Hi I am using FFDSHOW to upscale my DVD`s to 720p. With all filter tricks like liited

Hmm I had a bit of a look on the AVS Forum, and some guy had measured the average bit rates on the HD channels in the US. And mostly they're in the region of 10-12Mbit/s.

I'm guessing the average HD-DVD bitrate is at least 15Mbit/s :confused:

Or is it even higher?
 
However, if a decent VC-1 encode can go as low as 13Mbps average, and the likes of the BBC are experimenting with 18Mbps bandwidth rates for broadcast HD over satellite, it does beg the question, could or even should the differences be much closer than perhaps most people are seeing on Sky Movies HD??
I don't think broadcasts will ever match high def content provided on discs - we all know to well that bandwidth is just too much of an issue and the pressure for more channels (and thus more money) will always out. The BBC are probably the best bet for decent high def broadcasts though. And SkyHD Movies is probably one of the worst.

Furthermore VC1 is widely regarded as superior to H.264 - at least at present - especially with regards to noise. Certainly comparing AVP and VC1 HD DVDs the difference is considerable - obviously there are many factors involved though but the European Broadcasting Union came to similar findings and a Google search finds many other comparisons.
 
Don't forget a 12mb/s VC1 signal is really the equivalent of something like a 25mb/s MPEG2 signal. It is not just about the size of the numbers. Dtheatre was ahead of the game as it used a high value and fixed bit rate MPEG2 stream. HD DVD is now also ahead of the game as it uses VC 1 very effectively in reducing the bit rate, all are possible for broadcasts if there is the desire to use them. It would be great if we moved on from MPEG2...and other similar performing codecs, to high performing and efficient codecs that have minimal 'artifacts'.
 
jsgreen89 said:
Well that's spectacularly useful... how about educating me then on the big reason why HD-DVD is able to achieve drastically better picture quality than current HDTV broadcasts?

If it's simply bitrate and codec related then just say.. :rolleyes:

Apologies it was meant to open up the subject rather than an attack.

VC1 ( what US hd-dvds have been using so far) is 2-4 times more efficient than mpeg2. Compression technique differences aside you can get the same picture quality as mpeg2 with about a 2-3 times reduction in space and bit rate ( the two are somewhat linked) compared with similar quality at mpeg2.

Even then because of the way the compression schemes work its arguable that VC1 will always look better than mpeg2 assuming similar overall quality levels becasue fo the way VC1 compresses compared with mpeg2...this is somewhat debatable especially if you have progressive material rather than interlaced.

Some of the most impresssive hd I've seen recently is the freeview HD test from crystal palace (albeit my PC can only manage about 20 fps on a good day). This test is using primarily AVC which is yet another higher quality codec ( derived from mpeg4 I believe). The tests can at times I suspect better HD-DVD quality although its difficult to appraise when you can't get all the frames. Just had a quick look and the rate for video seems to be about 19-22 Mbps which is very high.

Having seen 1080p varyingly compressed with mpeg2 all the waY from 15-180Mbps I'd say you start to see a subtle flattening of the image about 70Mbps , by the time you get to 35Mpbs you are actually losing noticable fine transient detail . Below this and you start to see blocking and typical mpeg2 artifacts which gets steadily worse.

I'd say HD-DVD looks at least as good as 70Mps mpeg2 and this was from D5 through a realtime mpeg2 encoder , a non-realtime multipass encode used in commercial disc mastering would possibly drop the 70Mbps figure down to somewhere in the 50s but even so VC1 is still very impressive in comparisson.
 
Nic Rhodes said:
Don't forget a 12mb/s VC1 signal is really the equivalent of something like a 25mb/s MPEG2 signal. It is not just about the size of the numbers. Dtheatre was ahead of the game as it used a high value and fixed bit rate MPEG2 stream. HD DVD is now also ahead of the game as it uses VC 1 very effectively in reducing the bit rate, all are possible for broadcasts if there is the desire to use them. It would be great if we moved on from MPEG2...and other similar performing codecs, to high performing and efficient codecs that have minimal 'artifacts'.
No disagreement with the above, but I was thinking more of comparing AVC with VC-1. If AVC is capable of similar compression ratios to VC-1, then with say an 18Mbps bitrate available, and some work, could broadcast HD AVC (if it doesn't get bit-rate strangled later) get very close to disc formats if the latter are already managing to get down to sub 18Mbps rates on what is considered a decent transfer?

That's not to say that Sky for example would deliver that quality, they'll just squeeze more channels in, but perhaps there's hope for films on BBC.... doesn't seem too far fetched.
 
Mr.D said:
Apologies it was meant to open up the subject rather than an attack.

VC1 ( what US hd-dvds have been using so far) is 2-4 times more efficient than mpeg2. Compression technique differences aside you can get the same picture quality as mpeg2 with about a 2-3 times reduction in space and bit rate ( the two are somewhat linked) compared with similar quality at mpeg2.

Even then because of the way the compression schemes work its arguable that VC1 will always look better than mpeg2 assuming similar overall quality levels becasue fo the way VC1 compresses compared with mpeg2...this is somewhat debatable especially if you have progressive material rather than interlaced.

Some of the most impresssive hd I've seen recently is the freeview HD test from crystal palace (albeit my PC can only manage about 20 fps on a good day). This test is using primarily AVC which is yet another higher quality codec ( derived from mpeg4 I believe). The tests can at times I suspect better HD-DVD quality although its difficult to appraise when you can't get all the frames. Just had a quick look and the rate for video seems to be about 19-22 Mbps which is very high.

Having seen 1080p varyingly compressed with mpeg2 all the waY from 15-180Mbps I'd say you start to see a subtle flattening of the image about 70Mbps , by the time you get to 35Mpbs you are actually losing noticable fine transient detail . Below this and you start to see blocking and typical mpeg2 artifacts which gets steadily worse.

I'd say HD-DVD looks at least as good as 70Mps mpeg2 and this was from D5 through a realtime mpeg2 encoder , a non-realtime multipass encode used in commercial disc mastering would possibly drop the 70Mbps figure down to somewhere in the 50s but even so VC1 is still very impressive in comparisson.

Many thanks, now that information IS useful :clap:

So who uses MPEG2 for HD broadcasts? Is that mostly a US thing?
Sky uses H.264/AVC right? How does that compare to MPEG2 and VC-1?

But I guess as Ian says, when it comes to higher bitrates, or more channels, we all know what will win out :(
 
Sky uses H.264/AVC right? How does that compare to MPEG2 and VC-1?
SkyHD is nowhere near the quality you can get from HD DVD or BluRay. As you'd expect Sky are interested in giving you the bear minimum so they can fit as many channels as possible within their bandwidth. That said, although quality does flucuate dramatically, when it's good it is good. :thumbsup:
 
Don't forget it is not just about size but the artifacts as well (block size etc). In the HD DVD codec shootouts which formed the basis of codec choice (all three got in though!!), VC 1 won by a decent margin. MPEG2 / AVC was a score draw in second place. This happened more than once. Bsically for me it is time to move on from MPEG2, not because it is bad but because there is now better.
 
Nic Rhodes said:
Don't forget it is not just about size but the artifacts as well (block size etc). In the HD DVD codec shootouts which formed the basis of codec choice (all three got in though!!), VC 1 won by a decent margin. MPEG2 / AVC was a score draw in second place. This happened more than once. Bsically for me it is time to move on from MPEG2, not because it is bad but because there is now better.

So AVC is pretty close to MPEG2? That's quite surprising! :eek:
Oh well, long live VC-1! :thumbsup:

This discussion has been enough to convince me to invest in HD-DVD anyway!
 
Well I have decided to stick with FFDSHOW for now due to the fact that my projector only supports 720p, If I had a PJ thats native resolution was 1080i etc then I would buy a HD player tomrrow.

Upscaling with FFDSHOW to 720p gives me amazing results and I think a lot of it is down to my actual PJ the HD72 which picture Quality is stunning at times.

If my projector did support 1080i then I think FFDSHOW results wouldnt look so great and I would be forced to upgrade, as with upscaling to 1080i there is more resolution to stretch which will no dout make the picture seem patchy and not as sharp.

Will no dout upgrade to a HD player when the prices are around £200 for a player or DVD drive for my HTPC, as its something I am stopping my self buying at the minute as I am like a kid at christmas wanting all the new toys

Each to his own at the end of the day.. to be honest I have not really seen any HD material on my projector apart from some TS downloads which I no I cant even compare with real HD stuff.

So I dont really have the right to compare FFDSHOW to HD material in the first place. I am just comparing my results against standard DVDs which I am more than happy with the results I am getting at the minute.

If any once fancies taking a picture of a certain HD movie at a certain time frame I will match it and put my picture up and maybe we can do a slight compare (providing I have the same movie)... Please note I am not challenging to beat your picture Quality in any way, but more just to see what the diffrence is

:thumbsup:
 
jsgreen89 said:
So AVC is pretty close to MPEG2? That's quite surprising! :eek:
I wouldnt say that. AVC and VC-1 are both flavours of MPEG4. Having just watched the Japanese release of the Brothers Grimm, I would say good AVC gives you very good high definition. Picture quality was definitely up there with the decent US releases.
 
Having just watched the Japanese release of the Brothers Grimm, I would say good AVC gives you very good high definition.
Was that on HD DVD? If so where do you get your Japanese HD DVDs from? I have had a look at Amazon.jp but despite a "shop in English" button there doesn't seem to be much text either I nor my PC can understand.
 
Rasczak said:
Was that on HD DVD? If so where do you get your Japanese HD DVDs from? I have had a look at Amazon.jp but despite a "shop in English" button there doesn't seem to be much text either I nor my PC can understand.
Yep. Got Finding Neverland and Equilibrium as well, but havent watched those yet.

All ordered from Amazon Japan as preorders (you get 25% off for preorders). I tend to use CDJapan to find the titles (list here http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/search.html?type=GC&restrict=ALL&word=hd+dvd) and then use the catalog number from CDJapan to use in Amazon's search engine. I find thats the easiest way.

Some titles announced for Japan that arent on any lists for the US yet are,
The Pianist
Jersey Girl
Oliver Twist
The Gift
The Machinist
Reign Of Fire

Hope thats of some help.
 
That's superb - thanks :thumbsup:
 
Trust me if we end up with people comparing the pros and cons of VC1 vs AVC then we don't know we're born. lets just hope we don't all end up talking about how great the old hd-dvd releases were compared to the rip off 25gigger mpeg2 fluff infested blu-ray discs we are all lumbered with.
 
lets just hope we don't all end up talking about how great the old hd-dvd releases were compared to the rip off 25gigger mpeg2 fluff infested blu-ray discs we are all lumbered with
No, don't even joke about it :rolleyes: It this format war goes the wrong way we could spend 10 years plus regretting it :(

It won't happen though. For one thing HD DVD has cut itself a decent following already and it will only increase as the Xbox 360 addon and second gen players arrive - the market is there to justify more releases. And I think we'll be pleased with the announcements at the September show as well (NAD joining HD DVD perhaps).

Ultimately once 2006 Q4 battle has been fought I should imagine we could see some movement in studio support: hopefully Disney and BV will jump into Dual format. Fox may take a little more but HD DVD has done very well so far and hopefully the sales figures will encourage them to join the team.
 
jamieuk23 said:
Each to his own at the end of the day.. to be honest I have not really seen any HD material on my projector apart from some TS downloads which I no I cant even compare with real HD stuff.

Simply put...watching a good upscaled DVD you are watching a good quality film, but you still know you are watching a film......watching HD is like being there...it's much closer to real life resolution :rotfl:

I had some guests round the other day...We were waiting to watch a film...while we waited for everyone to get sorted I put on the BBC Proms on BBCHD (yes, yes, broadcast quality not as good as HD-DVD but using it as an example...also Proms isn't our taste) my guest and wife were both standing 2-3ft away from my 50" screen...my guest said "my god, that picture is incredible...it's like being there" and continued to whitter on about how good it was while not taking his eyes off the screen.... Now you wouldn't get that with upscaled DVD at normal viewing distances let alone 2-3ft :eek: !!!

Showing example pictures is interesting and done well you can see the difference but it doesn't show you how absolutely incredibly realistic it looks when watching. :smashin:
 
To the OP
If you've got an HTPC then there's loads of downloadable HD content about, some of it's even legal, this is so much better than upscaled DVD and I expect HD-DVD to be better again.

If you like random weirdness and girls in bikinis then this could be for you.
http://www.mariposahd.tv/
 
So Jus,, just getting this straight, you put some HD on for 'eye candy' when your friends were around and they loved the experience? :) whilst you were waiting for a film...... ;) So how is this different from eye candy HD DVDs?
 
lfletcher said:
Yep. Got Finding Neverland and Equilibrium as well, but havent watched those yet.

All ordered from Amazon Japan as preorders (you get 25% off for preorders). I tend to use CDJapan to find the titles (list here http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/search.html?type=GC&restrict=ALL&word=hd+dvd) and then use the catalog number from CDJapan to use in Amazon's search engine. I find thats the easiest way.

Some titles announced for Japan that arent on any lists for the US yet are,
The Pianist
Jersey Girl
Oliver Twist
The Gift
The Machinist
Reign Of Fire

Hope thats of some help.

Do these releases work in US player ?
 
Rasczak said:
No, don't even joke about it :rolleyes: It this format war goes the wrong way we could spend 10 years plus regretting it :(

It won't happen though. For one thing HD DVD has cut itself a decent following already and it will only increase as the Xbox 360 addon and second gen players arrive - the market is there to justify more releases. And I think we'll be pleased with the announcements at the September show as well (NAD joining HD DVD perhaps).

Ultimately once 2006 Q4 battle has been fought I should imagine we could see some movement in studio support: hopefully Disney and BV will jump into Dual format. Fox may take a little more but HD DVD has done very well so far and hopefully the sales figures will encourage them to join the team.


I still think when the 800lb Bluray gorilla wakes up, it'll be unstoppable. If there is any good news, its that HDDVD has shown the studios that VC1 (possibly AVC) is the way to go codec-wise, and thankfully forced bluray into adopting it. Sony or no Sony, bluray will switch to VC1 over the next 6-12 months.

So although I think bluray will win, it'll still be using VC1 for great quality.
 
jamieuk23 said:
for me looking at the pictures I am not seing a massive diffrence.

I would like to think I can get my picture with FFDSHOW to about 80% of HD Quality.

especialy now I am using limitedsharpen fliter.


you know, if you think you're getting a better picture with all those filters, imagine what you could do with a HD source and those filters.... Granted it'd take some serious grunt and probably isn't possible yet, but you should eventually be able to do the same 'enhancements' to HD as you can with DVD.



As for broadcast Vs disc, don't forget that broadcast being realtime makes it less efficient. A 15Mb/s AVC broadcast will look worse than a good 15Mb/s AVC encoded disc.
 
I still think when the 800lb Bluray gorilla wakes up, it'll be unstoppable.
We'll have to wait and see. I do think many under-estimate how potent the HD DVD case is though: Xbox addon (possibly full integration later), Vista support and MS pushing OEMs, very cheap players and combi disks are likely to go along way to ensure the formats survival and maybe even dominance over BluRay. If, as is rumoured, the high price of the PS3 does effect sales in a negative way then where does that leave BluRay? As a very expensive format that will fail to pickup early adopters due to quality issues.

If there is any good news, its that HDDVD has shown the studios that VC1 (possibly AVC) is the way to go codec-wise, and thankfully forced bluray into adopting it.
Has it though? If BluRay wins outright it will be through the PlayStation influence. You only need to look at the fanboys on the PS3 forum (or even the odd one that makes it in here) to know that they aren't too bothered about quality. They'll buy BluRay because they are told it's better not because they can see it is (the HDMI discussion is proof of that). They won't mind if a release is encoded in MPEG2. They won't mind about artifacts. So why should any BluRay company bother to chop to VC1 when they can use their existing technology and flog it to people who just don't understand.

Sony or no Sony, bluray will switch to VC1 over the next 6-12 months.
I hope you're right. And I should imagine the 'dual' format companies may well do this. But Fox and Sony? I won't hold my breath.
 
I'm actually slightly put-off by combos, as aren't they only single layer HDDVDs? If I'm buying HD I want the focus to be on HD.

I accept that they might be useful for the mainstream, but its not a mainstream market yet.
 
I'm actually slightly put-off by combos, as aren't they only single layer HDDVDs? If I'm buying HD I want the focus to be on HD.
TBH I was exactly the same until I saw a few. The titles released are actually some of the best available so picture quality hasn't suffered as a result of HD DVD15 being used. However the range of titles chosen for combi disks doubtless reflects the fact that HD DVD30/DVD9s aren't yet available - but I understand these are coming.
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom