Fox sure likes that mpeg2!

[teamerickson]

It's a shame that Fox studios continues to favor the super old mpeg2 codec to show off the so called technological advantages of Blu-ray. Isn't Blu-ray supposed to take the movie experience to the next level. It seems this is just a standard DVD at higher bit rates.

 

[navychop]

Fox brought us widescreen 480. Took them a long time to move up. Don't hold your breath.

 

[hpman247]

It's a shame that Fox studios continues to favor the super old mpeg2 codec to show off the so called technological advantages of Blu-ray. Isn't Blu-ray supposed to take the movie experience to the next level. It seems this is just a standard DVD at higher bit rates.

I take it you havn't seen Kingdom of Heaven in MPEG 2. It WOULD BLOW YOU AWAY

 

[teamerickson]

Fox's "The Sentinel" got rated almost as bad as "Talladega nights" for picture quality. Ouch!

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/sentinel2006.html

 

[Paradox-SJ]

I take it you havn't seen Kingdom of Heaven in MPEG 2. It WOULD BLOW YOU AWAY

Are you definding Fox's use of an outdate format or are you just stating that KH looks good?

 

[hpman247]

Are you definding Fox's use of an outdate format or are you just stating that KH looks good?

I am stating that MPEG 2 still looks as good as VC-1 or AVC, and my proof is KoH. I really do not care which codec they use so as it looks amazing.

 

[hpman247]

Fox's "The Sentinel" got rated almost as bad as "Talladega nights" for picture quality. Ouch!

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/sentinel2006.html

Talledaga Nights looked like crap. I'll give this a netflix, instead of buying, and decide on the pq myself.

 

[vurbano]

I take it you havn't seen Kingdom of Heaven in MPEG 2. It WOULD BLOW YOU AWAY

only to an extent. It is not flawless.

I am stating that MPEG 2 still looks as good as VC-1 or AVC, and my proof is KoH. I really do not care which codec they use so as it looks amazing.

I believe it would look superior on VC-1

"There are a few flaws, however. As the movie fades in from the opening title credit, some posterization is plainly visible, a problem that recurs during other slow fades. Low-amplitude edge ringing is also present during sharp contrasts repeatedly throughout the movie, lending some scenes a harsh "digital" texture. Fortunately, both issues are relatively minor and rarely distracting" - DVDtalk

 

[JoeSp]

only to an extent. It is not flawless.



I believe it would look superior on VC-1

"There are a few flaws, however. As the movie fades in from the opening title credit, some posterization is plainly visible, a problem that recurs during other slow fades. Low-amplitude edge ringing is also present during sharp contrasts repeatedly throughout the movie, lending some scenes a harsh "digital" texture. Fortunately, both issues are relatively minor and rarely distracting" - DVDtalk

Bob, VC-1 is not necessarily a superior compression technology. It is only superior in that it can produce some very good PQ when using low bitrates (hence the reason it is the choice of HD-DVD). However, both Mpeg2 and Mpeg4AVC can produce the same PQ although with a requirement of higher bitrates (hence the reason for continued use by BD). I personally prefer higher bitrates as I believe you can get better PQ and soundQ from higher rates. Someone more techie than I would have to explain this but I believe it to be true. Just look at your cable and satellite feeds -- more bitrate better PQ and SQ and I believe this to be true with HD movie authoring.

On another note, (credit to Mr Kotches) M$ continues to tweak VC-1 encoders and continues to get great results from it. However, I believe that this is a prelude to M$ providing downloadable movies for the 360. And at the limited rate of our poor internet (very slow compared to other countries) system I can see M$ using very low bitrates for HD movie viewing from the internet to the point it becomes like DirectTV HD -- HD-Lite anyone?

 

[mike123abc]

Bob, VC-1 is not necessarily a superior compression technology. It is only superior in that it can produce some very good PQ when using low bitrates (hence the reason it is the choice of HD-DVD). However, both Mpeg2 and Mpeg4AVC can produce the same PQ although with a requirement of higher bitrates (hence the reason for continued use by BD). I personally prefer higher bitrates as I believe you can get better PQ and soundQ from higher rates. Someone more techie than I would have to explain this but I believe it to be true. Just look at your cable and satellite feeds -- more bitrate better PQ and SQ and I believe this to be true with HD movie authoring.

It would be better to have VC-1 at MPEG-2 bit rates... But, they tend to try to save by lowering the bit rates more than advanced compression can compensate.

 

[BlackHitachi]

It would be better to have VC-1 at MPEG-2 bit rates...

Amen now this would be nice!