Studios Reducing/Ending Retail DVDs of Classics - Warner Interview - Page 5

#121

Rating: 0

8/14/09 at 1:51pm

MattH.
Matt Hough
offline

Joined: April 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Post Count: 1,960

Quote:

Originally Posted by smithb

Gary, How were those Lex Barker Tarzan's to watch? Those were one's that stood out in my mind to possibly purchase but I never pulled the trigger.

I've watched three of them thus far, and aside from a few white speckles, the video quality is quite good. Sound is a little hissy but nothing severe.

#122

Rating: 0

8/14/09 at 3:06pm

Point-Blank
Walker
offline

Joined: July 2008
Post Count: 72

As someone who studies history and works as an author and film historian, in addition to dabbling in both pop culture and general world history, it's hard not to see a bigger picture here. I believe the cyclical nature of culture will eventually find an opportunity to spin classic movies back in at least a variation of vogue.

After all, the whole concept of "classic film" wasn't much more than a virtually unknown, untested theory until the proliferation of television in the late 40's-60's helped spawn the idea and ideal of looking back instead of forward. Perhaps a future catalyst is out there waiting to make everything old new again, as the song said. Or perhaps we are just dinosaurs watching the comet in the sky and shrugging over the inevitable. Whichever, live your life now, not on a shelf collecting dust.

Or as Ray Bradbury once said: "Go not with ruins in your mind."

#123

Rating: 0

8/14/09 at 3:38pm

MichaelEl
offline

Joined: May 2006
Post Count: 116

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary OS

Quote:

Some of my TV buddies on the other board think Warners is going to be offering season sets of older classics like 77 Sunset Strip in the near future at reasonable prices. I totally disagree (but would love to be proved wrong). If the company even thought about doing TV shows in this format, and doing it correctly, we are only talking 2 hour long episodes per disc. Nothing more than that would result in even half-way decent quality. So you do the math. If an older b&w show ran for at least 30 episodes per season (and most ran for more), we are looking at 15 or more DVD-R's for just one season.

If they used dual-layer DVD+Rs, it would only take 7 discs for an entire season. In fact, Warner should already be using dual layer discs for movies that are over 2 hours long. While no one knows the longevity of burned discs for sure, I have CD-Rs over a decade old that play with no problems.

#124

Rating: 0

8/14/09 at 4:37pm

Jeff Willis
offline

Joined: January 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Post Count: 2,264

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattH.

I've watched three of them thus far, and aside from a few white speckles, the video quality is quite good. Sound is a little hissy but nothing severe.

Ditto on Matt's post. I've seen 3 of them so far and the transfer Q's are pretty good considering that these are RKO's. No complaints. I'm watching them on a 50" Plasma with 4:3 format at about 8-9 ft viewing distance.

This has been my only Archive purchase so far. I just figured that we wouldn't see the Barkers released on pressings and when the discount/coupons brought them below $10 ea, I pulled the trigger. If I recall, they were about $7+ each including shipping back during that "bundle set" sale.

"Checkmate King Two Out" Jeff Willis "Combat! A Selmur Production"

I'm a 50's - mid-90's TV/DVD Collector. One DVD show since '96: Firefly

The Fugitive/See Hollywood & Die: [Miles] "What, you think I'm crazy?!" [Kimble] "Next question."

#125

Rating: 0

8/14/09 at 6:08pm

smithb
Brad Smith
offline

Joined: September 2008
Post Count: 451

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Willis

Ditto on Matt's post. I've seen 3 of them so far and the transfer Q's are pretty good considering that these are RKO's. No complaints. I'm watching them on a 50" Plasma with 4:3 format at about 8-9 ft viewing distance.

This has been my only Archive purchase so far. I just figured that we wouldn't see the Barkers released on pressings and when the discount/coupons brought them below $10 ea, I pulled the trigger. If I recall, they were about $7+ each including shipping back during that "bundle set" sale.

I couldn't even wait for the replies and ordered this afternoon. The only purchase I will probably make through the archive program, unless they release the Gordon years or the TV show. I was able to get the bundled price of $49.95 and use a $10 off coupon. Unfortunately, I couldn't work around shipping so it ended up about $9 a movie.

#126

Rating: 0

8/14/09 at 6:13pm

smithb
Brad Smith
offline

Joined: September 2008
Post Count: 451

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelEl

If they used dual-layer DVD+Rs, it would only take 7 discs for an entire season. In fact, Warner should already be using dual layer discs for movies that are over 2 hours long. While no one knows the longevity of burned discs for sure, I have CD-Rs over a decade old that play with no problems.

They could use dual-layer disks. However, while I do not have a dual- layer burner I had heard from a few people that they were more problematic. Maybe that is no longer an issue but if so, it may be why they have stayed away from them. Also, they are more expensive, but for what they are charging that shouldn't be an issue.

Personally, I would stay away from +R's and stick with -R's. While I can burn both I had issues early on with some DVD players reading +R's but very rarely an issue with a -R.

#127

Rating: 0

8/14/09 at 9:24pm

Jeff Willis
offline

Joined: January 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Post Count: 2,264

Quote:

Originally Posted by smithb

I couldn't even wait for the replies and ordered this afternoon. The only purchase I will probably make through the archive program, unless they release the Gordon years or the TV show. I was able to get the bundled price of $49.95 and use a $10 off coupon. Unfortunately, I couldn't work around shipping so it ended up about $9 a movie.

You made a good buy, imo. That price ea is a good one. I remember when I was looking at that set, I had set the "$10ea including shipping line in the sand" that I wasn't going to exceed in price. The other reason that it's a good buy, imo, is that I don't see any future pressed releases of these titles. Maybe it'll happen but I doubt it for these.

This reminds me that I still need to watch 2 more in the set.

"Checkmate King Two Out" Jeff Willis "Combat! A Selmur Production"

I'm a 50's - mid-90's TV/DVD Collector. One DVD show since '96: Firefly

The Fugitive/See Hollywood & Die: [Miles] "What, you think I'm crazy?!" [Kimble] "Next question."

#128

Rating: 0

8/16/09 at 1:57am

Chuck Pennington
offline

Joined: May 2001
Post Count: 519

That's because there are more players on the market that can read the -R format, though now all players can read both -R and +R and have been able to for several years. I have burned hundreds of DVD+R DL discs and have yet to have a problem with any of them, though I also only use high-quality Verbatim media for DVD+R DL. Using Memorex or some of the off-brands that are known to be highly unstable with poor dye layers means creating a disc with a very limited lifespan.

I have found very many DVD players have no trouble with DVD+R DL burned discs, but there are some that refuse to load them. One of my friend's Sony players from 2001 refuses to play the DVD+R DL discs I send him, but his Sony player from 2005 plays them just fine. One would have to go back to pre-2000 to find DVD players that have trouble/can't play DVD-R discs, though the dye layer has a lot to do with whether players can focus in on it and play it. There are some DVD-R brands and DVD players that are just poor when it comes to compatibility. One of my players will usually not recognize discs burnt onto Ritek media (which I stopped using years ago anyway), though at one time it would read them.

There are a lot of variables when it comes to using burned media, period. I should think that if Warner chose for a few special titles to be dual layer they would actually make a small pressed run of them in that format due to the compatibility issues with dual layer media with players out there on the market.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smithb

They could use dual-layer disks. However, while I do not have a dual- layer burner I had heard from a few people that they were more problematic. Maybe that is no longer an issue but if so, it may be why they have stayed away from them. Also, they are more expensive, but for what they are charging that shouldn't be an issue.

Personally, I would stay away from +R's and stick with -R's. While I can burn both I had issues early on with some DVD players reading +R's but very rarely an issue with a -R.

#129

Rating: 0

8/16/09 at 11:22pm

MichaelEl
offline

Joined: May 2006
Post Count: 116

Quote:

Originally Posted by smithb

Personally, I would stay away from +R's and stick with -R's. While I can burn both I had issues early on with some DVD players reading +R's but very rarely an issue with a -R.

Actually, DVD+Rs are manufactured to higher standards than -Rs, which is probably why Verbatim only sells dual layer +Rs.

#130

Rating: 0

8/17/09 at 5:14am

smithb
Brad Smith
offline

Joined: September 2008
Post Count: 451

Yes, age of one's DVD players and the different formats brings up an interesting decision for WB with regards to burned media. Bringing it up made me think about my own setup. I currently have 4 DVD players in operation produced in the following years 1999, 2001, 2003, and 2007 (for PAL support). The one's that get used the most are the 2001 (daughter's use in family room), and the 2003 (Denon 2900 in the HT). As for my burner, I use a Pioneer 05 I bought back in 2002 that is still going strong and I only use Sony single layer DVD-R's for burning.

As stated, newer equipment probably would not cause an issue but one has to consider the abundance of quality older equipment still around working fine. Maybe I'm an anonmaly as far as age of setup's go, but I would guess not.

#131

Rating: 0

8/18/09 at 2:07pm