dvd regions.

decky1

why are there different dvd regions? 2 for Europe for example, why are they not all the same ?

CinemaGuy45

decky1 wrote: »

why are there different dvd regions? 2 for Europe for example, why are they not all the same ?

demanufactured

Who still plays Dvd's?

Ubbquittious

A money-making scam by Hollywood studios so they can enforce differential pricing and different release dates by making everyones' DVD player pretend not to be able to play discs from the wrong region

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Plopsu

Distribution rights can be owned by different companies in different regions IIRC.

If it's an issue google your DVD player model and the phrase 'region free hack'. Many (if not most) players can be made region free.

Since you already own it, you're morally free to just download it.

troyzer

Who buys DVDs anymore?

Most 4k and new Blu Ray releases aren't region locked.

DVDs were made obsolete 12 years ago, it's amazing that people still buy them.

Pelvis

troyzer wrote: »

Who buys DVDs anymore?

Most 4k and new Blu Ray releases aren't region locked.

DVDs were made obsolete 12 years ago, it's amazing that people still buy them.

I'll probably be buying my mam a boxset or two for xmas. She doesn't have a computer and doesn't have the internet.

TomSweeney

troyzer wrote: »

Who buys DVDs anymore?

Most 4k and new Blu Ray releases aren't region locked.

DVDs were made obsolete 12 years ago, it's amazing that people still buy them.

BluRays and 4K BluRays too or at least soon with streaming.
(OK 4K streaming is not true 4K, but most people don't care)

murpho999

troyzer wrote: »

Who buys DVDs anymore?

Most 4k and new Blu Ray releases aren't region locked.

DVDs were made obsolete 12 years ago, it's amazing that people still buy them.

I'm also amazed that people still buy any physical media in this internet digital age.

Cue vision and audio purist who will insist that blu ray is better than anything you can get off the internet.

Pawwed Rig

Region 1 was US. Region 2 Europe. Region 3 was Asia I think and there may have been more.
It was a hopeless attempt by studios to rip people off. People were smarter. As far back as 2003 the region's were essentially obsolete due to multi region players.
Funnily enough the player I have is still locked to region 2. So if on the off chance I ever play a DVD again it may not work

troyzer

murpho999 wrote: »

I'm also amazed that people still buy any physical media in this internet digital age.

Cue vision and audio purist who will insist that blu ray is better than anything you can get off the internet.

Sit down and watch a movie like 2001 in 4k HDR both on disc and then streamed and you'll see the difference. It's night and day.

VinLieger

decky1 wrote: »

why are there different dvd regions? 2 for Europe for example, why are they not all the same ?

Money

Plopsu

murpho999 wrote: »

I'm also amazed that people still buy any physical media in this internet digital age.

Cue vision and audio purist who will insist that blu ray is better than anything you can get off the internet.

The last time I measured my broadband speed, it was something like 200k. Lots of people in that boat. Doesn't really lend itself to streaming (and certainly not at a quality to watch on a TV). I also like being able to just go to a shelf and pick a movie out to watch.



I'm also secretly preparing for after the apocalypse. If I can rig up a bicycle powered generator, I have enough entertainment to run constantly. It's going to be my niche.

TomSweeney

murpho999 wrote: »

I'm also amazed that people still buy any physical media in this internet digital age.

Cue vision and audio purist who will insist that blu ray is better than anything you can get off the internet.

Well there is a difference, but I get what you are saying ... most people don't care.


But there is a BIG difference ...

VinLieger

troyzer wrote: »

Sit down and watch a movie like 2001 in 4k HDR both on disc and then streamed and you'll see the difference. It's night and day.

From where did you stream 2001 in 4k may I ask?

jester77

VinLieger wrote: »

From where did you stream 2001 in 4k may I ask?

You can stream it in 8K right now if you live in Japan.

VinLieger

jester77 wrote: »

You can stream it in 8K right now if you live in Japan.

Thats a broadcast afaik not a stream

TomSweeney

VinLieger wrote: »

From where did you stream 2001 in 4k may I ask?

I think Amazon prime video had it recently ... not 100% sure ..

troyzer

You can't. And that's half the reason I buy 4k, because most big new releases are available on the format and there are loads of reissues but the streaming options are still very limited.

dotsman

TomSweeney wrote: »

BluRays and 4K BluRays too or at least soon with streaming.
(OK 4K streaming is not true 4K, but most people don't care)

murpho999 wrote: »

I'm also amazed that people still buy any physical media in this internet digital age.

Cue vision and audio purist who will insist that blu ray is better than anything you can get off the internet.

It's not about being a purist. It's about actually wanting the quality you already paid for. Why bother with a 4K TV if you already have a HD TV? Why bother with a HD TV if you already have a digital SD TV, why bother with that if you already have a black white analogue TV etc?

If you're buying a HD TV, don't you want to watch movies in actual HD, and not a stripped down version? Likewise, if you have bought a 4K TV, don't you want to watch movies in all their glory rather than some stripped down streaming version?

For 4K, Netflix uses about 7GB an hour, (lets say 11GB for an average movie). 4K Bluray is 100GB. Just think about how much quality is stripped out jsut to compress it down to 11GB (a standard Blu-ray disk is 25GB - that will show you just how better Blu-ray is over streaming)?

Buying a HD/4K TV and just using it for broadcast/streaming TV is like buying a Ferrari and only ever using it to drive 30kmph down a country road. Or, maybe a better example is it is like building a 3-lane motorway for hundreds of kilometres and just have horse-and-carts use it.

Likewise, as pointed out above, there are far more titles available on disc than on streaming services. Finally, not everybody lives in a place with a decent broadband connection, so can't even stream in 4K etc

troyzer

dotsman wrote: »

TomSweeney wrote: »

BluRays and 4K BluRays too or at least soon with streaming.
(OK 4K streaming is not true 4K, but most people don't care)

murpho999 wrote: »

I'm also amazed that people still buy any physical media in this internet digital age.

Cue vision and audio purist who will insist that blu ray is better than anything you can get off the internet.

It's not about being a purist. It's about actually wanting the quality you already paid for. Why bother with a 4K TV if you already have a HD TV? Why bother with a HD TV if you already have a digital SD TV, why bother with that if you already have a black white analogue TV etc?

If you're buying a HD TV, don't you want to watch movies in actual HD, and not a stripped down version? Likewise, if you have bought a 4K TV, don't you want to watch movies in all their glory rather than some stripped down streaming version?

For 4K, Netflix uses about 7GB an hour, (lets say 11GB for an average movie). 4K Bluray is 100GB. Just think about how much quality is stripped out jsut to compress it down to 11GB (a standard Blu-ray disk is 25GB - that will show you just how better Blu-ray is over streaming)?

Buying a HD/4K TV and just using it for broadcast/streaming TV is like buying a Ferrari and only ever using it to drive 30kmph down a country road. Or, maybe a better example is it is like building a 3-lane motorway for hundreds of kilometres and just have horse-and-carts use it.

Likewise, as pointed out above, there are far more titles available on disc than on streaming services. Finally, not everybody lives in a place with a decent broadband connection, so can't even stream in 4K etc

This.^

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Although I fully accept that 4k is still largely a fringe format and the sort of person that cares about loss of fidelity in a compressed stream Vs a disc will always be a minority.

Ubbquittious

Plopsu wrote: »

The last time I measured my broadband speed, it was something like 200k. Lots of people in that boat. Doesn't really lend itself to streaming (and certainly not at a quality to watch on a TV). I also like being able to just go to a shelf and pick a movie out to watch.



I'm also secretly preparing for after the apocalypse. If I can rig up a bicycle powered generator, I have enough entertainment to run constantly. It's going to be my niche.

You'll have to spend all your time on getting food and otherwise staying alive. No time for entertainment

kneemos

Must say I kinda prefer the old standard def telly. Much easier on the eye.

murpho999

troyzer wrote: »

Sit down and watch a movie like 2001 in 4k HDR both on disc and then streamed and you'll see the difference. It's night and day.

Amazon Link

Pay about €35 plus for it and have to keep disc ("Open the disc door HAL") and case around, no thanks.

Could also try this.
Not sure how good it is but it's the way it's going to go.

murpho999

Plopsu wrote: »

The last time I measured my broadband speed, it was something like 200k. Lots of people in that boat. Doesn't really lend itself to streaming (and certainly not at a quality to watch on a TV). I also like being able to just go to a shelf and pick a movie out to watch.



I'm also secretly preparing for after the apocalypse. If I can rig up a bicycle powered generator, I have enough entertainment to run constantly. It's going to be my niche.

I'm grand. VM media 360mb for me.:D

I still buy blu rays and 4k because i want lossless audio.

Don't see the point of having a good tv and surround sound and and not getting the best out of them.

Seen people on twitter giving out that they lost their purchases on itunes because the distributer deal wasn't renewed.

murpho999

dotsman wrote: »

It's not about being a purist. It's about actually wanting the quality you already paid for. Why bother with a 4K TV if you already have a HD TV? Why bother with a HD TV if you already have a digital SD TV, why bother with that if you already have a black white analogue TV etc?

If you're buying a HD TV, don't you want to watch movies in actual HD, and not a stripped down version? Likewise, if you have bought a 4K TV, don't you want to watch movies in all their glory rather than some stripped down streaming version?

For 4K, Netflix uses about 7GB an hour, (lets say 11GB for an average movie). 4K Bluray is 100GB. Just think about how much quality is stripped out jsut to compress it down to 11GB (a standard Blu-ray disk is 25GB - that will show you just how better Blu-ray is over streaming)?

Buying a HD/4K TV and just using it for broadcast/streaming TV is like buying a Ferrari and only ever using it to drive 30kmph down a country road. Or, maybe a better example is it is like building a 3-lane motorway for hundreds of kilometres and just have horse-and-carts use it.

Likewise, as pointed out above, there are far more titles available on disc than on streaming services. Finally, not everybody lives in a place with a decent broadband connection, so can't even stream in 4K etc

I bought a 4k HDR TV last year to be future proof.

Also, I play Xbox 4k games.

People keep comparing to streaming but ignore the possibility of downloading it, which would be the same file size as the discs.

I like the idea of a digital library and quick switching. No interest in having discs all over the place.

We're at the start of 4k/8k and eventually the internet possibilities will get better and discs will die out. This is being been borne out by 15-20% decline in discs sales year on year.

I can live without this night and day difference that people go on about, there's only so much the eye can make out as well

murpho999

kneemos wrote: »

Must say I kinda prefer the old standard def telly. Much easier on the eye.

Now I definitely could not agree with that.

AllForIt

kneemos wrote: »

Must say I kinda prefer the old standard def telly. Much easier on the eye.

Yes you have a point. Not much good for wide screen movies though which is my single reason for having a large TV. I was just thinking last night as I watched a 80's remastered movie how wonderful it is that we can now watch older movies as they were meant to be seen, at home.

Not gotten into the 4k thing myself yet as I've still happy with my 1080p. I think there is a point of quality where you get diminishing returns the better the rez is. I still think size is more important than rez when it comes to movies. I'm sure in the future I'll upgrade to 4k and it will be a nice upgrade to look forward to. Only when 4k OLED is at the current price of standard 1080p TV's are now though.