DVD v BluRay

beauf

I think the quality of streamed content vs DVD vs Blu-Ray varies so much you can't make a sweeping statement about quality. If you have some kids cartoon, or an old movie, the quality may be much the same. How about watching a DVD vs Super HD on Netflix. I much prefer the BluRay if its qood quality source in the first place. Even DVD's seem to look much better upscaled on my cheapo BR player.

Where possible I will try to watch something on BR. My favorite movies I'll probably get them on BR, when I see them come up in a sale.

Nerdkiller1991

beauf wrote: »

I think the quality of streamed content vs DVD vs Blu-Ray varies so much you can't make a sweeping statement about quality. If you have some kids cartoon, or an old movie, the quality may be much the same. How about watching a DVD vs Super HD on Netflix. I much prefer the BluRay if its qood quality source in the first place. Even DVD's seem to look much better upscaled on my cheapo BR player.

Where possible I will try to watch something on BR. My favorite movies I'll probably get them on BR, when I see them come up in a sale.

BD. It's abbreviated as BD. Always frustrates me whenever I see it wrong...no offence.

Jumboman

Jumboman wrote: »

CRT still beats plasma or LCD/LED any day.

Bar the stupid size

Ageyev

Deleted User wrote: »

Bar the stupid size

When blu-ray and LCD TVs were taking off there were also silm and ultra-slim CRT sets that were developed. I hooked a PS3 up to a CRT once and watched some .avi files on it. They were quite compressed and looked as rubbish on an LCD TV as you would expect but on the CRT they came out looking fine with better colour rendering.

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Good to see a thread with like-minded boardies discussing Bluray and 4K displays.
I don't understand the point of these curved TV's, back when I was growing up companies strived to produce the flatest CRT screens, now it seems we are going backwards with these curved screens, lets hope its a short lived fad.

Cinerama springs to mind!

Jumboman

Ageyev wrote: »

When blu-ray and LCD TVs were taking off there were also silm and ultra-slim CRT sets that were developed. I hooked a PS3 up to a CRT once and watched some .avi files on it. They were quite compressed and looked as rubbish on an LCD TV as you would expect but on the CRT they came out looking fine with better colour rendering.

I actually think DVDs look better on my old CRT TV than Blu rays do on my 1080p Plasma.

CRT was the gold standard for TV.

Ageyev

Yeah DVDs do look better on a CRT as those screens were smaller so the image limitations and flaws of DVDs didn't show up.

Still though, a good remaster on blu-ray like Alien looks amazing on our new TVs.

I was into buying DVDs and amassing a library big time from 2001 up until a few years ago. Must have about 2,000 titles including music, TV sets, wrestling and films. I now only buy films I really love on blu-ray like my Kubricks, MoC titles, maybe some foreign language stuff that are harder to find on streaming/download.

Now I have Netflix and browse through all of their regions and since ceasing the mega purhases of DVD I am actually watching more films.

happysunnydays

Fools and their money eh? Bluray is superior to dvd but is no more the future than dvd or the cassette was, it is just clever marketing telling you that by having invested in this bluray disk you are now a true fan.
Digital is the future, and is offering superior quality as the technology progresses, it is also easier on your pocket. It shows what the true nature of films are...disposable entertainment! What you watch today..nobody will give 2 sh*ts about 50 years from now.
My advice is to save your money for your future, and things that you will really need, your health insurance, a car, family and a home, the costs of these are rising year in year out. Stop wasting your salary on rubbish like plastic disks that will eventually go obsolete.

Gmol

happysunnydays wrote: »

Fools and their money eh? Bluray is superior to dvd but is no more the future than dvd or the cassette was, it is just clever marketing telling you that by having invested in this bluray disk you are now a true fan.
Digital is the future, and is offering superior quality as the technology progresses, it is also easier on your pocket. It shows what the true nature of films are...disposable entertainment! What you watch today..nobody will give 2 sh*ts about 50 years from now.
My advice is to save your money for your future, and things that you will really need, your health insurance, a car, family and a home, the costs of these are rising year in year out. Stop wasting your salary on rubbish like plastic disks that will eventually go obsolete.

Your name suits you, can you not pay for all the above and buy a BD or 2. Should I wait 100 years and buy whatever the new technology is?

Right Turn Clyde

happysunnydays wrote: »

Fools and their money eh? Bluray is superior to dvd but is no more the future than dvd or the cassette was, it is just clever marketing telling you that by having invested in this bluray disk you are now a true fan.
Digital is the future, and is offering superior quality as the technology progresses, it is also easier on your pocket. It shows what the true nature of films are...disposable entertainment! What you watch today..nobody will give 2 sh*ts about 50 years from now.
My advice is to save your money for your future, and things that you will really need, your health insurance, a car, family and a home, the costs of these are rising year in year out. Stop wasting your salary on rubbish like plastic disks that will eventually go obsolete.

Some people will always want to actually own the media that they've paid for. In that respect physical releases will never go away. I'll subscribe to Netflix, and I'll rent titles from the BFI, etc, but I will never purchase a digital file and think of it as mine, nor would I gain any enjoyment from collecting those files. On the other hand, some people don't want collections. They just want to hear about a movie, find it online, and be able to watch it within 5 minutes. And more power to them. The good thing is that both groups of people never had it so good, and long may it continue.

I think that VHS and cassettes were the last of the dead media technologies, because they can't be easily ripped into a computer. There will always be CD, DVD and Bluray players. My collection might become cumbersome, but it will never become inaccessible. I still listen to vinyl records that I purchased nearly 20 years ago, and I'm sure I'll still be watching my film collection in another 20, despite a plethora of other alternatives, then and now.

happysunnydays

ourha

Gmol wrote: »

Should I wait 100 years and buy whatever the new technology is?

The future is already here, it's digital, stop sinking your hard earned cash into rubbish like bluray, it has no value! You'll be far happier in the long run with that house or car you saved for.

Gmol

happysunnydays wrote: »

ourha

The future is already here, it's digital, stop sinking your hard earned cash into rubbish like bluray, it has no value! You'll be far happier in the long run with that house or car you saved for.

A car depreciates at a faster value than a BD, I do have a car though should I buy another? Is your point against BD in particular or are you keen for people to save and buy cars and houses in particular?

happysunnydays

Gmol wrote: »

Is your point against BD in particular or are you keen for people to save and buy cars and houses in particular?

I spent years building up a similar cd/dvd collection, sank mountains of cash into it, turns out it wasn't worth jack sh*t in the end. I sold the whole lot off before they became worse than worthless. I can still listen to or watch anything from that collection on the internet here. I would have been better off paying off the loan on my car or putting it towards a property deposit.
Bluray is a cash trap, higher quality, fancy shiny disk, its all bollix!

Right Turn Clyde

happysunnydays wrote: »

The future is already here, it's digital, stop sinking your hard earned cash into rubbish like bluray, it has no value! You'll be far happier in the long run with that house or car you saved for.

It's not as simple as that. The majority of films that I buy are not available through streaming services. There is literally no other way that I can access them, except through illegal means. Also, streaming services like Netflix don't offer audio commentaries or any of the other special features that DVDs and Blurays offer. Those features are one of the main reasons that I continue to purchase physical releases. So rather than being a convenience, digital releases offer me a second-rate experience. They are a lesser product. Also, I've yet to see a HD stream that looks as well as a Bluray.

Of course, all of that may change. The Masters of Cinema series may become available digitally, streams may looks as good, or even better, than Blurays, and they may come packed with special features. But at this moment in time there is no good reason for me to stop buying physical releases. It is the only way I can get what I'm looking for.

Right Turn Clyde

happysunnydays wrote: »

I spent years building up a similar cd/dvd collection, sank mountains of cash into it, turns out it wasn't worth jack sh*t in the end. I sold the whole lot off before they became worse than worthless. I can still listen to or watch anything from that collection on the internet here. I would have been better off paying off the loan on my car or putting it towards a property deposit.
Bluray is a cash trap, higher quality, fancy shiny disk, its all bollix!

What do you mean by worth?

I don't build collections so I can sell them.

Gmol

happysunnydays wrote: »

I spent years building up a similar cd/dvd collection, sank mountains of cash into it, turns out it wasn't worth jack sh*t in the end. I sold the whole lot off before they became worse than worthless. I can still listen to or watch anything from that collection on the internet here. I would have been better off paying off the loan on my car or putting it towards a property deposit.
Bluray is a cash trap, higher quality, fancy shiny disk, its all bollix!

Yes you could have paid off the loans etc, but you also have to live in the present, A BD and beers on a weekend is easier on the pocket,
Secondly as another user mentioned the extras on blue Ray as well as whether they are available legitimately to stream.

Finally I would buy them as I enjoy having a video/music outlet where you can browse. As well as supporting jobs, we came very close to having no main street retailers and I like having that option.

Outkast_IRE

happysunnydays wrote: »

I spent years building up a similar cd/dvd collection, sank mountains of cash into it, turns out it wasn't worth jack sh*t in the end. I sold the whole lot off before they became worse than worthless. I can still listen to or watch anything from that collection on the internet here. I would have been better off paying off the loan on my car or putting it towards a property deposit.
Bluray is a cash trap, higher quality, fancy shiny disk, its all bollix!

So are you trying to say you purchase all your content digitally now ? That you re-bought your entire dvd collection digitally ?

Or are you just download whatever movie you fancy via torrents etc ?

Ok few points here to bear in mind.
1. Quality - there are few reasonable sized digital media files that can even compare to blu-ray or similar for audio and video quality. For a fair comparison you are looking at massive files which are a complete waste of space, before digital gets anywhere it needs comparable quality that can be stored on the cloud and watched from any of your devices at a moments notice.

2.Internet Connection - Unless you are hauling around vast digital libraries, you need a constant good internet connection, which is fine at home but on the move mobile data limits are very restrictive.

3. Collectors will always collect - If you are buying movies simply for the sake of buying then i agree you are wasting your time, however people who collect movies do so for numerous reasons - Such as wanting to support the movie financially, being a fan of the series and desiring the extra content and nice artwork etc that accompanies it.

4. Unless buying your entire collection again digitally in a legitimate fashion, then what are you doing to support an industry that you obviously have a liking for. As i tell people all the time, i have no problem with anybody watching something online but if you like it get out there and support it, by buying a copy, going to the cinema or similar.

I could equally say, why own a car i buy it and after a while its worth nothing.......

To a collector an item is not exclusively judged on what they could sell it for at this moment, it is not bought for that purpose it is bought to own something which they desire, the value to others is irrelevant as they dont intend to sell.

happysunnydays

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

I don't build collections so I can sell them.

I do and only if I feel they will go up in value, old comics, movie posters/memorabilia, prints, fine art... no rubbish like cds/dvds/bluray anymore.

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

So are you trying to say you purchase all your content digitally now ? That you re-bought your entire dvd collection digitally ?

Or are you just download whatever movie you fancy via torrents etc ?
.

Most of the albums I owned in the past are on YouTube now apart from a few specialised bits which I held on to. I only have time for cinema and TV shows these days, I don't miss my dvd collection. Torrents are a load of hassle, don't have the time for that messing. This is what happens when you get older, different priorities and a realisation of mistakes.

happysunnydays

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

I could equally say, why own a car i buy it and after a while its worth nothing.......
l.

The majority of people need a car, its a necessity like a roof over your head. In saying that, cars only lose their value to a certain point. If you look after it, it will always hold its value around that point.

Outkast_IRE

happysunnydays wrote: »

If you look after it, it will always hold its value around that point.

That holding point for value of a car unless you have bought something which attains classic status, is a tiny tiny fraction of original purchase price, and only if you take excellent care of the car. To take excellent care of the car to achieve that added value you will pay extra for maintenance every year of ownership.

There are plenty of DVDs and Blu-Rays especially special editions that are selling for prices well in excess of original purchase price as they were sold in limited quantities.With no need for yearly maintenance.

My point to you is this and this alone, you have obviously prioritised other things in your life at this point and time, so you no longer collect physical media and that is fine, but there is no point in telling others they are fools for buying physical media as like most collectors of items they do not consider the re-sale price too much. It is about - Quality - Supporting the Industry - Enjoyment of the extras/artwork etc.

Also to consider You-tube comparable to a record collection is foolish, You-tube music is so digitally compressed you are only hearing half the music. I dont collect records myself but it just re-asserts the argurment that quality in digital media is simply not comparable to physical media at this time.

the_syco

Open to correction, but late 90's, early 2000's people went from shooting in film to shooting in some "HD" type camera. Anything shot in film can be put onto BluRay, but anything shot on low res "HD" can't be.

Thus some films made around Y2K may not look so pretty in BluRay.

=-=

As for the Physical versus Digital debate; Physical takes up, well, physical room. If you have it, or like to display what you have, grand. It also comes down to home much you re-watch your collection. Digital takes up 7GB to 12GB if yaaaaarrrr go the Digital route, and works at around 80-90 films per TB.

Personally, I go both ways. I get certain BluRays if I know I'll watch them again and again, but I get some on Digital (iTunes) if I think it'll be a one view film. But then, I've sometimes bought the Physical version of Digital films that I've watched.

For the record, Prometheus was meh. I've watched it once with it's original audio, and twice more with the optional audio tracks. Although some films are just the film, I'm liking the "extras" that studios are now including with the DVD's as a bonus for buying the disc.

I have no access to broadband. What good is digital download to me?

Ageyev

the_syco wrote: »

Open to correction, but late 90's, early 2000's people went from shooting in film to shooting in some "HD" type camera. Anything shot in film can be put onto BluRay, but anything shot on low res "HD" can't be.

Thus some films made around Y2K may not look so pretty in BluRay.

=-=

This is inaccurate.

Star Wars: Attack of the Clones was the first big film shot on digital cinema cameras. Lucasfilm worked with Panavision to develop one. As it was a somewhat experimental technology, Clones doesn't look as good as latter day films shot on digital cameras.

With films shot on 35mm film (or 16mm or 70mm), they scan the print at a super high resolution for blu-ray. Some of the best looking blu-ray films were shot on 70mm at various points in the past 50 years eg. 2001, Baraka, Lawrence of Arabia .

Snake Plisken

So a couple of more things Blu-ray can do that streaming cannot and that includes extras, multiple commentary tracks, isolated score tracks, some will have decent feature length "making of" documentaries. Vastly superior picture quality if mastered correctly and most importantly for me an uncompressed HD soundtrack either PCM 5.1 or DTS HD Master Audio. In the early days of Blu-Ray, I went out of my way to import a region A PS3 from Canada so that I could buy the American version of The Prestige, as it had an HD soundtrack versus the European version which only had Dolby Digital+ soundtrack.
Also most of the Blu-Ray's I own I already had on DVD, but special films to me, like The Thing, Assault on Precinct 13, the Alien movies, Raiders of the lost Arc as I wanted the best presentation of my favourite movies, and I will triple dip when the 4K version's of these are released in the future.
I really hope that there will be physical media for a long time to come and we're not all consigned to streaming our favourite movies in the future.

the_syco

Ageyev wrote: »

This is inaccurate.

Star Wars: Attack of the Clones was the first big film shot on digital cinema cameras. Lucasfilm worked with Panavision to develop one. As it was a somewhat experimental technology, Clones doesn't look as good as latter day films shot on digital cameras.

With films shot on 35mm film (or 16mm or 70mm), they scan the print at a super high resolution for blu-ray. Some of the best looking blu-ray films were shot on 70mm at various points in the past 50 years eg. 2001, Baraka, Lawrence of Arabia .

My apologies, I have worded it wrongly.

Anything shot on film could be made into BluRay at a later stage, even if it wasn't shot for BluRay. In the late 90's. early 00's if it wasn't shot for BluRay (or HD at the time), you couldn't upgrade it to BluRay at a later stage, as it was shot at a lower resolution with a digital device.

Snake Plisken wrote: »

So a couple of more things Blu-ray can do that streaming cannot and that includes extras, multiple commentary tracks, isolated score tracks, some will have decent feature length "making of" documentaries.

Agreed. Streaming in most cases suck if you have a system that has anything more than a 5.1 setup. When I mentioned Digital, I was referring to iTunes and stuff from yaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrr PC.

Ageyev

the_syco wrote: »

My apologies, I have worded it wrongly.

Anything shot on film could be made into BluRay at a later stage, even if it wasn't shot for BluRay. In the late 90's. early 00's if it wasn't shot for BluRay (or HD at the time), you couldn't upgrade it to BluRay at a later stage, as it was shot at a lower resolution with a digital device.


Agreed. Streaming in most cases suck if you have a system that has anything more than a 5.1 setup. When I mentioned Digital, I was referring to iTunes and stuff from yaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrr PC.

Oh yeah. 28 Days Later is a good example. Afaik it was shot on digital video camcorders which would be of inferior quality compared to today's equipment. As a result the picture looks poor though some light say it adds character to the story.

Totally agree on the point about the special features, commentaries, docs and so on. However, they were probably only ever a big selling point to more devoted fans of a particular film and/or big film fans in general. Netflix has added the odd feature length making of doc like Full Tilt Boogie, the making of From Dusk till Dawn but it doesn't seem like streaming services will be going that sirectiin in general.

Right Turn Clyde

happysunnydays wrote: »

I do and only if I feel they will go up in value, old comics, movie posters/memorabilia, prints, fine art... no rubbish like cds/dvds/bluray anymore.

It's been pointed out already, but there are many DVD and Bluray series' that go up in value. Criterion is an obvious example, but I've also noticed plenty of Masters of Cinema titles rocketing up in value in recent months. An extreme example would be the Late Mizoguchi boxset, which seems to have increased by about 200% in the past 9 months. It's currently going for £156 on Amazon. I doubt there is a single MOC title that can be bought secondhand for cheaper than it originally retailed.

If we agreed on what we wanted from DVDs and Blurays, then we could argue about their practicality and 'worth'. But we don't want the same things from them. You admit that you see film as disposable entertainment. You want to watch a film once, maybe twice, then move on. I, and many other people on here, don't share that approach. So we're arguing about the value of something, when in truth, the value we are willing to put on it is different. We're trying to win each other over with different arguments when we've got fundamentally different attitudes. It's a pointless debate.

happysunnydays

happysunnydays wrote: »

Most of the albums I owned in the past are on YouTube.

Totally invalidates your argument.

I have a 1080p high end (well it was 3 years ago) plasma screen with an (admittedly old) digital sound receiver delivering 750w of ground shaking goodness. Do you honestly expect me, after spending that kind of cash, to skimp on media quality?

Mike Litoris

Jumboman wrote: »

CRT still beats plasma or LCD/LED any day.

In the same way a large V8 beats a small turbo. Good luck with that 40" CRT.

beauf

Mike Litoris wrote: »

In the same way a large V8 beats a small turbo. Good luck with that 40" CRT.

That would this... (7008cc V8 and puts 505bhp)
http://www.evo.co.uk/chevrolet/camaro/14895/talking-point-would-you-really-use-a-chevrolet-camaro-z28-on-track

Right Turn Clyde

Mike Litoris wrote: »

In the same way a large V8 beats a small turbo. Good luck with that 40" CRT.

I agree. I'm a fan of CRTs, but the truth is they are better at just one thing, i.e. standard definition on smallish screens.