Xbox 360 HD player

[JB]

I have a 720p projector using an 80" screen. The difference between SD and HD movies is massive on my display.

Yeah, but it's not saying much to say that since everything will be huge on a nearly 7 foot display Besides, aren't most (original new release) DVD's displayed at 640x480? So at ??? x 720, I'd say it show around 4x the pixels. Really good, but some people simply don't notice the difference in mearly doubleing the resolution.

720*480 for DVD-Video. ALL NTSC disks are at this resolution(PAL disks have a slightly higher vertical resolution, but they're 50FPS, so... eww.).

1280*720 for 720p.

 

That's actually closer to triple the resolution than double.

It's exactly 2 and 2/3s more pixels.

 

 

Actual image quality will vary significantly with level of compression and encoder quality, though. DVD suffered in several releases due to over-compression and/or bad encodes leading to visible MPEG artifacting.

 

The more advanced codecs used in HD disks have greatly reduced the issue. The added space isn't as significant as you'd think, since they're about 3x larger* and moving 6x the pixels(1080p encodes), plus higher audio bitrates too.

 

 

*While BluRay is far larger than HD-DVD per layer, most current BR releases are single-layer 25GB disks, while all current HD-DVD releases are dual-layer 30GB disks. BR publishers are shifting over to dual-layer 50GB disks, however, so it seems BR is starting to gain it's promised capacity advantage.

Edited May 24, 2007 by JB

[jsoper]

We're loving ours, bought last Dec and playing through a projector and 92 inch screen, a Sony projector even.

Watched episode 3 of "Planet Earth" last night and in one part the camera zooms along a river in South America, then suddenly goes

over a huge waterfall. You could actually feel the movement.

[StormSurge]

I picked mine up last night. Now I just need to get a HTIB.

 

The "Planet Earth" HD DVDs are what sold me.

[liveinabin]

720*480 for DVD-Video. ALL NTSC disks are at this resolution(PAL disks have a slightly higher vertical resolution, but they're 50FPS, so... eww.).

 

 

Dude, NOTHING wrong with 50fps for movies. Films are shot at 24fps. Half 50 is 25, half 60 is 30. Which is closer?

[Video]

720*480 for DVD-Video. ALL NTSC disks are at this resolution(PAL disks have a slightly higher vertical resolution, but they're 50FPS, so... eww.).

 

 

Dude, NOTHING wrong with 50fps for movies. Films are shot at 24fps. Half 50 is 25, half 60 is 30. Which is closer?

 

For real, seems most people don't know what speed this stuff is recorded at. Either way, both move fast enough you won't notice a difference either way...unless your useing a PC monitor or something to watch it on.

 

When I said double resolution though, I'm talking verticle (or horisontal, if you prefer) The fact is it's not that big a difference. It is close to 3X the pixels on screen, but it's still less than double the lines, and as I said, most people aren't going to notice.

[Jetboot Jack]

Well I have the HD DVD drive add on and really enjoy the superior PQ...

 

I find HD is a HUGE leap in image quality above SD broadcasts and DVD's.

 

Remember it is not just a resolution increase, but a change in compression and a much larger color gamut. It's not just that images are much sharper, but they have a really wonderful color quality and less compression artifacts so overall the PQ is so much better. DVD is only 480p at best (720X480) for NTSC (usually just 480i) - which is a tiny resolution compared to full HD...

 

Sure I have a great LCD TV (1920X1080) which helps, but the difference between the same material on DVD and HD DVD is huge - any to be honest I find it very difficult to believe that anone cannot see the difference. Even on broadcast material (via SKY) stuff like BBC shows and films the PQ is just much better...

 

Sure getting into HD is not exactly cheap, but the visual benefits are there if you do...

 

sTeVE

Edited May 30, 2007 by Jetboot Jack

[JB]

720*480 for DVD-Video. ALL NTSC disks are at this resolution(PAL disks have a slightly higher vertical resolution, but they're 50FPS, so... eww.).

 

 

Dude, NOTHING wrong with 50fps for movies. Films are shot at 24fps. Half 50 is 25, half 60 is 30. Which is closer?

I was thinking in terms of CRT flicker, actually. I'm behind, I know.

 

 

Technically, 50Hz is closer.

 

BUT...

Do you know which is adapted more accurately?

 

The traditional solution for 50Hz regions is to just run the movie fast.

The solution for 60Hz regions, due to the film becoming comically accelerated if just run at 30FPS, is "3:2 pulldown". Alternate between doubling and tripling frames.

It leaves the film running at exactly the original speed, though the field interleave gets a bit weird if you're viewing on an interlaced screen.

 

 

 

 

Of course, film source on DVD is supposed to be stored at 24FPS and the player is responsible for adapting it. But I'm not really sure how they react to wrong-region film-source disks(ignoring region code issues).

Optimally, they should select the native output fix(speed up for 50Hz, 3:2 for 60Hz), but I dunno how it works in practice.