Should I start buying UHD, even though I'm Blu-ray right now? (1 Viewer)

[Will Krupp]

Just a reminder that the first batches of both DVD's and Blu-ray's were quickly re-mastered and outpaced the original issues within a few short years.

You may very well buy that UHD now and wind up double dipping before you even get to watch it.

 

[CraigF]

If you're not planning to upgrade the system to 4K for 3 years, I have one main thing to say: UHDs will either be much cheaper in 3 years, or UHD will be gone.

I think of all the BDs I paid $20-25 for that are $5 BD titles now. I see UHD titles (with BD) that are $10 BD-only titles 1-2 years after the movie was released. I really don't see how most of these (current) UHD titles won't be in the $15 ballpark in (way) less than 3 years, some are $20 already. Based on market trends for hard media in the last several years. Not that the past certainly predicts the future...but more on the behavior of marketing/studios who would rather make some money than none at all in a time of decreasing hard media sales.

That said, I do buy the odd carefully selected (thanks for the reviews/tech details) UHD even though I can't play them (waiting for Oppo or "similar").

Edit: Will and I had "cross thoughts". I recall that happening the odd time before too...

 

[Mike Frezon]

"Should I start buying UHD, even though I'm Blu-ray Now?"
A worthy topic, for sure, but the very title of this thread kinda harkens to a similar question, which goes...
"Should I begin the process of moving in with my mistress, even though I'm still married, right now?"

This whole question does, indeed, sound like a fatal attraction, of sorts.

 

[CraigF]

^ Are you saying going UHD is like boiling a bunny?

e.g. Have you boiled the bunny yet? Nope, I'm still 1080p.

 

[Everett S.]

But the blu-ray for Mad Max is $9.99 now. I'm a price shopper for most movies. And they're not tending to bargain-cut the UHD's. So the incremental cost of future-proofing (on a large scale basis) is pretty big. Getting an affordable blu-ray leaves a lot of dollars left over to selectively purchase UHD's when I can actually play them.

I think the streaming/digital movement should teach us something -- it's not that physical media is dead, or is a thing of the past. It will endure. But I think us physical media types should view movies as more disposable viewing copies at the time of purchase (bought with only a 7-8 year timeframe in mind).

The key threshold to me is when I have the ability to play UHD because it's become affordable to have the projector.

I collect all types of entertainment stuff, legit posters from the 1890's of shows like Bur~Hur ,would loved to seen them live on stage! Ben~Hur looked incredible on it's poster.

 

[RJ992]

Just a reminder that the first batches of both DVD's and Blu-ray's were quickly re-mastered and outpaced the original issues within a few short years.

You may very well buy that UHD now and wind up double dipping before you even get to watch it.

Now that LionsGate had joined Warners with signing on for DolbyVision, you have a point. Right now, there are no discs or players for that...but I'd guess that will happen in a couple years, making today's two expensive players possibly obsolete already. Heck, people who bought UHD sets in 2015 are now crying because they don't have HDR. And if they do, then is it the right HDR?

Then there is the fact that 4K 3D is not supported by the UHD player specs...but it IS supported by some TVs (LG). Will the player specs ever be amended to accommodate that? Who knows...perhaps eventually.

For the OP: Personally, I'm not one of those who is sold on UHD. I've seen numerous clips and 3 full features on a 65" Samsung UHD set. Do they look good...sure they do. Do they look like night-and day over standard 1080p? Not to my eyes. In fact, one of them (FURY RD) actually looked worse! We stopped the movie 3 times to fiddle with the settings (one scene looked like it was snowing in the desert...LOL!) After the movie, 3 of us said that the movie wasn't as good as it was in 3D! (I know technically that was not the case but people enjoyed it more that way...probably because Miller designed it for 3D.) And some titles I've seen bits of (INSURGENT, BvS) looked pretty much identical to their BD counterparts. I'm not saying there is no difference on the spec side...but it sure isn't enough for me to even consider double-sipping or paying more for UHD.)

When I saw laserdisc over VHS, the difference was obvious. When I saw HD over standard DVD, the difference was obvious. When I see 3D over 2D, the difference was obvious. But when I see UHD over BD...umm, not so much, I mean, sometimes you have to get really close and squint to see any difference ("Oh yeah, I think I DO se a bit of extra detail on two of the leaves...and none at all when I stand a few feet back!") My HD copy of SICARIO looks spectacular...I really don't need it to look any better. And when I saw it on the 4K set, I didn't feel like my disc looked worse or that I needed an "upgrade".

Don't get me wrong...I'm not trying to convince anyone not to jump in to UHD but for me, any discussed differences are negligible, if that. And the players aren't quite "there" yet. (ESPECIALLY in price.) Just don't be swayed by what I (or anyone here) says, or the industry hype, or reviews, etc., etc. In the end, let your own personal tastes, needs, preferences, eyes (and wallet) be the judge.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Just a reminder that the first batches of both DVD's and Blu-ray's were quickly re-mastered and outpaced the original issues within a few short years.

You may very well buy that UHD now and wind up double dipping before you even get to watch it.

That is an excellent point. Some of the early Blurays I purchased are being remastered and/or restored, and I am double-dipping on some. This happened even more in the SD-DVD days.

Personally, I have no immediate plans to jump into another format, since (1) my current 1080p TV is working fine, (2) my A/V receiver would need to be replaced, (3) I am not adding any more speakers in my room for Atmos, and (4) my viewing distance is such that I doubt I would benefit much from UHD anyway -- 67-inch screen at 12 feet (I can only go to around 70-inches with a replacement). So, I see no reason to spend even a $1 more for a combo UHD/BD package at this time.

 

[Everett S.]

12/20~ SUPER Uhd player-recorder from Toshiba/Sharp*
No pre recorded films til sometime in 2017** New type of blank disk's 2nd qt. 2017~Sony***
Zenith Ultra Hi Def. plant in the US for new type disk development*
---

 

[Josh Steinberg]

My two cents: as others have also noted, the vast majority of films today are completed at 2K, so the difference between the BD and UHD for many titles should be small.

I think if you decide to future proof in your purchases, you'll need to read the labels carefully for each release to be clear on what is and isn't included and to be sure you're okay with what you're getting. To me, 3D is a much higher priority than 4K, and a lot of the 4K combo packs exclude the 3D version even though they include the 2D regular BD version. For something like Mad Max: Fury Road, you can get it in the UHD combo pack, but only in 2D, or you can get it in BD3D, but you can't get a UHD+BD3D pack. For that movie, it was finished in 2K anyway, and the director intended for it to be seen in 3D. So I think that's a clear choice for which to get.

Then you've got stuff like Batman v Superman, where the UHD combo pack includes the extended version in UHD only, and the theatrical version in BD only. The theatrical version is a bad movie; the extended version is not. If you're buying this movie, you want the extended version, so the UHD combo doesn't help you if you're just BD now.

Shout Factory has been issuing some 4K+BD+3D combo packs - that's a great idea, and if you're interested in any of their titles, that's probably the way to go.

For some 2D only movies, the UHD combo pack includes the standard BD with the movie and all the bonus features, and then a movie only UHD disc. If you can get one of those select titles at close to the same price as the BD, especially if it was a movie that was made in 4K in the first place, that may be worth it.

 

[DaveF]

Thanks for the info! I worry a bit about price drops over the next few years. But I don't know how fast prices drop. Similarly, there's early-release syndrome, where the format will be much better utilized in three years and all the early releases get Super Director's Releases and I want to double dip. And there's the problem of a included blu-ray being inferior to the standalone blu-ray release, be it 3D or Atmos or special features.

I will pay attention to the details before buying, to make sure there's no difference that matters to me. And I'll look for a $5 difference: Deadpool 4k/Blu/Digital for $25 is ok compared to $20 Blu. But I doubt I'll buy a $30 4k pack over a $20 blu-ray release.

As for the future...I too wonder if physical media is Dead Man Walking and my current efforts and expenditures on a media computer and buying blu-rays is going to be a regret in three years when I want to upgrade to 4k.

 

[RJ992]

Shout Factory has been issuing some 4K+BD+3D combo packs - that's a great idea, and if you're interested in any of their titles, that's probably the way to go.

Sony is doing the same with GHOSTBUSTERS...the first major studio to do so, I believe.

 

[dpippel]

Just a reminder that the first batches of both DVD's and Blu-ray's were quickly re-mastered and outpaced the original issues within a few short years.

You may very well buy that UHD now and wind up double dipping before you even get to watch it.

This is the best advice I've read here so far, and I agree with you Will.