negative1 said:
digitalfreaknyc said:
BMadden said:
Exactly. The AVCHD versions all fit on dual layer DVDs and they are absolutely "crystal clear" IMHO.

Oh yeah? what size screen are you watching it on? Just because it looks "crystal clear" and "blows away the DVD version" doesn't mean it's an up-to-snuff HD version. If you take that version and compare it to a proper blu-ray encoding, it's not going to compare. I'll guarantee that. Plus, the sound needs to be uncompressed.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great interim solution because, for the moment, that's all we have. But eventually the official release will (quality-wise) blow it away.

how in the world can you predict how well a movie is encoded? i have several HD-DVDs that

are marginally better than the DVD despite them being 1080p...... yeah, let's wait until it

IS ACTUALLY RELEASED and then talk...... not theoretically, and not hypothetically...

later

-1

How can I? Becuase the higher the bitrate, the better it's going to be encoded. There's going to be less blocking. There is absolutely NO WAY IN HELL regardless of the codecs currently used that it will look great in comparison to an eventual properly mastered blu-ray. Call it what you want but I will promise to buy you a blu-ray set if the paultry 8.7gb avc RE-encoded version will be better than the eventual official release. Save this posting.

Remember, there's the original master...and then there's an mpeg-2 encoding (or whatever the original broadcast used for this encoding was) and then there's this avc RE-encoding. That's just another generation away and mpeg-2 is just a horrendously outdated upsetting codec.