The Blu-ray Thread v1.0

[System_1]

After a shitty August, September is gonna be huge (and expensive).

Definite pickups for me:

-Transformers
-Kill Bill: Volume 1 & 2
-Madagascar
-Pirates Trilogy (yeah, I still don’t have them and literally haven’t seen any)
-Mongol
-Speed Racer
-Shrek the Third
-Godfather Trilogy (Restored!! Probably my most anticipated BD ever.)
-Iron Man
-The Sixth Sense

Transformers, Kill Bill, Iron Man…

bleh. Textbooks ftl.

[MiLky]

After a shitty August, September is gonna be huge (and expensive).

Definite pickups for me:

-Transformers
-Kill Bill: Volume 1 & 2
-Madagascar
-Pirates Trilogy (yeah, I still don’t have them and literally haven’t seen any)
-Mongol
-Speed Racer
-Shrek the Third
-Godfather Trilogy (Restored!! Probably my most anticipated BD ever.)
-Iron Man
-The Sixth Sense

Yeah there is a enough coming out next month to get expensive for sure. I just want to know why they are putting out Kill Bill 1 & 2 on Blu-ray and not ‘The Whole Bloody Affair’. I’ve been waiting for fucking ever for them to release that.

[Septimus_Prime]

Just a heads up: Justice League, season 1 and Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles, season 1 are both out today on BD and (ugh) DVD.

[Septimus_Prime]

DVD will fail? Sounds a lot like Blu-ray

DVD will fail? Sounds a lot like Blu-ray
Posted by Matthew Moskovciak

It’s hard to imagine now, but when DVD first launched, its success was far from guaranteed. Back in 1996, there were even anti-DVD fanboys, and recently we ran into a rant–sarcastically retitled as “Why DVD would fail”–that struck us as eerily familiar to the current arguments against Blu-ray. Considering that DVD was such a huge success, it’s worth looking at exactly how similar the two formats are at this early stage, and what that means for the future of Blu-ray.

1. Consumers aren’t willing to rebuy movies

They will be the same tired movies that everyone already owns and will be loathe to buy again. […] Because the titles available will be ones that people already own, they will naturally sell less than a new release that is still hot from the theaters. This will result in even a bigger cost for companies because the less they sell, the more each feature costs to implement on each title.

Right. Just like nobody repurchased their albums on CD or VHS tapes on DVD. This one seems to get dragged out for every new format and is quickly ignored once it takes off. We’re not saying that people will rush to replace their DVDs with Blu-ray discs, but it seems obvious consumers eventually give in and repurchase media if the new format is worthwhile. The only difference we’d note is that well-kept DVDs don’t deteriorate after use like VHS tapes did, so perhaps consumers will be somewhat less likely to replace their DVDs that still look as good as the day they bought them.

Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.

2. Not enough movies

All the companies involved with DVD are promising a catalog of 250 titles at the launch with maybe 50 to 100 actually available in the stores in the beginning. […] And even if they do manage to finish 250 movies in time for the launch, what will those movies be? Top Gun? Rocky?

When any type of new format launches, early adopters are stuck with a pretty limited initial selection. It happened with DVD, and it happened with Blu-ray, which still only has about 650 titles available two years after its release. And we’re seeing it all over again with criticism of the selection on online movie services, such as iTunes, Vudu, and the Netflix Player. This argument seems pretty shortsighted overall–if a new format offers a new compelling experience, the content will follow.

Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.

3. Can’t record

Consumers will look at DVD and see that it doesn’t record. That will instantly arouse suspicions in their mind that if the movies they want to watch are not available on the DVD discs, then the machine will be useless to them and a waste of money.

DVD recorders are old technology now, but when DVD first came out one of the knocks against it was that it didn’t record like VHS–which was a killer feature before DVRs became ubiquitous. Blu-ray recorders are available now in Japan, but we haven’t seen any signs of them coming to the U.S. in the near future. But the real issue is that Blu-ray recording just doesn’t matter as much with high-def DVRs and so many TV series being released on high-quality DVD and Blu-ray sets.

Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray, but less people care.

4. Nobody cares about special features

Another question is, how many consumers actually want and use all the special features that DVD might offer? CD players offer all kinds of special programming and playback options, yet most people never touch these features. A cheap VCR is seen as too intimidating to most Americans. They just want to watch the movie, not select different versions, languages, and such. The LD market has proven that these extra features are desired, but only by a small segment of the population.

This point has been made about Blu-ray right here on CNET, in Executive Editor David Carnoy’s Fully Equipped column. While I tend to agree that special features aren’t a big draw for DVD or Blu-ray, it tends to be the icing on the cake, rather than the main draw of the format. DVD didn’t succeed because of special features–and neither will Blu-ray–but they’re a nice extra.

Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.

5. Picture quality isn’t that much better

And now we get into the most controversial aspect of the entire DVD debate. Picture quality, or the lack there of. When DVD was first announced, it was claimed to offer D1 Master Tape quality. A short while later, the companies said it was much better than VHS but worse than LD. Now they have swung the other way again and are claiming D1 quality again. Quite simply, this will be impossible on commercially prepared, feature-length films.

It seems insane to argue that DVD isn’t a huge leap over VHS in terms of image quality, but it’s less crazy than you think. It takes content makers a while to fully understand how to use new technology, which is why many first-run CDs and DVDs are surprisingly mediocre. The same thing happened with Blu-ray–anyone who saw the first version of The Fifth Element on Blu-ray can attest to that. But now that we’ve seen a steady flow of exceptional looking Blu-ray discs, it’s going to be harder to find people who aren’t impressed by the image quality of Blu-ray on a big-screen HDTV.

Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.

6. The industry is just greedy

DVD is just a bad idea. It is being forced upon a uncaring and unwanted public and is an inferior product that simply isn’t needed or desired. DVD exists only for one reason. Greed. Motion picture studios are always looking for a way to sell the same stuff over and over again and they think DVD is the answer.

More cynical observers might characterize Blu-ray as just the industry’s latest attempt to make money on the same movies yet again. But the industry didn’t introduce DVD out of the kindness of its heart–it did it to make money–and few people look back on successful formats like DVD and CD as a devious scheme by motion picture studios.

Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.

So, since the same arguments that didn’t matter with DVD are now being used against Blu-ray, does that mean Blu-ray is destined to be as successful as DVD? Not quite. The simple fact is that Blu-ray’s main draw is that it offers significantly better image quality than DVD, and whether consumers think that’s a worthwhile upgrade will make or break the format. All the other arguments essentially don’t matter, just like they didn’t with DVD.

What do you think? Are Blu-ray critics lobbing the same weak arguments as DVD critics did back in 1996? Or are the same arguments against Blu-ray more convincing in the current marketplace. Sound off in the comments.

So, for people who are still doubting the value of BD, you can take comfort in knowing that the same inane arguments from the haters have been made countless times, toward DVD and every other type of new media.

[System_1]

When HD-DVD makes its glorious comeback, you’ll be sorry.

[Septimus_Prime]

You know, the funny thing about that is that the HD DVD “supporters” don’t even care about that format now. Now they’re toting the flag of digital downloads, with lossy compression and absolutely no special features (I guess all that shit that totally mattered to them when HD DVD was still around?like Internet connectivity and PiP, which BD now has?now magically doesn’t). The dumber ones are harping about SUC and XDE technology, where you can put in a regular DVD, wait several hours, and then have your player “super upscale” it to look almost as good as a BD.

On the other hand, it’s not like they really supported HD DVD in the first place. You’d think that, if they really thought the format was so good, they’d have at least bought some players and media.

[BeaTs]

so I don’t need HDMI cables to play blurays, on my PS3 to my 1080p, perfectly? Component works just as well?

[Septimus_Prime]

You should use HDMI. Component can carry 1080p but not digital audio codecs.

[System_1]

so I don’t need HDMI cables to play blurays, on my PS3 to my 1080p, perfectly? Component works just as well?

No. They don’t carry sound and contrary to popular belief, component is not digital.

[BeaTs]

Ah, ok thanks.

damn them cables are expensive though…any recommended ones or are they all the same? like this? React - HDMI for PS3

[System_1]

Ah, ok thanks.

damn them cables are expensive though…any recommended ones or are they all the same? like this? React - HDMI for PS3

NO! Don’t buy those. hit up amazon or soemthing. let me find a link. I got all mine for under 10 bucks.

Edit: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=HDMI
You don’t need any of that fancy gold plated or “SUPER DUPER EXTRA COOL LOSSLESS” shit. It’s a digital signal with a relatively short distance. Loss really isn’t an issue.

[BeaTs]

they’re good but just overpriced? or they suck?

I’ve seen some cheap ones on craigslist, but if you know some good ones from amazon I’ll wait for those links :tup:

[Septimus_Prime]

Ah, ok thanks.

damn them cables are expensive though…any recommended ones or are they all the same? like this? React - HDMI for PS3

Read the second post of the PS3 thread. I link to some $8 and $2 cables there, and those cables are just as good as any of the expensive ones.

Check your PMs.

[System_1]

All HDMI cables in store are overpriced. I wouldn’t pay more than 20 bucks max. 10 if you can.

Edit: yeah, check seps post. i think that’s where I got mine from. I also caught a Toysr us sale when they were like 5 dollars on line.

[BeaTs]

cool, thanks, will do. cheap price translates to cheap quality in my mind, but I guess not in this case.

[System_1]

Amazon Blu-ray Sale
http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fgp%2Ffeature.html%3FdocId%3D1000265211&tag=inevitboredo-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325

btw, this one’s a fucking good one. A bunch of titles never seen in sales yet, and most of them are $20 & under.

No Country for 19.95, Mad Men Season One for 29.95, Rambo for 21.95, Weeds Season 3 for 22.95, 3:10 to Yuma for 18.95, & many more.

[System_1]

cool, thanks, will do. cheap price translates to cheap quality in my mind, but I guess not in this case.

That’s what a lot of people think. In the case of analog it tends to be a real factor, because of the nature of analog signals. Thats another reason you should go with HDMI instead of component. If your source is too far away, you’ll definitely see the loss in the analog component cables.

Edit: Thanks Epp1e. i’m on it. I was just thinking I hadn’t used prime enough lately lol.

[Septimus_Prime]

I’ve been using Prime so much. Sometimes it’s actually slower than regular shipping, though, since regular uses like USPS or something while Prime uses UPS.

[bokchoy]

The funny thing is, HDMI technology offers nothing that we didn’t already have with component and toslink, in terms of vidoe/audio capabilities and bandwidth. HDMI is completely unnecessary. Digital 1080p signals can potentially be sent through component cables, and lossless audio can potentially be sent through toslink (optical) cables. However, the only reason why production companies are pushing for HDMI is because of its anti-piracy features.

Not like any of this matters, though since Blu-ray is designed to require HDMI to take full advantage. Food for thought.

About “brand name” HDMI cables compared to “warehouse $5 cables”, there is zero difference in quality. If you’re running your HDMI cable longer than 15ft, you might want to use a thicker cable, which is still a fraction of the price of the brand name variety. The only advantage that Monster HDMI cables have over generic cables is that it is more resistant to corrosion: which can be remedied by simply unplugging and replugging your cables every one or two months. If you’re too lazy to do that, just buy 4 cables instead of 1 and replace them when they actually start to corrode (several years), and you’d still probably be saving tons of money.

[System_1]

While you can send the signal, as I mentioned before, component is still analog and much more vulnerable to loss.