Should you replace your DVDs with Blu-ray?

[Blu-Ray Hunter]

I have a fairly sizable collection of DVDs (~400). Back in Jan, I took a gamble on Blu-ray and bought a Sony BDP-S300. Then, the war between Blu-ray and HD-DVD wasn't completely decided, however I got a sweet deal. I got the player and 10 free movies (five instant in-store selections and five through the mail). I tried to pick titles that I didn't already have on regular DVD. I've now got around 30 titles on Blu-ray.

I find myself really questioning which Blu-ray disks to purchase. Some titles I'll buy without question (i.e. Lord of the Rings, any Pixar releases, etc.). I really hate spending the extra money on a Blu-ray disk for something I already have on regular DVD, especially if the quality is not worth the extra price tag. For example, my Blu-ray player will up-convert (to 1080i) all of the regular DVDs I have. So the real question is, why spend $30 (or more) on a Blu-ray disk when I can get the same title at Wal-Mart in the $7.50 bin on DVD? Or, why replace a DVD that I already own with Blu-ray if the quality is not immediately noticeable? For example, I already own the movie Castaway on DVD. In looking at the Blu-ray version, I can't tell a noticeable difference in the picture. You can in the sound, but not the picture.

I buy Blu-ray disks for one reason, quality. How can you tell (from the back of a Blu-ray case or another method) if an older movie was shot in HD quality? What's going to make me run out and buy "American Graffiti" on Blu-ray when I know the movie wasn't shot in HD? I have the double-throw-down-anniversary version of the movie Jaws on DVD. I'll have to think twice about replacing it with a Blu-ray, if/when it comes available.

Thoughts?

On an ending note, if you like nature, you can't go wrong with the Blu-ray versions of "Planet Earth" and "Galapagos". Picture quality and sound are unsurpassed. These two are a must have for any Blu-ray owner.

[MOONPHASE]

if the transfer is excellent onto Blu-Ray then i say sure replace those dvds but if you see if there is a movie you have that isnt that great on Blu-Ray then i say keep the dvd. also blu-ray discs may not always contain the extras you may or may not want and if it doesnt on the blu-ray and you wanted that extra keep the dvd. oh and there is similar threads on here discussing this

[DealsR4theDevil]

Originally Posted by Blu-Ray Hunter

I have a fairly sizable collection of DVDs (~400). Back in Jan, I took a gamble on Blu-ray and bought a Sony BDP-S300. Then, the war between Blu-ray and HD-DVD wasn't completely decided, however I got a sweet deal. I got the player and 10 free movies (five instant in-store selections and five through the mail). I tried to pick titles that I didn't already have on regular DVD. I've now got around 30 titles on Blu-ray.

I find myself really questioning which Blu-ray disks to purchase. Some titles I'll buy without question (i.e. Lord of the Rings, any Pixar releases, etc.). I really hate spending the extra money on a Blu-ray disk for something I already have on regular DVD, especially if the quality is not worth the extra price tag. For example, my Blu-ray player will up-convert (to 1080i) all of the regular DVDs I have. So the real question is, why spend $30 (or more) on a Blu-ray disk when I can get the same title at Wal-Mart in the $7.50 bin on DVD? Or, why replace a DVD that I already own with Blu-ray if the quality is not immediately noticeable? For example, I already own the movie Castaway on DVD. In looking at the Blu-ray version, I can't tell a noticeable difference in the picture. You can in the sound, but not the picture.

I buy Blu-ray disks for one reason, quality. How can you tell (from the back of a Blu-ray case or another method) if an older movie was shot in HD quality? What's going to make me run out and buy "American Graffiti" on Blu-ray when I know the movie wasn't shot in HD? I have the double-throw-down-anniversary version of the movie Jaws on DVD. I'll have to think twice about replacing it with a Blu-ray, if/when it comes available.

Thoughts?

On an ending note, if you like nature, you can't go wrong with the Blu-ray versions of "Planet Earth" and "Galapagos". Picture quality and sound are unsurpassed. These two are a must have for any Blu-ray owner.

A movie doesnt have to be "shot in HD" to benifit from Blu-ray. HD cameras are a relatively new thing. Old movies were shot on film which can hold more detail than just 1080p. It is not about the way it was shot, it is about how much care and effort goes into the blu-ray transfer. Just about any movie can benefit from a Blu-ray transfer.

[navyman]

Really it isn't about the quality to me. It is about how much I like the movie. I just bought the kubrick collection on blu-ray and while the image is amazing it really isn't that much of a stretch from an upconverted dvd, but the image quality wasn't the selling point for me. If you love a movie you want the best version you can have. For the most part Blu-ray provides the best version.

[mustangfun101]

I'm like Navyman (except I am newly retired Navyman) in that I am only replacing the movies I really enjoy and watch over and over. I had about 200 DVDs and I've replaced about 20. In my collection I still have some that aren't out on blu-ray yet and when they come out I'm sure they will get replaced with the blu.

Indiana Jones (all four)
Lord of the Rings (all three and then the Hobbitt)
Forrest Gump
Mummy 1 and 2
Serenity
Transformers
Sleepy Hollow
Batman Begins


The only major titles I have that I'm not replacing are the Bourne movies, Rush Hour(s), and Shanghi movies.

[TK421]

Originally Posted by DealsR4theDevil

A movie doesnt have to be "shot in HD" to benifit from Blu-ray. HD cameras are a relatively new thing. Old movies were shot on film which can hold more detail than just 1080p. It is not about the way it was shot, it is about how much care and effort goes into the blu-ray transfer. Just about any movie can benefit from a Blu-ray transfer.

I totally agree with you and glad to see that someone made this point.

[MatrixS2000]

Originally Posted by Blu-Ray Hunter

On an ending note, if you like nature, you can't go wrong with the Blu-ray versions of "Planet Earth" and "Galapagos". Picture quality and sound are unsurpassed. These two are a must have for any Blu-ray owner.

I would hardly call the SQ of Planet Earth unsurpassed...it was the minimal quality Blu-Ray has to offer.

I do plan on replacing my DVD because of the exact reason above....upconversion does NOTHING for audio quality and still does not make video presentation near much less equivalent to Blu-Ray.

[ManUtd]

I'm slowly replacing all my DVDs with BD as they become available. Now the question is if all of them will be released in BD...that's another story.

[bhampton]

Should I replace my DVD's with Blu Ray?

No,.. I likely "shouldn't" but I want too and that's all that matters in this case.

I have a lot of DVDs and I could just say to myself if I already own the movie I don't need to buy it again and I can just wait till a movie I don't already own comes along on Blu Ray.

But,.... I only bought the DVDs because I liked the movies and the Blu Ray version is always better. So, I'm happy to re-buy them all.

(Except Once Upon a Time in Mexico. I'll keep that one so that whenever I consider buying the Blu Ray I can go watch the DVD again and remember that the movie pretty much sux. I would trade it in but I bought a ex rental copy and it plays perfect but the case is not standard and I bet Newbury won't accept it.)

-Brian

[blu2]

Originally Posted by Blu-Ray Hunter

I have a fairly sizable collection of DVDs (~400). Back in Jan, I took a gamble on Blu-ray and bought a Sony BDP-S300. Then, the war between Blu-ray and HD-DVD wasn't completely decided, however I got a sweet deal. I got the player and 10 free movies (five instant in-store selections and five through the mail). I tried to pick titles that I didn't already have on regular DVD. I've now got around 30 titles on Blu-ray.

I find myself really questioning which Blu-ray disks to purchase.

If you've already watched a title several times, then you have to ask yourself how many more times you'd re-watch if you re-buy on Blu Ray. Chances are, it would be more economical to just rent if you need an HD experience.

Don't forget in ten years or so something else will be coming along to challenge Blu Ray. The studios would like you to re-buy a collection or key titles every 10 years or so of course.

But if money is no concern and you need to have the latest and greatest of everything at your fingertips, then go for it.

[hitechiowa]

i pretty much double dip on everything, if i have it on reg dvd, its gettin replaced eventually by a blu lol

[werewuf]

Originally Posted by Blu-Ray Hunter

In looking at the Blu-ray version, I can't tell a noticeable difference in the picture.

I buy Blu-ray disks for one reason, quality. (from the back

I have yet to come across any blu that did not blow away an SD DVD. There are some reviews of discs that report poor PQ, so I avoid them. I am on a path to rid myself of SD DVD. The only blu-rays I hold back on purchasing are ones that do not have True HD, DTS HDMA, or PCM sound, I am just not into compressed sound any longer. For me what's the point of enjoying high definition if it's not HD? Upconverting does not make the picture true 720 or 1080 and I can always tell a difference.

[JimPullan]

I will acquire some of the set offerings that will be coming out, like the Matrix Trilogy, Lord of the Rings, Indiana Jones, Blade, and several other sets not yet on the drawing board, like Kill Bill, Elizabeth, and others. But I have no intention replacing my entire DVD library with Blu-ray, at least not at these price points per movie!!! [Jim]

[Zipzap713]

Only replace the ones you like. But don't get rid of the DVDs that don't have a BD copy out. Because it might be a while until you get a BD copy of it (Like any Universal or Paramount title)

[blackhawktraffic]

I Have pretty much replaced most DVDs with Blu Rays, assuming they were good enough in the first place to be kept in the collection. I haven't come across one BD that wasnt worth upgrading to.

[times]

i guess you would only replace ur favs.i dont think the upscaling of dvds is even that great.

[jw]

its only money, replace em now while the dvd is still worth something

[BluCrew]

Originally Posted by hitechiowa

i pretty much double dip on everything, if i have it on reg dvd, its gettin replaced eventually by a blu lol

I agree with that. I'm selling my regular DVDs one by one on Ebay and replacing them with blu-rays.

[owa]

I'm trying to replace all the DVDs that I can but I doubt some of the ones I have on DVD will ever be released on blu-ray (i.e. a lot of the low-budget horror movies).

[AaronSCH]

I sold off the vast majority of my 1200+ DVDs nearly two years ago after purchasing my first high definition disc. Now, with nearly 390 Blu-ray titles in my collection, I don't regret my decision to sell one bit. The image and sound quality is superior on nearly every Blu-ray I have purchased and the on screen menu system is much more user friendly. I am glad I chose to sell early because I was able to recoup my investment and in many cases, I actually made a small profit. There are really only a handful of titles that I am fearful may never make an appearance on Blu-ray and I could always try to find them on DVD through Ebay if I had to own them again.