I am afraid of buying DVD's now (1 Viewer)

[Joseph DeMartino]

But you'll also have to buy a second player to continue collecting hi-def discs in the other format, and you'll be able to continue watching your early discs until your player breaks and you can't find a replacement on eBay or parts for it anywhere.

I'm in no hurry. When discs are the same price as SD DVD, players are $100 bucks and there's only one format to buy, I'll be happy to join the hi-def DVD club. In the meantime my 720p JVC 56" is a vast improvement over my old 56" widecreen SD Toshiba and it does a quite decent job of scaling 480p DVD to 720p, and downcoverting 1080i cable shows to 720p and I'm happy with what I've got. Better can wait.

I don't see any reason to spend top dollar on equipment and software today (much of which will eventually be re-released in super-duper special editions with more content - what am I supposed to do? Triple- and quadruple-dip?) just to be one of the first on my block to have this stuff. I waited until the 2nd generation of DVD players (when the price had come down by about 1/2) before getting into DVD, and that was because of numerous advantages that DVD had over LD, and because of the need to save DVD from the threat of DIVX. For me there are no such compelling reasons to buy into hi-def DVD at this point and I have no problem waiting a few years before even thinking about it. (One reason why I went with a 720p LCoS rather than breaking the bank on some first generation 1080p set of dubious ability last year.)

Regards,

Joe

 

[RickER]

Here is my question. Why to people "trash" regular DVD, and usually in the non HD sections. They ask if a title is in HD, or ask if we should even be buying SD DVD titles now. I would be shot down if i went to the HD threads and asked why should i get into HD DVD, cause its expensive, and regular DVD is good enough. I just see a lot of threads in this section from people who are scared to buy into regular DVD. I for one am not. DVD is alive and well!

 

[Ted Todorov]

You'll have the movies all right, but you may have a lot of trouble finding a machine that will play them. Maybe combo machines will be ubiquitous, but I wouldn't bet the ranch on it.

Personally I'm waiting out the format war. Also, as thing stand, I am yet to see any guarantee that HD-DVD or BD will replace DVDs in the mainstream. The vast majority of consumers do not have a display devices that will make them notice the difference between an upscalled DVD and an HD-DVD. And there are all kinds of incentives to stick with DVDs:

The broken DRM on DVD is a big reason for remaining loyal to DVD -- aside from all the people participating in the Neflix rent-to-own program, look a what happens to people who buy in to losing DRMed formats: Anyone out there who bought a bunch of songs or videos in Microsoft's "Plays For Sure" format -- well, my condolences. What with MS's own Zune not supporting it, and the current #2 after the iPods SanDisk going to another incompatible DRM (Helix with Real Networks), I'll bet that you won't be able to buy any Plays For Sure device within a couple of years. (Another reason why Amazon's Unbox is DOA).

But speaking of download services, there is another reason not to bet just yet on BD or HD-DVD: if Apple manages to get the studios to play ball and agree to 1080P, together with the "iTV" device, it just might leave BD & HD-DVD relegated to SACD/DVD-A like oblivion. Buyer beware.

Ted

 

[Robert Crawford]

Rick,
Let's not get too sensitive here. By the way, people state everyday over in the HD area that they're not buying into HD because it's too expensive, SD DVD is fine with them and they don't have any titles in HD that interest them and nobody gets shot down for saying so.




Crawdaddy

 

[Bradley-E]

I am still buying Standard DVD's. I am expecting the Boris Karloff Collection and Ultimate Sci-Fi to arrive to me today from Best Buy.com. In November I will get the Preston Sturges Collection. I'm getting these because they have taken almost 10 years to make it to Standard DVD so who knows when they will arrive on HD. But in the meantime I am totally supporting HD DVD and intend on buying the titles available to that format. It will be a long time before HD DVD impacts but in the meantime I intend on enjoying BOTH HD and Standard DVD.

 

[ReggieW]

I am curious...

Isn't 1080i/1080p overkill for films made before 1953? Films only had so many pixels/lines back then, so picture wise, does anyone expect the HD-DVD of Casablanca to look any better than the already flawless SD DVD on the market? The only advantage I see is that you will be able to fit all of the content on the second disc on one disc with HD-DVD. I guess what I'm saying is that I am not concerned with owning films on HD-DVD which already boast near flawless picture quality (Citizen Kane, Wizard of Oz, Casablanca, etc) and were made before the advent of widescreen.

IMO, Warner should focus on titles like Ben-hur, Rebel without a cause, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Around the world in 80 days & other "scope" films which will benefit from the extra resolution HD-DVD offers. I know Casablanca and Maltese Falcon are very popular, but they are titles which will benefit little (if any) picture wise from the extra resolution. So yes, if you are interested in a classic academy ratio film like Stagecoach (which is now presented nicely on SD DVD) and all of the content can already fit on a single SD DVD, then there will be little benefit in owning an HD-DVD version.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Lars Vermundsberget]

Personally, I don't worry about the future of my collection of standard DVDs. I'm confident I'll be able to play them on a better-format player that I might buy within the next few years. However, since there's apparently still a "format war" going on I'll stay on the fence probably for a looong while...

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

As opposed to the infinite number of pixels/lines of films made since 1953?

1) Films don't have pixels or lines at all. Films have grains of light-sensitive emulsion. The lazy habit of referring to "resolution" in reference to electronic and digital representations of film really confuses the issue.

2) Most "widescreen" comedies, small "family" and "character" films that are projected at 1.85:1 theatrically are shot on 35mm film in the 1.37:1 Academy ratio exactly like Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon. If the 1.85:1 films can benefit from hi-def transfers, so can older films.

3) Do you seriously think that a 4:3 presentation of Casablanca that fills your screen from top to bottom using 1080 progressive lines of resolution isn't going to look better than a 4:3 presentation of the same film using 480 progressive lines? Even an upconverting player can't add resolution that isn't there in the first place. It can only "guess" at what might be missing and supply something that approximates it. It will never look as good as the actual 1080p picture. Which in turn will probably never look as good as a real film print projected in a theater.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

None of the films cited will benefit from the full resolution of HD, since even on a 16:9 screen some resolution must be sacrificed to letterboxing bars. It is nearer the truth to say that only the Academy ratio films will benefit from the full potential of hi-def, while even anamorphic "scope" films will necessarily be sacrificing something to maintain the correct ratio.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Paul Arnette]

If I had a nickle for every time this misconception raised its ugly head, I would have a BD player by now. No, 1080i/1080p is not overkill for anything shot on film, as film has more resolution than HD DVD or Blu-Ray is capable of presenting. For things like TV shows shot on video there is questionable benefit, but they would probably still benefit anyway.

 

[RickER]

Sorry to come across that way. You know how the typed word can come across worse than ment? I just dont see DVD as dead like some seem to. With a decent upconverting player DVD just seems like a good deal. You can find movies not even 6 months old for 5 to 10 bucks. How can you loose even if an HD version should come 6 months from now?

 

[Frank@N]

I'm buying whatever I like on DVD.

If Hollywood Video has a 3/$25 sale, then I'm walking out with Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, The New World, and Syriana.

Prices on catalog titles like the 'Stone' movies, Bladerunner, Backdraft, and Grease are going for $10-$13 on sale.

I'm skipping the Format War, HD in MPEG, 15-25GB transfers, extra-less discs, combo discs, and 720p HDTVs.

Count me in when everything's been redone at 50GB and good titles cost around $10 used.

 

[David_B_K]

Not to keep piling on, but I can see why you would think those older movies look about as good as possible on SD DVD. If they are mastered to their true potential, they could.

I had occasion to watch Casablanca a couple of weeks ago, after the thread about the over-cropping of Casablanca in this forum (I have the first Warner SE). The movie looked pretty scrumptious for most of its length, better than it ever looked on TCM or late late shows. However, the picture has problems in the scene at the end at the airport (kind of an important scene). DVDs without a high enough bitrate tend to artifact on B&W films, particularly in dark scenes with smoke or fog.

During the big closeups of Ingrid Bergman's face in that scene, as the fog dances around, the shading on her cheekbones tends to dissolve as the DVD breaks down. With all the fog in scene, it's like the player cannot tell what is fog and what is flesh. Also, the fog itself breaks up and artifacts at times. This could be due to a low bitrate recording. The dual-layer DVD included a documentary on the making of the film, as well a slew of Bogie movie trailers. Had the entire movie been on the disc, with the Special features on another, the movie might have looked better.

Or, it may be that in the mastering of the film, the software they used to clean up the print may have gotten confused in the scene in the fog, and it may not have been able to distinguish fog from film grain or dirt (remember the error with the rain on Warner's Citizen Kane?).

Oh, and I'm still buying DVDs as well. When I watch a HD broadcast, I can imagine how great HD looks. But until one format is left standing, I'm out. Or at least until one or both formats is supported by all studios, I'll stick with DVD, which does not suck in any case.