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

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by fitprod

Sure you'll have ESPN 3D, and a Discovery Channel, but with all due respect, launching a new format with the World Cup is a waste.

What does that mean?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by fitprod

Then we have the ultimate issue that is going to be the biggest stumbling block. Most everyone that upgraded to HD did so in the past three years, and then there's the more limited niche of us who bought new Blu-ray players and receivers. - Basically, if we want 3D, everything we own is completely obsoleted. For me, this is very annoying since I just updated my receiver a little more than a year ago, and basically had to buy a new TV in September since my LED DLP from Samsung shot itself in the head and died.

The hate is not coming the general hate of anything "new" it is the general problem of having to upgrade, again.

fitprod

The "general problem of having to upgrade” is apparently not shared by everyone, see - “A case in point”…
https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post3139812

and by “everyone”, I don’t mean just the general population but also, some members of the forum who are actually looking forward to the 3D experience at home asap, even if the content is limited for the time being.

Like I said before, I bought a new digital camera just before the Canon 5D Mark II was announced. Do I disparage my neighbors or try to dissuade them from purchasing this camera who are/were on a different purchasing tract than I am in regards to digital photography? No, as a fellow photog, on the contrary, I recently encouraged one of my best friend’s wives to buy one for him for his birthday…and I can’t wait for him to let me try it out some afternoon...esp. if Bobby H. posts anymore of his pretty pics on this thread.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by fitprod

Sure you'll have ESPN 3D, and a Discovery Channel, but with all due respect, launching a new format with the World Cup is a waste.

Well, granted the World Cup won’t be accessible in 3D to everyone in the world but, you can’t deny the fact that it is one of the most widely-viewed sporting events in the world, with an estimated 715 million people watching just the 2006 final alone.

I mean what would you preferred have done…something like broadcasting a few episodes of “Chuck” in 3D to herald 3D’s big coming out party?

And the Super Bowl is months away, so why wait for that?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by aygie

Penton I remember when you dropped the bomb on the PS3 DTSHD MA update, any chance you'd do the same with the 3D update

Shark and fits are riling me up!
Expect it no later than sometime in June.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by fitprod

I'm fully aware of the amount of R&D being put into 3-D by the CE manufacturers and CEA houses, but I just wonder if it's a ton of money being wasted, for a limited amount of assets and consumers that can actually use it.

fitprod

Well, I wouldn’t worry about it.
They’re betting with their money, not yours…
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/simonap...l-be-televised

unlike allegedly by some members of other businesses…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#36606822

If you want to “wonder” about something which apparently may more directly affect you and your preference for 2D viewing and "consumers that can actually use" something right now…do you think that studios (and I mean all the major studios) are honestly really happy with the sales figures for catalog titles?...and, I’m not referring to things like Wizard of Oz, etc. which obviously will sell but rather run-of-the-mill catalog titles. Perhaps, I should stop there before I get myself into trouble.

[blueshadow | Kosty]

Absolutely agree that one thing that goes mostly unnoticed in the 3D discussion is that the 3D push is making HDTV's better for non 3D content. To make a plasma or LCD thats an effective 3D capable set, the baseline performance just has to be better and that translates to a better regular 2D picture on that HDTV as well. Better blacks, better contrast ratios and refresh rates that 3D demands also are very useful in watching non 3D content as well.

[Slec]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

<snip>
If you want to “wonder” about something which apparently may more directly affect you and your preference for 2D viewing and "consumers that can actually use" something right now…do you think that studios (and I mean all the major studios) are honestly really happy with the sales figures for catalog titles?...and, I’m not referring to things like Wizard of Oz, etc. which obviously will sell but rather run-of-the-mill catalog titles. Perhaps, I should stop there before I get myself into trouble.

I wanted to ask about this but wasn't sure if you'd be able/willing to answer. Since you eeked the lid open, i might as well ask.

*beware: poor assumptions lie within*

How prepared are studio's to venture into essentially 2 new product lines (in blu-ray and 3D) at one time? I want to assume that it would be a directed move with only certain titles being targeted for 3D, and then "everything" coming out on blu-ray. Then with enough households not yet having blu-ray players affecting sales...... oh it's a slippery slope

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, granted the World Cup won’t be accessible in 3D to everyone in the world but, you can’t deny the fact that it is one of the most widely-viewed sporting events in the world, with an estimated 715 million people watching just the 2006 final alone.

I mean what would you preferred have done…something like broadcasting a few episodes of “Chuck” in 3D to herald 3D’s big coming out party?

And the Super Bowl is months away, so why wait for that?

Indy 500 May 30th. That attracts a couple dozen eyeballs.

[Cliff]

I want to make this post because it'll be the best place to archive what I'm about to say...

Saw Kick-Ass this weekend (three times actually) and noticed the image contains a very familiar look that I think will be interesting once it comes to Blu-ray. Skin textures were very smooth looking (the kind of smooth that gets the torches lit and the pitchforks to be sharpened). This was especially "strong" on Mark Strong, with his face often containing a very smoothed over, waxy appearance, but it was noticeable throughout on all actors. I'll be interested what the screenshot "cry"entists make of it (the theatrical look probably won't even measure as a blip of consideration).

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

If you want to “wonder” about something which apparently may more directly affect you and your preference for 2D viewing and "consumers that can actually use" something right now…do you think that studios (and I mean all the major studios) are honestly really happy with the sales figures for catalog titles?

No, I think they're probably thinking that it's a total waste of money to devote as much time and resources as they can to make things look as well as they should on HD.

Let's not forget that the -vast- majority of the pre-release comments about LOTR were from an MKV file illegally ripped from the (retail) BD. And still people were up in arms that they wouldn't be buying the disc (one that they had already, it seems, 'stolen')

I thought similar things regarding your comments about Sony's treatment of Close Encounters (a gorgeous disc, with lots of time spent on it clearly, aside from the branching stuff). If I recall, sales were crap.

I've mentioned it before, but I remember seeing a sales sheet posted on AVS, and the numbers for Forbidden Planet, Grand Prix, and others were in the thousands. TOTAL sales. Granted, that was the "other" format, and that was early in the game, but the numbers were indeed paltry. In fact, one of the early advantages that HD-DVD had over BD, at least for the first year, was in the number and diversity of catalogue titles coming out (many, it must be said, from substandard masters).

Here, years into the format, we are indeed seeing a number of masterpieces make their way to BD. But in terms of the more niche items, even for the majors, I fear that there just aren't enough serious film collectors (versus, say, video gamers who want to watch a film once in a while) that can maintain this market into the long term.

What's particularly creepy for me is that a generation below me has no interest or even understanding of physical discs for media, be it MP3 to DivX. What's even more irritating is that for many my parents age (who do not know how to download via public sites), they rely either upon VOD, or (in a shocking number) on BT to DVD-R rips available quite readily at our local "Pacific Mall" (or on the streets of NYC and other major cities).

So, yeah. I worry often about this, I have since the very beginning. I've never thought HD discs would get this far, and and happy every time we get a sliver out of the studios, a clear work of love from some executive that decided to make a loss leader out of some relatively obscure title, treating it with the respect usually reserved for the likes of Criterion (a mini studio that can, of course, survive on numbers significantly more niche than the majors). If for every theatrical success like Avatar we get a dozen or more smaller, riskier, better films out of the studios, one can only hope that for every shiny blockbuster, male oriented action pablum like Transformers that the not-so-evergreen classics make their way in HD in a matter to which we demand.

[Jeff Kleist]

I mean what would you preferred have done…something like broadcasting a few episodes of “Chuck” in 3D to herald 3D’s big coming out party?

I'd say Chuck is far more likely to reach a double digit percentage of the people who will purchase and use as more than a wall trophy in the next two years than the World Cup will. It's a good showpiece for in-store demos I'm sure, but it's the people who watch Chuck who are the frontlines of gadgetry.

I've mentioned it before, but I remember seeing a sales sheet posted on AVS, and the numbers for Forbidden Planet, Grand Prix, and others were in the thousands. TOTAL sales. Granted, that was the "other" format, and that was early in the game, but the numbers were indeed paltry. In fact, one of the early advantages that HD-DVD had over BD, at least for the first year, was in the number and diversity of catalogue titles coming out (many, it must be said, from substandard masters

Shovelling them out didn't do anyone any favors, and I'd say actually that the classics coming out on HD DVD selling barely into the thousands actually hurt the cause, because it made studios even more gun shy to releasing them. We're finally getting to the point where MAJOR old films can do well, but we're still not there for the solid midrange old ones.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Shovelling them out didn't do anyone any favors, and I'd say actually that the classics coming out on HD DVD selling barely into the thousands actually hurt the cause, because it made studios even more gun shy to releasing them. We're finally getting to the point where MAJOR old films can do well, but we're still not there for the solid midrange old ones.

Now, that's revisionist, Jeff. I noted several instances where things weren't exactly up to par (The Jerk?), but what do you think sales numbers were on Casablanca? Grand Prix is an -amazing- transfer, just great, done with care, and the numbers were crap, bad enough it's yet to make it to BD (I'll note no front page blu-ray.com petitions for this and other titles...Put up your hand if you own Mutiny on the Bounty in HD?). CE3K, hardly a long-lost classic from an obscure director has from all accounts totally assy numbers, and, as indicated, Sony went all out.

Put aside your latent format cheerleading for a bit, concentrate on titles actually released, and recognize Penton's not-so-subtle hint: classic sales as a percentage of total sales are (based purely on these anecdotal hints) anywhere from worse to significantly worse than the DVD equivalent, and they require actually -more- expense to get things "the look and sound of perfect", as it were. The fact remains that we're getting some -excellent- classics on BD, from a wide variety of sources and studios, but the sales for these rarely (if ever) have sales significant enough to reach even the increasingly paltry DVD sales numbers. I've got no idea what's going to turn it around (can you see it getting better, say, with increased HDTV sales?), but to say that the state of high definition classics remains pretty bleak, save for the "tentpole" titles like Wizard of Oz or the niche market titles from the likes of Kino, Criterion, etc.

ps. Besides, when's the last time you actually -bought- a disc? I asked Penton the same thing some time ago, he couldn't recall...

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Now, that's revisionist, Jeff. I noted several instances where things weren't exactly up to par (The Jerk?), but what do you think sales numbers were on Casablanca? Grand Prix is an -amazing- transfer, just great, done with care, and the numbers were crap, bad enough it's yet to make it to BD (I'll note no front page blu-ray.com petitions for this and other titles...Put up your hand if you own Mutiny on the Bounty in HD?). CE3K, hardly a long-lost classic from an obscure director has from all accounts totally assy numbers, and, as indicated, Sony went all out.

"Assy" numbers for BD in the beginning is different than for a format which had around 100k ownership.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

"Assy" numbers for BD in the beginning is different than for a format which had around 100k ownership.

the disc is still in stores, no? Again, that's a deflection... If classics aren't selling, and don't continue to sell even for MAJOR directors (we'll see how Minority Report etc. does past the opening week), then there's trouble longer term.

Again, I only have sales numbers from the likes of this forum, and am by no means an expert in such things. But if anybody really things that Classic films are the driving force of this format (as opposed to DVD, where it played a major role) then, well, I think you're mistaken.

[Jeff Kleist]

Now, that's revisionist, Jeff. I noted several instances where things weren't exactly up to par (The Jerk?), but what do you think sales numbers were on Casablanca? Grand Prix is an -amazing- transfer, just great, done with care, and the numbers were crap, bad enough it's yet to make it to BD (I'll note no front page blu-ray.com petitions for this and other titles...Put up your hand if you own Mutiny on the Bounty in HD?). CE3K, hardly a long-lost classic from an obscure director has from all accounts totally assy numbers, and, as indicated, Sony went all out.

No revisionism. There were piles of Universal catalog titles that were little better than shovelware. Monty Python Meaning of Life, Sneakers, Army of Darkness (still ass on the Blu) Timecop (which was on an HD-15! At least it was widescreen at last) The Game (well, anamorphic finally at least), Spartacus (shame they didn't pay Criterion for their master, no I don't know what the Blu will use, but I suspect it'll be a port), Last Starfighter (still not retransferred to this DAY working with an 11 year old master now) Tremors, Mallrats, a whole pile of them. It's almost as if they were the only exclusive studio HD DVD had, and they had a real need to get volume out there instead of quality.

I think Mutiny on the Bounty actually sold in the hundreds (one of them had that had been out for months, I just don't recall which), this is a hazy memory mind you, but somewhere I have unit sales figures from well after release. This is not a knock to the technical merits of the titles, simply a statement of fact. All of the numbers on those classics were extremely low, most hovering in the 5000 range.

I also wouldn't use CE3K as an example, you don't screw with Spielberg The movie has simply not aged well though, and is nowhere near as accessible as his other titles. It's very much stuck in the 70s, slow paced, and very little happens for the middle 70 minutes or so to keep virgin audiences interested. Add to that that that it doesn't have a lot of great pop for the armchair viewer, and it's not really suprising that people are reluctant to upgrade it. There are also plenty of good people at Sony and WB or Fox who rightly consider these things valuable assets and priceless artifacts of the company history, and therefore even if they don't make mad bank, they need to be put on a proper pedestal. Not every studio has the money, or feels the same way about their vintage catalog, or is simply more selective with what they have work done on.

But the sales are only going to get worse, outside of 2 dozen or so immortal titles like Patton, LOA, Oz, GWTW etc. are going to continue to get worse

ps. Besides, when's the last time you actually -bought- a disc? I asked Penton the same thing some time ago, he couldn't recall...

Today actually. I picked up Apollo 13. Contrary to popular belief, BILL gets all the good stuff, and i"m left to scrounge on whatever he doesn't want and what I can scare up for myself. I guarantee you that Alien and the presumed coming Indy set are coming out of my own pocket for example. Given the economy and the actions of certain individuals who post on forums and run websites(none of whom obtain their discs through proper channels, despite what they may claim), screeners in general are in short supply, and "one per outlet" is more often the rule than not.

I might add that more often than not the disc producers are in the same boat, scrounging for copies of their own work

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

No revisionism. There were piles of Universal catalog titles that were little better than shovelware. Monty Python Meaning of Life, Sneakers, Army of Darkness (still ass on the Blu) Timecop (which was on an HD-15! At least it was widescreen at last) The Game (well, anamorphic finally at least), Spartacus (shame they didn't pay Criterion for their master, no I don't know what the Blu will use, but I suspect it'll be a port), Last Starfighter (still not retransferred to this DAY working with an 11 year old master now) Tremors, Mallrats, a whole pile of them. It's almost as if they were the only exclusive studio HD DVD had, and they had a real need to get volume out there instead of quality.

I think Mutiny on the Bounty actually sold in the hundreds (one of them had that had been out for months, I just don't recall which), this is a hazy memory mind you, but somewhere I have unit sales figures from well after release. This is not a knock to the technical merits of the titles, simply a statement of fact. All of the numbers on those classics were extremely low, most hovering in the 5000 range.

I also wouldn't use CE3K as an example, you don't screw with Spielberg There are also plenty of good people at Sony and WB who rightly consider these things valuable assets and priceless artifacts of the company history, and therefore even if they don't make mad bank, they need to be put on a proper pedestal. Not every studio has the money, or feels the same way about their vintage catalog, or is simply more selective with what they have work done on.

But the sales are only going to get worse, outside of 2 dozen or so immortal titles like Patton, LOA, Oz, GWTW etc. are going to continue to get worse



Today actually. I picked up Apollo 13. Contrary to popular belief, BILL gets all the good stuff, and i"m left to scrounge on whatever he doesn't want and what I can scare up for myself. I guarantee you that Alien and the presumed coming Indy set are coming out of my own pocket for example. Given the economy and the actions of certain individuals who post on forums and run websites(none of whom obtain their discs through proper channels, despite what they may claim), screeners in general are in short supply, and "one per outlet" is more often the rule than not.

Ouch. I know how you feel, my own movie purchases have gone way down recently, in large part though due to the fact that I'm starting to hit the wall. I doubt there's more than 30 American releases left that I want.

[fitprod]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, granted the World Cup won’t be accessible in 3D to everyone in the world but, you can’t deny the fact that it is one of the most widely-viewed sporting events in the world, with an estimated 715 million people watching just the 2006 final alone.

I'm not denying it's international popularity at all, but for the big launch for 3D is in the US? Is this even going to be ESPN's own feed, I understand this is some type of international production.

I mean what would you preferred have done…something like broadcasting a few episodes of “Chuck” in 3D to herald 3D’s big coming out party?

And the Super Bowl is months away, so why wait for that?

Actually, put the effort into the NFL's regular season and a few random College Football and Basketball games in the 4th quarter of 2010, when the bulk of TV upgrades are pushed, and maybe you have something.

fitprod

[SpaceDog]

Unfortunately it's not profitable to release blu-ray titles just for the enthusiasts. The mass market has to be interested in handing over their cash for them. Sure, we all want these titles and know they can be great, but many people not on these forums think of it this way:

1) A movie isn't worth having on blu-ray if it was made before high definition existed
2) I already have the DVD and that's good enough for me

Until there is more education about #1, #2 won't go away any time soon. Even when people see that there is value in blu-ray for classics, they still may be inclined to hang on to their $5 DVD.
Plenty of Walmart consumers will pick a lesser DVD out of the bin than pay a premium for the blu-ray, even if they have a system at home.

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

Unfortunately it's not profitable to release blu-ray titles just for the enthusiasts. The mass market has to be interested in handing over their cash for them. Sure, we all want these titles and know they can be great, but many people not on these forums think of it this way:

1) A movie isn't worth having on blu-ray if it was made before high definition existed
2) I already have the DVD and that's good enough for me

Until there is more education about #1, #2 won't go away any time soon. Even when people see that there is value in blu-ray for classics, they still may be inclined to hang on to their $5 DVD.
Plenty of Walmart consumers will pick a lesser DVD out of the bin than pay a premium for the blu-ray, even if they have a system at home.

I suspect a more significant problem is that many people do not appreciate the difference between DVD and BD. Unless you have a surround sound system (more than the entry-level home theatre in a box) and a large screen (AND sit close to the screen), there is not going to be a great difference between up-converted DVD and BD.

Many (?most) people watch movies on modest screens, sit across the room from that screen, and get their audio from their TV's. "Educating" this group of people will not help, since their experience is that upconverted DVD is as good as BD.

I have a dedicated home theatre with 7.1 sound and a 125" front projection screen, and even then I am selective about upgrading DVD's to blu-rays, and generally only update movies I watch a lot, or are "classics" to me. Upgrading a movie I seldom watch is generally not worth the expense and effort unless there is something special about the film. (I'm not going to update American Pie anytime soon).

I almost exclusively buy Blu for titles i don't already own, but don't always update.

[uniquetreatone]

I just like to say after lurking and reading this thread everyday it's finally starting to make sense. When you and others talk about grain,masters,which camera they used and so on, it flew right over my head. After reading the last couple of pages, i'm really starting to get an idea of what you all are talking about. Sorry it took me about three years to catch on but if it's not something you were taught, it's like reading latin with no translator. Back to reading and learning.