HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! - Printable Version
-Shoutbox (https://shoutbox.menthix.net)
+-- Forum: MsgHelp Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+--- Forum: Skype & Technology (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Tech Talk (/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+----- Thread: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! (/showthread.php?tid=70080)
HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Supersonicdarky on 12-30-2006 at 09:13 PM
look at this 1 minute trailer of harry potter 5!
Download Here
the video doesnt even fit on my screen or play properly cuz my laptop cant handle it! watch i with full sound + full screen and be amazed by todays technology!
not low res screen safe (1280x??? and above)
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by CookieRevised on 12-30-2006 at 09:24 PM
warning: 71MB
(and QuickTime ... bah)
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Oxy on 12-30-2006 at 09:26 PM
Do you mean "HP is freaking awesome!" ? dont worry, understood. 
quote:
Originally posted by Supersonicdarky
not low res screen safe (1280x??? and above)
Well, ill give it ago when i get home.. it's an old monitor anyway
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Ezra on 12-30-2006 at 09:30 PM
LOL, just found out HD resulutions have you?
Yeah, they are awesome, and I can't wait until HDTV is introduced here in the Netherlands.
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by _Humphreys on 12-30-2006 at 09:30 PM
Chances are your watching on 1024x768 15 or 17 inch monitor so it won't be that 
.
My familiy have a HD-TV and it's not worth it to be frank, if I where you I wouldn't buy into HD untill 2009 at least.
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by andrewdodd13 on 12-30-2006 at 09:32 PM
I think he means HD as in High-Definition. Quicktime.. yuk. Unless they've implemented H.264 encoding into their files, I'd take that over QuickTime files any day.
However it's quite sweet. Except for 69.3MB at 50kb/s on an 8mb connection isn't what I was expecting :-\.
Further to the above, there's a 1080p 89mb version on the Apple QuickTime site. It lags my PC to play it... I guess I need another new graphics card. (One with onboard HDTV decoding). Of course, it could be that Apple didn't bother making QuickTime for Windows use DirectX...
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Ezra on 12-30-2006 at 09:35 PM
What's with the Quicktime bashing?
IMO .mov has far higher quality than standard .wmv and you won't see any .mpeg trailers.
RE: RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Supersonicdarky on 12-30-2006 at 09:39 PM
quote:i have hd tv and an hd reciever, but since my tv is 720p (i think) i didnt really think much of it. but when the movie doesnt fit on my screen, i'm impressed
Originally posted by Ezra
LOL, just found out HD resulutions have you?
Yeah, they are awesome, and I can't wait until HDTV is introduced here in the Netherlands.
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by _Humphreys on 12-30-2006 at 09:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Ezra
What's with the Quicktime bashing?
IMO .mov has far higher quality than standard .wmv and you won't see any .mpeg trailers.
I think that fact the Apple are the only ones who make you pay to use a video player is enough to bash them, not even Microsoft do that...
by pay I mean pay to use the player to the full
Also .movs in my exprience seem horribly compressed and if not the file size for the video is massive.
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by CookieRevised on 12-30-2006 at 09:41 PM
[OFF TOPIC]
quote:
The format isnt what is to be bashed though, it is how quicktime (the player) implements itself into everything and how it is just not incompatible enough to crash. If you have another player which supports the quicktime format than use that instead.
Originally posted by Ezra
What's with the Quicktime bashing?
IMO .mov has far higher quality than standard .wmv and you won't see any .mpeg trailers.
Though the quality is just as good or as bad as wmv, it depends on how it is encoded.
[/OFF TOPIC]
RE: RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Supersonicdarky on 12-30-2006 at 09:42 PM
quote:i tried it in vlc first, and it lagged even worse than quicktime
Originally posted by CookieRevised
[OFF TOPIC]
The format isnt what is to be bashed though, it is how quicktime (the player) implements itself into everything and how it is just not incompatible enough to crash. If you have another player which supports the quicktime format than use that instead.
[/OFF TOPIC]
the vlc team needs to work better at quicktime and realmedia movies :/
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by _Humphreys on 12-30-2006 at 09:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Cookie
Though the quality is just as good or as bad as wmv, it depends on how it is encoded.
At least it doesn't give you this horrible brown tint to your videos like .wmv tends to do.
quote:
Originally posted by Supersonicdarky
i tried it in vlc first, and it lagged even worse than quicktime
What specs does your PC have? If you have lower than 1 gig of RAM this might explain the lag.
RE: RE: RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by andrewdodd13 on 12-30-2006 at 09:49 PM
quote:From what I gather, both Realmedia movies haven't had their specifications released, hence it's harder to make a playback mechanism for them.
Originally posted by Supersonicdarky
quote:i tried it in vlc first, and it lagged even worse than quicktime
Originally posted by CookieRevised
[OFF TOPIC]
The format isnt what is to be bashed though, it is how quicktime (the player) implements itself into everything and how it is just not incompatible enough to crash. If you have another player which supports the quicktime format than use that instead.
[/OFF TOPIC]
the vlc team needs to work better at quicktime and realmedia movies :/
Quicktime uses a very complicated way of storing movies as well, although it's specifications (I believe) have been released to the MPEG group.
As to codecs... I use Xvid. It's got a lot of backing out there... primary because the encoder is free.
(Which is probably why it's used by a lot of "shady" groups on the internet.) I used to use WMV when I made movies with Windows Movie Maker (I *know*... )Quicktime really does die for High Res videos for me. I'm gonna download Quicktime alternative and give it a bash.
(Oh, and we're not really going off topic, there really wasn't a proper topic to start with
).
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Chris4 on 12-30-2006 at 09:53 PM
* Chris4 is downloading 
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by _Humphreys on 12-30-2006 at 09:58 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Phillip
Windows Media Player Classic > *
* _Humphreys hugs Phillip
I totally concur; I love how clean and easy to use Media Player Classic is. I also love the fact that it does not needlessly hog system resources.
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by kao on 12-30-2006 at 10:04 PM
quote:tru.dat.
Originally posted by Phillip
Windows Media Player Classic > *
<3 my 1080i HDTV but for that, at least i can fit it on my monitors
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by vaccination on 12-30-2006 at 10:29 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kao
quote:tru.dat.
Originally posted by Phillip
Windows Media Player Classic > *
indeed!
quote:
Originally posted by Carltos Cool
My family have a HD-TV and it's not worth it to be frank, if I where you I wouldn't buy into HD until 2009 at least.
But you won't be watching any HD tv without a some sort of HDTV receiver + someone transmitting it to you - I only know of Sky which do HD tv. And you need the SkyHD receiver + the subscription to their service.
I have a HDTV but no SkyHD service, so the tv is nearly the same(because the programs arn't broadcast in HD). But films are awesome on it. Especially with our surround sound home cinema set-up, it is worth it. IMHO
* vaccination enjoyed the harry potter trailer.
*pats monitor and new GTS*
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by kao on 12-30-2006 at 11:02 PM
quote:I don't even have Sky, i use freeview, and yes i know it isn't HD. I use it to watch films and play xbox 360 (which is in 1080i HD) so it does get some use out of it
Originally posted by vaccination
But you won't be watching any HD tv without a some sort of HDTV reciver + someone transmitting it to you - I only know of Sky which do HD tv. And you need the SkyHD reciever + the subscribtion to their service.
I have a HDTV but no SkyHD service, so the tv is nearly the same(because the programs arn't broadcast in HD). But films are awesome on it. Especialy with our surround sound home cinema set-up, it is worth it. IMHO
I don't fancy paying £300 for the SkyHD box, £10 per month for SkyHD subscription PLUS the normal Sky subscription (which depends on package but starts at something like £15 per month)
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by _Humphreys on 12-30-2006 at 11:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by vaccination
But you won't be watching any HD tv without a some sort of HDTV receiver + someone transmitting it to you - I only know of Sky which do HD tv. And you need the SkyHD receiver + the subscription to their service.
I have a HDTV but no SkyHD service, so the tv is nearly the same(because the programs arn't broadcast in HD). But films are awesome on it. Especially with our surround sound home cinema set-up, it is worth it. IMHO
I have saw it display a HDTV picture, sure it's a bit clearer but it's not the be all and end all. Plus as you said it's not even implemented here yet hence you should wait.
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by vaccination on 12-30-2006 at 11:06 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kao
I don't fancy paying £300 for the SkyHD box, £10 per month for SkyHD subscription PLUS the normal Sky subscription (which depends on package but starts at something like £15 per month)
I know, that's why i don't have SkyHD
it's flipping expensive =(quote:
Originally posted by Carltos Cool
Plus as you said it's not even implemented here yet hence you should wait.
It is implemented, you can watch HD films, or buy the subscription + box for SkyHD. So there's no need to wait, you can have HD now, it's just expensive.
quote:
Originally posted by kao
quote:I was just saying =p
Originally posted by vaccination
kao, it was mainly aimed at caltros cool =)
split time?
probably
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by kao on 12-30-2006 at 11:07 PM
quote:I was just saying =p
Originally posted by vaccination
kao, it was mainly aimed at caltros cool =)
split time?
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by _Humphreys on 12-30-2006 at 11:10 PM
quote:
Originally posted by vaccination
It is implemented, you can watch HD films, or buy the subscription + box for SkyHD. So there's no need to wait, you can have HD now, it's just expensive.
I was talking about how we don't have our Terrestrial TV in HD yet, plus the price Sky is asking is absolutely ridiculous. 300 pounds for a new box and an extra ten pounds or so on top of your existing subscription.
Also Blu-Ray and HDDVD is basically not here.
RE: RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by vaccination on 12-30-2006 at 11:17 PM
quote:
Originally posted by carltros cool
I was talking about how we don't have our Terrestrial TV in HD yet
Also Blu-Ray and HDTV is basically not here.
Well yeah, but that's terrestrial, HD is available, you just gotta pay(a lot) for it.
as for blu-ray, it's nearly here, you can buy Blu-ray players. (though they are very expensive)
but meh. your right in the sense that HD isn't exactly widely available.
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Ezra on 12-30-2006 at 11:20 PM
Talking about HD, Elephants Dream is a computer animation film made with Open Source Programs.
The film itself is about 10 minutes.
It's also released in Full 1080p HD resolution.
torrent (815 MB!)
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by Nathan on 12-31-2006 at 02:13 AM
PEOPLE LOOK AT THE mIRC :
RE: HD IS FREAKING AWSOME! by lizard.boy on 12-31-2006 at 03:14 AM
We have Rogers HD Cable, and it looks pretty damn good on our HD-Capable 4:3 TV, but its a pain since we don't actually have a wide screen TV. Dad watches sports with it.