Blu-Ray just not "catching on"

[TheArsenal]

Well the points I hear here, soem are utter rubbish.

One the difference of what VHS displayed (the data not how you tv handles it) and DVD while dramatic is not as significant as the difference between DVD and 1080i.

To be clear, because I made a point along these lines, one of the reasons the the DVD to Blu-ray changeover is not as dramatic as the VHS to DVD changeover is because the over-all format change is not as dramatic. Everything about a DVD from size, to features, to picture quality, to ease of use was an improvement over tape. Blu-ray offers, so far, only significant upgrade in picture quality. Which is not enough for some. There may be more features to follow, but the few discs I have don't offer them.

 

[Deckerd]

To be clear, because I made a point along these lines, one of the reasons the the DVD to Blu-ray changeover is not as dramatic as the VHS to DVD changeover is because the over-all format change is not as dramatic. Everything about a DVD from size, to features, to picture quality, to ease of use was an improvement over tape. Blu-ray offers, so far, only significant upgrade in picture quality. Which is not enough for some.

What I said, but with a lot more words. The last word in that sentence I would have said 'the majority'.

 

[Evil Twin]

The other aspect is the 'so what?' factor. Blu-ray was touted as this next big leap, but aside from a better picture, they aren't taking advantage of it.

Umm, it's not just picture. It's audio too. Monday I upgraded our 4 year old non-HDMI receiver to an HDMI one (Sony HT-SS2300) to take advantage of of Blu-ray's uncompressed audio tracks. Last night we watched The Incredible Hulk and all I gotta say is DA-YUM. Sounded f'ing, well, incredible, especially the campus fight. Very loud yet still remaining crystal clear and distinct, unlike regular Dolby Digital and DTS which tends to get a bit overbearing and muddled when a lot of loud stuff is going on. Very happy with the upgrade!

 

[Scout101]

^That's really not that big a deal. You'll get a few audiophiles that way, but I'd be willing to bet a good chunk of HDTV users are using the tv speakers and not a surround sound of ANY sort. And while the HD audio is nice, it's not enough of an improvement to me, and I've got the full surround sound setup.

Gotta add noticible differences if you want people to notice. They've pushed all the big ideas for what Blu-Ray can do, but haven't actually DONE anything to seperate from DVD. For example, my HD-DVD player had a button to change the camera angle, thinking that they'd include some sequences from several angles, andyou could change the view if you wanted. A whole button on the remote, does nothing. No movie implemented it. I've got a bunch of HD-DVDs that don't even really have special features, or very many. Even the regular DVD release had better features. Why pay extra for HD under those circumstances? (and yes, I said HD-DVD instead of Blu-Ray, because that's what I've got kicking around. Same argument applies to Blu-Ray, however)

 

[Top41]

Now before anyone starts attacking with the whole Xbox 360/HD-DVD PS3/Blu-ray stuff hear me out.

Nobody needs to, Pkerr. You're like clockwork.

Ya know what you fucking asshole, stop with the attacks already.
I'm tired of you sniping at me every chance you get.

Obviously, warning for flaming.

Now before anyone starts attacking with the whole Xbox 360/HD-DVD PS3/Blu-ray stuff hear me out.

Nobody needs to, Pkerr. You're like clockwork.

But this isn't really called for, either. If you've heard the commentary from someone before, feel free to skip over it, but no need to drop a little dig in. Next time it will earn you a trolling warning.

Back on topic....

 

[Captain Craig]

I'll not be getting a Blu-Ray anytime in 2009. Why?
I'm quite fine with the clarity and sound on the DVD format as it is.
Not impressed with what I've seen from this "upgrade".

I may just sit this whole format out and in 2015(or sooner the way tech evolves) upgrade to that format.

 

[John Clark]

The main reason I haven't upgraded yet is to do with portability. I tend to use a portable dvd player on my breaks and I haven't seen a blu-ray version yet. (I'm not sure if they'd think it worthwhile making one anyway).

I could get one for my laptop, but it's not quite as portable. I'll most likely wait and see how it goes.

 

[Gojirob]

I think the biggest roadblock for Blu-ray is that the average consumer is perfectly happy with regular DVD. While Blu-ray may look prettier and have a better picture, a standard-def DVD still looks awfully good. The transition from VHS to DVD was more dramatic and profound. There are even some people out there still trying to grasp onto VHS and haven't even made the leap to DVD (and I know a few of them!).

I watched the SW Trilogy on HBO-HD. Man. It was like they were filming a 'Making Of' docu. It was that clear. Still, not every movie calls for it, especially when it demands new funds to replace an existing disc. Iron Man, DK, Hulk, KOTCS - yeah. Mamma Mia - prolly not. I was lucky in that I used store reward points to buy the BD HP series (Stone-Phoenix), and the non-BD Voltron series. SW 1-6, Indy 1-3, Spidey 1+2, LOTR, all givens. WotW-1953 I might if they do some CGI sleight-of-hand on the wires on the Martian war machines, now so visible in DVD. Of course, in a lot of cases, upconvert takes these up a notch, anyway. My brother might want Outsiders, Cinderella Man, and the Rocky series.

For now, I regard BD as a possible upgrade format, but not a given.

 

[Mooch]

Given:
-I have a HDTV,
-I have a Blu-Ray player (PS3),
-Everything that comes out on DVD comes on Blu-Ray too these days,
I have no reason to NOT buy Blu-Ray instead of DVD, as far as new releases go*

*Except they cost a bit more, but that's not a bigdeal as far as I'm concerned--they don't cost any more than DVDs did a few years ago.

However, I don't feel the need to replace the vast majority of my DVDs, just the handful that seem as though they really deserve the HD treatment.

 

[Gryffindorian]

Boy, BR sure hasn't gotten the message out that it's backward-compatible with DVDs, has it? No wholesale replacement of the DVD collection is necessary.

That's one important point that I forgot to bring up--Blu-Ray's backwards compatibility. I have spent hundreds of dollars on such DVD movies as Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, as well as the entire James Bond collection and the complete X-Files series. No way on earth I'm going to spend $25 - $30 apiece on the same movie titles (that I have now) on BD unless and until their pirces are comparable to DVDs.

 

[hamudm]

Okay... so there are two majore reasons why I haven't adopted blu-ray yet.

1. I don't like the media, its still susceptible to scratches. Why didn't they spend their time/money develop an SD style chip that is rugged and can take some serious abuse before it becomes faulty.

2. Price per disk is still too high. If they were the same price as DVD I would so make the jump to blu-ray, but until then I'll slum it with my thousand plus DVD collection.

1. BD's are highly resistant to scratching as they have several layers of special coatings to prevent this very problem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc

Hard-coating technology

Because the Blu-ray Disc data layer is closer to the surface of the disc, compared to the DVD standard, it was at first more vulnerable to scratches. The first discs were housed in cartridges for protection.
TDK was the first company to develop a working scratch protection coating for Blu-ray Discs. It was named Durabis. In addition, both Sony and Panasonic's replication methods include proprietary hard-coat technologies. Sony's rewritable media are spin-coated with a scratch-resistant and antistatic coating. Verbatim's recordable and rewritable Blu-ray Disc discs use their own proprietary hard-coat technology called ScratchGuard.

2. DVD's were just as expensive when they first came to market. As you know, this certainly didn't remain the case. Although this high price point may prevent you from becoming an early adopter, it is not an inherent problem with the format.

 

[hamudm]

Well the points I hear here, soem are utter rubbish.

One the difference of what VHS displayed (the data not how you tv handles it) and DVD while dramatic is not as significant as the difference between DVD and 1080i.

To be clear, because I made a point along these lines, one of the reasons the the DVD to Blu-ray changeover is not as dramatic as the VHS to DVD changeover is because the over-all format change is not as dramatic. Everything about a DVD from size, to features, to picture quality, to ease of use was an improvement over tape. Blu-ray offers, so far, only significant upgrade in picture quality. Which is not enough for some. There may be more features to follow, but the few discs I have don't offer them.

Also a significant jump in audio quality. Listen to the DD 5.1 track on Lost Season 3 blu-ray and then listen to the HD audio sound... it's like night and day.

 

[RoJoHen]

I own an HDTV and a PS3, so technically I should be buying Blu-Ray discs.

However, I don't buy movies. If I'm going to buy DVDs, I'm going to buy a season of a TV show. I'd rather spend $50 or less on a regular DVD season than $80-90 on a season on Blu-Ray.

 

[doubleohfive]

As I already own a big screen HDTV,

You own? Or your parents?

my current goal is to purchase (an affordable and under $200 price range) Blu-ray player in the fall/winter of 2009 when Star Trek XI is available on Blu-ray disc, and I plan to purchase the following titles:

Quantum of Solace
Watchmen
Terminator Salvation
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Star Trek XI

Since new releases on DVD are costing about $27.00 a pop for me nowadays, I might as well purchase a Blu-ray player to get the best picture quality possible considering the price the consumers are paying for these newly released discs these days.

The average DVD viewer has spent at least hundreds of dollars on DVDs.

More like thousands of dollars on DVDs.

I own 180 DVDs currently, but had I not kept trading-in/giving away/selling DVDs since 2001, my collection would total almost 800 DVDs by now...

...sounds like you spend WAY too much money on DVDs.

 

[firehawk12]

Anyone hear about the release of "Baraka"?

It's an 8k digitization of a 70m print downsampled to 1080p. It's probably the best 1080p video available and is the first 8k resolution film.

 

[Good Will Riker]

...sounds like you spend WAY too much money on DVDs.

Well, so have you, buddy.

Boxes of them.

 

[Harvey]

Anyone hear about the release of "Baraka"?

It's an 8k digitization of a 70m print downsampled to 1080p. It's probably the best 1080p video available and is the first 8k resolution film.

Considering it was released in shoddy letterbox on regular DVD, it's about time.

Still...that film belongs in 70mm. Ain't no comparison. Not even HD.

 

[doubleohfive]

...sounds like you spend WAY too much money on DVDs.

Well, so have you, buddy.

Boxes of them.

The difference being that I wasn't lamenting how broke I was months ago while living at the discretion of my parents' kindness.

 

[jeff lebowski]

As some posters have mentioned earlier, the biggest difference maker in noticing Blu-Ray's clear quality advantage over DVD is:

1) Television size

and

2) Viewing distance


If you have a 27 inch LCD and watch it 20 ft across the room, you probably won't notice a difference at all.

But,

If you have a 60 inch Plasma and are 10ft away, your jaw will hit the floor.

The difference IS that huge.

Pixels don't lie.

 

[Deckerd]

Yes but how many people have that setup? The thing is, as far as I can see, that people like the DVD / LCD setup and don't really see the advantage in upgrading, especially now when money is tight.