|
|
Posted by Jeff Rife on 10/02/05 21:49
(electrictroy@gmail.com) wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> "Superbit" was originally coined by Columbia, not Sony, and it's not a
> scam.
Yes, it can be, since many non-"Superbit" releases have just as many bits
dedicated to video/audio encoding as some "Superbit" releases. The extended
versions of LotR trilogy are a good example...they have about 110 minutes
per double layer disc with nothing extra except a couple of very low bitrate
commentary tracks.
> Removing all the extra material provides nearly twice as much
> room for the Video, resulting in better quality.
"Twice as much" is definitely an exaggeration. Most double layer single-disc
DVD releases use at least 6GB for the main movie. Double-disc releases
easily give as much space to the main movie as a Superbit disc.
In one way, Superbit is definitely a scam in that they are almost
universally released after the first release that had the extras. Sony
could easily do a two-disc "Superbit" release in place of the original,
and put all the extras on the second disc.
> Look at the difference yourself. The normal dvd is blurred, like a VHS
> tape, where the Superbit version brings out the details:
>
> http://www.videophile.info/Review/TFE/42_c1.jpg
> http://www.videophile.info/Review/TFE/36_c1.jpg
Those aren't very stunning differences (in particular, both shots in each
pair have quality issues, just different kinds), and most of the difference
could be attributed to a different transfer, not lack of bits to do a
quality MPEG encoding. The change in the amount of edge enhancement is a
dead giveaway that a different transfer was used.
--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/BabyBlues/TVDistance.gif
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|