|
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
|
Author
|
Topic: New Blu-Ray prices coming down
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Karl Borowski
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 161
From: Sulking in GameFAQ Forum
Registered: Sep 2009
|
posted 11-30-2009 07:23 AM
While I have a DVD player, I thought DVD was a marginal improvement over VHS.
If they would have introduced the format in the early '90s, or even late '80s (even 4CDs are a lot less bulky than VHS), it would have been a good investment, but what was the point of going out and buying everything you already owned on VHS on DVD circa 2002? I clearly remember reading an article in the paper about how DVDs were already obsolete at that point in time.
So now here we are with affordable Blu-ray discs and players, just 6-1/2 years later, and it's NOT WORTH IT to buy Blu-rays?
If you made a mistake and over-invested in DVDs, sorry for your predicament, but HD is the first step FORWARD in quality since 16mm film, in my opinion.
In any case, it is funny how the tables have turned. I got laughed at for holding onto VHS and not jumping on the DVD bandwagon. Now I am the one going out and getting movies on Blu-ray with the money I saved only buying a dozen DVDs these past six years.
As a side-note, I still like tape over optical discs due to tape's better durability. There could have very-easily been a consumer format like maybe a DAT tape-sized device for home movies; then there should've been some sort of solid-state replacement. Now we are stuck with read-only optical devices with only very finicky writing options and no solid state content unless we want to pirate it or get it at standard definition. I have had DVDs that were damaged right out of the box. I am sure that this is going to be as bad of a problem best-case with Blu-ray with its much smaller data size.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 11-30-2009 11:59 AM
quote: Karl Borowski
While I have a DVD player, I thought DVD was a marginal improvement over VHS.
Hmm, picture quality improved at least 4x; easier search and skip functions; capacity for hours of special features; multi-angle capability; built-in multi-language subtitles; ability to pause the video for a long time without ruining it; easier storage; greater durability and reliability, ability to upconvert for HDTV...etc. How is that "marginal?" DVD was a MAJOR improvement over VHS and anyone who thought it wouldn't take over the market in a big hurry was smoking dope. The only barrier, at the beginning, was price; as soon as DVD players got below $200 it was all over.
quote:
If they would have introduced the format in the early '90s,
How can you introduce what hasn't been invented yet? DVD was invented in around '94-'95, introduced in the marketplace around 1997 or '98.
quote: Karl Borowski
what was the point of going out and buying everything you already owned on VHS on DVD circa 2002? I clearly remember reading an article in the paper about how DVDs were already obsolete at that point in time.
HD-TV was around by then, but at that time consumer-grade hi-def video disks were still being developed and very, very expensive. If nobody bought DVD due to waiting for the "next development" to happen, the technology would have stopped in its tracks. Where do you think the money for new developments comes from?
DVD was -- and still is -- a viable consumer format. Of course Blu-Ray will take over eventually, but like Steve says, it will mainly take over because it'll be the only thing available. Meantime, people who have a lot of DVDs will still be able to watch them "upconverted" and 99% of the people will think they look just fine. You won't see the mass audience replacing their DVDs with Blu-Rays, the way you did with the VHS > DVD conversion. The folks just won't find it necessary.
quote: Karl Borowski
If you made a mistake and over-invested in DVDs, sorry for your predicament, but HD is the first step FORWARD in quality since 16mm film, in my opinion.
What "mistake?" What "predicament?" I consider myself an average TV watcher and I have quite a few DVDS. There are probably maybe 10 or so that I love enough, and watch frequently enough, that I'd want to upgrade them to Blu-Ray. Trouble is? Most of those aren't available on Blu-Ray...and who knows if they ever will be? A LOT of movies will get lost in the conversion, just like there are plenty of movies and TV shows that came out on VHS, but have never even made it to DVD...what are the odds they'll get to Blu-Ray?
quote: Karl Borowski
As a side-note, I still like tape over optical discs due to tape's better durability.
I can state with certainty that I have never had a DVD tangle in the player; never had a random kid pull one off the shelf and string it across the room; never had the oxide coating of a DVD flake off; and have never had a machine refuse to play a DVD.
quote: Karl Borowski
I have had DVDs that were damaged right out of the box.
While I suppose this could happen, I own about maybe 2500 optical disks (CDs or DVDs) myself, and have sold tens of thousands of them in my store over the years. I don't think I've EVER had a CD or a DVD be damaged out of the box, unless the box itself was smashed also.
In the end, this whole argument will be pointless anyway, since eventually there won't BE any disks or whatever to buy. Disks, players and DVRs, etc will be so old-fashioned. Once bandwidth is sufficient in enough places, you'll buy all your content off the Internet and stream whatever you want to watch, and pay as you go (or maybe subscribe for a monthly fee). So Karl, I would advise you to be patient just a little longer. Think of all the money you'll save, not just on Blu-Rays, but on shelves!
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl Borowski
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 161
From: Sulking in GameFAQ Forum
Registered: Sep 2009
|
posted 11-30-2009 03:04 PM
"I own about 2500 optical disks"
Sorry that you were one of the ones that over-invested in DVDs Mike. . .
Tape is still a far better choice for professionals. I have never had a tape of any kind that wouldn't play right out of the box. . . Solid state is far better than either optical disks or tape, but that is another story, for another time.
I've damaged one VHS tape in a VCR. I repaired it, losing one second due to splicing, and that tape has played fine ever since.
As for 4x the resolution of VHS, you are smoking crack if you really believe that. VHS was ~250 lines, DVD (after you accounted for digital compression) was less than 350. Hardly 2x, let alone 4.
Upconversion? If you take something 480i and "upconvert" it to 1080p, do you REALLY think the quality is going to match a 1080p native file?
And if you have ever rented a DVD, where half of the disc didn't play because the A-hole before you damaged it, you wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this very common-sense arguement; DVDs are much more prone to damage than tapes of any kind PERIOD
IDK, though, maybe you are too busy reading here or shelling out thousands of dollars on DVDs of your own to rent any. Anyway, I am thrilled about Blu-rays for my sub-4-1/6' television set. What do I know though. . . Probably won't notice the difference between Blu-rays and DVDs, let alone the difference between VHS and 35mm film. . .
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
And P.S. DVDs became commercially available in late 1997, early 1998, depending on your geographic location. If you had access any earlier than that to them you were working in a lab somewhere in Japan.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chris Slycord
Film God
Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007
|
posted 11-30-2009 03:34 PM
quote: Karl Borowski
Upconversion? If you take something 480i and "upconvert" it to 1080p, do you REALLY think the quality is going to match a 1080p native file?
That's a non-sequitur. He said that most will watch upconverted DVDs and be satisfied with it and in turn not buy blu-rays of the same title. That's not at all saying that the people will say "This upconverted DVD is equivalent to a blu-ray disk."
Oh and, why is DVD a worse choice for professionals if you fully admit that it is approximately twice as good quality in image?
And DVDs definitely have tape beat, as he pointed out, in terms of chapter selection, multiple sound formats, adding subtitles/dubbing on-the-fly, etc.
quote: Karl Borowski
What do I know though. . . Probably won't notice the difference between Blu-rays and DVDs, let alone the difference between VHS and 35mm film. . .
Saying crap like this is why a lot of us don't appear to like you, btw.
Mike says "A lot of people will think that upconverted DVDs will be good enough" and you respond saying "I guess you think I can't tell the difference between VHS and 35mm." ![[uhoh]](graemlins/uhoh.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic