Can't Whip up enthusiam for Blu Ray (1 Viewer)

[RickER]

David, thats a beautiful post man.
I am gonna read it again, i liked it so much.
Well said, all of it.

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein

I have more of a love/hate relationship with Blu-ray.

On the one hand, I see the difference in quality and so
much enjoy watching a really well-mastered transfer on
that format over DVD any day.

What I don't like about Blu-ray is the format itself.

Amen!

The picture is gorgeous. But I am disappointed in Blu Ray as a consumer-electronics device. It's inferior to DVD in almost every way. Load times are atrocious. Menus are even more inconsistent in layout and scheme. You can't resume a movie mid-way through after turning off the player. There are needless options and confusion over audio decoding and special features.

As for DVD: after 10 years of "collecting" and merging my collection with my wife's a few years ago, we have perhaps 100 movies and 20 TV seasons. I didn't massively collect DVD and I'm not going to collect Blu Ray. But given the opportunity, I'll watch Blu Ray. The picture difference is obvious and significant, and I don't particularly care to watch DVD anymore. This is accentuated now that I've got OTA HD, since DVD is now inferior to even normal TV -- a significant change in the past year.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by DaveF

Load times are atrocious.

I don't mean to single any one person out with this (since a number have mentioned it) but I have a 1.0 profile player and the absolute longest time that I have to wait for a disc to load is around 2 minutes and I imagine that nearly every other 1.1 or 2.0 player loads much faster than mine. Of course, it'd be great if I dropped a disc in the player and it instantly played but I think people are really over exaggerating or worrying too much about the amount of time that they have to wait for a disc to load. Has anyone ever had 90 minutes to watch a movie but not had 91 minutes to let a disc load and watch a movie?

 

[Van594]

Originally Posted by TravisR



I don't mean to single any one person out with this (since a number have mentioned it) but I have a 1.0 profile player and the absolute longest time that I have to wait for a disc to load is around 2 minutes and I imagine that nearly every other 1.1 or 2.0 player loads much faster than mine. Of course, it'd be great if I dropped a disc in the player and it instantly played but I think people are really over exaggerating or worrying too much about the amount of time that they have to wait for a disc to load. Has anyone ever had 90 minutes to watch a movie but not had 91 minutes to let a disc load and watch a movie?

The point is really it shouldn't be that way at all though. It's not just the load times it's other things but thats one I find inexcusable for a next generation format. Devices should get easier and quicker to use and thats where Blu-ray has failed. Average Joe doesn't want to wait or make 10 adjustments to make it play at best quality...and frankly I don't either. Make better players is all we ask so this format will be easier for the public to buy into.

 

[DaveF]

The load times are far too long for a device that simply reads a disc and plays back the contents. It's not like we're fighting the Civil War here; things aren't unliveable. But for a toy, a luxury good, too many things about Blu Ray suggest a design goal was, "Antagonize the user when possible".

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by Van594

The point is really it shouldn't be that way at all though.

I completely understand that point but my feeling is that the positives of Blu-ray make the extra minute wait worth it (especially considering that we're talking about having to wait one minute).

 

[kemcha]

Well, DVD's load pretty quick but Blu-rays do take a long time to load. I think that Blu-ray players rely too heavily on java and I don't see why Java is neccessary to load Blu-ray disks.

 

[cineMANIAC]

I wouldn't go so far as to say studios are purposely trying to antagonize consumers with long load times and unnecessary features but sometimes it does seem like they don't want to make sitting down to watch a movie too easy. They should learn from Criterion - pop in a disc, a menu appears and just hit play! Barely a few seconds to load and best of all: no frigging warnings or disclaimers or forced trailers.

 

[Worth]

Originally Posted by David Wilkins

Don't think for a moment that I'm an industry or format apologist, or someone who perpetually wears the proverbial rose colored glasses. I'm none of those, and I've done more than a little venting around here over the years. Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see hard evidence that spawns so many negative posts. I think people cue on one example that sticks in their craw, then skew everything else toward it. One example is the "$5.00 DVD". Sure, there are quite a few, but I've noticed no small number of SDVD's that are still selling for $20.00+. In fact, I've seen a number of examples were the BD is priced lower than the SDVD title.

I think releasing $5 DVDs was a mistake on the part of the studios and retailers. On the one hand, it's great to have a favourite movie for the price of a Starbuck's coffee, on the other it devalues films as a whole.

I'm not pining for a return to laserdsic pricing, but there was something kind of exciting about having to save up to pay $75 to own a copy of The Empire Strikes Back - it felt like something rare and special. Feelings that aren't exactly evoked when you pick through the $5 bargain bin at the supermarket.

 

[DaveF]

Yes, I'm being facetious. It's probably design-by-committee, where the needs of the involved companies outweigh the needs of a user-centric device. It might also be design-by-engineer, driven by people who only care about technical capability and not about actual usability by a normal person.

I'll add that I like the in-movie menu. But even that is hindered by inconsistent behavior and needing to return to the main menu for certain actions (for no good reason, from a user perspective).

But, the picture is great. To me, it's no small improvement over DVD. My eyes are still young enough to find it substantially better. And I'll suffer the inconveniences.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Originally Posted by DaveF

But, the picture is great. To me, it's no small improvement over DVD. My eyes are still young enough to find it substantially better. And I'll suffer the inconveniences.

And don't forget the lossless audio. My favorite part of the HD experience.

The whole package in the HD presentation is what's exciting. Even on my budget-constrained system the difference in PQ & SQ is stunning.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveF

Amen!

The picture is gorgeous. But I am disappointed in Blu Ray as a consumer-electronics device. It's inferior to DVD in almost every way.

Judging by your reasons (which are addressed below), it seems as if you're basing Blu-ray on the initial set of devices and titles, because almost all of the problems you specify aren't nearly as widespread as it's being made out to be, or are in fact equally if not more applicable to DVD.

Load times are atrocious.

To each his own, but most of us (including you) seem to agree that they are getting better.

Menus are even more inconsistent in layout and scheme.

I actually think it's the exact opposite, seeing as how there's no real consistency in menu layouts and scheme for DVDs. Meanwhile, at least some studios like Warner (including HBO and New Line) and Criterion seem to have near-100% similar templates for Blu-ray when it comes to both root and pop-up menus across their respective offerings. Plus, apart from interactive-intense new release titles like Iron Man, most studios maintain seem to maintain a simpler interface roughly analogous to DVD, especially when it comes to catalog titles.

You can't resume a movie mid-way through after turning off the player.

This is definitely an issue. However, most releases now include an easy-to-use bookmark function that fulfills a similar purpose, and I can't recall if many DVD players could resume after a complete shutdown 3 years into that format's release either.

There are needless options and confusion over audio decoding and special features.

Could you elaborate? This may have been a problem for 1st-gen players, but every player and HDMI-compatible receiver released in the last year or two seems to be able to handle the audio just fine, which means it's no more or less complicated than the DVD options of yore. And apart from BD-Live (which can be easily disabled), special features are rarely treated any different than they were on DVD, apart from sometimes getting an HD upgrade.

I'll add that I like the in-movie menu. But even that is hindered by inconsistent behavior and needing to return to the main menu for certain actions (for no good reason, from a user perspective).

Again, I'm not sure what's being referred to here. I can't think of any of BDs that required returning to the main menu for specific actions during a movie. Certainly, enabling alternate audio, subtitles, and on-screen special features have always seemed to be available via buttons on the remote, and via pop-up otherwise. I could be lucky, of course.

Originally Posted by Van594

Devices should get easier and quicker to use and thats where Blu-ray has failed. Average Joe doesn't want to wait or make 10 adjustments to make it play at best quality...and frankly I don't either. Make better players is all we ask so this format will be easier for the public to buy into.

As has been pointed out, this isn't an accurate assessment of how the technology has advanced. I doubt you'd find many people here who would argue that load times haven't improved, for example. And as it has also been pointed out, players (and supporting tech like receivers and TVs) have been getting better and better quite steadily. It's hard to forget that the format is only 3.5 years old, sometimes.

In the end, David put it much more eloquently than I did, especially when it comes to the factors and ideas behind DVD's adoption being erroneously compared to that of Blu-ray.

 

[raiderman]

I had to get into this one. I purchased a Blu ray player in November but I cannot afford a flat screen tv (40 inches or more) yet. I have about 200 DVDs and I have been thru it all the letters (BETA, LD, DVD). I know they have outstanding quality, but some studios don't port all of the extras from DVD to BD, which can be pretty extensive. I am glad that the prices on BD discs and players are coming down tho. The DVD2BLU program from Warners is something that every studio should do. HEY WARNERS, MORE TITLES!!!

 

[Mike Frezon]

Gregory:

Welcome to the forum. https://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/9/95/avatar-60-9.jpg[/img]] [/img]

 

[DaveF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Frezon ">[/url]

And don't forget the lossless audio. My favorite part of the HD experience. [/QUOTE]
Considering I'm shopping for spendy speakers, I probably shouldn't admit I've not noticed any difference in the audio quality yet. But I've not done any comparisons on that.

Quote:[QUOTE]Originally Posted by [b]Jesse Blacklow[/b] [url=/forum/thread/298368/can-t-whip-up-enthusiam-for-blu-ray/90#post_3664702]

 

[David Wilkins]

Originally Posted by Worth




I think releasing $5 DVDs was a mistake on the part of the studios and retailers. On the one hand, it's great to have a favourite movie for the price of a Starbuck's coffee, on the other it devalues films as a whole.

I'm not pining for a return to laserdsic pricing, but there was something kind of exciting about having to save up to pay $75 to own a copy of The Empire Strikes Back - it felt like something rare and special. Feelings that aren't exactly evoked when you pick through the $5 bargain bin at the supermarket.

I tend to agree. Cutting too close to FREE, seems a violation of sorts. To begin with, it sets a bad precedent for consumer expectations; people "want it all", and by the way...they don't want to pay for it. I can't articulate much more without giving it some thought, but it just seems upon initial reflection, to signal less than positive things for the marketplace and the industry. Of course, nobody wants to shell out their hard earned money (me included), but at some point, near-free will spell an erosion in quality on several levels. We have enough of a disposable culture already.

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Worth
I think releasing $5 DVDs was a mistake on the part of the studios and retailers. On the one hand, it's great to have a favourite movie for the price of a Starbuck's coffee, on the other it devalues films as a whole.

I'm not pining for a return to laserdsic pricing, but there was something kind of exciting about having to save up to pay $75 to own a copy of The Empire Strikes Back - it felt like something rare and special. Feelings that aren't exactly evoked when you pick through the $5 bargain bin at the supermarket.

Quoteavid Wilkins

I tend to agree. Cutting too close to FREE, seems a violation of sorts. To begin with, it sets a bad precedent for consumer expectations; people "want it all", and by the way...they don't want to pay for it. I can't articulate much more without giving it some thought, but it just seems upon initial reflection, to signal less than positive things for the marketplace and the industry. Of course, nobody wants to shell out their hard earned money (me included), but at some point, near-free will spell an erosion in quality on several levels. We have enough of a disposable culture already.

To each their own, but I certainly don't feel the same. I've never thought "If only I could pay $150 [today's $$$] for a single movie, then it would really feel special." You're right in that people associate price with quality: price something too low and people will undervalue it, even if it's of truly high quality. But what then is a movie worth? Based on going to the theater, it's worth about $30, tops. But practically, I don't pay more than $5 for a DVD. And I'm eager for the $5 Blu Ray bin.

 

[Van594]

Jesse you remind me of Kevin Bacon in Animal House...as everyone is rioting and things are out of control Chip keeps saying "Remain calm. All is well, ALL IS WELL!!! ..lol...thing is it's not...it can be much better thats all were saying.

 

[Worth]

I certainly don't object to paying $5 for a DVD, but the studios are making it difficult for themselves when they charge $5 for something like the Adam West Batman on DVD but $30 for the blu-ray.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Quote:Originally Posted by Van594

If you're going to resort to the hyperbole above and in your previous post to describe the situation and then go on to claim I don't think things can be better, of course rebutting it in a measured faction is going to seem weird, especially since I actually, y'know, admitted things can be better. If you honestly believe that everything is like a riot and out-of-control with the format, as opposed to in need of tweaking, then perhaps you need to step back and review what's actually happening technologically and economically. This goes double if you're going to make comparisons to DVD that are neither universal nor (as David points out) directly related. To you, for some reason, the sky is falling, so don't act surprised when people think of Chicken Little.