Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > DVD Discussions > DVD Talk
Reload this Page >

"Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

DVD Talk Talk about DVDs and Movies on DVD including Covers and Cases

"Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Old 03-20-09, 05:48 PM
  #51  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bend, Oregon
Posts: 1,827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

For anybody who cares to compare and contrast, there are several sites (i.e. dvdbeaver and avsforum) that do screen captures of dvd versus blu-ray images. In many cases, it is blatantly obvious as to how much better the blu-ray image appears.

For me at least, upgrading to blu-ray for the improvement in video quality was no different than my rationale to double or triple dip dvd's for better image quality. I have no regrets whatsoever...
Old 03-20-09, 06:49 PM
  #52  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Midlothian, VA
Posts: 2,659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Obviously this argument will always differ on a case by case basis, dependent on MULTIPLE factors....think about all the things that must be taken into consideration!

The title itself that is being compared....is it a brand new release or a catalog title? Live action or animation? Hand-drawn/2D or CGI/3D? If it is a catalog title, did it have any restoration done to it, or did they just take whatever old HD master or print they had lying around and slap it to disc? Was it properly transferred, or did someone turn up the DNR knob and go overboard with the grain removal?

The equipment being used for comparison....are they viewing on a larger (40+ inch we'll say) screen, or something smaller? You won't get any benefits from HD on a smaller screen unless you're sitting really close to it, so are they even sitting at the appropriate distance?...Is the screen decently calibrated? It doesn't have to be professionally, but seriously, HD has a much deeper color range, and a badly set-up display might make it look inferior....What players are being used? If you're using the best, top rated, most expensive upcoverting DVD player (as all of them are NOT equal) against the lowest rated, cheapest possible Blu-ray player, then it could have an influence on the outcome....though I have to say that I have seen thousands of DVDs, and hundreds of Blu-rays, and not once yet have I seen anything upconverted that is AS GOOD as anything in actual HD....sorry, but you can't actually create detail that is not there!

I didn't bother to read the whole article because seriously, it is from IGN, the same idiots who give some Blu-ray reviews lower scores due to grain since they apparently think ALL HD titles should look like a brand new CGI feature and not FILM...but do they ever mention the AUDIO benefit of Blu-ray? There is no audio upconversion for DVDs, so Blu-ray will ALWAYS have the superior sound option of true lossless....
Old 03-20-09, 07:04 PM
  #53  
DVD Talk Legend
 
sracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Prescott Valley, AZ
Posts: 15,380
Received 59 Likes on 37 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by tonymontana313
What home theater setup out there would actually favor a dvd over an hd-dvd/blu-ray? If you have an HDTV and a decent surround sound system , the picture and sound of a hi-def disc will blow the dvd away. Plus the bigger the tv, the more apparent it is how bad the dvd quality is compared to hi-def. I understand that some people feel the need to bash hi-def since they think it devalues their dvds or something. But just because you don't "see the difference" doesn't mean it's not there.
Again, are you willing to say that there is a dramatic difference in picture quality between the Blu-Ray version and DVD version of "28 Days Later"?
Old 03-20-09, 07:26 PM
  #54  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 671
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

I think the problem a lot of folks are having is that when they do get a chance to see them side by side, the difference isn't mind blowing. Sure, BR looks sharper and one can perceive more detail, but it just doesn't grab folks the way VHS vs DVD did.

Most people can discern a difference, but when they start adding up the costs to be able to actually utilize that difference, it doesn't become worth it.

I mean, with DVD, you bought a player, plugged it into your TV with composite cables and, bam, instant major upgrade. Obviously not the dream setup, but even the worst system got a huge picture/sound boost. Get yourself a BR and plug it into that same TV, if you even can, and it looks the same. So now get yourself a new HDTV...and hdmi cables so you don't get downrezzed...and a new receiver to hear all that great audio.

Not too shocking that there are a bunch of folks out there who are perfectly happy to give this "upgrade" a miss once they realize it's gonna run them 4 figures. And even after spending all that, they still don't perceive that huge of a change. The picture is still widescreen, the sound still comes out of a bunch of speakers. The average guy is walking around wondering what kind of idiot thinks this is a good idea.

Last edited by mdnitoil; 03-20-09 at 07:30 PM.
Old 03-20-09, 10:03 PM
  #55  
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

For the studios, Blu Ray's another chance for them to convince us we need to buy all the same movies over again. Problem with that is they are going to have to lower the cost down to DVD prices to get people interested in upgrading.

And I really don't see downloading, on demand, streaming or whatever else being profitable for the companies. Not nearly as profitable as DVD sales. Why abandon DVDs? They're cheap to make, are good quality, are small enough to store. And almost everyone that cares about movies has a player.

Last edited by Jigen75; 03-20-09 at 10:07 PM.
Old 03-20-09, 10:28 PM
  #56  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Sonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 19,353
Received 347 Likes on 247 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by Jigen75
For the studios, Blu Ray's another chance for them to convince us we need to buy all the same movies over again. Problem with that is they are going to have to lower the cost down to DVD prices to get people interested in upgrading.

And I really don't see downloading, on demand, streaming or whatever else being profitable for the companies. Not nearly as profitable as DVD sales. Why abandon DVDs? They're cheap to make, are good quality, are small enough to store. And almost everyone that cares about movies has a player.
Exactly you nailed it perfectly. I love high def stuff, but I am not going to spend over $25 for a flick no matter how much I love the flick. It's just too much for media to be priced like that. Plus they enjoy re-releasing the same dvd over again with either better quality or additional features.

I also agree with downloading, I think studios, and the movie industry is going to face huge losses the same way the music industry lost millions and millions due to MP3 sharing.
Old 03-20-09, 11:19 PM
  #57  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
tonymontana313's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by sracer
Again, are you willing to say that there is a dramatic difference in picture quality between the Blu-Ray version and DVD version of "28 Days Later"?
Since you keep bringing it up, you should know that 28 Days Later was shot on a SD camcorder so if the footage is crap, there is only so much you can get out of it. Yet you also fail to mention the lossless DTS-MA track that it has which completely blows away the lossy track on the dvd. Any other examples you have in mind?
Old 03-20-09, 11:20 PM
  #58  
DVD Talk Legend
 
calhoun07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,401
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Once Super High Def becomes the next big thing, I will hold off upgrading.

If/when I decide to buy a new TV, I doubt it will be a 1080p. Maybe if the price ever dips under $500.00 for a good sized TV, but I'd be happy with a 720p TV to maximize my DVD enjoyment.

I do recognize that you can see more detail on Blu Ray, but it never has once made me enjoy the actual movie more.

The main reason I am just not interested in Blu Ray is that the wide majority of what I watch is just fine in standard def, such as TV shows. For the few event movies I would love to own on Blu Ray, it's just not worth the money to get a new TV and player just for that. Oh, and new furniture...my current TV stand would not hold a widescreen TV, and it also allows me to store things on the bottom and on the sides and on the top...I'd need to buy a whole new set up just to display the TV and still have the storage space that my current set up offers, which is very important to me living in a one bedroom apartment. That adds to the cost.

But Super High Def will be 7680 × 4320 pixels...it will blow Blu Ray out of the water. That will be something that will make me seriously consider leaving DVD behind. But I am not interested in the "middle child" format.

Last edited by calhoun07; 03-20-09 at 11:24 PM.
Old 03-21-09, 12:14 AM
  #59  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Doubt studios will want consumers to have resolution that good or it would be a serious dent in cinema attendance.
Old 03-21-09, 01:21 AM
  #60  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
pro-bassoonist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Blu-ray.com
Posts: 10,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by sracer
Again, are you willing to say that there is a dramatic difference in picture quality between the Blu-Ray version and DVD version of "28 Days Later"?
Is Blu-ray only about improved picture quality?

Pro-B
Old 03-21-09, 01:37 AM
  #61  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
pro-bassoonist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Blu-ray.com
Posts: 10,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by wormraper
*sigh, we're going to have 3 major fronts here.

1. The blu ray camp

2. the dvd camp who swear to god that their DVD's look just like Hi -def!!!

3. The HD DVD fans (who I was a MASSIVE one) who say that upconverting will be just fine since HD DVD lost (otherwise HD DVD was a godsend)

and no side will come to an agreement and will belittle the other camp. These thread should just be closed because they never end well.
This is a fairly good observation. So long as we are absolutely clear on where IGN stand - I assume it is very clear - I don't mind when they produce articles as the one quoted in this thread.

Pro-B
Old 03-21-09, 06:13 AM
  #62  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SALEM, OR
Posts: 1,484
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by mdnitoil
I think the problem a lot of folks are having is that when they do get a chance to see them side by side, the difference isn't mind blowing.
I can't help but think people are kidding themselves. I've done comparison tests myself and the difference between dvd and bd is immense. I wonder how many gentlemen who can't tell the difference between the two suffer from poor
eyesight. The other option is that they're just delusional. :/
Old 03-21-09, 09:18 AM
  #63  
DVD Talk Legend
 
calhoun07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,401
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by steelpotato
Doubt studios will want consumers to have resolution that good or it would be a serious dent in cinema attendance.
And digital music is killing the music industry, and people are going to stop buying books because of Kindle. Blah blah blah....

Give it 10 years or so...until Blu Ray sales start to fall off and DVDs really aren't so popular as they once were (and, yes, I certainly think DVD will be around in 10 years) and they have to come up with the NEXT BIG THING! Ok, so maybe they won't go exactly that much above and beyond on the high def, maybe a format that offers something in between, but I bet they are working on it already. I heard about "blue laser DVDs" being rumored as early as 1999. I am confident they are already working on the next big thing in home entertainment.

Last edited by calhoun07; 03-21-09 at 09:20 AM.
Old 03-21-09, 09:53 AM
  #64  
Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ANKARA / TURKIYE
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

I believe one must look into the sales charts of Blu-Ray and DVD for the past 6 months to make a notable projection. Does anyboy have such a current chart?

Reading through the reviews of Blu-Ray Discs from various online stores esp. Amazon.com, I can surely comment that Blu-Ray hype has turned somewhat into an easy money process for most of the studios.

Studios know that the consumer pool is fully saturated already with SD-DVDs and there must be something new added into the pool to be absorbed, so they are trying to overthrow a bunch of poor and made-in-a-rush Blu-Rays into the source to fool the consumers and make them buy the new hi-tech discs. But we stand informed and highly knowledgeable about the home entertainment concept since we are into it since 1997.

I welcome the perfect visual and audio experience as long as it is made satisfying the needs of the new tech perfectly. Otherwise, I am sticking to my beloved DVDs.

Last edited by dantes; 03-21-09 at 02:02 PM.
Old 03-21-09, 10:03 AM
  #65  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 671
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by izatright
I can't help but think people are kidding themselves. I've done comparison tests myself and the difference between dvd and bd is immense. I wonder how many gentlemen who can't tell the difference between the two suffer from poor
eyesight. The other option is that they're just delusional. :/
You don't have to take my word for it, go to a video shop and ask total strangers if the difference they see is huge. Then ask them if they'd be willing to pay well over a thousand bucks to be able to fully enjoy it.

Honestly, in a world where folks are perfectly content to watch video on their phone, doesn't that tell you that hi-res is not their priority?
Old 03-21-09, 10:14 AM
  #66  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 5,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

I was never going to jump on the bluray bandwagon anytime soon but a few weeks ago I was able to score the Samsung P1500 for $130 at a local shop clearance and since seeing how much better quality BD is, i would never go back. Sure, most of the movies are slightly more expensive but lately there have been great deals and most of the BD's i have now were cheaper than i paid for them on DVD. Now I will still end up buying certain things on DVD that arent on BD yet and some older films i wont upgrade. BD is mainly for the newer releases for me or those classics I am waiting for like Indy, LOTR, and Star Wars. BD quality is hands down better than DVD even an upconverting which I have been doing for a while. DVD's still look good but no where near BD. The Dark Knight DVD vs. BD disc proves why BD is better and will be in the long run for me.
Old 03-21-09, 11:51 AM
  #67  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The DVDTalker formerly known as "strawberry99"
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Pardon the lengthy post, but any response from Blu-Ray supporters/elitist would be highly appreciative.

Didn't know about Super High Definition until recently, so I'm including it in my post.
Originally Posted by calhoun07
Once Super High Def becomes the next big thing, I will hold off upgrading.

But Super High Def will be 7680 × 4320 pixels...it will blow Blu Ray out of the water. That will be something that will make me seriously consider leaving DVD behind. But I am not interested in the "middle child" format.
Super Hi-Vision (SHV)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4320p

Originally Posted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4320p
Super Hi-Vision (SHV), also known as , Ultra High Definition Video, UHDV, Extreme Definition Video, Ultra High Definition Television[1], UHDTV , UHD and 8K is an experimental digital video format, currently proposed by NHK of Japan, the BBC, and RAI.

The new format with a resolution of 7680 × 4320 pixels is four times as wide and four times as high (for a total of 16 times the pixel resolution) as existing HDTV, which has a maximum resolution of 1920 × 1080 pixels. According to the Yomiuri Shimbun, the Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications will be starting a public-private partnership to develop technology for SHV in the hopes of setting an international standard for Super Hi-Vision in addition to broadcasting with it beginning in 2015.

I'm still in the DVD camp, so a few questions for Blu-Ray supporters (especially those who have already amassed a nice solid Blu collection, or is taking the stance that you will only buy Blu-Ray from now on):

Anyone can answer the following questions, but I would really like to know what Blu-Ray elitist have to say.

1. Blu-Ray is still a new format. If another tangible format actually takes over Blu-Ray, how quick will you jump on board? Not sure really how to put it, but what would you think about having ANOTHER format that’s even far superior to Blu? What would you do with your Blu collection? Will you continue to buy Blu or wait for that NEXT BIG THING?

2. Do/did you know about "Super High Vision" or "Ultra High Definition Video"? What is your take on it?

3. For those only buying Blu-Rays from this point on, do you not even watch DVDs anymore considering Blu’s picture quality is [far] superior (according to both Blu-Ray and even non-Blu camp)? If no, what do you do with the hundreds or thousands of DVDs you have amassed … since you “can’t go back to DVD” and “will only buy Blu-Ray”?

4. The same question will be asked twice:
(A) Will Blu supporters upgrade their entire (or most of their) DVD collection? Let’s just hypothetically say all titles available on DVD will be available on Blu-Ray. Plus, let’s just say Blu prices will drop to current DVD pricing and finally be affordable. Plus, let’s just say for a fact that for all films in fact do look superior in Blu. If not a complete library upgrade, the question is why not if in fact Blu Ray picture is far superior to DVD?

(B) Will Blu supporters upgrade their entire (or most of their) DVD collection if in fact you know that ANOTHER format is in the works/development that will surpass Blu-Ray [soon, years, insert time frame here]?

Sure we don’t know exactly when this “OTHER” format will be available and affordable for mass consumption, but I believe it will happen.

Basically, the reason I’m not going Blu-Ray anytime soon (or possibly ever) is for the following reasons:
A. What IF in fact another format overtakes Blu-Ray? Do I do it all over again?
B. Since Blu’s picture quality is superior to DVD, if I start collecting Blu-Rays and if I apply the theory of “I can’t ever go back to DVD because of DVDs [inferior] picture quality, what do I do with my DVD collection?”
C. For some reason, I have this feeling that Blu-Ray is simply a “transitional” format to something better on the horizon (e.g. super/ultra high definition, holographics, 3D tech, or whatever this “OTHER” format will be)…
D. I just don’t know if in fact Blu-Ray is simply “transitional,” “a phase,” so to speak or is here to stay. Don’t really want to invest in a [temporary] format if something is better on the horizon.

Last edited by strawberryshortcake; 03-21-09 at 11:56 AM.
Old 03-21-09, 12:08 PM
  #68  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
beebs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 2,769
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by izatright
I can't help but think people are kidding themselves. I've done comparison tests myself and the difference between dvd and bd is immense. I wonder how many gentlemen who can't tell the difference between the two suffer from poor
eyesight. The other option is that they're just delusional. :/
Your post is very dismissive. I hate to pull the screen size/distance card but it's very true. It doesn't take a blind person to see little or just a tiny difference between BR and SD DVD on 32"-37" at very common 6-8' seating distances. We sit close to my 42", and it's apparent to me what is HD, but SD DVD is extremely pleasing and more than "good enough".

I'm quite impressed with how 106" SD DVD images look. Given the price gap today... I'm waiting for better pricing before getting more BR titles. Perhaps I'll use the money I save for Lasik.
Old 03-21-09, 01:27 PM
  #69  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
pro-bassoonist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Blu-ray.com
Posts: 10,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by strawberry99
Anyone can answer the following questions, but I would really like to know what Blu-Ray elitist have to say.

1. Blu-Ray is still a new format. If another tangible format actually takes over Blu-Ray, how quick will you jump on board? Not sure really how to put it, but what would you think about having ANOTHER format that’s even far superior to Blu? What would you do with your Blu collection? Will you continue to buy Blu or wait for that NEXT BIG THING?
I dislike the term you used above as there is nothing elitist about a film aficionado wishing to have his favorite films in the best possible quality. I certainly did not hear too many elitist comments when DVD took over VHS. But, allow me to answer your questions:

I would certainly welcome some sort of improvement over what 1080p offers. If the studios experiment with 4K releases at some point in the future (and I certainly do not think that any such event will occur in the next 7-10 years on a mass level) I would consider it. So long as this is a physical medium. I am absolutely, undoubtedly, not interested in "virtual ownership". This being said, I am absolutely convinced that Blu-ray will be the last mass physical format the studios will be investing in. With other words, it will be around for a very, very long time.


Originally Posted by strawberry99
2. Do/did you know about "Super High Vision" or "Ultra High Definition Video"? What is your take on it?
The same as having triple-layer discs in mass circulation. Beyond prototypes, these will not be mainstream any time soon, certainly as far as studio product is concerned (you could archive this: well beyond the 10-year mark that is typically considered).


Originally Posted by strawberry99
3. For those only buying Blu-Rays from this point on, do you not even watch DVDs anymore considering Blu’s picture quality is [far] superior (according to both Blu-Ray and even non-Blu camp)? If no, what do you do with the hundreds or thousands of DVDs you have amassed … since you “can’t go back to DVD” and “will only buy Blu-Ray”?
Yes, I do buy DVDs (I recently acquired Medvedkin's works) but I have severely restricted my purchases on classics and foreign titles (this is what I prefer). The fact that I could purchase An American in Paris, Gigi, South Pacific and even earlier releases such as Casablanca, Jailhouse Rock (), Viva Las Vegas makes me that much more excited about Blu-ray (Criterion's recent announcements are an even stronger motivator to avoid DVD as much as possible). Finally, what do I do with the DVDs I have purchased - so far, from the films I own on DVD exactly 9 have been released on BD. And I have replaced them all.


Originally Posted by strawberry99
4. The same question will be asked twice:
(A) Will Blu supporters upgrade their entire (or most of their) DVD collection? Let’s just hypothetically say all titles available on DVD will be available on Blu-Ray. Plus, let’s just say Blu prices will drop to current DVD pricing and finally be affordable. Plus, let’s just say for a fact that for all films in fact do look superior in Blu. If not a complete library upgrade, the question is why not if in fact Blu Ray picture is far superior to DVD?
Yes I will. It may take awhile but I will do it. As far as I am concerned it is well worth it. If I screened Truffaut's 400 Blows BD on a 102' screen and then showed you the SDVD version and you told me that you don't see a difference, and you don't believe that an upgrade is needed, then, I would simply have to conclude that you are blind or a very, very bitter film enthusiast.
Originally Posted by strawberry99
(B) Will Blu supporters upgrade their entire (or most of their) DVD collection if in fact you know that ANOTHER format is in the works/development that will surpass Blu-Ray [soon, years, insert time frame here]?
Here's my answer for you - I plan on buying Bela Tarr's The Man From London. I don't know if the film will ever arrive on BD, but I would like to own it. With other words, my collecting habits are driven by my interest in cinema, not by whether or not what I have purchased will have the same, or at least some, value in the eyes of others a few years from now. I hope this makes sense.

Originally Posted by strawberry99
Sure we don’t know exactly when this “OTHER” format will be available and affordable for mass consumption, but I believe it will happen.
Believing is great - it motivates many people around the world.

Originally Posted by strawberry99
Basically, the reason I’m not going Blu-Ray anytime soon (or possibly ever) is for the following reasons:
A. What IF in fact another format overtakes Blu-Ray? Do I do it all over again?
It sounds to me like you are (I assume) collecting films for the wrong reasons. Your thought process seems extremely flawed. Did you ask yourself the above question before you started investing into DVD (and not films)?

Originally Posted by strawberry99
B. Since Blu’s picture quality is superior to DVD, if I start collecting Blu-Rays and if I apply the theory of “I can’t ever go back to DVD because of DVDs [inferior] picture quality, what do I do with my DVD collection?”
You should start collecting films, not Blu-rays.

Originally Posted by strawberry99
C. For some reason, I have this feeling that Blu-Ray is simply a “transitional” format to something better on the horizon (e.g. super/ultra high definition, holographics, 3D tech, or whatever this “OTHER” format will be)…
Try to figure out what the reason is and then see if collecting films is for you. As I noted above, it seem to me you are in the hobby for the wrong reasons.


Originally Posted by strawberry99
D. I just don’t know if in fact Blu-Ray is simply “transitional,” “a phase,” so to speak or is here to stay. Don’t really want to invest in a [temporary] format if something is better on the horizon.
From what I've read above, I am fairly certain you don't take other people's words for granted, though, you seem to be curious enough to at least consider them. So, allow me to suggest something - try to figure out whether or not you want to build a library of films, and not a collection of shiny discs that care the logo of the latest format. Once you are clear on what you are doing, then I guarantee that you won't be tormented by the what if scenarios you've described above.

This being said, Blu-ray is here to stay and it is most definitely not a transitional format.

Regards,

Pro-B

Last edited by pro-bassoonist; 03-21-09 at 01:36 PM.
Old 03-21-09, 01:43 PM
  #70  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
pro-bassoonist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Blu-ray.com
Posts: 10,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by beebs
Your post is very dismissive. I hate to pull the screen size/distance card but it's very true. It doesn't take a blind person to see little or just a tiny difference between BR and SD DVD on 32"-37" at very common 6-8' seating distances. We sit close to my 42", and it's apparent to me what is HD, but SD DVD is extremely pleasing and more than "good enough".
Your post is very dismissive as well. The fact that SDVD looks pleasing on your 42' screen, to you, does not validate your "good enough" stance in the eyes of others who see an enormous difference. And since BD's superiority over SDVD isn't only limited to video, your rebuttal is even more flawed. The type of experience BD offers is vastly superior to SDVD.


Originally Posted by strawberry99
I'm quite impressed with how 106" SD DVD images look. Given the price gap today... I'm waiting for better pricing before getting more BR titles. Perhaps I'll use the money I save for Lasik.
Ironically, I just noted in my previous post that I am absolutely not awed with SDVD content on large screens - a 1080p screening of 400 Blows is a prime example why.

Pro-B
Old 03-21-09, 01:45 PM
  #71  
DVD Talk Reviewer
 
tylergfoster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,540
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Ugh. We'll figure out something smaller before we go digital. Imagine if an upcoming iPod had a drive for a mini-disc-style Blu-Rays, and you easily hook it into a TV with an adapter. I'm not saying it will happen, it's just the first thing that came to mind, but I have no doubt that there are a million similar ideas that would represent a stumbling block in digital downloads.

The other arguments are even worse. The economy won't be failing forever, and if it does, BD prices will drop accordingly. They've already dropped massively and they don't look like they'll stop. Upscaling is fine for some things, but it's a terrible argument against an HD format. And, come on, load times? It's not like you have to hand-crank the fucking player. Another 30 seconds isn't going to bother anyone.
Old 03-21-09, 02:36 PM
  #72  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The DVDTalker formerly known as "strawberry99"
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Pro-Bassoonist, thank you for your response. Highly appreciative.

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
I dislike the term you used above as there is nothing elitist about a film aficionado wishing to have his favorite films in the best possible quality. I certainly did not hear too many elitist comments when DVD took over VHS. But, allow me to answer your questions:
Apologies. Maybe elitist is the wrong word to use... let's use film aficionado or enthusiast.

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
It sounds to me like you are (I assume) collecting films for the wrong reasons. Your thought process seems extremely flawed. Did you ask yourself the above question before you started investing into DVD (and not films)?
Yes, I collect films. Predominantly animated works with a limited amount of live-action flicks and tv series mixed in between. My reason for collecting animated films is because I want to own the movie/series plus have it at my immediate disposal at the comfort of my home.

If I'm in the mood for Disney's Beauty in the Beast, I'll load that into the player. Pixar's A Bug's Life, I'll grab that one instead. Some Miyazaki's work, I'll carefully pop that into the player and push play. No need to wait for Blockbuster or Netflix to cater to my needs. I'll get immediate gratification.

My collection was built when DVD was the most convenient format (my very first string of DVD acquisitions were Shrek, Final Fantasy: Spirits within, Pearl Harbor, Tomb Raider from Blockbuster's used section priced $3.99 a piece. Prior to which, I have never bought a single studio released VHS tape.

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
You should start collecting films, not Blu-rays....

.... Try to figure out what the reason is and then see if collecting films is for you. As I noted above, it seem to me you are in the hobby for the wrong reasons.
I don't believe there's a right or wrong reason for getting into any one hobby, collecting films included.

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
From what I've read above, I am fairly certain you don't take other people's words for granted, though, you seem to be curious enough to at least consider them. So, allow me to suggest something - try to figure out whether or not you want to build a library of films, and not a collection of shiny discs that care the logo of the latest format. Once you are clear on what you are doing, then I guarantee that you won't be tormented by the what if scenarios you've described above.

This being said, Blu-ray is here to stay and it is most definitely not a transitional format.

Regards,

Pro-B
DVD is the format I'm accustomed to, and seeing as how technology continues to improve, if something offers better picture and audio quality than Blu to support my favorite films, I'm inclined to wait. But the question is when . As you pointed out "a film aficionado wishing to have his favorite films in the best possible quality." The reason to upgrade from DVD to Blu would be obviously quality. If something else surpasses Blu-Ray with extra-ordinary, superior quality, I'd much rather have that. Why "settle" for Blu-Ray when [insert time frame] something [available] for mass consumption might dethrown Blu in terms of overall quality. Whether Blu is "transitional" or "here to stay" is certainly debatable, plus we just don't know.

Last edited by strawberryshortcake; 03-21-09 at 02:41 PM.
Old 03-21-09, 02:47 PM
  #73  
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
so far, from the films I own on DVD exactly 9 have been released on BD.
Thanks for making the strongest case yet against blu-ray.

When the number reaches 500 for me, maybe I'll give blu-ray a look.
Old 03-21-09, 03:10 PM
  #74  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 851
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
The fact that SDVD looks pleasing on your 42' screen, to you, does not validate your "good enough" stance in the eyes of others who see an enormous difference. And since BD's superiority over SDVD isn't only limited to video, your rebuttal is even more flawed. The type of experience BD offers is vastly superior to SDVD.
It validates it for him and others that feel the same, which should be all the validation they need.

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
Ironically, I just noted in my previous post that I am absolutely not awed with SDVD content on large screens - a 1080p screening of 400 Blows is a prime example why.
Which is enough to validate the move up to BD for you and others that feel the same, but in the same way as above it does not take a way from the "good enough" stance of others that are fine with SD DVD.

Granted, to make a statement that SD DVD's are better then BD is ridiculous. But the stance that SD DVD is good enough taking into consideration the current financial difference between the formats is valid for some. If cost differences were taken out of the equation, I'm sure all would happily go for BD based on availability.

Now one does not have to go BD to be a film aficionado. A fan of file is a fan of film regardless. Would they like BD over SD of course. Do they have to go BD to still be a film aficionado, No.
Old 03-21-09, 03:30 PM
  #75  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
dhmac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Kissimmee, Florida
Posts: 7,422
Received 67 Likes on 58 Posts
Re: "Why DVD's Better Than Blu-ray" (IGN.DVD article.)

Originally Posted by Groucho
Try this:

1. Find a quality image that is 1920×1080.
2. Resize it to 720x480 using the best image software you can find.
3. Resize THAT image back up to 1920x1080 -- again, use the best imaging software you can.

Now, try and tell me that the image in #1 and the image in #3 look the same.
I don't think comparing still images is a good test for the differences in moving images. Because for still images, differences in resolution seem to stand out a lot more than for moving images. Although there is a clear difference between SD and HD moving images, it's not nearly as drastic as the one between still images at SD resolution and HD resolution.
.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.