|
|
Posted by Mark A on 10/02/30 11:33
pickles_james@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> whats the verdict then?
> i fancy a dvd to make the very most out of my lcd tv/home cinema, so
> would it be wise to get a 'superbit' dvd like e.g spiderman 2 rather
> than just get a 'normal copy'
The DVD system allows for various bit-rates to be used. I believe the
max is up around 12 Mbps, but most are around 7 or 8, but they can go
much lower and still be very good indeed. I've had this argument with a
know-it-all twat called Tony Morgan on Usenet who insists on DVDs being
able to carry only a certain amount of time based material per layer,
but he is of course talking arse, as it entirely depends on the bit-
rates used to encode the film. Now as to the quality, then that more
depends on the quality of the encoders used than the raw bit-rate.
Having said that, all things being equal, the higher the bit rate, the
higher the theoretical quality should be.
On Superbit films you'll find the bits-per-second reading to be about
the same as many non-Superbit films. So as others have said, it's more
a cynical marketing ploy than any real technical advantage. Though, to
be fair to them, all the Superbit DVDs I've seen have been very good
quality. Its just I've seen plenty of non-Superbit DVDs that easily
matched them for quality as well.
> also, does a progressive scan dvd player make any difference with
> 'superbit'?
None at all, for all the above reasons. If you've got a TV that can take
progressive then for the same screen resolution is should be better than
an interlaced feed, but there are poor progressive displays/players out
there that are outperformed by good quality interlaced displays/players,
so it's down to getting good equipment rather than simple specification
waving.
Regards
Mark
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|