Consumer Reports advises hitting 'pause' on High Def DVD

[David K]

[From the website and August 2006 Issue]

Call it a decided delay in DVD development. Until this year, the disc that dominates prerecorded movies was strictly a standard-definition medium. The introduction of high-definition DVD was delayed by limited disc capacity and a host of other issues. Though standard DVD images look impressive enough on an HDTV, their quality falls short of the set’s potential to create dazzingly detailed images.

Now, finally, two competing (and incompatible) high-*definition DVD formats are beginning to hit the market. There’s HD DVD, introduced by Toshiba and supported by movie studios including Universal and HBO; and Blu-ray, led by Sony and backed by Disney and others.

As we expected, in preliminary tests HD DVD delivered sharper, more detailed images than regular DVD, and Blu-ray promises a similar improvement. (As of early July, the first Blu-ray players were not yet on the market.) Both formats also allow for greater interactivity than regular DVDs.

Before beginning to make the popcorn, though, consider these seven sobering realities about high-def DVD. Together, they render the new technology more a development to track than a technology you should invest in now.

Beware the format war. Home-entertainment history suggests that only one format will be left standing. That’s what happened in the VHS vs. Betamax battle, the 1970s videotape-format fight in which consumers who invested in the latter format were left with obsolete tapes and players. Even if both high-def DVD formats survive, most movies will be available in only one or the other. A few major studios--so far, Warner Bros. and Paramount--will offer titles in both. But no combination HD DVD/Blu-ray players are currently available. True movie buffs will have to buy both HD DVD and Blu-ray equipment.

It’s not cheap. Stepping up to high-def DVD might be more tempting if it didn’t cost so much more than its *standard-def sibling. But player prices start at $500, compared with $100 or less for many standard DVD players, and discs cost upward of $25, almost double the price of many standard DVDs. Drives for both formats are being added to computers, but such models cost at least $3,000.

You can get a more versatile high-def DVD player if you can wait until November. That’s when Sony is supposed to roll out its PlayStation 3 video-game console, which will include a Blu-ray drive. But it will cost $500.

Improvements in image quality may vary by HDTV. In our side-by-side tests, the HD DVD version of “Phantom of the Opera” (2004) looked much better than its standard DVD version when viewed on a typical HDTV, which used a native resolution technology known as 1080i. But the HD DVD “Phantom” looked especially sharp and detailed when viewed on a set with 1080p native resolution, a technology on expensive new sets that makes the most of HD signals.

Expect some glitches. High-def DVD players are much like computers in many ways, though early testing suggests not in the best ways. HD DVD players we tested took longer to load their discs and skip chapters than regular DVD players, and digital connections were finicky.

Some features of high-def DVDs are yet to arrive. Both formats promise Internet access and video-game-style interaction with movie characters. However, most of the first high-definition discs have only the same extras as their standard-definition siblings.

Availability is tight. HD DVD players and discs, which appeared in April, are in short supply. Sony has hinted that the same may hold for the first Blu-ray players. And while titles are steadily being added, the number of movies available in high-def DVD remains limited--no more than about 50 titles in each format.

Other sources of HD movies are growing. The short*falls in availability of high-def DVD might be a blessing, since even movie aficionados should for now resist the call of the new technology. As time goes on, the format war may be resolved, prices will drop, and availability of HD movies and players (and eventually recorders) will increase.

Cable and satellite TV providers vow to increase their offerings. Other new providers may deliver movies in high-definition to computerlike set-top boxes using the Internet.

The upshot: Viewing movies at home in HD has nowhere to go but up, but it’s an open question how many of those movies you’ll get on DVD. Having waited so long for high-def DVD, we may eventually discover we don’t really need it.

[rumplestiltskin]

"Having waited so long for high-def DVD, we may eventually discover we don’t really need it."

Oh, how true.

[Tom81]

with an hdmi output you can get most of the quality of HD dvd with a regular dvd and a regular dvd player. In fact I read one survey than most people could not tell the difference.

[mike909]

with an hdmi output you can get most of the quality of HD dvd with a regular dvd and a regular dvd player. In fact I read one survey than most people could not tell the difference.

You can definately tell the difference...it's a big one. IMO the whole HD revolution has been mostly BS marketing and over-priced equipment requred to acheive the said HD Picture...but don't be fooled, a proper HD signal displayed on a tv that can 'natively' display that resolution looks awesome.

[lordsmurf]

At some point, resolution increase reaches a point of diminishing returns. It's already getting to that point, especially if you have a normal sized set, not a movie screen that takes up a whole wall of your house.

[Conquest10]

In fact I read one survey than most people could not tell the difference.

Doesn't suprise me. Most people don't notice a difference between VHS and DVD.

[festmaster]

You can definately tell the difference...it's a big one. IMO the whole HD revolution has been mostly BS marketing and over-priced equipment requred to acheive the said HD Picture...but don't be fooled, a proper HD signal displayed on a tv that can 'natively' display that resolution looks awesome.

When it comes to live TV like sporting events, I am in complete agreement. In fact, when you compare a Fox broadcast of an NFL game in 720p on 720p TV next to a CBS broadcast of an NFL game on 1080i on a 1080i TV, you can clearly see what the differences between the formats are (six of one and half dozen of the other).

However, I don't think there is that much of a difference between a standard DVD upconverted and a HD DVD. I have the HD HBO feed and occasionally my cable card gets freaky and gives me access to other premium HD feeds. I just don't see that much difference between upconversion of a DVD movie and a HD broadcast. I certainly can't see why I would buy a HD version of the Maltese Falcon or a seaon of The Bob Newhart Show. There is only so much the can do with the source material.

What I would love to see is a DVD player that will read .ts captures from DVD-R.

[Sartori]

Having waited so long for high-def DVD, we may eventually discover we don’t really need it.

I would change the "need" to "want" . Its all very well having extra features on these discs but the money to put them there is coming from somewhere - me .... or not as I wont upgrade nor want to , my widesreen 28" fits in lovely in my lounge and I wont be changing it for an ubergeek 7` one either , as Lordsmurf points out I wont see much difference . I read the article where it worked out the size of tv to actually see the difference and how far you need to sit from it , Id have to sit in the street outside my house . Its a house of cards which I think is gonna be falling down..not for one but both , mr average wont want to spend megabucks on a system that costs a lot to run as well , and I believe prices of the discs will always be a big jump up on the dvd ones .They can stick both where the sun dont shine

[davideck]

However, I don't think there is that much of a difference between a standard DVD upconverted and a HD DVD. I have the HD HBO feed and occasionally my cable card gets freaky and gives me access to other premium HD feeds. I just don't see that much difference between upconversion of a DVD movie and a HD broadcast. I certainly can't see why I would buy a HD version of the Maltese Falcon or a seaon of The Bob Newhart Show. There is only so much the can do with the source material.

While an upconverted standard DVD looks amazingly good, the OTA HD programming that I am viewing contains more detail. It can be absolutely stunning sometimes. Just like looking through a window. At other times the compression artifacts overwhelm everything. HD-DVD should solve that.

That does not mean that I will rush out to buy an HD player and titles. IMHO, upconverted standard DVDs look good enough to wait for a standardized HD solution that is easily affordable.

[Wile_E]

At some point, resolution increase reaches a point of diminishing returns. It's already getting to that point, especially if you have a normal sized set, not a movie screen that takes up a whole wall of your house.

Ok, so how about the movie industry focus on increasing framerate too? I'm tired of the 24fps dribble. Before anyone mentions 60fps or pulldown, these are not true framerates. The film was still only shot at a measly 24fps. Pulldown just doubles frames. Maxivision 48fps and SHOWSCAN was a genius breakthrough, offering a device to retrofit current projectors to handle 48fps. Yet very few people in the industry care about increasing framerate. I hate going to the damn theater and seeing that slow-ass framerate and flicker. Even in theaters with 3-bladed shutters on the projectors, I still see flicker and horrible choppiness when the camera pans left to right. The movie industry is dumb if they are going to embrace digital, and yet not increase framerate too.

I say the higher the better for resolution. I was not impressed by the digital Star Wars movies that used 3K and 4K digital transfers. Nor am I impressed by current movies such as Superman Returns or X-Men. These resolutions are not enough for a huge big screen theater. The quality and resolution of 35mm film is not there in the digital transfer. If someone would put a digitally processed movie and a regular 35mm print side-by-side on a theater screen, the difference would be clear.

http://www.showscan.com/
http://www.uhfmag.com/Issue59/Video59.html