Blue-ray vs. DVD is it worth it to upgrade?

[bpear95235]

I have a Mitubishi 40" LCD with a DVD player that up converts to 1080p. I am wondering if it is worth the expense to get a Blue-ray player? From what I am reading the only advantage to Blue-ray is that it gives a sharper picture. I am finding the newer DVD's are very sharp with my DVD player and wondering if there would be any viewing difference with a Blue-ray? I realize the larger the screen size the more of a difference the sharpness would make, but with my 40" TV would I notice much of a difference?

Eventually I will get a Blue-ray player as the market is turning towards that format. However my DVD player is not that old so changing to Blue-ray at this time would only be if there are enough advantages.

I appreciate everyones recommendations.

Bob

[chanster]

You will see a difference in picture but IMHO its worth waiting until player prices come down a bit more.

Especially with the holiday season upcoming, you will see deals. I'm happy with my A2 upconverting DVDs, but there are others out there who will tell you the exact opposite.

[Walker Boh]

Your satisfaction will depend on your expectations.

Do you just want a sharper picture, or a more accurate picture? Yes, part of being more accurate means sharper; on a good BD you can see more fine details, fewer compression artifacts, etc. However, more accurate can also mean more film grain is visible. It can mean that special effects that were passable on standard-def now look fake next to the real-world elements on-screen. If you're looking for a perfectly crisp picture with razor-sharp lines, no grain, and colors that explode off of the screen like a Best Buy display set on "dynamic," then you might be disappointed with a lot of Blu-rays, including ones that received very high ratings in reviews for the image quality.

Blu-ray has other benefits too, including more accurate colors (if done correctly) and better sound (if included, and if your set-up can handle the newer formats). Just as with DVDs, Blu-ray quality and features vary greatly.

My advice would be to try it out. Find a store that'll let you return the player if you aren't happy with it, or rent one for a day or two. Rent a DVD and Blu-ray of the same movie that most people agree has a good transfer. Look at the difference, and then decide if it's "worth the expense" to you ... we can't answer that part for you.

Have fun, and let us know how it goes.

[The Cow]

What kind of audio setup do you have? If that is lacking, I would upgrade that first.

[JimRochester]

In A/B comparisons the HD version always looks much better on my 58" Panasonic. In fact I have some combo HD DVD's and you can switch and notice a distinct difference.

[darkside]

It is a pretty huge difference on most every title. The thing that stands out to me is the color. Colors are so alive in HD. You go back and watch the DVDs and you realize how muted everything is. You also get the extra detail and in most cases much improved sound.

[dsa_shea]

If you really enjoy movies and don't mind spending a dime or two then go with Blu-Ray. Just be sure to research titles you're interested in for quality and best price before buying. Being a Blu-Ray consumer has actually saved me money in comparison to the old days where I would buy tons of SD dvds every month.

[GizmoDVD]

What this Blue-ray you speak of?

[mzupeman2]

We'll simplify this.

Why do video games look better and better with each next generation of gaming consoles? Why did the SNES 16 bit look better than the 8bit Nintendo for example, better resolution.

Take a big rectangular canvas, and make a picture limiting yourself to 480 lines of different colored macaroni. Now, make the same picture as detailed as you can with 1080 lines. What's going to look better?

[Coral]

Picture and sound quality aside, look at the available titles in Blu-Ray and see if there are a decent amount of films that you love.

A format means nothing if the there aren't many/any titles you're interested in.

Personally, I'm still waiting on the sidelines as there are only less than 10 titles that I would love to own in the format.

[BuckNaked2k]

It is hugely title-dependent.

Right now, there is a widely varying quality spread among the available Blu-ray titles on the market. Certain titles represent a dramatic, flawless upgrade to both picture and audio quality, while others may be categorized as no better than upscaled SD with lossy audio ported over.

Read the reviews here and on Hi-def Digest for certain titles you might like to have. You will see that not all Blu-rays are created equally.

[bpear95235]

What kind of audio setup do you have? If that is lacking, I would upgrade that first.

My audio system would be my weak link for a true movie buff. Unfortunately I can't upgrade. My audio system is stereo, 100 watt Yamaha receiver with a 20+ year old Keff bookshelf speakers, and I could not justify the expense to go with a 5 or 7 channel with my wife, (let alone the neighbors.) Also I would have a problem adding the sub...

The other night I was home alone, and watching King Kong, (the new one), with the sound at an acceptable level for me, (or so I thought.) My neighbor came over to complain that I was playing it too loud. Keep in mind that I live in a single family house and there is about 25 feet between our houses.

[GenPion]

It is going to depend on what titles you want. Look up reviews on DVDTalk and High Def Digest to get a better idea of what the quality is supposed to be like on the titles you are interested in.

Also, having a surround sound system that can handle the new audio formats is essential IMHO. Otherwise it is probably not worth the investment as much.

[bpear95235]

In A/B comparisons the HD version always looks much better on my 58" Panasonic. In fact I have some combo HD DVD's and you can switch and notice a distinct difference.

With a 58" screen I would expect you to see a difference, but I am wondering if I would see much of a difference on my smaller 40" screen.

When I got my first LCD, about a year ago, it was a 32". At that time the only 32" that had 1080p was the Sharp. I was strongly considering getting that TV for the 1080p, however the reviews that I had read at that time mentioned it was not worth the extra money since the screen was too small to see the difference. Today there are many 32" screens that hit 1080p, so maybe they would revise that statement.

When I got my 40" TV, Blue-ray players were starting at around $400.00, and 1080p up convert DVD plays were 20%-25% of that cost. Now that they are coming down I am starting to wonder how much of a difference I would see on my 40" TV and would the increased sharpness justify the expense to get it now, or wait for them to continue to come down and come out with new features and enhancements?

[kar10]

Do you mean upgrade your dvd collection? or switch from dvd to blue ray?

I have a samsung 46 LCD HDTV and the cartoons like cars, shrek, and many others look owesome. When it comes to movies they also look great but I do not recommend to upgrade your dvd collection to blue ray. I have a PS3 and it upconverts my dvd's to a great picture so I only must buy upcoming blue ray releases like iron man, kung fu panda and others. Since blue ray discs are expensive I try to buy very few releases.

[Brent L]

Check out this thread at AVS:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=858316

[vjack99]

If you are someone who likes to collect DVDs, be sure to consider that Blu-ray versions are still much more expensive than SD versions. If it wasn't for that, I'd buy a Blu-ray player today. Until that changes, I can't justify it.

[Mr. Cinema]

With a 58" screen I would expect you to see a difference, but I am wondering if I would see much of a difference on my smaller 40" screen.

When I got my first LCD, about a year ago, it was a 32". At that time the only 32" that had 1080p was the Sharp. I was strongly considering getting that TV for the 1080p, however the reviews that I had read at that time mentioned it was not worth the extra money since the screen was too small to see the difference. Today there are many 32" screens that hit 1080p, so maybe they would revise that statement.

When I got my 40" TV, Blue-ray players were starting at around $400.00, and 1080p up convert DVD plays were 20%-25% of that cost. Now that they are coming down I am starting to wonder how much of a difference I would see on my 40" TV and would the increased sharpness justify the expense to get it now, or wait for them to continue to come down and come out with new features and enhancements?
I see a significant difference on my 40" Samsung LCD.

[GizmoDVD]

I see a significant difference on my 40" Samsung LCD.

As do I with my 42".

Anything 32" and above should be noticeable.

[bpear95235]

Do you mean upgrade your dvd collection? or switch from dvd to blue ray?

I have a samsung 46 LCD HDTV and the cartoons like cars, shrek, and many others look owesome. When it comes to movies they also look great but I do not recommend to upgrade your dvd collection to blue ray. I have a PS3 and it upconverts my dvd's to a great picture so I only must buy upcoming blue ray releases like iron man, kung fu panda and others. Since blue ray discs are expensive I try to buy very few releases.


The cartoons look great on my DVD player too, Cars, Shrek, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo. I would keep my existing DVD's and not replace them with Blue-ray. We tend to rent alot of movies, and our local Blockbuster has several hundred Blue-ray titles.

[bpear95235]

I see a significant difference on my 40" Samsung LCD.


Thanks, this is the information I am looking for, that a Blue-ray disk will look signifigantly better then an DVD up converted to 1080p.

[Qui Gon Jim]

I think the difference is pretty major. You can't beat the quality.

[JimRochester]

I think the difference is pretty major. You can't beat the quality.

I watched Back to the Future tonight and it was really a disappointment. It was so pale compared to the Other Boleyn Girl which I saw last night.

[pro-bassoonist]

I am yet to see a classic film released on Blu-ray that isn't worth upgrading. If there is a release one believes fails the test please feel free to point it to me. From Bonnie and Clyde to Black Narcissus the discrepancy in quality between DVD and BD is staggering. With contemporary films that gap widens even more as the audio excellence high-definition allows is unmatchable on DVD, plain and simple.

Pro-B

[SoSpacey]

If you are someone who likes to collect DVDs, be sure to consider that Blu-ray versions are still much more expensive than SD versions. If it wasn't for that, I'd buy a Blu-ray player today. Until that changes, I can't justify it.

Ooh Ooh...I can justify it for you!

I am not a crazy collector but for people who really collect and have over, say, 700 DVDs, that means you buy early and often. Blind buys, catalog titles, etc.

The longer you wait, the more SDDVDs you will end up buying. Then, when you finally go over to Blu, you will instantly fall in love and then be on a mission to convert everything to Blu.

The longer you wait, the more titles you have to replace.

Go Blu now and stop the madness.

[clckworang]

And Blu prices are starting to go down more. There are quite a number of really good catalog titles in the $13.95-14.99 range at Amazon right now. You might have to be a little more patient and choosy where/when you buy, but there are plenty of good purchases to be had. Granted, there aren't any of those $5 titles to be had, but I'd much rather spend $14 on The Aviator or A Clockwork Orange on Blu-ray than buy some of the real cheap titles on DVD.

[Jim]

The cartoons look great on my DVD player too, Cars, Shrek, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo. I would keep my existing DVD's and not replace them with Blue-ray. We tend to rent alot of movies, and our local Blockbuster has several hundred Blue-ray titles.Cars is a fantastic upgrade on Blu-ray for both audio and video. There's just something about it that makes the movie come much more alive. There are other movies where the picture difference may be more obvious, but the whole Cars experience seems to improve over the DVD more than just about any movie we've upgraded. The growl of the engines at the beginning with the lossless audio is awesome.

[Brian Shannon]

Eventually I will get a Blue-ray player

Good plan.

There are newer and better players coming out, prices are dropping on older ones even as we speak.

The discs will also become less expensive and there will be no end of releases and re-releases and re-re-releases with better transfers, packaging and extras.

If you are on the fence there is absolutely no reason not to wait.

[dsa_shea]

Good plan.

There are newer and better players coming out, prices are dropping on older ones even as we speak.

The discs will also become less expensive and there will be no end of releases and re-releases and re-re-releases with better transfers, packaging and extras.

If you are on the fence there is absolutely no reason not to wait.


The same could be said about waiting. If you are about watching movies presented the best way that they can be then why wait any longer? The prices right now are pretty fair across the board for what you are getting. It is not like they will one day be handing the players out in the streets and selling blu-rays at wal-mart dump bin prices.

[Brian Shannon]

selling blu-rays at wal-mart dump bin prices.

I think that is exactly what will happen.

It already has. Whoever thought that when dvd's were introduced that they could be bought for flea market prices?

[BuckNaked2k]

I think that is exactly what will happen.

It already has. Whoever thought that when dvd's were introduced that they could be bought for flea market prices?I agree. If the Blu-ray format is successful, you will one day see a $5 bin at Wal-Mart. Book it.

[dsa_shea]

I agree. If the Blu-ray format is successful, you will one day see a $5 bin at Wal-Mart. Book it.

But I don't believe that a person should hold out on adoption until that happens. If you like movies and have some cash to spend then go for it.

[MasterofDVD]

With the right TV and sound system any movie fanatic should just go ahead and plunk down the money for a blu-ray player. If you don't have the TV or surround sound system DVDs will properly be more your style. Since all my hobbies revolve around a screen I upgraded to a Samsung LN46A650 1080p 120Hz LCD as well as a new receiver and all new speakers. After all that I figured it was finally time to start using my PS3, which was basically collecting dust, for blu-rays. While I am still able to enjoy some upscaled DVDs on this new setup I would be lost without a blu-ray player.

[BuckNaked2k]

But I don't believe that a person should hold out on adoption until that happens. If you like movies and have some cash to spend then go for it.No argument. We all have differing financial circumstances and tolerance for certain price points.

[toddly6666]

Your satisfaction will depend on your expectations.

Do you just want a sharper picture, or a more accurate picture? Yes, part of being more accurate means sharper; on a good BD you can see more fine details, fewer compression artifacts, etc. However, more accurate can also mean more film grain is visible. It can mean that special effects that were passable on standard-def now look fake next to the real-world elements on-screen.


So if you want to get an action-movie with a lot of CGI special effects, isn't it advisable to buy the DVD instead of the Blu Ray?

[Jim]

So if you want to get an action-movie with a lot of CGI special effects, isn't it advisable to buy the DVD instead of the Blu Ray?No. Transformers certainly fits that description and it's an excellent Blu-ray. I have yet to see a Blu-ray that isn't better than the corresponding DVD.

[mzupeman2]

So if you want to get an action-movie with a lot of CGI special effects, isn't it advisable to buy the DVD instead of the Blu Ray?

There's a huge difference between grain that's due to the limitations of DVD, or in most cases, due to the lack of a great transfer... and grain that's originally on the film itself.

Grain just for the sake of having grain, isn't a good thing, it's when the grain is the preserved and intended look of the film when it's acceptable.

What happens an awful lot with film that are encrusted in grain for an 'artistic' look on DVD, can end up causing issues in the transfer. The encode for the DVD is trying to capture the grain, but because it's all over the place like crazy in some of the more grain heavy films, additional grain is added as noise.

Now, you keep the grain intact for a blu-ray transfer as it's supposed to be intended, but you're not just gaining better sharpness. Sharpness is sort of a tricky term with HD. With HD content, you're able to use all 1080 of the resolution as opposed to the 480 a SD DVD has. So because you're maxing out the definition of the high definition screen, you really shouldn't be able to get any 'sharper' than that, unless there's some additional filtering going on which is never a good idea anyway. Also, you're gaining in those additional pixel on a high def screen, more pixels of color instead of letting a DVD player or TV 'create' them by doing some highly educated guesswork. Color clarity is much better, and not only that, you see MUCH more detail.

As I said, in simplistic terms, take a rectanglular board and make a macaroni picture using the typical 480 grid, then make the same picture but with the ability to use the 1080 grid like you would on an HDTV. What's going to have the ability to have more detail?

I've said this numerous times before, but yes, older films look fantastic in HD. The Godfather the most recent example. Dawn of the Dead (Romero version), Halloween, I think those looked pretty damn good too. To some people, the older film stock won't inherently look 'HD' enough for them, but I dare you to take a decent HD transfer of an older film and compare it to the SD, and not see the difference.

[kefrank]

So if you want to get an action-movie with a lot of CGI special effects, isn't it advisable to buy the DVD instead of the Blu Ray?
Definitely not. CGI effects on Blu-ray aren't going to be any more obvious than they were in the theater.

[Walker Boh]

So if you want to get an action-movie with a lot of CGI special effects, isn't it advisable to buy the DVD instead of the Blu Ray?No, that's not what I was saying. What I was getting at was that, based on all the discussions and debates that I've seen on this and other forums, it seems that many BD users fall into one of two groups.

The first group is those that want a "perfect" picture (cleaned up and DNR'ed with that high-def shine). These are the people that post tv calibration settings on AVS that purposefully minimize film grain and ramp up the colors, as that is how they prefer to watch things. Every movie should look like it was filmed on an HD digital camera.

Then there are those that want an "accurate" picture (film grain intact, etc.). These are the people that lament when a studio releases yet another filtered image that removes grain and leaves people looking like a claymation holiday special. Every movie should look like a brand new print did in theater (though, to be honest, there must be some nicely calibrated theaters out there, but I'm always a little disapppointed with the ones I go to).

Sometimes a title is lucky enough to please both groups, but it seems that many releases disappoint one of the two groups. Hence my comment to the OP about one's satisfaction with Blu-ray being based on personal expectations of what Blu-ray should be.

[devinjc]

Here's a fine example of why yes, yes it is worth it.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1067722

[The Bus]

The problem is that, unless we're talking about very specific titles where the director intended that look, the first group is a bunch of idiots.

And to answer the thread question, the answer is yes.

[Walker Boh]

... but it seems that many studios keep catering to them, at least to an extent. Whether it's because that group makes up a sizable chunk of the market and WANTS it that way, or because everybody buys the Blu-rays anyway which just makes the studios THINK that it's the way we want it ... that I don't know.

[brocklanders]

Compare un upconverted standard DVD vs. a blue ray on a 720p LCD and the difference is negligible....very slight. Once you upgrade to a 1080p, the difference is tremendous. Some BR transfers are shitty but you can read reviews to see if the BR is not up to par. Standard DVD's are still good for most TV shows, especially the older ones. I am also someone who believes that animation is not designed for BR as the details are just not that different than standard dvd.

[flyboy]

Yes its worth converting to Blu Ray. There is no such thing as upconverting a regular dvd to 1080p that is a myth and a gimmick. I have a nice Pioneer DVD player that upconverts and the difference in picture is minimal at best over non converting. As some have said the Blu Ray transfers might be crappy on some discs but you can always read the reviews first. I got suckerd into thinking that "upconverting" would be really something and I can tell you that all the Star Wars films DVR'ed off HBO HD are 10 times better than the DVD's upconverted..in fact the SW DVD sets are good for nothing anymore except setting my drink on.

[clckworang]

Compare un upconverted standard DVD vs. a blue ray on a 720p LCD and the difference is negligible....very slight. Once you upgrade to a 1080p, the difference is tremendous. Some BR transfers are shitty but you can read reviews to see if the BR is not up to par. Standard DVD's are still good for most TV shows, especially the older ones. I am also someone who believes that animation is not designed for BR as the details are just not that different than standard dvd.

I would disagree with this assessment. I have a 46" DLP 720p TV. I have an upconverting player as well as the PS3 and Xbox 360 HD-DVD add-on. Blu-ray and HD-DVD discs look significantly better than upconverting a regular DVD from my DVD player or from the Blu-ray or HD-DVD players.

[Yavin]

There are times now that I wish I had bought a Full 1080p LCD/Plasma instead of a 720p set ... but still the upgrade to Blu-ray on either is definitely worth it. I just have to cite Casino Royale to make my point. I was watching it for a while on the HD movie channel and then decided to pop in my DVD of it which I had never watched. Was totally disappointed by the drop in contrast and clarity, especially in the long shots of crowds and such. I've stopped buying DVDs altogether.

[nateman]

I see a significant difference on my 40" Samsung LCD.As do I with my 42".

Anything 32" and above should be noticeable.
I would have to agree. You can see the difference between Blu-ray and DVD on a 32" or larger.

Yes its worth converting to Blu Ray. There is no such thing as upconverting a regular dvd to 1080p that is a myth and a gimmick. I have a nice Pioneer DVD player that upconverts and the difference in picture is minimal at best over non converting. As some have said the Blu Ray transfers might be crappy on some discs but you can always read the reviews first. I got suckerd into thinking that "upconverting" would be really something and I can tell you that all the Star Wars films DVR'ed off HBO HD are 10 times better than the DVD's upconverted..in fact the SW DVD sets are good for nothing anymore except setting my drink on.
I would have to disagree with upconverting being a "myth" or a "gimmick". No it doesn't equal the quality of Blu-ray, but I find it pretty damn impressive. For example, if you put in a TOD title like Hawaii Five-O on a BD player that upconverts (or just a DVD player that upconverts) it looks like you are in the same room with Steve McGarrett. Everything from the telephones to MCGarrett's suit look so detailed and it's really impressive that a show that old can look new all over again.

[wd65733]

Compare un upconverted standard DVD vs. a blue ray on a 720p LCD and the difference is negligible....very slight. Once you upgrade to a 1080p, the difference is tremendous. Some BR transfers are shitty but you can read reviews to see if the BR is not up to par. Standard DVD's are still good for most TV shows, especially the older ones. I am also someone who believes that animation is not designed for BR as the details are just not that different than standard dvd.

This is completely false.

Even on a crappy 32 inch Vizio 720p lcd, bluray will look leaps and bounds better than an upconverted DVD in every way.

I know because I had a 2006 model 32 inch Vizio, and blurays looked fantastic on it. I now have a 40 inch samsung.

I am very tired of people misinforming others about how 1080p.

[wd65733]

blurays and HD tv look don't look any less "HD" on a small 32 inch 720p tv.

Both have that 3 dimensional looking through a window look even at this small screen size.

Who started this misconception that you need a big TV and 1080p in order to see the difference? It's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. I thought only Best Buy employees would say that.

[wd65733]

btw, I just read about an experiment where a group of AV enthusiasts were shown blurays on two different 100 inch screens. One was 720p the other 1080p.

Guess what? They couldn't tell the difference.

[Moopher]

btw, I just read about an experiment where a group of AV enthusiasts were shown blurays on two different 100 inch screens. One was 720p the other 1080p.

Guess what? They couldn't tell the difference.

Cool, got a link?

[DVD Polizei]

blurays and HD tv look don't look any less "HD" on a small 32 inch 720p tv.

Both have that 3 dimensional looking through a window look even at this small screen size.

Who started this misconception that you need a big TV and 1080p in order to see the difference? It's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. I thought only Best Buy employees would say that.

It's not that HD looks any less HD at 32", it's that SD DVDs and HD will appear more the same the smaller the television set. Blu-ray movies will look fantastic on a 10" portable Blu-ray player with monitor, but this isn't really saying much, is it.

32" HDTVs will display HD material well, but remember, the smaller the television, the more sharper common definition material will look as well. So, to answer your question, HD material will look great on a 32" HDTV, but the preferred size is 50" by most HD enthusiasts (and even larger). The 50" size is mostly attributed to viewing distance. In a standard living room, 32" is just too small. For smaller rooms, 32" is ideal.

[JimRochester]

btw, I just read about an experiment where a group of AV enthusiasts were shown blurays on two different 100 inch screens. One was 720p the other 1080p.

Guess what? They couldn't tell the difference.

Depending on the source material I believe it. I have a couple HD discs both Blu and HD that look no better than their SD counterparts. Also I'm quite certain much of the difference is psychological. I think my HD material looks better than my BD but according to the specs they are either identical or Blu was given an improved transfer so should be better.

[Dick]

It's worth the upgrade. I teetered on the fence for quite a while on this, but decided to go for broke (almost literally) and purchased a Sony 46" Bravia and a Sony Blu-ray player. This is an earlier model player and takes quite a while to load. The Bravia monitor does not have quite the contrast level I'd like for velvet blacks. Aside from those small caveats, this system has rekindled my interest in going back to virtually all of my 1,500 discs to see how they look upcoverted. Most look quite gorgeous, some remain more acceptable on a smaller standard def screen.

However, viewing the better Blu-ray discs with these machines is quite astonishing. You do not need to have a projector and 150" screen area to experience the submersion of a "large" picture area. You can quite literally sit 3-5 feet away from the screen and it will not bother you, because you can't detect the pixels. The sharpness of the image is such that it achieves a highly dimensional quality, and although your peripheral vision isn't filled as it would be watching, say Cinerama or IMAX, you could compare this to sitting roughly ten rows back in an average-size cinema whose projectionist knows what he is doing.

The HOW THE WEST WAS WON Smilebox version is about as good as it gets when it comes to home theater simulating a large-screen experience. Don't be shy - sit right up close!

I am enjoying my collection all over again now, disappointed by how a handful of my DVD's look on a larger screen, but mostly overwhelmingly impressed by how superb most of the are. Worth the money? Hell, yes.