Format Wars May Be Over, but Blu-ray Still Faces Challenges, According to ABI Research

akirby · Post by **akirby** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:09 am

I assume what you're saying is that some movies on cable HD are better than some (different) movies on BR. If so then of course that has EVERYTHING to do with the transfer and NOTHING to do with the format itself.

That's like watching Norbit on BR and Caddyshack on cable HD and concluding that cable HD is funnier than BR.

film11 · Post by **film11** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:22 am

Well, I mentioned some specific titles that I've seen on both Cable and BR.
Of course, I assume that the fault lies with the BR transfers. But that has been a BR issue since they first debuted! And, although at least FIFTH ELEMENT was re-released with a better transfer, it seems to have been an issue for BR since inception. Not trying to say that affects ALL titles. But there have been enough for me to determine that BR isn't really necessary or worth the money. (Especially now that OnDemand is presenting a couple movies in HD both prior to and during theatrical release!!!)

akirby · Post by **akirby** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:49 am

I didn't realize there were different HD transfers involved. Was that an anomaly because BR and HD DVD were new? Going forward would there still be separate transfers?

One thing you forgot to mention - audio. With cable or satellite or broadcast you only get DD 5.1. With BR you get much better sound.

Richard · Post by **Richard** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:38 am

I have yet to see any broadcast over the last 6 years equal the clean delivery of good DVD or even marginal Blu-ray. If not OTA the results tend to be even worse due to shaving video bits and odds are high you are taking another hit in the audio due to shaving audio bits.

If high fidelity is the desired result it would seem to make sense that the blu-ray version would get higher marks. I watched Casino Royal and noted the lack of detail in many scenes but without seeing the transfer I don't know if that is poor mastering or being faithful to the original. In the case of broadcast media services it is possible to jack up detail which still would not be high fidelity but it will create the perception of a more detailed image.

As with DVD, it is reasonable to expect the early years of blu-ray to have some quality problems. That said I am pleased to no end so far... For clarity, that is based on the torture test of 1080p at 3 screen heights. While that may be a torture test in our broadcast world it is what the system is supposed to be capable of!

dabhome · Post by **dabhome** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:54 pm

One problem with cable or OnDemand HD is that they very often resize the video to fit the 16/9 aspect ratio instead of keeping the original aspect ratio (OAR). Some people perceive that the video is better because of this.

In the early days some Blu-Ray disks had some bad transfers. Today, this rarely happens. Fifth Element was re-released to resolve a bad transfer (which was giving Blu-Ray a bad name).

I have watched HD-DVD (quality is equal to Blu-Ray) vs. cable HD and HD-DVD has always beaten cable. And the sound is always far better.

hharris4earthlink · Post by **hharris4earthlink** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:39 pm

My biggest complaint with my HD satellite feed is they sometimes modify the HD aspect ration to fit 16:9. That's a mistake. I'd much rather see bars than watch a distorted image. Imagine watching Angelina Jolie with a waist as big as her hips! My preference would be to standardize on 16:9 for all content. Use bars for older content when necessary.

Henry

Richard · Post by **Richard** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:22 am

Not sure if I understand you... Are you saying that OAR should be broadcast within the 16:9 and damn the black bars if required? If so, I'm with you!

dabhome · Post by **dabhome** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 2:06 pm

Yep, that is what I was saying. And I suspect that is what HHarris was saying. But, I should let him speak for himself.

David

hharris4earthlink · Post by **hharris4earthlink** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:19 pm

That's correct. I'd much rather see bars on the right and left if the alternative is chopping off people heads or distorting the picture. A separate problem occurs in broadcasts from the BBC which sometimes has a 16:9 picture inside our 16:9 frame with borders on the left, right, top and bottom. I'm guessing that's because the BBC picture has a smaller number of pixels than we use.

film11 · Post by **film11** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:27 pm

I agree, as far as OAR goes. But not all OnDemand movies suffer from this, thankfully.