said Toshiba's spokesperson today.

The spokesperson then added that it has not yet been determined whether current HD DVD players or recorders will be able to use the new format, which the headline of an official Toshiba statement given to BetaNews today is now calling "Trip-Layer." "Toshiba will study the performance of current HD DVD player/recorders with the disc after the standard receives final approval by the DVD Forum."

That last part is a pretty clear indication that final approval was not granted, contrary to our earlier report based on industry news that cited sources with a stake in the format.

The formal Toshiba statement reads as follows: "We welcome the DVD Forum Steering Committee's decision to approve the preliminary version (Version 1.9) of the physical specifications for the triple-layer 51 GB HD DVD-ROM disc. This decision reinforces the fact that HD DVD is capable of offering a range of capacities due to the flexible nature of the format and provides studios with even greater options for creating high definition content. With extended capacities, studios can meet their future needs for releases that may require more storage."

Toshiba's admission today is the first genuine admission from the company that work on engineering the final "Trip-Layer" format has actually not been completed, as was previously believed.

Add a Comment (143 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By tushar17_b

edited Oct 28, 2007 - 1:02 PM

I need atlis 50GB DVD singl DVD in available in market plz.replly me & when

Score: 0

By HoIIywood__

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 10:45 PM

http://img206.imageshack...759/hddvdretardsma2.jpg

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 9:00 AM

Can you get any more childish in your posts?

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 10:29 AM

That's how they think SGD, as you, I, and most everyone else here knows about the horror stories that go on at blu-ray.com and other BD-related breeding grounds for immaturity, blind faith, and ignorance.

We've come to expect no less than their distasteful tactics and lies, unfortunately.

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 4:27 AM

How old are you? Like 12?

Score: 0

By Setian^Stalker

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 4:26 AM

You know theres two things that come to my mind when you post under someone elses username
(1) You have to resort that low to use really pathetic images attached to unfortunate people to get your message across to people and
(2) You have to use someone elses username because your too ashamed to dribble rubbish under your own?

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 12:56 PM

Hey Dave,

I also noticed your beloved vgcharts.com is a malware site. LMAO!

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 11:33 PM

Sony releases it's movies on HD-DVD, this is classic.

Score: 0

By pridewalker

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 2:48 AM

If you like that, this link has an internal link for Bridge to Terrabithia (Disney funded, I believe).

http://thedefinitivehddv...f-international_19.html

Score: 0

By HoIIywood__

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 8:01 AM

It's not Disney releasing it, it's a local distributor. Idiot.

Score: 0

By pridewalker

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 3:58 PM

Since you couldn't be bothered to read the link, here ya go, psuedo-holly...

While of course it's not Disney who is directly supporting HD DVD through the release of this high profile title, it's certainly a big deal for HD DVD owners out there who simply can't bear the thought of having an HD format with no Disney titles. However, it is important to note that this is a far cry from an admittance on the behalves of Disney or Buena Vista's regarding their support or intention to serve up films on both formats. With all things considered however, it is without a doubt a step in the right direction towards format neutrality.

The point still remains though: when you look at how restrictive movie companies have become with their rights, there is absolutely no way that they would sign a contract, selling the dist. rights and not know exactly which formats the purchaser intends to release in. It's not a public proclamation of neutral support, but it is a big deal...and yet another reason to look at HD DVD as the most viable format.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 12:43 PM

OK Shadow. I personally saw a demo of POTC3 and Die Hard 4 at the Digital Projection booth at CEDIA. The funny thing is they were using a Toshiba XA2 hooked up to a D-Box for the demo.

Somebody needs to explain why they weren't using BD and why two Studios movie who are supposed to be exclusive BD releases were being shown on HD-DVD.

Believe me, they tried to hide the player so no one could see it except they were having problems with the Crestron panel which was suppos3ed to run a pre-programmed macro for each demo.

They had to manually change chapters on the disc and that's when I was the XA2, he even had a Toshiba remote in his hand.

I think they used HD-DVD / VC-1 codecs because they were using a quarter million dollar projector and wanted to show the best picture possible.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 6:44 PM

I remember when you posted that in a previous thread. That's classic, man.

Score: 0

By Keith Lard

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 9:24 PM

I call BS on this. I find it hard to believe that Sony would need to resort to this. Almost everyone agrees Blu-ray is better in terms of picture and sound quality.

Culled from elsewhere...

Here are some actual stats as of August 3rd, 2007.

There are 154 Blu-ray titles in North America with lossless audio.

There are 43 HD DVD titles in North America with lossless audio.

If you look at five of the main review sites for Blu-ray and HD DVD; Home Theater Forum, DVD Talk, Upcoming Discs, Home Theater Spot and High Def Digest, and add up all the reviews there are just over 900 HD DVD reviews and just over 900 Blu-ray Disc reviews. Here are some breakdowns from those numbers.

SQ Studio
4.38 Buena Vista
4.12 Sony
4.08 Fox
3.81 Lionsgate
3.81 Paramount
3.63 Warner
3.63 Universal
3.63 Weinstein

Notice how the two HD DVD exclusive studios have the lowest average SQ rating.

As for Picture Quality:

PQ Studio
4.19 Buena Vista
4.02 Paramount
3.95 Warner
3.94 Sony
3.84 Fox
3.80 Weinstein
3.73 Universal
3.66 Lionsgate

Averaging all the reviews to compare formats gives the following numbers.

Picture Quality overall
HD DVD - 3.85
Blu-ray - 3.94

Sound Quality overall
HD DVD - 3.67
Blu-ray - 3.96

As you can see the difference in sound quality is huge. When you have 48 Mbps bandiwdth for a/v versus the 30.09 Mbps bandwidth that HD DVD is limited to, things happen.

With substantially higher average bit rates on VC-1 and AVC/MPEG-4 encodes and 8 Mbps bandwidth left over above the peaks for audio encodes, Blu-ray has the most consistent results.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 8:25 PM

No, almost every BD lackey agrees that it's better, naturally. The more intelligent lot know otherwise, and have sided with HD DVD appropriately. Perhaps you would care to clarify what you mean by "lossless audio".

Add yet another username to the ever-growing list of BD Smurfs that do not know how to spell "Blu-ray" correctly.

There's only one person here that I know of that consistently makes that mistake. I'll give you 3 guesses who this is, and the first 2 don't count.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 4:33 AM

http://www.standards.org.sg/files/vol11no5art4.htm

Finding a better alternative

Despite the interest in lossless audio compression technology which restores all original audio data after compression, without loss or distortion, though at limited compression ratios, Dr Rahardja commented that many applications for lossy audio compression still exist. “Thus, there is a need to develop a solution that offers inter-operability between these two technologies to serve the marketplace as a whole rather than relying on existing isolated and separate solutions,” he said.

In order to find a solution, the Moving Picture Expert Group (MPEG), issued a Call for Proposal (CfP) in October 2002 at its quarterly meeting inviting technical contributions from proponents from all over the world. MPEG is a working group of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) in charge of the development of standards for coded representation of digital audio and video.

According to Dr Rahardja, the CfP called for the development of state-of-the-art lossless audio coding technologies that offer good performance, flexible quality scalability and backward compatibility to the MPEG AAC technology

Score: 0

By yountmj

edited Sep 17, 2007 - 12:23 PM

What in the world was that about? What exactly did that prove, other than your inability to respond appropriately to any given question or statement. What you quoted contained absolutely no pertinent information to the question I asked, as usual... not that the question was directed towards you in the first place (reason being, your response just now).

When people talk to you, do you hear some kind of "Charlie Brown's teacher" voice?

I know what lossless audio is, aredo. I asked what he meant by it (as in compressed or uncompressed). Thank you, however, for your definition of it (or rather, Dr. Rahardja's description of the need for it). I feel so... enlightened. *sigh*

I still don't get you, and quite frankly I am done trying to figure it out. You post a link that describes the compressed lossless "better alternative" that contradicts your earlier ramblings further down about the "better" uncompressed lossless PCM offerings that exist on so many Blu-ray titles.

It can mean both. No loss of audio quality is just that... no loss (compressed or otherwise). I was inquiring as to how many of those titles he mentioned included just lossless PCM, or better and more efficient lossless alternatives such as Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 12:13 PM

I'm flattered he picked me to emulate, he's positing a false reality because Hollywood__ is what he wants to be, not the simple unimportant drone he actually is.

It's hard being me sometimes.

Score: 0

By HoIIywood__

posted Sep 14, 2007 - 9:52 PM

HD DVD is dead, everyone knows this, including Toshiba, desperate to make up stories about new versions of HD DVD to keep them in the game.

Even Target are expanding their Blu-Ray shelves, but leaving poor old HD DVD as they ugly sister at the back of the store gathering dust, next to the laserdics.

http://bluray.highdefdig...VD_Levels_Unchanged/968

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 2:34 AM

What is truly pathetic is that you actually believe this, MinuteMaid...

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 12:45 PM

You mean Dave ..... that's right, they're all Dave.

You can always tell when I've got his paties in a bunch because he tries to piss me off by using a clone of my username (what a surprise). I love the fact that he probably thinks about me 24 hours a day and spends all of his time looking up BD stories.

It just shows what a loser he is. Which is exactly what I want.

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 1:53 PM

He is back ab bluray forming his blu blood army to come here and set the record straight as he says. You want to see a bunch of pathetic creatures check them out.

Score: 0

By SlapShot

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 1:31 PM

yup dave, the one and only tv-boy

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 1:27 PM

Haven't seen Benjamin or Ray lately. I wonder if he forgot the passwords to those accounts...

Score: 0

By pridewalker

edited Sep 15, 2007 - 12:00 PM

Hey, psuedo-Hollywood___

If HD DVD is such a dying format, why then have 20th Century Fox and (GASP) Sony, started releasing their movies on the format in Europe?

Fantastic Four: http://xploitedcinema.co...an-release-p-12469.html

Silent Hill:
http://xploitedcinema.co...an-release-p-12667.html

Underworld:
http://xploitedcinema.co...an-release-p-12664.html

Ghost Rider:
http://www.amazon.fr/Gho...d=1186891774&sr=1-3

On top of this, Resident Evil, and RE Apocalypse have HD DVD pre-order listings on Amazon Germany.

These films were released by companies that are supposedly BR only (SH, GR, Underworld, and RE all have Sony Pictures homepages), and are completely compatable with any HD DVD player worldwide, due to the fact the HD DVD doesn't have region coding (and yes, they're all in English).

Seems even Sony Pictures doesn't want to stay BR exclusive anymore...

Score: 0

By Metfanant

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 1:57 PM

what company has the distribution rights in Europe? its rather common for different companies to distribute films in other countries...

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 12:46 PM

Hi Dave.

Score: 0

By pridewalker

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 3:31 PM

I'll concede the point that many times films are picked up by other companies for distribution.

However, the fact remains, each one of these titles has been touted as Blu-ray only. There's no way that Fox and Sony could not have known that this company intended an HD DVD release. This fact would have been in the contract when the release rights were sold.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 2:33 PM

Apparently it is also rather common for BD fanatics to miss the point entirely... or ignore it.

Score: 0

By HoIIywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 5:08 PM

Or to be too busy to respond to his useless tripe.

He is obviously an idiot, as he can't work out that in Europe, different companies distribute movies, so allegiances on movies on the US, is different in Europe.

There are also HD DVD studios releasing on Blu-Ray in europe, but nobody bothers posting those.

The war will be over soon, and the nonsense will be long gone. Warners THD has been dumped, so this will mean an even earlier death to HD DVD.

Score: 0

By pridewalker

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 6:21 PM

Let's see...I'm the idiot, when you're the one who:

A) couldn't read the posting admitting that yes, different companies distribute films in different areas.
B) grasp the fact that your beloved Sony signed contracts with the distributors, which in this day and age must have contained the information of an HD DVD release.

The reason that nobody bothers posting about Blu-ray releases from HD DVD companies is simple: BR is region coded, which means that a European disc won't play in a player bought in North America or Japan. Given the fact that HD DVD has no regional restrictions, this makes the fact that Sony funded films are being released in HD DVD fairly significant.

The only chance that blu-ray has of winning this war, is if they can find a way to finalize the format, and make it economically feasible for the average consumer to jump on board. Financially, HD DVD is the only format that makes sense.

Score: 0

By HoIIywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 9:12 PM

More misinformation from the brainwashed HD DVD supporters.

1. Region Coding is optional on Blu-Ray, there are many releases that are region free.

http://tinyurl.com/2oer6l

2. HD DVD has region coding in the spec, but it's not used by any discs. This could however change at any point in time. In the extremly unlikely event that HD DVD lasts past holiday season, don't think for one momemnt, as that studios won't start using it once it's not a deciding factor in the format war.

http://www.reghardware.c...vd_to_get_region_coding/

Score: 0

By pridewalker

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 12:36 AM

"Brainwashed"? How well are you acquainted with that kettle there, pot?

Here's something a little bit more current about HD DVD's region coding:

http://thedefinitivehddv...f-international_19.html

It's true, as your link pointed out, that they began investigating region coding of HD DVDs...11 months ago; however, at the moment, nothing has come from it. There hasn't been a single news item since Oct. 06 about it. Furthermore, as the link I posted points out, every HD DVD player currently out bypasses the region check (if the machine doesn't check, a region coded disc won't matter). Seems like one more reason to adopt HD DVD sooner, rather than later.

As for BR's region coding: Why is it surprising that their RPC is broken, when they can't seem to achieve a finalized spec for their menus?

Until the region coding actually appears on an HD DVD disc, I'll just import the a bunch of blu-ray 'exclusives', knowing that I can enjoy them, without having to check to see if they'll play.

Score: 0

By Hocuspokus

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 9:00 AM

There are over 60 of those supposedly 'Blu-ray exclusive' movies available on HD DVD (which being region-free everytime work perfectly with anybodies' HD DVD player anywhere).

That's why HD DVD has more available content, more exclusive content and thanks to those world-wide publishing & distribution deals it's also why HD DVD has the largest potential catalogue.

.....so go on then Dave or whoever you are today, where are the 60 or so HD DVD exclusives out on BD?

It's simply not true to say Blu-ray's region coding is switched off at the moment (as a look at the forum threads from disappointed & mightily pi*sed off Blu-ray owners who believed this lie have found to their cost).

Some old Blu-ray titles do not have region coding.

.....but then when has the Blu-ray fanclub (like the BDA itself) not been feeding people lies and half-truths about this?

(Great customer relations btw.)

Score: 0

By Keith Lard

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 10:10 AM

All Warner and Paramount Blu-Ray releases are region free, many Disney releases also are, all the Pirates series are.

It's not old releases as you say.

Score: 0

By Hocuspokus

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 2:35 PM

What "Paramount releases"?

You haven't got any anymore.

(and when I said "old" it ought to have been obvious - considering neither format has been around that long - that I was referring to movies that had been around for some time, nothing to do with when they had a Blu-ray release)

.....and that leaves Warner (not even one of which is exclusive btw).
61 Warner movies out of 304 Blu-ray releases.
Wow.
Pretty cr@p when set besides the competing format which is guaranteed 100% region-free everytime.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 1:43 PM

Haha

/spank

Score: 0

By siryak

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 12:04 AM

Lol...Oh look since Dave lost all credibility he is now using Hollywood's name to spread his BS. It would be a good plan if everyone didn't know your true identity. I know it is rough having Blu-Ray going under and the PS3 going under with it. Making yourself look like an even bigger idiot is not going to change that...Sorry.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 5:48 PM

You have to have credibility to lose it. He has nothing and obviously I am getting to him.

Score: 0

By HoIIywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 5:09 PM

The funny thing is, you actually think I am daveBG. How wrong you are...

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 5:05 AM

Who do you think your fooling? How much do you get paid by Sony anyway. I may want to try it. Though I'd probably get fired because I wouldn't be able to say anything good about Sony.

Score: 0

By siryak

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 10:46 PM

Whatever you say Dave.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 5:48 PM

That's exactly what a liar would say.

Score: 0

By HoIIywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 9:13 PM

OK, I AM THE MESSIAH.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 11:34 PM

Sorry, that job is already taken .... by me.

Score: 0

By Metfanant

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 12:51 AM

if by going under you mean still outselling HD-DVD even after the big Paramount shift...than yeah its going under alright...

Score: 0

By siryak

edited Sep 15, 2007 - 3:41 PM

No...By going under I mean having everyone start jumping ship. Not to mention the fact that HD-DVD has a cheaper player on the way that will start to get in to the average consumer range. Blo-Ray right now has .06% and HD-DVD has .04% of the movie sales. Not a lot to brag about there.

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 1:22 AM

Yeah the PS3 is doing very well, oh yeah last place again. Time will tell it is very early.

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 5:08 AM

Yeah, even with their clearance sale on their 60gb model, they still couldn't outsell the Xbox 360 during that month. Sad.

Score: 0

By Setian^Stalker

posted Sep 14, 2007 - 11:10 PM

What, a store that’s allegedly receiving payments from Sony expanding their blu-ray shelf space?
NEVER!

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 1:24 AM

Yeah go to target and see what 15 blo titles and 7 HD big fricken deal. They are a real bonus for blo ray to have on their side.

Score: 0

By Hocuspokus

posted Sep 14, 2007 - 6:32 AM

Cribbed from elsewhere, this makes as good an explaination of what is going on as I've seen anywhere.

"The DVD Forum Steering Committee approved the TL51 spec (and Twin disc) on Wednesday; however, Toshiba is referring to it as a "preliminary" spec.

I'm not certain, but it seems as though the correct interpretation may be that this spec is now to be formally compatibility tested. If results are satisfactory (however that will be defined), then the preliminary spec can become the approved final spec.

That does seem like a logical solution to the conundrum of how do you get a final-approval spec, without first performing needed compatibility testing -- yet a spec has to be approved before formal testing can be initiated!"

......and btw it's pretty odd that it's been over-looked but the 'twin disc' mentioned above is likely to be hugely important and as big a deal as anything related to this.

http://www.engadgethd.co...ple-layer-dvd-twin-disc/

Score: 0

By ladylust

edited Sep 13, 2007 - 10:14 PM

Who cares.. Blu-Ray or HD-DVD have not used more then 25gb of data on any of their DVD's. The only reason someone would need more then that is for more then 1 HD movie to be put on one single side and we are a bit away from that. Im sure a year or two from now with 50+ GB disks actually being filled up you will see Lethal Weapon 1-4 on 1 side of a disk.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 14, 2007 - 5:38 AM

Actually on Blu-Ray there are many movies beyond 25GB in size, for example:

- The Fifth Element H.264 1080p 36GB
- Black Hawk Down MPEG-2 1080p 34GB
- Apocalypto H.264 1080p 32GB
- Starship Troopers VC-1 1080p 31GB
- Face Off H.264 1080p 31GB

Score: 0

By AaronDobbins

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 10:00 AM

Yea, but Black Hawk Down is the only GOOD movie that requires that much space. The rest of the movies have no logical reason to use that much.

Score: 0

By Hollywood__

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 12:47 PM

Hi Dave.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 1:29 PM

Yep... you can tell by the way they all spell "Blu-Ray" the same way.

For being such loyal Sony fanatics, you'd figure at least one of them would learn how to spell "Blu-ray" correctly. :)

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 14, 2007 - 8:40 AM

Oh, so you mean to say that based on the examples you've given, many Blu-ray movies barely take up more space than a HD DVD DL30 disc?

That's because each of the ones you mentioned make "excellent" use of the wasteful and unnecessary MPEG2 and PCM 5.1 found on a lot of BD releases... except for Face Off and Starship Troopers, which are curiously absent from the list on blu-ray.com

Sorry, but haven't seen a need for your oh-so-precious 50 GB yet. The 51 GB spec was basically a move to shut you up on one of the only things you and your little blue buddies could actually still brag about anymore.

Score: 0

By aredo

edited Sep 14, 2007 - 10:46 AM

1) MPEG-2 was born for HDTV. So it's a moot point to tell that it's not up to the task
2) I gave some examples and only 1 of them use MPEG-2, can't you read what I wrote there?
3) There is always need for more space despite improvements in codecs efficiency. (H.265 to be released in 2010 is being designed to achieve 50% better compression than H.264 and H.264 needs 1/3rd the bitrate of MPEG-2 for same quality). The best would always be uncompressed or lossless compression anyway, so the best thing to do is to allow any lossy codec being used to achieve the highest possible bitrate.

Score: 0

By mshulman

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 2:56 PM

It doesn't matter what MPEG2 was designed for. The reason blu-ray needs more space and a higher bitrate is simply because of MPEG2. MPEG2 at a lower bitrate just doesn't look as good.

VC1 or AVC looks fine at either.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 14, 2007 - 3:44 PM

3 - I agree with you on this point. However, just because the space is there doesn't mean you have to use it. Seriously, what happens when people are able to finally enjoy extras on Blu-ray discs? All of that extra space is going to need to be reclaimed to make room. Yes, PCM offers the highest possible quality, but it is extremely wasteful. When dealing with multi-channel audio, the problem is compounded. Dolby TrueHD, while compressed, is still lossless. PCM is simply not needed to achieve excellent sound quality at high bitrates.

2 - Yes, I can read. I made no mention, nor did I mean to imply, that more than one that you mentioned did use MPEG-2 compression (aside from that fact that an extremely large portion of BD releases do). However, every title you mentioned uses uncompressed PCM, as well as many others. They're using the extra space as a crutch to keep from being innovative. It makes me wonder if someone simply refused to pay licensing fees to Dolby Labs, or if all those optional components of the Blu-ray spec coming back to bite 'em in the rear.

1 - Even though there have been many enhancements to MPEG-2, to say that it was "born for HDTV" is stretching it a bit, don't you think? Despite having advantages such as being frame-editable and having no theoretical bitrate limitations, it is a rather inefficient codec.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 14, 2007 - 5:37 PM

MPEG-2 being an inefficient codec it's your opinion not the truth. MPEG-2 was designed for HDTV in the first place, you can read its history on books and MPEG/ISO documents.
Uncompressed PCM audio is what it is, uncompressed audio. Would you want a compressed Dolby or a quasi-lossless (which is still lossy) stream perhaps ?
Extras can be put on a secondary 25GB disc for a few bucks, they don't need to use the main 50GB disc for extra features.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 2:00 AM

Actually, I suggest that you do some reading of your own, as the only truth here seems to be that you are quite simply wrong... wrong about what MPEG-2 was "designed for" from the start, and apparently wrong about the readiness of so-called "H.265".

"H.265" is not to be "released in 2010" as you have stated more than once before.

According to the VCEG draft meeting held in January 2007 in Morocco (the purpose of which was to discuss proposals for future work on H.264), it was discussed that "serious work" on a standardization effort probably would not begin until 2010 or later.

Taken from the draft meeting report:

It should be understood that current work in these AHGs is not intended to imply any need for near-term planning to create additional enhancements of H.264 that are not yet under way, or to start drafting of an "H.265" or "H.266", etc., but are rather for study to determine whether and when work on such things should begin in earnest.

Most or all contributions to this meeting seem more in the direction of an “H.264+” as opposed to an “H.265”.

At the moment we do not see evidence of readiness of technical advances sufficient to justify embarking on a concentrated effort toward an "H.265" design project.

When we do get to beginning serious work on an "H.265", we agree that computational efficiency should be one serious and concentrated goal of the effort (obviously, along with coding efficiency and other considerations). In principle, we consider encoder as well as decoder computational efficiency to be worthy of consideration.

http://ftp3.itu.int/av-a...701_Mar/VCEG-AE01d0.doc

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 4:46 AM

MPEG-2 was designed for HDTV in the first place as you can read on various documents:

---
http://web.mit.edu/6.933/www/HDTV.pdf

B. Video Compression
The video compression was conceived as the core technology of HDTV. The GA HDTV system
used an MPEG-2-compatible video compression scheme that consists of Motion Compensation
(MC) and Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT). The basic idea of motion compensation is to
reduce the transmitted quantity of information by transmitting the differences between the
original sequence of the raw images and a corresponding sequence of estimated images
generated by a motion estimator. The concept of discrete cosine transform is to express the 2-D
image data in frequency domain. Since human visual perception is less sensitive to the high
(spatial) frequency components, a part of the whole set of frequency coefficients can be
discarded, which further reduced the quantity of required information. Figure 5 depicts the block diagram of a MC-DCT encoder/decoder loop.
---

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 15, 2007 - 10:02 AM

I really hate to think that you went through all that trouble for nothing, aredo. That rather lengthy document has only one instance of the term 'MPEG-2', and it mentions absolutely nothing of it's roots geared towards HDTV resolutions.

It merely mentions that the video compression technology used for GA HDTV was based on an MPEG-2-compatible scheme... which itself implies that MPEG-2 already existed before that. That does not mean MPEG-2 was developed for it.

That was a good read, however. Thank you.

Score: 0

By aredo

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 5:39 AM

From Keith Jack, Video Demystified 3rd Edition, page 557 Chapter 13 MPEG 2 :
"The primary application targeted during the definition process was all-digital transmission of broadcast-quality video at bit rates of 4-9Mbps. However, MPEG 2 is useful for many other applications, such as HDTV, and now supports bit rates of 1.5-60 Mbps."

------------

From Al Bovik, Handbook of Image&Video Processing, page 603 6.4 MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 Video Standards:
"The MPEG-2 committee started working in late 1990 after the completion of the technical work of MPEG-1. [...] MPEG-3, which was originally intended for HDTV (high-definition digital television) at higher bit rates, was merged with MPEG-2. Hence there is no MPEG-3. The MPEG-2 video coding standard (ISO/IEC 13818-2) was also adopted by ITU-T,as ITU-T Reccommendation H.262"

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 1:36 PM

Sneaky...

Even after I mentioned below that your original reference proves nothing, you add a second reference (after my time stamp) that does the same thing?

All you are doing is helping me out... seriously. You continually post links and quotes that say what I have already told you.

You are proving nothing, except that you are not as smart as you portray yourself to be. I'm sorry, but you're doing this to yourself. I'd stop now...

Score: 0

By yountmj

edited Sep 15, 2007 - 7:54 PM

Okay, seriously... why do you persist in trying to prove that which you cannot?

Yet another quote that does not reinforce what you are spouting:

"However, MPEG 2 is useful for many other applications, such as HDTV, and now supports bit rates of 1.5-60 Mbps."

Words such as "useful for..." "such as HDTV..." "and now supports..."

See, that's the key, and as smart as you claim to portray yourself, why do you choose not to see the difference? You say it was designed for HDTV, when in the reality most everyone else lives in, it was designed for digital broadcast transmissions. HDTV was an afterthought... a "hack" if you will (since you are quite fond of that term).

For the last time, MPEG-2 was not designed for HDTV. MPEG-3 was. MPEG-3 was abandoned when it was determined that MPEG-2 could handle the task with modifications. Why would modifications even be necessary if it was designed for it in the first place?

Please be so kind as to enlighten me where it is said anywhere that MPEG-2 was "designed for" or "born for" HDTV as you claim... because the material you have been referencing does no such thing.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 5:50 AM

http://bryan.cs.byu.edu/...deo.slides.printing.pdf
"Other Video Compression Standards
MPEG-2 Similar in principle to MPEG (designed for HDTV)
MPEG-4 Extension to MPEG-2 using overlapping “object planes”
H.261 Most commonly used standard (ITU) for video conferencing
H.26* Successors to H.261
H.320 Successor to H.261 designed for higher bandwidths (ISDN)"

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 5:57 AM

http://stason.org/TULARC...happened-to-MPEG-3.html
"130 What ever happened to MPEG-3 ?

MPEG-3 was to have targeted HDTV applications with sampling dimensions
up to 1920 x 1080 x 30 Hz and coded bitrates between 20 and 40
Mbit/sec. It was later discovered that with some (syntax compatible)
fine tuning, MPEG-2 and MPEG-1 syntax worked very well for HDTV rate
video. The key is to maintain an optimal balance between sample rate
and coded bit rate.

Also, the standardization window for HDTV was rapidly closing. Europe
and the United States were on the brink of committing to
analog-digital subnyquist hybrid algorithms (D-MAC, MUSE, et al). By
1992, European all-digital projects such as HD-DIVINE and VADIS
demonstrated better picture quality with respect to bandwidth using the
MPEG syntax. In the United States, the Sarnoff/NBC/Philips/Thomson
HDTV consortium had used MPEG-1 syntax from the beginning of its
all-digital proposal, and with the exception of motion artifacts (due
to limited search range in the encoder), was deemed to have the best
picture quality of all three digital proponents in the early 1993
bake-off. HDTV is now part of the MPEG-2 High-1440 Level and High Level
toolkit."

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 12:30 PM

...and yet another link that says exactly what I've been saying. You're amusing.

Still waiting for you to prove it.

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 9:43 AM

Who really cares that you are good at cutting and pasting. Mpeg2 is just a waste period. One would almost think that you are geting royalties for this antique form of compression the way you defend it. We all know it is old and a waste so move along already.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 12:19 PM

I'm still waiting for Retardo Montalban here to understand what I meant when I said "prove it". Do you see how he has managed to dodge it completely? If anything, he has actually been helping me make hims look like a clueless buffoon, as each of his links say exactly what I have. He contradicts himself repeatedly.

Maybe it needs to be spelled out in great big pretty colorful wooden blocks for him? What do you think?

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 1:57 PM

He is good at copy and pasting but fails to see the light. The technology works but is extremely outdated and not up to the standards of the newer codecs. Blu-ray should avoid the 50 gig disks since the chances of making a good disk is so low it is not worth the risk. It looks like Sony pushed blu-ray out the door before it was really ready for prime time that goes for hardware and software.

Score: 0

By aredo

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 2:58 PM

SGD: You keep spreading lies and nonsense. Blu-Ray Dual Layer 50GB discs are available for BD Writers as well and they can be bought for less that $20 each nowadays, prices are falling pretty quickly.
Telling people that there are manufacturing issues it's telling lies.
"fail to see the light" = tell you that you are smart and cool while telling lies and wrong things you claim to be facts ?
Well, then yes, I surely prefer to have a job in the field than trying to convince arrogant people like you and others here that keep insulting and get so emotional just because you don't know what you are talking about and/or maybe are paid for promoting HD-DVD at any cost...

Score: 0

By SGD

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 5:30 PM

Manufacturing issues with the 50 gig disks is not a real secret there hot shot so that is not a lie. The only thing that you have proven is that you can cut and paste info. And I do work in the computer industry by the way. Give it up already. If something in what I said is an insult than you must be one very sensitive person since I really fail to see an insult or name calling in my post. Maybe you are just trying the change the subject or something.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 6:48 PM

There are many kind of works in the industry and if you are promoting very old news, I'd say ancient since things in the field keep moving at a very high pace, and telling people that Blu-Ray production has many flaws.. well, that was true in the beginning, nowadays it's far from true.
You don't want me to cut&paste info from other sites.. why? Simply because they prove that you and others here are spreading wrong info as the truth in a hope to look smart and cool at any cost? And your insults are so obvious, anyone reading this thread could easily judge how emotional you and others here are.

-----------
http://www.burnworld.net...ing-50-gb-blu-ray-discs/

November 20, 2006
Sony is Producing 50 GB Blu-ray Discs

According to a press release from Sony they have beefed up production of 50gb BD discs. As many as 60,000 discs are being produced each day. Now how's that for media storage capabilities?

Sony DADC has announced that they now have six 50 GB Blu-ray Disc production lines up and running.
The company, which announced its 50 GB Blu-ray production plans in May
of this year, is currently ramping up production to 60K discs per day. High
demand for the 50 GB dual layer Blu-ray Disc is a result of the format's
ability to deliver superior, uncompressed audio and high bit-rate video,
more value added interactive content, as well as more available space to
include additional bonus features such as deleted scenes, interviews and
commentary.

-------

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 8:29 PM

"more value added interactive content, as well as more available space to
include additional bonus features such as deleted scenes, interviews and
commentary."

Viewable by whom?

Score: 0

By terminalx

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 7:20 PM

article is almost a year old and they will be used for additional content hm? Why does the Hd-dvd version of 300 contain much more material?

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 10:55 PM

While also getting a higher video transfer grade.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 4:38 AM

SGD: HD-DVD maximum muxed bitrate for audio+video+subtitles can't be over 30Mbps approx, a lower bitrate gives worse video quality and more compression artifacts, whatever codec being used.
HD-DVD higher video quality it's your opinion which is based not on facts, since facts tell you the opposite.

Score: 0

By SGD

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 9:07 AM

You can think that all you want but the reviews give the picture advantage to 300 on HD not blu. Look at the newest edition of SOund and Vision they reviewed both and gave the picture edge to HD. They did however give blu the sound edge. So you are not entirely correct. Why can you not admit that neither format is perfect! I do find your continual posts humours as you almost seem desperate, move along already, let it go.

Score: 0

By aredo

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 12:45 PM

yountmj: Insulting me just proves that you are getting really emotional, you don't have a clue of what you are talking about. As I told you, I work in the field, I know this stuff. Period.
You proved nothing, you kept repeating "MPEG-3" to prove what, your ignorance ?
Whoever reads your answers can only see how arrogant,childish and rude you really are. Stop insulting others and Grow up!

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 2:14 PM

No, basically I see how you work now. You keep the "argument" going (one that you cannot win, and apparently know it), trying to spin the situation to your own advantage, avoiding and dodging questions posed to you, selectively choosing what you wish to respond to, until someone insults you. Then you spin it in an entirely different direction attempting to psychoanalyze the other party, claiming "emotion" is clouding their judgment, therefore rendering them clueless about the subject at hand (I guess humor and amusement could be considered emotions).

The numerous MPEG-3 references prove that you are not as knowledgeable as you claim, as you fail to acknowledge that without the efforts that went into MPEG-3, MPEG-2 would never have been considered for HDTV distribution or transmission (had it never been discovered that MPEG-2 could be "hacked" to incorporate it). Do you know why? Because it was not designed for it from the start (as you continually fail to admit that you were wrong about with your original statments).

If you would have simply conceded that MPEG-2 is a viable option for HDTV now, but was not when it was originally conceived (as you try to make everyone else believe), this could have all been avoided. You were wrong, and I called you out on it. Don't blame me.

"Stop insulting others and Grow up!"

Is that the same as "I'm taking my ball and going home"? Hey, no need to get all emotional on me, now. :)

On a serious note, I don't know you well enough to dislike you, and I am not actively trying to make enemies of anyone here. However, when you make bold claims that sound just a little preposterous to others, be prepared for someone to expect you to back them up with facts. There is always someone else who is just a little more passionate and knowledgeable about a particular area of interest than you are (not to say that I am, but I hope you get the point).

The wonderful world of anonymity we call the Internet permits the use of such bold claims as "I work in the field, I know this stuff". It is something that everyone knows cannot be proven and has to be taken with a grain of salt. But I'll bite... If I may ask, what exactly in this field do you specialize in?

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 16, 2007 - 3:04 PM

yountmj: How pathetic you are, really. It's an old trick to accuse others of doing something while actually doing that same thing in the first place--because it's what you keep trying doing.
You keep repeating "MPEG-3" like it was the Holy Grail, sorry but that won't save you from your ignorance about this stuff. Avoiding reading the whole sentence about MPEG-3 and the fact that *MPEG-3 IS MPEG-2* simply because they got merged during the standardization process, actually if you read the references instead of putting so much effort at insulting me maybe you would have read that the work on MPEG-3 was halted simply because MPEG-2 was enough for the job so with some modifications MPEG-2 was adapted to do what MPEG-3 was designed for. It's just that simple.
But no, you must insult me because you don't like the fact that I work in the field and know this stuff, you must show the world how smart and cool you are, so you attack and insult those that know something you don't.
Really pathetic and childish attitude.

Score: 0

By yountmj

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 8:50 PM

aredo: "MPEG-2 was adapted to do what MPEG-3 was designed for. It's just that simple."

You don't say? And what have I been telling you this whole time? MPEG-2 became a suitable codec for HDTV later in its lifespan... not "designed for it from the start" as you continue to claim.

From your own fingertips you acknowledged that you were wrong. That's good enough for me.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Sep 17, 2007 - 4:39 AM

yountmj: You can't read, so it seems. MPEG-2 was designed for HDTV, it was a competing standard for HDTV, there were some among which there was MPEG-3 as well. There are various articles on the subject, I put links to some telling how things went in the business and among various multinationals, but you don't want to read them and/or you don't like what they tell you.

Score: 0

By aredo

edited Sep 16, 2007 - 10:56 AM

SGD: You got so emotional just because it's something you don't know anything about. If you read a bit you would know that royalties are needed to be paid for practically all ISO approved codecs like MPEG and Microsoft own VC-1.
MPEG-2 it's far from a waste, if it were for you 98% of networks worldwide would have gone bankrupt in a rush to upgrade their hardware and software.

Score: 0