|
It is currently 14 May 2024, 08:09
|
View unsolved topics | View unanswered posts
![](./styles/AeroBlue/theme/images/tl.png) |
|
![](./styles/AeroBlue/theme/images/tr.png) |
|
harlock
|
Post subject: Re: Picture quality scale by format ![Post Post](./styles/AeroBlue/imageset/icon_post_target.gif) Posted: 06 Aug 2020, 06:09 |
Serious fan |
![Serious fan Serious fan](./images/ranks/postranks/rank_8.png) |
![User avatar](./download/file.php?avatar=2157_1561668208.png) |
Joined: 20 Oct 2011, 21:57 Posts: 188 Location: United States Has thanked: 2 times Been thanked: 54 times
|
ertoili wrote: 35mm (Best) 16mm film can be pretty impressive as well. Attending screenings of a 16mm film collector friend is something else, with the cinemascope widescreen performing well at expanding a big 2.35:1 or so frame with the appropriate scope lens on the PJ. The IB Techicolor prints are particularly treasured for not succumbing to the red color fade of stocks like Eastmancolor. This is not a cheap hobby, later prints can go into the thousands. And of course 35 is the reference. I have a few 16mm projectors, but finding a 35mm unit that isn't huge is tricky (but prints are generally less than 16mm, and you get surround stereo sound and of course the huge resolution). The studios still strike 35mm prints of even the latest cgi fest blockbusters for long term archival storage in salt mine vaults. You can't really toss a hard drive in the corner and expect to return to it in 50+ years and have it both function and not have issues of nonexistent legacy hardware/software needed in the distant future.
|
|
|
|
![](images/spacer.gif) |
elahrairrah
|
Post subject: Re: Picture quality scale by format ![Post Post](./styles/AeroBlue/imageset/icon_post_target.gif) Posted: 15 Aug 2020, 19:10 |
Young Padawan |
![Young Padawan Young Padawan](./images/ranks/postranks/rank_15.png) |
![User avatar](./download/file.php?avatar=186_1509991115.jpg) |
Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 15:38 Posts: 3425 Location: New Jersey Has thanked: 79 times Been thanked: 152 times
|
ertoili wrote: Update according to forum members ; UMD and Mini-DVD "Nintendo Gamecube Optical Disc" is also a Mini DVD variation. "Sega Dreamcast" GD-rom is a Yamaha high density CD-Rom , so its vídeo quality is limited. The Dreamcast GD-ROM was never intended for video storage and its capacity was only 1.2GB. I think even Sony's UMD beats that. And most of the FMV featured on the Dreamcast used Sofdec which was basically a version of MPEG-2 compression (same as on DVD and early blu-rays.)
|
|
|
|
![](images/spacer.gif) |
deadlegion
|
Post subject: Re: Picture quality scale by format ![Post Post](./styles/AeroBlue/imageset/icon_post_target.gif) Posted: 17 Aug 2020, 07:56 |
Advanced fan |
![Advanced fan Advanced fan](./images/ranks/postranks/rank_10.png) |
![User avatar](./download/file.php?avatar=5453_1608360551.jpg) |
Joined: 02 Aug 2019, 02:29 Posts: 660 Location: Australia Has thanked: 52 times Been thanked: 85 times
|
elahrairrah wrote: ertoili wrote: Update according to forum members ; UMD and Mini-DVD "Nintendo Gamecube Optical Disc" is also a Mini DVD variation. "Sega Dreamcast" GD-rom is a Yamaha high density CD-Rom , so its vídeo quality is limited. The Dreamcast GD-ROM was never intended for video storage and its capacity was only 1.2GB. I think even Sony's UMD beats that. And most of the FMV featured on the Dreamcast used Sofdec which was basically a version of MPEG-2 compression (same as on DVD and early blu-rays.) Yeah UMD is 1.8GB. Video discs in that format use H.264/MPEG-4 AVC video (720×480) and ATRAC3plus audio. Gamecube discs are the same capacity as mini DVD-R used in older camcorders but obviously they're pressed discs. Some GC games had bonus discs with videos, but afaik those are designed to be used on the console they aren't like larger retail DVD's.
|
|
|
|
![](images/spacer.gif) |
deadlegion
|
Post subject: Re: Picture quality scale by format ![Post Post](./styles/AeroBlue/imageset/icon_post_target.gif) Posted: 18 Aug 2020, 00:34 |
Advanced fan |
![Advanced fan Advanced fan](./images/ranks/postranks/rank_10.png) |
![User avatar](./download/file.php?avatar=5453_1608360551.jpg) |
Joined: 02 Aug 2019, 02:29 Posts: 660 Location: Australia Has thanked: 52 times Been thanked: 85 times
|
elahrairrah wrote: And since a lot of early blu-ray releases used MPEG-2 compression before H.264 and H.265 were widely used, I can't imagine Sony would use another compression scheme besides MPEG-2 (same as DVD) for UMD. UMD Video does use H.264/MPEG-4 AVC video, as I already said. It doesn't use MPEG-2.
|
|
|
|
![](images/spacer.gif) |
tweeg
|
Post subject: Re: Picture quality scale by format ![Post Post](./styles/AeroBlue/imageset/icon_post_target.gif) Posted: 18 Aug 2020, 06:52 |
Honest fan |
![Honest fan Honest fan](./images/ranks/postranks/rank_7.png) |
![User avatar](./download/file.php?avatar=5691_1590785638.gif) |
Joined: 03 Dec 2019, 07:06 Posts: 118 Location: United States Has thanked: 3 times Been thanked: 43 times
|
deadlegion wrote: elahrairrah wrote: And since a lot of early blu-ray releases used MPEG-2 compression before H.264 and H.265 were widely used, I can't imagine Sony would use another compression scheme besides MPEG-2 (same as DVD) for UMD. UMD Video does use H.264/MPEG-4 AVC video, as I already said. It doesn't use MPEG-2. Correct, the system could even play h.264 encoded MP4 video files from the memory card. I think it was kind of a one trick pony in that regard as it was the only video format it natively supported playing.
_________________ My website: https://www.psoarchive.com/
|
|
|
|
![](images/spacer.gif) |
deadlegion
|
Post subject: Re: Picture quality scale by format ![Post Post](./styles/AeroBlue/imageset/icon_post_target.gif) Posted: 18 Aug 2020, 11:00 |
Advanced fan |
![Advanced fan Advanced fan](./images/ranks/postranks/rank_10.png) |
![User avatar](./download/file.php?avatar=5453_1608360551.jpg) |
Joined: 02 Aug 2019, 02:29 Posts: 660 Location: Australia Has thanked: 52 times Been thanked: 85 times
|
ertoili wrote: Wait a minute, im not using the word potentially to mix everything, a 720p DVD would be a variation of the format and not the "capabilities" of the actual format! Even with that we have the HD-DVD far superior on mpeg-2. But the UMD case is not the same cause H.264/Mpg-4 can do better motion without pixelation than DVD for example, so thats why my questión about UMD bitrates But UMD Video total capacity is only 1.8GB (dual layer), so even though the compression type is superior over DVD standard the capacity is far far less than DVD9. UMD Video, afaik, never has any extras besides some included subs. So there really shouldn't be a massive difference in quality. Superbit DVD would look far better than UMD Video (probably a better comparison as both have stripped extras).
|
|
|
|
![](images/spacer.gif) |
elahrairrah
|
Post subject: Re: Picture quality scale by format ![Post Post](./styles/AeroBlue/imageset/icon_post_target.gif) Posted: 18 Aug 2020, 18:35 |
Young Padawan |
![Young Padawan Young Padawan](./images/ranks/postranks/rank_15.png) |
![User avatar](./download/file.php?avatar=186_1509991115.jpg) |
Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 15:38 Posts: 3425 Location: New Jersey Has thanked: 79 times Been thanked: 152 times
|
ertoili wrote: Wait a minute, im not using the word potentially to mix everything, a 720p DVD would be a variation of the format and not the "capabilities" of the actual format! Even with that we have the HD-DVD far superior on mpeg-2. But the UMD case is not the same cause H.264/Mpg-4 can do better motion without pixelation than DVD for example, so thats why my questión about UMD bitrates Well a 720p DVD would still be a DVD-9 in all respects. Just the compression codec would be different. They were saying it was possible for some DVD players to be upgradeable to playing 720p DVD with just a firmware update (those that could be updated anyway.) Just like with Laserdisc and all its upgrades (digital tracks, AC-3, etc.) while some older players couldn't properly play those upgrades--you'd need a new player to play them--the format is still LD. Which HD-DVDs were MPEG-2? From what I've remember the majority of early HD-DVDs were VC-1, not MPEG-2 before they went with h.264/5 before folding.
|
|
|
|
![](images/spacer.gif) |
elahrairrah
|
Post subject: Re: Picture quality scale by format ![Post Post](./styles/AeroBlue/imageset/icon_post_target.gif) Posted: 18 Aug 2020, 18:43 |
Young Padawan |
![Young Padawan Young Padawan](./images/ranks/postranks/rank_15.png) |
![User avatar](./download/file.php?avatar=186_1509991115.jpg) |
Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 15:38 Posts: 3425 Location: New Jersey Has thanked: 79 times Been thanked: 152 times
|
deadlegion wrote: UMD Video does use H.264/MPEG-4 AVC video, as I already said. It doesn't use MPEG-2. Thanks for the correction!
|
|
|
|
![](images/spacer.gif) |
|
|
![](./styles/AeroBlue/theme/images/bl.png) |
|
![](./styles/AeroBlue/theme/images/br.png) |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|