Laserdisc: Any chance of new players coming out? (1 Viewer)

[jcroy]

From an historical perspective.

Back in the day circa late-1990s at the dawn of the dvd format, how common was it for the movie companies to use the same old laserdisc transfers for the first dvd versions of the corresponding movies?

(ie. Possibly due to laziness).

 

[Bryan^H]

From an historical perspective.

Back in the day circa late-1990s at the dawn of the dvd format, how common was it for the movie companies to use the same old laserdisc transfers for the first dvd versions of the corresponding movies?

(ie. Possibly due to laziness).

Good question, but I can only guess most were new transfers at the time. I had already given my Laserdiscs away by the time I was heavily invested in DVD.

 

[Rob_Ray]

In the earliest days of DVD, I know a lot of transfers were laserdisc transfers, because they were not anamorphic. I don't think it was laziness so much as a desire to more quickly get product on the shelves to support the new format, with the idea the digital format's increased color stability would be enough of an upgrade for the present, until time permitted remasterings.

 

[Angelo Colombus]

My first introduction to dvd's happened in late 1999 when my laserdisc player broke so I went to my local Best Buy and they had one left and that was the Pioneer DVL-909 which also plays dvd's. Went to my local video rental store and they only had about 20 dvd's to rent so I picked my favorite which was Blazing Saddles and was very impressed with the image.

 

[Worth]

In the earliest days of DVD, I know a lot of transfers were laserdisc transfers, because they were not anamorphic. I don't think it was laziness so much as a desire to more quickly get product on the shelves to support the new format, with the idea the digital format's increased color stability would be enough of an upgrade for the present, until time permitted remasterings.

Also, HD and 16:9 sets were in their infancy at the time, and downconverting an anamorphic image actually looked worse on a standard 4:3 set than a normal letterboxed transfer. It's one of the reasons Criterion took so long to start releasing 16:9 discs.

 

[Worth]

Guess the MUSE discs did look pretty good:

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Non-anamorphic DVDs were fairly common in the early days and some studios were worse offenders than others when it came to recycling laserdisc transfers. I remember that the Disney offshoots like Touchstone recycled tons of LD masters, they might have been the worst offenders because it seems like they kept doing it long after everyone else moved on.

 

[Dave Moritz]

Non-anamorphic DVDs were fairly common in the early days and some studios were worse offenders than others when it came to recycling laserdisc transfers. I remember that the Disney offshoots like Touchstone recycled tons of LD masters, they might have been the worst offenders because it seems like they kept doing it long after everyone else moved on.

When Lucas caved in and offered the original theatricals of the Star Wars trilogy on DVD that is what he did port the laserdisc over to dvd! IMHO he was not about to put any real effort into a good transfer other than the SE discs that where the main part of the release.

 

[JazzyJerome]

The thought went through my mind with blending the laserdisc size with the disc technology of the new 4K UHD blu-rays but like I said before never will happen. Better chance of nice large artwork though and alot of storage space with the dense multi layer designs of the new discs.

Disney has done that in the UK with Guardians of the Galaxy big sleeve but we didn't get it in the US. Laserdisc was more popular in the US I would think they would have released some here.