Yes. More is always better, but there's a price that goes along with that. Yet, it's a formula: simply put, one needs enough space given the program details (resolution, bit rate, length etc) and quality desired. Were 4.7GB DVDs adequate? Not for full-length films encoded to MPEG, which is an inefficient format.
So 9GB DVD-9s were being pressed for commercial products to achieve the quality desired. (They always do cheaper if they can, and DVD-5s are cheaper than DVD-9s). Sometimes they'd squeeze a 2+ hour movie onto a DVD-5, using a high compression rates, and there're the artifacts. Particularly in dark scenes. But throw it on a 30GB disk, and whammo, if there's an artifact there'd better be a really good reason. And that's fine.
But my question is this: can a DVD-5 be adequate for HD using another codec? Maybe. There are quite a few out there that look really nice, all better than MPEG2. I'd like to see how they do.
But people keep taking this discussion back to the HD-DVD vs BR debate, which it is not. I'm a "download" kind of guy, so I'm not a fan of either. I would, though, like to see how far regular old 4.7GB DVD5 can be pushed. But people are just so foolish; so damned eager to jump on one side or the other and say, "I am right!!" even when there's no side to jump to.
And we haven't even discussed monitoring and the quality thereof.
Anyway, the Russians have an interesting phrase: they say, "The Best" is the enemy of "Good Enough." And to tell the truth, "good enough" is good enough, for me anyway.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Harry D @ Mar 18th 2008 3:17PM
@EatingPie:
Yes. More is always better, but there's a price that goes along with that. Yet, it's a formula: simply put, one needs enough space given the program details (resolution, bit rate, length etc) and quality desired. Were 4.7GB DVDs adequate? Not for full-length films encoded to MPEG, which is an inefficient format.
So 9GB DVD-9s were being pressed for commercial products to achieve the quality desired. (They always do cheaper if they can, and DVD-5s are cheaper than DVD-9s). Sometimes they'd squeeze a 2+ hour movie onto a DVD-5, using a high compression rates, and there're the artifacts. Particularly in dark scenes. But throw it on a 30GB disk, and whammo, if there's an artifact there'd better be a really good reason. And that's fine.
But my question is this: can a DVD-5 be adequate for HD using another codec? Maybe. There are quite a few out there that look really nice, all better than MPEG2. I'd like to see how they do.
But people keep taking this discussion back to the HD-DVD vs BR debate, which it is not. I'm a "download" kind of guy, so I'm not a fan of either. I would, though, like to see how far regular old 4.7GB DVD5 can be pushed. But people are just so foolish; so damned eager to jump on one side or the other and say, "I am right!!" even when there's no side to jump to.
And we haven't even discussed monitoring and the quality thereof.
Anyway, the Russians have an interesting phrase: they say, "The Best" is the enemy of "Good Enough." And to tell the truth, "good enough" is good enough, for me anyway.