ProphetVX
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2006
- Messages
- 228
- Reaction score
- 10
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Cronulla, NSW
- Members Ride
- A Pushie
In 720p, which is the maximum tv shows are broadcast in, content is at about 1.5gb per hour. Your regular standard definition tv shows are transferred at around 0.3gb per hour.as much as i want to stay out of this debate, i have to correct you. granted there arent many movies, except maybe the lord of the rings, that would fill a disc, what about tv series? instead of buying a boxset that contains 6 dvds, have them on one bluray disc at 1080p. id love having just a few bluray discs of tv season boxsets, instead of the 100 or so dvds i have now
HD DVD actually has discs that are 51gb so it equates to around 34 hours of 720p footage. Which is more than enough for a television series and it's bonus content on one disc (unless you want a whole year of neighbours on one disc , which BD can't do either). Or 170 hours of standard definition content.
They were also working on getting more layers on the disc.
I can't think of any real world examples where the limits of HD-DVD or BD at present would truly be tested for pressed video formats.
For both formats, the numbers are irrelevant, both are more than capable of doing whatever the job is. Neither format is inferior or superior, whichever one prevailed the content would have been exactly the same. Blu-ray was immature when it hit the market, it still is, once the format is finalised then it's time to go out and buy a standalone player, but not until then. I just think it's a massive stretch to call a technology inferior, without understand the technology itself, or the technological requirements needed for it's purpose. BD could have had 900gb, it still wouldn't have been any more superior for it's purpose.
Last edited: