Quadruple dipping ahead/ - Page 3

The newer films will benefit with HD because the studios have them recorded for it. Older films that have been restored, will benefit too.

What I am concerned with is HD releases that have not been restored. They would/could look even worse in HD.

As for the sales pattern, the newer films would be released on an HD format, but bare boned, with extras on an SE that would be released in 6 months or so later, sort of like it is now. If they released the newer films with the same quality as we can see on SD, there are going to be a lot of really P.O.'d people, and the studios will hear about it really quick.

Glenn

Regarding the double dipping phenomenon that most of us engage in...I won't be upgrading alot of my dvd library to Blu-Ray or whatever. Film classics, yes. Star Wars, LOTR, etc...yes. Most of the romantic comedies or comedies...No. Alot of those look pretty good even projected at 108 inches. Of course I've never seen a high definition dvd so I reserve the right to change my mind when I do.

The problem with the 'extras' will be that they'll (most likely) be from standard def. sources. They'll look SO much worse (as compared to the HD movie) that you may not want (or care) to even have the extras on the disc.

in other words, if done correctly, we'll be salivating SO much at the quality of the movie, that we'll be like "Extras? Who cares!" I've held onto all of my DVD's that I upagred to newer versions...I've even given a few to my family, so no biggie as far as worrying about the 'old' versions for me.

The way I see it is, the $20 I spent on the DVD was worth it the first time I watched the movie. The fact that the upgraded disc, now makes the older version "Obsolete" - doesn't bother me one bit. I got my moneys worth out of it.

I wish more people would look at it that way.

You know, pretty much everything except for material shot in NTSC (like TV shows such as All in the Family and Married with Children) will never need HD. However, we can hopefully look forward to film-based TV eventually being remastered.

A lot of this has been done already. The Twilight Zone was retransfered in HD and NTSC remasters for the definitive sets resulted.

There's also cartoons... WB remastered the cartoons for their sets in HD.

Then, there's the digital restorations made in HD, 2K, or 4K. Just think, Fritz Lang's Metropolis could be a great HD title thanks to the existing high resolution digital source.

I think it's obvious that studios like Sony will play the same game. The real question is are you going to go for the same standard def extras that you already have on the SE dvd or are you going to wait for that definitive Superbit HD or whatever release? For me it's simple: Picture and Sound Quality.

Picture and sound for me too. Give it to me once, give it to me right!


Not even when the remastered Driving Miss Daisy in 16x9 WS? What about the 5th Element SB? Ben Hur properly framed? Will you upgrade to the new 16x9 Dune? Did you pass on these discs to start with or did you stick when the original (inferior) versions even after the improved re-releases?

DVD has come nowhere near the number of titles that VHS has had. The only area that DVD beats VHS is in tv shows. The
shame is that if third parties were given a chance, a lot of these titles would get released at a measured pace. I don't believe the marketing departments at the major studios understand classic films or how to sell them unless
there's a remake.

I do think hi-def is being pushed because the marketing departments say its easier to re-sell the movies that have been put out rather than trying to sell classic movies. I do think this model may be flawed because the average person is looking for a decent picture at a decent price. For the price of a $400 PS3, you can get a tv, SD player, and have a little left over to buy a movie or two. Until hi-def can compete with that, average people are not buying into this.

DVD hasn't been around as long as VHS was. At the same stage in VHS's life-cycle, it had far fewer titles available.

I know what you're saying about 3rd party companies...but there *are* 3rd party companies (criterion) that license films that often major studios don't see a need to release on their own. Also, if anything, DVD has actually *increased* the market for catalog classic film titles. I don't think that historic titles were ever regarded as having such strong potential for $$$ before. Think of all the time and money that WB has spent restoring classic catalog titles. That sort of effort never took place with VHS...DVD created the market for such high regard for classic catalog presentations.

Are there still too many titles that don't make it onto the list? Of course, but I think that as time moves forward that more and more titles will show up on DVD.



Like "duh". Why would anyone who only wants to buy a sub-$400 NTSC 4x3 TV care about HD media to begin with?



Five years from now when Blu-ray players are selling for under $100 at Costco, the average person will buy them without even knowing that they are any different than their old DVD player.

That's what I was referring to about the price. Since the general consumer isn't going to get into HD for a while, the original releases may not be SE's. If I were a studio, I wouldn't put all my production into an initial SE when I know the "BOOM" isn't going to hit for several years.

And if I DID initially make SE's, by the time the general public gets into HD (like 5 years later), I will have to RE-RELEASE my HD library to market those people.

Can you imagine the "Double-dip" threads then??? I see it as a no-win situation for the studios. Double dipping would have to occur no matter what.

That's why I don't see many SE's initially, because the studios don't want to lose profits by putting all of their production into a market that will most likely be small for quite some time.

The $400 is really the wrong thing to say. I know that they don't, but the stores are supposed to be carrying only this year's models of TV's, and all of those are ready for the next gen of players.

This should be a major selling point but the salesmen are too busy trying to 'dump' last year's sets first. Anyone that buys a TV (I think it is at 19" for a minimum should get a set with the HDMI connection. After the WTF? factor kicks in, getting a new HD player will be a no-brainer - and now there is only one cable necessary to make it work, not 3 or 5, to get the best picture.

Glenn

Patrick is this really what you meant to say? All film-based material will "never need HD"?

-p

We are way passed quad!
1. VHS
2. VHS Widescreen (rare)
3. LD
4. LD CAV (fairly rare)
5. LD DTS
6. DVD
7. DVD DTS (somewhat rare)
8. DVD SE
9. DVD DC (not so rare)
10. D-VHS (super rare)
11. HD
12. HD SE

DiscoVision anyone???

There is no such thing as 'dippping' when a new format comes out. It's only consider 'dipping' when it's re-released on the same format.

Well, yeah, that's what I said. But certain studios will still do the bare bones->special edition->Superbit/Divimax/Extreme route with Bluray.

When DVD came out, it was established that consumers would buy movies. When VHS came out studios didn't believe that consumers would buy movies. That's why Fox practically gave Magnetic Video the home video rights to 50 of their movies. VHS established a depth of titles such as tv movies as well as regular movies. I still have a large number of VHS titles that are not on dvd that I will eventually have to transfer over.


Bingo!!! That is my point. There are people who do not care about HD. Yet HD will need to appeal to these very people if it wants to become as popular as SD. It could do that but it also could become like LD. I do think that movie sales are likely to fall below HD maker's expectations and will not be the bonanza the studios are hoping for.


Exactly, but the problem is that many studios as a policy, do not license films. Warner is one of these studios that has such a policy. Maybe MPI, which distribute the DS series, would be interested in the DS movies. Films such as this are gathering dust and making nothing for Warner. I can understand a studio passing on a title they don't think they can make money on but I don't see why they would allow a title to sit rather than shopping them around and see if anyone is interested.

Has the FCC specified a HDMI connection? I think that they have said they have to be hd ready. That means a lot of people will have to buy a box or as I suspect, the government will have to keep moving the deadlines back. If they cut people's tv off just because they don't get digital, these politicians better build a deep bunker. Hell hath no fury like a tv viewer deprived of their tv shows.

I see most of what you are saying, but:


You failed to read a few lines further where I talk about 5 years hence. What made laserdisc so expensive was that:

A: it actually *was* expensive to make and
B: Because it was so akward, people didn't like it even when price wasn't an issue and so
C: it never gained mass penetration and so
D: Laserdisc hardware maintained its premium price even years into the format.

Blu-ray has an entirely different situation.

A: It will initially cost more to make BD discs, but these prices will fall into DVD costs within a few years and Sony will subsidize the format to get it going so price won't deter early adoptors.
B: BD discs appeal to the same familiarity that folks already have with CD and DVD...a 5" disc. The conveience-factor is all there just like with DVD so there's no obstacle to form-factor here.
C: Once HDTV costs come down, so will the cost of Blu-ray players. Unlike laserdisc (but just like DVD) the computer industry's installation base of BD drives in PCs will help leverage costs and increase savings from mass-manufacture for the drives and software...allowing Blu-ray players to drop in price to where "normal" people who aren't tech-savvy will be able to buy them...even if they hook the player to the S-video of their NTSC set.

DaVid, is this one of those which came first, the chicken or the egg questions?

HD TV's are practically (or should be) the only thing on sale now, so anyone looking for a new TV will probably get one, and the prices are dropping month by month.

But putting BD drives in PC's only proves my point that new BD DVD players won't be priced at $1,000. when they come out. After all, they sort of are already on sale in Japan, so the initial "new" technology is not so 'new' anymore.

So why can't these players come out at say $300.? Why can't a store sell you a new HD TV, and for a little extra, they'll throw in an BD player?

The mass sales is what will get this going, and I am sure that Sony wants that to happen right away. They don't want any kind of a niche.

Glenn

This whole thing comes down to software sales how close the studios are to being right. The studio vision is that the general public will buy the same titles on hi-def as they did on SD. If the studios are completely wrong and only early adapters upgrade then hi-def becomes a niche like LD.
If the studios are right then they make out like bandits.
Somewhere in between and it becomes a nailbiter.

I have no problem with HD being a niche. Not everyone is going to bother upgrading their set anyway. Some will stick to SD dvd like some people stuck with VHS until the costs came down.

Business is half statistics, half luck (perhaps even more luck than statistics). If they REALLY knew what the future would bring, EVERYONE would be rich

That's kind of why I don't believe in all of the "Consipracy" theories. While there are some releases that do seem a bit obvious, I think most releases are 'guess work'.

It's like those who claim that sporting events are 'fixed'. While it does seem like it (from time to time), I really doubt it.

One would think that going from 480 to 1080 might well be considered a step-change event. Certainly it would seem reasonable assumption to me.

However, after seeing Sony's Blu-ray demonstration (their 60" screen, their split-screen demonstration of Lawrence of Arabia (half 480, half high def)in their home threatre setup (theatre like lighting) I have to say that while it was clearly a signficant improvement I don't think that the average viewer would have noticed.

More specifically, if the average viewer came in and sat down without knowing what was being demo'd they would have walked out none the wiser.

So, if they are over an early adopter's house, will they appreciate the difference or just piss off the guy that spent a bunch for his new set-up?

Don't know, but as a sample of one, I don't think it bodes well for mainstream consumers quickly getting on-board. As far as moi, I'll wait and see. If those 4k scans of the Bond films turn to something great ... I could crack.

Sometimes you make your luck. The marketing departments of the major studios seem to worship surveys. Wonder if they take a survey before they use the bathroom. Companies like Image and AB regularly take things the studios wouldn't touch and sell them. I have said laboriously, if studios don't want to risk releasing them then license. You take a licensing fee and risk not one penny. I would catalog the films that a company owns and shop them around to third party sellers. Instead they leave them sitting in a vault,
gathering dust. I just don't understand it. Doesn't make a bit of sense.

I'm ready for Blu-Ray or HD discs today. I say if there's enough demand to re-release these films again and again, then great. That means there will tons of stuff out there to choose from.

Quit worrying about double dips of all this stuff. Grab a version you like and enjoy it.