Blu-Ray just not "catching on"
- Thread starter PKerr
- Start date
Well, I couldn't care less how you or any other person watch movies, whatever works for you. But speaking for myself I'm very big on experiencing a film as the director intended it. That means in the original aspect ratio, because distorting the film by stretching it is an offense againt the director's vision. It's alright if you don't care about such things, but I find it very important. You don't mess with a painting to make it fit your wall. The same goes for dubbing and cropping a 2:35 film to fit a 4:3 screen, which is the most horrible stab in the back of a director imaginable.
Another example: David Lynch hates chapter selection on dvd's because he feels a film should be experienced in one sitting. And I agree with him. Some people spread a film over three days and think they get the total experience.
To be fair, if anyone expects me to sit through four hours of Gettysburg in one sitting, that person has another thing coming.
To be fair, if anyone expects me to sit through four hours of Gettysburg in one sitting, that person has another thing coming.
I didn't say you couldn't go for a pee-break. But is it really so much trouble to piss in a bottle to respect the director's vision?
To be fair, if anyone expects me to sit through four hours of Gettysburg in one sitting, that person has another thing coming.
I didn't say you couldn't go for a pee-break. But is it really so much trouble to piss in a bottle to respect the director's vision?
In that case, yeah, because ... well, fuck Ron Maxwell.
A
Amaris
Guest
We have a 42" widescreen television.
We stretch tv broadcasts. Fortunately, our very nice television does a terrific job of it, and the picture still maintains proper aspect ratio, if zoomed in just a tad.
J.
To be fair, I was talking about television broadcasts, not so much movies. To me, cutting a significant percentage of the picture off the sides is a far bigger sin than proportionately stretching the picture to fill a 16:9 television set, but I understand your point.
I just don't "get" the logic. I mean, I can understand if one doesn't want to invest $1000+ into a 1080p TV and all that. BUT if you have bought a fancy new TV, why would you watch stretched 480p images on it?? What's the point of buying it in the first place!?
I think I may have told this story on this board before, but here goes again. When i was selling TV's etc... at an electronics store during university, some big tubby biker dude came and bought a brand-spanking new LCD screen. Back then 37"-40" would still cost you a pretty penny. So I help this guy out in choosing the right screen and he also buys a DVD player to go with it. Great right? So while I'm ringing it up, he goes and picks up a FULLSCREEN version of some movie. I tell him the obvious problem with that and let him know that for the same price that he could get a DVD that wouldn't present the stretching/skewing problem he's going to have... I got flipped the bird. I wasn't even rude or anything. Just goes to show that if someone is dead-set on not adopting whatever new technology we're talking about because VHS/DVD is "good enough," that there's just no point in arguing it.
I think I may have told this story on this board before, but here goes again. When i was selling TV's etc... at an electronics store during university, some big tubby biker dude came and bought a brand-spanking new LCD screen. Back then 37"-40" would still cost you a pretty penny. So I help this guy out in choosing the right screen and he also buys a DVD player to go with it. Great right? So while I'm ringing it up, he goes and picks up a FULLSCREEN version of some movie. I tell him the obvious problem with that and let him know that for the same price that he could get a DVD that wouldn't present the stretching/skewing problem he's going to have... I got flipped the bird. I wasn't even rude or anything. Just goes to show that if someone is dead-set on not adopting whatever new technology we're talking about because VHS/DVD is "good enough," that there's just no point in arguing it.
AGAIN, I'm not talking about buying fullscreen DVDs of widescreen content and then stretching it to fill the screen. Obviously, that would be silly.
I bought my widescreen television mostly for the purpose of enjoying movies and HD content. So it's not that I bought it with the intention of "stretching 480P content." At the same time, TO ME, when I do use my television's proportional stretch mode, it looks perfectly acceptable to me and it gives the perception of a bigger picture.
Of course, I totally get the whole original aspect ratio argument, but if I happen to be watching "People's Court" on a standard definition channel, I'm not particularly concerned about the director's artistic vision.
http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=655332
$99.97 blu-ray player.
In the last few months they've come down to regular price at $199.99 here in Canada. I bet you in within the next year a $100 BD player won't be an uncommon sight. If we look back to DVD, those players took MUCH longer to come down in price than BD has.
In other news, Wal-Mart is cutting back on CD and DVD shelf space to make more room for Blu-Ray!
http://forums.highdefdigest.com/hig...-report-wal-mart-replacing-music-blu-ray.html
It is inevitable suckers!
$99.97 blu-ray player.
In the last few months they've come down to regular price at $199.99 here in Canada. I bet you in within the next year a $100 BD player won't be an uncommon sight. If we look back to DVD, those players took MUCH longer to come down in price than BD has.
In other news, Wal-Mart is cutting back on CD and DVD shelf space to make more room for Blu-Ray!
http://forums.highdefdigest.com/hig...-report-wal-mart-replacing-music-blu-ray.html
It is inevitable suckers!
A
Amaris
Guest
That's exactly how I feel about it.
Our DVDs are watched widescreen, our television shows watched in aspect ratio zoom. The picture loss is negligible and the quality looks just as good for general TV viewing purposes.
J.
Too late, you said it....IT......cant be unsaid.
We have a PS3 at home and the only Blu-Ray movies we have were a gift given to my father when he bought a Sony laptop with a Blu-Ray drive. They look wonderful on our 52' plasma screen but I haven't purchased any movies merely because I don't see the need yet. Though I'd love to get Planet Earth in that format.
I know I'm coming late to this party, but I agree with the OP's friends - I am not prepared to start replacing all my DVDs for a technology which might be replaced in a year or two.
I think it was easier for most people to make the leap from VHS because DVD technology offered MANY benefits besides improved picture quality. Better picture quality, ease of use (no rewinding, chapters, etc), more bonus features included, less storage space required, longevity of your purchase before it breaks/becomes unusable...these are all benefits that DVD gave us over VHS...and it make the leap worth it for most people.
But Blu-ray doesn't give us anything except better picture quality. Not that that is a bad thing...but that alone is not gonna drive alot of folks to change over. Some people simply don't care that much about HD if they get a pretty doggone decent picuture anyway. Especially if the incremental boost is gonna cost 'em a fortune in DVD replacements.
I think it was easier for most people to make the leap from VHS because DVD technology offered MANY benefits besides improved picture quality. Better picture quality, ease of use (no rewinding, chapters, etc), more bonus features included, less storage space required, longevity of your purchase before it breaks/becomes unusable...these are all benefits that DVD gave us over VHS...and it make the leap worth it for most people.
But Blu-ray doesn't give us anything except better picture quality. Not that that is a bad thing...but that alone is not gonna drive alot of folks to change over. Some people simply don't care that much about HD if they get a pretty doggone decent picuture anyway. Especially if the incremental boost is gonna cost 'em a fortune in DVD replacements.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Not having chapter stops really makes it harder to study and deconstruct sections of a movie, I can tell you that. Plus, on pics where you just want to watch the big set-pieces (like a Roger Moore bondmovie) and skip what passes for drama, chapstops are almost essential.
Also, I don't get any joy out of listening to the full cut of the music from the trench battle in STAR WARS ... mainly, because after a flourish it dies down to almost nothing for a couple minutes. I'll pause that time out of a recording and keep 'the good stuff' because that is what I choose to listen to. Some folks say that is destroying the composition, but since we're talking about a composition that exists to augment a visual, it is a compromised composition anyway.
I guess Lynch doesn't want anybody to De-MEMENTO his MULLHOLLAND DRIVE ... it'd be fun to watch it in a reconstructed order, but I DO get why he doesn't have stops on that one.
Why would you have to replace DVDs that you're happy with if you bought a Blu-ray player? They work perfectly fine in it. No one I know has ever recomended someone buy a Blu-ray player if they don't have an HDTV but if you do have an HDTV couldn't you only buy Blu-ray discs from this point forward, of movies and shows you don't have, and keep your DVDs?
A Blu-ray player can be had starting at a couple of hundred dollars and like I said if you don't want to replace existing DVDs there is no reason too. Of course if you're talking about the HDTV in that "several thousand dollars" don't buy a blu-ray until (or if) you buy an HD set.
This complaint of Blu-ray being too expensive is a little bizarre. If you have an HDTV the price of a Blu-ray player is a fraction of the cost of the TV. If you don't have an HDTV you wouldn't buy one anyways. If you think the disc pricing is a concern go to Amazon or whatever online source you use to get DVDs and compare pricing. The price difference is not as great as some would have you believe.
Probably so we'll have to work at it just so we can get to the Laura Harring/Naomi Watts scene.
