10 Nov
2008
10 Nov
'08
11:19 a.m.
What I don't understand is that HD quality surely isn't *that* much better than DVD quality? A DVD can be transcoded to around 1GB without loss of quality as an XVID, which means doubling the resolution should still comfortably fit a film on a DVD, so why the need for something 7+ times bigger?
I think most dvds display at 720×576, which equates to 414720 pixels and fits onto a 4.7 GB disc, hd dvd i think is 1920×1080, or 2073600 pixels which is about 5 times the number of pixels per frame.