Slashdot Mirror
Big Releases Heat Up High-Def Format War
An anonymous reader writes "Choosing sides in the high-def format war becomes that much harder today, as two powerhouse movie franchises hit store shelves on opposing formats. Exclusive to Blu-ray are the first two 'Pirates of the Caribbean' flicks, while exclusive to HD DVD are two different configurations of the 'Matrix' Trilogy. So which format wins this battle? According to High-Def Digest, this one's a draw. The article has capsule reviews of the four releases ('The Ultimate Matrix Collection' & 'The Complete Matrix Trilogy' on HD DVD, and 'POTC: Curse of the Black Pearl' & 'POTC: Dead Man's Chest' on Blu-ray) with links to excruciatingly in-depth reviews. In the end the site says both sets of releases boast benchmark video and audio, but a preponderance of standard-def supplements prevent all of the above from being the perfect high-def package."
GD /. eating my > sign!!
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Exclusive to Blu-ray are the first two 'Pirates of the Caribbean' flicks, while exclusive to HD DVD are two different configurations of the 'Matrix' Trilogy. So which format wins this battle? According to High-Def Digest, this one's a draw.
I guess they didn't watch the second and third Matrix movies.
Rob
Several PS3's out there, plus isnt walmart even going to be selling a bluray player for under $600? I've seen bluray blanks and burners at Best Buy and a couple other places, yet I have never seen even a regular HDDVD player.
They're just ahead, and sales seem to agree.
Just my $0.02
If either had been an exclusive release when they first came out, that would be much more telling of the formats acceptance I think.
No sig for you, two weeks!
I was much happier believing you meant "pirate ninjas"... maybe I won't see POTC after all...
Which one can I copy? I'm going to be using at home, and I want them to be compatible with all of my systems; and I'll want to start, stop, pos, skip what I want to. If they won't let me use it the way that I want to, I'll vote with my pocket book, and they can both be a looser.
You're closer to the truth than you know. The format that's cracked first, provides better value for the consumer, and wins.
Case in point: Player piano rolls vs. sheet music publishers. Everything vs. Minidisc. CD vs. SACD. DVD vs. DIVX (Circuit City's pay-per-view-disc scheme, not the codec)
The suggested retail prices of The Matrix Trilogies are actually 30% cheaper than buying a single disc of The Matrix.
this wont be over until every player is dual format
hopefully all this will be sorted out by the time i buy a hi-def tv. then again, i'm constantly teetering on the edge of ditching my tv anyway - maybe if this kind of nonsense is going on when my current tv dies, i'll just junk it and not replace it.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
So if Matrix is only going to be an HD-DVD exclusive for six months, and the HD-DVD camp is spending huge marketing dollars (Microsoft, anyone?) to try to "fight off
Or the second POTC film.
So just the first movie then?
I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
Early adopters are dumb Republicans. 35 bucks for a movie? 120 for a trilogy? How much for the player that may or may not have anything to play next year?
Stop giving these companies money. These companies have more of a vote in this "democracy" than you do. Vote with your dollar, don't support industries that lobby for crappy legislation.
Last year I compared my DVD versions of 2001: A Space Odyssey, Bladerunner, and a couple of other movies to the HiDef versions on HDNet Movies. While the HD versions did have more detail and brighter colors it wasn't enough to convince me to buy a PS3. It still isn't enough.
The big problem I see with HD formats is...
there's nothing there that I don't already have!
Yes, the visuals are better, but the sound is the exact same from what I can tell. Understand that I had to watch the movies on HDNet and then the DVD later, or first, to make my comparisons. I only have one large screen HD TV with surround sound.
As many here at Slashdot have already noted; DVDs are just as compact as HD disks, allow for menus and quick chapter selection, and have had their anti-consumer Digital Restrictions Management CRIPPLED! >8^D
WTF do I need HD disks for?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know someone is going to say that we don't have to watch the commercials on HD disks now. Just wait, sucker, until they become common place. After that you'll be dropping your shorts and grabbing your ankles again.
We have always been at war with Eurasia!
Which ever format the majority of Porn distributors pick will win.
"TV, a medium as it is neither rare nor well done." Ernie Kovacs
And - No - I'm needing it for backup of data not for downloading and burning movies.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
The first half of the first movie.
The Matrix collection is exclusive to HD-DVD only for the time being, it will be released on Blu-ray eventually. If you know it's coming to Blu-ray is there a reason to get all bunched up over which format to go with? And how many of us are still waiting for this whole nonsense to end?
This may all become a moot point if the multi-format drives (by Samsung and LG) mentioned earlier on /. (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/13/19332 01) become a reality, thus allowing end-users to buy content on HD-DVD or BluRay or regular DVD and run any of them on their drives/players. This would also allow the studios to release in whatever format they are geared up for instead of in both formats - or instead of hoping the format they selected "wins the war" (as the war would essentially end in a "it doesnt matter anymore" scenario.
-Robert
StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
One thing is certain; we lose.
When you have finished this cup of coffee your adventure will begin again.
"Choosing sides in the high-def format war becomes that much harder today, as two powerhouse movie franchises hit store shelves on opposing formats. Exclusive to Blu-ray are the first two 'Pirates of the Caribbean' flicks, while exclusive to HD DVD are two different configurations of the 'Matrix' Trilogy. "
Uh, in actuality, who really cares? I mean yeah sure a small group of people (larger on this site) with HD everything and money to burn are caring. But, I see know real good offering that either brings to the table. Sure, you get a nicer video resolution and more data space (the latter being the improvement the mass public may care about). But as someone who owns a 720p TV and an upconvert DVD player, DVDs are good enough. Before I see hi def enhancements, how about continuing the real good fight DVDs started, the fight against data loss. We no longer have analog data loss and shelf life and reuse life has improved. But we all know its to easy these days, especially with CDs to scratch that disc up and oh its now unusable. I'd like to see a far more loss proof media be introduced. Now you don't have to keep backing up your Audio media. And the shelf life of the data on computer backup media is enhanced.
That's why I like x.264, there's no side to pick.
Incomplete trilogy with a strong first movie and a sucky sequel vs. a full trilogy that should have been one movie and whose sequels are largely regarded as plain old bad. This goes in the "must-miss" category for me. I'd buy either of the first movies, but not the collections. This will probably happen with a six-movie Star Wars Hi-Def set that cannot be purchased separately as well.
u-bend
OR the third. (Come on, you know the score.)
Breakfast served all day!
Knowing technology and how fast it moves, by the time these two stop duking it out and a winner is declared... some other "better" format will be out and will then crush the shortened current generation hi-def dvd victor's to death...
All POTC has is a buch of special effects!
668: Neighbour of the Beast
The second POTC film was far better than the Matrix sequels. Those were a complete let-down.
Blu-Ray and HD-DVD use the same copy protection...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Are there any players out there that will play both BluRay and HD-DVD? That could potentially put an end to the battle. Probably not the safest idea, if one format flops, half of your device is usless.
Shameless plug alert: Game server control panel
Duh, this one is easy. Blu-ray wins.
Especially since The Matrix set is coming out on Blu-Ray too. Pirates is Blu-Ray exclusive.
So I don't see how this really ups the ante at all. It's still Blu-Ray FTW.
PotC vs Matrix? Fun pirate movies vs overwrought pop philosophy and bad physics? Is this even a choice?
Even then Bluray wins. Because the Matrix SUCKS!
The Farewell Tour II
While I've already bought a PS3, let me say that Pirates of the Caribbean is no reason I would choose to buy in to blu-ray. Nor would The Matrix convince me to buy into HD-DVD. What is it with the studios releasing such crappy movies?
Whether Blu-ray sales actually make the studios the money they're counting on is still up in the air.
Well, I wouldn't call number two a *complete* let-down. At the time, one could see how it might've set up a great third movie. And then number three came out... *sigh*
I see this as 3 movies released on HD DVD and 2 released on Blue Ray.
DVD to BR/HDDVD? What's really the big difference, that justifies spending $500-600/player and a lot more per movie?
HD pr0n
first, it's not copy exactly protection. if you obtain a bit-bit duplicator, you could copy without decrypting. Perhaps, using consumer recorders, an obscured encryption scheme could slow unauthorized duplication. But the immediate effect is that the players are tightly restricted and controlled.
second, yes both use the same encryption. But there is more to restriction management than just an encryption standard.
It's so much easier to just download torrents.
which format won the DVD+R vs DVD-R war again?
right... the DVD writers that support both formats won...
maybe this should be telling us something about the BR-vs-HDDVD war?...
and don't forget: Teradisc, Holodisc and 200GB Bluray are coming soon...
maybe BR and HDDVD should hurry up with their war, so it is decided BEFORE both formats are wiped out...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
HD-DVD doesn't have enough repetitive letters in its name to be successful. I'm going to wait for HHD-DVVDD-BVD. Or Red-ray.
Man, you really need that seminar!
...they are equally unimpressive. All five are available on DVD- In fact, I already own 2 of them.
If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
Why would anyone want to rebuy movies they already have on DVD? Did anyone rebuy their VHS movies? The thought have never even occurred to me, which is why I don't see why anyone care about old movies (If you don't already own Matrix and PotC on DVD, you probably don't want them anyway) rereleased. And they're spending $$$ marketing these old flicks? Madness.
I'll tell you what will win cat5e, cat6, cat7, fiber and wireless. Seriously, if you have to wait X days for the movies you ordered to arrive in the mail you might just as well download them overnight. The hard drive space needed will be available before either blue-ray or HD-DVD becomes mainstream. Of course, the movie industry will shoot itself in the foot and cripple the whole thing with DRM and whatnot, so it will be done over file-sharing networks and then we will hear how the HD formats lose sales "because of piracy", and there will be more draconian copyright laws. Blue-ray will lose, HD-DVD will lose, consumers will lose, the movie industry will lose, the artists will lose, ISPs will lose as they have to deal with DMCA notices, even the lawyers will lose as they have will have to deal with bullshit like this instead of something worthwhile. Orwellian governments will win as they get another excuse to implement more privacy infringing legislation. Welcome to the the digital millennium.
Yeah, you have a point there.
I hope POTC doesn't follow the same path with its 3rd film. At least POTC has the advantage that they aren't trying to be completely serious with their movies.
I wanted the Blu pill.
This is stupid - this petty side-taking and continued fighting after deployment of both formats is only hurting consumers.
So... I'm not arguing morality, but what do you think someone is more likely to do when faced with this situation? Buy a Blu-Ray AND HD-DVD player? Or just download torrents of both?
pirates! They got all four of them, exclusive (as a whole) to their "platform".
Does it run Linux? Silly Slashdot faggots!
Exclusive to Blu-ray are the first two 'Pirates of the Caribbean' flicks, while exclusive to HD DVD are two different configurations of the 'Matrix' Trilogy
"Exclusive"? All five of these movies are already available on standard DVD as well.
I'm ready to declare a winner in the format war.
I think we all know that the winner of this format war will be whoever releases Labryinth first. Dance, magic dance!
How can that be?
In my opinion, the second POTC was identical in quality to the second Matrix. Both were unnecessary sequels to great movies (I'm much more partial to Matrix though). Both upped the budget on special effects. Both also chose to focus more on special effects than on the actual storyline. Reloaded had these 20 min fight scenes that costs millions and then had to pause for some story before the next 20 minute million dollar fight. Dead Man's Chest was similar. Huge budget with amazing special effects, but I found the actual story hard to follow because the dialogue explaining the plot was often rushed in the middle of action sequences. Plus the story was just not as compelling (also I think the crappy local theater I saw it in cut off the first five minutes and I was totally confused. Can anyone tell me what happened before the title credits appeared?) Both also ended with a cliffhanger and and the third installment is premiering only a year later (cause we all can't wait to find out what happens next. I just hope the third POTC doesn't ruin the first the way the third Matrix did.
"It's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -- H. J. Simpson
Are classical movies getting released and does HD make a difference in that area? Any HD release search function that lets you search for the movie's production year? With most modern movies, I just don't seem to care enough to buy a DVD, let alone one of the more expensive HD versions.
You thought a film about a man whose entire life is a computer-generated fiction in which he develops super powers was being completely serious? ;-)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Porn on Blu-ray is okay, but Sony facilities won't be used to press it.
Gizmodo
High-Def Digest
The Inquirer
As bad as the sequels were, the Matrix still beats anything Jerry Bruckheimer touches.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
What he meant was, pirated hddvd-rips or bluray-rips encoded in x264 format.
So there's no winner.
HDBits.org FTW!
Yes, VHS to DVD was a huge step. . . But LD (LaserDisc) to DVD wasn't a huge step. DVD really offers very little -- aside from a smaller disc -- that LD hadn't already offered for years. So why did everyone abandon the excellent and long-established LD format for something minimally better? For that matter, why didn't LD ever really take off and displace VHS for pre-recorded content years before DVD even came along? There's no logic.
I do think LD was ahead of its time. People were beginning to appreciate the format's advantages, and it finally was starting to show signs of taking off in a big way, right up until DVD took all the wind out of its sails. It was particularly frustrating how many people were gushing over the "amazing new" DVD technology without even knowing that LD existed and had offered most of the same features for years and years already.
Also consider. . . Now we have many people chiming in to say that DVD is "good enough" and that improved picture quality isn't enough to justify the move to HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. Again I ask, where's the logic? If improved image quality isn't enough to move them, then why did we all move from LD to DVD when it didn't even offer that much?
I've often felt that in a logical world DVD would never have existed. LD would have become popular and widespread, until it was possible to make a real leap forward to HD discs (which IMHO should have happened some years before now). The success of DVD really threw everything out of whack, from my standpoint. It not only made LD players and disc collections obsolete before their time, but it also stunted the development of HD discs because the industry didn't want to introduce them while DVD was still considered relatively new.
HD discs are something I've wanted badly for several years. I'm already on my *second* HD set, and I've got HD satellite, a HD hard drive based recorder, an ATSC tuner, and the only missing element is HD discs. My frustration is, they are arriving years behind all the other HD components, plus we get an unwanted "format war", plus all the DRM nonsense on top of that. It's very disappointing. It didn't have to be this way.
I guess they didn't watch the second and third Matrix movies. I guess that you didn't see the second and third Pirates movies either.
copyright © 2005 Flamsmsmark the ravings of a melancholly i
Well, laserdisc over VHS had a really limited title selection, almost no rental options, and simply didn't have broad availability in general... DVD over VHS, well my biggest nod to DVD is not having to fast-forward/rewind over tape. Also, size is a big factor. Laserdisc was about the size of an LP record. DVD has the height of VHS, for cases, and about the width of a CD case. It allows at standard case size for two dvd's to fit into one VHS holder's slot, or certain CD case slots... That is mainly the case size as a factor. Also, you can fit an entire season of a tv show in about the same space as one or two vhs tapes, probably the biggest reason for DVD television show purchases over VHS... My wife has about half of I Love Lucy, MASH, and ST:TOS to replace in DVD and the tapes go into storage. Benefit is a lot more shelf space. The space considerations are also important wrt LaserDisc since the format was LP size, the storage considerations are much more difficult than using a pretty typical book case for storage.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
DVD's maximum bitrate is 11 Mbit, but you'd run out of disc in about two hours if you did that - with no room for extras. Most DVDs actually run at 3-5 Mbit. (it is variable)
The problem with most HD systems is that they were designed with the crappy old MPEG2 codec in mind. This means ATSC *needs* almost 20Mbit to broadcast 1080p - a serious waste of bandwidth and it also makes for a less stable signal. Cable and sat broadcasters have switched to MPEG4/h.264 for their HD content so they can look better at lower bitrates.
The same could have been done for an HD DVD version; a standard DVD can average 6.5Mbit for 3 hours - that is plenty for 1080p using h.264. No need for expensive new disks and players...
I do love my Sony 34XS955 as my main monitor. S'big but I got a big table. Hi ho back to HD Half Life 2 ... yes I am a year or so behind ;).
"But LD (LaserDisc) to DVD wasn't a huge step. DVD really offers very little -- aside from a smaller disc -- that LD hadn't already offered for years." You're kidding, right? LD's could only hold 30 minutes (CAV) or 60 minutes (CLV) of video per disc side. Before double-sided players came out, you had to physically eject and turn over the disc at least once in the middle of the movie. And even with a double-side player, you had about a 5-second pause between side changes. If your movie was in CAV and you had a single sided player, you had to flip/swap discs a minimum of 3 times just to watch one movie. My LD boxed set of the movie Gettysburg had something like 12(!) discs in it, IIRC. There were numerous other problems with the LD format - disc warping, laser rot, etc. I haven't tried to play any of the LD's in my collection for years, but I'd be very surprised if any of them could now play through an entire movie without skipping or locking up. The LD format was not well designed (who the hell thought that glueing two platters together to make a double-sided disc was a good idea?) LD's did introduce the AC3 audio format to home video, but I could never get it to work properly on my players, and now Dolby Digital and DTS on DVD's has far surpassed the audio quality of LD's.
Just because I'm curious...
Way back when, I rented a PS2 from Blockbuster video and a couple of games (I'd just switched to Mac OS X and my copy of Virtual GameStation would never be updated...) to try it out. Decided it wasn't for me (I like the keyboard, I guess) and returned it after a week.
So what I'm saying is, are there places renting PS3s and Blue Ray Movies? Maybe you could give it a try and see what you think...
You remind me of the babe.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
There's an old saying: "When elephants fight, it is the grass that gets trampled."
Here are the possible outcomes I can see:
No matter what happens, it's going to be Joe Consumer who gets the shaft. Lovely prospect. I would say the best option is the last, as a colossal failure of that magnitude might teach the industry a lesson, but if there is one thing I've learned from history, it's that people don't learn from history.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
True. In fact, I've never seen an 11 Mbps DVD. I think I saw one that was almost 8 Mbps. Most are 5 Mbps or less. For example, Star Wars Ep. 2 that I have on my HDD is an avg. bitrate of 5445 Kbps. That's a DVD-9, so it is higher than FS/WS, two-sided DVDs, or old DVD-5s.
I don't think anyone's seen the third one yet outside of some critics and a few lucky participants of private screenings, buddy. As for the second one, I quite enjoyed it, and it was a hell of a lot better than either of the Matrix sequels.
Rob
Geeeeezzz .... Just enjoy watching movies without feeling the need to criticise each tiny weeny bit of each and every frame ... just to show the whole world that brand advertising does not work on you!! :S !!!
Come on!! Go to the cinema ... or rent the dvd .. or download it if you prefer ... you don't like it ... bah .. tough luck ... you'll like the next one. Not each and every film has to be stellar! I bet the whole bunch of you would enjoy life more if you just got a little bit less overcritical!
I see several torrents up.
Couldn't vouch for authenticity though...
For the personnal storage/backup field, solid state could probably prevail in the long term.
But for the mass production ?
Currently a movie company can very quickly press millions of media, each at a cost of a fraction of a using a technology that's basically as old as pressed vinyl records (only optimised a lot since then). And several company could do it at the same time for several movies/musi discs, etc.
Currently, although usb stick are available, we lack the infrastucture to over-night produce millions of them with a specific movie preloaded them, for each of the several movies, for each of the thousands of movie companies. And at the same time keep the costs similar to what pressing vinyl/CD/DVD/HDDVD/whatever the next pressed media is.
Also, usbstick happen to have more components and to be a little bit more complicated to ecologically recycle.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
And the second POTC movie was just a big trailer for the third (and was too long). Its the only film which has put me off watching the next in the series.
Thats why I awarded my money to * fanfare * warner.
The adult movie industry announced that they are going with HD DVD. Remember history? That same industry went with VHS, and what happened win Sony Beta?? I guess Sony has not learned what industry drives technology. If you do not believe this, look what paid for this internet in the first place.
yeah but that was back before the advent of limewire and bittorrents. all the pr0n I have, I acquired w/ torrents
If creativity is the field, copyright is the fence.
LD did offer pretty good quality, but no one bought it. The players were expensive and tempremental, the discs were also expensive, heavy, cumbersome, prone to warping, and you had to flip the damn thing halfway through the movie.
DVD existed because the world had a rare attack of logic and demanded a more convenient and more flexible format. The fact that DVD's can be stamped on existing CD presses is a definite bonus.
As for HD, I'm holding out until AACS is as fully cracked as CSS. I don't even intend to pirate (arr!) movies, I just want to view the damn things from my player of choice without the industry jerking me around with mandatory no-skip tracks and buggy, expensive, and slow copy protection.
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
It strikes me that those who choose to use the torrents may already have seen it http://btjunkie.org/search?q=pirates%20caribbean%2 0world suggests that it's already available.
copyright © 2005 Flamsmsmark the ravings of a melancholly i
So was the second Matrix movie. The difference is that the second Pirates movie was actually a pretty good trailer.
Rob
I really don't care if some random movie is trash. The problem is when one movie comes out, and it's excellent, but then it has a sequel or two, and they're very mediocre or worse. It spoils the original, by association. Look at the "Alien" franchise: the first was great, the second was even better, but after that they took a nose-dive. Highlander is an even better example: the first was great, the second was pure crap.
The studios shouldn't screw up good movies' legacy this way. If they can't make sequels that are as good as the original (like X-men 2), they should just stop with the original.
Firstly, there are two bitrates here, the raw disc rate (up to 11Mbit/s) and the video rate (up to 9.8Mbit/s) which you shouldn't confuse. If you have DVDs that are reported 9.5Mbit/s or more by software like 'mplayer' they're basically the full rate possible.
If you put up with studios selling you 5Mbit DVDs, why bother with HD DVD or Blu Ray? The studios will sell you some down-filtered, cheaply put together crap on any format and you'll continue to pay top dollar for it.
The only reason to put out a DVD at 5Mbit/s is because the studio wants to cram as many hours as possible of tedious "extra material" onto the same DVD so that they can say '4 million hours of bonus material' on the outside of the box without having the expense of another DVD. Unless you're actually planning to watch Keanu explaining in monotone that he plays a character called Neo (a fact you'd otherwise have to discover by watching the movie you bought) this is a bad deal.
So, examples of DVDs I had around...
Run Lola Run is 9.8Mbit/s of 576p on DVD. That's the maximum rate allowed by the standard, but also logically the only rate you'd choose unless you are trying to fit a really long movie onto the DVD or, as I said, spewing hours of third rate "extras" onto the same disc.
What else did I look at... Fargo is 9.8Mbit/s, American Beauty is the same, my remaster of The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is just under at 9.78Mbit/s
On the other hand the Matrix is just 7.5Mbit/s. So of course once there's smoke everywhere and lots of action it falls apart. But the people who mastered the DVD knew that. They already knew that they were going to come back to Matrix fans in a few years and say "Here's a better version" either with a 9Mbit/s version of the same footage (which I think happened already) or with a next generation format (happening now).
My boxed set of Before Sunrise / Before Sunset is 7.5Mbit/s as well, which is slightly annoying although the movies don't demand a lot from the DVD encoding, there's a lot of gentle tracking shots through half-empty streets or close-ups on faces which aren't a struggle for MPEG 2. On the other hand my copy of Leon is terrible not so much because it's only 8Mbit/s despite fast action sequences - but more because they've letterboxed a 2.35:1 movie to 4:3. So it's only half the intended resolution.
I'd be a lot more enthusiastic about higher definition DVD replacements if the studios had reliably produced DVDs that were everything they could be. If they're still selling wrongly matted, poorly encoded DVDs, why should you think their Blu Ray releases will be better? Did you see that version of the Princess Bride that was being sold for a while before it was recalled for misleading advertising ? It's not only got an 'open matte' version pretending to be 4:3, it has been edited in 3:2 pulldown for TV and then spliced back onto DVD, so it won't display as progressive scan.