PDA

View Full Version : Why not blue-ray in red-ray instead DVD-9 ?



Milan Nikolic
11-01-2008, 12:23 PM
It would be advancement cosidering capacity and future of the media. Just my two dinars! :umm:

Evan Meades
05-27-2009, 05:28 PM
yeah makes sense!

Stuart English
05-27-2009, 06:20 PM
Because when you apply our compression technology, a Blu-Ray disk drive isn't necessary....

Pawel Achtel
05-27-2009, 06:27 PM
Cost.

Charles Angus
05-27-2009, 06:29 PM
But you could fit 5 times the content onto a Blu-ray, at the same quality...

Graeme Nattress
05-27-2009, 06:46 PM
Think format agnostic, rather than tied to a particular physical media. And what Stuart says...

Graeme

Jonas Rejman
05-27-2009, 10:53 PM
Why an optical media in the first place?

Of all RED bleeding-edge advancements, this seems rather antiquate to me.

Won't we deliver over internet anyway?
Aren't 2.5' drives/flashdrives reusable and more economic and (almost) smaller in size?

What do I miss here?

Steven Caesare
05-28-2009, 06:31 AM
I suspect format agnostic is exactly what Red has in mind...

Graeme Nattress
05-28-2009, 06:33 AM
I'm agnostic about format agnosticism.

Graeme

Noah Kadner
05-28-2009, 06:33 AM
SDHC baby- cheap and plentiful. :)

-Noah

Stephen Gentle
05-29-2009, 01:11 AM
Why an optical media in the first place?

Of all RED bleeding-edge advancements, this seems rather antiquate to me.

Won't we deliver over internet anyway?
Aren't 2.5' drives/flashdrives reusable and more economic and (almost) smaller in size?

What do I miss here?

About $30 for a flash drive vs. $0.50 per DVD, I'd say...

Steven Caesare
05-29-2009, 07:46 AM
I'm agnostic about format agnosticism.

Graeme

Is that redundant AND repetative?

Graeme Nattress
05-29-2009, 07:55 AM
Probably....

Graeme

Bing Bailey
05-29-2009, 12:30 PM
what are the chances of being able to stream that 4k file over the net if its lower then 10mbits or a 1080p version , will it be playable with a software player from any machine or will you require the custom asic chips of red ray to decode that in real time.

Sven Seynaeve
05-29-2009, 12:47 PM
i still vote for blu-ray compatible

Jacek Szwarc-Bronikowski
05-29-2009, 02:06 PM
SDXC -- 2TB capacity & 300MBps transfer ...

Andy Jarosz
05-29-2009, 06:45 PM
Another vote for anti-optical. I hate optical media in general.

Stephen Gentle
05-29-2009, 08:49 PM
Another vote for anti-optical. I hate optical media in general.

I don't see the problem with having a $30 optical drive that will let people distribute $0.50 media... The renders still have a Compact flash slot in the back, and I'd be very surprised if it didn't have a USB drive for Flash or hard drives... So I'm sure you'll have plenty of options apart from the optical drive if you want.

Tom Visser
05-29-2009, 10:21 PM
I vote against Sony, err, I mean I vote against Blu-Ray.

jimhare
05-29-2009, 10:22 PM
DVDs are a great choice, especially as many of us will be sending stuff everywhere. I would have to think twice about sending $30-$100 media all over the place but $.50 I can handle!

Good call!

Gavin Greenwalt
05-30-2009, 01:15 AM
Yes. Death to Blu-Ray.

If you need a longer movie use a portable hard drive/jump drive/GigE

Pawel Achtel
05-30-2009, 01:33 AM
Yes. Death to Blu-Ray.

If you need a longer movie use a portable hard drive/jump drive/GigE

They seem to be even cheaper than sony Blue-Ray and rewritable too :rofl:

Craig W. Bickerstaff
05-30-2009, 05:59 AM
I don't see the problem with just making it blu-ray compatible so you can choose to use either or?
You could have a blu-ray drive that reads dvds but not a dvd drive that reads blu-rays think about that.

And it is Blu-ray disc BTW not blue ray, the only thing blue is the blue laser.

Radoslav Karapetkov
05-30-2009, 07:13 AM
The future belongs to codecs.

:)

... and peer-to-peer... :sifone:

Iannis Holwech
05-30-2009, 02:35 PM
I don't see the problem with just making it blu-ray compatible so you can choose to use either or?
You could have a blu-ray drive that reads dvds but not a dvd drive that reads blu-rays think about that.

And it is Blu-ray disc BTW not blue ray, the only thing blue is the blue laser.

You can't just "make" a blu-ray compatible player. You need a BD license and that is something you must ask Sony for, think about that.

And to make a optical discplayer which use a compression codec not found in the BD specs means you have to make all you’re "secrets" available to Sony and Panasonic and the rest of the blu-ray "boys" so they can vote fore or against allowing this in the BD specs. :rofl:

Blu-ray didn't win the format war because of technical superiority but because they manage to gather up Industrial support for a protectionist strategy to get the control of the (possible) future optical disc media marked against the Chinese consumer electronic manufacturers (CEM) that has had the control of over 95% of the DVD hardware production.

That's also why Toshiba lost, because their strategy was to continue working with the Chinese CEM and had a superior strategy to make the consumers transit from SD to HD. If Toshiba had gotten support for this, the production of standard definition DVD players would have stopped last year and all new DVD players would have been HDDVD players.

If the need for larger capacity optical discs should arise for RedRay, RED can easily get inexpensive blue laser drives in China where they have just released the Chinese equivalent to HDDVD called; China Blue High Definition (CBHD).
This format is a development project between Toshiba and CEM and Chinese Universities through the DVD Forum (where Sony, Panasonic, a.o. tried repeatedly to vote the project down).
The only difference between HDDVD and CBHD is the codec called AVS which is developed by Chinese Universities and in that way gives the Universities licensing income from sale of CBHD.

The reason for this was twofold.
One was the previous mentioned incentive to have the Chinese CEM stop/change over to only produce blue laser DVD players.
The second reason was to give CEM, Universities and thereby the Chinese government an investment incentive and interest in «crack down» of pirate discs production and protection of the optical disc format in China, because pirating would hurt the licensing income to the Universities and thereby the Chinese Government.

The CBHD format will use the SL15GB and DL30GB discs, but if the format is successful they surely will start to use the Triple Layer 51GB HDDVD disc that was finally approved by the DVD Forum last year.

The discs can be produced/replicated on existing DVD replicator machines with a small add-on just like HDDVD.
(who in their right mind would make a nearly identical optical disc format to DVD that needs billions of dollars in investments to build a new disc production platform from the bottom when you already have the facilities running that could be used to produce discs for a nearly identical HD disc format?? :crying: )

HDDVD was the most thoroughly thought through consumer format to date. Both technically and strategy, and in many way far superior to BD. But lost the out to Sony's far better salesmanship via their connections in Hollywood with Sony Pictures, broadcast cameras and a English CEO that had his connections from working in NBC. Add in Panasoic's connections in broadcast. Between them they managed to drum up enough support in the content industry. Even Warner they managed to turn, the company that initially managed to get a very sceptical Toshiba involved in developing the DVD HD format.
I can imagine what the Toshiba leadership felt when Warner without prior warning dropped HDDVD on the morning of the HDDVD press conference of CES 2008.



So if RedRay should need BlueRay drive; they are available in China without fiddling with the blu-ray boys. :beer:
(but I don't know really why RedRay would have a need for this)



I just end by quoting one of the longest supporters of Blu-Ray and which strangely have not yet released any BD Apple hardware : Steve Jobs; «blu-ray is a bag of hurt.» :sifone:

Pawel Achtel
05-30-2009, 05:53 PM
And it is Blu-ray disc BTW not blue ray, the only thing blue is the blue laser.

Sorry, Australian spelling :rofl:

Craig W. Bickerstaff
05-30-2009, 05:55 PM
You can't just "make" a blu-ray compatible player. You need a BD license and that is something you must ask Sony for, think about that.

And to make a optical discplayer which use a compression codec not found in the BD specs means you have to make all you’re "secrets" available to Sony and Panasonic and the rest of the blu-ray "boys" so they can vote fore or against allowing this in the BD specs. :rofl:

Blu-ray didn't win the format war because of technical superiority but because they manage to gather up Industrial support for a protectionist strategy to get the control of the (possible) future optical disc media marked against the Chinese consumer electronic manufacturers (CEM) that has had the control of over 95% of the DVD hardware production.

That's also why Toshiba lost, because their strategy was to continue working with the Chinese CEM and had a superior strategy to make the consumers transit from SD to HD. If Toshiba had gotten support for this, the production of standard definition DVD players would have stopped last year and all new DVD players would have been HDDVD players.

If the need for larger capacity optical discs should arise for RedRay, RED can easily get inexpensive blue laser drives in China where they have just released the Chinese equivalent to HDDVD called; China Blue High Definition (CBHD).
This format is a development project between Toshiba and CEM and Chinese Universities through the DVD Forum (where Sony, Panasonic, a.o. tried repeatedly to vote the project down).
The only difference between HDDVD and CBHD is the codec called AVS which is developed by Chinese Universities and in that way gives the Universities licensing income from sale of CBHD.

The reason for this was twofold.
One was the previous mentioned incentive to have the Chinese CEM stop/change over to only produce blue laser DVD players.
The second reason was to give CEM, Universities and thereby the Chinese government an investment incentive and interest in «crack down» of pirate discs production and protection of the optical disc format in China, because pirating would hurt the licensing income to the Universities and thereby the Chinese Government.

The CBHD format will use the SL15GB and DL30GB discs, but if the format is successful they surely will start to use the Triple Layer 51GB HDDVD disc that was finally approved by the DVD Forum last year.

The discs can be produced/replicated on existing DVD replicator machines with a small add-on just like HDDVD.
(who in their right mind would make a nearly identical optical disc format to DVD that needs billions of dollars in investments to build a new disc production platform from the bottom when you already have the facilities running that could be used to produce discs for a nearly identical HD disc format?? :crying: )

HDDVD was the most thoroughly thought through consumer format to date. Both technically and strategy, and in many way far superior to BD. But lost the out to Sony's far better salesmanship via their connections in Hollywood with Sony Pictures, broadcast cameras and a English CEO that had his connections from working in NBC. Add in Panasoic's connections in broadcast. Between them they managed to drum up enough support in the content industry. Even Warner they managed to turn, the company that initially managed to get a very sceptical Toshiba involved in developing the DVD HD format.
I can imagine what the Toshiba leadership felt when Warner without prior warning dropped HDDVD on the morning of the HDDVD press conference of CES 2008.



So if RedRay should need BlueRay drive; they are available in China without fiddling with the blu-ray boys. :beer:
(but I don't know really why RedRay would have a need for this)



I just end by quoting one of the longest supporters of Blu-Ray and which strangely have not yet released any BD Apple hardware : Steve Jobs; «blu-ray is a bag of hurt.» :sifone:

Your confusing the ability to play back blu-ray movies with the ability to read the media, thats all the drive has to be able to do.

Grady Wilson
06-14-2009, 02:01 PM
I do not like the licensing hassle BluRay has. I think spinning media of any sort has gone the way of the dinosaurs.

Raul Gonzo
06-14-2009, 02:08 PM
There is always the possibility that Red will release their own "Red disk" that will hold X amounts of GB (or TB knowing them).

Stephen Gentle
06-14-2009, 10:18 PM
Blu-ray didn't win the format war because of technical superiority

Apart from the disks being almost twice the capacity of HD-DVD, letting you have far higher quality video and/or more special features?

Andrew Gentle
06-14-2009, 10:30 PM
Your confusing the ability to play back blu-ray movies with the ability to read the media, thats all the drive has to be able to do.

Agreed. All RED would have to do was to place their own special RED Ray file on a Blu-ray data disk and then have their player interpret that file. Then you could have five 4K movies on a disk instead of one and you wouldn't have to have your format approved by the Blu-ray board.

Dominic Jones
06-15-2009, 09:39 AM
Apart from the disks being almost twice the capacity of HD-DVD, letting you have far higher quality video and/or more special features?
I think the point that was being made (I certainly believe this is true) is that Blu-Ray didn't win the format war because of technical superiority. That's not to say that it's not superior (it is), just that it wasn't really a factor in how the battle played out (although, of course, it should have been).

The greatest factor, imo, was one of once bitten, twice shy - Sony was still acutely, painfully aware that the best format does not always win, and was in no mood to end up with another BetaMax on their hands. So they came out with all the guns blazing, right from the off. That's why the PS3 was sold so cheaply, for instance. Toshiba just weren't prepared for the veracity of Sony's response, and never got their footing back...

That's my 0.02 on it, anyways,
Dom (does quite like his BR player though!).

Tom Visser
06-15-2009, 01:18 PM
The biggest determining factor, was when Sony more or less "bribed" a major studio, if my memory serves me correctly, it was Warner?... This deal between Sony and Warner prompted Warner to announce Blu-Ray exclusivity and caused the dominoes to fall, where the other studios who were either undecided or equally committed to both formats to also fall over to the Blu-Ray camp. Very early versions of Blu-Ray were inferior to HD-DVD, in that the video codec they supported was limited to (I might be incorrect regarding the specifics here) some variant of H264 compression, where HD-DVD supported VC-1 from the get go. A revision to the Blu-Ray specification subsequently added better video codecs, to include VC-1, I believe, so then leveled the playing field.

HD-DVD was cheaper for the consumer, as the media itself is cheaper and required simple modification to existing production equipment. Blu-Ray offered Sony a licensing and royalty revenue source, so it was in Sony's best interest to see the success of Blu-Ray. It is true that Blu-Ray offered greater capacity than HD-DVD, but the fact of the matter is that a full length film would fit on either disc, so Blu-Ray's increased capacity potentially only offers better supplemental material. There are already researchers who have found ways to increase the storage of HD-DVD and if allowed to continue, I'm sure we would have seen a progressive increase in the technology that would have retained backwards compatibility.

Sony is taking huge losses on its gaming revenues, consumer electronics, and I don't believe its studios or distribution divisions are doing that great either. The only thing that Sony has done is driven up the price for consumers and they can't even claim that they did so and made a profit out of it. At this point, Sony is a cancerous growth in multiple industries and major parts of it need to be removed. I'm not saying that the company is worthless, they do make some great products and are innovators, but from a corporate standpoint, its extinction for the dinosaurs time.

Axel Mertes
06-19-2009, 05:43 AM
We recently stumbled over an issue that might as well have played a role in that format war:

The costs and issues involved when trying to release a copy protected BluRay media content!

In fact the upfront costs are so (unexpectedly) high that almost ALL small releases (indy filmers, get out of here) will be impossible on BluRay for this costs.

As an indy content producer you may end up doing single copied prints without copy protection, but then your media costs will be extraordinary and the lifetime of your media is very limited compared to a pressed BluRay.

This may sound strange to some here, but if you dig into it deeper than "I burned a BluRay and its working for me" you quickly understand: The chance to get into a profit zone for SMALL productions is more than low. At the same time these cost will not play a big role for Hollywood blockbuster releases, so once again securing their market.

IMHO I suspect that this fact played a big role behind the scenes.

While with HD-DVD everyone could easily have raised a "release business", the BluRay consortium prevents newcomers pretty much from growing up. The league of old gentlemen needs to get a bump into their face to wake up that this kind of policy isn't right in todays world. The whole licensing scheme behind Sony BluRay is monopolism IMHO.

In that context I wish Jim & Co a good hand on making the right freedom securing decisions when putting RedRay into place. If I were him, I'd ask Toshiba about some already developed but "believed to be dead" HD-DVD technology...

That story is by far not over.

Axel

Stephen Gentle
06-19-2009, 06:37 AM
In that context I wish Jim & Co a good hand on making the right freedom securing decisions when putting RedRay into place. If I were him, I'd ask Toshiba about some already developed but "believed to be dead" HD-DVD technology...

You're right that having a Blu-Ray drive in RED-RAY doesn't make much sense. But HD-DVD makes a lot less sense than Blu-ray - why would they use a format that almost nobody can write, no disk duplication services support, and which nobody could buy blank media for?

Axel Mertes
06-19-2009, 07:39 AM
There has been media.
There has been writers.
DVD copying plants can easily create HD-DVDs with their DVD production pipelines - thats what they told us a while back...
It all has been there, it may be very cheap to get it back on track, thats why I suggested this.

But on the other side, if RED Ray is really that capable to get the data down to a traditional DVD, then all is fine as it is.

The question is if there is ANY backing by the Hollywood studios when starting a 4K capable home theater replay system such as RED Ray, because 4K is the only thing that a theater has in advantage over the home cinema. They want to earn first on Film, then DVD, then BluRay, and very much later on 4K. 4K@home now makes FEW sence for Hollywood, as they want to sell each film a couple of times to us...


Axel

David Rasberry
06-19-2009, 08:19 AM
The Red Ray compression codec is apparently so efficient ( 4k visually near lossless resolution at 7mbps) that at least for normal length program releases the extra capacity of blue laser media is just not needed. No telling where storage formats will go in the future, but permanent low cost optical media are better for archival storage and for collectors.

Gerald Menclik
06-19-2009, 09:22 AM
Because when you apply our compression technology, a Blu-Ray disk drive isn't necessary....

but you could lower the compression factor to give another boost to the picture quality, or am I missing something here? Not yet used to the RED workflow, 'cause not owning one ..... desperately waiting for the SCARLET

:badputer:

David Rasberry
06-19-2009, 09:41 AM
but you could lower the compression factor to give another boost to the picture quality, or am I missing something here? Not yet used to the RED workflow, 'cause not owning one ..... desperately waiting for the SCARLET

:badputer:

Maybe someone who was there could comment, but the previously posted comments from the RED party at NAB was the people could not tell the difference between uncompressed 4k playback and 4k from the Red Ray codec running at normal DV data rates. If this is the case, Red Ray is a revolutionary breakthrough in video compression technology.

Jonathan L. Bowen
06-20-2009, 04:53 AM
Apart from the disks being almost twice the capacity of HD-DVD, letting you have far higher quality video and/or more special features?

Yeah, what a silly comment, that's EXACTLY why Blu-ray won the format war! HD-DVD had a headstart, but it's a lousy format by a stupid company that just wanted to make money being a useless third party, rather than actually contributing ANYTHING to the technology world whatsoever, ahem, Micros**t. It was a battle of codecs for them.

And there are some people here who are just weird, sorry. I love Blu-ray and to talk about it like somehow it's not necessary, or it's not the future, is really silly to me. There is no better alternative. Blu-ray is cutting edge technology for a reason -- you can watch 1080p movies with uncompressed audio. All of this crap about how the future is downloads, what a lot of nonsense. You tell me when we're going to have 100 terabyte hard drives, then maybe I will tell you that's a realistic option.

I currently have 1,150 DVD and Blu-ray products, which is more than 3,000 total discs. There is simply no way to hold that much data on any computer short of very expensive RAID units, so yeah great maybe I could have about 5 CalDigit 16 TB RAID units and put all of my movies on them. Haha, wow, no. And not to mention the time it would take to download anything without fiber optics is no fun. SD movies, sure, not that hard. Blu-ray movies and special features, no thanks.

So when people talk about "optical media" like somehow they are going to use a cool name for it (rather than just calling it what it is -- physical media, which is preferable to downloading data if you ask me, unless it's tiny stuff like songs) and it being obsolete, I think either you're not much of a movie fan or you're really poor. Those of us with huge collections would not have any interest or use in just downloading movies. Now I agree in the distant future, like 2025 or maybe 2030, it would be fantastic to have this massive hard drive array where I could store all of my movies, with redundant backups, and then hook that into both my computer and my high definition TV, so that I could watch anything easily like playing a song. But you are talking about something that is a long, long, long ways off. I'm in downtown Los Angeles, we don't have fiber optics in my area. What does that tell you? If we don't even have fiber here, available now, then when do you think most households will have it? It will be a LONG time. And there's no way I'm going to download 30-50 gigs of data and wait for it, then find somewhere to back it up, when a 500 gig hard drive still costs $90. No. If we could buy 10 TB hard drives for $90, that's getting in range of what would be affordable to have backups.

So Blu-ray will be dominant for quite some time.

Gerald Menclik
06-20-2009, 07:44 AM
Maybe someone who was there could comment, but the previously posted comments from the RED party at NAB was the people could not tell the difference between uncompressed 4k playback and 4k from the Red Ray codec running at normal DV data rates. If this is the case, Red Ray is a revolutionary breakthrough in video compression technology.

Thank you David, couldn't attend the RED party - quite a long way from Europe :cryin: so it's all about seeing (or not seeing) - forget the measurements or compression facts ....... :banghead:

Joe G.
07-19-2009, 04:16 PM
"The only thing that Sony has done is driven up the price for consumers and they can't even claim that they did so and made a profit out of it. At this point, Sony is a cancerous growth in multiple industries and major parts of it need to be removed."

That's funny.

I don't have BluRay, have no plans to ever invest any money in it. I also wasn't impressed by the compression on the several samples I saw (designed specifically to sell the thing).

I'm more than happy to see what else comes along...

...like Red Ray. Hey, back on topic!