|
(IMHO, of course)
At the end of the day, it's what makes YOU happy and gives YOU enjoyment that is most important with the format of home video. Let your own eyes and ears be your guide. Personally, I am satisfied with DVD quality (on a 46" 1080p LCD) and have no desire to re-buy the same movies, TV shows, etc. again in yet another format (BLURaY). (Or even buy new movies for that matter in yet another format). I certainly can afford to buy BLURaY and have been leaning that way, but I already have satisfaction with DVD. I suspect many of the commercial websites that endorse BLURaY so voraciously are given review copies for free - that's an easy way to build a collection. The rest of us earn money and spend it to buy our home entertainment. We're seeking enjoyment for that money - and for many of us DVD delivers it - yet another format does not. Cheers.... |
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 9109523)
With 30% cashback that's tempting.
|
Originally Posted by Mister Peepers
(Post 9109246)
I'd have a completely different opinion if he were able to admit being wrong about things. I guess it's a pride thing but I've narrowed some questions down to him in the past or ask for proof about something he said, where there is none, and the only thing that happens is he'll stop posting for awhile, ignoring the question completely.
-beebs |
Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
(Post 9109247)
This is a debatable observation and I think that you are missing the point of my statement.
DVD did not become what it is because people suddenly realized that it is a tremendous improvement over VHS. In fact, DVD was effectively dismissed by many because it tried to instill a brand new philosophy of viewing films at home - original aspect ration, multiple subtitle options, extras, etc. With other words, the studios made it succeed. Now consider this, the parties that made DVD a success, are the same parties that changed people's perceptions about quality and value, and rightfully so. These are also the same parties that own the content you get on DVD. I hope you understand what I am trying to reveal to you, and why I disagree with your pessimistic view on Blu-ray. You really do not have to be a "Blu-ray fan" to recognize what is shaping out. You simply have to realize that generations, and formats for that matter, change. It is what drives markets and economies. Pro-B I also just want to add that I was like most of the dvd collectors in this thread where I thought there would be no way that I would upgrade to another form of media but trust me, the more you think about not upgrading you end up doing just that. |
After going Bu Ray a couple of months back I would say that I'm still an avid buyer of DVDs. Blu Ray doesn't offer much selection yet in most cases, and depending on the particular film a Blu Ray edition may not offer any notable improvement over DVD. The James Bond movies are pretty amazing as is THE SEARCHERS and a few other older titles but I've had a few that were a disappointment. Upscaled DVD appears to be pretty damn good most of the time and I certainly wouldn't take a snob approach to this.
And if you are more than happy with upscaled DVD I would say roll with it.... |
<----- too broke to go Blu
|
Originally Posted by JerryKILL
(Post 9108506)
I see many (not all) enthusiasts of BluRay being more tech-freaks than movie-freaks. They want the latest and greatest technology so they can ewe and ahhh at all the fine strands of hair and pores they can see on their mega-sized TV sets. Movie-freaks get excited about Budd Boetticher box sets.
Originally Posted by soop
(Post 9109188)
In other words, the improved picture and sound quality alone isn't enough to get people to switch to Blu-Ray.
Originally Posted by Mondo Kane
(Post 9109497)
I'll only upgrade to BR if there's no other way to obtain a certain title. Untill then, I'm still perfectly fine with DVD.
I still think some of the arguments here are ridiculous. I have nothing against Pro-B and agree that he makes a very good argument for Blu-ray and I believe he is true cinemaphile in the purest sense of the word. I think it is unecessary to tell someone they don't love a film as much as someone else. Example: Jim - I love There will be Blood! I think it might be my favorite film of all time. Dwight - Oh yeah, do you have it on Blu-ray? Jim - No. Dwight - I do. (Wins) |
I still buy dvd and plan to for sometime, when blu gets to a lower cost 15-20 then maybe but for now why pay double when your perfectly happy with dvd.
I did however purchase several blurays this holiday even though I dont have a player yet, only becouse of the cost Wanted for 19.99,Narnia,Hancock, and Hellboy 2 cant beat that price also for 9.99 Halloween, Hellboy, and Underworld. |
Originally Posted by g
(Post 9107223)
I'm happy with DVD taking up 80 percent of my multi thousand collection. DVD is an excellent product at a good price. Until Blu ray is treated like a dvd in pricing on columbia house or comes way down in price, I will continue to embrace dvd.
For me, it makes no sense to buy the DVD if the BD is coming out because I will then just want to upgrade. So I'm sitting on the sidelines of home video and just going to the theatre a lot more. |
Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
(Post 9109247)
It is what drives markets and economies.
Pro-B
Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
If you are a cinema aficionado, who desires the best possible quality for his favorite films, then Blu-ray is the only and natural supplement.
If DVD is so bad, I'll gladly Paypal you money so you can send me your R2 collection. Don't worry, I won't charge you for collecting the inferior waste. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by bsmith
(Post 9109907)
It's interesting you mention going to the theater more. It made me realize I've only been to the theater twice in the last 10 years. I went for LOTR: Two Towers and Jurassic Park: Lost World.
|
Originally Posted by Brent L
(Post 9109352)
Wow, some of you are really taking what Pro-B said the wrong way. You have to undestand where he's coming from, which is from the perspective of a true cinemaphile.
Any cinemaphile who has the money should want to view these films in HD, since it's a fact that BD offers the best video and audio quality available. It's not true at all that upconverted DVDs match BD, much less offer better quality than BD. That's just a silly thing to say. If you aren't a hardcore cinemaphile, and DVD is as far as you want to go, that's fine. If you don't have the money to spend to dive in just yet, that's obviously fine as well. I'm like Pro-B, in that the lies and misinformation is what ticks me off the most. People saying you have to spend thousands of dollars to notice a difference, people claiming that upconvered DVD is just as good or even better than BD, etc... If the only thing that matters to some of you is the actual content of film, the story of the picture, and you don't care much about the audio and video, that's fine also. But for many of us, film goes beyond just the story, and very much includes the visual aspects of video and audio. I couldn't be more thrilled by seeing the classics as good as many of them look on BD. I can only imagine how the director's of some of these pictures would love to see their work in homes, looking just about as perfect as it did the first day it was put on film. |
Originally Posted by The Bus
(Post 9109909)
As does demand. Frankly, I find it this bordering on the obscene:
Originally Posted by The Bus
(Post 9109909)
The only supplement? Give me a break.
If DVD is so bad, I'll gladly Paypal you money so you can send me your R2 collection. Don't worry, I won't charge you for collecting the inferior waste. :rolleyes: Pro-B |
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 9109396)
I see you points to some degree.
I feel that a person can be just as much as a film aficionado with a VHS on a 5" black and white as a person with a hundred thousand dollar home theater. The movie is the thing. Better sound and/or picture is just bells and whistles. Saying or implying that a true fan has to go blu-ray is just wrong.
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 9109396)
Also, the blu-ray library is very much geared towards mainstream stuff right now. I could easily see a classic film buff having only 3 or 4 of their 500 favorite movies available. How can you even begin to imply that true fans should go blu when there is nothing available.
Pro-B |
I don't have a Blu-ray Disc Player yet, but I hope to get one soon. I have two movies on Blu-ray already, and am going to get a third next Tuesday. I will always purchase DVDs though and can't see me truly switching over to Blu-ray anytime soon. The only movies I would consider buying on Blu-ray are movies that I think will actually benefit from them. So, for example, a recent movie I saw in the store for Blu-ray was Mrs. Doubtfire. I have that on DVD and I don't really see the point of spending all that money for a movie that personally I don't see being enhanced by the HD of Blu-ray. However, I did purchase Iron Man on Blu-ray because I think that is a movie that will look better on Blu-ray; I also got it because of the Target Mask Package and it wasn't much more than the DVD in the same package.
So basically, if they ever stop making DVDs I will obviously be Blu (pun intended), but otherwise I will be more selective in my Blu-ray purchases than I would ever consider be in my DVD purchases. |
Still DVD format for me. We have an HDTV, upconverting 5-disc changer and no surround sound. I appreciate the improvement Blu-ray offers (a friend has a great home theater set-up), but it's not a priority. Also, I'm afraid we have rather pedestrian taste in titles, and I can't imagine watching a title like "Superbad" benefits significantly from the Blu-ray format. And, while I'm at it, the OP identified Blu-snobbery and it's apparent even in this thread. I think that's something the format could do very well without, because it's quite off-putting. Is Blu-ray a great advancement over DVD? Yes, but saying that owning that equipment is required to prove you're serious about films is like saying you need box seat season tickets to prove you're serious about sports.
|
Originally Posted by MinLShaw
(Post 9110674)
...but saying that owning that equipment is required to prove you're serious about films is like saying you need box seat season tickets to prove you're serious about sports.
|
I'm not DVD collector. I'm not a Blu-ray collector. The particular medium that the content is stored on is secondary to the content itself. I'm a movie and TV buff. I don't care about special packaging, special inserts, statues, covers, etc. And even though I have a modest HD home theater setup, I don't need the best possible picture quality. Yes, more is better, but as long as the video quality doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the film/show, then I'm satisfied. (Especially given that my tastes fall outside the mainstream)
I have about 2 dozen BD discs and use my PS3 as my sole multimedia device in my living room. My collection is predominantly DVD and will remain so for the foreseeable future. I'm very selective about the BD discs I purchase. But DVD is it for me because I can easily take the contents of a DVD and play it back on any consumer device with a screen. ...because for me, it is ultimately about the content. |
I don't own a BD yet, or a player for that matter. And for the most part DVDs have all the features, which is the selling point to me. Though The Dark Knight will be my first BD buy. Mostly cuz it's got the IMAX version, which I loved, and some bonus features. It's stuff like that will make me convert to BD. Yes, I love the Visual and Audio quality but for the cost I better get more than a nice picture. DVD atm gives me most of that. Good quality plus some features.
|
I buy both DVD and blu-Ray. Cost is the only obstacle with blu-ray and title selection at the moment.
|
Originally Posted by MinLShaw
(Post 9110674)
Still DVD format for me. We have an HDTV, upconverting 5-disc changer and no surround sound. I appreciate the improvement Blu-ray offers (a friend has a great home theater set-up), but it's not a priority. Also, I'm afraid we have rather pedestrian taste in titles, and I can't imagine watching a title like "Superbad" benefits significantly from the Blu-ray format. And, while I'm at it, the OP identified Blu-snobbery and it's apparent even in this thread. I think that's something the format could do very well without, because it's quite off-putting. Is Blu-ray a great advancement over DVD? Yes, but saying that owning that equipment is required to prove you're serious about films is like saying you need box seat season tickets to prove you're serious about sports.
|
You guys railing on Pro-B are still missing the point. You seem to think there's a choice that has to be made when there isn't. Pro-B is merely stating the film aficionado wants the best possible version. If the Blu-ray isn't available (or affordable) then the DVD is the next option, or the laserdisc, VHS or finally the bootleg.
|
Originally Posted by bsmith
(Post 9111524)
quality of film content
Dvd is quite satisfactory for me and I wont be buying any blu ray until they force me to with exclusives and stuff. |
If I love a certain movie, I want it to be presented as close to the original theatrical experience as possible, particularly with classic titles. Since we can't go back in time to watch Bonnie & Clyde or The Godfather at the theater, the next best option is Blu-ray. So I'm all 3...
Throwing out cost, wouldn't you want to see your favorite films in the best possible way? |
Once you find yourself on a very tight budget, you'd be surprised how quickly that desire drops in relative importance.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:37 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.