"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Sounds to me like it’s pretty unanimous that you guys want to deep-six D59.
From a consumer standpoint, does anyone find any value in them at all…..compared to the conventional alternative of two separate discs?

can't see why any consumer would prefer a combo over separates. Any benefit of a Combo would be shared with separates (like the list made by icemage above), and then there are the issues of a combo (as he mentioned in the Con side). In the end If someone wants them together, they can keep the separate disks together, but an other benefit of separates over combos is that they don’t need to be together, so if the person likes the DVD because he only uses it in the car (or only in a kids BR....) then he can leave the DVD there.

[Icemage]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Fact of the matter is that John Hora purposely shot Gremlins “soft”….....the main concern being to protect the integrity of the mogwais (bad gremlins) as they were essentially puppets and human operated! The rest of the non-mogwais footage had to obviously blend as seamlessly as possible with the scenes with the mogwais so the whole dang thing is “soft”!

John normally avoided ever using zoom lenses and also preferred to shoot everything in prime but, with this particular motion picture at least half of it was shot with Cooke zooms (soft) and anything that wasn’t was made soft, for instance, by using fog filters on the nighttime snow sequences or spreading MT2 or 85 gel over the back lamps with mineral-oil smoke in the opening sequence of the movie, etc., etc.

Little gems like this are why I love to lurk in this thread even when I have nothing to contribute. Thanks for a fascinating bit of film history, Penton.

[Hep]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

God help me if SPHE ever embraced BD59’s in the same fashion as Uni, or me thinks you guys would all keelhaul me if I showed up here again.

And just to add insult to injury, Peter THX would probably save my remains to feed to the camels rather than the sharks.

After a few minutes getting gnawed on by a camel and you will pray for sharks .

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, I know she loves ice hockey and that she fairly recently had a birthday but, the camel thing is news to me.
Hmm, I may have to change my position concerning the beasts.

Heh

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

God help me if SPHE ever embraced BD59’s in the same fashion as Uni, or me thinks you guys would all keelhaul me if I showed up here again.

And just to add insult to injury, Peter THX would probably save my remains to feed to the camels rather than the sharks.

Nah. I would be more annoyed than outraged. So I would not be present at a Penton Pyre or keelhauling or shark/camel feedings.

More annoying to me is the 12-year old SD transfer of Fools Rush In.

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I am not assuming anything, will it be wide spread or not, it is not important, like pirating, studios see it as losing $ and so it is bad, no one knows how much it is or will be. You asked why a studio would prefer BD59 over BD50+DVD9 and I posted what I see as the biggest one, especially since you are assuming it is not cost (since you also think BD would cost more)

Do you have any data showing a BD59 would be less expensive to produce than a pair of more common BD50 and DVD9 discs?

When DVD-18 (and DVD-14) were introduced their replication costs were significantly more than double the cost of making a DVD-9 and more expensive than making two DVD-9 discs. This is one of the crucial reasons why DVD-18 never became popular. If past history of disc replication costs follows the trend then it's pretty easy to assume a BD59 disc would be very expensive to produce and significantly more prone to replication problems and increased likelihood of eventual bonding layer rot.

I really don't see BD59 as being any sort of effective tool at all in fighting movie piracy. If anyone really wants to grab a free DVD of a movie they won't have a hard time downloading it from any number of torrent sites.

IMHO, the biggest problem in movie piracy is pre-release screener DVDs given to studio employees, film critics and various other insiders. Those things leak out to the Internet long before any legit home video version hits stores. These things are sometimes available online before the movie arrives in commercial movie theaters. Yet the movie theaters are typically seen as the main problem.

Pirated movies are also more desirable while the actual movie is still in theatrical release or hasn't yet hit home video. Anyone looking to offer up his bonus DVD from a BD case to a freeloading friend might get the response, "I already downloaded that movie off the Internet."

Originally Posted by Icemage

For the more narcissistic people, you could pop in the DVD side of a disc to show someone, then flip it over and wow them with the Blu-ray side. I guess. Or you could, I dunno, just show them the Blu-ray and be done with it.

It would be cumbersome to do any A/B comparison using a BD59 flipper disc. It is easier to synchronize separate BD50 and DVD9 discs in separate Blu-ray and DVD players. Lots of Blu-ray player owners still have a working DVD player on their home theater equipment shelf. Just switch back and forth between BD and DVD player sources. I've done this very thing to show a few friends the obvious quality differences between DVD and Blu-ray.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

Do you have any data showing a BD59 would be less expensive to produce than a pair of more common BD50 and DVD9 discs?

No, that is why I did not say it is cheaper. I said you are assuming the opposite because you did not prove that combos will be more expensive and I don't know if it is true or not. If I had facts to back me up, do you think I would be shy to tell you you are wrong?

I really don't see BD59 as being any sort of effective tool at all in fighting movie piracy. If anyone really wants to grab a free DVD of a movie they won't have a hard time downloading it from any number of torrent sites.

IMHO, the biggest problem in movie piracy is pre-release screener DVDs given to studio employees, film critics and various other insiders. Those things leak out to the Internet long before any legit home video version hits stores. These things are sometimes available online before the movie arrives in commercial movie theatres. Yet the movie theatres are typically seen as the main problem.

Pirated movies are also more desirable while the actual movie is still in theatrical release or hasn't yet hit home video. Anyone looking to offer up his bonus DVD from a BD case to a freeloading friend might get the response, "I already downloaded that movie off the Internet."

As for pirating, I was not discussing pirating. When I bought Resident evil box I gave away me RE2 BD I bought earlier because I got it again in the box set, same with X-man 3, there is nothing ethically or legally wrong with giving away (or selling-assuming selling it in the first place is not wrong) something you do not need. I did not give away my Up DVD that came with my UP BD because I did not want to brake up the set, some people might not feel the same way about sets but maybe, like me, they might have ethical issues with pirating.

But let me ask you this, you are assuming (not meant in a bad way just that you don't have any proof of it) that it is not cost, let's assume I agree with you, can you give me a reason, other then the one above, why Universal prefers combo to having 2 disks a BD and a DVD? I am guessing if you knew the answer you would not have asked the question in the first place.

The issue in the end might not even be one of actual benefit, why did studios continue releasing movies on DVD with CSS even though CSS has been a long time broken? Why add ACCS or even BD+ to BDs , most encryption tends to be broken eventually and even if it secured BDs the movies would be out any ways due to other means (some of which you mentioned). In the end you have to have the appearance of doing something and that can be more important then the final effect.

[Jeff Kleist]

The issue in the end might not even be one of actual benefit, why did studios continue releasing movies on DVD with CSS even though CSS has been a long time broken? Why add ACCS or even BD+ to BDs , most encryption tends to be broken eventually and even if it secured BDs the movies would be out any ways due to other means (some of which you mentioned). In the end you have to have the appearance of doing something and that can be more important then the final effect.

It's not just that

People assume copy protection is there to STOP you. It's really just there to be a pain in the ass, and with BD+'s ability to be renewed, to be a constant PITA

[micks_address]

what gets me with flippers is that i can never figure out the labeling.. around the spine.. if it says widescreen edition on one side and 4:3 on the other.. and i want to watch the widescreen edition which side is up? i nearly always ended up putting it in the darn wrong way up.. i would be much more a fan of including a dvd or digital copy with the blu-ray.. i had thought of giving away some of my dvds that have come with recent blu-rays like snow white/pinocchio.. but as the kids get older and want maybe a portable dvd etc.. maybe they'll use them then.. plus sometimes my wife just sticks on the dvd especially for some of the discs that are always on just to a avoid little fingers doing damage

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

...

The issue in the end might not even be one of actual benefit, why did studios continue releasing movies on DVD with CSS even though CSS has been a long time broken? Why add ACCS or even BD+ to BDs , most encryption tends to be broken eventually and even if it secured BDs the movies would be out any ways due to other means (some of which you mentioned). In the end you have to have the appearance of doing something and that can be more important then the final effect.

I have always assumed it was because of the DMCA. In the US, it is illegal to remove copy protection. If there is no copy protection, then it is probably legal to make an archival copy, something the studios don't want.

I doubt that it has much real impact on copying and distribution, butu I think it has a psychological impact.

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by micks_address

what gets me with flippers is that i can never figure out the labeling.. around the spine.. if it says widescreen edition on one side and 4:3 on the other.. and i want to watch the widescreen edition which side is up? i nearly always ended up putting it in the darn wrong way up..

That got to me as well. I mean the laser reads from underneath the disc, so if it says 16:9 on one side, do I put that side face down in the player, or have they already swapped the labels so the one that says 16:9 is actually the 4:3 side and vice versa? I'm sure there were inconsistencies between manufacturers as well.

Flippers are just a bad idea all around, especially for people who mainly care about Blu-rays, there's just no upside to them (pun slightly intended ). If it had a separate DVD there was the option to give it to the kids, put it in the car, or kitchen, or outhouse or what have you. But I personally would never let my expensive Blus leave my shelf so the DVD side would be completely pointless.

[neo_reloaded]

This is not an endorsement of flippers as I absolutely can't stand them - but choosing which side to put up is fairly easy (assuming your eyes are decent I guess). If the label says "Side A", you place the disc with the Side A label up to access Side A. It's like miniature disc art - for a normal non-flipper disc, you don't place it label-side down just because that's the side that says the movie name, right? It's always label side up - just with flippers you have two labels, so you place it so the content you want is reflected on the label that is facing up.

For HD DVD / DVD combos (and presumably BD / DVD combos), it's even easier, as the disc read surface is a noticeably different color. HD DVDs were a purple-ish color, very different from the standard clear DVD color used on the opposite side. Blu-rays are a, well, blue color - again different from the standard clear DVD color. So you don't even have to read the label (unless you mix discs or something and don't even know the title of the movie on the disc you are holding) - just put blue side down and you're good to go.

But again, I hate them for many other reasons.

[Jeff Kleist]

The difference in shiny would make it easy to determine the Blu side. If you can shave in it, it's a blu-ray

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Icemage

Little gems like this are why I love to lurk in this thread even when I have nothing to contribute. Thanks for a fascinating bit of film history, Penton.

Well, “oink”, is just plain wrong and appears was being a pest about it (Gremlins). That forum is notorious for goof-ball ‘opinions’ in regards to picture quality of Blu-rays, be it either based on flawed *screenshot science* speculations or total recall of the theatrical presentation from many years ago.

I actually see a greater potential impediment emerging to the cinematic fulfillment at home among more well-meaning hobbyists. That be for the lack of a better description, a ‘videophile’ – ‘cineaphile’ disconnect.

It seems that many ‘videophiles’ have simplified their optimal viewing preferences down to a cookbook appearance that best demonstrates the attributes of their 1080p televisions……..namely, very sharp images (without any digital sharpening applied – which is considered a mortal sin) and natural colors with as much detail in the shadows and highlights as possible – screw the mood that the filmmaker was attempting to portray in the scene if it cuts down on the detail in every corner of the image.

And then when somebody points out that the Blu-ray is actually very faithful to the creator’s intent, well then, many ‘videophiles’ condemn the artistic or creative intent of the Director or the D.P. for making *poor* choices in the first place, because it essence it's not "demo material" for their new-fangled high definiton TV sets or front projectors.

Believe me, if every filmmaker shot with the cookbook recipe that many videophiles are subconsciously becoming attracted to in their high definition living rooms, the world of cinema would be a very, very boring place. For instance, even though Catherine Zeta-Jones is a very beautiful woman, I would not want every woman in the world to look very similar to her and wearing the same clothes every day.

P.S.
I can do modern cuisine too.
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...es#post2524244

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by micks_address

what gets me with flippers is that i can never figure out the labeling.. around the spine.. if it says widescreen edition on one side and 4:3 on the other.. and i want to watch the widescreen edition which side is up? i nearly always ended up putting it in the darn wrong way up..

Wow, I hadn’t thought of that aspect with regards to BD59’s.
Boy, if some of you guys (whom, I think it’s accurate to assume, are much better informed than the mainstream public-at-large) have trouble with which side should be ‘up’, then no matter how the content provider ‘labels it’, I would say that Joe6Pack will have even a tougher time figuring it out properly.

This factor does not bode well for optimal use of these discs unless there is some sort of rectification in labeling or consumer education for BD59's.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The difference in shiny would make it easy to determine the Blu side. If you can shave in it, it's a blu-ray

But again, even if this sort of thing was done, what side should face up and which side should face down?
Do you think the mainstream public will be able to make that correct determination?

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

But again, even if this sort of thing was done, what side should face up and which side should face down?
Do you think the mainstream public will be able to make that correct determination?

If people consider this a strong point against BD-59s, disregard my previous post re: it being easy to figure out which side to place up.

Me no understand, disc shiny on both sides are confusing.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Sounds to me like it’s pretty unanimous that you guys want to deep-six D59.
From a consumer standpoint, does anyone find any value in them at all…..compared to the conventional alternative of two separate discs?

No!

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Wow, I hadn’t thought of that aspect with regards to BD59’s.
Boy, if some of you guys (whom, I think it’s accurate to assume, are much better informed than the mainstream public-at-large) have trouble with which side should be ‘up’, then no matter how the content provider ‘labels it’, I would say that Joe6Pack will have even a tougher time figuring it out properly.

For the record, I have this problem as well. Sure, if I think about it a minute, I can figure it out, but I STRONGLY prefer a disc where it's obvious which side is up. It doesn't have to have cover art, but at least something like some Paramount BDs, as well as early Sony BD releases.

~Alan

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

No, that is why I did not say it is cheaper. I said you are assuming the opposite because you did not prove that combos will be more expensive and I don't know if it is true or not.

I didn't prove a BD59 would be more expensive?

Look at the extra steps involved to make a BD59 versus making a separate BD50 and DVD9. That definitely is going to result in higher costs to make that BD59.

A BD59 would require just as many glass and stamper masters as two separate BD50 and DVD9 discs. A BD59 is really two separate discs produced on thinner material. Then you have the added step of aligning the two separate BD and DVD platters and bonding them together. That's going to cost more money.

The thinner material for BD and DVD sides along with the bonding step to join the two back to back greatly increases the chance for replication problems. The disc replicator must put forth more effort in quality control to ensure the discs are properly produced. Those guys aren't going to do that for free.

Glue layer failer, one of the factors in Laser Rot was not left behind with the old Laserdisc format. DVDs and BDs can develop rot. A BD59 would have three layers of bonding glue inside of it, one between each BD and DVD layer and one between the two BD and DVD sides. That means at least three times a greater chance for the disc to develop rot.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

But let me ask you this, you are assuming (not meant in a bad way just that you don't have any proof of it) that it is not cost, let's assume I agree with you, can you give me a reason, other then the one above, why Universal prefers combo to having 2 disks a BD and a DVD? I am guessing if you knew the answer you would not have asked the question in the first place.

My question was rhetorical. I am not convinced anyone anywhere has a good answer or reason why a BD59 would be better than a pair of separate BD50 and DVD 9 discs. It appears to be nothing more than shallow aesthetics and nothing else.

Basically I think someone high in Universal Studios Home Video management, or a few people there, have that mindset that anything and everything must be crammed into only one disc no matter what.

I'm used to casual end users gripe about multiple discs, "I don't like switching DVDs!" Well, what problem will you solve by making a flipper disc? Flipper discs still require you to get off the couch, walk over to the movie player, open the disc tray and turn over the disc. That's no difference in effort from flipping discs. Worse yet, with a flipper you always have to go to the player to turn over the disc, even if you have a multiple disc changer.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Hep

...After a few minutes getting gnawed on by a camel and you will pray for sharks .

...I'm sorry, was somebody talking to me?

Penton, I've got some pics that I'll PM, but I highly recommend to -anyone- looking for a killer dive vaction to consider BVI. The Cuan Law was simply awesome, great crew, amazing food, and lovely dives. I'm back to the cold and snow, not a happy thing...

[Penton-Man]

Hey, you can post them here for ehvvvvvvvvvveryone to enjoy.
You mentioned before that you were anchored off Salt Island.

I remember doing some night diving in a bunch of caves (shallow water).
Was that Salt Island or some other place in the BVI’s?

Any female divers on the trip?