Has Blu-Ray failed?

[doubleohfive]

No. I want a physical copy. I want to sit back, look at my bookshelf full of boxes and admire my collection.

I feel this way as well, but not about DVDs. I feel this way about books. In fact, I'm rather embarassed at how large my DVD collection is and have been trying to pare it down to only those titles I feel are essential, worthwhile, or really personal favorites.

As for whether or not Blu-Ray has failed.... the only way it has failed has been in that it is still unaffordable for me at the moment to make the change. Luckily, my roommate has a player and I do own one film on Blu-Ray -- North By Northwest -- but I don't see myself dropping the small fortune on discs anymore the way I used to.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

For me, when it comes to books, I don't want an expensive Kindle or Nook. I want a cheap little paperback that I can lug around & abuse to my heart's content and not feel too bad about it because I only paid $2-$8 for it anyway.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

I'm running out of shelf space so bought a Kindle, I'm thinking most purchases with be Ebooks, and it I end up loving the book/series I will get them in hard copy to, if not I haven't paid quite as much for them and they're backed up on Amazon's server should I ever need to download them again.
Video, music and game downloads I'm kinda 50/50 on, right price range and the ability to have an online back up and very small chance they will disappear one day with a rights problem rearing it's head and I'd be happy enough to go digital with them for the most part, but at the minute there are very few services I trust to be that way. Amazon, iTunes neither allow you to redownload stuff you already purchased should you need to, so I'm wary of using them.

 

[Whofan]

I think part of the problem with the format is that some titles have too much DNR (Digital noise removal) and it takes away their film look and a good chunk of the detail. Take Patton and the recent Predator release for example.

 

[doubleohfive]

For me, when it comes to books, I don't want an expensive Kindle or Nook. I want a cheap little paperback that I can lug around & abuse to my heart's content and not feel too bad about it because I only paid $2-$8 for it anyway.

Precisely. There's nothing better than the smell of musty, yellowed pages barely staying together as you turn the page.

That said, I do enjoy big, pretty shiny new books too. And at the risk of contradicting myself earlier, I do tend to enjoy some of my DVD collection very much. Things like Battlestar and LOST, etc. so "starting over," even if it were financially feasible for me at the moment, would probably not be on the top of my list of things to spend my hard-earned money on right now.

I do look forward to the day when I can make the switch, and when I can watch my favorites on Blu-Ray. But for now, my cheap, free, imagination will have to do.

 

[Tulin]

I still want physical media. A disc, a box, and something I can have sitting on my shelf to admire.

See I view that attitude in the same way you view people who cannot see the difference between DVD and BR.

I realized a long time ago, why should I bother storing at my own house when I can just jump on a quit warrant site and draw on the memory storage of tens of thousands of people around the world.

It's called the future.

Join us in it.

 

[Trekker4747]

I'm a big-time collector and I like seeing my purchases sitting on a shelf in all there glory. It makes me feel better to have a physical copy that's not dependent on an off-site server or me maintaining a fee or activity to keep in existence. Further, if I'm going to pay several dollars for something I better damn well have something in my hands to know it exists and that I'll always have it.

Also, I'd argue, if physical media dies it'll be harder and harder to get a hold of those old, random, jewels or things that cannot be put out there for various legal reasons. I've the entirety of MST3K on DVD, over half of these episodes will likely never see the light-of-day when it comes to an "official" release.

I dunno, I just like having a hard copy, I like collecting and I like seeing my collection.

 

[Tulin]

Sure you do, and so do I. We, however, will be slowly phased out. Look at the younger generation. They're already used to streaming everything on their PC, their TV, their cell phones. In time, that little cell phone will represent all the tactile contact they'll need to enjoy their media and have that same sense of ownership.

"Younger generation"? You're fucking 30, dude! You're not that old.

In this day and age, there is a huge difference between people who are 30 and people who are in their teens, especially when it comes to technology. There are probably high schoolers who have never even used a VHS.

Indeed. To the person who scoffed at the "younger generation" comment, sorry to say but to teens you are VERY old.

Welcome to the club.

Case in point - I was watching a film with friends the other day when their eleven year old son started laughing. Since it wasn't a comedy we asked him what was so funny, since we couldn't see what it could be.

The person on screen was dialing a rotary phone and the dumb ignorant kid thought it was the funniest thing.


Fucking stupid kids.

 

[Sparky]

I think part of the problem with the format is that some titles have too much DNR (Digital noise removal) and it takes away their film look and a good chunk of the detail. Take Patton and the recent Predator release for example.

Excessive DNR has been around long before Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. It's just easier to spot with HD video. It's not a problem with the format, it's a problem with the people who master the content. I highly doubt that DNR is part of the problem. I'm willing to bet that a very small percentage of people even know what DNR is.

 

[Sparky]

"Younger generation"? You're fucking 30, dude! You're not that old.

In this day and age, there is a huge difference between people who are 30 and people who are in their teens, especially when it comes to technology. There are probably high schoolers who have never even used a VHS.

Indeed. To the person who scoffed at the "younger generation" comment, sorry to say but to teens you are VERY old.

Welcome to the club.

Case in point - I was watching a film with friends the other day when their eleven year old son started laughing. Since it wasn't a comedy we asked him what was so funny, since we couldn't see what it could be.

The person on screen was dialing a rotary phone and the dumb ignorant kid thought it was the funniest thing.


Fucking stupid kids.

Why is the kid stupid? DTMF (Dual Tone Multi Frequency..IE Touchtone phones) were introduced in 1963. Rotary phones went out of style in the late 70's early 80's. That was 20 or so years before this kid was even born. It may have been the first time he had ever seen a rotary phone. He is growing up in the digital age of advanced cordless phones, computers, laptops, iPhones etc. A primitive block of plastic the size of a small ham that has a dial on it would be pretty damn funny. 30 or so years from now some 11 year old kid will see an old movie with an iPhone in it and laugh his ass off at how funny and primitive it is.

FYI I still have a rotary phone. It's hooked up downstairs in case of a power blackout + emergency. The damn thing is 40-50 years old and built like a brick shithouse. It works like a charm. I can either call for help or crush an intruders skull in with the thing.

 

[Deckerd]

Indeed. To the person who scoffed at the "younger generation" comment, sorry to say but to teens you are VERY old.

Welcome to the club.

Case in point - I was watching a film with friends the other day when their eleven year old son started laughing. Since it wasn't a comedy we asked him what was so funny, since we couldn't see what it could be.

The person on screen was dialing a rotary phone and the dumb ignorant kid thought it was the funniest thing.

All teenagers think they're it. It's part and parcel of being a teenager. They didn't invent or manufacture any of the technology they take so for granted but they sneer at the generation of people who did. They rarely live in the real world, where they actually have to pay for living. By the time they're in their twenties reality has arrived with a thud. You never meet supercilious, know-all twentysomethings if they have a job and pay rent. The only people who have time to sneer are those still living in their parents' houses. But by that time they're very old as far as teenagers are concerned. Old and sad.

 

[Sparky]

Indeed. To the person who scoffed at the "younger generation" comment, sorry to say but to teens you are VERY old.

Welcome to the club.

Case in point - I was watching a film with friends the other day when their eleven year old son started laughing. Since it wasn't a comedy we asked him what was so funny, since we couldn't see what it could be.

The person on screen was dialing a rotary phone and the dumb ignorant kid thought it was the funniest thing.

All teenagers think they're it. It's part and parcel of being a teenager. They didn't invent or manufacture any of the technology they take so for granted but they sneer at the generation of people who did. They rarely live in the real world, where they actually have to pay for living. By the time they're in their twenties reality has arrived with a thud. You never meet supercilious, know-all twentysomethings if they have a job and pay rent. The only people who have time to sneer are those still living in their parents' houses. But by that time they're very old as far as teenagers are concerned. Old and sad.

Or an 11 year old could have found a rotary phone with a cord funny. In the context of being able to video chat wirelessly with relatives and friends at the push of a button or a click of a mouse. Not to mention text message or facebook.

I'm not sure where "living in the real world" or " actually having to pay for living" applies to an 11 year old or teenagers in general for that matter. Technology is advancing at such a fast rate that it is impossible for us to expect kids to know all of the older technology.

As for them not having invented it. I'm willing to bet that you didn't invent any of it either.

 

[Deckerd]

I said invent or manufacture. Cuz, y'know, those machines don't put themselves together. We're talking about the purchasing power of young people. I'm saying they don't have much or any when they leave home and you're saying but they get whatever they want when they're at home (electronically speaking) which I'm not so sure is true in any case. Bottom line, my daughter is a twentysomething and neither she nor any of her friends can afford Blu-ray. Since everyone else is being anecdotal, I can do it too.

 

[Sparky]

I think we are discussing 2 different things then. I'm talking about Tulin's accusation that an 11 year old kid is a "dumb ignorant" "stupid fucking kid" for finding a rotary phone funny. That is the only tangent I was on. Anything else was a misconception on my part.

I didn't even read much of the preceding conversation so my entire tangent might be a misconception on my part.

 

[ST-One]

Precisely. There's nothing better than the smell of musty, yellowed pages barely staying together as you turn the page.

Oh, I love the smell of an old book
But I haven't bought a single dtf-book this year since I first got a Kindle and then a Nook (except 'Art of...' and 'Making of...' books)

It's just a little bit better than DVD

Actually, the picture and sound quality on a BluRay is a lot better than on a DVD.

 

[Sparky]

Actually, the picture and sound quality on a BluRay is a lot better than on a DVD.

It is quite a bit better visually. However the overall experience is not nearly as game changing as the switch from VHS to DVD.

I think that is the achilles heel of Blu-Ray. It's not a game changer. VHS to DVD gave us smaller form factor. No rewinding. Menus, Chapters, Extras. Multiple Languages, Multiple language subtitles. Audio only track. Commentaries. No signal degradation. Vastly superior video even on the worst CRT. Audio that was light years ahead of VHS. A Phantom Menace VHS/DVD comparison was a standard demo in my house for a while. Yes I know Laserdisc had most if not all of these features first, but it really was a niche product.

Blu-Ray improves on the DVD picture. It also improves the audio if you have the right equipment. However both of those improvements are not as drastic.

The one thing that Blu-Ray did not improve on is convenience and price. It's easier to instant watch on Netflix or rent/purchase through iTunes/PSN/Xbox.

At this point in time I really think that picture and audio quality is not a major factor for most consumers. They are so used to lower quality instant internet video like youtube that a crappy SD quality video off of Netflix or iTunes or On Demand through their cable provider is just fine for them. It's close enough or better than DVD quality that the convenience outweighs the hassle of actually having to search for and rent/purchase the physical product.

Cloud based services are the future as the convergence of the Internet and your Television become so intertwined that you can't tell the difference.


In a decade or so we will be the equivalent of the people singing the praises of LP's over CD's and mp3's. You will have to pry my Blu-Rays out of my cold dead hands.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

^There have been studies suggesting that the more you enjoy the film/tv show/whatever the less the video and sound quality matters to you. Yes, it is nice to have better sounds and video quality, but if you're enjoying it you don't care so much.

 

[JoeZhang]

Cloud based services are the future as the convergence of the Internet and your Television become so intertwined that you can't tell the difference.

Get ready to buy a lot lot, if everyone is suppose to be streaming video than someone has to pay for the infrastructure and it's not going to the shareholders...

 

[Starbreaker]

The person on screen was dialing a rotary phone and the dumb ignorant kid thought it was the funniest thing.


Fucking stupid kids.

You have some serious anger issues you need to work out. How could you be so mad at a kid that probably just saw a rotary phone for the first time?

 

[ST-One]

^There have been studies suggesting that the more you enjoy the film/tv show/whatever the less the video and sound quality matters to you. Yes, it is nice to have better sounds and video quality, but if you're enjoying it you don't care so much.

True, otherwise I, Claudius would be unwatchable
But when I have the option to get better sound and picture for roughly the same money for which I would get a DVD then I always take the BluRay.