How long will Blu-ray be around for?

Sad Professor

Right now the answers to this question to seem to cover a fairly broad spectrum. On one hand there are people who feel that Blu-ray has a life-span of no more than 5-7 years before it gets supplanted by the next bigger, better format. On the other hand, there are people who feel that Blu-ray could follow in the footsteps of music CDs and VHS and be around considerably longer, like 20 years+. And then there's the digital proponents who feel that Blu-ray is the last physical format and will very quickly be replaced by digital downloads.

Of course, it is important to differentiate between buying to own and renting. Unlike music, people have always rented movies and digital downloads is certainly the future in that regard. But what about owning? Surely it's going to take a lot for current Blu-ray purchasers to switch to getting their films digitally. So while it's easy to say that digital downloading is the future, it seems to me that there are a lot of problems with it that will prevent it becoming the dominant way to own a film any time soon.

What does everyone think? Is Blu-ray here to stay (for a while)?

I imagine it will be around for at least another decade if not more. People are constantly stating that digital downloads are the future of the industry but I really don't see that happening for a long time. With Blu Ray, you can walk into a store pick up a film and you have it for as long as you want, you can lend it to people, sell it on, etc. There's no wait while yous pend hours downloading it, as fast as internet is these days I don't think I fancy downing a 30 or 40 gig file and while there are numerous compressions available to shrink the file size if I'm buying a film I want the best possible quality. Factor in the whole, if you hard drive fails you have to redownload the file again and the inconvenience of it all.

Voodu Child

The change from VHS to DVD and then Bluray has proved that some people are willing to buy the same movies all over again. Movie companies love that, what is better - to spend $100 million shooting a new movie, or to just root through your archives and re-release something that has already been made?

So if the movie companies can convince you to buy a LOTR box set all over again then they will try, probably in about 15 years. No doubt they will only offer the Theatrical Editions first too :pac:

There can certainly be something 'better' than Bluray. They can't really do much with audio, but the video can improve. In the same way as DVDs looked great on your 28" CRT but crap on your 50" flatascreen, maybe in 15 years time, Blurays will look crap on your 150" OLED panel that came in a roll and went on your wall like wallpaper. :pac:

4k televisions are already being shown off at consumer shows, and actually most old movies are now being scanned at 4k for their Bluray transfers. They are downscaled to 2k for the Bluray but they keep the 4k scan in their archives and im sure they would like to make use of it eventually. Same for digitally-shot movies, 4k or higher is slowly becoming the norm.

They could also offer things like greater colour depth, uncompressed video streams etc.

jaykhunter

Digital Downloads/streaming will take off but especially in a country like Ireland where high-speed broadband isn't ubiquitous and we have download caps etc it'll take a long time. Since DVDs are still fighting it out and is adequate for the masses I imagine Blu-Ray won't be gone for another 15 years. We haven't yet seen it take hold and be the standard before it gets replaced.

I don't know if the general public really want anything bigger than 50" but it'll be more a videophile kind of thing. Like CDs have reached the quality that it's at stagnation point, and saw a dip in quality with mp3s. I imagine most people wouldn't care to have something in better quality than Blu-Ray, sure DVD is good enough.... But when streaming gets big I think that'll be the last step. Physical mediums will still be available but just not as popular, like CDs.

So ya, 15 years

indough

Yeah advances in cloud computing and a decent broadband infrastructure will spell the end of optical media eventually, id give it 15 to 20 years although it only takes a breakthrough or two in technology to push things forward pretty fast.

Sad Professor

With 4k home video I think you'd be getting into diminishing returns. How a big a screen would you need to see the difference? The studios are struggling to make films that only came out 10 years ago look good at 2k/1080p. I mean, LOTR had its DI done at 2k. Unless they go back and re-edit, re-grade and possible even re-do the effects from scratch, that's as good as those films will ever look. Also, the studios still want to give people some reason to go see a film in the cinema. So, no, I think in terms of picture quality, 1080p Blu-ray is going to be good enough for most people for a very long time to come.

The issue is really how this content will be delivered. For people who want to own a film, digital downloading is a bad deal and I can't see that changing anytime soon.

amacachi

Sad Professor wrote: »

With 4k home video I think you'd be getting into diminishing returns. How a big a screen would you need to see the difference? The studios are struggling to make films that only came out 10 years ago look good at 2k/1080p. I mean, LOTR had its DI done at 2k. Unless they go back and re-edit, re-grade and possible even re-do the effects from scratch, that's as good as those films will ever look. Also, the studios still want to give people some reason to go see a film in the cinema. So, no, I think in terms of picture quality, 1080p Blu-ray is going to be good enough for most people for a very long time to come.

The issue is really how this content will be delivered. For people who want to own a film, digital downloading is a bad deal and I can't see that changing anytime soon.

Agreed on most of that. It's a bit like what I see being a looming issue for video games, i.e., where next? The next gen will look pretty damn similar to what we have now unless you drop thousands on a 4k screen that's going to make everything else look like crap. The infrastructure for HD broadcasts is also just getting settled in now and I haven't noticed any forward-planning for higher res stuff.
I think BDs are going to be the last mainstream stand for physical media for films. How long it lasts depends on how quickly the world rolls out fibres. Remember plenty of places struggle to stream HD as it is, with 4+ times the bitrate it's a while away before 4k will be a push of a remote button away.

richymcdermott

I hope i dont get to see digital movies, cds or games for that matter anytime soon , i one of those who like to own a copy so i can display it on my shelf in my sitting room and bedroom . But the whole thing with blu ray it was a rocky start almost a complete fail when i looked at the numbers and it didnt have legs till 2008, since then its out selling dvds , i do love blu rays more when ya have more content better visuals and better audio than dvds, i love when ya get a dvd version and blu ray version in one like they did for avatar and black swan under 20 euros. I think blu ray will be around for another 10 years at least.

richymcdermott

richymcdermott wrote: »

I hope i dont get to see digital movies, cds or games for that matter anytime soon , i one of those who like to own a copy so i can display it on my shelf in my sitting room and bedroom . But the whole thing with blu ray it was a rocky start almost a complete fail when i looked at the numbers and it didnt have legs till 2008, since then its out selling dvds , i do love blu rays more when ya have more content better visuals and better audio than dvds, i love when ya get a dvd version and blu ray version in one like they did for avatar and black swan under 20 euros. I think blu ray will be around for another 10 years at least.

Digital gaming has been around for years and is great innovation. Steam is a fantastic little idea even if the pricing can be ridiculous at times.

richymcdermott

Deleted User wrote: »

Digital gaming has been around for years and is great innovation. Steam is a fantastic little idea even if the pricing can be ridiculous at times.

Oh yeah of course , just saying i prefer to have a copy in my hand;)

the_syco

Sad Professor wrote: »

So, no, I think in terms of picture quality, 1080p Blu-ray is going to be good enough for most people for a very long time to come.

IMO, there's real, there's very real, annnd then there's no difference, but the specs say it looks so ultra real you just can't tell the difference between very real and ultra real, apart from the price tag.

Voodu Child

Sad Professor wrote: »

With 4k home video I think you'd be getting into diminishing returns. How a big a screen would you need to see the difference?

100" and over. Which will be a pretty normal display size in 15 years. If that sounds far fetched, go back in time to the mid 90s and ask someone what they think of a 50" TV that hangs on the wall like a picture.

The studios are struggling to make films that only came out 10 years ago look good at 2k/1080p. I mean, LOTR had its DI done at 2k. Unless they go back and re-edit, re-grade and possible even re-do the effects from scratch, that's as good as those films will ever look.

I don't agree, LOTR is an exception because it was an early example of a movie with a digital intermediate. Most older movies are capable of giving up considerably more detail than 1080p, and of course most newer movies.

Also, the studios still want to give people some reason to go see a film in the cinema. So, no, I think in terms of picture quality, 1080p Blu-ray is going to be good enough for most people for a very long time to come.

3D is their current gimmick to get people to go to the Cinema, but it hasnt stopped them allowing 3D in the home. Not to mention that some people already get a better experience in the home anyway, some of the Cinemas here have dire equipment.

Agreed on most of that. It's a bit like what I see being a looming issue for video games, i.e., where next? The next gen will look pretty damn similar to what we have now unless you drop thousands on a 4k screen that's going to make everything else look like crap. The infrastructure for HD broadcasts is also just getting settled in now and I haven't noticed any forward-planning for higher res stuff.
I think BDs are going to be the last mainstream stand for physical media for films. How long it lasts depends on how quickly the world rolls out fibres. Remember plenty of places struggle to stream HD as it is, with 4+ times the bitrate it's a while away before 4k will be a push of a remote button away.

Actually the trials and forward planning are well underway. There's been 4k and 8k broadcast trials and the EBU have discussed. It is definitely going to happen, it's more a case of when rather than if. A timeline of 15 years doesnt sound too far fetched imo.

Regards the infrastructure, H.265 is only a few years away, it should double the efficiency of H264. And give it another ten years and something will replace H265. All of a sudden broadcasting or streaming in 4k/8k is not such a big deal.

Sticky_Fingers

Deleted User wrote: »

Digital gaming has been around for years and is great innovation. Steam is a fantastic little idea even if the pricing can be ridiculous at times.

Agreed but it would truly be tragic (but inevitable IMO) if digital media had some ridiculous DRM attached to it to combat piracy as is the case with many video games today.

I personally like owning physical copies of things but then again I also like to rip stuff to harddrives to allow me to carry stuff of it around with me when traveling.

Sad Professor

The 4k scans the studios are doing of older films is more for the purpose for preservation and future digital screenings. I've no doubt that there will be a higher resolution successor to 1080p Blu-ray, I just think it will be a niche format. I mean, people went from listening to CDs to MP3s. Even CDs now days sound much worse than they did 20 years ago with all the dynamic range compressed. And most people don't notice. Quality clearly isn't everything for people.

johnny_ultimate

I think Ireland's a bit behind the times. We don't have effective legal downloads yet. The States has HD Netflix on every device you care to name. Our alternatives - say Xbox Live or iTunes - are overpriced and limited. We need high quality subscription streaming - anyone who has used Mubi on their PS3 (interesting films, poor quality) knows we ain't there yet.

Until then physical formats will remain relatively popular, alongside illegal downloads of course. I also feels game consoles of the future will be our core viewing devices - indeed, they pretty much already are. Technically, digital film distribution will be the most effective way to get pretty much every film ever made quickly and cheaply. With poor Internet and a lack of service providers (rights issues are really holding advancement back) Ireland is definitely behind in the game though.

Imagine though - theoretically a film will never be out of print again. Quality is a vital concern, but universal availability is the one thing BluRay lacks thus far and it will be the true glory of a digital golden age.

Mellor

Voodu Child wrote: »

100" and over. Which will be a pretty normal display size in 15 years. If that sounds far fetched, go back in time to the mid 90s and ask someone what they think of a 50" TV that hangs on the wall like a picture.

I can't bee 100" being common place. It's just too big to view comfortably in most living rooms. As the width increases so too does the comfortable distance.
We are approaching the peak tv size for current room sizes (room sizes aren't going to drastically increase)

Sad Professor

Actually on the subject of game consoles, the next-gen is only a few years away at most. Is it not inevitable that MS will have to go with Blu-ray for their next Xbox? They can't keep using DVD9, can they?

johnny_ultimate

Sad Professor wrote: »

Actually on the subject of game consoles, the next-gen is only a few years away at most. Is it not inevitable that MS will have to go with Blu-ray for their next Xbox? They can't keep using DVD9, can they?

I wouldn't put it past MS to make some sort of proprietary medium :pac: But yeah, probably BluRay. More so than this gen, though, we'll be looking at an increased reliance on digital downloads. The PSPGo was a massive failure, but TBH it was simply ahead of its time. Two major impracticalities remain - HDD size (I'd be surprised if we don't push past HDDs in the terabytes for the next console gen - current sizes are fine for independent and arcade games, but not bigger games) and price (retail still has a major role and hence online downloads have to match the 'suggested' RRP to placate angry retailers - a 'big' release like Black Ops or Infamous 2 will set you back 59.99 or even 69.99 online whereas you can get the physical product for like half that).

And as for size, look at Japan - Kinect has already proven an ill fit in typically economically sized Japanese rooms given the space required. There ain't going to be many people with the room for 100" screens.

faceman

AFAIK the next physical format to replace Blu Ray is called Ultraviolet. Whether it does or not will remain to be seen.

Frank Black

Sad Professor wrote: »

Actually on the subject of game consoles, the next-gen is only a few years away at most. Is it not inevitable that MS will have to go with Blu-ray for their next Xbox? They can't keep using DVD9, can they?

There’s been some speculation that the PS4 (whenever it’s released) will not have an optical blu ray drive – just a big hard drive for storing downloaded content. Apparently it would make a big difference to the pricing of the unit.
All speculation, I know – but something like this would have a pretty negative effect on blu-ray.

Sad Professor

So how would we get the games onto it?

Voodu Child

Mellor wrote: »

I can't bee 100" being common place. It's just too big to view comfortably in most living rooms. As the width increases so too does the comfortable distance.
We are approaching the peak tv size for current room sizes (room sizes aren't going to drastically increase)

You are thinking of it from the perspective of a 2011 TV. A big box with a thick black bezel that dominates the room. Yeah, for sure a 100" version of that is too big for most people.

But the TV of the future will be nothing like that. Every surface could potentially be a display. If the image is too big to be 'comfortable' you will just scale it down. And it won't just be used for watching television.

This might all sound like crazy Minority Report science fiction stuff, but go back to the 80s or 90s with your thin-bezel 50" Plasma and iPad and all your other gizmos and see what they make of them.

All that stuff is being worked on currently, transparent displays, flexible displays, modular displays, laser projectors....we spend so much time consuming information and communicating electronically that all kinds of 'display' technology will develop hugely in the coming decades.

Maybe 15 years is a bit optomistic for a wall TV but it's a very unimaginitive person who things thinks we have reached the 'peak' of anything and everything will stay exactly as it is from now on.

jaykhunter

Sad Professor wrote: »

Actually on the subject of game consoles, the next-gen is only a few years away at most. Is it not inevitable that MS will have to go with Blu-ray for their next Xbox? They can't keep using DVD9, can they?

MS and Ninty will never pay Sony for a blu-ray drive; especially since on-demand streaming is getting a foothold and will only get bigger. They'll both just focus on the latter.

I imagine MS will just use some kind of HD-DVD. The 12cm dual-layer disc can hold 30GB (and double-sided it can hold 60GB). Maybe the Wii2 will use something similar, who knows.

I'd assume Blu-ray drives will be fairly cheap in 5 years so sony's PS4 will include it, they still wanna sell Blu-Ray films; plus it holds 50GB and i assume they won't max that out game-wise on a regular basis until way down the line.

I suppose if 3D took off and they needed double the processing power (or double the space?) to render HD images it'd hasten a new console but honestly I can't see 3D making a big splash as long as it's just an "optical illusion" if u get my meaning; like i think Holograms definitely, where things are in a physical 3D space; not just making your brain do extra work...especially in Japan. I believe asians have a predisposition to be more prone to motion sickness (read it when I saw the new 2D Mario outsold Mario Galaxy 3:1)...

Frank Black

Sad Professor wrote: »

So how would we get the games onto it?

Download them I guess.

Or do you mean the PS3 games you already own? In which case - no idea.

johnny_ultimate

Sad Professor wrote: »

So how would we get the games onto it?

I'd imagine the next gen of consoles will be in line with advances in internet tech, so the barrier between download speeds and game size won't be so big. We also have to realistically look at how much better and bigger games will get next gen - I for one would be extremely surprised if the jump is going to be anywhere near as big as the one from SD to HD last gen, probably more inline with the PS1>PS2 era jump (which was big, but not massive). If I was a betting person, my bets would be on consoles designed with different playstyles and interconnectivity in mind - soon, incremental graphics updates won't be a major selling point IMO. I'm open to being proven incorrect!

Also, we can look to Nintendo who are the first to have announced a next-gen machine with WiiU. Proprietary format has won out over BluRay in that case anyway.

Mellor

Voodu Child wrote: »

You are thinking of it from the perspective of a 2011 TV. A big box with a thick black bezel that dominates the room. Yeah, for sure a 100" version of that is too big for most people.

The bezel isn't that thick. The viewing surface of a 100" is fours times the size of a 50". Too big for home use, bezel or no bezel.

But the TV of the future will be nothing like that. Every surface could potentially be a display. If the image is too big to be 'comfortable' you will just scale it down. And it won't just be used for watching television.

That complete undermines you original point. Why would you insist of ultra HD videos if you are going to scale them down to a size where that can't be displayed?

I have no doubt that minority report type stuff will imerge. My point was purely in response to the fact that'll we'll be using 100" as standard . We won't

Maybe 15 years is a bit optomistic for a wall TV but it's a very unimaginitive person who things thinks we have reached the 'peak' of anything and everything will stay exactly as it is from now on.

lol nobody said that. We simply refer to the size, not the technology.

When somebody starts backtracking and changing their argument, its usually a sign they know they are wrong.

Blazer

It's all down to resolution
Super Hi-Def was already being touted at E3 I think in 2010 but it's still a few years yet...they reckon 2016-2020.

Currently TVs are 1080p, super hi def is 4320p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_High_Definition_Television

eco2live

This is how I think it will work with the next advancement of digital wireless broadband.

In the future you will own the viewing rights to film and music by massive content sharing corporations (itunes ahem). You will be able to access your collection from anywhere. Nobody needs disks.

After a certain period of time after release they will all go into a pool of subscription content and royalties will be paid out of the subscription to the artists based on the amount of % of overall viewers. It will be really cheap and excellent quality. Otherwise piracy will continue to dominate.

It has to be a no brainer. About €5 a month for as many films as you want to watch and all the music you want. They will make more money in the end as loads of people who don't buy anything will sign up. Everyone with a mobile, tablet, computer terminal (cloud computing) or TV. All of our content will be online. Photos, videos, documents, bills, forms, voting.

Everything.

Voodu Child

Mellor wrote: »

The bezel isn't that thick. The viewing surface of a 100" is fours times the size of a 50". Too big for home use, bezel or no bezel.

If you have a 100" wall then potentially you have the space for a 100" TV. It feels like I am repeating myself, but again, you are assuming a future display would have the same form factor as a current one.

Mellor wrote:

That complete undermines you original point. Why would you insist of ultra HD videos if you are going to scale them down to a size where that can't be displayed?

Who said im going to scale them down? I would watch them as large as possible, personally I love the idea of an immersive cinema-type experience at home. I said one could scale it down if one wished.

Mellor wrote:

When somebody starts backtracking and changing their argument, its usually a sign they know they are wrong.

A comment like that says more about you than me. I am discussing the future of movies and Bluray because I enjoy it, not to be 'right' on the internet. If that is your mindset when coming into every discussion then I feel sorry for you.

ImpossibleDuck

I can't see Blu-Ray surviving unless the prices come down. When I'm browsing on Play.com, I come across a film I might buy and then I'm hit by the price and then I realise that it's Blu-Ray and the DVD version is 1/4 of the price.

mfw I realise it's Blu-Ray

Sad Professor

I think the prices have come down enormously. I mean, HMV have a been doing a 2 for €22 deal for ages now. And you can get them even cheaper from Amazon. It took a lot longer for DVDs to get down to that price.

Play isn't the best place to be buying Blu-rays anyway. They force you to buy in Euro which means an extra €2+ because of their dodgy conversion rate.

Sad Professor

Sad Professor wrote: »

I think the prices have come down enormously. I mean, HMV have a been doing a 2 for €22 deal for ages now. And you can get them even cheaper from Amazon. It took a lot longer for DVDs to get down to that price.

Play isn't the best place to be buying Blu-rays anyway. They force you to buy in Euro which means an extra €2+ because of their dodgy conversion rate.

They hav loads of Blu's for under a tenner, theres currently a sale on with loads of titles for 7 euro. Their instore price for The Thin Red Line was the cheapest anywhere, 5 and 6 euro less than elsewhere.

jaykhunter

Well blu-rays will come down in price as it becomes the standard. The standard is still DVD; much like DVDs had to get cheaper; when VHS was still the standard

Sad Professor

I only made the jump to Blu-ray about 6 months ago. But with the exception of box sets, I don't think I've paid more than €10-12 for any of the Blu-rays that I have. That to me is pretty cheap already. When I was buying DVDs I was regularly paying €20+. Of course, the studios are throwing out a lot of single disc Blu-rays to keep the price down. DVDs are basically dirt cheap now as they cost next to nothing to produce.

johnny_ultimate

TBH the only films I'm really fussed about getting on Blu-Ray are animation (anime was made for Blu), the occasional blockbuster (Star Trek or Inception) and older films with crappy DVD transfers. For curiosity buys I'd only tend to go with it if it's solidly priced. But since I tend to only pick up world films these days, the Blu-Ray market can be limited at best, and until there's a healthier selection of films available it'll probably be predominantly DVD for at least another year. Luckily, it seems to be changing - even smaller distribution companies like Manga and Third Window (the latter being my favourite film distributor of the moment) are putting out their new releases in HD

Mellor

Voodu Child wrote: »

If you have a 100" wall then potentially you have the space for a 100" TV. It feels like I am repeating myself, but again, you are assuming a future display would have the same form factor as a current one.

Who said im going to scale them down? I would watch them as large as possible, personally I love the idea of an immersive cinema-type experience at home. I said one could scale it down if one wished.

You are repeating yourself, but its still nothing got to do with my point.

It's not an issue of having 100" of free space, that bit isn't hard. Be bigger the TV the further away you have to sit otherwise you can't see all of the screen at once. That's obvious.

I think we'd all love it too if I could have a dedicated home cinema as you see on cribs. But 100" is over 8 foot, so you'll need to be about 20" away to view it properly. Normal rooms just aren't big enough. So your "ah stick it on the wall, it'd would be immense" idea wouldn't work. DUCY?

A comment like that says more about you than me. I am discussing the future of movies and Bluray because I enjoy it, not to be 'right' on the internet. If that is your mindset when coming into every discussion then I feel sorry for you

I was pointing out something I felt you overlooked. That's all. Pretty standard.

Zombrex

Voodu Child wrote: »

You are thinking of it from the perspective of a 2011 TV. A big box with a thick black bezel that dominates the room. Yeah, for sure a 100" version of that is too big for most people.

But the TV of the future will be nothing like that. Every surface could potentially be a display. If the image is too big to be 'comfortable' you will just scale it down. And it won't just be used for watching television.

This might all sound like crazy Minority Report science fiction stuff, but go back to the 80s or 90s with your thin-bezel 50" Plasma and iPad and all your other gizmos and see what they make of them.

All that stuff is being worked on currently, transparent displays, flexible displays, modular displays, laser projectors....we spend so much time consuming information and communicating electronically that all kinds of 'display' technology will develop hugely in the coming decades.

Maybe 15 years is a bit optomistic for a wall TV but it's a very unimaginitive person who things thinks we have reached the 'peak' of anything and everything will stay exactly as it is from now on.

We are decades away from something like wall paint that can act as a display. So until then people are going to be purchasing a physical box that is stuck some where in the room, and 100" is always going to be too big for most people when it comes to that.

When something like display paint eventually arrives Blu-ray will be long gone along with all physical media, replaced with cloud storage and fiber optic transmission of data. The idea of getting up and putting a disc in a player will seem as out of date as rewinding a cassette tape back to the start.

This is what will kill blu-ray long before the need for much higher resolution movies. Already DVD and Blu-ray are used by most tech savvy people as just a way to get the movie physically home from the store, it goes into the computer and gets ripped to a harddrive and played from a media player.

Remove the need to transfer the movie home with a fiber optic cable running into your home and physical media becomes redundant, particularly if you have an unlimited replacement policy so you don't even need the disc as a back up.

dark crystal

Well, we already had the PS3 and so eventually invested in a HD flat screen TV so we could watch blu-rays.

Have to say, I was pretty disappointed overall.

Not sure how to describe it, but well-lit daytime scenes, explosions etc were great, but as soon as the scenes moved to low-lit or night time scenes, the picture quality would decrease immensly. There appears to be a really grainy quality to these type of scenes on blu-ray and it can be really disracting.

For example, we watched 'The Road' there a few weeks back and the picture was so grainy and blurry during the majority of the film, it was really offputting.

The OH loves the big budget action films, so it works well for him, but I find a lot of smaller, drama based films (especially the older ones) just don't benefit from blu-ray at all.

I much prefer to watch DVDs, as the PS3 does a great job upscaling them anyway.

Sad Professor

dark crystal wrote: »

Not sure how to describe it, but well-lit daytime scenes, explosions etc were great, but as soon as the scenes moved to low-lit or night time scenes, the picture quality would decrease immensly. There appears to be a really grainy quality to these type of scenes on blu-ray and it can be really disracting.

Probably just the source. Night scenes are difficult to capture on film. The DP has to use a more sensitive film stock which means more grain. However, grain is a normal part of how a film looks. It's presence on a Blu-ray transfer is usually a good sign as it means there hasn't been any DNR applied.

dark crystal

Sad Professor wrote: »

Probably just the source. Night scenes are difficult to capture on film. The DP has to use a more sensitive film stock which means more grain. However, grain is a normal part of how a film looks. It's presence on a Blu-ray transfer is usually a good sign as it means there hasn't been any DNR applied.

Perhaps, but I never have the same sort of problem when watching normal DVDs. Darker scenes never diminish in quality in the way a blu-ray does.

I understand that movies filmed digitally are far more adept at keeping the picture quality intact during darker scenes, but otherwise, I consistently find DVDs are much clearer when watching the darker scenes.

Sorry, I'm not that technically minded, so am probably not explaining myself that well!

jaykhunter

Maybe projector technology will get so good that the brightness/contrast will be as good as a TV.

Venom

jaykhunter wrote: »

Well blu-rays will come down in price as it becomes the standard. The standard is still DVD; much like DVDs had to get cheaper; when VHS was still the standard

The jump from Video tape to DVD was huge tho and still took a while to take off. Going from DVD to Blueray is just not that big a leap, disc's still way to expensive and so is the hardware.

Venom

Venom wrote: »

The jump from Video tape to DVD was huge tho and still took a while to take off. Going from DVD to Blueray is just not that big a leap, disc's still way to expensive and so the hardware.

You can pick up a player for 60 euro, hardly expensive. Regards the discs, elwell they too are far from expensive when you consider that you can buy many for 3 pound. Some newc release can be expensive in shops but online most new release are between 12 and 16 euro. Even in store the prices are rapidly decreasing, Bareney's Version was 13 euro in HMV the week after it's release and they are routinely putting recent releases in the 2 for 22 offer.

Sad Professor

Yeah, I got Inception in the 2 for €22 offer the other day. It was Triple Play as well - includes the Blu-ray, DVD and digital copy.

Basq

Blu-rays have dropped enormously in price.. especially with online retailers.

For example - I went looking this evening to pre-order Source Code - Amazon currently have the DVD for £10, and the Blu-ray + DVD Double-Play for £13).

Bricks and Mortar stores are still quite expensive.. but these same stores are still charging €15 - €20 for a new release DVD so paying €20 - €30 for a new release Blu-ray is hardly ridiculous.

A decent Blu-ray Player can be picked up for under €100.

With regards to the "how long will it last?" - I'm in the they'll certainly live on well past DVD and I don't think this "digital downloads" argument is worth any salt.. the time and effort (and not forgetting the all too often present broadband cap) puts an dampner on downloading a 9 - 10GB HD (MKV or alternative) file.

I'm buying most releases on Blu-ray right now.. but I'm finding myself getting frustrated with Blu-ray titles availability ('Breaking Bad' only available on Region A, same with 'Lost in Translation').. but I often pick up a DVD set cheap (a 25 disc DVD boxset of 'Monk - Season 1 - 6' for €14 last week on Zavvi.. how could you not pick it up?!).

I can see Blu-ray's being around for the long haul.. they're getting more affordable and while they're far from the normal for most households, who knows what will happen in the next 5 - 8 years?

Mickeroo

I've not made the jump to blu-ray yet, but when I rejoin the workforce I plan to!! Don't know how long it will last, dvd has had a pretty good run of it, and it's still going strong in many respects. In fairness though, downloads shmownloads, as long as I live I'll want to have an actual physical collection of movies that I can put on a shelf in my house so that people can come in and see what bloody awesome taste I have and how that makes me ever so slightly cooler than them. :cool:

Sad Professor

How important is owning a film to people? I mean, most of us here could probably be considered part of the VHS generation. We grew up with video tapes of our favourite film that we watched over and over again. Can digital downloading ever really replace that? We can't lend a digital download, we can't put it on our shelf, we can't give it away or sell it.

Mickeroo

Sad Professor wrote: »

How important is owning a film to people? I mean, most of us here could probably be considered part of the VHS generation. We grew up with video tapes of our favourite film that we watched over and over again. Can digital downloading ever really replace that? We can't lend a digital download, we can't put it on our shelf, we can't give it away or sell it.

When it comes to films I genuinely love then its pretty important. Plus one of the best things about having a collection imo is being able to lend movies to people, especially if its a film they've not seen or heard of and one I'm sure they're going to like. It works kind of the same with music too i think.

Frank Black

Digital downloading is the future – it’s going to happen whether we like it or not.
Look at the music industry. If you join a service like Qriocity or similar, for a monthly fee you instantly have access to tens of thousands of albums. That record collection you spent years painstakingly assembling is rendered obsolete.
It will eventually be the same with movies – you won’t own any, they’ll be all stored in the cloud and you’ll pay a small fee to rent them or have access to them all for a monthly fee.
Current problems like broadband caps and speeds will soon be overcome.

Sad Professor

black francis wrote: »

It will eventually be the same with movies – you won’t own any, they’ll be all stored in the cloud and you’ll pay a small fee to rent them or have access to them all for a monthly fee.

Which is where I see digital downloading heading as well. But what about people who want to own a film rather than rent it?

bonerm

Sad Professor wrote: »

How important is owning a film to people? I mean, most of us here could probably be considered part of the VHS generation. We grew up with video tapes of our favourite film that we watched over and over again. Can digital downloading ever really replace that? We can't lend a digital download, we can't put it on our shelf, we can't give it away or sell it.

I think owning hundreds/thousands of DVD/BD's is actually a sickness. It's extension of the book / music collection psychology. It's just a bunch of stuff sitting neatly on your shelves that serve no purpose except to be looked at sitting there.

It'd be interesting for people here to look at every DVD/BD they own and ask themself the following questions.

1) How many times have I watched the movie itself off that particular disk?
2) Have I watched all the extras on the disk?
3) When's the last time I actually watched the movie off the disk?

IMHO, if your answer to
1) isn't : "at least twice"
2) isn't "yes"
and
3) isn't : "in the last couple of years"
then I reckon you're wasting your money.

That test goes doubly-so for titles you've been double and triple dipping on.

I've a lot of DVD/BD myself but I'm slowly phasing the process out in favour of various non-physical, non-own download/renting options. I welcome a non-disk future tbh.