logo Sign In

Star Wars in High Definition: OT clips from "Science of Star Wars" in HD

Author
Date
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

Did anyone happen to see the “Science of Star Wars” on Discovery HD Theater? The clips from the original trilogy were all in HD, and they looked great. I can only hope that eventually we’ll get the original (yes the real original) trilogy on Blu-ray, and it will look that good.

Author
Time
Post link
I don't understand any of this Blue-Ray stuff that people talk about. I barely understand and remember when VHS become bunk and DVD was the way to go. But with Blue-Ray?... bah. I'll hope for it when I fully understand what it is. I have a standard TV tube. I have no moneys to buy me a nice HDTV set, and the one that my father has...I don't even watch the HD channels anyway.

This thread derailment has been brought to you by light speed briefs.
"I am altering the movies. Pray I don't alter them any further." -Darth Lucas
Author
Time
Post link
The problem with High Defintion DVD's is right now there are two competing companies: HD-DVD & Blue Ray, and each carry certain movie studios. So the problem is if you want to re-buy your movies in HD, you have to buy two players. It is such a stupid way to start off a new format, by having a war like this, but it seems to happen everytime. VHS & Beta, and DVD & Divx went at it. Usually someones wins early on, but it is does is delay any mainstream fans from getting involved. I am taking a wait and see until one of the formats wins, I think it will probably be HD-DVD, cause they are sponsored by Warner Bros, and they always try to keep the prices lower on DVD's to get more of a mass market, rather than a niche market like Laserdisk.

Because of this, I don't see any SW movies, SE or O-OT or PT coming for a couple of years. Lucas held out on DVD until 2001, and that format was 4 years old by then. So it will probably be the super duper SE in 2010 or something.
Author
Time
Post link
True, there are two formats. The reason I mentioned Blu-ray, and did not mention HD-DVD is because 20th Century Fox has specifically announced their support for the Blu-ray format, and is NOT supporting the HD-DVD format.

Anyway, my reason for posting was not to start a format debate, but simply to discuss how good Star Wars looks in high definition, even though all I saw were small clips of it.
Author
Time
Post link
if Sony ever gets their shit together & releases the PS3, that'll pretty much seal the deal for Blue-Ray winning the HD format war
Author
Time
Post link
The format war is pretty much over. HD-DVD was not favoured at all to begin with and they seriously screwed up their release and introduced so many problems into their hardware and software that even those who wanted to give it a chance have basically said "to hell with it." HD video will not catch on with average consumers, DVD will be around for at least five more years if not more, and only the hardcore cinephiles will adopt Blu-Ray.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: zombie84
The format war is pretty much over. HD-DVD was not favoured at all to begin with and they seriously screwed up their release and introduced so many problems into their hardware and software that even those who wanted to give it a chance have basically said "to hell with it." HD video will not catch on with average consumers, DVD will be around for at least five more years if not more, and only the hardcore cinephiles will adopt Blu-Ray.


Yeah, exactly. The HD-DVD would have had a chance if the average consumer who doesn't care got access to it, but at the moment Blu-ray offers a lot more. I hope Blu-ray wins, but if not, its not the end of the world I suppose.

Anyways, CO said that Warner Brother's is supporting the HD-DVD format only and that's not accurate. Warner is now actually supporting both formats. Here is a good page for learning about Blu-ray and who supports it (and what movies have been announced so far):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
In the future if the price comes down i will buy blu ray since that the one fox is supporting and will have full uncompressed pcm sound. it may be a few years down the road but star wars will be for blu ray most likely because of lucas relationship with fox. on the other hand the uber ultimate star trek motion picture box set I saw on amazon.com is going to be on HD-DVD.

too bad they could'nt come to a compromise and have a hybrid unit because I sure as hell will not buy 2 seperate units to watch my favorite films, but unless something happens down the road looks like us film fanatics will have to bite the bullet and buy them both.

Xmen will be for blu ray,

still no word on which system will have lord of the rings or king kong, which is new line/universal/weta supporting.

It's about time we have the best of both worlds people have been talking about for awhile now laserdisc quality sound and dvd picture merged, only worlds better. No more crap compressed movies or soundtracks now that will change the home theater experience.

who knows what will happen in the eighties Lucas put star wars on both betamax and Vhs and we all know which format won that one. maybe he will support both because of the cash benefit. Unless he's some sort of person who can see into the future and knows which will win.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
Post link
Devilman is probably right about the PS3 though. It will be expensive, but aside from that it will be the first player with mass market appeal. That should solidly make sure Blu-ray wins in addition to the technical superiority (I hope).

Both HD-DVD and BD (Blu-ray disk) drives will be designed to work with already existing DVDs, so there's no probem there for the average customer. Whichever format becomes the most popular will have all movie companies releasing titles for. Star Trek and anything else will come to Blu-ray quickly if it wins the format war.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
I dont think we will see the OOT on HD becouse he cant bring it out on DVD in the first place .
May the force be wth you .........
Author
Time
Post link
Mark my words - HD-DVD will win the war. Why? because of the name. HD = Hi Definition. The average joe on the street can understand that. We already have HBO HD, ESPN HD, etc, and the initials HD are slowly slipping into the public subconscious. So HD will win because of the name. Silly, but true.

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
Post link
But will GL bring the OOT to HD DVD ??
May the force be wth you .........
Author
Time
Post link

HD-DVD is soaring ahead at the moment, and on many enthusiast forums people are saying that the first batch of Bluray discs are not matching up in the quality department.
Author
Time
Post link
Yes, Blu Ray's delays have certainly done some damage. But I still say Blu-Ray will win. This business about "the name HD-DVD subconsciously affecting consumer decision" is nice and logical but the thing is---average Joe Shmoe consumer wont be buying either of these formats. The people who will--and who will be deciding the early outcome of the format war--will be the home theater enthusiasts, who already know that Blu-Ray has better specs. The earliest titles are too primitive to accurately gauge, for both formats--in 2007 we'll see what either formats are actually capable of and it will be around here that we'll start seeing who will be the victor. The fact that Blu-Ray will be included with the PS3 is a huge advantage because now "average consumers" will own a high-def format player--which is the deciding factor in the format war victory. But like i said, no matter who wins, it will not be a mainstream format. I likely will never touch one of these things--i can't afford an HD TV set, and i don't see myself buying one within the next five years. By that time consumers will actually be switching to HD in the mainstream due to huge price drops and then another next-next-gen format will be coming out. When 2K resolution format comes out, then I'll start saving up.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Invader Jenny
I don't understand any of this Blue-Ray stuff that people talk about. I barely understand and remember when VHS become bunk and DVD was the way to go. But with Blue-Ray?... bah. I'll hope for it when I fully understand what it is. I have a standard TV tube. I have no moneys to buy me a nice HDTV set, and the one that my father has...I don't even watch the HD channels anyway.


There is not much to understand. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are the competing DVD successors for the HDTV television format. HD-DVD has 30 GB memory capacity, Blu-Ray 50GB. HD-DVD has already been launched in the US while Blu-Ray is still not released.

HDTV is 16:9 only, and can have up to 1920x1080 pixel resolution compared to 720x480 pixel (NTSC) or 720x576 pixel (PAL), and comes relatively close to the resolution of a standard 35mm cinema release copy.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Vigo
and comes relatively close to the resolution of a standard 35mm cinema release copy.


Actually it is not close at all. But it sure beats SD.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your Father
Mark my words - HD-DVD will win the war. Why? because of the name. HD = Hi Definition. The average joe on the street can understand that. We already have HBO HD, ESPN HD, etc, and the initials HD are slowly slipping into the public subconscious. So HD will win because of the name. Silly, but true.


Heh, I've thought that myself a number of times. I hope that won't be the deciding factor though, and there's a good chance it won't be do to the early expense and availability that will plague both formats. Plus, even the name might be a bonus since Blu-ray stands out as more unique, and, if anything, people are identifying Blu-Ray disks as a kind of HD-DVD as well, and the superior HD-DVD at that.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
people are identifying Blu-Ray disks as a kind of HD-DVD as well, and the superior HD-DVD at that.


Really? Over at AVS Forum, the general opinion on picture quality is almost entirely in favor of HD-DVD. Better codec and more disc capacity. (The BD spec allows for double-layer discs that will be larger than HD-DVDs, and advanced video codecs, but we haven't seen them yet.) With a lower price (by hundreds of dollars) and better performance, HD-DVD has a much better demonstrated price/performance ratio.
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Author
Time
Post link
The consensus is that the HD-DVD discs look amazing and have used the VC-1 codec. But Bluray have opted to use that old MPEG2 codec and they just don't look as good. Bluray have been shooting their mouth off for years now about how much better they will be and they haven't delivered. Meanwhile HD-DVD has become the enthusiasts choice and people have even figured out how to author their own HD-DVD discs playable back on the machine.

HD-DVD hardware is half the price of Bluray hardware too. Consumers will vote with their wallets here.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your Father
Mark my words - HD-DVD will win the war. Why? because of the name. HD = Hi Definition. The average joe on the street can understand that. We already have HBO HD, ESPN HD, etc, and the initials HD are slowly slipping into the public subconscious. So HD will win because of the name. Silly, but true.

Heh- you're probably right about that. 'HD-DVD' is self-explanatory, but 'Blu-ray'? "What is that?" Most people won't know.

Frankly, I think it's a little too soon for both of them. The DVD format is only about 9 years old, and most people just aren't ready for hi-def DVDs yet. I've heard that both the HD-DVD and Blu-ray players and software have bugs, but so far Blu-ray is having bigger problems. Maybe in a few years the 2 camps will have the bugs worked out, and consumers will be ready to make a choice. Hopefully, the companies will be able to hold out that long. I think they really jumped the gun on this one- but they were each so eager to beat the other one to the punch, that they put the players out there before they were really ready.

The Star Wars movies will probably be among the last of Fox's back catalog to be released in HD (the PT and the SE, that is) and I think the DVD sales of the OOT will determine the future of those films in HD.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Scruffy
Really?

Well, if you're asking about the line you quoted from me, then yes, laypeople who don't care about terms are calling Blu-Ray discs an HD-DVD. Sounds dumb, I know, but that does affect the general market's recognition of names which is what I was discussing. (And, if they aren’t calling it a ‘superior’ HD-DVD then they should in my opinion.)


Originally posted by: Scruffy
Over at AVS Forum, the general opinion on picture quality is almost entirely in favor of HD-DVD. Better codec and more disc capacity. (The BD spec allows for double-layer discs that will be larger than HD-DVDs, and advanced video codecs, but we haven't seen them yet.)
Originally posted by: Jobel
The consensus is that the HD-DVD discs look amazing and have used the VC-1 codec. But Bluray have opted to use that old MPEG2 codec and they just don't look as good. Bluray have been shooting their mouth off for years now about how much better they will be and they haven't delivered. Meanwhile HD-DVD has become the enthusiasts choice and people have even figured out how to author their own HD-DVD discs playable back on the machine.


First, Blu-Ray discs have far more capacity than HD-DVDs so there's no doubt which format is more advanced and deserving to replace DVD in that respect. A single layered HD-DVD holds 15 GBs while a single layed Blu-Ray holds 23-25 GBs. That's a huge difference (10 GBs). If you double the layers then you only double the capacity of each disc (30 GB vs 50 GB). (In addition, as a hybrid disc, a BD can fit an entire 8.5 GB DVD on its second layer while HD-DVD requires you to use the other side of the disk to achieve hybrid status. A single layer BD holds almost as much as a dual layered HD-DVD.)

Second, what do you both mean about VC-1 being a "better" codec than Mpeg-2? As far as I know, it is primarily more efficient, but it doesn't offer a better image quality in a practical sense. That means while using less space on a disc with VC-1, you can still have a comparable image with Mpeg-2. But, do we remember the larger capacity of BDs? It seems logical that even while using Mpeg-2, a BD can fit visual data at just as high a level of quality (or maybe even higher) without needing the extra compression of VC-1. Yet, even considering that likelihood, BD players also require both the VC-1 and Mpeg-4 codecs just as HD-DVD does. Just give the technology more time and you’ll VC-1 or Mpeg-4 content.

HD-DVD has had a large head start on BD. Simply because it is more mature in the marketplace does not, by any means, imply that it is the more advanced technology. To the contrary, BDs have a new and more advanced structure (compared with HD-DVDs which follow closely from CDs/DVDs). BD will be better in the long run. For one thing, BD will read and burn data faster than HD-DVD. Also, BD will have a protective coating that will make them far more durable and easier to handle than CDs, DVDs, or HD-DVDs.


Originally posted by: Scruffy
With a lower price (by hundreds of dollars) and better performance, HD-DVD has a much better demonstrated price/performance ratio.

Originally posted by: Jobel
HD-DVD hardware is half the price of Bluray hardware too. Consumers will vote with their wallets here.


Again, Blu-Ray just came onto the market in time for all that World-Soccer nonsense. The cost of BD players will go down quickly enough as production increases and the demand from people who don't mind burning cash starts to drop a bit.

As for the actual discs, they cost more to produce, but they sell for the same retail price.

In general, the HD market needs more time and I wish that each format had waited a few years. They're better than DVD of course, but HD tvs won't be mainstream for a long while and I'd personally rather have a format that makes BD and HD-DVD look like crap.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
First, Blu-Ray discs have far more capacity than HD-DVDs so there's no doubt which format is more advanced and deserving to replace DVD in that respect. A single layered HD-DVD holds 15 GBs while a single layed Blu-Ray holds 23-25 GBs. That's a huge difference (10 GBs). If you double the layers then you only double the capacity of each disc (30 GB vs 50 GB). (In addition, as a hybrid disc, a BD can fit an entire 8.5 GB DVD on its second layer while HD-DVD requires you to use the other side of the disk to achieve hybrid status. A single layer BD holds almost as much as a dual layered HD-DVD.

There's still this bizarre idea that capacity = better for a movie playback platform. The plain and simple fact is that a VC1/AVC encoded movie will not need 50GB. Not even with extreme picture quality. Not even with the inclusion of lossless audio codecs.

Short of movies coming with hours upon hours of extreme encoded HD extras, 30GB is more than enough space. There could well be a case of HD-DVD movie releases spanning onto two disks if things really get silly, but even then it will work to HD-DVD's advantage - 'Two Disk Collector's Set' is a better marketing spin than 'One DIsk Collector's Set'.

In real world scenarios, it all comes to down to TV series boxsets: less episodes per disk on HD-DVD if both formats use VC1/AVC. But less episodes per disk for Blu-Ray if they insist on using MPEG2.

At the end of the day, the Bluray discs have so far delivered disappointing image quality compared to HD-DVD. I think that speaks for itself.


For one thing, BD will read and burn data faster than HD-DVD.


Bandwidth between the two is pretty much the same actually.

Blu-Ray most certainly is not the only proper option. HD-DVD is just as 'proper.' That's the whole point, the formats are interchangeable. Being an advocate of either is ludicrous.
Author
Time
Post link
Personally, if HD-DVD and Blu-Ray give us hassles, I predict that d-vhs may even over-take the market (and let's not forget how long it's already been out, it has proven reliability). If HD-DVD/Blu-Ray does get regional coding (currently HD-DVD does NOT have it, but apparently they're adapting the format to include it) - and IF they can make it stick (which I doubt) - I for one would much rather buy d-vhs, because at least I know I can import legal copies from anywhere I like, at least I know I can go down to JB HI-FI or other speciality stores and ask them to import foreign releases for me without having to worry about incompatibility. Personally I would still prefer a disc format, especially because they can be played in computers, and can include special features, menus and instant scene-access - but when all u want to do is sit down and watch a movie that matters little anyway. I feel I'll just skip hd-dvd and blu-ray and wait for the next consumer-friendly format.
Some were not blessed with brains.
<blockquote>Originally posted by: BadAssKeith

You are passing up on a great opportunity to makes lots of money,
make Lucas lose a lot of his money
and make him look bad to the entire world
and you could be well known and liked

None of us here like Lucas or Lucasfilm.
I have death wishes on Lucas and Macullum.
we could all probably get 10s of thousands of dollars!
Author
Time
Post link
HD-DVD costs less to manufacturers too. It takes relatively little time and resources to convert from producing SD-DVD to HD-DVD, as you can alter the existing hardware. Blu-ray requires completely new hardware. HD-DVD discs are more than adequate for high definition home cinema.

Am I right that Microsoft came out on the HD-DVD side?

And since when did being the 'better' format EVER mean that it could win the war? It doesn't work like that. I still hear people shaking their heads and sorrowfully intoning: "Betamax was the better format, you know..."

I have to say I disagree with Mielr on the possibility of HD OOT releases - I don't think it'll make a bit of difference to future releases of the OOT if this one in September is a financial success. In fact, I think it would be more damaging. LucasFilm would be justified in thinking that everyone is perfectly happy with the 4:3 letterbox Laserdisc copy so why bother making an HD transfer?
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Post link
Also, if you look at the global markets, they're all different. Just because Americans don't care so much about region-coding doesn't mean the rest of us don't. In NZ we get hardly any official local releases - many other countries, like say Portugal are in the same boat and have it even worse then us - and so we rely on the market of other countries. Now according to region-coding, we're supposed to share our market with "Australia, Pacific Islands, Central America, Mexico, South America and the Caribbean". Parallel-Importing is legal, and so politicians decided (and rightly so) that region-coding was trying to restrict consumer choices when buying officially incensed movies. It was also seen as a way for them to control market prices, you just have to look at the prices of DVD's and CD's in brittain to see the effect of an anti-global-friendly-market. That's why region coding is now illegal. Why, according to region coding, is it okay to import DVD's from Australia and Mexico - but not okay to import them from Holland, Canada, Japan and China?

Also the AACS system worries me. It basically means that each time a key is leaked it becomes invalid - in other words, it won't be used on subsequent HD-DVD/Blu-Ray releases to combat piracy. Well fair enough, however what will happen is that new HD-DVD players and Blu-Ray players can have more keys then the first ones did, and so eventually once all the original keys have been cracked/leaked the current HD-DVD's or Blu-Ray DVD's being released will no longer be able to play on older machines!

As if that isn't bad enough, when hooked-up to your equipment you cannot watch it unless it takes the encrypted signal - and if it doesn't it'll be scaled down. Now I know people who bought HD-ready sets BEFORE this was implemented in them, as well as 2 people with home-movie-projectors (professional ones mounted to your roof with the three colour guns, not cheap lcd or data-projectors) that are also capable of HD but are not rated for AACS encryption. This would mean spending more thousands of dollars on replacing a perfectly good professional-grade projector to get one that takes the encrypted signal so you can watch 1080i - or else you'll just have to watch the scaled-down version. And by the way, yes it's expensive to replace the projector bulbs - but that's nothing compared to replacing an entire projector!

And it just keeps getting worse and worse.

I hope HVD or even DMD will be released to the home video format and be more consumer friendly.

Blu-Ray encryption goes even further - restricting even more the flexibility (or what's left of it) of use. If, 5 or 6 years from now, I have to choose between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, I believe I'd choose HD-DVD simply because it is a little more flexible then Blu-Ray. But I'm not happy with either, not in the least.

I won't be interested in a format that will not play on HD equipment my friends and family owns. I wouldn't support a format that doesn't support them. I won't be interested in a format that tries to force you to update your hardware just to watch their releases. I remember when people were rushing to buy HD-TV's before the AACS encryption was implemented – because they didn't want it in their TV. Someone will eventually build "digital signal stabilizers" like the analogue ones you can get that remove macrovision.
Some were not blessed with brains.
<blockquote>Originally posted by: BadAssKeith

You are passing up on a great opportunity to makes lots of money,
make Lucas lose a lot of his money
and make him look bad to the entire world
and you could be well known and liked

None of us here like Lucas or Lucasfilm.
I have death wishes on Lucas and Macullum.
we could all probably get 10s of thousands of dollars!