Warner, Universal and Paramount announce 89 HD-DVD titles at DVinfo.net

Christopher C. Murphy · January 7th, 2005, 04:35 PM

Warner, Universal and Paramount together announced some 89 titles that will be available on HD-DVD in time for the format's 4th Qtr launch:

http://videostoremag.com/news/html/b...rticle_ID=7014

I want Blu_ray!!!!! Interestingly, Blu-Ray is trying to bring the game industry into the fold, so that's a huge plus for them. There is still great opportinuties for it, and I think we'll see both win. The public is very savvy to digital tech, so I think the multiple format players will truly be the "winners" in this race.

Also, check here for the complete list of DVD titles:

http://www.digitalbits.com/

Murph

Yi Fong Yu · January 7th, 2005, 07:33 PM

thank GOD i didn't buy THOUSANDS of DVDs!!!! i knew hi-def DVDs were on the horizon!!! woo hoo hindsight is very nice indeed!!

time to sell all my crappy DVDs!

so which films from the list would you guys own on HD-DVD?

This is what I would buy (START SAVING!):

Paramount HD-DVD
Forrest Gump
Braveheart
Star Trek: First Contact

Universal HD-DVD
The Chronicles of Riddick
Apollo 13
12 Monkeys
Pitch Black

Warner Bros/HBO/New Line HD-DVD
Blade
Contact
Constantine
The Fugitive
The Mask
The Matrix Trilogy
Se7en (New Line)

Brandon Greenlee · January 7th, 2005, 11:09 PM

Hate to ask a stupid question, but....

If these titles weren't hd to begin with how are they going to be that much better quality than the original dvd's?

Or is film resolution independent in this aspect. Please explain.

Jesse Rosten · January 7th, 2005, 11:19 PM

Hey Brandon,

Film resolution IS much higher than HD. I'm sure they are going back to the original negatives and re-scanning the film at a higher resolution. It's not like they're just up-rezzing the DVD footage.

Yi Fong Yu · January 7th, 2005, 11:37 PM

in my wish of wishes i want all older films to go through lowry digital and clean them up... THEN release them. for most modern films 2k transfer is fine but do you really need 4k? anyway... i eagerly await the cost of the equipment! =). if it's gonna be $50 straight out of the gate... then pluck me down for a few.

Charles Papert · January 8th, 2005, 12:58 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Yi Fong Yu : for most modern films 2k transfer is fine but do you really need 4k? -->>>

That depends who "you" is.

2K still fudges more than half of 35mm film's information. It probably won't be around for long, other than for low-budget work. It's really just about storage at this point. If "you" is a filmmaker shooting on 35mm...yes, they do need 4k.

Obviously for the home viewer, it will be a long time before the difference between 2k and 4k is a factor, but I imagine it will get there someday.

Ever had a chance to re-read what you posted in forums 10 years ago, especially if it involved technology predictions? I have; it's pretty interesting.

Christopher C. Murphy · January 8th, 2005, 10:17 AM

Hey, the general rule is the higher res the source material the better the final downgraded material. Whether it's crappy web video or the highest soon-to-be HD DVD's - they all benefit from having the highest quality source material. I don't think a lot of people understand it, but it's really simple...the more bits you have to work with the better the compression you will get because the math it computes has more to pick and choose. Does that make sense? All compression techniques are about taking what's there and re-calculating it to a new version minus bits that it deems unnessasary. The trick is writing code that gives you the ultimate version without losing what's most important. They're getting really, really good at this now. My experience with codecs (COmpression - DECompression) goes back to Vivo. Anyone remember Vivo? I stopped doing web video development in 2000 while living in Los Angeles. The tiny pipe for web video wasn't there yet...(it is now with so many broadbanders), but it's amazing that the same technology is used to encode 4k scans to DVD's. It's just re-calulating bits in an efficiant way. I'm dying to see the HD-DVD's and Blu-Ray's....although, not to jump the gun but I've read that the Japanese are blazing forward to unreal HD res stuff. One article I read said they developed a camera that so HD that people watching playback got physically sick because it was so real - yet they weren't moving. (It was a car driving through traffic)

Interestly, I'm a little ticked that the Star Wars Trilogy was scanned at 2k instead of 4k. I read an article that said Lucas opted for 2k because he said he couldn't justify the cost for getting a 4k scan of the material. Is that most insanely **&^&% thing you ever heard? If it's true the guy is so lost in la la land....I want optimal visuals when I buy new and improved versions of films. I bought them and they look awesome, but I'm sure that having the extra res in scans would have made them look even better.

Yi Fong Yu · January 8th, 2005, 02:58 PM

yesh star wars was 2k. i mean... if STAR WARS was done 2k, ya know? but then again that was specifically for DVD. would the same 2k look better on HD-DVD/BR-DVD? who knows.

i read an interview with lowry and he said that a really detailed 4k scan of film played back is virtually indistinguishable from the original... is it that good? i've never seen it, i dunno.

Dennis Liu · January 8th, 2005, 03:13 PM

Man, what's gonna happen when Sony releases all their titles on Blu-ray and Columbia/Warner Bros releases all their titles on HD-DVD? Will the players play both formats? Or do I have to buy one machine per format?

I'm really waiting out and seeing who eventually wins in this one, cos it's a consumer's nightmare...

Dennis

Brandon Greenlee · January 8th, 2005, 03:16 PM

What does 4k and 2k mean?

Christopher C. Murphy · January 8th, 2005, 04:31 PM

Dennis, there is suppose to be a compatible player coming out that'll do both. I really think that people are a little smarter now then when VHS/Beta happened. It's my belief that we don't have to worry because the companies that make this stuff will have whatever we need on the market...it's DVD's we're talking about. The #1 selling consumer electronic device in history is the DVD player........

Yi Fong Yu · January 8th, 2005, 06:12 PM

it will be similar to what Pioneer has done for SACD and DVD-Audio (MLP). The model #578a i think is an universal player that can play DVD video, Audio (MLP) as well as CDs, SACD and MP3s and so on. it only costs $120-170!

i bet somebody (doesn't have to be Pioneer) will come out with ANOTHER updated Universal player that plays:

-HD-DVD (and all its write-once, rewrite-able varieties)
-BR-DVD (and all its write-once, rewrite-able varieties)
-DVD-Video (and all its write-once, rewrite-able varieties)
-DVD-Audio MLP
-SACD
-MP3
-CD (and all its write-once, rewrite-able varieties)

and further down 2010 or so you'll see Chinese cloning companies making players that play all those above AND:

-divx
-xvid
-wmv
-EVD
-all other formats known to man.

January 7th, 2005, 07:33 PM	#2
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	thank GOD i didn't buy THOUSANDS of DVDs!!!! i knew hi-def DVDs were on the horizon!!! woo hoo hindsight is very nice indeed!! time to sell all my crappy DVDs! so which films from the list would you guys own on HD-DVD? This is what I would buy (START SAVING!): Paramount HD-DVD Forrest Gump Braveheart Star Trek: First Contact Universal HD-DVD The Chronicles of Riddick Apollo 13 12 Monkeys Pitch Black Warner Bros/HBO/New Line HD-DVD Blade Contact Constantine The Fugitive The Mask The Matrix Trilogy Se7en (New Line) __________________ bow wow wow

January 7th, 2005, 11:09 PM	#3
Brandon Greenlee Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: North Alabama Posts: 242	Hate to ask a stupid question, but.... If these titles weren't hd to begin with how are they going to be that much better quality than the original dvd's? Or is film resolution independent in this aspect. Please explain. __________________ Brandon Greenlee

January 8th, 2005, 12:58 AM	#6
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	<<<-- Originally posted by Yi Fong Yu : for most modern films 2k transfer is fine but do you really need 4k? -->>> That depends who "you" is. 2K still fudges more than half of 35mm film's information. It probably won't be around for long, other than for low-budget work. It's really just about storage at this point. If "you" is a filmmaker shooting on 35mm...yes, they do need 4k. Obviously for the home viewer, it will be a long time before the difference between 2k and 4k is a factor, but I imagine it will get there someday. Ever had a chance to re-read what you posted in forums 10 years ago, especially if it involved technology predictions? I have; it's pretty interesting. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

January 8th, 2005, 10:17 AM	#7
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	Hey, the general rule is the higher res the source material the better the final downgraded material. Whether it's crappy web video or the highest soon-to-be HD DVD's - they all benefit from having the highest quality source material. I don't think a lot of people understand it, but it's really simple...the more bits you have to work with the better the compression you will get because the math it computes has more to pick and choose. Does that make sense? All compression techniques are about taking what's there and re-calculating it to a new version minus bits that it deems unnessasary. The trick is writing code that gives you the ultimate version without losing what's most important. They're getting really, really good at this now. My experience with codecs (COmpression - DECompression) goes back to Vivo. Anyone remember Vivo? I stopped doing web video development in 2000 while living in Los Angeles. The tiny pipe for web video wasn't there yet...(it is now with so many broadbanders), but it's amazing that the same technology is used to encode 4k scans to DVD's. It's just re-calulating bits in an efficiant way. I'm dying to see the HD-DVD's and Blu-Ray's....although, not to jump the gun but I've read that the Japanese are blazing forward to unreal HD res stuff. One article I read said they developed a camera that so HD that people watching playback got physically sick because it was so real - yet they weren't moving. (It was a car driving through traffic) Interestly, I'm a little ticked that the Star Wars Trilogy was scanned at 2k instead of 4k. I read an article that said Lucas opted for 2k because he said he couldn't justify the cost for getting a 4k scan of the material. Is that most insanely **&^&% thing you ever heard? If it's true the guy is so lost in la la land....I want optimal visuals when I buy new and improved versions of films. I bought them and they look awesome, but I'm sure that having the extra res in scans would have made them look even better. __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

January 8th, 2005, 02:58 PM	#8
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	yesh star wars was 2k. i mean... if STAR WARS was done 2k, ya know? but then again that was specifically for DVD. would the same 2k look better on HD-DVD/BR-DVD? who knows. i read an interview with lowry and he said that a really detailed 4k scan of film played back is virtually indistinguishable from the original... is it that good? i've never seen it, i dunno. __________________ bow wow wow

January 7th, 2005, 04:35 PM	#1
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	Warner, Universal and Paramount announce 89 HD-DVD titles Warner, Universal and Paramount together announced some 89 titles that will be available on HD-DVD in time for the format's 4th Qtr launch: http://videostoremag.com/news/html/b...rticle_ID=7014 I want Blu_ray!!!!! Interestingly, Blu-Ray is trying to bring the game industry into the fold, so that's a huge plus for them. There is still great opportinuties for it, and I think we'll see both win. The public is very savvy to digital tech, so I think the multiple format players will truly be the "winners" in this race. Also, check here for the complete list of DVD titles: http://www.digitalbits.com/ Murph __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

January 7th, 2005, 11:19 PM	#4
Jesse Rosten Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Redding, California Posts: 114	Hey Brandon, Film resolution IS much higher than HD. I'm sure they are going back to the original negatives and re-scanning the film at a higher resolution. It's not like they're just up-rezzing the DVD footage.

January 7th, 2005, 11:37 PM	#5
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	in my wish of wishes i want all older films to go through lowry digital and clean them up... THEN release them. for most modern films 2k transfer is fine but do you really need 4k? anyway... i eagerly await the cost of the equipment! =). if it's gonna be $50 straight out of the gate... then pluck me down for a few. __________________ bow wow wow

January 8th, 2005, 03:13 PM	#9
Dennis Liu Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 136	Man, what's gonna happen when Sony releases all their titles on Blu-ray and Columbia/Warner Bros releases all their titles on HD-DVD? Will the players play both formats? Or do I have to buy one machine per format? I'm really waiting out and seeing who eventually wins in this one, cos it's a consumer's nightmare... Dennis

January 8th, 2005, 03:16 PM	#10
Brandon Greenlee Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: North Alabama Posts: 242	What does 4k and 2k mean? __________________ Brandon Greenlee

January 8th, 2005, 04:31 PM	#11
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	Dennis, there is suppose to be a compatible player coming out that'll do both. I really think that people are a little smarter now then when VHS/Beta happened. It's my belief that we don't have to worry because the companies that make this stuff will have whatever we need on the market...it's DVD's we're talking about. The #1 selling consumer electronic device in history is the DVD player........ __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

January 8th, 2005, 06:12 PM	#12
Yi Fong Yu Trustee Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vulcan Posts: 1,564	it will be similar to what Pioneer has done for SACD and DVD-Audio (MLP). The model #578a i think is an universal player that can play DVD video, Audio (MLP) as well as CDs, SACD and MP3s and so on. it only costs $120-170! i bet somebody (doesn't have to be Pioneer) will come out with ANOTHER updated Universal player that plays: -HD-DVD (and all its write-once, rewrite-able varieties) -BR-DVD (and all its write-once, rewrite-able varieties) -DVD-Video (and all its write-once, rewrite-able varieties) -DVD-Audio MLP -SACD -MP3 -CD (and all its write-once, rewrite-able varieties) and further down 2010 or so you'll see Chinese cloning companies making players that play all those above AND: -divx -xvid -wmv -EVD -all other formats known to man. __________________ bow wow wow