Blu-rays are 8 years old and DVDs still cling to them like a cancerous tumor. Why?

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

A handful that I would like, yes. Absolutely.

Then to answer your earlier question: no, that doesn't sound like all that big a kick in the teeth to videophiles.

[BklynCowpoke]

Your right, but I also think they put a DVD in the package because it costs them pennies to do that, and they can bump the price up dollars.

[BklynCowpoke]

Those streaming and downloading outlets have their place, as does Blu-Ray. Every movie I watch, to me, doesn't merit the Blu-Ray upgrade.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by pentatonic

I guess one common idea that is put forward by the "pro-BD" clan (though we all are pro-BD, but you get the point ) is that BD will live on as it makes the studios a huge wad of cash. By that logic it stands to reason that if some titles aren't on BD, I would assume is they don't think it would be a fruitful venture to release them on the format, otherwise it wouldn't make any sense wouldn't it?

Just a thought

That's a bit oversimplified though isn't it? If the studios had took that stance with Shawshank after it's box office struggles we wouldn't have had a huge success story on our hands. How many future films will be denied their release on bluray due to an educated gamble on the studios part? Collectors are the ones buying these supposed 'high risk titles'. As more and more releases are made available through streaming channels in HD, Where is the choice in that? I can't have a pristine bluray copy of that film but I can have a bit rate starved HD lite version? Do you know what that will lead to? Me renting movies as opposed to buying and I bet there are lots just like me.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

Why do people want just one format with home video, especially in this day and age? The rest of the business world seems fine with having choices.

I think people have this idea that if we could just shovel enough people away from the 'bad' formats then BD would finally achieve some critical mass and we could relive the glory days of DVD but this time with 4k scans of every catalog title imaginable.

Don't get me wrong, that's a fine dream but...

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by octagon

Then to answer your earlier question: no, that doesn't sound like all that big a kick in the teeth to videophiles.

Bu where do you draw the line? Next year it's twenty or so titles that it happens with and so on and so on. Chuck them on streaming services and forget about the collector! Fabulous, that really helps my cause.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by octagon

I think people have this idea that if we could just shovel enough people away from the 'bad' formats then BD would finally achieve some critical mass and we could relive the glory days of DVD but this time with 4k scans of every catalog title imaginable.

Don't get me wrong, that's a fine dream but...

Nope, that's not my thinking.

[pentatonic]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

That's a bit oversimplified though isn't it? If the studios had took that stance with Shawshank after it's box office struggles we wouldn't have had a huge success story on our hands. How many future films will be denied their release on bluray due to an educated gamble on the studios part? Collectors are the ones buying these supposed 'high risk titles'. As more and more releases are made available through streaming channels in HD, Where is the choice in that? I can't have a pristine bluray copy of that film but I can have a bit rate starved HD lite version? Do you know what that will lead to? Me renting movies as opposed to buying and I bet there are lots just like me.

Steed buddy, I think we all got that many many pages ago. But you also have to understand that BD has outgrown the "niche" label, though just not a huge hit in the mainstream yet. Now with UHD definitely showing up much faster, the death of DVD will happen, DVD on UHD becomes seriously ridiculous.

I have no doubt that if the ones who did buy DVD transfer it to BD the format's future is sealed. But you also have to understand that people now expect to pay $10 or less for a BD, and the DVD crowd might even be cheaper, though at today's prices, there no reason to further discount. But bringing to BD is still relatively costly if a brand new, perfect-or-they-will-complain master needs to be done. Now if you factor that most won't pay more than $10, and that includes the distributor and retailer's cuts.

You know, 1 thing kills me here. So many take a "superior" attitude towards their use of BD, but when you skim the threads around here, all you find are references to where it's cheaper to buy.

Elite and cheap usually don't make for a great union ime. Did I find spending over $40 in early 2007 to be outrageous, as in Canada retail was $10 more and everywhere sold for full retail. Or I would get them form US AMZ, with a 20% or so exchange rate? Yes, and no. I wanted to be in the cool few, I expected to pay for it. Once something outgrows niche status, prices dip, revenue dip (once the fan base is stable that is). We also know mastering is somewhat cheaper, but most here are not willing to put aside expensive extras "in full HD please", and the works. Most actually demand much more than the best DVDs offered.

To this point, I see the ones still spending $30 or whatever a Criterion goes for, as "real" collectors, special import editions, etc. Now having a few 100 BDs is not the same as 100 BDs in 2008.

I'm up to $0.04 lol

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by BklynCowpoke

Those streaming and downloading outlets have their place, as does Blu-Ray. Every movie I watch, to me, doesn't merit the Blu-Ray upgrade.

EVERY title deserves the blu upgrade.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by octagon

I think people have this idea that if we could just shovel enough people away from the 'bad' formats then BD would finally achieve some critical mass and we could relive the glory days of DVD but this time with 4k scans of every catalog title imaginable.

Don't get me wrong, that's a fine dream but...

but again, what makes dvd a bad format? It is personal preference for a lot of it. I love the fact that dvd is still being used because if it wasn't, I wouldn't have a bunch of concerts from bands I will probably never get to see in person. Blu-ray has its bonuses compared to dvd but that doesn't make dvd a bad format. There is always going to be something newer and shiner coming out.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

but again, what makes dvd a bad format?

I agree. I mean, I'm definitely in the camp that believes that pretty much anything can benefit from a good HD upgrade. When there are suitable source materials available old black-and-white movies can look great. Old tv shows can look great.

But that doesn't mean DVDs automatically look bad. I might not always agree when somebody says something like 'eh, the Gun Crazy or The Asphalt Jungle DVDs look fine' but I'm not going to get outraged or offended.

A lot of DVDs do look fine.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by pentatonic

You know, 1 thing kills me here. So many take a "superior" attitude towards their use of BD, but when you skim the threads around here, all you find are references to where it's cheaper to buy.

There is an ongoing, muted protest to BD pricing. It is having an effect on producers and retailers, but their response has exposed the real problem.

There was an abortive attempt to raise BD prices by 10% in the last few months, now abandoned. Blu-Rays were pumped up to $23, or even $24 (US). I'm an avid Blu proponent, and bought 3 or 4 Blu-Ray's per month - and when that meant $80 or so, I wrote that off a supporting a superior format.

When the attempt was made that would move me, with no change in product, to $100 per month, I stopped cold. Greater adoption and support should lower prices, or at least stabilize them, not raise them.

The tide has receded; most prices are back down to $20. What astounded me was the latest release of Frankenstein in 3-D - the triple pack (3-D, 2-D, and DVD) is $20! Where were they when this kind of pricing would have boosted the format? People with 3-D capable televisions were buying DVD's, and occasionally Blu, just to save money, and looking at a 25% increase for 3-D sent them into uncontrollable spasms of disgust. Now that the format is being dismissed, we get normal pricing. No wonder people are sticking with old formats.

There is an element of elitism about BD in this forum, but not in the outside world. There, it's the pricing that seems to control, and I'm amazed the industry has dealt with that so poorly.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

There is an ongoing, muted protest to BD pricing. It is having an effect on producers and retailers, but their response has exposed the real problem.

There was an abortive attempt to raise BD prices by 10% in the last few months, now abandoned. Blu-Rays were pumped up to $23, or even $24 (US). I'm an avid Blu proponent, and bought 3 or 4 Blu-Ray's per month - and when that meant $80 or so, I wrote that off a supporting a superior format.

When the attempt was made that would move me, with no change in product, to $100 per month, I stopped cold. Greater adoption and support should lower prices, or at least stabilize them, not raise them.

The tide has receded; most prices are back down to $20. What astounded me was the latest release of Frankenstein in 3-D - the triple pack (3-D, 2-D, and DVD) is $20! Where were they when this kind of pricing would have boosted the format? People with 3-D capable televisions were buying DVD's, and occasionally Blu, just to save money, and looking at a 25% increase for 3-D sent them into uncontrollable spasms of disgust. Now that the format is being dismissed, we get normal pricing. No wonder people are sticking with old formats.

There is an element of elitism about BD in this forum, but not in the outside world. There, it's the pricing that seems to control, and I'm amazed the industry has dealt with that so poorly.

there is no DVD with the I, Frankenstein release. it's like Dredd 3D... 2D and 3D on one disc and a UV copy. nothing else

[Tok]

Last fall Disney was downright smoking crack for the prices on their Iron Man 3 and Little Mermaid releases. Retailers are still trying to sell the gold border versions for $30 and up.

Thor 2 on the other hand was very aggressively priced even for the 3D.

I rarely push above $20 for new releases and that's only if a 3D version is slightly above it. Otherwise I usually wait a few weeks past the release and get it between $10 and $15.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by wormraper

there is no DVD with the I, Frankenstein release. it's like Dredd 3D... 2D and 3D on one disc and a UV copy. nothing else

I had so many problems running that movie in 2-D I only watched it once. It's on Netflix now, but I refuse to see it there - something's got to give.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Tok

Last fall Disney was downright smoking crack for the prices on their Iron Man 3 and Little Mermaid releases. Retailers are still trying to sell the gold border versions for $30 and up.

Thor 2 on the other hand was very aggressively priced even for the 3D.

I rarely push above $20 for new releases and that's only if a 3D version is slightly above it. Otherwise I usually wait a few weeks past the release and get it between $10 and $15.

I hope your prices drop on the desired movie.

[pentatonic]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

There is an ongoing, muted protest to BD pricing. It is having an effect on producers and retailers, but their response has exposed the real problem.

There was an abortive attempt to raise BD prices by 10% in the last few months, now abandoned. Blu-Rays were pumped up to $23, or even $24 (US). I'm an avid Blu proponent, and bought 3 or 4 Blu-Ray's per month - and when that meant $80 or so, I wrote that off a supporting a superior format.

When the attempt was made that would move me, with no change in product, to $100 per month, I stopped cold. Greater adoption and support should lower prices, or at least stabilize them, not raise them.

The tide has receded; most prices are back down to $20. What astounded me was the latest release of Frankenstein in 3-D - the triple pack (3-D, 2-D, and DVD) is $20! Where were they when this kind of pricing would have boosted the format? People with 3-D capable televisions were buying DVD's, and occasionally Blu, just to save money, and looking at a 25% increase for 3-D sent them into uncontrollable spasms of disgust. Now that the format is being dismissed, we get normal pricing. No wonder people are sticking with old formats.

There is an element of elitism about BD in this forum, but not in the outside world. There, it's the pricing that seems to control, and I'm amazed the industry has dealt with that so poorly.

Bingo! Niche=Expensive and they sell well. But once you want to go mainstream, you start giving away BD players with TVs etc. But if the studios don't do their jobs intelligently, the whole industry suffers. What kinda bothers me and I can't quite dismiss it, is Sony's admission to not count on them for UHDBD and I'm left wondering, if not Sony, who will pick up being the official BD poster-boy. When you think about it, outside of Sony I don't really recall much others getting involved, or the BDA for that matter.

Right now the studios look like they have no vision at all and just jump on any possible revenue, no matter what or how. When you treat your property like that it tends to lose value in the public's eyes.

[blonde_devil]

One thing I will agree on is that the dvd pricing is a bit out of whack. You get a blu-ray for $20, combo pack for $25 but then they still want to sell the dvd version for $17 or so? It makes no sense. Can't write it all off on packaging and such.

One thing with dvd is how much are they pushing the limits of the technology? I am sure they could get better resolution out of dvds but they are not trying since blu-rays are around. You can put HD quality on a dvd, you just run out of room quickly but there is no reason with a dvd9 that they couldn't do better quality video with it. But it seems they never tried which is weird considering so many of the dvds released still had room to spare on it.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I hope your prices drop on the desired movie.

What do you mean?

I don't mind paying $15 or less for most newer releases. Sure I may go higher for a few high profile titles, but in general I can wait until it hits a price point I'm comfortable with paying.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by wormraper

EVERY title deserves the blu upgrade.

agree. I always find it funny when people say "I want BD for X (because it is good) but not Y (because it sucks)". Why are they wasting their time on something that they don't care to watch?