Customer Discussions > Blu-ray forum

LOTR Trilogy EE's Blu-Rays to be split on 2 disc each.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 101-125 of 292 posts in this discussion
Posted on Mar 29, 2011 7:33:20 PM PDT
DeAd MiKe says:
I'm talking fact, you're talking nonsense. There will definitely be a difference in quality between a 30mbps 'Return of the King' and a 15mbps 'Return of the King.' It's not even debatable. Some encoders are very good at what they do and manage to get great video out of lower bitrates, but you trying to justify fitting a 251 minute movie on one 50GB Blu-ray at approximately 15mbps is crazy enough. Then saying that there would be no difference in quality if that same movie were instead encoded at 30mbps is even crazier. Seriously, leave. ^_^

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 8:01:22 PM PDT
A/V guru says:
Why explain this to Tarek?

He probably watches BD from a PS3 to a Westinghouse LCD, so he has no clue why those of us with real BD players(Oppo, Panasonic, Integra etc) and plasma TV's care about video quality.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 8:05:27 PM PDT
DeAd MiKe says:
I honestly don't know why I bother. I think it's just because I hate this type of ignorance. I would have the same "conversations" with people who thought that the black bars in widescreen movies were covering half of the picture, and that "full screen" = "more picture real estate." What the director intended for them to see was completely irrelevant. They just wanted to fill their 4:3 TVs and were happy with whatever the pan-and-scan editor wanted them to see. Ugh.

Posted on Mar 29, 2011 8:07:40 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 29, 2011 8:08:50 PM PDT
I AM A.M. says:
This is straight from the Blu-Ray.com article

"Of course, with four hours of material on a 50 GB disc, there are instances where light compression noise can be spotted amid the natural film grain-this is most apparent in darker interior scenes-but never to the point of distraction"

Key words being never to the point of distraction. So unless you have either ocd or a really expensive set up it would not bother you. What would make the set more expensive having 6 blu's with 9 dvd's or just 3 blu's with 9 dvd's? They are just trying to get more money from the consumer. This movie since it is split up on 2 blu's better be reference quality picture and sound. Also them having the nerve to release a blu ray box set with 9 dvd's is so messed up.

p.s. Guru thanks for the projector cleaning advice it worked like a charm. The picture looks almost brand new.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 8:09:48 PM PDT
A/V guru says:
I tried to explain it before by saying Baraka Remastered barely fit on one disc, and it is under 100 minutes. So, if IT barely fit...then LOTR with a bitrate barely lower than Baraka...is obviously going to need 2 discs.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 8:13:06 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 29, 2011 8:14:15 PM PDT
DeAd MiKe says:
To me, the key words are: "...there are instances where light compression noise can be spotted..."

tarek is proposing that there will be no difference in quality if the movie were put on one disc. I say that is rubbish. If there is light compression noise on 'Dances with Wolves,' a film that is shorter than 'Return of the King,' it's pretty easy to see that there will be compression noise (and probably more of it) if 'Return of the King' (a longer movie) were put on one disc.

Just think about this for a minute.

A film shorter than 'Return of the King' had compression noise.

'Return of the King' is longer than that film.

'Return of the King' will therefore have compression noise, and probably more of it since it is a longer film and it will therefore have to be at a lower bitrate.

One can then say that the compression noise will be more evident, and therefore, may very well be at the point of distraction.

But that's neither here nor there. What distracts me may not distract you. *I get that.* That's not even what the debate with tarek is about. He is saying that there will be no compression noise and that the movie will look perfect because of some ridiculous and irrelevant example having to do with 'Avatar 3D,' 'King Kong,' and 'Dances with Wolves,' and whatever craziness he was also trying to say.

Posted on Mar 29, 2011 8:16:16 PM PDT
Watcher says:
http://archive.perfectduluthday.com/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 8:17:12 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 29, 2011 8:20:58 PM PDT
A/V guru says:
You're welcome.

I personally have no problem with them putting 9 DVD's in the 6 BD set of LOTR. They are re-using existing digital information. The cost of BD(as in the discs themselves) is still prohibitive to putting SD information on them.

The plant in Terre Haute, Indiana(which by the way, makes 30% of the worlds supply) is on a 3 month delay. So, you can cry and whine about 9 DVD's of SD information all you want. But when the cost of BD(again, as just the disc) is still 20 times the price of DVD...that means 9 DVD's of SD information cost a bit under HALF AS MUCH as putting it on 1 BD.

Next, once "SD extras" are put on a BD...somebody will cry that the digital copy wasn't on a BD...

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 8:47:04 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 19, 2011 10:50:40 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 8:48:06 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 19, 2011 10:50:40 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 8:59:23 PM PDT
The keywords may have been "never to the point of distraction" to you, but to me the keywords are "light compression noise can be spotted". That signifies that there's a visible difference, and I'd rather have the best quality possible. Call it OCD or perfectionism if you like. If I didn't care about quality, I could Bit Torrent this stuff for free.

Also, Casey Broadwater "Woodstove" of Blu-ray.com, the reviewer, never specified what kind of system he has out of his 92 forum posts, so we don't know whether he watched Dances with Wolves from a 60" Pioneer Elite, or 120" 3-chip projector; we don't know whether he was sitting 10' away, or 25'. This is all very relevant to being distracted with light compression noise.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 9:01:24 PM PDT
DeAd MiKe says:
"The keywords may have been 'never to the point of distraction' to you, but to me the keywords are 'light compression noise can be spotted...'"

- Heh. I made the same point.

And tarek, go away already.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 9:07:50 PM PDT
You sound very sure of yourself for it being a speculative topic, tarek... If you're a graphic designer, you should know that unless the resolution is low, compression artifacts can be seen very quickly.

If you're arguing that there would be no frames with visible differences -- if you paused at each individual frame and compared a 100GB encode vs a 50GB encode -- then that would be a bold claim.

The question should rather be: are these *visible* differences visible in motion -- when the movie is being watched normally? And even in that case, I would rather err on the side of caution.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 29, 2011 9:12:47 PM PDT
DeAd MiKe says:
tarek, have you given up on this conversation along with the other ones that you were also wrong about:

tarek says:
correct me if I'm wrong Mike, but a 50 Gb Blu-ray may contain up to 4h50m of video for a rate of 23 Mbps at 25 fps of 1080 pixels height, (video encoding format MPEG-4 AVC).

We are talking here about 290 mn at a bitrate of 23 Mbps...

I replied with a later post

DeAd MiKe says:
What about the audio?

---

Every point that you have tried to make in this thread in the hopes of proving me wrong has failed. I just want you to know that.

Posted on Mar 30, 2011 12:37:39 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 30, 2011 1:10:04 AM PDT
AaronMK says:
Here are single disc max average bit-rates for each extended film if they were going to put them on a single disc, assuming audio bit-rates of the Theatrical BD's. (I have posted these elsewhere, and have not seen them disputed, so I'm assuming my math is right at this point. :) )

(video/audio - add the two if you want total bit-rate)
Fellowship of the Ring: 26.3 Mbps / 4214 kbps
The Two Towers: 24.4 Mbps / 4074 kbps
Return of the King: 21.0 Mbps / 4249 kbps

At these bit-rates, you could probably argue either way for LOTR. (As a couple have ad nauseum for five pages.) I guess it depends on what metric is being used determine the necessary bit-rate. If the metric is getting past the "point of distraction" these are probably good enough. If it is getting to the point where adding bits would not create a perceptible difference (ie, point of diminishing returns), these are probably insufficient bit-rates. (Keep in mind many people watch these at cinema viewing angles on revealing displays.)

For my Blu-ray dollars, I expect proper mastering at a bit-rate that is at or past the point of diminishing returns, whatever it happens to be for that particular movie. With the capacity of Blu-ray, it is rare that it requires more than a single disc, and trying to argue that having to switch a disc once during those very few 3 1/2 to 4 1/2 hour movies brings us back to the laserdisc days is hyperbole at best.

Even streaming services like Vudu can get passed the "point of distraction" on 1080p. If people place more value on that minimal amount of convenience than picture quality, they are better off using such services. They won't even have to leave the couch to put that first disc in the player (forget ordering or running out to purchase the discs themselves), and can rent these movies numerous times for the cost of this set.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2011 6:51:17 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 19, 2011 10:50:40 AM PDT]

Posted on Mar 30, 2011 6:55:13 AM PDT
MustSeeHDTV says:
What I'm upset about the splits are that they are not on BD-75 or BD-100. Yeah, that would be expensive for them to make, but it would make the sets worthwhile (since they have DVD material too).

As for the size of the original 2k master, here is a quote from Bill Hunt of the digital bits.com when I complained to him since he can talk to the studios.

"I'm told that for full RGB scans at 2048 pixels (2K), the average file size is 1TB per hour of film. That's a LOT of compression for films as long as the Rings extended editions"

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2011 6:59:22 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 19, 2011 10:50:40 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2011 7:08:03 AM PDT
A/V guru says:
You are an idiot.

I have a 108" D-ILA. A 50" Hitachi Director series plasma as well. So, to answer your stupid question about the "point of distraction"...

The capability of my two displays is probably 50% better than yours. Because I can get a better picture, I want THE BEST SOURCE. If they, the creative team behind LOTR, say they need 2 discs per movie...

I say HOORAY.

I'd say get off your high horse there Tarek, but you probably think horse, donkey and mule are all the same.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2011 7:12:41 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 19, 2011 10:50:40 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2011 7:58:04 AM PDT
"Because I can get a better picture, I want THE BEST SOURCE."

Isn't that a 1080p screen? How are you getting better than 1080p? You point should be that "because you get a BIGGER picture"

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2011 9:10:04 AM PDT
A/V guru says:
The point is. D-ILA is better than DLP or LCD projectors. So it is "better", not just bigger.

Also, a Director series plasma is "better" than, apparently, whatever Tarek has to watch.

Posted on Mar 30, 2011 9:26:39 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 19, 2011 10:50:42 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2011 9:31:26 AM PDT
6 parts for the original 6 books? Makes perfect sense to me. LotR is only considered a trilogy because it was originally published in 3 volumes due to post-World War II paper shortages.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 30, 2011 9:40:56 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 19, 2011 10:50:42 AM PDT]
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Blu-ray forum
Participants:  35
Total posts:  292
Initial post:  Mar 21, 2011
Latest post:  Nov 16, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions