Questions for people who haven't gone Blu yet... (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Willis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cadavra
[COLOR= #0000cd]90% of what I buy was made before GHOSTBUSTERS. 99% of that is unavailable on Blu-Ray. End of story.[/COLOR]


[COLOR= #0000cd]Mike S.[/COLOR]

That's about it for me as well. I'm mainly a TV/DVD collector of older shows first, and a film collector second since I have nearly all of the films I'm interested in collecting at present. BR hasn't released any older TV/DVD shows except for a few of the mega shows like Star Trek and the original Twlilight Zone series.

Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich

[COLOR= #0000cd]90% of what I buy was made before GHOSTBUSTERS. 99% of that is unavailable on Blu-Ray. End of story.[/COLOR]


[COLOR= #0000cd]Mike S.[/COLOR]

Makes sense Mike, but with players so cheap, aren't you ever tempted by African Queen, Bridge over the River Kwai, Casablanca, Maltese Falcon, Wizard of Oz or any other titles available? Is there one "classic" title that would push you over the edge if it were released?

[/QUOTE]

Good point about the players but as a region-free guy, I'm waiting for the online stores (hard mod'ed BR players) to decrease in price more before looking into buying my 1st BR player.

As for the few classics that are out on BR, it's not enough for me to enter the BR mkt yet. The deciding factor for me might be if I saw an increased trend of exclusive BR releases (without a DVD release) of older films that have either never been released in anamorphic format in R1 (and R2) or a specific personal "holy grail" film that's been on my waiting list for years.

Originally Posted by RPMay
"i just don't want to start that collection all over again with blu." You won't have to; little of it will hit Blu, and a good upscaling player will add luster to your existing collection. I went Blu to cherry pick, not to repurchase the whole orchard.

Another good point to consider. I can't afford to double-dip again in home film formats. I did some of that when SD DVD arrived after Laserdisc but it's not affordable for me to repeat that with BR, although for my collection of older films and older TV/DVD sets, I've not seen the need to consider that anyway. BR doesn't have much available that interests me yet.

 

[Eric Vedowski]

Originally Posted by Bob Cashill

"i just don't want to start that collection all over again with blu." You won't have to; little of it will hit Blu, and a good upscaling player will add luster to your existing collection. I went Blu to cherry pick, not to repurchase the whole orchard.

This will be my philosophy as well. I've had a HDTV for quite some time but until the last year or so the pickings in HD on Comcast (only option for cable) were very slim. Now there are quite a few HD channels that show older stuff and now I'm sold and I'm getting spoiled. I've been meaning to finally pick up that new player but I've been in my house 20 years now and so many things need replacing-wooden floor, deck, furniture, etc. Most of my analog TV sets conveniently died right around the switch and I still have to replace a few of them yet. "The Sound of Music" almost pushed me over the edge. OT: Speaking of "Sound," last time I watched "The St. Valentine's Day Massacre" I noticed that Capone's mansion is a tarted up (in red velvet and dark wood) version of the Von Trapp house entry hall where they sing "So Long, Farewell".

 

[cadavra]

[COLOR= #0000cd]I just don't wanna be like Rip Torn in MEN IN BLACK: "Now I have to buy The White Album again."[/COLOR]


[COLOR= #0000cd]Mike S.[/COLOR]

 

[Bob Cashill]

One Blu benefit is that they're not as region-locked as DVDs are. I've purchased the definitive version of SPIRITS OF THE DEAD, a high-quality IPCRESS FILE, and a ZULU and a PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE that blow their US DVD counterparts out of the water. All can be watched on my Sony--and I doubt any will be revisited on DVD or Blu here. Plus Blu is the only place here (and maybe anywhere) where you can both cuts of KING KONG (05) and LEON: THE PROFESSIONAL on one disc, all of GRINDHOUSE (theatrical) on one disc, APOCALYPSE NOW in its OAR (and a REDUX that can be watched without changing discs, same with ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA), various non-anamorphic DVDs revived as Blu-rays that are unlikely to be reissued as DVDs (like 48 HRS.). Etc.

As someone in the biz, Mike S., I'm surprised you're so adamant about this, but then again I was, too, till I caved.

The other thing about Blu is that I strongly figure that this is it, the end of physical media formats. From here on in it's all streams. Hey, I'd rather go out in a Bentley than a Toyota.

 

[Adam Gregorich]

Originally Posted by Steve_Pannell

Since I have gone Blu the original question isn't really for me but I want to bring up something about Blu-ray/DVD combos.


I've only bought one so far (Inception) and I noticed that the DVD is a very bare-bones disc. For example, it has chapter stops but doesn't have a chapter menu. Also, it is only a 4.8GB (more or less) DVD. Is this typical of the combos?

Not sure. WB has rental DVDs out now that have no features. It sounds like the included one of those. My guess is they dont want you to sell the DVD from your combo set.

 

[Nebiroth]

Well, technically Blu is as region locked as DVD - although the regions are fewer in number, and thus larger.


It's just that some labels haven't bothered to region code their discs.


But others have, so you can't make the assumption that you'll be able to play a disc from anywhere. One day your player will spit it back out with that "wrong region" message.

 

[Bob Cashill]

There are several places to check first, Richard, as I do. No one should ever make assumptions. So far so good.

 

[marcco00]

Originally Posted by Bob Cashill

"i just don't want to start that collection all over again with blu." You won't have to; little of it will hit Blu, and a good upscaling player will add luster to your existing collection. I went Blu to cherry pick, not to repurchase the whole orchard.

i hear you.....but i myself am staying OUT of that particular 'cherry orchard' altogether!!


seriously, with the SDVD market slowly slipping away, i think for the next few years i'm going to concentrate on buying niche/eclectic titles--- titles like 'model shop' 1969 that i just saw on TCM last night. i want my collection on ONE format, & i have a huge SDVD library, so i'm going to just stay with that.

 

[Al.Anderson]

In my case, I'm waiting for HD-Red to make a comeback.


Okay, two reasons - despite some of the combo packs being reasonable, most Blu disks are still more expensive. And, until my 760p Panny dies, regular DVDs look just fine on my 47" TV.


Despite both of those, when my DVD player dies, I'll probably get a BR.

 

[Grant100]

I said to myself I might upgrade this Xmas just gone but didn't bother in the end. Most of my film watching is older films, I upscale DVD on my HD television anyway, region coding is no longer an issue with SD DVD (in the UK anyway) but has been adopted for Blu, etc.


I also have issues with this upgrading thing. I'm old enough to have once had a big vinyl collection that was mostly purchased again on CD just as my VHS tapes were replaced by DVD. That's enough for me I think. I'm quite happy with the quality of DVD.


Besides which the major studios are now starting to release the obscure films that I love on MOD programs. Most of my purchases these days are with these or small companies like Scorpion.

 

[Douglas R]

The one title which made me get a Blu-ray player was HOW THE WEST WAS WON. The smilebox feature was a brilliant attempt to recreate the Cinerama experience. Other worthwhile upgrades have been THE ROBE, ZULU, THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, PSYCHO BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, PLAYTIME and ZULU. Nevertheless I certainly do not automatically replace my DVDs with the Blu-ray version. In some cases I've wondered whether it was worth upgrading a title - especially when I may only watch it once. Despite what the reviews said, I didn't care all that much for NORTH BY NORTHWEST, mainly because when I saw the film theatrically it didn't look anywhere near as dark as the Blu-ray presents it. One thing which annoys me is the way the studios make much hype about the extras on the Blu-ray versions - but they are the very same extras already on the DVD.

 

[Nebiroth]

I was vaguely tempted by the Blu editions of Space:1999 and Star Trek:TOS but my list of "wants" is so enormous, and nearly everything on it consists of titles you can only get on SD, at this point Blu is a luxury I can forego in favour of getting a bunch of much-wanted titles first.


When I have my lists completed, then I might go to Blu. At the moment it's a "nice to have", not a "must have", whereas a load of my TV/movie wants are "must haves"


Anyway, I'm content to watch Blu prices come down in the meanwhile.

 

[Sumnernor]

I don't have Blue Ray yet. WHY? Very easy, I still have my very good TUBE TV (german Loewe). It is still not very old. When it dies, then I will perhaps go BLU . One cannot buy tubes anymore. Another factor will be $$$.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Originally Posted by marcco00

"i just don't want to start that collection all over again with blu." You won't have to; little of it will hit Blu, and a good upscaling player will add luster to your existing collection. I went Blu to cherry pick, not to repurchase the whole orchard.

i hear you.....but i myself am staying OUT of that particular 'cherry orchard' altogether!!


seriously, with the SDVD market slowly slipping away, i think for the next few years i'm going to concentrate on buying niche/eclectic titles--- titles like 'model shop' 1969 that i just saw on TCM last night. i want my collection on ONE format, & i have a huge SDVD library, so i'm going to just stay with that.

[/QUOTE]

The thing is, it pays to own a Blu-ray player, period. Because even if you NEVER buy a Blu disc, your large existing standard DVD collection will look even BETTER when upscaled on a Blu-ray player. They do not become obsolete or anything. Then, once you have the new player, you always have that option to buy any future Blu-ray discs, too.

 

[mdnitoil]

Not for nothing, but in a thread specifically pointed at non-blu adopters, trying to convince us that our reasons for not purchasing are unfounded is kinda silly at this point in time. It's not like each of us hasn't heard every single reason why blu isn't so bad at least a thousand times by now.


I think it really comes down to the fact that us non-blu people just don't care enough to spend a dime on it. I also think most of us recognize that it's inevitable that we will end up with a player once our existing one dies, but there's no point in accelerating the process. As for the magical upconverting properties of blu, most of us who care about that sort of thing bought upconverting SD players years ago. Blu upconverting may be better, but we're making do with our inferior tech for the time being.

 

[Thomas Newton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich

Are there any of you who haven't added a Blu-ray player to your system yet?



Yes.




Quote:

If so why not?



1. DRM. I hate being treated by a criminal by companies to whom I am paying good money for hardware and software. Blu-Ray does the DRM bit to an even greater extent than did DVD.


2. After having just built a DVD collection, I don't feel like doing a "forklift upgrade" (buy everything again) to move everything to Blu-Ray. Yes, I know one could buy just a few, select discs (same as with a VHS-to-DVD migration), but if Blu-Ray pictures looked much better, I can see where this treadmill would lead. (To a complete Blu-Ray collection just in time for the next forklift upgrade, to 2K or 4K "Purple-Ray" discs!)

 

[Ricardo C]

Originally Posted by Thomas T

I hate hi-def. It's as simple as that. Susan Sarandon recently said, "Don't get me started on hi-def. I hated it. It makes movies look like video games". I couldn't agree more! I've been going to the movies (and still do) for over 50 years and I've yet to see a high def that even approximates what I've seen in theatres. They don't look like [COLOR= #4b0082]film[/COLOR], they look like well, video games. The texture, the grain, the whole film like look is gone. I shudder to think what something intentionally dark and grainy like Altman's McCABE AND MRS. MILLER will look like on hi-def and without Altman around to supervise the tampering ........ well, best not to think about it.


Also, my interest is primarily in classic cinema, not LORD OF THE RINGS, AVATAR, PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN, THE DARK KNIGHT or HARRY POTTER AND THE (fill in the blank). Films like THE AFRICAN QUEEN, CASABLANCA, GONE WITH THE WIND were never intended to be digitized to hi-def standards and look just fine and textured like film on standard DVD.


Grain is good, grain is cinema's friend. I even hate the way SUNSET BOULEVARD looks on standard DVD. It's been digitized to the point that it no longer resembles any pristine print I've ever seen in countless theatrical showings.

Hi-def doesn't make anything look like video games. Poor mastering does. And no home video format is immune to poor handling, DVD included. You can overcompress/DNR/overprocess any film, on any format. However, done right, BluRay offers a faithful rendition of the source. I invite you to take a look at films like 2001, Avatar, or Pride and Prejudice (2005) on BluRay, and then tell me they look like "video games".

 

[Ricardo C]

When Netflix can give me the same quality as a BluRay disc, and the ability to locally store content - DRM is bad enough, I don't need my media living in "the cloud" -, I'll consider online streaming as a viable choice. It should augment a physical format, not replace it.

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Thomas T

I hate hi-def. It's as simple as that. Susan Sarandon recently said, "Don't get me started on hi-def. I hated it. It makes movies look like video games". I couldn't agree more! I've been going to the movies (and still do) for over 50 years and I've yet to see a high def that even approximates what I've seen in theatres. They don't look like [COLOR= #4b0082]film[/COLOR], they look like well, video games.

Just recently, I've found that watching on a Plasma TV that supports 24 fps display dramatically reduces the "video game" experience compared to an LCD TV running at 240Hz interpolation. That may not eliminate other issues of overly smoothed movies with grain eliminated, or other digital artifacts, but it helps.

 

[DaveF]

I held off on Blu-ray until late 2009. I've also seen my brother in law, a home movie enthusiast, hold off on blu-ray until this year when a friend lent him a PS3. I think my reason and his are similar to the current non-adopters.


* Blu-ray was relatively expensive, around $200 for a player through 2009. Black-Friday sales brought the players down to sub-$100, which persuaded me to buy one.



* Blu-ray media was, and is, expensive. This held off my brother-in-law. While he does fine financially, he saw the $30 price tags and loses interest. And having gotten used to $5 bargain-bin DVDs, I wasn't enthused about spending $25+ on Blu-rays. Mitigating that increased cost, I've significantly cut back on purchases, mostly at Christmas time. (I've also significantly cut back on disc watching in general).


* Most Blu-ray players required TOSlink (optical) out if you're not using HDMI. I was out of optical inputs on my receiver. In deciding to go blu-ray, I also decided the time was right to get a new AVR and switch to HDMI.


* I was put off by the consistent reports about Blu-ray incompatibilities, bugs, unplayable discs, and slow performance. By late 2009 it felt like I was hearing that the bugs were fixed and players weren't so slow.



Now that I've had the Blu-ray for a year, I've found two things: I love the picture; it's gorgeous and superior in every way to DVD. I hate the performance and am so annoyed by the load up times that I watch even fewer discs than ever before; that little bit of friction pushes me towards Tivo or videogames or iPhone stuff.