High Definition DVD is on Its Way!

Phoenix, We have Comcast digital cable, and we're very happy with the quality of our picture. We also have HDTV, so even non-HDTV programs look pretty good. Comparing the t.v. picture to the photos on our wall behind the t.v., they're comparable - with the t.v. screen being much bigger, it's a no contest comparison. c.i.

I had a major failure with my Mitsubishi big screen (it was eight years old anyway) and took the plunge with a more appropriate sized 42" rear projection wide screen HDTV, also Mitsubishi. I am having the Time Warner Cable box installed which delivers an HDTV picture and programming guide. The next steps is, of course, a HD DVD player when they arrive so thanks, Phoenix. I'm wondering just how much they can get on a disc since there's three times the digital data required so that's amazing that they can compress 135 minutes. However, I wonder if that means some sacrifice of the total resolution of true HDTV? I know rear projection screens lose about 20% of the resolution due to dispersion of the pixels (except the set I bought does not have the fresnel lens, meaning the viewing angle is more confined. Compared to the plasma, there is a visual difference (the plasma being superior, of course). But for $2,000.00 more, I wasn't impressed. I was considering the Sony 40" direct tube but it's only comes in the old square picture, producing those dang letterbox black bands at the top and bottom. It was comparable to the plasma, though.

The real issue here is that filmmakers shoot their films on film with film cameras, no HD cameras. What that means if the best resoultion you'll get with HD DVD is the quality of the original film, which is not HD. So what you'll see is a negligible difference between HD DVD's and Standard Def DVD's. Of course the more HD we see in consumer electronics the more producers start to think about originating their material in HD to start with. But filmmakers are an odd bunch and there is something to be said for the "look" of film. I'm excited about it for the data storage capacity. Being able to backup the entire contents of your hard drive on a a single disc is awesome. Once they become re-writable, you'll have backup devices that can backup your hard drive every day automatically, using the same disk.

That's true to an extent, Brian. The last "Star Wars" film was shot in HD digital and some theaters were showing it in the digital projection. However, standard 70mm film still has higher definition than the around 450 lines of DVD. You will notice the difference (I've watched a few films on HBO which are HD and it is better than DVD), especially if a print used is 70mm or IMAX. Microsoft XP backs up your hard drive and although you would lose any data other than the OS if it were to crash, you can boot up and reclaim the XP OS. You are correct that storing that data on a backup disc is great news.

One thing that many of the broadcasters are doing is shrinking the picture with a black border around all four sides or still letterboxing so that expanding it to a 16:9 screen stretches the image up and down. Why are they doing this? I suspect to save on bandwidth. That also means they aren't using all 1080 dpi resolution.

hd dvd won't be around for a while unless you count wmv encoded dvd's like the new edition of terminator 2.

dvd's just don't have enough space for hd content. already i'm seeing increasing numbers of 2 dvd sets. and wmv is a microsoft format so it's not going to be embraced by any standards organization. not to mention that wmv doesn't support dts audio and requires almost ridiculous amounts of computing power to decode.

hd dvd's will have to wait until blue-ray dvd is available which don't be soon.

yeman, WELCOME to A2K. c.i.

I agree that it will be a bit of time before we see blue ray players in the U.S. Sony has slated release for one in Japan (they already have a recorder on the market at $3800.!) before the end of the year. However, HDTV is far ahead of the first inkling that the US was going to pick up the format -- originally the prediction was 2005 before the first sets were availabe, let along the programming. Like I said, the over cable and satellite programming is meager, the major networks only broadcasting a true HD image on a few shows and movies (decided to watch "The Mark of Zorro" when CBS broadcast it in HDTV and it was as good as a film projection in a good theater). Also, there's no standard -- "The Mark of Zorro" was still letterboxed, not fitting the TV wide screen ratio and, of course, not utilizing all 1080 lines of a fully capable HDTV screen. I couldn't guess whether they were presenting the original theatrical ratio on purpose or were simply saving bandwidth. Probably a little of both.

thank c.i.

i would also think that the dvd standards body would want to come up with a new encryption scheme for hd dvd. dvd encryption has already been broken. and that can take a very long time. or maybe they just won't license blue-ray technology to computer hardware manufacturers. keeping it a standalone product only.

The industry wants to deliver HDTV -- people will lull in buying the sets if the programming including DVD is not put on the market. I think SONY being one of the leaders of new technology will get this pressured through ASAP. At least, I'm not replacing my VHS of "2001" until it's in HD DVD.

Samsung's HD 931 will deliver a full 1080dp to computer screen with the proper connection and can be inputed into one's DVI input or a component input on a big screen digital TV. But what it's really doing is converting the 480 to 720 or 1080. The picture quality isn't much different than a good progressive scan DVD player and, as a matter of fact, doesn't look the same as utilitzing the line doubling available with nearly all HD TV's. Beware of this product as Samsung techs will conveniently ignore that it won't work the way it looks on the surface specs. It does mean that it looks like it won't be all that long before true HD DVD is on the market. I'm going to stick my neck out and say by Christmas 2004.