1st HD-DVD release features

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Goro, Mar 29, 2006.

  1. Goro

    Goro Guest

    http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents

    Here's a little something you might be interested in. We've got the
    exact details for you on the disc specs and special features you can
    expect on Warner's first three HD-DVD releases (due on 4/18).

    Million Dollar Baby will include anamorphic widescreen video (1080p &
    480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio), Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 (English
    and French) and Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo audio, subtitles in English,
    French and Spanish, English SDH (Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of
    Hearing - feature only), the James Lipton Takes on Three roundtable
    discussion with Clint Eastwood, Hillary Swank and Morgan Freeman, the
    Born to Fight and Producers Round 15 featurettes and the theatrical
    trailer. Here's a look at the technical grid on the back of the disc's
    packaging:

    Phantom of the Opera (2004) will include anamorphic widescreen video
    (1080p & 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio), Dolby True-HD 5.1
    (English), Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 (English and French) and Dolby
    Digital 2.0 Stereo audio, subtitles in English, French and Spanish,
    English SDH (Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing - feature
    only), the Behind the Mask featurette, the 3-part The Making of The
    Phantom of the Opera documentary (including Preproduction, The Director
    and Production), a deleted scene (No One Would Listen), a sing-along
    feature and the film's theatrical trailer. Here's the title's tech
    grid:

    Finally, The Last Samurai will include anamorphic widescreen video
    (1080p & 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio), Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1
    (English and French), Dolby Digital-Plus 2.0 (Spanish) and Dolby
    Digital 2.0 Stereo audio, subtitles in English, French and Spanish,
    English SDH (Subtitles for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing - feature
    only), audio commentary with director Edward Zwick, deleted scenes, the
    Edward Zwick Director's Video Journal feature, the History Channel's
    History vs. Hollywood documentary, 6 featurettes (including Tom
    Cruise: A Warrior's Journey, Making an Epic: A Conversation with Edward
    Zwick and Tom Cruise, A World of Detail: Production Design with Lilly
    Kilvert, Silk and Armor: Costume Design with Nigla Dickson, From
    Soldier to Samurai: The Weapons and Imperial Army Basic Training),
    video of the Japanese premiere and the film's theatrical trailer.
    Again, here's the tech grid:

    ---

    So, looks like HD-DVD is going to have 1080p video and 480i video for
    the extras. I was under the impression HD-DVD was going to be 1080i
    and i don't understand why they would put 480i video on there at all.

    And this is still quite ho-hum, imo. Nothing here excited me and
    entices me to buy into it.

    -goro-
    Goro, Mar 29, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Goro

    WinField Guest

    You may have missed something on that page, Goro ... :~P

    Goro wrote:
    > http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents
    >
    > Here's a little something you might be interested in. We've got the
    > exact details for you on the disc specs and special features you can
    > expect on Warner's first three HD-DVD releases (due on 4/18).
    >

    [ snippage ]
    >
    > ---
    >
    > So, looks like HD-DVD is going to have 1080p video and 480i video for
    > the extras. I was under the impression HD-DVD was going to be 1080i
    > and i don't understand why they would put 480i video on there at all.


    480i video may not be on the discs at all! The author mentions
    asterisks on the Video* & Audio* specs, and wonders if the 480i
    specification is for "down-sampled" video: (pertinent quote below)

    " Notice the * after Video and Audio in the tech grids? It's worth
    noting that all three of these titles include the following statement in
    tiny print on the back of the packaging: *Levels of video resolution and
    audio standards stated require audio-visual equipment capability and
    appropriate digital connections. We're trying to determine if that means
    that these are DVD/HD-DVD hybrid discs (offering both standard
    definition and high-definition video on the same disc), or that these
    titles make use of the Image Constraint Token (ICT) and analog video
    downsampling on HDTVs that lack HDMI or DVI connections. We strongly
    suspect that it's the latter, as all three titles are priced at SRP
    $28.99 (Warner has previously indicated that their DVD/HD-DVD hybrid
    discs would be priced at SRP $38.99). We'll confirm this with the studio
    and let you know for sure as soon as possible.


    > And this is still quite ho-hum, imo. Nothing here excited me and
    > entices me to buy into it.
    >
    > -goro-



    Why do you say that? What specs are you looking forward to? 1080p @
    24/30 frames per second is pushing our chipsets/pipe_lines and the
    professional equipment Hollywood has at their disposal to the max right
    now. At least that's my understanding.

    we live in exciting times,
    winf
    WinField, Mar 29, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Goro

    Goro Guest

    WinField wrote:
    > You may have missed something on that page, Goro ... :~P
    >
    > Goro wrote:
    > > http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents
    > >
    > > Here's a little something you might be interested in. We've got the
    > > exact details for you on the disc specs and special features you can
    > > expect on Warner's first three HD-DVD releases (due on 4/18).
    > >

    > [ snippage ]
    > >
    > > ---
    > >
    > > So, looks like HD-DVD is going to have 1080p video and 480i video for
    > > the extras. I was under the impression HD-DVD was going to be 1080i
    > > and i don't understand why they would put 480i video on there at all.

    >
    > 480i video may not be on the discs at all! The author mentions
    > asterisks on the Video* & Audio* specs, and wonders if the 480i
    > specification is for "down-sampled" video: (pertinent quote below)
    >
    > " Notice the * after Video and Audio in the tech grids? It's worth
    > noting that all three of these titles include the following statement in
    > tiny print on the back of the packaging: *Levels of video resolution and
    > audio standards stated require audio-visual equipment capability and
    > appropriate digital connections. We're trying to determine if that means
    > that these are DVD/HD-DVD hybrid discs (offering both standard
    > definition and high-definition video on the same disc), or that these
    > titles make use of the Image Constraint Token (ICT) and analog video
    > downsampling on HDTVs that lack HDMI or DVI connections. We strongly
    > suspect that it's the latter, as all three titles are priced at SRP
    > $28.99 (Warner has previously indicated that their DVD/HD-DVD hybrid
    > discs would be priced at SRP $38.99). We'll confirm this with the studio
    > and let you know for sure as soon as possible.


    Yes, i saw that, but why would you downsample to 480>>i<<, which is
    below standard DVD res?

    AND, how many HDTVs have 1080p inputs?

    >
    > > And this is still quite ho-hum, imo. Nothing here excited me and
    > > entices me to buy into it.
    > >
    > > -goro-

    >
    >
    > Why do you say that? What specs are you looking forward to? 1080p @
    > 24/30 frames per second is pushing our chipsets/pipe_lines and the
    > professional equipment Hollywood has at their disposal to the max right
    > now. At least that's my understanding.
    >
    > we live in exciting times,


    HD : exciting
    HD Million Dollar Baby? not so much.

    -goro-
    Goro, Mar 29, 2006
    #3
  4. Goro

    unclejr Guest

    Goro wrote:
    > Yes, i saw that, but why would you downsample to 480>>i<<, which is
    > below standard DVD res?


    No, 480i *IS* standard DVD resolution. HTH.

    -Junior
    unclejr, Mar 29, 2006
    #4
  5. Goro

    Jeff Rife Guest

    Goro () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
    > http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents
    >
    > Million Dollar Baby will include anamorphic widescreen video (1080p &
    > 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)
    >
    > Phantom of the Opera (2004) will include anamorphic widescreen video
    > (1080p & 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)
    >
    > Finally, The Last Samurai will include anamorphic widescreen video
    > (1080p & 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)


    Well, this is bad news.

    The term "anamorphic widescreen" for DVD meant that the normal 4:3 image
    is supposed to be stretched to fill a 16:9 screen. This allowed them to
    gain scan lines of resolution without needing a different format.

    *BUT*, it also implies that the horizontal pixel count won't be "correct".

    In other words, a DVD *should* have 853x480 pixels for a 16:9 movie, but
    it only has 720x480. Likewise, this would seem to mean that an "anamorphic
    widescreen" HD-HVD *should* have 1920x1080 pixels, but will have less
    (maybe 1440x1080?).

    Or, do they mean that the 2.40:1 movies will be encoded at 1920x800 (which
    is all the movie needs) and the player will send out black bars at the
    top and bottom to fill in the full 1080 scan lines? That would be great,
    although it's not "anamorphic"...but then I wouldn't be surprised to see
    studio marketing people misusing a technical term.

    --
    Jeff Rife | Sam: How's life treatin' you, Norm?
    |
    | Norm: Well, Sammy, it's not...so I sure
    | hope you are.
    Jeff Rife, Mar 29, 2006
    #5
  6. Goro

    Larry G Guest

    "Jeff Rife" <> wrote in message ...
    > Goro () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
    >> http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents
    >>
    >> Million Dollar Baby will include anamorphic widescreen video (1080p &
    >> 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)
    >>
    >> Phantom of the Opera (2004) will include anamorphic widescreen video
    >> (1080p & 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)
    >>
    >> Finally, The Last Samurai will include anamorphic widescreen video
    >> (1080p & 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)

    >
    > Well, this is bad news.
    >
    > The term "anamorphic widescreen" for DVD meant that the normal 4:3 image
    > is supposed to be stretched to fill a 16:9 screen. This allowed them to
    > gain scan lines of resolution without needing a different format.
    >
    > *BUT*, it also implies that the horizontal pixel count won't be "correct".
    >
    > In other words, a DVD *should* have 853x480 pixels for a 16:9 movie, but
    > it only has 720x480. Likewise, this would seem to mean that an
    > "anamorphic
    > widescreen" HD-HVD *should* have 1920x1080 pixels, but will have less
    > (maybe 1440x1080?).
    >
    > Or, do they mean that the 2.40:1 movies will be encoded at 1920x800 (which
    > is all the movie needs) and the player will send out black bars at the
    > top and bottom to fill in the full 1080 scan lines? That would be great,
    > although it's not "anamorphic"...but then I wouldn't be surprised to see
    > studio marketing people misusing a technical term.


    It is also looking more and more like HD-DVD will be keeping the DVD region
    system, as the French track "Dubbed in Quebec" suggests. That would seem to
    suggest an R2 release would be dubbed in France and would have
    additional/alternate languages. Hmmm.

    Larry
    Larry G, Mar 29, 2006
    #6
  7. Goro

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    "Jeff Rife" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >> Million Dollar Baby will include anamorphic widescreen video (1080p &
    >> 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)
    >>
    >> Phantom of the Opera (2004) will include anamorphic widescreen video
    >> (1080p & 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)
    >>
    >> Finally, The Last Samurai will include anamorphic widescreen video
    >> (1080p & 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)

    >
    > Well, this is bad news.
    >
    > The term "anamorphic widescreen" for DVD meant that the normal 4:3
    > image
    > is supposed to be stretched to fill a 16:9 screen. This allowed them
    > to
    > gain scan lines of resolution without needing a different format.
    >
    > *BUT*, it also implies that the horizontal pixel count won't be
    > "correct".
    >
    > In other words, a DVD *should* have 853x480 pixels for a 16:9 movie,
    > but
    > it only has 720x480. Likewise, this would seem to mean that an
    > "anamorphic
    > widescreen" HD-HVD *should* have 1920x1080 pixels, but will have less
    > (maybe 1440x1080?).
    >
    > Or, do they mean that the 2.40:1 movies will be encoded at 1920x800
    > (which
    > is all the movie needs) and the player will send out black bars at the
    > top and bottom to fill in the full 1080 scan lines? That would be
    > great,
    > although it's not "anamorphic"...but then I wouldn't be surprised to
    > see
    > studio marketing people misusing a technical term.


    I wouldn't read too much into this. I haven't seen these specs published
    anywhere other than Digital Bits yet, so it could just be Bill Hunt's
    misunderstanding. I've seen him use that term in relation to HDTV many
    times before. And even if that was in the official press release, these
    things often have technical errors that are corrected later.

    HD-DVD content is stored on disc in 1920x1080p24 format. This has been
    confirmed by people doing the encoding. There is no downsampling and
    anamorphic stretching. Likewise, there is no form of anamorphic
    enhancement for 2.35:1 content, which some of us would have appreciated.
    The term "anamorphic" in that announcement really means nothing.
    Joshua Zyber, Mar 30, 2006
    #7
  8. Goro

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    "Goro" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > So, looks like HD-DVD is going to have 1080p video and 480i video for
    > the extras. I was under the impression HD-DVD was going to be 1080i
    > and i don't understand why they would put 480i video on there at all.


    Do you really need your making-of featurettes and HBO First Look
    specials in HD? Most of these things weren't shot in HD in the first
    place, and upscaling a Standard Definition video featurette to store it
    on disc in HD would just be a waste of disc space when the HD-DVD player
    can upscale it during playback later.

    The movie will be encoded in true High Definition. Isn't that what
    really matters?
    Joshua Zyber, Mar 30, 2006
    #8
  9. Goro

    Mark Jones Guest

    WinField wrote:
    > 480i video may not be on the discs at all! The author mentions
    > asterisks on the Video* & Audio* specs, and wonders if the 480i
    > specification is for "down-sampled" video: (pertinent quote below)


    If they down sample to 480i, I will not be interested in this at all.

    I can already watch 480p on my HDTV using a progressive scan
    DVD player. Sounds like a step backwards to me. They can keep
    their new technology if it won't provide an improved signal over
    my component connections.
    Mark Jones, Mar 30, 2006
    #9
  10. Goro

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    "Mark Jones" <> wrote in message
    news:O%FWf.11649$...
    > If they down sample to 480i, I will not be interested in this at all.
    >
    > I can already watch 480p on my HDTV using a progressive scan
    > DVD player. Sounds like a step backwards to me. They can keep
    > their new technology if it won't provide an improved signal over
    > my component connections.


    There's no downsampling to 480i. In a worst case scenario, the video may
    be downsampled to 540p, which is not high definition but is a bit better
    than DVD.

    Both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray work the same way in this regard. The players
    themselves are capable of outputting full HD resolution over component.
    It will be up to the studios to decide on each disc whether to add an
    Image Constraint Token or not. If they don't add the ICT, the movie will
    play in full HD over either HDMI or component. If they do add the ICT,
    HDMI output will be full HD, but component output will be downsampled to
    540p.

    Several studios, including Sony and Universal, have said that they won't
    use the ICT, at least not at first. Warner Bros is undecided and says
    they *may* use it.
    Joshua Zyber, Mar 30, 2006
    #10
  11. Goro

    WinField Guest

    If the native format for HD-DVD/BH is 1080p24 and the new player
    outputs this - then it seems to me Mark Jones is still up the creek
    without a connector. As are almost all other folks who have invested
    big-time into HDtv monitors/tvs.

    Aren't the majority of HDTVs out there native 720p or 1080i ? How
    many monitors already sold can input 1080p24 to even attempt to
    down-sample /convert to native resolution.

    Seems a bit of a mess. {winf}


    Joshua Zyber wrote:
    > "Mark Jones" <> wrote in message
    > news:O%FWf.11649$...
    >
    >>If they down sample to 480i, I will not be interested in this at all.
    >>
    >>I can already watch 480p on my HDTV using a progressive scan
    >>DVD player. Sounds like a step backwards to me. They can keep
    >>their new technology if it won't provide an improved signal over
    >>my component connections.

    >
    >
    > There's no downsampling to 480i. In a worst case scenario, the video may
    > be downsampled to 540p, which is not high definition but is a bit better
    > than DVD.
    >
    > Both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray work the same way in this regard. The players
    > themselves are capable of outputting full HD resolution over component.
    > It will be up to the studios to decide on each disc whether to add an
    > Image Constraint Token or not. If they don't add the ICT, the movie will
    > play in full HD over either HDMI or component. If they do add the ICT,
    > HDMI output will be full HD, but component output will be downsampled to
    > 540p.
    >
    > Several studios, including Sony and Universal, have said that they won't
    > use the ICT, at least not at first. Warner Bros is undecided and says
    > they *may* use it.
    >
    >
    WinField, Mar 30, 2006
    #11
  12. Goro

    Jay G. Guest

    On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:08:23 -0500, Jeff Rife wrote:

    > Goro () wrote in alt.video.dvd:
    >> http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents
    >>
    >> Million Dollar Baby will include anamorphic widescreen video (1080p &
    >> 480i resolutions, 2.40:1 aspect ratio)

    >
    > Well, this is bad news.
    >
    > The term "anamorphic widescreen" for DVD meant that the normal 4:3 image
    > is supposed to be stretched to fill a 16:9 screen. This allowed them to
    > gain scan lines of resolution without needing a different format.
    >
    > *BUT*, it also implies that the horizontal pixel count won't be "correct".


    The term "anamorphic widescreen" is used only by The Digital Bits itself.
    The technical grid the site shows from the studio itself describes the
    film's video as "1080p High Definition 16x9 2.4:1". The inclusion of 16x9
    in the description seems to be what's throwing digital bits off. However,
    WB may simply mean that the video is 16x9, with a 2.4:1 image letterboxed
    inside it.

    Also note that The Digital Bits thinks that the feature film will be in
    both 1080p and 480i, which again the technical grids don't support. The
    only video listed for the "Main Feature" is "1080p High Definition 16x9
    2.4:1," while the 480i is listed as the video for the "Special Features."

    -Jay
    Jay G., Mar 30, 2006
    #12
  13. Goro

    Goro Guest

    WinField wrote:
    > If the native format for HD-DVD/BH is 1080p24 and the new player
    > outputs this - then it seems to me Mark Jones is still up the creek
    > without a connector. As are almost all other folks who have invested
    > big-time into HDtv monitors/tvs.
    >
    > Aren't the majority of HDTVs out there native 720p or 1080i ? How
    > many monitors already sold can input 1080p24 to even attempt to
    > down-sample /convert to native resolution.
    >
    > Seems a bit of a mess. {winf}


    btw, even the 1080p HDTVs don't have 1080p inputs.

    -goro-
    Goro, Mar 30, 2006
    #13
  14. Goro

    Jeff Rife Guest

    Jay G. ("Jay G." <"Jay "@tmbg.org>) wrote in alt.video.dvd:
    > The term "anamorphic widescreen" is used only by The Digital Bits itself.
    > The technical grid the site shows from the studio itself describes the
    > film's video as "1080p High Definition 16x9 2.4:1". The inclusion of 16x9
    > in the description seems to be what's throwing digital bits off.


    OK, no surprise that somebody got confused.

    > However,
    > WB may simply mean that the video is 16x9, with a 2.4:1 image letterboxed
    > inside it.


    I still think the HD specs missed the boat by not allowing the video to
    be encoded in *any* aspect ratio and requiring a player to be able to
    create black bars on the fly for output to both 4:3 and 16:9 aspect
    ratios.

    Sure, it's not gonna save a *lot* of disc space, but it would allow a few
    nice things, like moving the movie up (or down), easier zooming/cropping
    (for those dummies who absolutely have to have the screen filled) or output
    to completely abitrary resolutions if the player wanted to do so.

    --
    Jeff Rife | Al Gore: To my left, you'll recognize
    | Gary Gygax, inventor of Dungeons &
    | Dragons.
    | Gary Gygax: Greetings it's a...
    | [rolls dice]
    | Gary Gygax: ...pleasure to meet you.
    | -- "Futurama"
    Jeff Rife, Apr 2, 2006
    #14
  15. Goro

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    "Jeff Rife" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I still think the HD specs missed the boat by not allowing the video
    > to
    > be encoded in *any* aspect ratio and requiring a player to be able to
    > create black bars on the fly for output to both 4:3 and 16:9 aspect
    > ratios.
    >
    > Sure, it's not gonna save a *lot* of disc space, but it would allow a
    > few
    > nice things, like moving the movie up (or down), easier
    > zooming/cropping
    > (for those dummies who absolutely have to have the screen filled) or
    > output
    > to completely abitrary resolutions if the player wanted to do so.


    I agree, and it would also be a huge benefit for those of us running
    2.35:1 Constant Image Height projection. However, I believe the reason
    they didn't do this is because the HD masters that the studios have been
    striking for several years now use square pixels at 1920x1080p
    resolution, meaning that the master itself only accomodates the 16:9
    ratio and anything else has black bars encoded into the video right at
    the master.
    Joshua Zyber, Apr 2, 2006
    #15
  16. Goro

    Jay G. Guest

    On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 13:38:32 GMT, Joshua Zyber wrote:

    > > I still think the HD specs missed the boat by not allowing the video to
    > > be encoded in *any* aspect ratio and requiring a player to be able to
    > > create black bars on the fly for output to both 4:3 and 16:9 aspect
    > > ratios.

    >
    > I agree, and it would also be a huge benefit for those of us running
    > 2.35:1 Constant Image Height projection. However, I believe the reason
    > they didn't do this is because the HD masters that the studios have been
    > striking for several years now use square pixels at 1920x1080p
    > resolution, meaning that the master itself only accomodates the 16:9
    > ratio and anything else has black bars encoded into the video right at
    > the master.


    That may be, but just because that's the way they are *now* doesn't mean
    you should exclude the option of doing it different later. For example,
    anamorphic video didn't hit it big until after DVD included in its spec.
    Even then, a lot of earlier title were non-anamorphic because studios were
    using existing masters that were 4:3 letterboxed.

    -Jay
    Jay G., Apr 3, 2006
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Hugo Drax
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    343
    Hugo Drax
    Nov 20, 2003
  2. Torsten Kaiser \(TLEFilms\)
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    885
    Allan
    Jun 6, 2005
  3. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    472
    George K
    Nov 20, 2006
  4. gerry
    Replies:
    91
    Views:
    1,956
  5. Becky
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    726
    Becky
    Mar 15, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page