Blu-Ray media and drives

[murrays 0]

This article is about the imminent release of Bluray media and drives by Sony. 25 gb single layer discs with 50gb to come....slow though...2X....these will be overnight projects

I'm thinking the Intel Power Macs by Apple will have BluRay as an option at least.

--
Murray

"No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: the officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets." - Edward Abbey

[PhreeZone 20]

Don't count on it yet. BlueRay vs HD-DVD is going to be like the Betamax vs VHS fight all over. Only one medium is going to win out to consumers and anyone that picks the wrong site to start with is going to be left holding the bag with nothing to play their disks on.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[videointhesky 0]

Porn industry may decide battle between Blu-ray, HD-DVD

Here is a link to a Google search on the above statement

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2003-34,GGLD:en&q=hd%2Ddvd+pron+industry

[DSE 5]

Not so. BD (Blu-Ray) and HD-DVD will not be like the VHS/Betamax wars for several reasons.
First, it's all about longevity, which is why virtually every studio signed on with BD. BD already has a max layer space of 200 GB with 70ms seek times. HD DVD can't remotely approach that. HD-DVD would have completely gone away had Bill Gates not gotten pissed off at the BD consortium and Sony. But...at NAB this year and at CES this year, it was abysmally clear that Toshiba is determined to garner as much of the market as they could. But few studios are releasing content. It's true they got out first, but remember that Betamax came out long bfore VHS. It's not who gets there first, it's who has the most toys. The adult industry has siezed on BD as well, and that alone spells death for HD-DVD in the long term.
BD is slower coming to market, but as Pioneer, Panasonic, and other majors have indicated, it's what they're betting on.
However, one potential problem is that if BD and HD-DVD don't get out soon, we're going to see non-DRM discs in the form of DivX or NeroDigital come out, and they'll play on super-cheap Emerson/Apex/etc set top boxes.

[goobersnuftda 0]

And thats not be best part.
There are millions of HDTV sets sold and out there in homes that do not have a DVI or HDMI input. That means the new HD DVD [blu ray]players won't work on them.

They use that format for the copy protection scheme that goes along with the blu ray disks as well as giving you true high defintion pictures (no RCA jacks from DVD player to your HDTV).

CNet explanation

I see the new HDTV as OK but I'm not peeing in my pants to go buy a Sony HC3 (which has a ferocious 20 min tape life). I set up my partents HD dish and their plasma TVs. Sure it looks good but please, there are too many people suckered into these market schemes. Just like bulls being lead by the ring in their noses to buy HDTV.

Ex. Purchase a 3 Ghz processor for $500. Buy a 3.2 Ghz Processor for $1,200. Wooooo, what performance. Yes it is faster but the price for the increase in performance sure is not worth the added expense.

I have a 45 inch Sony 1990 rear projection TV. I keep it in tune and clean. It is in awesome shape. The video I shoot on my PC1000, burn to DVD then play on the TV looks absolutely awesome. I would be a fool to get rid of this sytem and pay $5,000 for the upgrade from 3.0 Ghz to 3.2 Ghz.

I also have the added bonus of no stupid black bars on the TV screen I watch. Most satellite feed, cable, networks is what is broadcast and I don't want to loose 1/3 of my viewing area because I got suckerd into the widescreen version TV. Every time my wife goes to rent a DVD of a movie she must see, the very last version left on the shelf is always the stupid widescreen/letterbox version which we reluctantly get because all other options are gone and picked over.

When it comes to my money, I don't throw it around foolishly. Movie companies are saying they will go one way on formats, make it compatable, maybe not but who really knows. Until the fallout of the nuclear blast settles and I see the single victor left standing on the battlefield, my money stays in skydiving instead of the speculative equipment inventory of blue ray/HDTV.

[Fast 0]

Quote

And thats not be best part.
There are millions of HDTV sets sold and out there in homes that do not have a DVI or HDMI input. That means the new HD DVD [blu ray]players won't work on them.

They use that format for the copy protection scheme that goes along with the blu ray disks as well as giving you true high defintion pictures (no RCA jacks from DVD player to your HDTV).

CNet explanation

I see the new HDTV as OK but I'm not peeing in my pants to go buy a Sony HC3 (which has a ferocious 20 min tape life). I set up my partents HD dish and their plasma TVs. Sure it looks good but please, there are too many people suckered into these market schemes. Just like bulls being lead by the ring in their noses to buy HDTV.

Ex. Purchase a 3 Ghz processor for $500. Buy a 3.2 Ghz Processor for $1,200. Wooooo, what performance. Yes it is faster but the price for the increase in performance sure is not worth the added expense.

I have a 45 inch Sony 1990 rear projection TV. I keep it in tune and clean. It is in awesome shape. The video I shoot on my PC1000, burn to DVD then play on the TV looks absolutely awesome. I would be a fool to get rid of this sytem and pay $5,000 for the upgrade from 3.0 Ghz to 3.2 Ghz.

I also have the added bonus of no stupid black bars on the TV screen I watch. Most satellite feed, cable, networks is what is broadcast and I don't want to loose 1/3 of my viewing area because I got suckerd into the widescreen version TV. Every time my wife goes to rent a DVD of a movie she must see, the very last version left on the shelf is always the stupid widescreen/letterbox version which we reluctantly get because all other options are gone and picked over.

When it comes to my money, I don't throw it around foolishly. Movie companies are saying they will go one way on formats, make it compatable, maybe not but who really knows. Until the fallout of the nuclear blast settles and I see the single victor left standing on the battlefield, my money stays in skydiving instead of the speculative equipment inventory of blue ray/HDTV.

Being someone who has had an HDTV with HD service for a few years I can't see how you are able to ignore the stunning difference in picture between broadcast and HD. Bitching about seeing black bars on the TV is going to work the other way too! Already its true that many of the shows on NBC are recorded and broadcast in a wide format. If you have a standard aspect television you get black bars on the top and bottom. Not all TV is like this, but people are moving in that direction. That is besides the fact that with almost every wide screened version of TV they have image processors that can make the picture fill the whole screen and you don't even notice the distortion after a week.

Bottom line is that quality on HD products is a bigger step than going from 3.0 to 3.2 ghz.

~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

[goobersnuftda 0]

I agree with you that the HD has higher resolution and a better picture but in a performance/cost ratio, it is waaay out of wack for me.

The other thing is that the human mind can be accustom to just about everything. Every time I go over to my parents home and watch thier HDTV with thier image processor to fill the screen, everyones head is a weird shape. After an hour or two you don't notice it true, but it is just a bit wrong compared to how true head/body shape should be when I come home and see how it should be. To each their own.

[FeFe 0]

Quote

a Sony HC3 (which has a ferocious 20 min tape life).

where this comes from? I believe HDV has the same tape-speed as miniDV

[goobersnuftda 0]

I was talking to someone who had just purchased one and he told me that with the huge amount of extra video data that the high definition camera records, it chews up more tape. Same miniDV tape just faster speed in order to store the data.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but from a techo-geek point of view, the physics made sence to me.

EDITED: Yup, I just called the SONY store and they told me that the HD cameras go through an INSANE amount of tape. Tech recommended that when you shoot HD, you should have backup HD media to record to and not use the internal tape. I didn't tell him that this would be for skydiving so the general info is what he gave me. The Sony camera in their store that a normal 45 min miniDV tape would only last 5 min on high end HD mode.

Everything in the world is a compromise. Choose what works best for you.

[DSE 5]

Quote

EDITED: Yup, I just called the SONY store and they told me that the HD cameras go through an INSANE amount of tape. Tech recommended that when you shoot HD, you should have backup HD media to record to and not use the internal tape. I didn't tell him that this would be for skydiving so the general info is what he gave me. .

This is an absurd statement on the part of the store employee. HDV in 1080i is 25Mbps, period. Same bitrate as DV. In other words, there is no difference in speed or length, or anything else. I have an HC3, shoot with it, and it's just like any other HDV camcorder (JVC HD100, Z1U, Canon XLH1, etc) 60 mins is 60 mins. Only time that's different is if you shoot DVCAM mode, which the HC3 does not offer. This cause the cam to go to 40 min capability, not 60. Either way, in DV or HDV mode, ALL HDV cams shoot 60 mins. Bit rate is a constant. Go back and tell the clerk he's full of crap.
It *is* true that HDV when converted to intermediate takes up more disk space on a hard drive, figure about 40GB per hour vs 13 GB per hour. But that's not relevant to the tape storage capacity.


[edit]http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/ProductDetailDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=1002547 this link clearly shows the 60 minute record ability in HD mode.

[goobersnuftda 0]

Interesting. This is a funny topic that seems to be different depending on who you ask. I really thought that the Sony Store in Calgary would know of these things.

Does anyone else have first hand knowledge to back up the 1hr capacity on miniDV tape for a HD camera? I am curious on how a HD camera can record so much more video info and still be the same as the "old" camera records. Doesn't hurt in asking. I'm always learning something new when it comes to video.

[DSE 5]

Well....given that I'm the guy that wrote the book on HDV...and am Sony's only official third-party trainer on the subject of HDV...I'd say I can back it up pretty thoroughly.
It's understandable that you'd have questions when the Sony store can't answer your question, but...remember that they're college students at best. Rarely if at all trained. Granted, the HC3 isn't a broadcast cam, but I have one all the same, and shot an hour of vid with it just this morning.
The cam *can't* be any different than anything else that has the HDV label on it, because the HDV specification forbids it to do so. Higher speed would also allow a higher bitrate, and the HDV spec forbids that, as well.
If you'd like to view my books on HD or HDV, www.vasst.com or Amazon sell them, as well as the NAB bookstore (National Association of Broadcasters).
Or you can call Sony Broadcast in NJ, and ask for the HDV team. They'll verify what I'm telling you.
I know very little about jumping with cameras right now, but I do have a fairly deep knowledge of video, and specifically HDV, and FWIW, I've trained thousands of folks in how to set up, use, and edit with this format in virtually every NLE out there from Adobe/AVID to Sony Vegas.
Damn, reading over this, I sound like I'm a lecturing a$$hole. Don't mean to...just that this is one subject that isn't subjective, and that I know quite well.
Google my name, "Douglas Spotted Eagle +HDV" and see what cha' get.