Blu-ray is Sony's way of keeping us buying disks forever ?

[Ksyder]

Lately I've actually been buying alot of dvd's since theres a store that sells them cheap nearby. Its amazing how variable the video quality is on them depending on when the video was made.

I will say, I've taken the opportunity to start collecting some of my favorite shows via dvd, its a nice break from worrying about how to manage an ever expanding set of hard drives. I've had alot of friends do this and i've done it myself and the downside is you have to worry about hard drive failure. I know everyone is into streaming but I'm not really a fan of subscription based services so I don't currently use them.

I haven't made the switch to blu ray, I actually use windows media center with a couple of tuner cards & clearstream antenna and its nice to play dvd's directly from there.

 

[SaurusX]

This past Halloween the wife and I watched An American Werewolf in London via Amazon Prime. It was quite possibly the most horrendous transfer I had ever seen. They had to have used a 25 year old VHS tape as their video master. And yes, we were streaming the highest quality version they were offering. Half the movie was so dark I couldn't see what was happening and the rest was muddy as all hell. If that's the streaming utopia that everyone is looking forward to then count me out.

 

[darkewaffle]

I don't have a lot of Blu-rays but I don't think I've ever had a problem playing one. Though when I upgraded my HTPC from W7 to W8 I decided to look for something other than Cyberlink to play them (because Cyberlink is so crummy) and finding a free, working solution was a little convoluted but did get it working.

 

[spacejamz]

Lately I've actually been buying alot of dvd's since theres a store that sells them cheap nearby. Its amazing how variable the video quality is on them depending on when the video was made.

It is not a matter of when they were made but how they were mastered (source content)...

The are many blu rays that look like DVD quality because the masters used to create them were crappy. Blu-ray.com rates movies on their video quality so you can get an idea of which movies look better than others.

 

[Ksyder]

I don't have a lot of Blu-rays but I don't think I've ever had a problem playing one. Though when I upgraded my HTPC from W7 to W8 I decided to look for something other than Cyberlink to play them (because Cyberlink is so crummy) and finding a free, working solution was a little convoluted but did get it working.

did you use VLC?

 

[darkewaffle]

Nah, Daum PotPlayer.

 

[Insomniator]

I'll Redbox the occasional blu-ray that is worth watching, but that is rare... just look at the movies that are out. Here comes the boom? Another super hero movie? No thanks. As long as netflix is in 'HD' even if its streamed, its still sharp enough for me. House of cards in any kind of HD is better than Transformers 6 in 4k.

I never understood people who buy media, who can watch things over and over?

The fact that some blu rays players won't update and therefore cannot play new movies is total BS however. That shouldnt be a thing the consumer needs to worry about... if you buy a blu-ray player you should be able to play all BLU-RAYS.

 

[SaurusX]

I never understood people who buy media, who can watch things over and over?

I bought Dredd on blu-ray in the hopes that they'd make a sequel.

 

[Ksyder]

I never understood people who buy media, who can watch things over and over?

Well definitely in my experience redbox has a limited selection and then you have to go to the hassle of returning it.

The image in my mind is someone going to best buy and spending $100 or something on blu-rays regularly. Personally I wouldn't do that. But $20 on 5 dvd's is doable for most people.

 

[dainthomas]

The updates are due to Blu-ray's retarded copy protection. They change the keys for new discs.

And then DVDFab issues an update within a week. Lifetime subscription was the best $99 I ever spent.

 

[JackBurton]

basically this, however even with a stupid expennsive Kaleidescape system, you still need to own the BR disk in order to stream it. IIRC

No, you're right. You do have to own the BD, which is why I said it is the best of both worlds. Absolutely one for one bit perfect BD quality, with the convenience of streaming. What I hate about the system is that you not only have to own the BD (which is the way it should be), you also actually have to have the disc physically inserted into the BD carousel to stream it. Extremely archaic, but they have to do that to abide by the license agreement. Freakin' annoying.

And although the system is "stupid expensive," it is the most awesome streaming experience you'll ever experience. Super slick interface with tons of features. I can't say it is worth the ridiculous price tag, but if I had a shit ton of money, I'd be seriously considering one. The thing is amazing.

 

[norseamd]

hdmi already supports 4k resolution (version 1.4 4k @ 30fps). The new hdmi 2.0 (not out yet?) supports 4k @ 60fps. HDMI will be around for awhile. Honestly a lot of consumers have wised up and realized there is hardly any 1080p content outside of blurays. Even streaming is highly compressed. People are even more amazed when they find out their "HD" cable is often times only 720p. Until theres mass content that is actually pushing the limits of hdmi there is no need for a new interface IMO. Theres things i dont like, such as the connections themselves, but HDMI is to popular now to switch.

the bigger problem i have is this. i just bought a new 42 inch sharp led tv. it is a best buy exclusive but the picture is not that bad. the problem is that it is a 120 hz display yet it seems not to be able to take a 120 hz input. there are no dvi anywhere only hdmi and a vga (or whatever it is called). have a hard time understanding why they put a vga input on a brand new tv in 2013. the 3 different hdmi inputs are called dvi mhl and arc. any idea what these are? i know the mhl is for mobile or something

 

[BarkingGhostar]

Boy this thread is so 2005.

I own many BD players, but three of them I paid just under $60 shipped to me that I was able to rollback the firmware and thence make them region free. I've played BD titles not available in the USA and region locked to Europe or Australia. I'm not complaining as I'd rather watch something that was there originally and that my eyes can resolve.

And compared to software updates for computers and cell phones, this is a non-topic.

 

[norseamd]

what i am saying is that displayport has much better support for more formats and framerates. hdmi can do 4k at 30hz. that is not sufficient for full 4k support. displayport can do 4 1080p displays at 60hz (or one display at 240 hz) a 3d 2560 by 1600 at 120 hz or a 4k at 60 hz. display port is much better and i am mad that very few companies support it. the weakest link is not the displays or the computer but the connection.

 

[spacejamz]

the 3 different hdmi inputs are called dvi mhl and arc. any idea what these are? i know the mhl is for mobile or something

ARC - audio return channel

 

[Capt Caveman]

I'll Redbox the occasional blu-ray that is worth watching, but that is rare... just look at the movies that are out. Here comes the boom? Another super hero movie? No thanks. As long as netflix is in 'HD' even if its streamed, its still sharp enough for me. House of cards in any kind of HD is better than Transformers 6 in 4k.

I never understood people who buy media, who can watch things over and over?

The fact that some blu rays players won't update and therefore cannot play new movies is total BS however. That shouldnt be a thing the consumer needs to worry about... if you buy a blu-ray player you should be able to play all BLU-RAYS.

Children like to watch the same movies over and over.

 

[destrekor]

I stopped buying Blurays when I realized that I don't watch them more than once after I buy them and I got rid of my PS3.

I'm mostly renting stuff on iTunes, watching it once or twice, and moving on. It'd be great if iTunes had similar purchase prices to retailer stores (e.g. Amazon). I haven't seen a movie on sale for less than $20 in HD form. And we're talking old movies, so I can usually find the Bluray for <$15 on Amazon. Having the media readily available on a hard drive or for streaming is so much nicer than having to grab the disc -- yes, I'm that lazy.

If it's a movie I have a damn good feeling I won't watch more than once, or at least it will be forever and ever before I watch again, I'll rent.

Hopefully, the movie is available from Redbox on Blu-ray if it's still a movie I really care to see with detail.

Generally, I have a very good hunch about movies and whether I'll want to watch multiple times. Those movies I can even get myself to buy around full-price ($20-30) - often, I have no plan to buy a Blu-ray, but I see one at a store for $15, $10, or even $5, and I just pick it up. Not every movie, but ones I liked before or especially ones I want to see but never got around to seeing for whatever reason.

The movies I can't get on Redbox and/or don't care about detail, Netflix or Prime Instant Video save the day most times. I'm thinking I'll hit up Vudu (HDX) for more movies that I want to see, likely only want to see once, but still want good detail and can't get from Redbox.


If one doesn't have a good TV and surround sound system, there isn't much point to Blu-ray other than building a modern disc library. Streaming is good enough if you lack the equipment to appreciate the full uncompressed audio and amazing picture quality of Blu-ray, but streaming will not even remotely come close to matching both for a very long time. We're still streaming sub-300kbps Dolby Digital Plus tracks, for crying out loud. That should be punishable by death, when they otherwise decide that they can push out 10Mbps+ video streams with a good compression algorithm. That is one of the chief reasons why Blu-ray is worlds better, like MLB compared to Single A ball (or even Div 3 Collegiate ), if you can appreciate the difference.

 

[destrekor]

It is not a matter of when they were made but how they were mastered (source content)...

The are many blu rays that look like DVD quality because the masters used to create them were crappy. Blu-ray.com rates movies on their video quality so you can get an idea of which movies look better than others.

That's often part of what helps me decide which movie is worth buying on disc, and which one is worth renting or something.

I will only buy a new movie around the MSRP if it's A) a movie I have a hunch I will watch at least twice, and B) has top-notch audio and video. If it gets a Yes for A) and a no for B), I will probably wait until it's cheaper. If it's the reverse, I'll probably try and ensure I at least rent it from Redbox on BR as opposed to streaming.

 

[KeithTalent]

Yes. If I'm going to buy a film I want the best quality possible. Steaming doesn't compare.

This. I watched 12 episodes of Game of Thrones on Blu yesterday and just to test I fired up the HBO on demand and the quality was not even close to the Blu-ray quality I was watching (both PQ and AQ).

KT

 

[Xonim]

I see the appeal of streaming -- it's easy, accessible, etc -- but in no way does the quality compare to a good bluray.

I have probably 60 blurays, and I wouldn't care if 5-7 of those were DVD or streaming (comedies, dramas, etc). The rest are movies where I WANT the 1080p video and the DTS-MA or TrueHD audio. Streaming something like Band of Brothers is not going to get you anywhere near the same experience as the bluray will. The train derailment on Super 8? It has to be the disc. The LFE in Pacific Rim? Only bluray. You ever see the color in an animated film from a bluray vs a stream? There's no comparison.

If you're running the $500 65" walmart special TV with a $99 HTIB system, of course you're not going to care. For the rest of us with Panasonic plasmas and audio setups that cost just as much or more than our TVs, it makes a difference. For the minor inconvenience of an automatic update (since my bluray player is connected via ethernet anyway), I'll take the quality any day.

 

[Ichinisan]

the bigger problem i have is this. i just bought a new 42 inch sharp led tv. it is a best buy exclusive but the picture is not that bad. the problem is that it is a 120 hz display yet it seems not to be able to take a 120 hz input. there are no dvi anywhere only hdmi and a vga (or whatever it is called). have a hard time understanding why they put a vga input on a brand new tv in 2013. the 3 different hdmi inputs are called dvi mhl and arc. any idea what these are? i know the mhl is for mobile or something

Other than PC games, I don't think there's a such thing as 120hz content. Theatrical movies are 24hz. TV shows can be 60hz (though many are shot in 24hz and broadcast with 3:2 pull down to be 60hz). 120hz is a multiple of both 60 and 24 so 3:2 pull-down is not necessary and motion looks smoother (no "judder"). 120hz can also display 2x 60hz images to 3D shutter glasses.

 

[Ichinisan]

the 3 different hdmi inputs are called dvi mhl and arc. any idea what these are? i know the mhl is for mobile or something

Someone already mentioned ARC and you're right about MHL.

DVI ports carry the same signal as HDMI, just without audio. You can use a passive adapter to connect a DVI source to an HDMI display or vice-versa.

The "DVI" HDMI port sits next to analog audio inputs so you can run audio separately (when it's not present in the HDMI signal).

I have one of these on my TV (a very old Sony KDL-52XBR2).

 

[KeithP]

So years ago, I got a Blu-ray player, and today I could not watch a new disk. Had to upgrade firmware first, and could only do it over the internet.

It has been my experience that the vast majority of players that will update over the internet will also update by disc or thumbdrive (of course you need the internet to get that update). I use a PS3 for BD movies and I don't recall ever being in a situation where the BD disc required an update to play. Not saying that it never happens on a PS3, just hasn't happened to me.

I would be curious as to the brand/model of your player. I think cheaper players have more problems and require more updates than better players from more established brands. In any event, given the inferior quality of streaming I am okay with having to get a firmware update once in a while if it means I get a much better viewing experience.

-KeithP

 

[poofyhairguy]

The movie companies most of the time don't bother to remaster old movies

You must be joking. Many many old movies have been redone for Blu Ray and they look great. 35mm film actually has more data than a 1080p Blu Ray can show. Heck I have a pile of silent film Blu Rays and they look great too.

You can't call yourself a Sci Fi fan until you have seen the Metropolis Blu Ray with the fully restored story. Or a Bugs Bunny fan until you have seen "What's Opera Doc?" in 1080p.

Blu Rays are the first and probably the last format we can buy where we get a quality that is close to the film without being locked to the server of whatever iTunes/Amazon service like when you "buy" a streaming movie.

Long live King Blu!

 

[spacejamz]

And just exactly how is this Sony's way? They don't "own" blu ray technology...