DVD v BluRay

the_monkey · 15-01-2015 10:22PM

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Good to see a thread with like-minded boardies discussing Bluray and 4K displays.
I don't understand the point of these curved TV's, back when I was growing up companies strived to produce the flatest CRT screens, now it seems we are going backwards with these curved screens, lets hope its a short lived fad.

+1 curved TVs I know it's concave and not convex but still the biggest load of ****e since 3d ....

MisterAnarchy · 15-01-2015 11:30PM

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

I'm just wondering how may people have made the switch over at this stage? The reason I ask is because I watched some DVDs for the first time in a few years last night, and it really got me thinking about whether HD is worth the extra money, which can be considerable, depending on the release.

I think it all depends on how big your tv is .
The bigger the set the most noticeable the difference in picture quality .
Once you go over 39 inches DVD will look patchy.

Mpeg 2 or h262 (DVD) is a pretty old and inefficient codec now so not only is the resolution much lower than Bluray (primarily h264) ,the video quality for even similar resolution is much less.

There does seem to be quite a wide variation in both Dvd and Blu-ray picture qualities,some Dvds can look great others terrible ,likewise with Blu-ray ,some of the discs I have seen lately have been very poor.

Certain Blu-ray players can make DVDs look better than others ,dependent on the chipset and upscaling technology.

I only watch Blu-Rays now

Outkast_IRE · 16-01-2015 10:55AM

the_monkey wrote: »

Fantastic news , the big problem I thought with 4k would be the storage .
Be another few years when media players catch up - since a 4k movie will be at least 100gb maybe ?

The next gen disc sizes range from 50gb - 100gb and they are using a newer compression format. Decent article on it here
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/4k-blu-ray-discs-arriving-in-2015-to-fight-streaming-media/

Nerdkiller1991 · 16-01-2015 12:18PM

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

The next gen disc sizes range from 50gb - 100gb and they are using a newer compression format. Decent article on it here
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/4k-blu-ray-discs-arriving-in-2015-to-fight-streaming-media/

I still don't think it's really large enough for 4K. I feel like 200GB BD's would be a the best amount of space for it.

Elessar · 16-01-2015 01:01PM

Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever bought a Blu-Ray disc. Digital format is where it's at.

4k is the next big thing, but then 8k is around the corner. Will 8k take off? Who knows. Someone mentioned there is no real need for anything beyond 4k, I'm pretty sure the same was said for 2k/1080p. 4k file sizes are already huge, I can only imagine what 8k is like. Do any movies master on 8k these days?

johnny_ultimate · 16-01-2015 01:08PM

Elessar wrote: »

Digital format is where it's at.

Blu-Ray still has many benefits over digital, not least the fact that is significantly less compressed than digital alternatives (a full quality 'rip' of a Blu-Ray would be a good 20GB+, at least). There are many films that are far more easily procurable on disc formats, especially smaller and niche releases. Many of those films are only released and translated because smaller distribution companies still rely on physical releases as their bread and butter (there's very little money in digital for many releases). And the best physical releases offer supplementary materials that are often worth the purchase alone - from the novel sized accompanying booklet that comes with Master of Cinema's Late Mizoguchi boxset to the rare shorts and even sometimes bonus feature films that come with top-tier releases (like the BFI Ozu films, where the major features all come with a much harder to procure film from the great man's oeuvre).

I have no problem with digital formats, but certainly given my own tastes and interests it'll be quite a few years if not decades yet before I foresee physical editions being completely superseded.

Outkast_IRE · 16-01-2015 01:20PM

Elessar wrote: »

Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever bought a Blu-Ray disc. Digital format is where it's at.

4k is the next big thing, but then 8k is around the corner. Will 8k take off? Who knows. Someone mentioned there is no real need for anything beyond 4k, I'm pretty sure the same was said for 2k/1080p. 4k file sizes are already huge, I can only imagine what 8k is like. Do any movies master on 8k these days?

Where is 8k coming from, there is already some arguing that the difference from high quality current HD to 4k is very hard to see at normal viewing distances, i would imagine that the argument will hold truer at 8k, seems like the marketing department is just gearing up to want us all to replace our tvs every couple of years.

To be honest i think if you get one of the highest quality tvs of the current generation and put it up next to a 4k tv the difference isnt mind blowing.

What has happened in the race to the bottom price wise with the current tvs is the quality has suffered so now when comparing the €10,000 4k tv to the average build current generation there is a massive gulf in quality.

Also 100gb will be fine with the new compression technology, as everybody probably is aware 4k is so large you nearly always need it compressed, basically the new 4k blu ray players will have a lot more processing power to handle this new compression that they are using.

johnny_ultimate · 16-01-2015 01:26PM

I think gaming will benefit more from higher resolutions than film, TBH, considering 5K filming is still a rarity in even big cinema blockbusters. The 4K upgrade will be more of a quantum leap in terms of gaming.

Really high resolutions will be better appreciated in a cinema context if and when they do come, although obviously the big technical upgrade - not long behind the last big one - will mean it will be a slow process.

Nerdkiller1991 · 16-01-2015 01:48PM

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

Also 100gb will be fine with the new compression technology, as everybody probably is aware 4k is so large you nearly always need it compressed, basically the new 4k blu ray players will have a lot more processing power to handle this new compression that they are using.

I know that they're using new codecs for the next gen BD format. I'm just saying that perhaps we're not getting enough out of it when it comes to size. After all, when it first released, Bluray discs could store up to 5 times more than what DVD had to offer. This, on the other hand, we're only seeing a two times difference at the most.

Outkast_IRE · 16-01-2015 01:51PM

Nerdkiller1991 wrote: »

I know that they're using new codecs for the next gen BD format. I'm just saying that perhaps we're not getting enough out of it when it comes to size. After all, when it first released, Bluray discs could store up to 5 times more than what DVD had to offer. This, on the other hand, we're only seeing a two times difference at the most.

I was reading another article somewhere that was saying to increase the disc capacity again they would have to use another colour laser which isnt in common usage and is expensive to produce, along with the media being very expensive & thus using it would just result in a large price difference and potential issues with backwards compatibility.

Nerdkiller1991 · 16-01-2015 02:01PM

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

I was reading another article somewhere that was saying to increase the disc capacity again they would have to use another colour laser which isnt in common usage and is expensive to produce, along with the media being very expensive & thus using it would just result in a large price difference and potential issues with backwards compatibility.

I don't mean like sticking more data per layer, I'm saying the addition of more layers would help mitigate the problem. Having 6 layers of 33GB BDXL's would be enough.

the_monkey · 16-01-2015 02:03PM

Elessar wrote: »

Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever bought a Blu-Ray disc. Digital format is where it's at.

4k is the next big thing, but then 8k is around the corner. Will 8k take off? Who knows. Someone mentioned there is no real need for anything beyond 4k, I'm pretty sure the same was said for 2k/1080p. 4k file sizes are already huge, I can only imagine what 8k is like. Do any movies master on 8k these days?

That's the thing , storage for these files now is an issue - streaming or discs are needed for now ...

16-01-2015 03:30PM

I do not think that I could convince my O/H that my 3 year old 60" 1080p needs an upgrade!!

pixelburp · 16-01-2015 04:06PM

Thing I've found about those giant screens, the ones that are 50" and beyond, is that if you're not watching films or something inherently cinematic, they can really dominate and overpower a room. Watching Gravity on a 75" screen that takes up the entirety of a wall is probably a hell of an experience, but the idea of something like Fair City, the weather forecast, or any number of TV adverts and general mundane broadcasts plastered across a giant screen sounds pretty unpleasant. Unless you have a dedicated room for a home cinema, giant TVs feel grossly impractical.

I have a 42" in our living area and given the amount of space we have to work with, that's about as large as I could get away with without the living area becoming 'The TV plus a few seats'. Plus, as much as I love cinema, and love the concept of cinema itself, I could never justify dropping €6,000 on a television. To me, that's 'new car' money, not something I'd spend on what I still consider a luxury. I don't even have that kind of disposable income, so it's a bit of a non-runner.

16-01-2015 04:25PM

I thought the same with my 42" until I got the bigger one. Also have my PC hooked up to it for gaming so love it.

Living room is big enough to handle it though to be fair.

TheDoc · 16-01-2015 05:08PM

I wasn't rushing to buy Blu-Ray at first. DVD was doing me fine and the cost assosiated with Blu-Ray releases near the start was nothing short of laughable.

But after investing in a bigger TV last christmas, we bought some Blu-Rays on sale to give it a spin. We bought Equilibrium, Alien Anthonoloy and a season of Son's of Anarchy. After watching Alien and Aliens on Bluray, the misses and myself pretty much agreed that any new purchases would be Blu-Ray.

Granted we are heavy on the streaming and downloading, we have pruned right back on our physical purchases. But the ones we do make are blu-ray no questions asked.

Oddly enough Blu-Ray looks that little bit crisper and sharper then the equivalent from say a download or stream from netflix. Maybe its not, just seems that way to me.

Outkast_IRE · 16-01-2015 05:31PM

TheDoc wrote: »

I wasn't rushing to buy Blu-Ray at first. DVD was doing me fine and the cost assosiated with Blu-Ray releases near the start was nothing short of laughable.

But after investing in a bigger TV last christmas, we bought some Blu-Rays on sale to give it a spin. We bought Equilibrium, Alien Anthonoloy and a season of Son's of Anarchy. After watching Alien and Aliens on Bluray, the misses and myself pretty much agreed that any new purchases would be Blu-Ray.

Granted we are heavy on the streaming and downloading, we have pruned right back on our physical purchases. But the ones we do make are blu-ray no questions asked.

Oddly enough Blu-Ray looks that little bit crisper and sharper then the equivalent from say a download or stream from netflix. Maybe its not, just seems that way to me.

Oh man that alien anthology is what i show anybody when im talking about how good blu-rays can be with old movies converted correctly. Alien and Aliens are so crisp on the screen they could of been filmed yesterday, it puts many more modern movies to shame. I suppose alot of it is to do with the huge amount of visual effects in it rather than computer generated effects.

I would also stream and download a fair bit, but i would also visit the cinema and purchase my favourite movies on blu-ray... you gotta support the industry when they put out something of good quality.

Nerdkiller1991 · 16-01-2015 05:33PM

TheDoc wrote: »

I wasn't rushing to buy Blu-Ray at first. DVD was doing me fine and the cost assosiated with Blu-Ray releases near the start was nothing short of laughable.

But after investing in a bigger TV last christmas, we bought some Blu-Rays on sale to give it a spin. We bought Equilibrium, Alien Anthonoloy and a season of Son's of Anarchy. After watching Alien and Aliens on Bluray, the misses and myself pretty much agreed that any new purchases would be Blu-Ray.

Granted we are heavy on the streaming and downloading, we have pruned right back on our physical purchases. But the ones we do make are blu-ray no questions asked.

Oddly enough Blu-Ray looks that little bit crisper and sharper then the equivalent from say a download or stream from netflix. Maybe its not, just seems that way to me.

It's not just you. Streaming services such as Netflix offer a highly compressed image full of visual artifacts inherent to such a low quality bitrate. In fact, compared to some other streaming services, Netflix comes up pretty poor, at least according to this.

http://hdguru.com/blu-ray-vs-hdtv-streaming-services-a-quality-comparison-review/

Even their 4K streaming service only has a bitrate similar to that of an AVC encoded BD. Not to mention, Netflix has a habit of cropping the image certain movies to fill the screen, which just screws the the composition. Something that almost never happens these days with Bluray.

http://whatnetflixdoes.tumblr.com/

DoYouEvenLift · 16-01-2015 05:40PM

You can get blurays very cheaply nowadays on eBay and sometimes Amazon (<€10). I try to only buy blurays that are worth having and using blu-ray.com is a big part of that. I check the ratings of the bluray on there and usually if it's above a 4/5 for video and audio I'll buy it. For 3D blurays I only buy them if they're true 3D/filmed in the format and not post-converted.

Hmv/Xtravision have some good movies in the 4 blurays for €30 as well, each works out at €7.50 since delivery is free.

cloud493 · 16-01-2015 07:39PM

I don't own any DVD's. Only blu rays.

Gmol · 16-01-2015 07:44PM

pixelburp wrote: »

Thing I've found about those giant screens, the ones that are 50" and beyond, is that if you're not watching films or something inherently cinematic, they can really dominate and overpower a room. Watching Gravity on a 75" screen that takes up the entirety of a wall is probably a hell of an experience, but the idea of something like Fair City, the weather forecast, or any number of TV adverts and general mundane broadcasts plastered across a giant screen sounds pretty unpleasant. Unless you have a dedicated room for a home cinema, giant TVs feel grossly impractical.

I have a 42" in our living area and given the amount of space we have to work with, that's about as large as I could get away with without the living area becoming 'The TV plus a few seats'. Plus, as much as I love cinema, and love the concept of cinema itself, I could never justify dropping €6,000 on a television. To me, that's 'new car' money, not something I'd spend on what I still consider a luxury. I don't even have that kind of disposable income, so it's a bit of a non-runner.

Rather than spend 6k buy a projector and surround sound. All for less than 1k.

Right Turn Clyde · 16-01-2015 07:55PM

Gmol wrote: »

Rather than spend 6k buy a projector and surround sound. All for less than 1k.

I've never seen a projector that matches a top of the range TV, which is exactly what you'd be looking for if you're about to drop 6K.

the_monkey · 16-01-2015 08:56PM

But in a few years I'd imagine 50-55 " 4K tv's won't be 6k ... maybe around 1k or perhaps thats just wishful thinking on my part ..

edit - I see :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-UE55HU6900-55-inch-Freeview-Freesat/dp/B00JWTVISI/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1421441894&sr=1-3&keywords=4k+tv

is this a gimmick ?

it's really 4K ??

DoYouEvenLift · 16-01-2015 09:05PM

the_monkey wrote: »

But in a few years I'd imagine 50-55 " 4K tv's won't be 6k ... maybe around 1k or perhaps thats just wishful thinking on my part ..

edit - I see :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-UE55HU6900-55-inch-Freeview-Freesat/dp/B00JWTVISI/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1421441894&sr=1-3&keywords=4k+tv

is this a gimmick ?

it's really 4K ??

4k TVs have been available for under 2k for a while now. Not a gimmick.

the_monkey · 16-01-2015 09:05PM

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

4k TVs have been available for under 2k for a while now. Not a gimmick.

f*cking SWEET !!!

DoYouEvenLift · 16-01-2015 09:23PM

the_monkey wrote: »

f*cking SWEET !!!

They're still mostly only led though and high end 1080p plasmas can still look as good as some of them, once OLEDs get to that point we can all be happy.

the_monkey · 16-01-2015 10:25PM

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

They're still mostly only led though and high end 1080p plasmas can still look as good as some of them, once OLEDs get to that point we can all be happy.

ah !

I guess then the price tag will really jump !!

Jumboman · 17-01-2015 03:57PM

Mike Litoris wrote: »

and dump the CRT

CRT still beats plasma or LCD/LED any day.

Nerdkiller1991 · 17-01-2015 06:01PM

Jumboman wrote: »

CRT still beats plasma or LCD/LED any day.

Just wait until OLED's become cheap. Then we'll talk.

Right Turn Clyde · 17-01-2015 06:49PM

Jumboman wrote: »

CRT still beats plasma or LCD/LED any day.

Yeah, CRTs are still the best for standard definition. My landlord left a Sony Trinitron behind him and it's something else. It has an RGB input, which makes it even better. I bought an old PS2 to replay some classic games, and I was amazed at how well some of them looked. I never had the chance to hook up a console via RGB back in the day, so I had never seen SD games look so good. Resident Evil 4, running in widescreen mode, through an RGB cable and on a Sony CRT. That's a wicked combination. Very impressive looking for such old software/hardware.

If anyone's interested, check out the picture quality that retro gamers are cranking out of calibrated CRTs. It's hard to believe.

DVD v BluRay

Comments