Sony Pictures announces its Blu-ray titles will now downscale resolution over analog

[Titanio]

edit - misspelled title! Sony Pictures announces its Blu-ray titles will not downscale resolution over analog

It seems like it's a running concern for early HDTV adopters with component connections only, or non-HDCP DVI - how resolution can be constrained on these connections with HD-DVD or Blu-ray - but it seems Sony Pictures for one will not be constraining resolution on analog with its Blu-ray titles:

http://www.hdbeat.com/2006/03/10/sony-pictures-blu-ray-titles-wont-down-res/#comments

That is the bad news, the good news is that Sony Pictures has announced that none of the movies that they own will exercise this right, which they refer to as a "Image Constraint Token". This of course doesn't mean that they won't ever use it, but instead will wait till analog piracy becomes a problem.

It's not confirmed, I don't think, but FWIW, some others in the Blu-ray camp apparently also won't be exercising the resolution constraint option. I think Warner and Universal may be the only ones that haven't given any firm indication yet.

[london-boy]

Oh it was confirmed a long time ago. Both HDDVD and Bluray will downscale on analog- unless the publisher decides not to, but they enforced this so they'll make sure they use it - so millions of HDTV owners in the US are, in short, f***ed.

[Titanio]

Doh, the thread title meant to say NOT, not NOW, lol. Sorry! They're NOT constraining resolution. The point is that it's a studio's choice to downgrade resolution, on a title per title basis, and Sony has said they won't be (for now anyway).

Maybe a kind mod could edit my title :( :(

[Bobbler]

Doh, the thread title meant to say NOT, not NOW, lol. Sorry! They're NOT constraining resolution. The point is that it's a studio's choice to downgrade resolution, on a title per title basis, and Sony has said they won't be (for now anyway).

Maybe a kind mod could edit my title :( :(

Might as well remake/delete the thread and try again. =o

That 1 letter makes a rather large difference. Heh.

[Titanio]

Might as well remake/delete the thread and try again. =o

That 1 letter makes a rather large difference. Heh.

lol, I'm not able to delete threads unfortunately. I'm hoping anyone who bothers to come into the thread will see the correction fairly immediately :oops: Or moreover, that a mod might edit the title.

[kyleb]

Heh, cool, now I have something hard to throw in the face of all the drama queens who start screaming that the end is nigh every time HDCP gets brought up. :)

[Guden Oden]

Oh it was confirmed a long time ago. Both HDDVD and Bluray will downscale on analog- unless the publisher decides not to, but they enforced this so they'll make sure they use it - so millions of HDTV owners in the US are, in short, f***ed.
Actually, that's never been confirmed at all. Up until quite recently the specs or whatever you want to call it weren't finalized. There was a piece about it on ars when they DID settle on an official policy, and the policy is the studios themselves decide if they want to downsample or not. And several did announce they had no plans to do so.

[Sxotty]

Heh, cool, now I have something hard to throw in the face of all the drama queens who start screaming that the end is nigh every time HDCP gets brought up. :)
Wow now we can buy sony movies, on sony's propietary format. Woopdee frikin doo.

If all the studios promised this then one wonders WTF did they need it in there for in the first place.

Nevertheless I am happy since my monitor defintely ain't hdcp. By the time I buy a HDTV though it will have all the necesary bells and whistles, but it is a dissapointment nevertheless to me that they have been so anal about their protection schemes.

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

It's only because they don't want to kill uptake of next-gen DVD by effectively forcing someone who wants a new player and is willing to get BR for future use to upgrade the whole of their AV chain at the same time to get benefit.

Companies like Sony also don't want to get the bad publicity associated with implementing this kind of consumer unfriendly tech that gives the customer no benefit from their new purchases.

No doubt there are intentions to use this flag at some point in the future as many of those companies that helped develop the standard are the same ones issuing content. They wouldn't have put the flag in if they didn't have scenarios where they wanted to use it.

[kyleb]

Wow now we can buy sony movies, on sony's propietary format. Woopdee frikin doo.

If all the studios promised this then one wonders WTF did they need it in there for in the first place.
All the studios didn't promise, some would rather protect their content and others would rather make it more accessible to a larger audience, hence the standards have been set to alow for both. Reguardless, my point is that those who have been arguing that Blu-ray devices would be useless for anything but HDCP displays were pulling a Chicken Little act.

[NANOTEC]

Reguardless, my point is that those who have been arguing that Blu-ray devices would be useless for anything but HDCP displays were pulling a Chicken Little act.

Well if you want to be able to watch all BR movies from all the studios, this announcement if true doesn't really matter much.

[randycat99]

Are you anticipating that all other BR publishers will chance the potential of prematurely limiting sales volume for their product by employing hdcp locks, to the contrary of Sony's strategic policy? If they are to do that, what is the point of even backing BR, if you are going to do something that will limit uptake right out of the gate?

It seems like a fairly obvious strategy to bend over backwards a little to ensure the most robust launch/debut as possible. That seems to be the road Sony is taking. I don't see why the rest of the industry would suddenly do an about-face to that strategy at their own peril. It's better in the long run to risk some initial release titles to potential piracy (hdcp-free mode) in order to maximize/nurture the market now. Then in another 5 years or so (where the userbase of hdcp-ready TV's have grown considerably), the possibility for hdcp-locked BR discs for new release titles can be revisited. Even then, it's not certain they would employ an hdcp policy, unless they need to. Whether they need to or not will depend on the state of BR piracy at that point in time. There's no need to expose hdcp to hacking before the time it is really needed. If piracy losses are "minor", they may wait. If piracy losses are on a significant rise, then they pull out the "big guns" to slow it down for a little longer. It would be a similar strategy to how/when antibiotics are issued to combat bacterial infections. You don't pull out the big guns right away, risking premature bacterial adaptation. You pull them out as the last resort, when all other lesser measures have been exhausted.

[NANOTEC]

From what I've heard Warner doesn't want full HD resolution through component and they're probaby the biggest studio of them all.

[randycat99]

So you went from "what you heard about Warner" to "all movies from all studios employing hdcp locks right out of the gate"?

What is "heard" is a different matter from what will be done to serve a business priority. Either way, we won't know what studio xyz plans to do with BR until they actually do it. So it is very "chicken little alarmist" to make blanket statements asserting everybody except Sony will be lowering the boom on hdcp BR. Maybe it will happen, maybe not. I've already laid out a few points where it is in their best interests not to do it (at least, not right away). Otherwise, it is a pretty big waste of effort to bother supporting BR from the start, if you are going to mandate a handicap right from the start. It just makes no sense, imo.

[NANOTEC]

So you went from "what you heard about Warner" to "all movies from all studios employing hdcp locks right out of the gate"?

Stop twisting what people said to suit your own strawman argument. Nobody said all studios will not allow full HD resolution output through component. What was said was that just because one studio have hinted at allowing HD resolution through component doesn't mean much with respect to the rest of the studios. In fact it's not even surprising considering HD MPEG2 through component have been allowed since the inception of D-VHS and guess what? SONY plans on releasing BR movies in...gasp...MPEG2!

What is "heard" is a different matter from what will be done to serve a business priority.

Yeah and I guess Warner's decision has nothing to do with business?

Either way, we won't know what studio xyz plans to do with BR until they actually do it.

No duh..thanks for pointing to the obvious "It won't happen until it happens."

So it is very "chicken little alarmist" to make blanket statements asserting everybody except Sony will be lowering the boom on hdcp BR.

And the real chicken alarmist is the one who resorts to twisting peoples words around to prop up a scarecrow to argue with.

Maybe it will happen, maybe not. I've already laid out a few points where it is in their best interests not to do it (at least, not right away). Otherwise, it is a pretty big waste of effort to bother supporting BR from the start, if you are going to mandate a handicap right from the start. It just makes no sense, imo.

Again considering we're talking about lower quality MPEG2 it's not really a surpise SONY will allow it. It's not that great of a thing either. When SONY and other studios allow HD VC-1 through component then we can talk.

[randycat99]

Well if you want to be able to watch all BR movies from all the studios, this announcement if true doesn't really matter much.

Not much twisting going on here. Your meaning is quite clear in the quote above. Clearly you are trying to cast a gloom that Sony would be the only one in the entire industry to not lock properties with hdcp, when you really have no idea what the industry response will be. If it is to follow suit with Sony's lead, then the announcement is quite significant. We won't know for sure until that ground is actually traversed. In the meantime, there is no need to be overly positive or negative on the matter.

Mpeg2 is the reference standard, used well into the mastering chain. You won't make much ground attempting to pan it as "low quality". It's VC-1 that will need to establish itself as a competent codec. However, that is another discussion, altogether. Derailing this discussion into another codec debate will not help you.

[NANOTEC]

Mpeg2 is the reference standard, used well into the mastering chain. You won't make much ground attempting to pan it as "low quality". It's VC-1 that will need to establish itself as a competent codec. However, that is another discussion, altogether. Derailing this discussion into another codec debate will not help you.

Anyone who has seen the VC-1 encoded HD DVD demos Toshiba has been showing around the nation says otherwise. A quick visit to AVS Forums support this notion. SONY is using MPEG2 not because it provides better visuals than VC-1. Anyone who thinks otherwise is horribly uninformed or in denial. Again one studio hinting at allowing HD MPEG2 through component doesn't mean much considering Warner has said they won't allow it and considering D-VHS using inferior MPEG2 encoding has allowed it for years.

[randycat99]

The "D-VHS and mpeg2" issue has since been debunked in your absence, pc engine.

Regardless, mpeg2 (in its various incarnations) remains the standard by which movie properties filter down the chain to the consumer. It's a moot point, anyway, as BR can just as easily handle mpeg4 should "PQ issues" really become an issue.

Your argument is questionable when you assert that what one company says is "meaningless" when it comes to not using hdcp vs. what another one company says is highly indicative when it comes to using hdcp. You can't have it both ways. One company says they will, and one says they won't. Hence it could still go either way, when it comes to the rest of the industry. I have already laid out the points that suggest why it is in their benefit to go Sony's way, if they are to bother with BR in the first place. For all we know, the entire industry may follow Sony's lead and Warner's decision ends up being the odd man out. So they miss out on a "few" non-hdcp customers, while everyone else benefits across the table. Either they'll come around or people will eventually become hdcp-ready. It's not a question of "if" at that point- just when.

What this all comes down to, is the hdcp situation is otherwise an open field, and Sony's announcement is but one positive note of things to come. If industry follows rationally, your concern will have been utterly futile.

[NANOTEC]

http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/JVC_HM_DH3000U_D_Theater/4514-6476_16-20149605.html

Time to face reality...

[randycat99]

...and...what is your point?

[NANOTEC]

The "D-VHS and mpeg2" issue hasn't been debunked. It's a cold reality.

[randycat99]

...and this pretty much ends your credibility on this subject, as you seem to be unaware or willfully deceptive of the difference between cbr and vbr. Thank you. Come again!

NOW STOP DERAILING THIS TOPIC WITH AN IMPROMPTU CODEC DEBATE.

[NANOTEC]

...and this pretty much ends your credibility on this subject, as you seem to be unaware or willfully deceptive of the difference between cbr and vbr. Thank you. Come again![/B]

Actually it doesn't end my credibility at all. D-VHS uses CBR but it goes all the way up to 28Mbps and to date the highest bitrate encoded D Theater movie is 25Mbps. SONY plans on using MPEG2 at a measely 16Mbps VBR so they can fit movies onto 25GB BRDs. So far the consensus is SONY's showings look worse than D-VHS. And no WI didn't derail this thread. You did. I simply mentioned HD MPEG2 has been available through analog component via D-VHS for years so this news about SONY allowing crappy MPEG2 over analog has little to do with what the rest of the studios will do. It means nothing in the overall scheme of things...

[randycat99]

If quality ends up being a problem in the real product, people will complain and movie releases will address this.

(Note people, how pc engine indiscriminately continues to compare cbr and vbr bitrates w/o an inkling of an idea that they aren't directly comparable. I rest my case... Funny how that logic doesn't lead him to also consider VC-1 @ 16 Mb/s as "measily", by the same notion.)

Considering how difficult it is to discuss PQ issues with your average hd viewer on existing digital HD cable/satellite/ota broadcasts w/o screams of "blasphemy", I doubt they will have an inkling complaint over D5 master losses on a consumer disc format.

[NANOTEC]

(Note people, how pc engine indiscriminately continues to compare cbr and vbr bitrates w/o an inkling of an idea that they aren't directly comparable. I rest my case... Funny how that logic doesn't lead him to also consider VC-1 @ 16 Mb/s as "measily", by the same notion

What's funny is how you think 16Mbps MPEG2 VBR somehow magically equals 16Mbps VC-1. Must be the number 16!!

Get back to me when people at AVS Forums say 16Mbps MPEG2 VBR looks better than 25Mbps MPEG2 CBR let alone VC-1. I guess you didn't get the memo where it was shown that VC-1 at 16Mbps beats 25Mbps MPEG2 CBR. Guess where that leaves 16Mbps MPEG2 VBR on the food chain? 16Mbps VC-1>25Mbps MPEG2 CBR>16Mbps MPEG2 VBR.

[randycat99]

No where did I say that. The point that alludes you is that bitrates are not directly comparable across cbr/vbr/mpeg-n/whatever. You seem content to apply this when it suits your argument and ignore it when it doesn't. That's all I was illustrating to the kind people of B3D.

You act like AVS is the paragon of video authority, when the reality is it is like any other place on the internet. There is no end of people with their own alliances and agendas to push. There will always be spin thrown at 2 sides of a dichotomy. Amongst all of that, there are a few experts that really do know what is going on. In all likelihood they are never the most vocal because they already realize it is pointless to argue with the flotsom and jetsom of the internet masses. AVS will be no exception. You'll also find topics about whose digital cable/satellite hd service is better, how the other one looks like $hit, and the incidental 1 or 2 who have the balls to say it all looks like $hit who are ignored or shouted down, anyways. It's all the same show, over and over again, no matter where you go.

[NANOTEC]

No where did I say that. The point that alludes you is that bitrates are not directly comparable across cbr/vbr/mpeg-n/whatever.

And the point is irrelevant when the final output that people see on the screen confirm that 16Mbps VBR MPEG2 is the worst of them all. You can keep your meaningless numbers and theoretical comparisons. The nonbiased members at AVS concede that SONY's showings pale in comparison to even D-VHS/D Theater. Even biased pro BR people are reluctantly admitting it. Sure one or two fanb*ys with no credibility may say otherwise, but that's a sad fact of life.

[randycat99]

Precedence has shown that if you are the one to claim any group of sorts to be "unbiased", we know the complete opposite is then the truth. I'm sure AVS thanks you for representing them.

[NANOTEC]

Precedence has shown that if you are the one to claim any group of sorts to be "unbiased", we know the complete opposite is then the truth. I'm sure AVS thanks you for representing them.

Why don't you go to AVS and readup then? Better take off that tinfoil hat first.

[randycat99]

You are pathetic to use the "tin foil hat" remark on me, when it was placed upon YOU for citing a wacko product website as evidence for your argument in another topic. GIVE IT A FUCKING BREAK.

[NANOTEC]

You are pathetic to use the "tin foil hat" remark on me, when it was placed upon YOU for citing a wacko product website as evidence for your argument in another topic. GIVE IT A FUCKING BREAK.

Yet the site that you regard as wacky has more internationally published papers then you ever will...

Why should anyone care what YOU think? Where is your credibility? What is your expertise in the matter? Nothing, nada, zilch...

[randycat99]

For those who aren't clued in on nanotec's joke website, they were marketing a product using "rare earth salts" powdered inside a ping pong ball sized bulb which when stuck to the front of your monitor creates a "bioshield" that blocks "dangerous radiation" from reaching the viewer. I submit to the rest of you, does that sound like a website to be citing "international papers" as evidence for anything? :lol: Would you even let them remotely near your credit card to purchase their product? Now consider that nanotec wholeheartedly believes in their presentation...I rest my case. :lol: Perhaps you would care to run that website by your bros over at AVS? See what they say...

[NANOTEC]

For those who aren't clued in on nanotec's joke website, they were marketing a product using "rare earth salts" powdered inside a ping pong ball sized bulb which when stuck to the front of your monitor creates a "bioshield" that blocks "dangerous radiation" from reaching the viewer. I submit to the rest of you, does that sound like a website to be citing "international papers" as evidence for anything? :lol: Would you even let them remotely near your credit card to purchase their product? Now consider that nanotec wholeheartedly believes in their presentation...I rest my case. :lol: Perhaps you would care to run that website by your bros over at AVS? See what they say...

Finally the good old last resort---->:lol: I was beginning to wonder why it was taking you so long. You're so predictable.

Now you shouldn't be twisting what was said in that thread to make yourself seem more credible. Fact is I never said I believed in the product. I only said the evidence they provided in the form of IEEE papers gives good support to their claims. You on the other hand have ZERO credibility and nothing nada zilch to offer to refute their claims other than this---->:lol: Not suprised really and actually expected it from you.

Anyway I'll take that as a quiet admission that you've never in your life presented any IEEE papers on the subject nor will you ever...thank you for your contribution and god bless.

I rest my case

You never had one to begin with...oh btw it's funny how you're derailing this thread into a completely unrelated topic...

Like I said before: Why should anyone care what YOU think? Where is your credibility? What is your expertise in the matter? I rest MY case.

[randycat99]

The IEEE papers were presented for a specific scenario which does not fit well at all with the point you were trying to pose. Similarly, their use in that website which you seem highly attached to for "evidence" is also not a good fit for what the IEEE papers were addressing. Chicken embryos and sperm quality have about zilch to do with a fully developed human staring into a CRT screen. Hence the "tinfoil" moniker was placed at your feet for even attempting to make such an association w/o even a smirk on your face. Now you are using the "tinfoil" moniker on others, which only points attention back to your own connection with that word. It's a ridiculous "insult" for you to wield upon others.

Now get back on topic, already. This isn't about codecs or silly tinfoil websites.