| HD Wars ... Is it worth it? PC on TV, BD, HDDVD, upscaled DVD, & HDTV Contributor: len January 6, 2008 |
So that brings me to "The Matrix" and HDDVD vs DVD. As you may note in the picture
above I actually have an HDDVD copy of The Matrix Trilogy and a DVD copy of The Ultimate
Matrix box set. Some may argue that I don't have a true 1080p player, but to be honest
1080i just uses a trick that is hard to detect to the human eye by going to 30 fps from 60 fps
in a data transfer method known as 'interlacing'. On a flat panel it is almost impossible to
see. Then you take a fully upscaled DVD which is native 480p and compare it to full
HDDVD, or BD which both use the same compression method now (VC1 or AVC) and once
again the differences are subtle, especially on a TV that is 52" or smaller. Even HD TV is
apparently lost on TV's smaller than 32" from what I've heard so the thought that fully
implemented 480p which is what DVD's are, is impressive in itself is not surprising.
My Conclusion for those out there with 52” or lower HD TV’s is to avoid Bluray Disc Players
and HD-DVD players and simply go to the standard DVD players with a full 1080p HDMI
connection and full support for upscaling your DVD’s. Once the dual format players like the
Samsung BD-UP5000 get to around $300, then they might be worth getting. If you have a
monster TV (>52”), I would still argue that it is best to wait, however you may want to sit 4
feet from your TV and get the immersive experience from that … then blowing off a few ‘C’
notes should be no problem and purchasing a dual format player isn't an issue.
If you already own or plan on purchasing a Sony Playstation 3 or upcoming HDDVD version
of XBox 360, well then the HD player is just a side line and the only issue is whether to pay
the extra 10 bucks for an HD disc if it is available.
above I actually have an HDDVD copy of The Matrix Trilogy and a DVD copy of The Ultimate
Matrix box set. Some may argue that I don't have a true 1080p player, but to be honest
1080i just uses a trick that is hard to detect to the human eye by going to 30 fps from 60 fps
in a data transfer method known as 'interlacing'. On a flat panel it is almost impossible to
see. Then you take a fully upscaled DVD which is native 480p and compare it to full
HDDVD, or BD which both use the same compression method now (VC1 or AVC) and once
again the differences are subtle, especially on a TV that is 52" or smaller. Even HD TV is
apparently lost on TV's smaller than 32" from what I've heard so the thought that fully
implemented 480p which is what DVD's are, is impressive in itself is not surprising.
My Conclusion for those out there with 52” or lower HD TV’s is to avoid Bluray Disc Players
and HD-DVD players and simply go to the standard DVD players with a full 1080p HDMI
connection and full support for upscaling your DVD’s. Once the dual format players like the
Samsung BD-UP5000 get to around $300, then they might be worth getting. If you have a
monster TV (>52”), I would still argue that it is best to wait, however you may want to sit 4
feet from your TV and get the immersive experience from that … then blowing off a few ‘C’
notes should be no problem and purchasing a dual format player isn't an issue.
If you already own or plan on purchasing a Sony Playstation 3 or upcoming HDDVD version
of XBox 360, well then the HD player is just a side line and the only issue is whether to pay
the extra 10 bucks for an HD disc if it is available.
HDDVD at 1080i on 42" TV (scene paused)
DVD upscaled to 1080i (native 480p) on 42" TV (scene paused)
DVD upscaled to 1080i (native 480p) through PC on 42" TV
1080p Desktop on 42" TV
Setup with HD TV (Satelite), HDDVD and HD PC display.
With Warner Brothers recent announcement that they were going to go Bluray, I thought I'd
actually confirm my views on HD technology across a number of fronts. First of all I think I
better describe my setup as it pertains to this article. I have a Intel quad core 6600 PC with
a Nvidia 6800XT video card hooked up with DVI/HDMI to a Viewsonic N4280p LCD TV
(1080p), along with a Starchoice Motorola DSR 500 (1080i), and a Toshiba HDA2KC
HDDVD player (1080i). As for the HD Desktop, it takes a bit of tweaking with the color,
brightness, sharpness ... but once you get it, it is nice. For what I use the computer hooked
up to this TV for, video editing, photo editing, web surfing ... it is an enhancement and the
system is not overtaxed although the video card I have does not officially support HD.
actually confirm my views on HD technology across a number of fronts. First of all I think I
better describe my setup as it pertains to this article. I have a Intel quad core 6600 PC with
a Nvidia 6800XT video card hooked up with DVI/HDMI to a Viewsonic N4280p LCD TV
(1080p), along with a Starchoice Motorola DSR 500 (1080i), and a Toshiba HDA2KC
HDDVD player (1080i). As for the HD Desktop, it takes a bit of tweaking with the color,
brightness, sharpness ... but once you get it, it is nice. For what I use the computer hooked
up to this TV for, video editing, photo editing, web surfing ... it is an enhancement and the
system is not overtaxed although the video card I have does not officially support HD.
Nvidia is not known for its great DVD
or HDDVD playback and usually it
comes down to the washed 'black',
washed out colors, and artifacts in
dark areas. Showing low res
photographs of paused video may
not be exactly fair, but come to think
of it there was a 'jitter' when I paused
my computer at this scene while
playing the DVD on it. But overall, if
you went to a PC setup for HD
content, the biggest issue is the video
or HDDVD playback and usually it
comes down to the washed 'black',
washed out colors, and artifacts in
dark areas. Showing low res
photographs of paused video may
not be exactly fair, but come to think
of it there was a 'jitter' when I paused
my computer at this scene while
playing the DVD on it. But overall, if
you went to a PC setup for HD
content, the biggest issue is the video
card and there are a lot of articles on sites like Tom's Hardware Guide and Anand Tech that
will give you specifics on these issues.
Now there's the issue of HD on Cable or Satelite and the photo of my setup above shows the
HD version of the Movie Channel on Starchoice playing. Here is where my conclusions
about HD implementations becomes a tale of two movies.
will give you specifics on these issues.
Now there's the issue of HD on Cable or Satelite and the photo of my setup above shows the
HD version of the Movie Channel on Starchoice playing. Here is where my conclusions
about HD implementations becomes a tale of two movies.
The movies are "The Matrix" as you may have guessed, and "The Davinci Code". The
Matrix I've seen on a number of formats while The Davinci Code I've seen on HD TV and
DVD. Like The Matrix, The Davinci Code is visually rich and has some spectacular scenery
and many dark scenes so any technology is challenged. When watching The Davinci Code
on HD TV I first thought it was a trick and not actually an HD source as is typical right now
but then I realized the action scenes and quiet scenes had different detail and in action
scenes blocky artifacts could actually be seen that are typical in lower resolutions of MPeg
compression. Doing more research I found out that HD TV uses variable MPeg 2
compression with other tricks to reduce the amount of data transfer. HD TV is still
remarkably more detailed and clear than regular TV; but overall, I'd place old DVD
technology above it. Those still moments when you might actually be approaching 1080p
don't make up for the fudging to get the data transfer rate down to a manageable level for
cable.
Matrix I've seen on a number of formats while The Davinci Code I've seen on HD TV and
DVD. Like The Matrix, The Davinci Code is visually rich and has some spectacular scenery
and many dark scenes so any technology is challenged. When watching The Davinci Code
on HD TV I first thought it was a trick and not actually an HD source as is typical right now
but then I realized the action scenes and quiet scenes had different detail and in action
scenes blocky artifacts could actually be seen that are typical in lower resolutions of MPeg
compression. Doing more research I found out that HD TV uses variable MPeg 2
compression with other tricks to reduce the amount of data transfer. HD TV is still
remarkably more detailed and clear than regular TV; but overall, I'd place old DVD
technology above it. Those still moments when you might actually be approaching 1080p
don't make up for the fudging to get the data transfer rate down to a manageable level for
cable.
 | |  | |  | |  |
Copyright © 2008 itsonlysteam.com