Recent shows getting DVD release instead of Blu-ray

[dheian]

Just curious what the production cost difference between a DVD and a Blu-ray is?

You see recent HD shows like Life in Pieces getting DVD or MOD DVD releases instead of the HD resolution of a Blu-ray. Why? Is the cost difference that great? And for the made-on-demand releases, again why not offer Blu-ray as a choice?

Call me curious.

[Clark Kent]

The Blu-ray market for television is just too small at this point for seasonal releases of most properties, ie anything that isn't superhero-related. Once retail stores stopped carrying television Blu-rays, it was all but over. The only exception would be complete sets, which have higher price points and make good gifts around the holidays.

The studios want you purchasing television content over digital these days.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The Blu-ray market for television is just too small at this point for seasonal releases of most properties, ie anything that isn't superhero-related. Once retail stores stopped carrying television Blu-rays, it was all but over. The only exception would be complete sets, which have higher price points and make good gifts around the holidays.

The studios want you purchasing television content over digital these days.

That's just sad too, because DVD is practically a relic. Blu-Ray is very close to becoming the standard for home viewing, whereas streaming and such gets met with a big question mark. Speaking only for myself, I don't even know how to work a DVR machine, and I'm 38 years old. The vast majority of my home-video collection is Blu-Ray.

[Captain Flint]

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

That's just sad too, because DVD is practically a relic. Blu-Ray is very close to becoming the standard for home viewing, whereas streaming and such gets met with a big question mark. Speaking only for myself, I don't even know how to work a DVR machine, and I'm 38 years old. The vast majority of my home-video collection is Blu-Ray.

I'm 25 and I don't know how the hell Vudu, Digital HD, DVR, Firestick or any of that digital stuff works. All I need is a TV, Blu-ray player and Blu-rays and I'm happy.

[oilers73]

I prefer Blu-ray, too, but I also know that supporting only one format isn't very smart. If you want to view most television series in HD, you're going to have to watch it when it airs, record it on a DVR, or stream it using a service such as Netflix or Amazon Prime. Like it or not, it isn't going to change.

[Wildcat2000]

I thought this about Wonder Years. It took so long to get a home release and by that time Blu Ray was already established.

As for streaming...I use it out of necessity but there are way too many services now. Some that that don’t even seem big enough to justify being service.

I feel like eventually it’s gonna get bundled somehow and marketed as one big thing basically turning it into traditional tv.

That’s what these companies are doing. Creating a “channel” that doesn’t come through a cable/satellite provider...yet.

[Legend293]

Originally Posted by Wildcat2000

I thought this about Wonder Years. It took so long to get a home release and by that time Blu Ray was already established.

As for streaming...I use it out of necessity but there are way too many services now. Some that that don’t even seem big enough to justify being service.

I feel like eventually it’s gonna get bundled somehow and marketed as one big thing basically turning it into traditional tv.

That’s what these companies are doing. Creating a “channel” that doesn’t come through a cable/satellite provider...yet.

Im hoping that streaming becomes less and less popular as each compay makes their own version of it and people move back toward physical media. And while they are at it discontinue the Dvd. Blu ray only as the lowest standard. We are at 4k and getting closer to 8k. How is 480p still more popular?

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by Legend293

Im hoping that streaming becomes less and less popular as each compay makes their own version of it and people move back toward physical media. And while they are at it discontinue the Dvd. Blu ray only as the lowest standard. We are at 4k and getting closer to 8k. How is 480p still more popular?

The 4K label for Ultra HD is deceptive, because the maximum resolution is 3840 x 2160. True 4K would be 7680 x 4320, four times the 1080p resolution.

[Canada]

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

The 4K label for Ultra HD is deceptive, because the maximum resolution is 3840 x 2160. True 4K would be 7680 x 4320, four times the 1080p resolution.

Yeah they really messed up by building the Blu-ray/HD-DVD resolution spec of the existing 16:9 720p/1080i HDTV resolutions.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by Canada

Yeah they really messed up by building the Blu-ray/HD-DVD resolution spec of the existing 16:9 720p/1080i HDTV resolutions.

I don't know about that; I'm just using basic math. If you're going to call something 4K (in this case, shorthand for 4,000), its only reasonable the result you offer should match that number. But it doesn't, hence the problem.

[Wildcat2000]

Originally Posted by Legend293

Im hoping that streaming becomes less and less popular as each compay makes their own version of it and people move back toward physical media. And while they are at it discontinue the Dvd. Blu ray only as the lowest standard. We are at 4k and getting closer to 8k. How is 480p still more popular?

I agree everything should be as HD as possible and I prefer physical media because you actually own whatever it is.

Streaming is fine for convenience and binge watching but everything is being split up onto specific services. It’s ridiculous.

Eventually that formula is going to collapse because there’s too many. It just divides customers.

[Sawasdee1983]

The Problem is, for most people around the World is DVD or Streaming enough for a series. They don't want to pay much money for that, they just want to watch it and don't care much about the quality.

In Most Countries in Asia the DVD is still standard for Movies and TV Shows. They try to sell the Blu Ray, but no one cared, in most countries in Asia the movies aren't released on Bluray anymore, because almost no one buys it.

The TV Series Market is way smaller than the movie market. Most people are like watching it one time and thats all, so most people don't buy tv series, so many studios stopped releasing TV Series on Bluray, or act like Disney who says to most Seriens: No release but you can stream it

[mysticwaterfall]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600
3840 x 2160 = 8,294,400
7680 x 4320 = 33,177,600

4K is exactly four times the resolution of 1080p. Your so called "True 4K" resolution is sixteen times the resolution of 1080p.

You beat me to it What he calls "True 4K" makes no sense, since its really 8k. Granted, they shouldn't have switched how they call formats after decades of using the vertical instead of the horizontal, but "4K" sounds more impressive then "2160P" I guess...

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by mysticwaterfall

You beat me to it What he calls "True 4K" makes no sense, since its really 8k. Granted, they shouldn't have switched how they call formats after decades of using the vertical instead of the horizontal, but "4K" sounds more impressive then "2160P" I guess...

Plus those who are math challenged would likely think that 2160p is only double the resolution of 1080p. In some ways comparing 4000 to 1080 gives a more accurate representation.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600
3840 x 2160 = 8,294,400
7680 x 4320 = 33,177,600

4K is exactly four times the resolution of 1080p. Your so called "True 4K" resolution is sixteen times the resolution of 1080p.

I was not using the "x" as in "multiply", but rather to mean "by". There are 1,080 pixels in a Blu-Ray image, and four times that is 4,320. Likewise, the width of a Blu-Ray image is 1,920 pixels, and four times that is 7,680. If you wanted sixteen times the original Blu-Ray image, it would be 30,720 wide by 17,280 high. Basic math, plain and simple.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

I was not using the "x" as in "multiply", but rather to mean "by". There are 1,080 pixels in a Blu-Ray image, and four times that is 4,320. Likewise, the width of a Blu-Ray image is 1,920 pixels, and four times that is 7,680. If you wanted sixteen times the original Blu-Ray image, it would be 30,720 wide by 17,280 high. Basic math, plain and simple.

1920 by 1080 is exactly the same as 1920 times 1080. A Blu-ray image consists of 1,920 columns of 1,080 pixels each for a total pixel count of 2,073,600. A 4K Blu-ray image consists of 3,840 columns of 2,160 pixels each for a total pixel count of 8,294,400.

If something is twice as tall and twice as wide the total area is four times the size. Basic math, plain and simple.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

If something is twice as tall and twice as wide the total area is four times the size. Basic math, plain and simple.

Only if you're multiplying in terms of area; I wasn't. My stance was limited strictly to the label of 4K as being promoted to mean four times the height or width of a Blu-Ray image, when it is neither.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

Only if you're multiplying in terms of area; I wasn't. My stance was limited strictly to the label of 4K as being promoted to mean four times the height or width of a Blu-Ray image, when it is neither.

It was never advertised as being either of those things. I have never seen any advertisements mention height or width. It was advertised as being four times the resolution of Blu-ray, which it is. Just as Blu-ray was advertised as being six times the resolution of DVD, which is also accurate.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

It was never advertised as being either of those things. I have never seen any advertisements mention height or width. It was advertised as being four times the resolution of Blu-ray, which it is. Just as Blu-ray was advertised as being six times the resolution of DVD, which is also accurate.

If Blu-Ray is six times the resolution of DVD, please explain to me why the average DVD is 9 GB, and the average Blu-Ray is 25. I know some are 50, but that's not the norm unless the film is long or there's lots of extras.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

If Blu-Ray is six times the resolution of DVD, please explain to me why the average DVD is 9 GB, and the average Blu-Ray is 25. I know some are 50, but that's not the norm unless the film is long or there's lots of extras.

Six times the resolution does not equal six times the bitrate.

And your numbers are off: the maximum capacity of a DVD is 7.8 GB and most movies are less than 6 GB. The maximum capacity of a Blu-ray is 50 GB and most movies are 30-35 GB. Additionally Blu-ray uses the H.264 codec which is way more efficient than the MPEG-2 codec that DVD uses.