After almost a year, still glad to be sitting out format war (2 Viewers)

[Jeff_HR]

1. I have a DVD Recorder.
2. I had at one point 1000+ movies recorded from TV broadcasts (These were 90% Beta) plus 500+ pre-recorded video tapes (95% VHS). I also time shifted very extensively (NOT SOAPS!!).
3. Learning how to record or use the timer in a VCR is NOT HARD. It is IMHO just laziness that people didn't learn these aspects of their VCRs.

I had a LD collection of 500+ at one time. I bought them because they had a better picture than video tape & were WS!!! Most of my OTA video tape collection was in Beta because I was a very early buyer, buying my 1st Beta VCR in 1978. I didn't buy a VHS VCR until the mid to late '90s.

Getting to the subject of this thread. I'm at this point leaning toward Blu-Ray. I think it will be the type of Optical drive that I install in my newly built computer later this year, I am thinking of finally buying a game console & it seems to have the most Studio backing. Buying a PS3 will fill two of those slots while the Computer Optical Drive fills the last. My final decision & purchases will most likely be made between June 2007 & the end of 2008.

 

[James Ryfun]

I'm currently waiting to jump on the HD bandwagon for several reasons. Some clearly my own, some beyond my ability to control.

1) Cost. Hell, I don't even own an HDTV, yet. Though I do upscale SD DVD's on my Xbox 360 / VGA adapter / LCD monitor set up. It's a poor man's HDTV, and I know this. I need to upgrade that setup first before I adopt a new disc format. Obviously.

2) I'm not convinced either of these new formats are destined to "win" anything. I realize they sport unequaled PQ and audio, but whether that's enough to convince Joe Sixpack to go out and dump any previous formats for the new, is another story. As much as we tend to look down up the common DVD consumer, like the ones who constantly buy "full screen" discs, like it or not I think they decide the winners or losers in any format war. You diehards have the knowledge and the saavy, they have the numbers.

3) It's a complicated new era. And that's where Joe Sixpack rears his ugly head again. These people can't even grasp the concept that a full screen DVD doesn't in fact, reveal the "full screen," (depending on it's OAR, of course) versus a properly framed widescreen presentation. When you start throwing out screen resolutions, interlaced versus progressive scan, compressed audio, PCM, etc, etc, you're going to get a lot of blank, vacant stares from consumers. Who then have to rely on a sales pitch from a guy at Best Buy or Circuit City to clue 'em in. And we know how that usually ends up. My point is, if you think people were misinformed during the SD DVD era, you ain't seen nothing yet. This is just another factor that makes me wonder how the hell this format war is going to play out.

4) I'm not impressed with the actual content on the discs released so far. Shades of the first couple years of DVD. Bare boned releases, for one thing. As well as releases which really haven't even looked as good as they could have - cracking open that same old 'double dip door' again for the not so distant future of "extra special releases!" They're getting better for sure, but in the first couple years of a new format, you have to expect things like this. Thus another reason to wait.

I just think standard definition DVD's are going to be around for awhile. In fact, one of the few reasons I do want to join in, has been the (slight) fear that some current Hi-def DVD's that are out right now are going to be OOP in the future and possibly impossible to find once I am convinced to jump on this train. But that's one of my only reasons for jumping, and that's just not enough for me just yet. And then again, I probably have access to the SD DVD's of those titles anyway.

I'm not against either of these formats coming out on top. But this "war" is annoying as hell and it needs to end. Soon. Only then will I start thinking of adopting.

 

[Qui-Gon John]

How true. That is one reason I will not get a TIVO or DVR. I can use my VCR to record shows I want to time-shift/commercial-skip. So I don't need another piece of hardware, that I also have to pay a fee to use.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Doug,

That is one of the reasons that I won't be going to the HD format anytime soon. I don't have many PAL DVD's but the ones that I have are for the same reason as yours, they're not available in the U.S. I don't know much about the HD/BLU-RAY technical aspects of the encoding/copy-guarding, etc. But the regional coding issue is, to me, a big concern. I may risk some "comebacks" here at HTF for this , but I just don't see the Region-coding issue being equal (from a studio's point of view) to copy-guarding. I'm one of the consumers that doesn't have any problem buying a legit copy of a film or TV/DVD set but, again, IMO, the use of Region-coding issue is something that I don't agree is necessary. I guess if I were a studio Mgr in the Home Video Dept, I'd see it differently. I'd buy their DVD's if they were made available in R1.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I agree that region coding is not a significant issue, but it has the potential to tip the scales. Far more disturbing is BD+ copy protection, which carries far more draconian potential than region-coding. Some of the aspects of BD+ bring back images of 1984.

For the record, still not adopting. Finally bought a 16:9 display, but I'm not in any hurry to convert.

 

[Jonny P]

I have said before that the main problem for DVD in hi-def (either format) are the relatively "few" HD sets that are currently owned by consumers.

Price cuts will start to help this situation. Companies like Vizio (I just purchased one of their sets) are quickly growing because consumers want to move to plasmas and LCDs. They have a "coolness" factor, and their non-bulky lines are appealing to consumers.

Also remember that once they see an HD broadcast of any sort, they'll be "curious" about one of the hi-def DVD formats.

Many SD DVDs look very good. In fact, I was watching "Flushed Away" last night on my progressive scan Sony on the Vizio, and it looked FANTASTIC.

Granted, you notice the "softness" in the picture when you are two feet away from the monitor, but how many people truly sit "that" close to their TVs?

Contrast "Flushed Away" with the recent release of "Happy Feet." For a computer animated movie direct from its digital source, the SD version of "Happy Feet" didn't look all that hot.

My big concern is that companies are going to start "skimping" on their SD transfers (and not put as much care into making them "look good") in an attempt to drive picture/sound conscious consumers to either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.

My personal feeling is that SD-DVDs from the last few years look very good on HD sets. And in my case, they'd probably look "better" if I had an upconvert DVD player (there's a Sony that I have my eyes on).

As someone who does graphics for a living, I can safely say that technology finds ways to make better image quality, in the same format, over time.

As an example, programs like Photoshop make better JPEG images for the web today than they did in earlier versions of the application software.

I personally don't think they should "abandon" standard DVD...or skimp on the development of that format.

However, that might eventually happen.

I'd pick one of formats (possibly Blu-Ray) if and when the price for a player dropped to around $150 and movies could be purchased in the $15 to $20 range.

I was an "early adopter" for the original DVD format. I purchased a player in March of 1998 for around $400.

I must say at that time that certain studios (like Paramount) weren't even making DVDs. My player (over the next couple of years) had trouble playing a number of discs.

This time around, I decided not to be an "early adopter." This time, there are two high-profile HD formats competing in the market place (Divx wasn't much of a competitor back in the late 90s).

In my mind, one of them has to look to be a clear winner in the format wars. I am not willing to invest in the format that could eventually become the Sega Dreamcast of formats.

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

True that.

 

[Dave Scarpa]

I think that's already been confirmed that alot of Warner titles like The Departed and Blood Diamond have had less than steller SD Transfers. Blood Diamond was funny the 1st 40 minutes or show looked like they had some sort of Compression accident, then after that it clears up and looks generally good, but the QC just might be slipping a bit

 

[Jeff Willis]

Steve, what is BD+ copy protection? I google'd a couple of items a minute ago...
---------------------------------------------------------------
BD+", a Blu-ray specific enhancement for content protection renewability

BD+ is a dynamic encryption scheme that allows for changing encryption schemes midstream. Should the encryption be cracked, the Blu-ray Disc group can update the encryption scheme and put it on all new discs, thus preventing a single crack from opening up the entire BD spec for the duration of its lifetime.
----------------------------------------------------------------
I seem to remember something about this at the Digital Bits a couple of months ago. "Renewability"? Does the DVD expire and self-destruct? "Holy Mission:Impossible, Batman"

Seriously, I'm in support of the studios 100% regarding the copying issues, but not about this Region-Coding issue.

 

[Rich Malloy]

I'm still sitting this one out, despite being an early adopter of several other niche formats. Blu-ray is clearly the most impressive technology, but none of the players currently on the market are capable of exploiting all that technology. Its my understanding that no such players will exist until (possibly) the next gen this Fall.

I would almost certainly have purchased an HD-DVD player with upscaling capabilities for SD discs now that they've dipped into affordable ranges, but for one reason: these players (and I'm referring to the Toshibas) can't play out-of-region/PAL discs.

At some point, I suspect there will be released a player, either HD-DVD or Blu-ray, that's backward compatible (upscales SD discs as well as the Oppos and last-gen Panasonics) and can play other region and PAL SD discs. The "HD component" will be merely icing on the underlying SD cake, but will become more significant as well-mastered HD releases of films outside the usual blockbuster cineplex fodder start making their way to the market. Until then, I have no problem waiting.

 

[Steve Schaffer]

One of the cool things about HD DVD is that there is no region coding. I have 4 import HD DVD titles--Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, The Elephant Man, The Pianist, and Enemy at the Gates. They all play just fine on my Tosh HDA2. I never imported SD dvd as I never owned a region free player but I'm looking forward to more import HD DVD titles in the future, including some that are BD exclusive in the US.

I think the guy who posted that he prefers low quality VHS recordings for time shifting to the higher quality and easier to set up PVR recordings is pretty indicative of the sort of luddite thinking that pervades this thread.

 

[Jefferson Morris]

I also suspect Katzenberg is right. The differences between a well-upscaled SD DVD and its HD counterpart are subtle even on most HD displays of 50 inches screen size or less. For most consumers, there's just no point in upgrading.

I didn't see a dramatic difference myself until I upgraded to a 110" front projection system. And even on that setup, well-transferred SD discs (via my Momitus player) still look very good.

This is the new laserdisc, I have little doubt. And the format war isn't helping. Standard DVD will do must consumers just fine until direct download takes over in a few years.

As for myself, I have both the HD-DVD add-on drive for my Xbox 360 and a PS3. So I'm format neutral (though I'm probably going to lean towards Blu-Ray versions of multi-format titles, since my PS3 outputs via HDMI and my 360 does not. I ain't upgrading to the new 360 just for HDMI. Shame on Microsoft for that one - that fact is also going to push me toward the PS3 versions of dual-platform games).

--Jefferson Morris

 

[Bruce Hedtke]

I can't say I agree with that. Laserdisc was never really affordable to the masses. HD isn't either at the moment but if it is to follow the same price-point arc as SD-DVD (a united format would certainly help this along), it will be within the next two years.

I think the one aspect that is driving me toward jumping into the format is the availability of software thru rental outlets. I'm not sure about Blockbuster's online rental program but Netflix will send you the HD-DVD or Blu-Ray version of a movie if you tell them to. When DVD first hit the market, there was no Netflix and Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, Family Video, etc did not carry DVD rentals. The only way to actually use the format was to buy the movie. If you didn't like it, you had to sell it to someone else at a loss or just eat the whole cost yourself. Now, at least, there are online vendors who will rent you the movie if it is available in HD for no extra charge. That's a pretty sweet deal, to me.
Bruce

 

[David_B_K]

Actually, Laserdisc was often more affordable than VHS in terms of purchasing a movie. You could get most standard play laserdiscs for $29.95 or $34.95 when a VHS (priced for rental houses) would go for $69.95 to $89.95. Rental places for laserdiscs were few, but here in Houston, we had a few. It took several years before VHS was priced for sell-through.

I am inclined to agree with Katzenberg on this. I think the "winner" of the format war will be the new laserdisc. I will probably get one of them when one "wins", but I do not expect mass acceptance of the format from the average consumer. The average consume does not even have his SDVD connected to a stereo, let alone a 5.1 system.

 

[Sami Kallio]

Eventually the studios are going to shift their focus on HD and then it doesn't matter what J6P thinks. SD can look decent but HD can look amazing. There is a big difference so HD isn't going anywhere, either one of the formats is here to stay unless a third format appears and wins it all but that's very unlikely.

I find it odd that people that were willing to spend big bucks on SD players that provided subtle differences in PQ that were very hard to see are waiting on this one. Why didn't they settle for $50 off brand player instead of their $500-$1500 Denon? People are still shelling out $150-200 for upconverting off brand players that offer very small difference in comparison when it takes only a $100 more to get into HD. Prices are only going down so it won't take long when a true HD player is at the same price as an upconverting player. Which would you buy?

For me, it's SD only when I'm on the road and watching on the hotel TV or on my laptop. Home it's almost 100% HD other than the F1 Grand Prix's on Speed that are SD. I know all my videophile friends had to have HD-DVD when they saw my setups, mainly the 1080p DLP which IMO is a big leap over 720p as well.

I have to be fair though, I like my TV's big (61" TV, 116" FP) so that definately is a factor. Still you will see a difference on smaller set, just like you will see a difference between a quality TV and cheaper set.

 

[Yumbo]

FUD!
It's relative to viewing distance.
HD is more apparent on smaller screens and that's a scientific fact.
With this attitude, no wonder less people upgrade to HD.

And I say it with love, ok.

 

[Sami Kallio]

Whatever Chris.

 

[Mike Frezon]

While I am also sitting out the HD-format wars, I gotta tell you John that I love my HD-DVR to go along with my HD cable service. The quality for time-shifted programs is as perfect as the original broadcast. And the ease of use is great.

I'm a fella who has owned VCRs since the early 80s (my first BIG VCR purchase was a Sanyo Beta HiFi VCR--official product of the 1984 LA Olympic Games! ) and has always known how to program them for maximum advantage. I have used VCRs to time-shift AND to archive.

With my tiny Samsung 28" HD CRT set, I really enjoy the images from my HD cable service and now use the DVR for all time shifting and a DVD-R for archiving shows (and duping old VCR tapes--VHS & Beta). While the use of the DVD-R is an exact parallel to the VCR...the DVR just blows away the VCR in terms of convenience and ease of use when it comes to time-shifting.

I LOVE HD (I find I rarely watch ANY non-HD TV anymore)...but with my set-up and budget the DVD HD format wars will have to wait. DVD quality is still plenty good enough for these eyes.

 

[Charles_Y]

A question here. I haven't kept up with developments in this area, but unless ALL of the studios and 3rd party video companies (i.e. Image, Anchor Bay, etc.) are backing BOTH formats, why would anyone opt for either? Also, even if all companies start to back both formats I don't see the studios going to the expense of releasing their product in both formats for every release going forward.

For collectors and lovers of films one has to realize they come from very many companies. Are you going to only limit your self to hi-def releases from only a select group of studios because you have a Blu-Ray player and cannot play releases from other studios backing only HD DVD? This is very foolish in my estimation.

Maybe there are now universal players to deal with both formats but the costs involved and technical issues make them weak choices in my view. This is only enabling a situation that needs to be resolved by having one of them drop out (possible but unlikely) or another format be developed (no chance).

I have to say I think the reviewers at the various magazines and websites that critique new releases are only perpetuating this mess by spending increasingly more space on the hi-def releases and much less on the SD stuff. I think they should be ashamed of themselves. They are definitely forsaking a large part of their readership.

I guess this is all a moot point for many with the advent of downloadable movies. Something about which I'm not very sanguine at present.

 

[Jefferson Morris]

Yep.

--Jefferson Morris