51 GB HD DVD disc rivals Blu-ray capacity

[joepic]

Further blurring the line of which format is technically superior, Toshiba has announced that it has successfully created a triple-layer HD DVD disc that holds 51 GB of data. It has begun the process of submitting it for regulatory approval.

Blu-ray Disc (BD) has been regarded as the winner in terms of capacity since the beginning of the next-generation format war. However, the 51 GB HD DVD would slightly overpower BD, which currently has a maximum capacity of 50 GB. Previously, HD DVDs were only available in 15 GB and 30 GB capacities.

According to media reports, Toshiba is planning to launch the new format before the end of the year.

[yoda313]

So now will the new triple layer disc work in first gen hd dvd players???? Thats the trick isn't it??

[roma_turok]

Old news
https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=319741

[oldandinthe way]

If triple layer is their means to the capacity I'll pass. I'm unimpressed with the performance of writeable double layer devices.

And pressed triple layer seems premature as well.

I'd rather have pancakes.

[gotnotime]

Not to mention the costs, DL remains 5-6x more expensive then DVD-R media.

I also hate those pauses for layer breaks in movies

[Wile_E]

Multiple layers should not be the solution to capacity. What is needed is tighter and smaller pits/lands on the disc. I still think that HD-DVD and Blu-Ray were brought out too prematurely. The industry was dumb for not working together on one unified format. The problem is, will current players be able to read these three layer discs? People buying movies will see HD-DVD and think it will play in their players.

Instead of increased capacity, I would like to see better transfer quality of films. I have recently seen Waterworld and a few other transfers. They are terrible! The films were not cleaned up and have scratches, spots, etc throughout the film. This is unacceptable and I will not buy a HD movie that is not cleaned up. I am tired of the poor transfers being released on DVD. There should be better standards and quality control in place. If a film is going to be transfered to HD, it should be cleaned up entirely. The studios are just rushing these films to HD, touting the higher resolution.

[FulciLives]

@Wile_E

What you talk about happens all the time and just not now due to HD-DVD and Blu-Ray although I suppose they make it all the more "painful" since a HDTV format will show film-to-video flaws more readily than other older formats with less clarity.

Around 1990 a company released SUSPIRIA on VHS and LaserDisc. This release was absolutely beautiful as it was presented widescreen and in the case of the LaserDisc it was in PCM WAV with Dolby Surround Sound. An absolutely gorgeous presentation of the film.

Then back around 1997 give or take another company released the film as that first company no longer had the rights. Although the old releases was out-of-print (both VHS and LD) this new release ... some 7 years later ... was only brought out on VHS. I didn't much care as I had the LD release but a lot of people were excited because not too many people had a LD player and the old VHS was very limited (at least the widescreen release ... there was also a full screen VHS releases at the same time which was easier to get).

So this new release was widescreen but the image quality was all screwed up and not because of VHS but due to the print used and/or the film-to-video transfer. Whereas the colors of the old release were "spot on" the new release (from what I had read) had colors that were "off" and was also considered to be a bit "too dark" at times. Worst of all the old VHS which was Hi-Fi Stereo and Dolby Surround was gone with the new release which had a Hi-Fi Mono soundtrack!

If you have ever seen SUSPIRIA then you know that this is one of the most gorgeous looking films ever and the last to use the old 3-strip technicolor film stock and one of the few (at the time) to use 4 channel audio to great effect.

Thus the new 7 year later release was a very poor release. At the time people on horror forum boards (I'm talking the good old newsgroups) kept messaging me asking if I could make a VHS copy of my LD for them ... nobody wanted this new release and those that bought it were pissed off.

I can give you many such examples of this happening over the years with other titles. It often boils down to one of two things (or a combo of both). Either a poor quality film print is used (when often a better one exists if someone was bright enough or lucky enough to find it) AND/OR some seriously bad film-to-video transfer errors. In fact film-to-video transfer errors plagued the last Anchor Bay Entertainment DVD release of the first HALLOWEEN film. The newest DVD (they have released this film multiple times with different transfers each time) was sharper looking (though only by a bit) compared to the previous release they did but the newest release was subjected to color correction and the person that did it had no idea what he/she was doing and they destroyed the blue tones in several scenes destroying the original intent of the cinematography. The previous release is not as sharp but has much better colors (including the blue tones color adjusted out of the newest release) and is preferred among collectors.

I could go on and on with such examples.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[gotnotime]

I agree, quality of transfer is the main issue, size makes no difference if you don't have a quality original.

I don't recall that movie, but I have the 1959 vers of Journey to the Center of the Earth. Here they managed a really amazing restoration of a "B" movie. The movie was filmed in a smaller film format, that already sacrificed resolution and was poorly stored with marked fading and damage.

[waheed]

So what happens if Blu-Ray come out with a triple layer. That would be 75GB.

[nwo]

Then back around 1997 give or take another company released the film as that first company no longer had the rights.

Would that be the Nouveaux Pictures release.

The only thing more terrifying than the last twelve minutes of this film are the first ninety!

So what happens if Blu-Ray come out with a triple layer. That would be 75GB.

And Still nobody would buy it!

[FulciLives]

Then back around 1997 give or take another company released the film as that first company no longer had the rights.

Would that be the Nouveaux Pictures release.

The only thing more terrifying than the last twelve minutes of this film are the first ninety!

The first video release of SUSPIRIA happened in 1990 (might have been 1989) and was done by a company called MAGNUM. They released several version onto VHS including an uncut widescreen version (also to appease the market place they did an uncut pan&scan and a cut 'R' rated pan&scan). They also did an uncut widescreen LaserDisc release through Image Entertainment.

The 1997 release (might have been 1996) was an uncut widescreen VHS only release put out by a subsidiary of Fox. I don't recall if it was called Nouveaux Pictures or not but it was essentially a Fox owned company. That much I do remember.

So what happens if Blu-Ray come out with a triple layer. That would be 75GB.

And Still nobody would buy it!

I was just at BEST BUY last night and the Blu-Ray demo didn't look as good to me as the HD-DVD demo. I mean if Blu-Ray was the only HDTV disc format then yeah it did look good but HD-DVD looked better to my eyes. I saw some "artifacts" in the Blu-Ray demo presentation that just where not there with the HD-DVD demo presentation. However both did look most excellent with the Blu-Ray artifacts being fairly subtle (and remember I was standing ultra close to some LCD type TV). Yet I was as close to the HD-DVD display being used and saw no such artifacts so ...

- John "FulciLives" Coleman